Mini 909: Nice'n'Fun Mafia (Game Over)

[cruelty]

/confirm

[cruelty]

where in nz you from?


mod-buddying strategy in full effect.

[cruelty]

RVS over already??? Gonna have mine anyway.

vote: hoopla

And on that same subject..

cruelty; is it okay to skim wall of text posts?

Yes.

90% of content in wall posts is useless filler used to make the critical 10% seem important. Just gotta make sure you find the chocolate centre.



I think the 'joke' + subsequent defensive posts are interesting but not damning at this point. Worth pulling the thread though, I'll look into it a little later, pressed for time right now.

[cruelty]

cruelty; is it okay to skim wall of text posts?

Yes.

90% of content in wall posts is useless filler used to make the critical 10% seem important. Just gotta make sure you find the chocolate centre.

How are you going to find the chocolate center by skimming?

you read the inevitable summary at the bottom, then skim read to find out if there's anything else of importance.

[cruelty]

unvote, vote tracker

Let's get this party started kids.


Interested in the claim, as hito said it's basically null. I tend to think though that it'd take some balls for scum to claim miller this early day 1 with no pressure, it's at the very least an attention getter.

[cruelty]

Why did I vote tracker? Because I could.

I tend to throw out votes if I feel the game is stagnating (I'm aware I've been largely absent and therefore partly to blame but I'm having a very hard time actually browsing these forums at the moment, the site is horribly slow). It's fairly logical to assume that the more active the game, the better town should be doing. At least, the more activity there is, the more information there is. The more information... you get it.


Dunno what's up with Quagmire, weird way to play but eh, scum will slip at some point.

Given the game has been a little more active, I'll

unvote

for now, the Tracker wagon is a little bigger than I thought so in the interest of continued discussion I feel that my unvoting will lessen the likelihood of a quicklynch.


Anyway I'll try to be back with actual content over the weekend.

[cruelty]

Sorry for the inactivity, I'm having a really hard time opening the thread, let alone posting.

Quagmire - I really don't like the play. I think that it's inherently selfish and subsequently anti-town. This isn't about what you're doing (which is essentially nothing right now anyway. Passive scumhunting? lol), it's about the information we're getting from you, which is zero. As someone said, you're actually no better than a lurker.

[cruelty]

vote: quagmire

I've decided that under no circumstances I will read my role PM today, mostly because I want to troll Cyberbob and Hoopla some more.

right, because this is helpful.

You're not scumhunting, you're not contributing, you're being wilfully anti-town at this point.


You know what the worst part of this playstyle is? You bring a lot of heat on yourself and distract town entirely (everyone is pretty much tunneled on you right now), so if you are a town power role, you're going to be forced into claiming day 1, thus heavily compromising your ability to help us. It's just fucking bad play.

[cruelty]

@Cruelty: Quagmire doesn't read his Role PM; that includes if he's about to be lynched, I'm guessing.

I could have sworn someone linked to a game where Quag said he did read it if forced to roleclaim. I can't find the post now though, maybe I imagined it.

The thing is he's now deliberately trolling - why? Quag, can you explain to me how your actions are helping you? I can't see how drawing this much attention to yourself aids you as scum, or how drawing this much suspicion and deliberately trolling the thread benefits you as town. Seems lose/lose to me.

[cruelty]

@Cruelty: Quagmire doesn't read his Role PM; that includes if he's about to be lynched, I'm guessing.

I could have sworn someone linked to a game where Quag said he did read it if forced to roleclaim. I can't find the post now though, maybe I imagined it.

The thing is he's now deliberately trolling - why? Quag, can you explain to me how your actions are helping you? I can't see how drawing this much attention to yourself aids you as scum, or how drawing this much suspicion and deliberately trolling the thread benefits you as town. Seems lose/lose to me.

Because the logic behind Hoopla's argument is frustrating. I have read and claimed my role PM before. That was in Tree Stump I.

What are you answering here?

That your current actions help you because Hoopla's arguments are frustrating?


I'll ask again, how is your playstyle currently beneficial to you? In any regard?

[cruelty]

I just really don't like this Quagmire thing. it's a smokescreen, distracting us from scum hunting. Everyone who is voting for Quagmire hasn't really been scum hunting. They just want Quagmire gone because of his playing style. There may be some truth to what they are saying but scum could easily be using that situation to their advantage.

Ok you know what? You're doing the exact same thing. All of your recent posts have been about Quagmire and how we need to focus on something else. Yet strangely, you haven't done a single thing except harp on about this. I get it, it's a smokescreen. It is NOT a scum-created smokescreen though - if Quag really hasn't opened his role pm then we can conclude that this isn't a scum gambit. So I think that it's a valid discussion; we can be relatively sure that scum are trying to play this situation to their advantage which will in all likelihood be illuminating further down the road. Anyway.


The exception (to the rule of your current posts = handwringing re. Quagmire) is your Tracker vote. Which, to be honest, I don't think much of. It amounts to nothing more than a pressure vote. And that post is still generally re. Quagmire.

Quick quote summary. (#s in iso).

NOTE: These quotes aren't meant to point to anything other than a continued and unwavering interest in Quag despite implying otherwise.

Vote: quagmire

You're right we should discuss this a little.

Now that I think about it it doesn't deserve a policy lynch.

There's really no way not opening his PM could hurt him

Where's all the real scum hunting? We have pages of why Quagmire should be executed.

This Quagmire thing is wasting our time.

I just really don't like this Quagmire thing. it's a smokescreen,

If it's such a big smokescreen, redirect our attention. It's good and well to claim it's a smokescreen, a distraction, but ultimately you're not actually contributing at all by continually referencing it. I'm beginning to wonder if you're breadcrumbing distaste for this lynch to point to tomorrow.

[cruelty]

I see very little posting trying to convince anyone otherwise with actual cases. I've shot down every "case" that tries to belittle the way I play.

Well, you haven't shot down shit. If anything you've been spectacularly useless. And this in the face of repeated attacks on/discussing about you. One would think that you'd inadvertently contribute but this hasn't been the case at all. Some halfassed remarks about CyberBob do not a case make.

I've waited (relatively) patiently for you to wow us all with some sort of amazing case that you've put together from your distancting/passive information gathering tactics and the best you've come up with is two sentences over two posts attacking Cyberbob. Fuck outta here son.

Cyberbob, you've spent the entire day so far commenting on marginal material

You've spent the entire day discussing your retarded playstyle.

Cyberbob's case isn't the strongest, but I feel it's pretty valid

So.. he had a valid case but he's spent the entire day commenting on marginal material? What changed your mind, and why?

[I should probably note at this time that I don't really have a read either way on Cyberbob, this is all about Quag].


Moving on.

The following is all from the same post:

I agree with the idea

to wait until the next day and see how his playing changes.

Hoopla's claim: Not a fan, but

I'm more or less convinced by other players

I found that Flareon began the game with some lovely wishy-washy voting. Changed votes around a lot and kept his random vote at one point for a bit after changing back to it. He explained it as he doesn't like to not use his vote, but it just comes off as wishy-washy to me. Then he starts complaining about how Quagmire's playing (or lack thereof) is smokescreening without doing anything to change that problem.

I really, really dislike this post.

Basically, he's agreeing with other players for the first two (lacking original thought). The first part of the third quote is rehashing someone else's case (can't be bothered looking to find out who - it's not really relevant), and then the second is paraphrasing my last post.

This entire post Tracker specifically states is "his stuff". This isn't good enough man, you're not bringing anything new - I have no issue with you agreeing with good cases but this isn't even an attempt to build on things other people have said, it's just halfassed paraphrasing and momentum surfing. It really, really seems to me like you're trying to fade into anonymity by agreeing with the majority.

[cruelty]

there has to be a doctor in this game.

Elaborate.

[cruelty]

I cut myself off there because speculation is bad but you asked.

A doctor could protect tracker so the SK can't get rid of him but now that I said it the SK probably wouldn't kill tracker.

That's not what I asked - I understand how the doctor role works and I even have the imagination to conceive of a situation whereby the doctor might use his powers to protect a fellow townie.

I'll rephrase.

Why do you think there is a doctor?

[cruelty]

I cut myself off there because speculation is bad but you asked.

A doctor could protect tracker so the SK can't get rid of him but now that I said it the SK probably wouldn't kill tracker.

Why do you think there is a doctor?

Not relevant. Stop fishing.

Flare was pretty certain there was a doctor in the game. I generally think that certainty about roles/setups is absolutely worth pursuing. I don't want to know about roles, I just want to know the reasoning behind his statement. I think it's pretty relevant.

[cruelty]

Alright, consider the issue dropped.

[cruelty]

I hope Hoopla, cruelty, AGar, and Cyberbob are happy that they get their political lynch through. I have seen no case on Quag based on anything game related, outside of some minor lurking issues.

I guess his role will be a surprise to us all.

unvote

;

vote: Quagmire

a) He's not lynched yet.
b) I'm positive he's said (possibly not in this thread) that he claims D1 if pressured.


I'm happy enough to shift my vote to Tracker or Flare following a Quagmire claim.

[cruelty]

Out of context quote time.

I'm the densehead

I know.


You're not seriously comparing contribution here are you? I've brought up solid points against two other players (Flare, Tracker) in the last 2-3 days (Stopped short of making a full-on case because I want you lynched). You... well, you haven't done shit.


Nacho you've been full of one and two line posts lately - why is that? You were pretty wordy earlier on, what's changed?

Mod: I will be V/LA (basically no internet access) for about a week starting in about 4 hours.

[cruelty]

Ok I'm back.

@whoever cited me as not having posted today, I was out of town for a week. Not lurking.

I seriously got the impression that cruelty voted Quagmire almost purely out of spite, especially after their little slapfest at the end of the day. He won't agree with that characterization of course, but the town can draw their own conclusions. cruelty played a big part in artifically extending that wagon. He either did so out of emotion and principle, being against Quagmire's D1 play, or he did so to because he did not want another wagon to garner any steam, as lynching townQuagmire or (supposedly) townTheTracker would've been good enough.

1: I didn't vote for Quag solely out of spite, but I definitely wasn't unhappy to vote him.
2: I thought there was a good chance he'd read his role and was lying.
3: He claimed to be scumhunting, but I didn't see any real evidence of him doing so.

Basically, I think the guy's an idiot, I think his style of play was horribly anti-town and I thought he was probably lying about 2 things - 1: reading his role pm, and 2: contributing to scumhunting. Both of these I would seriously consider voting for, both being present was (for me) lynch-worthy.


I've read through the thread so I'm technically up to date, but I need to read through day 1 again to place it in context (it's been a long week in hot temperatures, my brain is fried) - I'll try to answer any questions anyone has of me, but I'm not 100% up to speed yet.

[cruelty]

1: Shrug.
2: Oh ok. You find someone scummy, you generally don't believe anything they have to say. In the event that he was lying about having not read his role pm, then it would also follow that he wasn't actually trolling (That is, making an absurd play in the hope that people would think him town because scum wouldn't be that stupid). I was wrong, he had no ulterior motives and is in fact just a common idiot.
3: I don't consider his cyberbob "case" to be scumhunting. I think he even said at one point it wasn't that convincing a case (or something to that effect). How seriously am I supposed to take that?

[cruelty]

[/game]How many of you ACTUALLY think, "Hey, I'm going to appeal to everyone's emotions with my next post."? I doubt anyone actually does that whether they are scum or not. You all should stop following the wiki so much and play the game the way you want to play the game. Leave the poor guy alone, if you don't believe him then you can say that but don't accuse him of trying to appeal to peoples emotions[game]

This is interesting.

[cruelty]

Why?

Reads like genuine concern over the attacks being fired at tracker.

[cruelty]

Yeah sorry, I meant mindgamer.

[cruelty]

Ok Red, let's take your vote seriously.

I seriously got the impression that cruelty voted Quagmire almost purely out of spite

, especially after their little slapfest at the end of the day. He won't agree with that characterization of course, but the town can draw their own conclusions. cruelty played a big part in artifically extending that wagon.

He either did so out of emotion and principle, being against Quagmire's D1 play, or he did so to because he did not want another wagon to garner any steam

, as lynching townQuagmire or (supposedly) townTheTracker would've been good enough.

That's inconsistent. The first bolded part, you're sure I'm basing my vote on emotion, then you're suddenly ascribing devious logic to it, saying that I artificially extended the wagon out of

either

spite or strategy.

That's not a case. That's a silly little justification for a vote with a backdoor you can quietly slip out if things don't work out.

[cruelty]

mmm yeah, i think i side with cruelty here. hey cruelty, want to start a bandwagon on RC with me? It'll be fun.

Yeah, I got ya.

vote: RC

RC - I'm not going to bother really responding to your 396. Suffice to say I disagree, I think the original post

was

inconsistent and you're unlikely to be able to change my mind.

The problem is that, coincidentally, everyone who isn't on the Mindgamer wagon is bad news, with the exception of me and possibly angelmouse's replacement.

6/10 (including AM's replacement)? 6 players are bad news, and those (3) on the MG wagon are cleared in your eyes? Interesting.

I think Hitogoroshi is town, because he hammered Quagmire while I said I would hammer him.

Been brought up, but quoted to show my displeasure with this statement.

I wouldn't mind lynching tracker. He rarely posts

Do you find him scummy or is this entirely due to lurking?

[cruelty]

I have read my role PM

(relief)

[cruelty]

*Four.

Flare, Hoopla, you, and Mindgamer.

I guess you get six if you add me and angelmouse into that count of yours, even though I specifically said that me and angelmouse's replacement were exceptions...

Eh, missed Tracker's vote, included AM deliberately. So six. Shrug.

Also, can you please tell me where I said anyone was clear? Or did you just make that part up?

here:

everyone who isn't on the Mindgamer wagon is bad news

We can extrapolate 2 things from that quote:

1: You have doubts about everyone not on the Mindgamer wagon (like it's scummy to be off it??).
2: You have a strong town read from the people on the wagon.

The only people I could see having a realistic shot at being lynched are Mindgamer, Nacho, and cruelty

Towncoaching much?

I was pretty fond of angelmouse

I looked into this, I can't really see it. You made one post (your iso 12) stating this:

I love this statement to death. This is the kind of critical thinking that I think the game has been lacking.

I like post 202 in general

but you were fairly critical of her in the early game:

This seems... off. This seems borderline defensive of The Tracker rather than just a general disagreement.

This sounds to me like you are covering all your bases and backpedaling a bit.

I'm not really seeing your love for angel to be honest. I get that you liked one post of hers, but you're being critical of her in the early game in my mind nullifies that. I think that this too is a little inconsistent.

See, I'm in a tricky situation. There is no one I can go with to prop an alternative lynch.

Don't like the way this is worded. It almost feels like AtE. I think a big part of my problem with you is the way you articulate yourself, it's coming off (for me) as really fuckin sly.

A vote on RC is just insane at this point

Is it? Why?

I don't understand the MG wagon.

Looking at AGar's iso 10, there are 4 points against him:
1: Active lurking.
2: Posting fluff (I'd say that's basically the same as 1, but eh).
3: Didn't hammer Quag, retracted his early Tracker vote.
4: The RVS thing.

So three things, none of which I'm particularly feeling. I understand the logic, I'm just not really getting a scum vibe. Given Quagmire's flip, I'm hesitant to vote away from my gut (which is saying RC).

[cruelty]

I agree with this, and it's partially why I am voting cruelty.

As far as I can tell that's the only reason..

[cruelty]

But seriously cruelty, as long as you ignore any player who's not voting for you I can't take you or your vote seriously

Oh I'm with you now. I have to find a suspect who doesn't return the sentiment, one of those unspoken rules, I guess.

my bad,

unvote

.

back to RC.

I felt very comfortable he wasn't scum, and I won't deny that. I felt it mainly because, I don't know, he hadn't done anything scummy?

Why? This is a logical failure. You even go on to say that (you believe) he didn't know his role, so there's no possible way that you could have had any legitimate read on him. Therefore, absolutely no reason for you

as town

to be comfortable he wasn't scum.

I should prob also note that you were on an earlier Quag bandwagon for a lack of contribution, so you had to have some sort of doubts about him at some point in the game (or were you buddying hito???)


Nachomamma8 dropped right off the radar recently. I see V/LA from today but there's been nothing coming from that corner recently.

Pushing a Tracker wagon would have done far, far more to derail the Quagmire wagon than just yelling 'no one can vote quagmire today, we have to give him lynch immunity while he trolls us!'

This was directed at Nacho, right? (btw sup RC??)

RC is totally right that cruelty is just focusing on him and him exclusively. I pointed this out back in 425 and cruelty has kept doing it.

It's true. I'm driving full tilt down an OMGUS tunnel with the lights off and Lynyrd Skynyrd blasting out Free Bird.

I still don't see the case on Mindgamer as substantial.

Neither.


signing off now.

..wait,

vote: RC

[cruelty]

It's true. I'm driving full tilt down an OMGUS tunnel with the lights off and Lynyrd Skynyrd blasting out Free Bird.

I guess you're being sarcastic here, but it is true.

Sarcasm mixed with acknowledgment.

[cruelty]

I mean, I don't know what else to say. Mafia or not, cruelty has a chip on his shoulder that he's willingly acknowledged. I don't see how someone can not see that as anti-town. At the very least, he should be gotten rid of in case he does what he's doing to me to someone else tomorrow. AGar, The Tracker, and Nacho (we'll see how the replacement does; hi horror) are either absent or have not come down on one side or the other with any passion.

Ahh there we go.


Unwilling to lynch Quagmire, but happy to push the possibility that I might do the same thing tomorrow?

This is contradictory, inconsistent, bad. Scum.

[cruelty]

What game was I in with you ed?

[cruelty]

What do you mean?

I voted Quagmire...

Did you want to?

Hey Faraday: My partner was writing the ~F posts and *I* understood what he meant.

...

cruelty is literally saying 'I acknowledge I'm only focusing on RC

Indulge me for a sec; if I flip town then who will you look at tomorrow?

The "me" is my player slot. It doesn't change from player to player

Of course the slot can change from player to player. Different people can give off different reads. It's entirely possible to have a scum read on a player and then not on the replacement. Doesn't look like this is the case here for Faraday, but I've been in games where a replacement has basically been so pro-town that any suspicion of the original player was dismissed as poor play on their part.

1. You're scum and The Tracker is your scumbuddy. You're not going to make your scumbuddy look bad, but of course it's very helpful to put a townie in a bad daylight.
2. You like The Tracker and dislike me.

mate I got a spare seat on the wagon if you're keen.

I'm skeptical that you change your playstyle in the middle of the day cause you had to claim.

Agreed.

[cruelty]

Well yeah, but if someone's been really scummy and you think they're scum you can't just give the replacement a clean slate either, it shouldn't happen. Ignoring everything the person in the slot did before is just stupid as you're minimizing your chance to get a read on that slot.

That's what I'm saying - if someone finds AM suspicious then by all means pursue it, regardless of how the replacement is behaving.

[cruelty]

ah, amished.

last game i played with amished he went mental, posting a LOT. this is a big departure.

[cruelty]

eh?

you're reading too much into that, wasn't really trying to imply anything in terms of the game, was more along the lines of a poorly worded 'oh wouldn't have recognised you'. i guess that's my bad.


jumping all over me for that is interesting though - i've never really had any particular reason to dislike your slot (i've read faraday's post and i see what he's saying, but didn't really feel the scumminess) so i haven't really engaged you at all. it is noted that the first time you've really interacted with me is an enormously indepth read into something (i consider to be) completely innocent. i guess time will tell as to our alignments but for now i'm gonna dismiss you as one of those irritating over-enthusiastic townies who have eureka moments all the time about things which amount to nothing.



giving me a bit of respect? followed quickly by your condescending teacher routine? that's cool.


@faraday, no idea. i think it was a newbie game but i never bothered keeping track of games i've been in so i can't direct you to the specific one (since the find all posts function has gone).

[cruelty]

Well, it's nice to see that you aren't actually going to take a stance and say who your top three scum reads are with reasons.

~ F

i'm happy enough to answer questions, i'm just not going to let you take a position of condescension for the rest of the game.


with regards to faraday, i have a slight town lean.

[cruelty]

Only really one scum read.

RC - been over why. my articulation hasn't been the best but i think he's inconsistent and contradictory.


This is followed up by a vague uneasiness towards hoopla (not sure why, I've been re-reading her posts to try to work it out with no success, haven't said anything because i quite honestly can't work out why i feel this way) which isn't nearly as strong as RC and a nagging concern about Agar who hasn't really taken a strong stance on anything and has conceded a willingness to be on several wagons today (RC, nacho, faraday, mindgamer).

Unwilling to lynch Quagmire, but happy to push the possibility that I might do the same thing tomorrow?

What do you mean?

I voted Quagmire...

Did you want to?

I made it pretty clear that I did not.

Just seems odd to me that you'd use the fact that I (might) tunnel on someone as a point to push my lynch, when you were opposed to a quagmire lynch based on his play not being scummy.

To be clear, I'm drawing a comparison between an unwillingness to lynch quagmire due to his playstyle, and a willingness to do the same thing to me. I can concede that you might find me scummy, but I find this to be inherently contradictory.

[cruelty]

Ho hum.

If I flip town, where do your suspicions lie?


My townflip would change your Faraday read, I assume?



I could be completely off-base with this giving I have no knowledge of the moderating process, but:

This setup was conceived by a sadistic madman and reviewed by aliens.

In the original quote the word aliens is linked to Vi's profile, so using my powers of deduction I'm gonna go ahead and speculate that she didn't actually create the setup, merely reviewed it to ensure balance. If that's true (and really, I see no reason it wouldn't be) then trying to breakdown the setup based on Vi's preferences seems a little foolish.

If the above is true (that is, Vi didn't actually -create- the setup) then your read into Faraday becomes questionable too.

Basically, I think the above post is a load of shit, I think that it's completely meaningless in that you're making assumptions about the creation of the rules (even the creator) and trying to apply them in-game. It's weak and illogical reasoning, which is something you (well, your pal) accused me of displaying earlier. Dislike, +scumpoints.

[cruelty]

You think it's more likely that I consciously went on an elaborate OMGUS-fuelled tunneling rampage than I simply play this way?

I'm not entirely sure that's logical at all.

[cruelty]

lol.

Let's look at this logically. I'll indulge in a little wifom (maybe you can mention it and use it against me!) too.

You attack me, that's fine. Your argument is that I turned around and took a second look at you because of this. Again, fine. I'd assume that most people look at who is voting them, especially if they're innocent.

The problem is the assumption that me taking aggressive action against you would somehow pull the focus off me and the impending wagon. This is where you're losing me - it'd make absolutely no sense for crueltyscum to attack you and thereby drawing attention to the both of us. Logic would dictate that the best play would be to try to bat away your concerns (which I haven't really tried to do) and work on shifting town focus away from me and onto a third party.

This isn't what I've done at all - I've deliberately drawn attention onto the both of us (more specifically, onto me), made no real attempt to derail the wagon on me and haven't even looked at anyone else. Yeah, wifom, but let's be real here. I'm not making an optimal scum play so I'm either really, really stupid scum (which I assure you I'm not), or I'm bad town.

It always amuses me when people attribute all these weirdo psychology-based arguments to my play, I find it hard to believe that people actually conceive of and act out these complicated plans. I don't, I'm basically a reactive player. I'm not particularly aggressive in terms of seeking out clues, I meander through the game until I find a thread and then I pull it until I'm happy with what I'm seeing. I'm not particularly happy with you, but this is documented. For now, it's bedtime.


post-preview edit:

1: Don't really care what Hoopla does. As stated, she makes me uneasy. Not as much as you, but my vote would be on you regardless of her.

2: I could be wrong, but I'm not entirely sure I mentioned your position on Quag's lynch until very recently (the last realtime day or three). If I thought I could get you strung up for that, why wouldn't I have mentioned it earlier? As stated, my initial issue with you was what I perceive to be inconsistencies within your post where you vote for me. (fuck it i'll look it up) I didn't bring up Quag's lynch until my post 30 - the first time I expressed suspicion of you was my post 23, a full real-time week later.


I think your arguments against me (setting aside OMGUS and tunnelling) are weak, you're inconsistent and you're contradictory (specifically with your attitude towards my playstyle vs Quag's).

and now, bed.

[cruelty]

check

[cruelty]

ok if my math is right deadline is in 6 hours or so. will be back before then.

[cruelty]

well, bleh.

hope you guys are right, i'll be back to tunnel rc some more tomorrow.

[cruelty]

btw feel free to read way too much into that.

[cruelty]

what's popcorn?

[cruelty]

sounds interesting hoopla, we don't have that here in new zealand. maybe i'll try it when i goto the usa in july.


i'm vt.

not giving a scumlist. my top 2 lynches right this second would be:

RC (documented).

hito: i'm aware how omgusy this looks but the more i read his posts the more he looks like a palpatine to me. i recently completed a game with zorblag who as scum basically nudged the town along for the entire game and i'm sort of seeing very similar things from hito's posts. it's hard to explain exactly what (by definition palpatine looks very pro-town) but having just read him in iso i'm hearing alarms in the back of my mind.

recent posts of hito's that concern me (his iso #s):

34 - weird drop of the assault on nacho. yes, it's reasonable logic, but the actual reasoning reads as contrived to me.
35- first mention of agar (either my firefox is fucked up or he seriously never mentioned agar until this post) which is, oddly enough, a strong town read (rather no lynch that lynch rc/agar). this is strange to me.
39 - agar is "slipping down into a neutral-leaning-town".

this strikes me as very strange, especially in light of agar's flip. no mention of the dude for 34 posts, then suddenly he's a strong read, a slightly lesser town read, then bang, dead. ho hum. probably wasn't you though, y'all were pals.

I'd also note that his scumread of me became a lot stronger when hit began to gain some support. This will become important if I flip, I think.


don't like amished's logic (vi had a hand in the setup therefore faraday can't be the cop therefore cruelty must be scum. what??), don't entirely trust hoopla (i think she's just generally mysterious though so i'm not sure how accurate that read is) and think nacho needs to get back into the game asap.


i'm currently happy with faraday and tracker.




rc, it's your turn pal.

[cruelty]

Did you actually read my post or did you just quickly scan for your name?

Curious.

[cruelty]

nah I just misread your post. thought it said "because i claimed first", my bad.

[cruelty]

Don't believe they're beneficial. Basically did anyway.

[cruelty]

lol.


now i'm tunneling two people. is that even possible?

you're misrepping what i'm saying about you by dismissing it as more of the same (tunneling). quite obviously, ONE post detailing my suspicion of you is not tunneling, not even close. to call it such is, in my mind, scummy in and of itself, which strengthens my suspicion (which, i suppose, will somewhat ironically result in more "tunneling"). for now though, i'm doing exactly what's been asked of me (looking at other people) and you're trying to paint it in a scummy light.


you're probably scum.

[cruelty]

Yeah, that's no problem. I'm just a 'nilla townie.

Middle of 612.

[cruelty]

Instead of doing anything to recitfy it, you just joked about it (this is something I personally call a scumtell - when you joke about an anti-town thing you're doing without changing it, I interpret it as trying to keep doing it without making a defense while LOOKING as thought you've addressed the point).

This is... I don't even really know what this is. This reads as a very awkward attack on something you think should be scummy but don't really know how to approach.

Now I personally don't think it's even possible to have an RC scum read for the reasons people have been giving. It strikes me as scum trying to look 'scumhunting' by deliberately picking a player whose posts ooze town. There's a bit of hesitation because you're not the only one who wanted to lynch RC, but out of the players who support his lynch you were both the start and the one I feel to be the least sincere.

Irrelevant.

Obviously we're two completely different people, so our town/scum reads are not necessarily going to be the same. Don't really think it's valid to criticise someone based on their reads; that would presume that you're infallible, which I highly doubt.

Don't get me wrong, I'm open to the possibility that I have a bad read, it's happened before and it'll happen again, but in the absence of an RC flip I don't see this as a valid point.

someone I KNOW is a townie, for reasoning that boils down to 'well he's acting pro-town but I still think he's secretly a sith lord.'

This is a simplification.

You're right that calling this tunneling was an over-simplification.

t's not what I said. I said you were misrepresenting me. I stand by that.

But it's still wrong. For the town to win this game, we can't lynch either of your lynch targets. For the town to win this game, you can't have influence on our lynch. For the town to win this game, you have to die.

This is also irrelevant (and wifom). Actually it's a little bit more than that.

So far all we really have to go on is your word that you're town (and RC's). If you're scum, obviously what you say means nothing, and if you're town with a bad read on your "voting bloc" then you're probably a whole lot more dangerous than I am.

That is where we stand. I think you're scum and there's no point talking to you.

lol.

We lost this game when you did nothing but cling stubbornly to attacking your attackers.

Wait what? The game is lost? Solid attitude.

I'm not really sure how I'm to blame though. This reads as another awkward attempt to convince the town of my guilt (and responsibility for everything that has gone wrong this entire game).

The problem is, it's untrue.

I gotta cut this short, people just arrived.

[cruelty]

lol, classic.

happy enough to hold off on voting until snow white posts.

I admit I'm biased here in that I'm weighing this against a cruelty lynch (and even if we hit SW-scum today, tomorrow we'll be back in the same position) and if this was, say, D2, I wouldn't have the uncertainty I do now.

what's the problem? you'll get town cred for bussing which will make it easier to push a mislynch tomorrow.



incidentally does snow white's claim make anyone else think twice about ed's and hoopla's?

[cruelty]

Ok, so Hoopla, Faraday, cruelty: Do you really think that RC would lay that kind of trap as a scumbuddy? Will you finally move on with your tunneling (specifically cruelty)?

sorry who am i tunnelling on now?

i'm not voting for nor have i really talked about rc at all today.

[cruelty]

oh day's over huh.


i'm almost certain hito is scum (#1 pick now, sorry rc you've been demoted) with hoopla/rc/ed filling out the remaining spots.

[cruelty]

actually looking at the votecount day isn't over (5 to lynch, hoopla was #4 i think) unless i missed something.

vote: hito

if i miscounted i look like a damn fool now.

[cruelty]

aaaaand i'm a damn fool, missed hito's vote. lol.

[cruelty]

well played scum.


the tunneling thing was deliberate (sorry rc), was trying a half-assed strategy, tunneling on someone relatively town to see who rode with me (i would have gone hard against your wagon if it looked like getting through). it worked, 2/3 followed but oddly my strongest scumread was the one who didn't. probably won't use that again; it seems to be effective but my town cred was shot to pieces + too much focus on me as anti-town.

hito i honestly don't really know how i knew you were scum but i was fucking positive. soon as you started exaggerating/misrepping at the start of today i was thinking jackpot. it's a damn shame that claim came out and raped us.

faraday i didn't have much of a read on (slight town lean in the absence of any scumflips to work with), hoopla made me uneasy (as i stated earlier) but i probably wouldn't have actively pushed her lynch.


hydra.. don't like. hard to read.

[cruelty]

yeah amished, my meta is all over the place (again, deliberately, i try to mix things up so i can't be pigeonholed) so aside from an intense hatred of day 1 i don't think there's a lot of consistency to be found.


i was scumhunting, i was just taking a deliberately contrary stance in order to see what would happen. as i said, it worked, but i never really got the chance to use it and honestly, probably wouldn't have given how much of a battering i had to take in order to play the role.

i'll chalk it off as a failed experiment.