^The stuff above the spoiler is the sort of thing you were looking for, right? The method to my madness? Some of this is true, most of it is bullshit. How about you read this instead and figure out what you should have figured out?
This was just plain old reaction testing. I certainly didn't mean to softclaim, which was an added benefit(I didn't forget it was a night start, but I didn't persay consider it), but I did mean to put early pressure on an unknown variable, a new player who I had never seen play before. I had played with everyone on this player list and knew that most of them would reaction more or less the same if I tried to put early pressure on them. I wouldn't know their alignment, because I had seen them play before. So, I picked on the newb, calling him out as scum, with the softclaim as an added benefit.
So, what's his reaction to being wagoned up to L-2 on page 2?
How is that wrong Darox?
A weak attempt at scumhunting(yay)! He sees a potential wagon brewing, the first real content of the game, but hasn't figured out that someone may have possibly claimed a guilty on him, so he figures that once everyone figures Darox out, he can vote him. You can actually see him ready to vote him based on this question.
Then, GreyICE finally says what mostly everyone was thinking, but no one said: "It's pretty fucking clear that the Lurconis wagon is due to a fucking softclaimed PR result." Wrong, but a good guess. Now, Lurc steps onto the scene:
If you believe seraph was soft claiming why didn't he do it in his first post?
A good point! With an easy answer: reaction testing. I mean, after all, there is always the possibility of a false guilty. But why is he pointing this out now? CES puts it best in his 47: "Did you
just
go back and examine whether it made sense as a soft claim?" All of a sudden, he's in danger, and instead of saying that if that is a false guilty, something is wrong, he tries to disprove the idea of there being a guilty result.
This isn't a town frame of mind: town want to bolster or build down but scum want to discredit other players to mislynch them later.
Lurc's 58 continues along a similar vein, trying to call GreyICE out and discredit the idea of it being a softclaim,
rather than trying to refute the supposed result
. It could be a softclaim but he's trying to play it down NOT being a softclaim.
Post 71 is Lurc playing more defensive ball by attacking SpyreX's vote on him.
In post 71, Lurconis wrote: In post 67, SpyreX wrote:You actually thought this Luc wagon was based on a claim?
I'm thinkin its actual scum caught but we'll see. Waitin for a few things.
If you didn't think it was based on a claim why did you put me at L-2 about 5 hours after the thread opened and all I had posted was
Besides being wrong(LLD put him at L-2, SpyreX only put him at L-3), this statement shows a continued fixation on the theoretical guilty result than actually scumhunting.
Lurc 78 wrote:Not really I think if anything there was scum on there already for it to get so high so fast. I just think it is weird he seems to think you were dense for thinking it was based off a soft claim yet he seems to think it was actually scum caught and gives no reason.
In this post, Lurc manages to discredit SpyreX's vote and GreyICE using SpyreX's words at the same time, which I have to admit is rather crafty.
Lurc 83 wrote:No my idea is that scum saw town thinking sereph soft claimed and thought it might be possible to get away with a quick lynch not that it is normal for scum to pile on votes day 1.
I would say I am most suspicious of LLamarble at this point but I don't have strong enough reads to call anyone scum for sure yet.
Here you can see a MASS discrediting of anyone who was ever on his wagon, with a specific focus on LLamarble, a focus that he does not follow up on. Also, a flaw in his logic: scum would actually be MORE wary of a false positive result, would be skeptical of the claim, and then would jump the soft-claimer the next day. Scum know whether or not information regarding alignment is correct, especially when we mostly know the distribution. In fact, people jumping on so quickly speaks to either his scumminess OR the fact that he is in fact scum and his scumbuddies are trying to bus for town cred.
I don't want to focus on his question to me in his next post, 94, where he asks a logical but still very defense-oriented question: "if you think my post have made me seem more scummy that is fine but it doesn't explain your still claiming to of not been joking or soft claiming in you 2nd post." He takes this question from his savior, his guardian, the mighty Zang who posed the same question in 87.
Rather I want to focus on his question to Llamarble, who he has not voted yet.
Lurc wrote:How does serph saying my post since make him think i'm scum enough for you to change your vote, if you agreed with him why didn't you change your vote back after the post i made you thought were scummy?
Here, Lurc asks Llamarble a...question. Maybe. Here, lemme translate: "How does Seraphim saying that my post makes him think I'm scum change enough of your read to change your vote? If you agreed with him, why didn't you change your vote back after I made saying I thought you were scummy?" In other words, he is asking Llamarble why he didn't OMGUS. Even though he answered that question in full 4 posts ago. Huh. Is he just not reading the game?
Lurc 98 wrote:Well Seraphim seems to actually believe he is a RVS super psychologist where as CES is just agreeing, I doubt two scum would try to push a mislynch so strongly from the get go. I am guessing CES is the scum there so I'll leave my random vote on him.
I've already said why this is scummy. He is trying to discredit my point without trying to address WHY I voted him from the get-go and also I mentioned the following in the same post how he "'found' scum in CES while trying to buddy up[to me] because you know I'm more aggressive than CES."
Also, what happened to Llamarble, his scumspect?
Lurc wrote:Your only explanations are that posts are scummy you haven't explained why you think that about any of them. I still don't think your scum though as scum would have to be mad to push a mislynch this hard without any reason right out of the gate.
Wrong. I've explained far more than that.
Lurc wrote:Your whole theory is that I was too caught up on my own defense. The scummiest thing coming out of RVS was the bandwagon forming on me to drive a mislynch. I examined that to look for scum on it.
You can't examine a wagon until it is no longer a wagon, which means it must either dissolve or result in a lynch. Neither has happened. You are also incapable of being objective while looking at a wagon on YOU.
Lurc wrote:Your supposed ability to find scum without a guilty read obviously comes from your master RVS psychology skills as you alluded to in post 96. Yet you have yet to build that into a case despite being asked. Your either so sure of yourself that nothing is going to disuade you until I flip town and you realize your not the RVS sherlock you thought you were or you are the ballsiest scum I have seen thus far.
Some actual town reactions and some attempts at scumhunting rather than trying to buddy up to me(sarcastically or not) while attacking CES would go a long way. Not to mention this is the second time that I haven't made a case, the first time you've done so in a post where you summarize my case on you.
Lurc wrote:The reason I say you are town is because you are an experienced player and I doubt you would paint such a huges target on your back just to drive a mislynch. CES is just one of the possible scum he is helping drive the mislynch without being too vocal allowing him to stay under the radar, the others Spyrex, LLmarble, Darox could just as easily be scum.
Do you know that about me? Maybe I have a meta of it. You never know. Also, appealing to my experience is a logical fallacy.
"This is the true face of a man who plays paladin."
