In this post, you clearly stated Raffles did not know OTU's alignment. If your believe Raffles to be ignorant of alignments, how can you be so easily convinced he's scum based on his theory of ESE? More importantly, how do YOU know he didn't know what OTU's alignment was?MoS wrote:Erm, how is that an excellent point, PBug? You're making the same mistake that Raffles made. You're assuming that the result of OTU being town justifies the conclusions he made before knowing OTU's real alignment. He did not KNOW OTU was town, and there was no logical reason for a wagon to stall on a protown player without a counterwagon springing up.
Why would you say it that way? Why no mention of conclusions we may gather if Raffles is scum? Do you know Raffles is town? Also, why wouldn't we be able to draw any conclusions if he's town? Are we going to ignore the fact that 4 out of the 6 people voting Raffles were on OTU's wagon as well? Of course you could just ignore these questions like the way you ignored xReyox asking you why you voted OTU.DGB wrote:A deadline lynch featuring a single contender means we'll almost certainly be unable to derive any conclusions from today, if Raffles turns up town.
Yet, another disclaimer moving towards a possible townie lynch. Which is typically followed up the next day by blaming the accused for not defending himself well enough.Kison wrote:Justified? Maybe. I'm not feeling all too optimistic about the outcome from this, but guess what? It's the closest we've got, and there's a deadline.
Am I the only 1 here that missed the "logic that is far better than other weak suspicions?" Someone please catch me up. And if Finals is preventing anyone from analyzing players, they probably shouldn't be voting until after finals.MoS wrote:There is no reason to spread votes around unless there is equally good logic for all the candidates being wagoned, and the logic against Raffles is far better than the weak suspicions on the other two. As it is, if I were to be convinced that Raffles was not the play today, I would probably switch my vote to DGB as a competing wagon. The chances that I will find time to go through and look at other players and analyze them by deadline are slim, considering this is finals week for me.
To me this looks like scum latching on to a townie. If Raffles gets lynched and comes up town, DGB can use this as a shield later.DGB wrote:The only connection is that I believe there is a greater chance Raffles may be town, than scum. Incidentally, I think a Raffles lynch would be most informative, especially if he is town, because I am challenging it, and people are reacting differently to the challenge to Raffles' wagon.
I agree with suspicions of DGB and BM. Could you explain the obvious tells from Raffles that I am missing? Also, in post 954 you remove your vote from Raffles("obvious scum") and place it on DGB(the "tres scummy", which I guess means average scummy). I don't disagree with your vote. But, why did you switch from a "sure thing"? In post 955 you talk about 3 scum groups. If Alex was cult and tried to recruit scum last night, what is your opinion for the lack of nightkills?mneme wrote:It's just that with certain subthreads taking up lots and lots of space, it's hard to get a hard read on anyone aside from raffles (obvious scum), BM (mixed -- but not having played with him, some of this may be playstyle), DGB (seems tres scummy), and a bare few more.
In post 975, when you say other scums, who is the primary scum? As in, other than whom?Raffles wrote:I find it more of the case that other scums are over-pushing the option 2.
Your post 983 I do agree with. It does seems that way.
What do you believe is the cause for the missing nightkills?MoS wrote:the conclusion he came to about us having at least three scum groups is not only a reasonable one, but one that I have also considered to be the most likely scenario, and we're not alone in this.
