Mini 1830 - Game Over

[gerryoat]

I dont like how Square world playes but its not a reason to lynch him.
What i dont like about him right now is that he mentioned how eagers analysis on RhazhBash sucks.
While i think he has a valid point that its not really an analysis but rather a summary of what said player posted that game, i dont understand why he only refers to the RhazhBash analysis and not to the ones on Victor and Gerry.

@Square: Why do you think Gerry is scum?

@RhazhBash can you elaborate what's so scummy about this post? You can't just say "___ is scum cause of this post" And not elaborate as to why. This is why I think you're mafia. Maybe if you explained your reads a bit more. I could change my mind.

[Grendel]

Gerry, hi, I'd like to know why you don't consider my post 305 to be akin with "___ is scum cause of this post."

My town read from post 102 has evaporated. Manuel is null veering towards scum now.

I don't feel like dissecting posts 254, 259 tonight, but both rubbed me the wrong way. And I'm not seeing any thing that looks townie since my explanation on why I thought he could be town. He had a lacking presence in today's voices imo.

I didn't explain why I didn't like 254, or 259. I just said that I didn't like them, and considered it motivation to start scum reading that slot. What Rhazah did is not different from what I did. Quite similar actually. So your selectivity for this argument is quite telling given that Rhazbash is lynch bait, and I am generally town read. It'd be easy to use this on player like Rhaz, but not with me, so you

ignore what I did

that would be incriminatory based on your argument, while

throwing it on the widely scum read dude

. Its really not a stretch for you to be opportunistic scum here. If you were a tunneler then this wouldn't be so scummy, but you don't look the type.

Also your town read on me feels very forced. Explain why I'm town in a way that isn't a vague piecemeal statement.

[CCC]

Good. Now take what you said there and reread Rhahz's reason for voting. Here I'll quote it for you.

Now my vote on Manuel is serious.

He looks more like he's pushing on low hanging fruit than hunting scum.

There's a lot indicative of the type of player Snake is in the thread, but not his alignment IMO.

I even added some helpful bold on the sentence that made me vote him.

Well, I'm not sure about the low hanging fruit part, but Manuel really

wasn't

doing much scumhunting before that post.

[Manuel87]

Good. Now take what you said there and reread Rhahz's reason for voting. Here I'll quote it for you.

Now my vote on Manuel is serious.

He looks more like he's pushing on low hanging fruit than hunting scum.

There's a lot indicative of the type of player Snake is in the thread, but not his alignment IMO.

I even added some helpful bold on the sentence that made me vote him.

Well, I'm not sure about the low hanging fruit part, but Manuel really

wasn't

doing much scumhunting before that post.

From my point of view i did more scumhunting then at least 6 other players in the game at that point.
I think i already mentioned that i never post much but when i post it wont be useless prodges or unexplained "reads".
I could easily increase my postcount by spamming multiposts like other players do but thats not my style.

@Grendel: That may be true for others like Victor he also scumreads me for said post without any explanation on why he does.
Your post felt different from the others and had a statment pointing that you would eventually explain what you didnt like and a reasoning what you scumread me for even though i think low activity on a weekend is a silly reason to scumread someone but its at least something i can understand.
On the other hand saying xy post is scummy is something i dont understand especially since i still think what i said is correct.

[VictorDeAngelo]

Why would that make you vote him?

I was already scumreading Rhahz before hand. However what made shift back the vote is how much he is now coasting.

Post 302 is similar restating two reads he already has. It has no new content.

Then in post 303 after supposably reading and analysing he repeats the two reads he already has and then a fencesit read on one other player.

Rhahz doesn't seem to have a lot of opinions on players nor an interest in scumhunting, as his ISO will show anyone who looks. Instead he seems to found an easy scumread on Manuel and is just sitting on.

That would be enough for me to vote Rhahz even if I wan't already scumreading him.

Vote Count 1.05

Manuel87

: RhazhBash

RhazhBash

:

VictorDeAngelo

, gerryoat

Gamma Emerald

: Grendel, CCC

Square World

: eagerSnake, Gamma Emerald

eagerSnake

: Square World,

VictorDeAngelo

With 11 players alive, it takes

6

for a lynch.
The deadline for this day is (expired on 2016-09-26 18:00:00).

@Eggman

- First, I am totally down with having two votes. Second, please put 100% of my votes on Rhahz.

Good. Now take what you said there and reread Rhahz's reason for voting. Here I'll quote it for you.

Now my vote on Manuel is serious.

He looks more like he's pushing on low hanging fruit than hunting scum.

There's a lot indicative of the type of player Snake is in the thread, but not his alignment IMO.

I even added some helpful bold on the sentence that made me vote him.

Well, I'm not sure about the low hanging fruit part, but Manuel really

wasn't

doing much scumhunting before that post.

Ok, we're nearly there. Two things:

1) It's post 90. There's often not a lot of scumhunting from anyone in any game at this point. Manuel is at least contributing and asking questions. Sure, that might be not a lot of scumhunting but it shows at least some indication of hunting scum.
2) The low handing fruit part is entirely unfounded. There's no evidence of either snake or Gerry being low hanging fruit, and it's a stretch to think Manuel could have formed that this early. And that's if we were being incredible generous describing one or both of posts 84 could be considered as pushing (I don't think they are and I'm somewhat skeptical that a town player would form that conclusion).

All in all, the sentence doesn't line up with what's happened in the game. Instead it sounds like a nice set of buzzwords for why someone could be scum. And a disingenuous reason for voting is an idication of ____.

I left that last blank in for you to fill in yourself.

[gerryoat]

Gerry, hi, I'd like to know why you don't consider my post 305 to be akin with "___ is scum cause of this post."

My town read from post 102 has evaporated. Manuel is null veering towards scum now.

I don't feel like dissecting posts 254, 259 tonight, but both rubbed me the wrong way. And I'm not seeing any thing that looks townie since my explanation on why I thought he could be town. He had a lacking presence in today's voices imo.

I didn't explain why I didn't like 254, or 259. I just said that I didn't like them, and considered it motivation to start scum reading that slot. What Rhazah did is not different from what I did. Quite similar actually. So your selectivity for this argument is quite telling given that Rhazbash is lynch bait, and I am generally town read. It'd be easy to use this on player like Rhaz, but not with me, so you

ignore what I did

that would be incriminatory based on your argument, while

throwing it on the widely scum read dude

. Its really not a stretch for you to be opportunistic scum here. If you were a tunneler then this wouldn't be so scummy, but you don't look the type.

Also your town read on me feels very forced. Explain why I'm town in a way that isn't a vague piecemeal statement.

I TR you because of what you've done all day. Whereas he hasn't done much at all day. Also this post was also townie in itself, so lol

[eagerSnake]

VOTE: RhazhBash

At this point I don't feel like we should have to extract explanations by force

[eagerSnake]

Also if Huntress doesn't post at least an "I'm up to page X, this is what I think so far...." I would vote the slot

[Eggman]

Vote Count 1.06

Not Voting

: The_Jester, Huntress

Manuel87

: RhazhBash

Gamma Emerald

: Grendel, CCC

Square World

: Gamma Emerald

eagerSnake

: Square World

The_Jester

: Manuel87

RhazhBash

: gerryoat, VictorDeAngelo, eagerSnake

With 11 players alive, it takes

6

for a lynch.
The deadline for this day is (expired on 2016-09-26 18:00:00).

Upon their request, RhazhBash is being replaced.

[CCC]

Well, I'm not sure about the low hanging fruit part, but Manuel really

wasn't

doing much scumhunting before that post.

From my point of view i did more scumhunting then at least 6 other players in the game at that point.

For the purposes of reading you, it no longer matters how much scumhunting you had done at that point. It's better to consider how much scumhunting you've done

altogether

, which is an entirely different question.

[CCC]

Ok, we're nearly there. Two things:

1) It's post 90. There's often not a lot of scumhunting from anyone in any game at this point.

I agree with you. But I can easily see a Town player disagreeing.

2) The low handing fruit part is entirely unfounded. There's no evidence of either snake or Gerry being low hanging fruit, and it's a stretch to think Manuel could have formed that this early. And that's if we were being incredible generous describing one or both of posts 84 could be considered as pushing (I don't think they are and I'm somewhat skeptical that a town player would form that conclusion).

Yeah... I wouldn't count either of those posts as 'pushing', either. But if they are, then anyone who could conceivably be pushed so early in the game would be low hanging fruit, surely?

All in all, the sentence doesn't line up with what's happened in the game. Instead it sounds like a nice set of buzzwords for why someone could be scum. And a disingenuous reason for voting is an idication of ____.

Possible completions include:

1) Lack of sleep
2) Poor communication abilities
3) Poor reasoning abilities
4) Typos
5) ...

Alright, I get that the completion you're

looking

for is Mafia. And it can be. Or it can be a sign of over-eagerness, or of a village idiot, or, or, or...

I just think that one comment is a frightfully thin thing to hang an entire scum case on.

[Eggman]

House replaces RhazhBash.

[House]

I've been following this game since GreenNope was being replaced.

I'm fine with where my vote is. Would also be willing to proxy my vote to Jester

[Gamma Emerald]

Okay, so you townread Jester and scumread Manuel. How about sharing some more reads?

[Huntress]

Most of the questions I had while reading have been addressed pretty thoroughly in the thread already but here are a few that I couldn't find answers to.

@ eagerSnake:

- Why feel the need to tell everyone (in 6) that you're not making a random vote? And why attack Victor for his vote in 74 rather than ask for an explanation?

I disagree. Establishing scumteams is a great way to POE people into your town block. For example, we will number players 1-11. Everyone starts off as scum in your book. Over the course of the day, numbers 5-11 have all earned town points, and you have moved them into your town block. Numbers 1-4 are still in your scum block as they have not earned any town points. Number 1 has scumtold, and is the scummiest of the block. After reading interactions between 1 and 2, you determine that it couldn't be scum interaction, so 2 is moved to your townblock. Etc.

And if you're wrong about 1 you end up with scum in your townblock.

rhazhbash is probtown because there are opportunistic scum on him

Who are the opportunistic scum? I know you have a scumread on Gerry, but you imply more than one here.

Sorry, meant to have two parts to that post.

I dont like how Square world playes but its not a reason to lynch him.
What i dont like about him right now is that he mentioned how eagers analysis on RhazhBash sucks.
While i think he has a valid point that its not really an analysis but rather a summary of what said player posted that game, i dont understand why he only refers to the RhazhBash analysis and not to the ones on Victor and Gerry.

I'm putting Manuel back into my "would lynch today" pile for this post.

Why is that?

I dont like how Square world playes but its not a reason to lynch him.
What i dont like about him right now is that he mentioned how eagers analysis on RhazhBash sucks.
While i think he has a valid point that its not really an analysis but rather a summary of what said player posted that game, i dont understand why he only refers to the RhazhBash analysis and not to the ones on Victor and Gerry.

@RhazhBash can you elaborate what's so scummy about this post? You can't just say "___ is scum cause of this post" And not elaborate as to why. This is why I think you're mafia. Maybe if you explained your reads a bit more. I could change my mind.

Did I miss you asking the same thing of Victor for 258?

[VictorDeAngelo]

Ok, we're nearly there. Two things:

1) It's post 90. There's often not a lot of scumhunting from anyone in any game at this point.

I agree with you. But I can easily see a Town player disagreeing.

2) The low handing fruit part is entirely unfounded. There's no evidence of either snake or Gerry being low hanging fruit, and it's a stretch to think Manuel could have formed that this early. And that's if we were being incredible generous describing one or both of posts 84 could be considered as pushing (I don't think they are and I'm somewhat skeptical that a town player would form that conclusion).

Yeah... I wouldn't count either of those posts as 'pushing', either. But if they are, then anyone who could conceivably be pushed so early in the game would be low hanging fruit, surely?

1

All in all, the sentence doesn't line up with what's happened in the game. Instead it sounds like a nice set of buzzwords for why someone could be scum. And a disingenuous reason for voting is an idication of ____.

Possible completions include:

1) Lack of sleep
2) Poor communication abilities
3) Poor reasoning abilities
4) Typos
5) ...

Alright, I get that the completion you're

looking

for is Mafia. And it can be. Or it can be a sign of over-eagerness, or of a village idiot, or, or, or...

2

I just think that one comment is a frightfully thin thing to hang an entire scum case on.

1.

No. Being pushed in the early game does not imply your low hanging fruit. And if it did then Rhazh vote becomes a player didn't do a lot of scumhunting and he pushed some players. So despite your best efforts, you really can't defend this.

2.

Sure, technically anything scummy could explained away any number of ways. Perhaps he was tired and completely misunderstood the gamestate. Perhaps he didn't the communication skills to say what he meant so instead he said something different. Maybe he simply misspelt.... no sorry it's too late for me to even find an implausible finish to that sentence.

I don't see any value in continuing this discussion further. You seem to willing ignore your own analyse of the posts (since you state repeatedly that you agree with my assessment of Manuel posts), and instead inexplicable willing to give Rhahz the benefit of the doubt that he must have read them differently, and subsequently it's plausible this all came a townie place even if no one will explain precisely how.

[House]

Okay, so you townread Jester and scumread Manuel. How about sharing some more reads?

Had I replaced in when I first asked, I'd have voted you Your early game was complete shit.

I'm fighting that urge because your content has improved lately, but I'm still sus.

Happier?

[House]

Ok, we're nearly there. Two things:

1) It's post 90. There's often not a lot of scumhunting from anyone in any game at this point.

I agree with you. But I can easily see a Town player disagreeing.

2) The low handing fruit part is entirely unfounded. There's no evidence of either snake or Gerry being low hanging fruit, and it's a stretch to think Manuel could have formed that this early. And that's if we were being incredible generous describing one or both of posts 84 could be considered as pushing (I don't think they are and I'm somewhat skeptical that a town player would form that conclusion).

Yeah... I wouldn't count either of those posts as 'pushing', either. But if they are, then anyone who could conceivably be pushed so early in the game would be low hanging fruit, surely?

1

All in all, the sentence doesn't line up with what's happened in the game. Instead it sounds like a nice set of buzzwords for why someone could be scum. And a disingenuous reason for voting is an idication of ____.

Possible completions include:

1) Lack of sleep
2) Poor communication abilities
3) Poor reasoning abilities
4) Typos
5) ...

Alright, I get that the completion you're

looking

for is Mafia. And it can be. Or it can be a sign of over-eagerness, or of a village idiot, or, or, or...

2

I just think that one comment is a frightfully thin thing to hang an entire scum case on.

1.

No. Being pushed in the early game does not imply your low hanging fruit. And if it did then Rhazh vote becomes a player didn't do a lot of scumhunting and he pushed some players. So despite your best efforts, you really can't defend this.

2.

Sure, technically anything scummy could explained away any number of ways. Perhaps he was tired and completely misunderstood the gamestate. Perhaps he didn't the communication skills to say what he meant so instead he said something different. Maybe he simply misspelt.... no sorry it's too late for me to even find an implausible finish to that sentence.

I don't see any value in continuing this discussion further. You seem to willing ignore your own analyse of the posts (since you state repeatedly that you agree with my assessment of Manuel posts), and instead inexplicable willing to give Rhahz the benefit of the doubt that he must have read them differently, and subsequently it's plausible this all came a townie place even if no one will explain precisely how.

And you should know better than to be voting Rhaz.

No good will come of my wagon.

[VictorDeAngelo]

Sorry, meant to have two parts to that post.

I dont like how Square world playes but its not a reason to lynch him.
What i dont like about him right now is that he mentioned how eagers analysis on RhazhBash sucks.
While i think he has a valid point that its not really an analysis but rather a summary of what said player posted that game, i dont understand why he only refers to the RhazhBash analysis and not to the ones on Victor and Gerry.

I'm putting Manuel back into my "would lynch today" pile for this post.

Why is that?

I didn't like how he said he didn't like square's but wouldn't lynch for it, but then his reasons sounded more like valid reasons to lynch. To put it another way, I didn't see him thinking the second two lines but then coming to the conclusion in the first line.

Although, looking back now, I'm thinking perhaps I was being too harsh. I'll take a reread of Manuel but not tonight.

And you should know better than to be voting Rhaz.

No good will come of my wagon.

Well, I'll just unvote now then... wait a sec. Are you trying to trick me House?

[House]

Well, I'll just unvote now then... wait a sec. Are you trying to trick me House?

I guess we'll see after I'm dead.

[Huntress]

Vote: CCC

My other scum reads at the moment are eager and gamma, with Rhaz/House a little lower.

[House]

Vote: CCC

My other scum reads at the moment are eager and gamma, with Rhaz/House a little lower.

Please explain eager and Gamma?

[House]

Vote: CCC

My other scum reads at the moment are eager and gamma, with Rhaz/House a little lower.

Also, why a vanity vote on CCC instead of voting me if I'm among your scum reads?

I'd have expected a case if you were going to seriously vote CCC instead of joining my wagon.

[House]

Also also... you haven't even interacted with CCC... Meeeehhhhhhh

Not a good look.

[Gamma Emerald]

You don't

have

to interact with someone to assess them.