Mini 956: The Quayside (Game Over)

[Goatrevolt]

Also, can you explain your thoughts on Patrick and why you now believe him to be town?

[Goatrevolt]

1. This shows your theory of the game is at least partially self-contradictory.

Can you explain this one as well?

[SerialClergyman]

My main reason for dulling my fire on RC was due to him explaining his lack of vote on me or McGriddle. I think scum rarely would say 'I liked the answers they both gave me'.

Aside from that specific instance, I thought he dealt with pressure pretty well.

At the same time, NabNab started egging you to push on me, and then attacked Elmo and McGriddle, the two easiest targets in the game. My cause for concern at McGriddle's recent vote is that if he is scum, Nab is probably innocent, which is less than ideal. However I do think it's more likely that he's a townie who is genuine in his putting himself down and Nab is taking advantage of 'mistakes' like that to push him. Same with Elmo, I think most town just don't see much about Elmo yet.

When Jahudo posts discrediting the town read on Ecto and sounding like a Nab buddy with his disagreeing with the case but zero opinion on Nab, I felt the two really looked like scumbuddies. Elmo got in first, but I agreed absolutely.

My opinion of Patrick changed in post 146, where he answered my demands for something more concrete. He explained why there wasn't something more concrete earlier and I believed him, and I liked what he put forward. I also like his semi-defence of McGriddle to me just then, which pushed him into the no lynch for today category.

As for your last post, I admit upon reflection that was probably not really correct. I guess I don't like it when you set things up that may or may not be true, it appears to be having your cake and eating it too. If Pops' alignment matters in how you view me, it seems unreasonable to counter my objection by saying it's up in the air.

But even then, having another look at it, it seems that part was using ME to try to determin POPS' alignment, so I think I just read that wrong on the way through. My bad.

[Goatrevolt]

Good responses. Your progression on Patrick matches my own, which makes me feel a bit better about you. I felt your question to Patrick earlier on in the game was your most pro-town post in that I was thinking the exact same thing about Patrick and it reflected genuine scum hunting. And I agree with your current read on him as well.

[Ectomancer]

unvote

I re-read 159. I think I skimmed and skipped over parts that actually appied. My Father-in-law's funeral was yesterday and so I hope I can be excused. (A fantastic send off for an amazing guy. He was a nuclear physicist who worked for General Dynamics and was a Grand Commandant of the Knights Templar and Grandfather to my children)

[RedCoyote]

No, if I felt someone was being anti-town but couldn't definitively say that I thought his or her behavior was more likely to come from scum, I wouldn't be willing to support that person's lynch. You would?

Of course. I don't subscribe NabNab's point of view that Elmo is acting in "bad form" (I'd say he's probably just trying to be cute), but I'd definitely be willing to lynch someone on the first day who I thought was actively hurting the town's chances at victory, because that's the best time to do so.

That being said, no one here would fall under that category.

---

I don't think I have any problem with McGriddle's play now.

This is kind of a big step to make. I mean, I think I understand McGriddle's mindset (in regards to the pops situation), but I'm not ready to say I have no problems with his play. His latest vote especially has me particularly interested.

---

I want to put it on Naab, but I want to do some ISOing and more hunting before I put him at L-2. I have not necessarily had a change of heart, just a better candidate come up.

This really does not sound honest to me, if I can be frank with you. You say he's a "better candidate" than pops, but not good enough to vote just yet. You say you want to reread over his posts, but how do you know he's a "better candidate" if you aren't familiar with what he's said?

In other words, I'd be willing to cut you slack here if you told me, "Well, I noticed NabNab say 'blah blah' in post X and 'blah blah' in post Y, and it caught my attention. I need to go back and see if this is a pattern of behavior, or if there was an explanation for why he said this".

Why do I feel like you're making it up as you go along?

---

Clarification was not elaboration last time I consulted a dictionary.

That's cute. If you want to be obstinate, that's you're call. I'm just calling it how I see it.

I actually thought it was rhetorical, but I figure #145 woulda answered it if not.

Funny, I was just talking to Ecto about that. It seems like you haven't found anything worthwhile this game, and yet you've already got a few townies picked out. That's pretty impressive, so what's your secret?

---

One really key interaction I noted was the one between SerialClergyman and Nabakov. If Nabakov ends up as scum, I bet SC is as well. SC called out Nabakov, but didn't vote him in that post. I found that really odd at the time, and then when called out on it by Red Coyote, he votes for Red Coyote next, and never goes back to Nabakov, which I also found odd. When the Nabakov wagon picks up, SerialClergyman jumps on immediately. Distance, distance, distance! There is a strong chance the two are scum together.

I can see that connection, most definitely. I don't really get scum vibes from NabNab, but if I'm wrong, I'd want to look at SC a little more.

In direct opposition to Nabakov's push, I felt like his stance on pops was natural and honest.

We're beyond this stage, I think. I agree with the second part of the sentence. McGriddle was just kind of speaking his mind of pops. I think McGriddle backing away from pops and moving toward NabNab has felt very sloppy though.

---

Fine Nab, the only reason I didn't vote fo you was because I was going to go back and ISO you, but I don't have time for that

Unvote; vote: McGriddle

You don't have time for it? Do you feel rushed? Are you going V/LA? I don't think you've even given a reason for why it is you're suddenly seeing scum in NabNab.

---

But when I ask "Why did you feel the need to totally breakdown Goat's non-scummy starter case?", I am definitely NOT looking for "Oh, well my vote was going somewhere else, but those guys weren't scummy haha."

Goat said he wanted the case to be taken seriously, and offered it up for public discourse. I consented, and gave him my honest opinion. I don't know where you get this idea that you think Goat would've wanted me to sugarcoat my feelings or be gentle with him. My opinion was not far removed from Incog's, in fact I even said that I basically agreed with what Incog had to say about Goat v.s. pops.

I took it a step further to say that I thought the loaded question was awkward and too forceful of an approach, but that didn't cause me grief given that fact that I had seen other things that interested me more than Goat at that point in the game.

I don't know where I've been unclear about any of this, and I certainly haven't been dishonest or dodgy.

---

It may not be surprising, but you're using it as evidence against me. You're suggesting that it's likely that Serial(scum) is more likely to completely ignore a giftwrapped case on Pops(???) and instead push (however feebly in your opinion) suspicion on Nabarov(scum mate).

This is really, really awkward sounding. I don't like this at all. At no point did I ever consider pops a "giftwrapped case", and just the notion strikes me as misleading.

People Serial wouldn't lynch today include:

Incognito
Goatrevolt
iamausername
Patrick
Ectomancer

Why did you put iamausername on that list? I don't recall you exchanging with him much at all. Personally, I don't know how anyone could have a solid read on him at this point, let alone a "he's good enough to not lynch" read.

At the same time, NabNab started egging you to push on me, and then attacked Elmo and McGriddle, the two easiest targets in the game.

That's debatable. I mean, I get what you're saying here, but I don't think anyone should be too quick to call anyone the "easy lynch". I think we're missing a lot from both of these players at the moment, and in the case of McGriddle especially, I think some players may be trying to find reasons to excuse him.

---

My Father-in-law's funeral was yesterday and so I hope I can be excused. (A fantastic send off for an amazing guy. He was a nuclear physicist who worked for General Dynamics and was a Grand Commandant of the Knights Templar and Grandfather to my children)

My condolences. He sounds like he was an amazing man.

[Jahudo]

Jahudo had previously been ok with Nabakov's pressure on Elmo, and I don't see specifically what was wrong with what Nabakov did here. He called Elmo out then later expanded on what he dislikes, what's the "setup" aspect of this and why is it scummy?

I never said I was okay with Nabakov's pressure on Elmo. But yes, post 179 was the first time I noticed it was wrong.

I interpret it as Nabakov stating that Elmo is questionable for only providing content when asked a question. Nabakov asks Elmo to provide content, making any response from Elmo seem more scummy because it will prove that Elmo only gives content when asked a question. That doesn't seem like the town way to prove a scumtell.

When Jahudo posts discrediting the town read on Ecto

That wasn't my intention, and I made sure to say in that same post that I didn't have any suspicions on Ectomancer. I just did not understand how that one post was pulled out to give a gut town read, because it was null to me.

[McGriddle]

You don't have time for it? Do you feel rushed? Are you going V/LA? I don't think you've even given a reason for why it is you're suddenly seeing scum in NabNab.

It is Finals season and I have spent a lot of my time studying and preparing. This weekend is crush weekend, and I am going to a concert tonight. We have a 2-week deadline, and I don't know how devoted and active in this game so I want to put my vote down as I find Nab more scummy than pops. Nab is a gut feel scum to me, and also if you will refer to post # 137 you will see my defense and why I think he is scummy. I never thought pops was too scummy to begin with, but it being the beginning of the game I like to have my vote places for pressure. All I said was that pops is likely to be scum based on his attitude. But that's not much of a case so I didn't have a confident read on pops. Nab comes in and takes a shot at me out of the blue. That wasn't enough to vote him. I wanted to go do some ISO reading as the post seemed like grasping at a case against me, and struck me as randomly making a case. I have not had a lot of time and the ISO read on Nab was hard to sit down and do.

[popsofctown]

So there's been talk. In this thread. About me. And the f-word.

Jahudo got the question I asked him wrong. Or half correct perhaps. I full read of Mafia Jailbreak would reveal that I continued fluff deep past when it was useful for initiating conversation, with players even saying "The time for that is over now".

A more correct answer would have been that I entertain myself and laugh at my own jokes and become ever so pleased with myself. This has nothing to do with alignment, empirically I don't do it more as scum rather than town, on paper it is foolish as well. Suppose I am under some pressure x, and can either lurk or crack a joke in this thread. Are people going to forget that I have crap to answer for if I come make myself conspicuous with a joke, or skip a day and look at some card spoilers on MTGS? If I lurk.

I've been accused of fluffposting here and there in other games, but not as strongly as here since mafia jailbreak. In that game, there seemed to be several townies who totally believed it was a scumtell and remained unconvinced it didn't matter as long as I produced ample content ("ample" doesn't mean you double it every time I make an offtopic post, that's unfair beeteedubs) all the living mafia in the game who "me too-ed" on to it when they weren't really crafters of the argument, and one vanilla townie who actually read one of my games and also had a brain and refused to vote me. So I expect that pattern to be followed to some extent, and I'm suspicious of the later votes on my wagon. There's not one in particularly that does it so strongly that I'm ready to bite the neck and leech for blood, but Jahudo was disappointing at the very least, I feel like he's seen this before. Instead of developing a patterned model for my play, he went on an extremely WIFOMy angle of logic and said "last time he posted fluff we thought he was scum and he was actually town, so this time it means he's town... BUT THAT'S WHAT HE WANTS US TO THINK DUN DUN DUUUUUUUUUUUUN". That's fine as a reason not to count the fluff as a towntell, but selecting one half of a WIFOM tradeoff with the certainty of a vote, without satisfying analysis explaining why you think a certain half of the tradeoff was selected, ( he vaguely mentioned that I was deflective with my fluff or something), is not good.

So Incognito called for more content from me, which is fair, I'm a little behind the curve on content. It's honestly because I'm seeing lots of town this game, I keep checking the thread, seeing town, not posting, and then LoL tells me a match has been found, but my teammate picked Katarina so it's autoloss anyway.

I had to reread ISOs and the thread before I could find much of anything to point fingers at, but I did find a string of stuff I didn't like from SerialClergyman. (I also hate Nabanab as much as everyone else seems to, but it's been gut and I don't get the articulated reasons atm).

Incog points out that I ignored some major material. Goat quotes and expands on that point. RedCoyote quotes THAT and expands on THAT point. I bet there's scum in those three, and even further I would guess it's Red. The original point was nowhere near strong or unusual enough to get this kind of reaction.

First time through I can't figure out what bothers me. Something worse besides the normal fail/slight scumtell from "dude everyone on my wagon is scum".

It's the way it's ordered. It's sort of subtly arranged in a circular logic form that reinforces the argument with the argument itself.

If you naturally ordered these thoughts yourself, you'd say "Incog points out I ignored some major material, when it wasn't even a big deal. Goat jumps on the molehill too, quoting him and expounding. Then RedCoyote quotes and adds even MORE. One of them is scum, and I bet it's red"

Instead it's out of order. The conclusion that one of them is scum is put before the opinion that it is not a major deal. So by the time you get to the end, you believe it wasn't that big a deal because one of those three is scum. Because they made a big deal of it. It's ordered for circular logic. Even if you don't buy that, it's not ordered logically and town roles are the ones that want to argue things in a clear, logical fashion rather than just spray and pray.

To answer the charge - I read Goat's case on pops and didn't feel the need to comment. While Goat checked the time was 4 minutes after his post, he didn't check that that time in Sydney would have been about 3:30am, and that was my last post before going to bed, which explains it's brevity. But even then, I would have commented if I felt I had something to add, I just didn't.

The "overly defensive" attack should be used sparingly, but I think it's valid here. Serial Clergyman clearly indicates that there are two separate reasons he didn't comment on the case, and that either one was independently sufficient to excuse him of commenting. Yet he takes the time out of his day, and adds space to our thread to explain both reasons. Why not just one and be done with it? Most people just pick the strongest reason that could stand alone and don't go on and on.

It was probably 2:30 in Sydney and he thought, "I'm tired and it'd be easier to wait for the litmus test for pops to come back from the lab before i comment on it anyway."

I think the above is both utterly believable and very unlikely to come from scum.

Wasn't my reaction at all, and I think the strength of his certainty suggests he's playing Sponsor a Townie.

I didn't like one part of Nab's post (that I was oging to for other reasons stuff is a minor scumtell) but I'm not sold on him.

I would like Patrick to say something concrete after his last post, hence my question to him about his suspects.

Greetings, myself and my associate Nabakov are your assigned nightkill provision officers for this game, please don't hesitate to ask us if you have any enquiries

I was thinking the same thing could be possible, Elmo.

unvote, vote Nabakov

Independence 0, Opportunism 1

Neither of you mentioned McGriddle's bizarre, selfadmitted-ignorant vote. Thoughts?

Can I haz your thoughts so that when you haz my thoughts they will be like your thoughts and you won't think the thoughts i haz are scummy?






Well that's all for now.

[RedCoyote]

I understand where you are coming from, McGriddle. I have finals coming up in the next few weeks as well. If you think you've got too much going on in your life, then there's no shame in replacing out.

I mean, I don't want to feel like I'm misreading you because you honestly don't have the time to commit to the game. On the same token, I don't want you to get away with "Here is a vote, but I don't have time to do anything else so later" if you are scum.

[NabakovNabakov]

Note: This post has been ninja'd by 203-209. I will address them at a later date.

One really key interaction I noted was the one between SerialClergyman and Nabakov. If Nabakov ends up as scum, I bet SC is as well. SC called out Nabakov, but didn't vote him in that post. I found that really odd at the time, and then when called out on it by Red Coyote, he votes for Red Coyote next, and never goes back to Nabakov, which I also found odd. When the Nabakov wagon picks up, SerialClergyman jumps on immediately. Distance, distance, distance! There is a strong chance the two are scum together.

Don't forget how I pushed at your vote on SC in such a way that you removed it. That would seem like the biggest tell to me.

As soon as the pops thing died out, Nabakov basically just kind of stopped putting any pressure on pops anymore.

My line of thinking kind of petered out in 54. I had noticed that pops was giving undue attention to Patrick, and my initial reaction to pops' OMGUS qualification was suspicion. But then I thought about it and realized the two things canceled out.

Suspicion of players is relative, so even if someone's thoughts on a player don't change they can still become more suspicious of someone else. I don't see anything unusual about what McGriddle did.

The observation that suspicion is relative would have bearing in an "unvote; vote..." context. But like I said, when you are only talking about an unvote, the only factor involved is suspicion of the player being unvoted. When Germany moves troops from the Western to the Eastern front, it's because they consider Russia a larger threat than France. But when Russia moves troops from the front, it's because they don't want to fight any more.

As for Nab, I don't have time to post a case right now, but I'll try to get on that today or tonight. The general gist involves our interactions at the beginning of the game, his vote on McGriddle, interactions with Elmo, and attitude toward the wagon on him. The McGriddle vote felt like an attempt to frame a possibly scummy McGriddle as scum rather than a legitimate feeling that he was scum.

And

I support the wagon on NabakovNabakov but not going to put him at lynch-1 now. His attack on McGriddle looked less like he was interested in his alignment and more like he just wanted to make a case against him. If he's scum there's a possibility he was trying to turn attention away from RedCoyote or pops with this.

To be perfectly honest, I had no idea I was going to make a case on McGriddle when I decided to sit down and give a serious answer to the question of who I thought was suspicious. I iso'd him because I had no read on him. When I did that analysis, I saw pre-excuses, I saw reflexivity, I saw a contradiction, I saw a suspicious vote. Did that convince me 100% he was scum? No, and I've never been a "diescumdie" sort of player anyway. But why would I go through all that effort of examining McGriddle, come back reasonably assured he was scum, and not subject my results to public scrutiny?

So that might be part of the problem here. My case doesn't read like someone convinced his target is scummy because I didn't begin collecting information under the assumption that McGriddle was scummy. There was no big tip-off that got me going in this case. Instead, it's a collection of details, and a case like that certainly

can

come from a player who is trying desperately to cobble together a case for some ulterior motive, but it can also come from someone who likes to look at the details and thinks that's where good scum hide.

So with that in view, I'm not quite sure how to convince anybody that this is an example of the latter and not the former. The main thing to zero in on might be the idea of my having ulterior motives. I will admit that there was an element of forced motive to "make a case" for its own sake, both because that's a skill I've been working on recently (my town play, which is rarely lynched but also rarely right about who's scum, generally settles into a role of commenter/historian if I'm not careful) and because in this game specifically I didn't have any strong reads or particular affinities with current cases.

There wasn't one strong case on RedCoyote so much as three weak ones (username's vote was RVS, SC's was... OMGUS?, and Ecto's seemed to be a punishment for not understanding goat's case in the larger context of the game). I was getting strong town vibes from Goat. No real read on Ecto, and I didn't want to vote Elmo so much as give him a time-out. I've already said that my suspicion of pops had played itself out.

I think this also plays into the second thing that has been floated as an ulterior motive, which would be attempting to divert attention from a scumbuddy in trouble. RC's wagon didn't have a unifying theme, and the unifying theme of pops wagon was that he was unrepentantly drawing attention to himself. The first wouldn't need my help and the second wouldn't want it. Either way, it seems the main criteria for identifying my scumbuddies (we're up to pops, jahudo, SC, and RC now ,right?) is whether or not it makes me look more suspicious.

At the same time, NabNab started egging you to push on me, and then attacked Elmo and McGriddle, the two easiest targets in the game.

Eh, I think that's a questionable claim. Elmo knows what he's doing, I just happen to disagree with it. McGriddle may be the least experienced player here (?), but he's also played 14 games. At that level of experience, base vulnerability really only comes down to playstyle. I mean, I'm the first person to give an inexperienced player the benefit of the doubt, but that's why I balked at McGriddle's first post. When a player who's been around the block opens with a post that screams "Go easy on me," I tend to think my sympathies are being played.

[popsofctown]

I made a very large post and got ninja'ed several times.

It may not be surprising, but you're using it as evidence against me. You're suggesting that it's likely that Serial(scum) is more likely to completely ignore a giftwrapped case on Pops(???) and instead push (however feebly in your opinion) suspicion on Nabarov(scum mate).

This is really, really awkward sounding. I don't like this at all. At no point did I ever consider pops a "giftwrapped case", and just the notion strikes me as misleading.

By giftwrapped case, he means a case that is easy to piggyback on, take ownership of, and push to lynch.

I feel like I have to take a pretty big step into scum mindset territory just to figure out the term though..

[popsofctown]

and the unifying theme of pops wagon was that he was unrepentantly drawing attention to himself.

lawl

[McGriddle]

I understand where you are coming from, McGriddle. I have finals coming up in the next few weeks as well. If you think you've got too much going on in your life, then there's no shame in replacing out.

I mean, I don't want to feel like I'm misreading you because you honestly don't have the time to commit to the game. On the same token, I don't want you to get away with "Here is a vote, but I don't have time to do anything else so later" if you are scum.

I don't want to replace out or anything, I am doing what I can to maintain my part in this game to the best of my ability. I will admit, after these finals are over next week I will have a lot more time to pay attention to this game. Until then I am going to only play a reactionary role to what people ask me or things that have been said recently that I want to dispute. Meaning ISOing and searching out scum from previous arguments and statements are going to be lacking on my end, and the amount of posting I will be doing shall be limited.

[Hoopla]

Day 1, Vote Count #9

With twelve alive, it takes

7

votes to lynch. Deadline is schedueled for 7:00AM GMT, April 26th <Countdown>.

NabakovNabakov

-

5

(Elmo, Goatrevolt, SerialClergyman, iamausername, McGriddle)

popsofctown

-

2

(Incognito, Jahudo)

Goatrevolt

-

2

(Patrick, popsofctown)

McGriddle

-

2

(NabakovNabakov, RedCoyote)

Not Voting

-

1

(Ectomancer)

[Patrick]

I never said I was okay with Nabakov's pressure on Elmo. But yes, post 179 was the first time I noticed it was wrong.

You didn't say it in so many words, but it was the impression I got. It would be fair to say you were ok enough with it to voice some kind of agreement and to say that you didn't like Elmo not explaining his positions. Anyone can change their mind of course, but yours stuck out to me because it came shortly after it became obvious that the Nabakov train was gaining real momentum. Whilst his play looks scummy, what you pointed out didn't strike me as an attempt to make Elmo look scummy whatever he did; I just read it more as trying to get him to contribute something and a seperate critisism for showing up after I'd asked for his opinion.

Haven't really read the text walls that have sprung up, will do so tomorrow.

[Elmo]

Elmo knows what he's doing

News to me.....

[Elmo]

I'd definitely be willing to lynch someone on the first day who I thought was

actively

hurting the town's chances at victory, because that's the best time to do so.

Would that include someone who literally wasn't posting anything (and wouldn't be replaced or killed under the ruleset)? It seems very difficult to actively hurt the town's chances outside of something like MAD Mafia or so. (Posting too

much

?)

That's cute. If you want to be obstinate, that's you're call. I'm just calling it how I see it.

(shrug) I'll generally answer specific questions, and I intend everything that I write to be clear and will clarify things if asked to. I just don't (for whatever reason) think there's much value in spontaneously volunteering 'content' at the present.

Funny, I was just talking to Ecto about that. It seems like you haven't found anything worthwhile this game, and yet you've already got a few townies picked out. That's pretty impressive, so what's your secret?

Well, Goat said he's passive as scum and he's not being passive so he's town, and Patrick is always town so he's town, and popsofctown said he posts fluff as town and he's posting fluff so he's town. I think. I know he does it as scum too, but it's more likely he's town, so.

Jahudo - Unless he's decided to shed his busing meta, he's probably town if Nabakov is scum. Weak read, though.

What do you think of what he's written (how much, what on)? Especially

popsofctown is aware of his fluff meta, and I think he could use it as scum to try and hide behind this null tell. I don't mind some of his jokes, as long as he doesn't use it to deflect from attention. Post 99 looks like deflection. I think he tried to redirect Goat's feelings about him into the fluff posting tell. unvote; Vote: popsofctown

that? You put him down as ?? but don't seem to be looking into him much, relatively speaking.

I'm trying to dig out the case on pops but it may 'ave to wait until tomorrow.

[Goatrevolt]

Yeah, I mentioned earlier that I needed to dedicate some time to looking over Jahudo, and putting together some reasons on Nabakov. I've got a headache destroying my brain right now, though, so now is not the time.

[Incognito]

Trying to catch up with stuff. I'll try to keep this brief since this page had a bunch of walls already.

Mind control.

I'm gonna need you to elaborate on this a bit more. Because I got the same feel Patrick did in his #196 about Jahudo's post #179, so it surprised me when you suddenly mentioned you had a town read on him. What

specifically

is it about Jahudo's posting that made you feel he was town?

Maybe making the 5th consecutive reasonless vote on this wagon seems like a dangerous play if this whole things goes belly up.

Do you find the other reasonless votes scummy so far? I think this is the first post where you've actually

addressed

the wagon on you and it strikes me as a bit bizarre that you've taken this long to do so. I know that when I'm being wagoned, I'm usually strongly interested in each and every person's reasons for wagoning me because I know I can use that wagon to get a feel for people's possible alignments. It's odd that you haven't seemed to take the time to do just that.

-~-~

I should note that despite the fact that I did mention that I like the wagon on NabNab, I did find myself disliking McGriddle's eventual vote. I can see what Patrick's saying about it seeming like something a bit brazen for scum to do, but the follow-up post made by McGriddle doesn't inspire as much confidence.

I never thought pops was too scummy to begin with, but it being the beginning of the game I like to have my vote places for pressure.

Didn't you say he was your strongest read when you placed your vote on him though? Also, if you like having your vote places just for pressure, why exactly did you feel the need to remove it when you were planning on doing this iso read of NabNab? You said you felt pops was still scummy in your book; I don't get why the pressure would need to be removed then.

@popsofctown:

Why is your vote still on Goatrevolt?

Gonna make another post on other stuff tomorrow.

[RedCoyote]

By giftwrapped case, he means a case that is easy to piggyback on, take ownership of, and push to lynch.

I gathered that. I just don't understand why he thought that. I don't think you were anywhere close to being a sure lynch, with or without SC's support.

I also like your case against SC, and I'm anxious to hear his response to you.

---

Would that include someone who literally wasn't posting anything (and wouldn't be replaced or killed under the ruleset)?

Sure, that would be acceptable. If a Mod wasn't keeping up with the game and there was a player who was effectively lurking for the entire day. The town shouldn't have to carry that weight.

[Ectomancer]

Trying to catch up with stuff. I'll try to keep this brief since this page had a bunch of walls already.

Mind control.

I'm gonna need you to elaborate on this a bit more. Because I got the same feel Patrick did in his #196 about Jahudo's post #179, so it surprised me when you suddenly mentioned you had a town read on him. What

specifically

is it about Jahudo's posting that made you feel he was town?

Because he seemed to be the one who saw the failing in declaring me to be town after 129. All I saw from supporting posts was "NK Ecto, he's town!" until Jahudo's rain on the parade.
Sure, if you think someone is town, then it can be a good idea to state it (as I did with Jahudo), but it also can be a bad a idea to so blatantly advertise who the town has cleared in their mind as it paints a target on their back (aside from protection WIFOM of course).
I thought he did just enough to kill that without being obvious about it or going too far.

[Ectomancer]

EBWOP: Because he seemed to be the one who saw the failing in universally declaring me to be town after 129. Didn't mean to imply it was a bad thing individually, but it needing tempering and he did it in an appropriate manner.

[Goatrevolt]

Out all of today and most of tomorrow.

[SerialClergyman]

Zzz

Pops case:

a) Logic out of order - Just not true, as far as I can tell. I saw a minor point quoted and expanded then quoted again and expanded again. That led me to believe it was being taken out of proportion, which suggests the work of scum. That's how I thought about it, that's how I expressed it. It's the correct logical order and it's not circular.

Usually if a point is quoted excessively it's a contradiction or some other big interesting point that the town grabs and runs with. This was not - this was pointing out I'd ignored some material in thread, which would apply to everyone about one thing or another. It's also puzzling as to why the motivation for ignoring it is scummy. So I'm pretty confident in objectively calling that a minor scumtell. From there, the logic saying that one of those three are scum follows.

b) Overly defensive - Well, I didn't defend that issue at the first opportunity, in fact I ignored it completely. It was only when Red pushed it after incog and goat that I even addressed it. Once addressing it, I thought both my non-inclination to comment and the time in Sydney were both factors (and could be factors again) so I listed them both.

c) Sponsor a townie - I'm a massive advocate of town tells, you can look at most of my meta or anyone who's played with me to verify. I even went through a phase where for day 1 I specifically DIDN'T scum hunt as town, instead just looking for people I wouldn't want to lynch and lynching literally anyone else. I just finished a98 page game with iam as mod where a major factor in our winning was a town read elvis and I made on each other on page 2. If I see something town-looking, I'm calling it out. Theory arguments that it's a bad idea for a scum hitlist are stupid. If we could use a cop or something to give us 3 confirmed town right now, we'd do it, yes? You only need 1 more obvtown than scum left in lylo to win.

So, in short, I'm big on town reads, I'm loud about them.

d) Lack of independence - Probably the worst of the lot given in B) and C) he's shown instances where I WAS independent. I think grabbing all of the times where I've agreed with people or asked for thoughts without acknowledging I've made several of my own observations throughout the game (initial suspicion on nab for his 'I have other reasons' comment, declaring patrick town, declaring ecto town, declaring iam town, suspecting Red) - all of which I think I was either first on or had unique reasoning.

Bed time.