Open 581: Making Friends and Enemies! (Game over)

[Lone Ranger]

Hello. I've replaced Hannibal. Thoughts later.

[Lone Ranger]

VOTE: I Love Fairies

Elle is my second choice. Riddleton, Cheetory, Davesaz, Corpses and maybe GreenCrayons are townreads.

[Lone Ranger]

Whatiswag is town. I forgot to mention this. ILF's first post is wishy-washy nonsense. Scum trying to look helpful but not saying anything. Elle read is gut. Not in the habit of explaining my townreads.

[Lone Ranger]

Soooo 'RVS' and no reason whatsoever for other reads. Noted.

Not what I said. How did you get "RVS" out of "her first post looked scummy?"

Not providing reasons don't mean I don't have them.

UNVOTE:
VOTE: Elle

[Lone Ranger]

No reason to.

[Lone Ranger]

You are so scum it is funny. I could make a case on you based just on what you posted since I replaced in:

VOTE: I Love Fairies

Elle is my second choice. Riddleton, Cheetory, Davesaz, Corpses and maybe GreenCrayons are townreads.

Why are ILF and I scum?

What made ILF more scum than me - enough to start a new wagon on her instead of joining mine for an L-4?

Why are Riddleton and Corpses town?

Loaded question. Who gives a damn how many votes are on you or on ILF at this stage of the game? Deadline is more than two weeks away. If a need to compromise arises, it can be done. The way you frame this question is intended to make me look bad for voting someone with no votes on them as opposed to you. It also shows you giving off an air of "I don't care if you vote me."

Soooo 'RVS' and no reason whatsoever for other reads. Noted.

A pretty clear misrep. I called a post scummy. Never said anything about RVS. You correct this later but I'm not sold on it.

You assume I have no reasons because I don't give them. Have you never played with people who don't divulge reasons for their reads? Have you never had gut reads?

The "noted" at the end is the icing on the cake. It carries a tone of "I have proved my case" and attempts to manipulate bystander's view of our argument.

No reason to.

Yeah, I suppose not - if you're scum.

The posturing here... my god. Do I need to explain this?

[Lone Ranger]

Do you typically like to wait until deadline to lynch - or just as scum?

This is a completely nonsensical loaded question and misrepresenting my position. I didn't say I wanted to wait for deadline to lynch. I said there were two weeks left till deadline and it doesn't matter whether the person I'm voting seems like a viable lynch or not at this point in time. I voted who I suspected the most. At first, this was ILF. Now it's you. The "or just as scum" at the end is another loaded question that doesn't serve you any scumhunting purpose as town. It is pure rhetoric.

You make yourself look bad all on your own. The way the question is framed is both to a) see why your read on ILF is stronger than your read on me, enough for you to start a new wagon and to b) taunt you into voting me - just to see if you do.

a) Why are you interested in why one read is stronger than the other as opposed to the reads themselves? Brining up the number of votes that each of you have is a red herring. You could have simply asked why my read is stronger if you wanted to know. Instead you fabricated a reason why voting you would make more sense and accused me of not taking this "sensible" path.

b) It is interesting that you characterize my vote on you as a response to a taunt. It implies that it was part of your grand plan to get me to vote you and I fell into your "trap." This shows that you like being in control - or rather the illusion of being in control. I voted you because I want you lynched. Being a vote closer to a lynch gives you no control so nice try.

Your explanation 'wishy washy nonsense' vs 'gut read' doesn't actually justify why ILF was better. Crazy.

I wasn't trying to. It is a moot point now. My read on you is stronger.

Not that I can recall, no - definitely not in the scumtastic way you've displayed. You

clearly

have them so why withhold the information when asked? And saying 'gut reads' doesn't negate the point of the lack of reasoning.

I will not explain my townreads because I don't believe it helps the town to do so at this point. If they appear to be getting lynched, I might.

[Lone Ranger]

All 1v1 I have seen in my four games of mafia are town vs town. This should be the same, unless...

I will try to read closely to see whose arguments are less logic based but that will take a moment.

Now that you have read, what do you think? And do better than "you are both raging."

[Lone Ranger]

Nice misrep! I

did

ask why your read on ILF was stronger in my #366 - just because you didn't want to answer it or like that it was followed by why I thought it was strange doesn't mean I didn't ask.

You did. My problem is way you phrased that question. You didn't directly ask why one is stronger. You pretended that voting the larger wagon is a better, more "pro-town" thing to do somehow. And then you asked me why I didn't do it.

I didn't 'characterize your vote on me as a response to the taunt' - you didn't vote me for the taunt, you voted me for a

reason

. I was looking for a reaction. Given your weak 'wishy washy nonsense (later amended to 'scummy') vs gut' reads you had between ILF and I, you voting me for the taunt would have made me think town because with 'reads' that weak, why

not

be on the larger wagon? Yeah, what a

trap

that would have been to give you town points for.

Why would voting for the larger wagon in response to your "taunt" make you think town?

If you're town - this is a tvt - so we'd be clouding up the thread with this noise and helping scum, a situation that could have been rectified with just explaining these reads you have would have helped town. I can't see any reason as town to actually withhold the reads in the manner in which you have - only scum motivation.

The noise is coming from you when you ask me for things that I've said I won't provide. You don't need to know why I have the townreads I do in order to read me. It is not something I can explain in a factual way. I read the thread. Some people felt town. Perhaps in later days, I can nail down precise reasoning but that is not the case now.

[Lone Ranger]

I kind of feel like you're changing gears here LR.
So your reasons for your townreads are gut? Why make such a big deal out of not giving reasons for townreads if it's just gut or how people look at this point?

It is a "big deal" because Elle made a big deal of asking for them. I wasn't going to ignore her posts entirely. That's just rude.

[Lone Ranger]

No, I mean, why not just say "my reasoning is gut"? Instead, to me it looks like you kind of just roundaboutly answered her in a way that made it seem like you had really good reasons for keeping your reasons secret, but you're saying now that it's just gut? Why be difficult if you're willing to eventually explain it to her/everyone?

We have differing definitions on what is gut. Gut feelings are those that are hard to articulate in a presentable way. Yes, I have deeper reasons. They are not something I can describe factually at a surface level, hence gut. From my view, I don't differentiate between the two things you are describing.

[Lone Ranger]

Did you really just recycle your original misrep by adding 'directly' to it as if it makes it so different?

It does make it different. Asking why one of my reads were stronger than the other is a neutral question. Asking me why one read was so strong that I voted that read over a larger wagon makes a lot of rubbish assumptions i.e. votes on larger wagons are better and attempts to paint me as bad for not voting that larger wagon for no reason at all.

This is actually answered in the exact thing you quoted...

If I could make heads or tails of what your argument was, I wouldn't have asked. Rephrase it.

Cheetory beat me to it but - this would have actually been what I expected of a town response for not sharing your reads.

Something like: they're just early gut reads, just impressions I got while reading through the thread and I'd prefer interactions to verify, or I'll provide them when they become firmer... Etc.

Instead, it's 'I have

reasons

and will not provide them' which eventually leads to a switch of you needing time to 'nail down precise

reasoning

', indicating that you didn't actually have

reasons

at all.

VOTE: Lone Ranger

The back down is just 'icing on the cake'.

I'm town and I gave the response that I gave. You are making shit up right now about what town would do. Your long line of questioning and then voting me feels like you had agenda all along. It doesn't feel like you developed your read natural.

That's not what I mean.
I'm asking why you didn't say your reasoning was gut right away in response to her.
A lot of her reasoning for jumping on you is for being so elusive with why you weren't explaining your townreads. Them being gutreads is a weird reason to be like "I'm not telling you why I'm townreading this person!" especially since you eventually spilled the beans anyway. It just feels like you kicked up a fuss for no reason and forced an argument and I want to know if I'm misunderstanding something along this train of thought.

You are. "Gut" isn't a reason. It is a term I use to describe reasons that can't be clearly expressed. I said I didn't want to state my reasoning because some of them aren't easily describable and others I chose not to. If someone asks me for reasons for a read and I reply "gut," that's not an answer. I was partly "forcing an argument." It helps me get reads and in this case, it helped me deduce Elle as scum.

[Lone Ranger]

So, in a way, you were doing a reaction test with elle then? Is that what you're saying?

Not really. "Reaction tests" imply doing something unnatural, stupid, scummy or saying things the player doesn't actually believe to see how people react. I was standing my ground more forcefully than needed to force interaction and debate. Nothing I've said so far was a lie or something I solely said just to see how someone would react.

[Lone Ranger]

I just really don't agree with a lot of the reasoning you're dropping on elle being scum, even if I've thought she's scummy thus far for other reasons. I want to know if it's just that our thought processes for scumhunting are very different or if you're forcing your reasoning, because I keep getting feelings that it's more likely to be the latter. The nitpickiness of #375 bugs me. Attacking stuff like her use of the word "noted" feels like such a stretch to me and I don't know why you'd want to pad your posts with something like that. Like, I just get this bad feeling that you were trying to start an argument to get a townread and now that you've been called on it, you're backtracking and saying the argument was for the purpose of trying to sort elle. Maybe you could make that argument for 1-2 of your posts, but you'd already concluded that elle was scum as of like.. your second response to her. What's the point in pushing the argument further if it was mainly to try and read her? To me it looks like you're just throwing up an evergrowing wallwar against elle which most people are eventually going to give up on trying to read. If you think she's scum, is that really the best way to convince people that she's scum?

The reason I find the "noted" scummy is because of the dismissive tone it conveys as if to say "I'm winning this argument and I've proved that your points are weaker than mine." The word by itself isn't scummy. I used it to describe the vibe that Elle giving. This is part of what I call gut reads. I believe that you believe that I'm nitpicking though. My only concern with you is you are being a bit vague with your argument and I somehow feel it is more difficult to get you to understand a point than it normally should be while interacting with another human being. No, I did not backtrack on my suspicion of Elle. She is still my biggest suspect. Starting arguments doesn't usually get people townread and if I were scum, there are plenty of other tactics I could have used to get townreads over starting an argument. I did not "start an argument" with Elle in order to read Elle. You are conflating the entire interaction. In fact, I specifically said that nothing that I've posted so far was a lie or something I don't believe in. You are focusing on the wrong parts of the argument and missing the main thrust of my case.

[Lone Ranger]

The way that lone ranger only comments on Elle's most recent posts and ignores the rest looks like a POSSIBLE scum bussing scum. Town would have a wider view. But it could be possible that she just does not want to include the earlier posts. Even if I die, I dont believe Elle versus lone ranger are of the same alignment.

I can't follow your position here at all. Town doesn't know who other town are so would react the same way regardless of the other's alignment. Have you been in a game where scum bussed or town got into TvT arguments? If so, link that game. At this point, I'm worried you are scum with Elle and sensing her impending lynch are trying to cut down on the number of townies who would be cleared by her scumflip. I have not ignored any other part of the game and bussing is an unnatural conclusion to draw from the argument between me and Elle.

[Lone Ranger]

AwesomeUsername is scum. I don't know if he is scum with or without Elle yet. But he is scum. Thinking of switching there.

Kaboose's case on elle make sense, I do think she is uncomfortably self-aware in general. I can see where Cheetory's coming from, too, saying she jumps on easy things.

I feel pretty "meh" about elle though.

Like, she certainly could be scum and I'd be up for an elle lynch if nothing else jumps at me,

but it's not really clicking for me.

Re: the Ranger/elle debate, I really, really like Cheetory's remarks. The whole "forcing an argument" thing does make the argument feel like an attempt to get townreads.

Could just be the power of suggestion though. I found myself nodding along with Ranger more often than with elle - mostly because elle seemed unnecessarily hostile and posturing. Lines like "Do you typically like to wait until deadline to lynch - or just as scum?" (377) make me wonder why elle waited until 395 to vote, too.

It struck me that elle acted differently towards Ranger than I remember her acting towards other people, almost immediately. It looks like her voting history goes swag -> awesome -> swag -> Ranger (which is fewer people than I expected and doesn't support Cheetory's argument that she attacked lots of easy targets), and I know several people have voted her, but I didn't remember elle bristling like this before. I can see a few similar moments in her ISO, though. I need to meta elle to figure out whether this is just playstyle.

@elle: Is my understanding correct that you're scumreading Ranger for 1) not revealing the reasons for her reads and 2) bringing a bad attack on you?

@swag: Why do you think elle and Ranger are the same alignment?

dave's jump onto the elle wagon pinged for me at first but looking back his trajectory on elle seems fine.

The amount of hedging in this post. I've used red and green to highlight it is highly unlikely to come from town. This entire wall is completely meaningless except to say that Elle might be scum but Elle might be town and Ranger might be scum but ranger might be town. Oh, and Cheetory's remarks are good! Town doesn't talk like this. Town may be uncertain, may be unsure, may be confused by a back-and-forth debate even. But not this. It is meaningless nonsense.

[Lone Ranger]

I cannot really seem town pushing hard on scum and scum also pushing hard back.

Why exactly do you feel that scum will not push back on town?

[Lone Ranger]

Cheetory, by forcing an argument, I meant arguing when it might have been better to look elsewhere and defuse it to see what others think which is what I would have normally done. I thought Elle's questioning of me was scummy so I started engaging her to see how she would respond. I wanted to see if she would push me in a scummy way or a townish way. I felt the former based her response. I didn't at any point lie about my suspicion. I didn't make up points against her as some sort of "reaction test" so I could go "aha, this was a test all along and you fell into this trap" which is the implication I've been getting from your posts. I expressed what I felt to see how she would respond when I normally would not have been so specific or aggressive.

[Lone Ranger]

I'm curious about the unanimous townreads on Cheetory due to his questioning of me. I think he's very likely town and I felt that his questioning was genuine too. But something doesn't feel right about the other's townreads. As in I'm comfortable reading Cheetory as town but I feel some players are jumping in to give easy townreads. His questioning of me was based on a misunderstanding. I fully believe that he believes what he is saying and is hence town. It is the people that are townreading him that concern me. I'm not sure if this is making sense but I'll come back to it at some point.

[Lone Ranger]

The hedging is what sticks out to me the most. Even in his first content post.

I was actually town reading swag by the end of page 2 for proactively coming up with suspicions and getting us out of RVS.

Corpses has a good point with the "mechanical" scumhunting, I think, though.

I'm gonna have to check to see whether he usually relies on tells like that or not.*

For now he's town, though.

elle sorta pinged to me, too, around the time she was jumped on.

Hearing her reasoning makes me feel better about her, though.

* No follow up. I'm interested in hearing if he checked whether Corpses "usually" relies on tells like that.

[Lone Ranger]

^ Swag, not corpses.

[Lone Ranger]

Actually, I think he did follow up in his next post so never mind that. But I want to hear which games he read.

[Lone Ranger]

L-2 is no more significant than any other vote. It is two weeks to deadline. I'm debating between Elle and Awesome as the better lynch today.

[Lone Ranger]

you don't think the back and forth over not providing reads while saying that you have them, only to ultimately NOT HAVE THEM, isn't scum

If you are town, you should be able to figure out where you are going wrong here.

[Lone Ranger]

UNVOTE:

I want to think about things a bit more before deciding where to cast my vote. I have thoughts about Kaboose's wall but they'll have to wait until I have enough time to think them through. I want to NJAC and others posting more before I post my thoughts.

[Lone Ranger]

Kaboose, give me a list of your reads from towniest to scummiest.

[Lone Ranger]

If Elle is scum, Kaboose and Swag are who I suspect most.

[Lone Ranger]

Have you also never seen scum push back against town?

[Lone Ranger]

So you don't even remember whether scum push back against townies, yet you are so adamant that me and Elle pushing back against each other cannot be scumVtown. Why?

[Lone Ranger]

Why are you posturing like this here and then saying that LR is one of your strongest townreads in the same post?

This is what had bugged me about Kaboose. Every case against Elle, every bad thing said about Elle, Kaboose endorses enthusiastically. He calls me town for going after Elle. The one single criticism he has of me is when I consider moving off of Elle. The criticisms he has of you are when you poke holes in my Elle case.

[Lone Ranger]

UNVOTE:

Hmm...

What is your opinion on Kaboose's wall?

[Lone Ranger]

A glance through Kaboose's ISO confirms my suspicions that Kaboose is scum, probably with Elle. His mentions of Elle before his recent wall are minimal and could easily be faked by scum.

If not, I'd like you to at least look over Elle and tell me what you think of her play thus far.

219 and 236 look reasonable, but there isn't really enough said to get a full read.

What do you think about my defense of you in #238?

Do you think I'm more likely to be scum trying to buddy you with it or town not wanting to see you lynched because of it?

Why do I hate this question? Like, why are you looking for a confirmation from just one person for a town or scum read? I just I don't know, I'm probably not smart enough to put it in to words but this question here just does something to me inside.

@Elle, I had a line of questioning for you, but I feel like the response wouldn't be informative.
Basically, it seemed to me like:

What changed between then and now?

My read, obviously.

Was implying that you were scumreading him rather than trying to sort him, but the followup in response to me seemed more geared towards you saying that you were trying to sort him again. Realized on reflection that asking you about it wouldn't really yield anything productive because "oh I was just saying that I wasn't townreading him and am now nullreading him" was likely to be your response regardless of what your alignment is.

Let's go somewhere else from here. What do you make of Kaboose's softpush on you?

Oh good someone brings it up for me!

What did you think of the post of hers I quoted? I don't know what to make of it but it seemed weird.

What do you think about my defense of you in #238?

Do you think I'm more likely to be scum trying to buddy you with it or town not wanting to see you lynched because of it?

Why do I hate this question? Like, why are you looking for a confirmation from just one person for a town or scum read? I just I don't know, I'm probably not smart enough to put it in to words but this question here just does something to me inside.

I see the scum-motivation in trying to prod people for their reads on you so you can adjust your play accordingly, however, I've seen some townplayers do stuff like this in the last few games I've been in, so I'm more inclined to nullread this particular post.

I think I'm more troubled by how safe her play up until her push on Swag has felt, but I admit this is more of a tone argument on my part and I won't be surprised if nobody will listen to me on this point alone.

I guess it would be too obvious for a scum member to be like "If I said this, or since I said that, do you find it scummy or townie" but I just don't see why a town person who is scum hunting would make this a worry. Like do I worry that someone may read me as scum based on me trying to help solve the game? Sure, but I'm not going to be worried enough to stop what I'm doing to ask for confirmation before I proceed. Could you imagine if that's how we played?

Am I alone in my thought that scum are more likely to care about what they look like than a town person? Especially since there aren't any cops or doctors who need to alter their play a bit to make it to day 2.

I'm scum reading Dave, Elle, and still Corpses.

I will say though, maybe it's just me, but this game still seems to be suffering from a bit of holiday hangover. We need some more interactions in here to get people talking and slipping.

Grib! I'm starting at the top of the VC. Do you still find awesomeusername scummy and deserving of your vote? I'll research the answer myself, but if you get a chance let's talk about him. We have a bit of a connection, you're voting awesome, awesome is voting me. I think you also told me I was stupid once or twice in this game. I don't like you for that. Oh and I haven't forgot, I'm going to get to your Green Crayons inquiry as well.

There are three major mentions of Elle before his recent wall. The first is him calling Elle scummy for something that is completely null. The second is Kaboose excitedly asking Cheetory about his Elle suspicion eager to show that he had Elle as a scumread. The third is an elaboration of his scumread which is okay and fairly null.

My biggest issue with Kaboose is that his recent wall reeks of confirmation bias. He is acting like he KNOWS Elle is scum. He is quick to critisize people for considering that Elle may be town. He is quick to applaud and encourage Elle scumreads. He thinks Elle will get lynched today and is setting up for tomorrow. Who can he attack next as being partners with Elle? Who showed that slight hesitation that he can exploit to chain a mislynch following today's bus? Those thoughts seem to be pre-dominant in Kaboose's mind. The wall he wrote is so unnatural, it is downright ridiculous. I have never seen a townie post with the level of bias and confidence that he has posted.

Cheetory misunderstood my initial arguments even though I explained them to him several times. I cannot believe that Kaboose so miraculously understood all of them and see them as persuasive. My case against Elle is one that is unlikely to appeal to the masses. Cheetory's reactions and calling it nitpicking confirms my thoughts there. I think it would be moderately difficult for an objective outsider to break down what I found scummy about Elle. Kaboose's understanding here is alarming.

As for who to lynch, I feel Kaboose is on balance scummier than Elle. I will switch back if Elle is the lynch that is viable but I want everyone in this game to read Kaboose's wall. And anyone that is reading Kaboose as town should explain why. He is very clearly scum.

VOTE: Kaboose

[Lone Ranger]

Kaboose - Leaning Town - I was up in the air on him until 339 - he gives a good view on why he's thinking the way he is and I especially like his appeal to Grib in it. I feel like him keeping his vote on Corpses despite Corpses being VLA is coming from town - because he has both me and davesaz as scumreads for reasons he's explained but that if he were scum, he'd have cared less who of the three he had his vote on.

This is also rather weak. He is town because he left his vote on someone that was on V/LA?

[Lone Ranger]

Elle could be town. Her latest posts felt townish.

[Lone Ranger]

I'm not seeing the GC love tbh. His arguments are rather shallow and not in a "why is this so hard for you to understand" way but in a "you are making arguments that look decent on the surface but have no real depth" way.

My biggest worry is that from the way GC posts and thinks about things, he comes as a discerning player and an in-depth thinker but isn't applying such thought to the arguments he makes. That feels contradictory so I'm not sure if I'm being clear.

[Lone Ranger]

To put it succintly, I feel he is playing below his skill level.

[Lone Ranger]

Elle could be town. Her latest posts felt townish.

I felt the same about you with your unvote - because I had a hard time seeing that coming from scum.

But then the association with Kaboose came and I was like 'Oh, that explains it' because it felt like you were lynch-lining us which made your unvote make sense to me again. But arguing that is basically just saying I wouldn't have associated myself that way with Kaboose if I were scum but all I have to prove that is two games of meta, and meta can be changed.

So, here: White Flag.

I'll try and forget what I think about your not wanting to give me your reads as scum if you can at least consider for a moment that I may be town.

Who do you think is scum?

I don't get why it would bug you when I associated you with Kaboose though. My plan as scum in that case would be hop off of the Elle mislynch wagon, tie Kaboose to Elle, bus the shit out of Kaboose, and after he flipped scum, mislynch you for being his partner. That wouldn't make sense as a scum strategy at all considering your mislynch was up for the taking without bussing Kaboose as well. If Kaboose were town, tying him to you would be pointless as his townflip means my arguments are invalidated and I'd have to concoct new ones. It would be a far better scum strategy to consider options for who is scum if you are town, see the lynch through and then attack those people.

Awesome could be scum if you are town. The hedging makes a ton of sense from someone that wants to see a lynch through but not want to get their hands dirty.

GreenCrayons's latest posts worry me as well. His take on our argument roughly echoes majority opinion in the thread although I'm not sure I can point out specifics. The whole "their argument looks scumVscum" "tunneling" "too focussed on each other" etc. There are no new insights. There is also a lack of assertiveness and his take seemed a bit hesitant and wishy-washy.

[Lone Ranger]

Spoiler: Elle's reads

Grib -

Obvious Town

-

I could sit here and reference almost every post he's made and point out why it's coming from town - but, look for yourself.

Green Crayons -

Town

-

I've found his posting throughout helpful, progressing, probing. The pause at the end of 129 is very 'don't fuck up my line of questioning' and comes out townish. It probably doesn't hurt that I agree with a lot of their thinking. I liked his questioning of me beginning in 173 - the interaction feels like he's genuinely trying to figure me out.

awesomeusername -

Town

-

I liked his response in 166 to my vote on him. He can see why I've put my vote on him for being 'fence-sitty' and has no worries about stating that his reads just arent very solid - something I don't think scum would be as comfortable admitting. I hesitate on this read until his 279, everything in that post feels like it's coming from a town POV. Same with 410.

Kaboose -

Leaning Town

-

I was up in the air on him until 339 - he gives a good view on why he's thinking the way he is and I especially like his appeal to Grib in it. I feel like him keeping his vote on Corpses despite Corpses being VLA is coming from town - because he has both me and davesaz as scumreads for reasons he's explained but that if he were scum, he'd have cared less who of the three he had his vote on.

Riddleton -

Null

-

NFC - I can't read him at all. I don't like that he doesn't pursue his scumread on me further with our interaction beginning in 72 but I'm not really sure what to make of it, either. I can see his hard-defense of swag coming more from scum than from town, but since I could still see it coming from town, it's null.

Cheetory6 -

Null

-

I really like their entry and that with most of his posting, you get a feel like he's moving things forward, trying to sort people. I didn't like his vote on me in 246, for the above reason, because I was someone he hadn't tried to question or even engage at all and his reasoning is fairly weak to not even pose a question about it with it. I feel like at that point, he's more trying to convince people I'm scum as opposed to figure out if I actually am scum - although part of me says that he may be trying to sort me indirectly. But 301 and on (with the exception of 399) makes me me lean back towards townish again. Ends up null - though I don't think it would take much to make me lean one way or the other.

NJAC -

Null

.

I can't see anything in his limited posts that's alignment indicative - I could see it coming from either town or scum. Although, I feel like his empty promises from 187 and on are more likely to come from town because I feel like scum would be a little more cautious about not following through with their catchup - but I'm not putting a ton of weight in that.

CorpsesInEthanol -

Nullish

-

I'm tentative on the hydra being possible scum, referenced by my 162, 219 and 236. I still think their explanation could go a long way in my read, though - especially if it comes without a rhyme. (Your metre is tight, don't get me wrong - but it's easier to gauge when not in sing-song.)

davesaz -

Null, Leaning Scum

-

Ugh. Just ugh. If you're town, you should at least

try

to read me better. I keep looking at his 259, and him addressing why swags play and hunting for masons and associations is srs scum play and his posting afterwards that looks like he's trying to sort swag. It looks like a town progression. But his switch on me is just... flat. No questioning, no real attempt to read me. I go from null town, to null leaning scum to scum without really much interaction at all. With his description of how he scum hunts in point 1 of 314, it doesn't sit well with me because he's not doing that. Maybe he's reading me from my posting to others but again,

ughhh

.

Whatisswag -

Leaning Scum

-

I'm pretty much just done trying with this slot. I can't actually tell 'if he's town that's just making himself look scummier by not giving a damn about what he posts or scum that just doesn't know how to not give himself away'. I ask questions, he dodges. I'm going to say this as nicely as I can: I can't tell if he's actually just being deliberately obtuse with his responses or if he's just... missing it alto-fucking-gether. Example: Him dodging the questions asked of him in 311 and 312. Both relatively the same question but one I want to see the response to, too. He doesn't answer when he returns. I point him in their direction. He comes back in 373 answering my 309, because what? Maybe he thought I meant my last post in 309 instead of what I'd actually said as 311/312? So I quote it again and I get 'lolwut?' Because reading is hard? I'm going to say it now: I will vote this slot - and I'm ridiculously biased because I no longer care whether he's town or scum - trying to make sense of him is frustrating the hell out of me.

Lone Ranger -

Scum

-

Lynch all liars.

I've made my line of thinking on the slot pretty clear in thread already (starting from 366) - so no, I'm not voting her for the policy but if you don't think the back and forth over not providing reads while saying that you have them, only to ultimately NOT HAVE THEM, isn't scum - then you should consider the policy for yourself.

I mean, the people I'm most worried about are your top three townreads besides Grib. So, if you are town, you see games much, much differently than I see them.

[Lone Ranger]

@Ranger:

I'm assuming you're reading my posts, so you could at least respond to them.

3.

@Ranger:

My biggest issue with Kaboose is that his recent wall reeks of confirmation bias. He is acting like he KNOWS Elle is scum.

He is quick to critisize people for considering that Elle may be town. He is quick to applaud and encourage Elle scumreads.

He thinks Elle will get lynched today and is setting up for tomorrow. Who can he attack next as being partners with Elle?

Who showed that slight hesitation that he can exploit to chain a mislynch following today's bus? Those thoughts seem to be pre-dominant in Kaboose's mind. The wall he wrote is so unnatural, it is downright ridiculous. I have never seen a townie post with the level of bias and confidence that he has posted.

The bolded portions of your Kaboose suspicions describe your own play pretty spot on. Thoughts?

No they don't. First bolded part refers to Kaboose so exclusively focussing on Elle to the point where the only criticism he has for me is that I considered moving off of Elle. To the point where he agreed with every single thing I said against Elle.

There's a difference between tunneling (which is null) and betraying an informed perspective (which is scummy). Having confidence in a read is not the same as betraying that you know someone is scum. I think you know this.

Second bolded part - I only started tying Kaboose to Elle after Kaboose's latest post

because

of Kaboose's latest post. I explained why and gave me reasoning. Saying that I'm doing the same thing he is is meaningless.

[Lone Ranger]

There's a difference between tunneling and an informed perspective, yes.

Citing that fact as a truism doesn't really address the situation here. Particularly when people have criticized your tunnel of elle as a potential manifestation of your informed perspective. (There's no one, true Scotsman of how an informed perspective plays out.)

You've set up both awesome ("AwesomeUsername is scum. I don't know if he is scum with or without Elle yet. But he is scum. Thinking of switching there." in Post 419) and Kaboose ("A glance through Kaboose's ISO confirms my suspicions that Kaboose is scum, probably with Elle." Post 472) as being potential elle-scum buddies.


Thanks for your response.

Yeah. Good job noticing. Ok LR just got boosted a few levels above other people on my reads list.

[Lone Ranger]

I finally have enough time to be a bit more definitive.

Green Crayons looks town. I liked 484, 485, 570, 573 for example.

NJAC's time is running out. I think being willing to replace out if availability isn't there is a good move but isn't necessarily alignment indicative.

What in the world is townish about those posts?

[Lone Ranger]

@LR

, I want your updated perspective on things. Why is your vote still on Kaboose if it was based on an associative tell with elle and you said that you were leaning town on elle's last few posts? Can you pitch me why elle's last few posts came across as town to you?

I'm still trying to figure out my perspective on things right now, but my Kaboose suspicion wasn't based only on associatives. If it was purely associative, I never would have voted him over Elle in the first place. My vote on Kaboose isn't hurting anyone right now. I'll change (or leave) my vote after I think things through.

[Lone Ranger]

Can you walk me through a situation in which kaboose is scum and elle isn't in which the confirmation bias points you had against him still apply in a way that makes him obviously scum?

My 467 and 472. I still feel that the most likely scenario there is partner interactions but even if Elle were town, the points that Kaboose is making against Elle, and the way he interpreted Elle's posts and my posts about Elle doesn't feel natural.

[Lone Ranger]

I have nothing to add at this point until the inactives are replaced and I hear from the replacements in a way that will help me get reads on them.

The only thing I really want to comment on is how no one seems to have any issue with Green Crayons's analysis. Too many look at his walls, nod their heads in agreement and say "good point, I didn't notice that!" or similar things. It is lame as hell and moderately annoying. GC's analysis is shallow, surface level, and looks fake. Scum are perfectly capable of writing walls and posting comments and the easy townreads there suck. Unlike my previous concern about people townreading Cheetory, this one is more of I feel that GC is scum coasting by on surface level analysis that a whole bunch of town are buying hook, line, and sinker. What of GC's posts have felt town? Where has GC at any point felt genuine and like he was trying to solve the game? His analysis is skin-deep and lame as hell. And that's who I think people should look into.

Elle, if you are town, don't give up. Your lynch is far from a foregone conclusion. Who knows what the thoughts and opinions of the people replacing in are going to be? I sympathize with your feeling of being frustrated at trying to drive the game forward only to picked apart and its probably one of the reasons that all things being equal, I'd lynch someone who is contributing less.

[Lone Ranger]

LR, if you think GC's posts suck, attack him. Sink your claws in. Pointing fingers from the sidelines is for preschoolers.

The fuck did I just read? There are plenty of ways to attack. You could direct your questions to a player directly, or to the game at large. Or talk about that player with other people. The implication that there's only one way to attack is bad.

[Lone Ranger]

Prod dodge. Still waiting on those replacements.

[Lone Ranger]

Malakittens is town. Now to wait for the other replacements (who hopefully will also make their alignments apparent).

[Lone Ranger]

Hey Lone Ranger, did you give thoughts on Elle reading people town/scum based on when they confirm to the mod?

I didn't. And I don't care.

[Lone Ranger]

Malakittens is town. Now to wait for the other replacements (who hopefully will also make their alignments apparent).

I dont see you using logic here for your read so I will assume you use gut. If you use gut, how are you so sure that their alignments would be "apparent"?

Your question doesn't make sense on the surface. I'll take a wild guess at what you are asking: you seem to believe that a) Reads are of two varieties: "Logic" and "gut." b) "Gut" reads are worth less than "logic" reads. c) Alignments can only be apparent based on logic.

I don't agree with any of those premises. Hell, I'm having a hard time even understanding what you are asking without taking wild guesses.

Disregarding the whole logic/gut nonsense, if you want my reasons for reading Malakittens as town, I can do that:

1. She seems engaged with the game in a way that I normally don't see from scum.
2. Her posting feels organic and not artificial and the way she interacted with the game and the reads she developed don't feel strategic or orchestrated.

[Lone Ranger]

If you use gut, how are you so sure to yourself that someone is completely town? gut are often wrong, you know

I cannot give you straight answers to questions like this because they are loaded. I don't believe you are intentionally making your questions loaded but I think that you are taking what you know of mafia theory and making assumptions as to how others will apply that theory.

First, any kind of reads can be wrong. Gut-based reads are not the only ones that can be wrong so the "gut are often wrong" is meaningless.

Second, I never said "I'm so sure that Malakittens is 'completely' town." You added those bits. I have a townread on Malakittens based on what she posted in the thread so far.

Third, you seem to imply that reads based on gut should be less strong than other reads (I assume you mean "logic" reads as you claim - I don't agree with you that reads can be subdivided into gut and logic reads so it is meaningless anyways but I digress). I see no reason gut-based reads should be less strong so prompting me to answer a question phrased that way isn't reasonable.

All this while, you've ignored the actual reasons I gave for reading Malakittens as town. Do you want to talk about them because that's what I'm interested in.

Do the posts that Malakittens made make you feel she is scum?

[Lone Ranger]

I don't give a crap if you think the time frame was quick.

Also, the last bit is manipulative. I explained my read and THEN asked others if they find Mala scummy. Your accusation would have fit better if I had refused to explain the read and demanded that others fulfilled the burden of proof.

VOTE: Green Crayons

[Lone Ranger]

It was still manipulative on your part to pretend that I was shifting the burden of proof. I invited him to discuss my reasoning as well. You acted as if I provided no reasoning and demanded that he prove the opposite position. Also, the question I asked him was "

Do the posts that Malakittens made make you feel she is scum?

" not "why is Mala scum?" It is a difference that I expect you to notice. The latter is a deflection. The former is an investigative question.

In any case, my issue is not with his inability to engage reasoning beyond "how are you so sure Mala is town." My issue is how you chose to interpret our interaction. It feels opportunistic. I think if you were unbiased, you would be seeing through the fallacies of WiS's arguments (which I don't believe are alignment indicative for him) but is alignment indicative for you to pretend like his questioning and loaded assumptions are sound.

[Lone Ranger]

Also, the question I asked him was "Do the posts that Malakittens made make you feel she is scum?" not "why is Mala scum?" It is a difference that I expect you to notice. The latter is a deflection. The former is an investigative question.

To expand, the latter question is loaded. The former question is inquiring whether he disagrees with my read. You are acting as if I asked a loaded question.

[Lone Ranger]

@Ranger:

1. It's not "manipulative" to "pretend" that you were shifting the burden of proof.

You did shift the burden of proof.

You identified the reasoning from the 5 Mala posts that you thought made her apparently town, and then asked swag to show that you were wrong by explaining how those 5 Mala posts made her scum. This was a false dichotomy, because you could be wrong even if the 5 Mala posts didn't make her scum, but simply wasn't probative of her alignment. That's how your Post 739 reads, period.

2. lol @ you trying to conjure up this distinction between

"do these posts make Mala scum"

and "

is Mala scum

"?

They are the same question.

Mala had only 5 posts, and therefore the answer to both questions would look to the same 5 posts. This is you muddying the waters with valueless arguments - here, coming up with a distinction without a difference.

Those were not the questions I'm drawing a distinction for.

The questions I'm drawing a distinction for are "why do you think Mala is scum" vs "do you think Mala is scum."

The first has the assumption you are accusing me of - unjustifiably assuming that Mala is scum instead of null and asking WiS why she is scum?

The second is merely a base question with no assumptions. He could reasonably answer that he wasn't reading Mala as scum without having to correct any assumptions.

"Have you stopped beating your cat?" vs "are you beating your cat?"

The first needs to be corrected with "I have never beaten my cat." A no would assume that the listener has beaten her cat before.

The second can be answered with just a no.

[Lone Ranger]

Who am I suspecting that you are reading as town?

[Lone Ranger]

Why are you attacking Green Crayons for what I brought up about you?

I don't understand what argument you are referring to.

[Lone Ranger]

Grib - Haven't seen a read.
Cheetory6 - RubikAshtray - Talked to this slot, but haven't seen a read.
elleheathen - Attacked for being scum.
CorpsesInEthanol - Haven't seen an interaction with this slot.
davesaz - Can't remember an interaction with this slot.
Whatisswag - Suspected as scum if Elle flipped scum.
Malakittens - awesomeusername - Awesome was scum for sure at one point, but five posts from Mala has erased that completely to a town read.
Kaboose - Attacked for being scum.
Green Crayons - Attacked for being scum.
CptPicard - I Love Fairies - Attacked for being scum.
NJAC - Haven't seen an interaction with this slot.
Riddleton - Haven't seen an interaction with this slot.

Now please correct me, as now this is rushed to prevent me from needing to requote all those again. Point I'm getting at is that LR is getting close to scum reading everyone. This is either a scatter gun VT, or scum trying to muddy waters as best they can.

If you are actually town here, please learn how to scumhunt. Getting into a theory discussion with you about why it is a terrible strategy as scum to attack everyone in the game is boring. Accuse me of something that's actually scummy and engage my interest.

[Lone Ranger]

I mean if you accuse me of doing a certain scummy thing X, then I can defend that I didn't do X or why it was justified.

You are accusing me of doing thing Y which is whole hell of a lot more likely to come from town than scum. That's a theory discussion. That's boring.

Pedit: It is implied from your response.

[Lone Ranger]

Okay, I'm going to make a few comments on picking the third Mason. I think it should typically be someone active, hard to lynch, someone that you are reading reasonably as town. Me, Elle, and GC are good candidates for that. Especially me and GC as I think it would provide a lot of clarity to the town and help make sense of who to trust among the more active voices among the town.

I'm fairly sure GC will flip scum. His approach of a line of questioning followed by a vote seems premeditated. I don't know how he managed to flick away the previous suggestions that he be masoned. There is very little downside to Masoning immediately and also Masoning an active voice among the town.

Now for the lynch: the only concensus I can reasonably see forming is on one of the inactive players. I have no strong scumreads outside of GC at this point so there's no one I'd push for. Corpses and Riddleton are the ones in need of replacement so if we are going to compromise there, I'd vote either to help the lynch go through. I'll re-evaluate their posts tomorrow. I'm leaning corpses. I had them as town early partly because I was reading Elle as scum. Not a huge fan of their push from a town-Elle standpoint. So, that's who I'm voting unless Riddleton gets a lot more votes.

[Lone Ranger]

In other words, the way GC posts places a lot of emphasis on presentation. I accuse him of being scum to which he responds with "you are slandering me" or some such post. Then he picks apart my townread on Malakittens and wages a semantic assault on a question I asked and later finds some other issue with my reasoning, refutes it and votes me. Town doesn't post like that. It belies an agenda. He doesn't want to look bad by OMGUSing immediately so spends a series of posts making it seem like he is scumhunting. I'm not sure I can explain it better than that. The things he is picking up on and questioning me about misses the greater thrust of what I'm trying to say in favor of less important points.

I also feel that he is taking advantage of some of the weaker players (like WhatisSwag) who normally provide weaker arguments and running with them to manipulate them. For instance WiS's question to me about the Mala townread and "gut" vs "logic" debate he got into is a fairly novice level argument. Very rarely do competent scumhunters pose the types of questions that he did. But GC takes it as a starting point to run his own argument. Anyways, tl;dr, I want him investigated. If he's town, it can only be helpful to have that figured out.

[Lone Ranger]

NJAC is a meh vote. I'm not against it.
VOTE: NJAC
I'll be here to switch my vote should another wagon gain steam.

I'm far more interesting in putting forth the idea that one of me or GC should be masoned. That will solve a truckload of problems of perspective that a lot of players have with regards to us. If you know one person is town, that simplifies things.

[Lone Ranger]

I wouldn't make this suggestion as scum because it cuts down my avenues of attack on GC considerably if GC is town. But hey, you don't have to take my word for it as you could just Mason me and see if I'm scum.

[Lone Ranger]

It is notable that GC has never suggested or responded to that suggestion.

GC might probably argue that it is not "pro-town" to discuss night actions etc. But that would miss the context that the game is in: two active players very confident that the other is scum and most inactives barely keeping up with the game, reasonably sure that there is scum among the two but not sure which.

[Lone Ranger]

@LR, your references to mason targets, and willingness to be recruited, are admirable. But I'm concerned about the role fishing aspect of that kind of discussion, which may not be intentional on your part. An insufficiently cautious mason might respond to it in a way that inadvertently outs themselves. I think we're best off leaving it to their judgment.

Seriously, people need to stop with "any reference to night actions is rolefishing" type arguments.

I'm not asking for responses or for the Mason group to confirm. I'm laying it out as clearly as I can that this is not only beneficial but optimal given the gamestate.

The judgment is theirs by definition. No one can force them to recruit anyone. I'm explaining why it is optimal to recruit from among me/GC.

[Lone Ranger]

I didn't comment because I don't care what the masons do. If either us gets confirmed town, that only confirms that the other was wrong, not that our own suspicions are right.

Also, there isn't the possibility of either one of us getting confirmed town to the thread. We'll be either confirmed scum by a mason revealing itself, or someone will be recruited and nobody will say anything because it'd be stupid to out yourself as a mason simply to confirm town one player.

Your plan has a lot of holes in it and the masons can do whatever they want.

1. The Masons recruiting one of us is not for our sake but to help the rest of the town make sense of this mess. If they can find someone they trust, they can extrapolate from there whether they want to believe that player's arguments. The current situation is a lot more murky from an outside POV and helps the scum more.

2. If one of us gets recruited, we can simply out that we have been and the Mason would keep silent. If we lie, the Masons would deny that and get the liar lynched.

3. There are no holes. Stop pretending that there is a scum benefit and generalizing it as if talking about roles is anti-town (this is not just for you but others).

In the current situation

, there is no downside to masoning one of us.

[Lone Ranger]

GC, you seemed SO sure that I'm town. Why are you against the Masons recruiting me and failing and me being caught through an investigation? I'm not getting lynched today and am generally active and productive, much more so than three quarters of the players in this game. If you are so, so sure, why do you object? It feels more like you don't want the avenue of discrediting me snatched away from you.

[Lone Ranger]

SO sure that I'm *scum*

[Lone Ranger]

There's no reason to think that there are any specific number of scum on the wagon.

[Lone Ranger]

There's no reason to think that there are any specific number of scum on the wagon.

Why's that?
Do you not think scum is on the wagon?

There may be. There are 11 players left in the game and three scum. You've narrowed down the pool to six players and then claimed that there are at least two scum in there. First off, what's the point? Secondly, your number is arbitrary - NJAC was a deadline lurker lynch that no one opposed. There was no counterwagon or competing wagons. Players that were online voted for the lynch. Your analysis basically says being online is scummy. If other people were online, they would have voted.

[Lone Ranger]

Are you on crack?

[Lone Ranger]

Heartless is town.

[Lone Ranger]

Heartless is town.

hello random person who knows me's alt

jingle?

mastin?

It's Antihero. Learn to recognize alts.

[Lone Ranger]

VOTE: Green Crayons

[Lone Ranger]

I had no idea why Grib was being townread tbh. What was your reasoning Elle?

[Lone Ranger]

That's actually quite a good case. I fully agree that his backpedal on me and telling me he's trying to townread me was awkward. The thing is, so many things people are doing this game feel awkward and newbish so it is hard to get a feel for what's scummy-awkward. I'm going to take a better look at your case later when I'm home. Why do you have a townread on GC?

[Lone Ranger]

I disagree with both of you. The people who were online voted. I can't see how it is alignment indicative at all.

[Lone Ranger]

You start by saying it's a good case, and that you "fully" agree that my backpedal on you was telling, but "meh everyone else is doing it so who knows?"

Yes. And?

[Lone Ranger]

I need a prod? I thought I was one of the most active players here.

[Lone Ranger]

Scum: GC.

[Lone Ranger]

Walls are boring. GC's posts just aren't town. Flip GC and figure it out from there.

[Lone Ranger]

titus could be scum.

[Lone Ranger]

Why are you voting me again? Because I haven't been posting a lot lately?

[Lone Ranger]

I've made my thoughts pretty clear about GC.

[Lone Ranger]

I don't have strong opinions on everyone else. Heartless is town.

[Lone Ranger]

I'm still waiting on Titus and Elle to explain their votes in a way that doesn't amount to "you are not giving us reads" which later morphed to "you are not giving us

enough

reads ergo you are scum. You are both better scumhunters than to think such a ridiculous line will fly. This is not D1. We have enough information in the game to analyze than voting someone because they don't have reads. And let me tell you, fabricating reads as scum is extraordinarily easy.

[Lone Ranger]

1. ISO me. Holy crap it is long. I list my reasons for scumreading GC.
2. I'm not going to fabricate content because I'm town. Duh.

[Lone Ranger]

Explain Titus town? Nothing that she said made any sense. It feels like she jumbled up her sentences in random order and spit them out.

[Lone Ranger]

I skimmed the past few pages and still came away with nothing meaningful. GC is still scum and needs to be lynched. The way Kaboose is posting makes me suspect him as well. I have no idea what Elle's plan is here. She planted her vote on me and did nothing as the wagon built up. This means she wants to lynch me and it wasn't some sort of reaction test. And her reason for wanting that is that I'm not providing reads and not commenting in depth on the game. Neither of these are scummy and Elle should know it. Because if I was scum, I had posted analysis upon replacing in which means that scum-me is capable of posting analysis. So I don't get why she finds it scummy of me to withdraw from the game - enough to want to lynch me.

[Lone Ranger]

GC is still scum. TTH losing touch.

[Lone Ranger]

Titus is town, whoever thinks titus is not town can screw off.

Titus is not town. Titus is Titus.

[Lone Ranger]

Your order is garbage by the way.

[Lone Ranger]

No, I'm saying that whatever tells WiS thinks he picked up are Titus-tells, not town-tells. I was simply remarking on the fact that he isn't competent enough to read you. Very few are.

[Lone Ranger]

why the fuck is this kaboose lynch so hard to get?

GC is top priority.

[Lone Ranger]

Why? And GC's case on me wasn't actually good or townish even. Although I won't bother refuting as it is more from a personal experience view so I doubt people would see that. It is logical and pretty, sure but scum can make pretty, logical cases. Eh, I might actually refute it but not feeling it right now. Feeling more like we should hammer GC.

[Lone Ranger]

It is not impossible the GC as town gets into a ridiculous tunnel with another townie. I've seen it happen before. It is more of how GC is taking advantage of the weaker players in the game and building off of some arguments that he should as town cut through. It feels agenda-driven.

[Lone Ranger]

I didn't bother opening the spoiler but from your title: All of D2, I've refused to engage your reasoning for the most part precisely because I didn't want to get into a lengthy wall war.

[Lone Ranger]

VOTE: Kaboose

That should be the real hammer.

[Lone Ranger]

One of GC or Titus is probably scum. I'd say both but I find it unlikely (though not impossible) the way they are going after each other now. I'm no longer confident in my Malakittens townread considering her lack of engagement. I was heavily leaning GC on D2 but I just don't know at this point.

Heartless, what made you change from GC to Titus as the most likely scum?

(RIP Elle. She was hilarious to play with. Probably why she got killed.)

[Lone Ranger]

Mala's pride in defending Titus makes me think Mala is town if Titus is scum. I agree that Titus did go to extraordinary lengths to protect Kaboose.

[Lone Ranger]

Possibly. It could be a "towncred" type reaction too though i.e. questioning a townread on a buddy made on a tenous basis so if Mala ever flips, he looks good and I look bad.

[Lone Ranger]

Can't decide between Titus and GC. Feels too good to be true.

[Lone Ranger]

I have quite a problem with the way titus went out of her way to protect Kaboose and a lot of the stuff she said didn't make sense. I have a few conflicting thoughts on Malakittens but this is the way to go today.

VOTE: Titus

[Lone Ranger]

So, I was going to ask why Mala was scum and then I read her ISO and am convinced she's scum.

Then I thought to ask Heartless to make a case anyways for my own amusement and decided against it.

The bottomline is this:

- Mala townread Titus and scumread GC.
- She voted on the GC wagon.
- As momentum swayed towards Titus, she then expressed paranoia of Titus stating that she is a "diabolical mastermind" who would totally scum-theater with GC.
- In 1179, she said that if she had to lynch Titus to lynch GC, she would but not without reservations. It feels like pushing a mislynch while tying a buddy to it so if the buddy got lynched, she could still push that mislynch.
- Then she hammers Titus despite Titus being a decent townread for her.

I think it is rather obvious. But TellTaleHeart, will you make a case to amuse me?

VOTE: Malakittens

[Lone Ranger]

Malakittens is currently at L-1 btw.

[Lone Ranger]

From a Grib ISO, all his mentions of Titus felt okay. Nothing betrayed an informed perspective. He had Titus as "leaning town" but that fits with him saying he can't read her.

[Lone Ranger]

Dave talking about Titus doesn't feel a whole lot like scum to scum. He doesn't say much about Titus but at one point he asks, "if not Titus, who's next?" in 1974.

[Lone Ranger]

Titus' behaviour looks to be from town (Very town). But analyzing interaction will show only one possible scum team {Kaboose, Titus, Mala}

This post is interesting.

If titus is scum, then the last one is mala.

If titus is town, then... we have green, grib, dave, mala, LR and it is impossible for the pair green/LR. I am townreading dave and scumreading Mala.

Well, I guess the lynch next day will be mala regardless of the outcome today.

So is this.

I prefer Mala to titus but whatever.

And after this, he votes Titus. Overall, he feels scattered so it is hard to get a read but I can easily see his interactions with Titus as town-town.

[Lone Ranger]

GC is very likely town from the way the wagons formed and I don't think they were both on scum. It is a lesser townread but I'm not buying into the diabolical Titus scum that Malakittens talks about.

[Lone Ranger]

Heartless are clearly

bussing since it is impossible for town to be that accurate since they are uninformed

town.

Malakittens looks to be it. It'll probably give us the game.

[Lone Ranger]

Hammer y/n?

It's about all I can do, too busy today for real posts.

Yes.