Marvel Avengers Alliance - Game over

[Yates]

it means Yates is scum and his buddies are scrambling for a counter wagon.

This isn't getting old yet? You are trying too hard to be meta. And that's sad for you.

In other [kinda related] news, just got back from seeing Captain America [had to because of Agents of Shield]. Awesome. Much better than the first. These Marvel movies are hitting their stride...

[Yates]

Oh yeah...
VOTE: pappums rat

Long time no see. Why are you scum this game?

[Yates]

Yates thinking I was being serious is rather sad but it Yates so...

Oh. I guess the "JK! LOL!!!" is in invisible text, then. Probably why it just went zooming over my head. I mean, I would have no reason to think you were being serious, right? And I would have no reason to think you are trying to fabricate sticking to your meta, right? My bad.

[Yates]

Bro Chill. Too much over reaction for a seemingly RVS vote?

I'm chill. Nero and I have a frustrating history. To me, his vote is less RVS and more a needle. In a moment of honesty, I'm p-sure he'd admit as much. He pretends to scum read certain players in EVERY game and it gets exhausting for us.

OR - he is trying to throw me off by using exactly the same meta here as in other games - which raises non-RVS suspicions for me. As in, people have a

similar

approach to games when they are the same alignment and that's where "meta" comes from, right? But you take notice when someone is not just posting similar but

exactly the same

. That's where I'm at with Nero. And it makes it hard for me to get an honest read on him - which is probably his intent.

[Yates]

my 37 was a totes joke.

You see why it looked like a troll given the conversation we VERY recently had about how you scum read certain players [myself being one of them] in every game?

I hope to God that Josh_B has a post restriction 'cause that shit is annoying as hell.

I'm p-sure I know who "Josh_B" is. He did this in another game and it was a fake restriction - AND annoying.

[Yates]

Note to self: play Metroid.

[Yates]

Nero is town, but Yates is more debatable.

Don't let any facts to the contrary get in the way of this totally arbitrary read of either of our slots, sweetie. This is pretty much the opposite of how you should be reading this game. Further, you have intimate knowledge of my scum game. If you're Town, use it.

[Yates]

I don't have much of anything to off Pidgey on, but will admit to a slight gut townish on him moreso than Yates simply because he appears to be trying to scumhunt right out the gate which Yates did not.

So... noticing that someone is trying to hyper-meta and subsequently pointing that out isn't scum hunting to you? Conversely, care to share which of pidgey's posts looks like scum hunting to you? I checked his ISO. It's short. It's also pretty devoid of anything I recognize as scum hunting so it really begs the question about how you arrived at this determination...

[Yates]

Sorry. Couldn't resist.

[Pidgey] appears to be trying to scumhunt

right out the gate

Here's his scumhunting "right out the gate"

helo?

sorry nero just really busy day ill bring the hype later

uh rvs post?

vote: Charizard dude player

Ok so, why charizard?
1. First of he is a fucking DRAGON.
2. Second, he is confirmed for smash 4, and im not even there in a pokeball or much less a fucking cameo in the background (still negotiating for a trophy... fingers crossed)
3. He has base stat of like 510, i probably dont have more than 340.
4. Majestic wings that i want
5. Pidgeot has no mega evolution

also i had some cool beers tonight lol

First four posts in ISO... wow. such skumhunt. town hero. very leet.

[Yates]

I don't find pointing out the hyper meta to be scumhunting. Functionally you were attacked and defended yourself. Defense isn't scumhunting.

Except if you actually read the posts, you'll see that my beef it isn't a defense - it's noticing meta. I would have said pretty much the same thing if he did this to about three other people off the top of my head. So, again, you're just wrong.

you cherry picked the front half and ignored the back half. I found him giving early town reads, clarifying a scum read without prompting and poking at someone to all be indicitive of scumhunting.

I "cherry picked" the front half because you said he was scumhunting "right out the gate" and his first 4 posts [you know - the ones "out the gate"] were zero content and an RVS vote. We also obviously define scum

hunting

quite differently. Giving reads without context is not the same as advancing the game. And I'm not saying this because I have a scum read [or any read] on pidgey but specifically because you are making claims that do not hold up under scrutiny. This is pertinent because this is what ACTUAL scum hunting looks like and I was afraid you wouldn't recognize it.

Further, I asked you point blank for specific posts that indicated pidgey "scum hunting" to you and you failed to do so. There are only two qualified statements in his entire ISO, in fact, and those are simply qualifying a read on displaced. So how you quantify that as "50% scumhunting" remains a mystery.

Why do you have such issue with this read that you're attacking so aggressively?

And this ^^ illustrates my fear that you don't know what scum hunting even looks like. You can't point it out when asked... you can't see it when it's being done to you... *Yates throws his hands up in the air* What am I to do with this??

I don't care about the reads right now - I just want to know how you claim to have arrived at them. I want to know because I'm not following your purported logic. Any statements you have made that I have inquired about are problematic for me because I don't understand your posts or motivation. If I don't understand those two very important things then I can't read you. If I can't read you AND I disagree with your reads? I want you dead. Because like any good Renaissance Man, I fear what I do not understand. That's just how I roll.

[Yates]

Okay...let's be specific for you then.

Post 125 is scumhunting - he is taking stances and pressing scum reads.
Post 135 is scumhunting - he is presenting a stance and seeking reactions.
Post 136 is scumhunting - he is clarifying a read and providing reasoning.

Post 125 is the one post where he gives a qualified read on Displaced. I had already granted you this post. While not scum hunting, he at least gives a reason for his read and vote.

This is post 135:

Typical horrible umbridge reads

An unqualified statement. It isn't even a reaction fish. He just makes the statement with no reasoning, explanation, or follow up. How you equate unqualified statements like these to be "scum hunting" is beyond words.

Post 136 is the other post I already mentioned that adds to his Displaced scum read. Again, he is qualifying a read - which is not the same thing as scum hunting.

So even using your loose definition of "scum hunting" as "giving reads" you get 2 out of 8. And frankly, giving reads isn't scum hunting - it's simply playing the game. So you see why I would be confused as to how you came to the conclusion that

he appears to be trying to scumhunt right out the gate

Of course, if you are going to use such a broad stroke to define "scum hunting," you would also understand why I'm confused as to why you would claim *I* did not appear to be scum hunting given that virtually ALL of my posts from literally my first post to this one meet or exceed that marginal standard for scum hunting that you are willing to accept.

Squirrel Girl is town as fuck.

Based on what? A demonstrated misunderstanding of the definition of the term "scum hunting?" Or is it the obvious and provable inconsistencies presented in her reads that are the literal definition of Cognitive Dissonance?

I've been catching scum left and right looking for people that fabricate reads with no substance. Where's the substance on this read, Chandra?

[Yates]

P.s Yates you appear to suspect a few people it seems.

Who and why?

As of this post I will have 12 posts. They are all written in English and fairly succinct for the amount of information they each posses. Feel free to read them and arrive at your own conclusions. I don't mean to be a prick but if I'm going to run up and down squirrel's back for having poor reads, and I'm going to call into question the efficacy of pidgey's scum hunting without providing reasons for reads, I certainly can't provide you with any more information than what I have already presented you with in order to enable you to come to your own conclusions.

[Yates]

So instead of making things clear (I'm pretty sure your only "scum" reads are my and Squirrel despite not voting any of us) you got go tell folks to read your posts.

Who are you?

And yes. Read. Who cares about my vote right now? It's early and I'm doing stuff. You should be doing YOUR OWN stuff. We can loop back in later in the day after you've done some of your own stuff and we can compare notes. That's how it works.

[Yates]

Basically using double standards in his reads. i don't actually think he's doing that, mind, I think he's faking reads - which gives the appearance of double standards because he's just tossing out things to justify stances.

Pot meet kettle.

So, in light of recent information, have you made any adjustments? Let's review:

- The main crux of my problem with you is that I didn't think you were being consistent with YOUR standards.
- You claim you saw pidgey scum hunting out of the gate.
- I challenged you on that.
- You were unable to adequately justify your stance because you were just tossing out posts that you claim indicated pidgey was scum hunting.
- Pidgey has since come in and basically said, "I have not yet begun to scum hunt." [click spoiler for exact words]

Spoiler:

I pretty much agree that squirrel girl calling me a super scum hunter for my first posts is weird lol dunno if its town or scum but it does look like trying to get allies and getting on my good side?

- So pidgey wasn't scum hunting [by his own admission], I was and continue to be scum hunting, and you appear to have faked reads on my slot and pidgey's slot.

THAT is where we are at. Ball is in your court.

[Yates]

Yes yates, I realize your vote is on your RVS but that's effectively a no lynch vote.

So? Are you concerned that I'm not aware of my vote? We are 10 pages in to a large theme game that is 4 days old with more than 17 1/2 days left. Does it surprise you that I may need as many as 5 days to place a serious vote?

In the mean time - while my vote is parked on my RVS choice - I used my early posts to probe suspicious activity and have just clearly illustrated anomalous activity. Given what Squirrel has said, how I have played, how pidgey has played, and what pidgey has said; what do you think about the path I'm pursuing with Squirrel? I think it's pretty obvious that I'm going to vote her barring some explosion of logic that suddenly makes her play make sense. My only fear is that this is an "ArchAngel" player and I'm trying to suss that out.

Last time you sheeped me onto a read, we nailed scum. I don't see why we can't make it 2 for 2. Let her answer for herself then tell me what I'm missing.

[Yates]

@ yates 163: no doubt you have a point but as squirrel girl mentions I'd feel a lot better about you if you didn't cherry pick.

That was something of a superfluous post but you have to admit that if you had clicked on pidgey's ISO at that point in time looking for scum hunting "right out the gate" seeing those posts in sequence would make you chuckle. That said, my previous post challenging the assertion is basically a call for people to ISO pidgey and read a grand total of EIGHT posts - short ones at that. So to focus on the one post and disqualify my entire argument as a "cherry pick" is both hypocritical and inaccurate. I'm not saying you are doing this but this isn't my first rodeo and I know where this bull is headed.

It would have taken less words to just say: "my scumreads are X and Y".

True. But I'm not comfortable doing that this early in Day 1. I would prefer to see the many varied directions different players take their own investigations and see how they read the game organically without being lead. How many times have you seen scum ask Town for reads only to hide in those reads? Think about it.

[Yates] is flat out presenting a false case and doing the literal definition of misrepping, which is to present only part of the info with the express goal as to paint it bad. ...somehow, in Yates' view, it's illogical to call those posts "out of the gate" no, no, no "out of the gate" can ONLY mean the very early intro posts, and CERTAINLY not the later posts that contained...well...y'know, scumhunting.

No, THIS ^^ is a misrep. I argued that pidgey didn't scumhunt at all in ANY of his initial 8 posts - the posts you used to arrive at your "read" - and I stand by that. I later conceded that he had 2 content posts according to your purported BROAD definition of scum hunting and actually used that to challenge why you wouldn't consider my content posts [since all of them are furthering the game to some degree] to fit that same definition. And you still haven't addressed this.

If you think the Pidgey post I quoted wherein he said he was confused by your calling him a super scum hunter is a misrep then there's a very simple solution to this - ask

him

what he meant. When I "cherry pick" statements [as you and ThAd have phrased it] it's because I'm trying to highlight precisely what I'm taking issue with without all the inapplicable clutter. I'm pretty careful about making sure the link is there to the entire post in case someone thinks I'm taking something out of context or intentionally misrepresenting a case on someone. Look at the post where I quote Pidgey, for example. I highlighted the portion of the Pidgey post that had to do with the argument we were having simply because the rest had nothing to do with it. The link to the entire post is there and you don't seem to be taking issue with the context, are you? So what's your issue? You have a problem with me being concise?

I don't think he went into an ISO of 7 posts and just grabbed the first few. he did it on purpose.

1. It was 8 posts. Count them.
2. Of course I picked the first four on purpose. It made your argument look as silly as possible. That's the point. I'm disproving your arguments. It's not like I picked posts 1,3,4, and 8 randomly while ignoring ACTUAL scum hunting. If I did that? You'd have a valid concern. Instead, *I* am the one with a valid concern.

I completely agree with your point about him strategically misrepping you

I would like to know, given the information presented, if you still think this. And if so, what

specifically

am I misrepresenting?

I think you are being massively anal here

Perhaps. Let's take a different approach. Do you feel like Pidgey was scum hunting in those first 8 posts? I don't think he was, my interpretation of Pidgey's post is that he didn't think he was, but what do YOU think? Also, do you feel like I was NOT scum hunting in my first 6 posts? I think I was, but of course I have the benefit of knowing why I go in the direction I go so maybe my scum hunting isn't obvious to everyone else? What do YOU think?

The fact that he spoilered pidgey's post because he knew it wasn't what he wanted. That part just screams that he is scum misrepping.
If it was without the spoiler I would've thought he is a townie with a conviction.

So you think I spoilered the quote to hide... something? Or, is it at all conceivable that I spoilered the quote for effect? Also, have you bothered to ask Pidgey if my interpretation of his post is accurate? You seem pretty concerned about that so I just thought maybe you'd verify the information. *shrug* Flash Gordon would not be amused.

there is no ego in play except maybe Yates

Best for last:

And there are people doing actually scummy things in this game, so attention would be better placed on scumhunting rather than trying to boost your own egos.

Are you still talking about ZZX "forgetting" to vote? If so I find this to be uninteresting as I have done this before as both alignments and find it entirely null. Is there something else I'm missing here? As far as I'm concerned, there ARE scummy things happeneing in this game and I'm in the process of sorting it out. It's good to see you back, though.

[Yates]

How this post feels.

I see how it could feel that way if you only read one post in a vacuum and applied zero context. I guess.

My response to the way it feels

I agree with you. I feel as though I am and have been hunting.

I'm pretty sure Squirrel's read on you has nothing to do with whether or not you are or aren't scum hunting

I'm pretty sure you don't know what my problem with Squirrel has been all along, then. Maybe you're right. Maybe she's scum reading me for some other made up reason now BUT not when she said this:

[Pidgey] appears to be trying to scumhunt right out the gate which

Yates did not

. I would neithe rparticularly support nor oppose either being lynched at this stage.

She claimed Pidgey was scum hunting.
I didn't see Pidgey scum hunting.
She claimed I was NOT scum hunting.
I was scum hunting.

Do you see the disconnect here? I have since been spending a lot of time and effort trying to figure out why what she claims to think and what is actually happening in the game are not aligning. Keep your crayons. I'm sculpting marble...

[Yates]

Admitting that what you're doing is scummy and that I was right does NOT preclude that it was scummy and I am right.

Oh I get it now. You are reading words that I'm not typing. Did I say anything even remotely similar to what you are accusing me of? Your answer is in the rest of the sentence you cropped. And that seems odd coming from someone who accuses me of cherry picking and misrepping since the part you cropped removes the actual context.Spoiler alert, it's pretty easy to spot!

Spoiler:

Of course I picked the first four on purpose. It made your argument look as silly as possible.

That's the point.

I'm disproving your arguments

. It's not like I picked posts 1,3,4, and 8 randomly while ignoring ACTUAL scum hunting.

Here is Yates other reply about the cherry picking. He admits to no cherry picking at all and is DEFENDING that his "out the gate" deal qualifies them as valid quotes.

Again, your answer is in the rest of the sentence you cropped. I'll include that here with bolded words for easy reading.

Spoiler:

I "cherry picked" the front half because you said he was scumhunting "right out the gate" and

his first 4 posts [you know - the ones "out the gate"]

were zero content and an RVS vote

. We also obviously define scum hunting quite differently.

Giving reads without context is not the same as advancing the game

. And I'm not saying this because I have a scum read [or any read] on pidgey but specifically because

you are making claims that do not hold up under scrutiny

.

my arguemnet was - Pidgey and Yates are null.

If your argument was "Pidgey and Yates are null" we wouldn't have had a problem. But that wasn't your argument, was it? You said Pidgey is Town because he did X and Yates is not Town because he didn't do X. I look at the ISO and see that - gee, Pidgey doesn't seem to be doing X at all and I *know* that I *am* doing X so where is this coming from? I ask you about it. And now we have like 4 pages of back and forth because you faked reads and won't own up to it despite being given every opportunity to recognize either your mistake or misunderstanding of what was being said and done. Mistakes happen. Misreads happen. Stubborn refusal to yield to facts? Scum.

VOTE: Squirrel Girl

I will ask you again - what

specifically

did I misrepresent?
What

specifically

did I take out of context with the Pidgey quote?
Why haven't you asked

Pidgey

if I'm wrong about what he was saying in that quote?

[Yates]

If you didn't think Pid was scumhunting why haven't you called Pid out...

One thing at a time. My first priority was to suss out SG. And why would I focus on Pidgey? There are a LOT of players in this game that don't appear to have started yet. That wasn't the real point. The real point is SG said he did X. I did the ISO. He didn't do X. In this case X is "scum hunt" but it could have been ANYTHING that Pidgey wasn't doing.

...and why did you call 2 of his posts scumhunting?

I conceded that given SG's BROAD definition of scum hunting [apparently giving a read or an explanation for a read] two posts would have qualified. Basically, trying to avoid a semantic argument while also setting her up for the second part of my point - the second part of my point is that even under a STRICT definition I *was* scum hunting and she was claiming I wasn't. Again, she claimed I wasn't doing X but an ISO proves I was doing X. In this case X is scum hunting but it could have been anything I'm doing including making snarky posts.

I don't think you've been hunting at all, all of your posts have been reactionary and pushing back on anyone that suspects you.

Well, sure I'll push back on people. I actually haven't said boo to ZZZ yet so the second part isn't accurate. And you admitted to what I was accusing you of so I'm willing to let it slide and read you based on content. And the interesting thing here is you claim you don't believe I wasn't scum hunting when my first few posts were clearly me scum hunting you.

[Yates]

Pid, what do you think of Yates accusing you of fake scumhunting?

Also, I never made this claim. I simply stated that he did not appear to have begun scum hunting yet within his first 8 posts. Two very different things. It is important to note the distinction given SG's claimed reasons for her reads. That's it.

[Yates]

Yates are you saying im fake hunting in those first 7 posts, not counting the obviously charizard part? Or not hunting?

I'm saying you weren't hunting yet [at least not to the extent that SG should be able to give you a Town read for it]. To me hunting is a process that allows people to find scum [or Town] - which is separate from simply stating a read. While I can't find a legit definition of scumhunting, this is from the Townie page:
"traditional scumhunting methods -

analysis of actions, intent

, voting, previous posts, etc"

Not super helpful but the bolded is what I would be looking for to determine if someone was scumhunting versus making random reads/faking reads.

[Yates]

I don't think you've been hunting at all, all of your posts have been reactionary and pushing back on anyone that suspects you.

Is this what you really think?
Or are you being argumentative because it's me?
I mean... I'm pretty sure I think you think differently for some reason...

So its scummy that I asked Khan why he finds me scummy for something that others are doing? That's scumhunting. What the fuck is wrong with you? Did you roll a scum pm?

I could pretty much rewrite this thus:
"So its scummy that I asked SG why she finds me scummy for something that others aren't doing? That's scumhunting. What the fuck is wrong with you? Did you roll a scum pm?"

[Yates]

What is SG accusing you of that others are doing?

SG accused me of not scumhunting.

[Yates]

What is SG accusing you of that others are doing?

SG accused me of not scumhunting.

Also, YOU accused me of not scumhunting. Though you clearly recognize that there is scumhunting inherent in defending yourself or challenging the logic/motivation. At least, you think that when people accuse YOU of not scumhunting in games where you are sussing out your attacker. *shrug*

[Yates]

How about now? Are you scum hunting now?

Now? I'm watching Continuum while waiting for responses.

[Yates]

Yates has argued about the case.

Have I? I'm not sure what you are talking about. I've been a little distracted. Can you clarify?

[Yates]

This looks opportunistic as fuck to me.

I thought the same thing. JK and Josh_B have the two worst/most opportunistic votes in the game.

[Yates]

Sorry - I was supposed to hit enter not submit. The rest of the above post is...

But does that make them scummy in a large game?

[Yates]

It's supposed to be "throwing shit at the wall to see if it sticks"

Is this what you meant, Pidgey?

[Yates]

How are these different things?

Are you a native English speaker?

"Mudslinging" is an attempt to destroy someone's reputation through attacks [discredit, misrep, etc]
"Throwing [stuff] at a wall to see what sticks" is when someone takes a shotgun approach throwing out varied reads or accusations to see what people react to.

Two very different things.

He is now changing his tune, first it was because i contradicted myself or some shit, and now its because i TOOK A MASSIVE LEAP?

I would expect him to change his tune if you meant the second but said the first and have since clarified. You accused him of doing something he didn't do when what you

meant

is something he may or may not have done. Have you quoted the post that looks like "throwing stuff at the wall to see what sticks" yet?

[Yates]

Why does everyone always ignore me?

Because you are scum. Or because you are pedantic. I'm going to read you based on your performance going forward since apparently [and inexplicably] I'm the only one that makes a distinction between giving reads and scumhunting and that doesn't discount defenses as scumhunting. *shrug*

[Yates]

And if you mean his, then this.

That's what I meant. Thanks.

With that posted; I happen to agree with displaced on that point, actually. Saying that banter "feels relaxed" as an explanation for a Town read is pretty weak. Do you disagree?

[Yates]

Ok did I do either of these things ?

That's a different question from "How are these different things?"

I have already stated that I agree with your observation. That said, I can see how someone could perceive that as "seeing what sticks" even if I don't agree with it. You could *prove* that you didn't mudsling so that's irrelevant.

[Yates]

And what's the difference between being opportunistic in a small and a large?

I don't know either of them. What I do know is some players get overwhelmed in a game this size and will do something "opportunistic" as an excuse to place a vote. If anyone had meta on either of these clowns, that would be better than assuming they are Monkey or AA9 alts...

[Yates]

It's like he's almost sort of admitting to being wrong, and is trying to get a semi-truce called

Don't press your luck. I'm willing to admit that I don't know wtf you people are thinking saying giving reads = scumhunting while disproving points - even in defense - is not. I also like how you missed the Nero quote where HE claims defending is scumhunting when it was pressed on him in another game but in this one he's pretending like my doing it isn't. So in the interests of sparing this game more of this BS, I'm moving on. You probably should too.

[Yates]

Why are you so hung up on KidA, He freely claimed wolverine at the beginning.

If you claimed such a prominent character at the beginning with no prompting, and you weren't CC'd on it, I'd think you were probably town too.

Are you assuming scum didn't receive fake claims for some reason? My experience with Jason's games is that he does give them out:
WWE
Heroes of Comedy - it doesn't say in the end game but I had a fake claim of Ross Gellar
DC Universe
Inbetweeners Mafia

That, I think, should suffice to illustrate that Jason typically gives fake claims. Some of his games that were eaten by Tigers I also know had fake claims but I can't find them to link, obviously.

[Yates]

Sorry - ^^ That post isn't just directed at Josh. That's for anyone discussing fake claims. Jason hands them out like candy. Scum almost certainly have fake claims. That's what we are dealing with.

[Yates]

What I actually like about it is that name claims won't break the game. I mean,

Bruce Wayne

was a scum fake claim in DC Universe. If someone was forced to claim Bruce Wayne, they'd need to claim their role as well in order to full claim. It's in the full claim that you catch the lies. So, really, it's like any other normal game except the game can be more fun because you like the theme/flavor.

It's important to bring this up now so people don't get faked out by mistakenly believing any random name claim. Me claiming Captain America in this game, for example, is pretty much the same as me claiming Yates in a regular game. It carries exactly the same weight in terms of alignment - none - or at least it should.

[Yates]

Is it me or is most of those notihng useful?

It's you.

Post 411 was a pretty important clarification. I think I'm the one that asked for it.

Post 404 is clearly showing frustration at how his post was being misunderstood not not knowing why the misunderstanding exists.

Post 410 is Pidgey clarifying his reason for voting Displaced when asked.

Post 400 is exasperation again.

I could go through the rest but there's no point. They are all content posts. Do you have any actual "active lurking" posts? Because I don't see any.

[Yates]

Can you explain how it does?

I showed my pov. Was that wrong?

Did you see post 527?

[Yates]

No one else cares.

I care. I happen to agree that you have no case if you are willing to accept that Pidgey simply mixed metaphors as that changes the entire context of those two posts and invalidates your claim.

Let me show you...

You obviously think Pidgey meant "mudslinging" per post 127 where you say "Would you say

displaced is attempting to smear

mozamis or mozamis' read on me?"

Pidgey's post 136, in retrospect, appears to be a clarification that supports the theory that he misspoke and meant "seeing what sticks" when he says "i feel that going out of his way to just mentiona

point anout something without really commiting to a read

was what made me weary of displaced"

The reason I use the term "mudslinging" above is because that's how displaced characterized the statement in post 214 ["How is that post mudslinging? How is mudslinging non committal?"], which you refer to as justification for your vote in post 229 ["pay attention to displaced - he caught all of the problems with Pidgey's posts that I was picking at"].

Post 258 appears to be your summary of the situation and in this post you point out that Pidgey's post 136 [quoted above] "is a dramatic change in pidgey's reason to vote for displaced" from post 125 where Pidgey says "Displaced looks scummy with his last post since that seems like a little "throw some dirt and see if it sticks." Do you see how if you replace "throw some dirt and see if it sticks" with "throwing crap against the wall and seeing what sticks" [per our recent clarification] is

entirely

in line with what he stated in post 136? And if you accept that, then the "back pedaling" you refer to in post 363 is also invalidated.

The last point you have in play is from post 433 "Could you look me in the eye and state that displaced's post held scummy intent?" I happen to agree that I find nothing scummy about post 121 and asked Pidgey the following " I happen to agree with displaced on that point, actually. Saying that banter "feels relaxed" as an explanation for a Town read is pretty weak. Do you disagree?" in post 412. Pidgey's response was "yes, it felt to me as if he wanted to point something and see if others would think is scummy" in post 414.

Essentially your only remaining point, then, is that you disagree with Pidgey's assessment of Displaced's post 121. And that's really nothing at all. So... what else have you got?

Also, what was the purpose behind your unofficial vote count?

[Yates]

Struggling to motivate myself though

Can you at least motivate yourself enough to comment on my assessment of the displaced-pidgey-ruffling mess summaraized in post 569?

[Yates]

yes, before anyone goes crosseyed Im going to be assuming multiball.

I will go on record as supporting this theory. Nothing to be ashamed of. It will likely sort itself out by morning - obviously - but there's no reason NOT to think this will be multiball based on all the big theme games Jason has moded in the past. Fake claims and multiball are mod meta.

So that's my last setup spec post of the day.

[Yates]

VOTE: Aronis

He's a gross lurker, but calling post 15 a "rolefish" is a bit of a stretch. To me it reads as a snarky reaction to:

You are Professor Doctor Awesome?

and

Maybe he's Dr. Decibel.

So two people jokingly referred to him as a "Doctor."

[Yates]

Yates(499) alerted me to the probability of two scum factions in this game

You're welcome. I also subtly hinted this is likely a multiball game in in post 579 when I said "there's no reason NOT to think this will be multiball based on all the big theme games Jason has moded in the past.

Fake claims and multiball are mod meta

."

Referring to the primary role fishing infractions, but oops forgot to include his partner on that train. Hello Scum

Is there something about post 580 you don't understand? The claim is that post 15 looked like a rolefish. My interpretation is that post 15 was a

response

to the two posts immediately preceding it. Did you think ZZZX's post [16] somehow influenced Aronis's "rolefish" post [15]? Unless you think Aronis had a fusion reactor powered Delorean, I don't see how ANY post that came after it would.

It makes me feel like the Yate's/SG war was Faction on Faction

Possibly. I'm in the Town faction so if SG is in a different faction then what you are saying here makes perfect sense. Which faction are

you

in?

You are right about one thing, though, SG's inability to read for context is driving me nuts [get it - "nuts?" - I slay me!]:

how Yates decided to start supporting [the Ruffling wagon] from the sidelines

You know what? Before I lose my crap, why don't you tell me how I supported the Ruffling wagon from the sidelines. Because, again, I think we have VERY different interpretations. I'm assuming you mean post 569, yes? The post where I jumped square in the middle of the ring and refereed? If so, I think you'd have an easier time mischaracterizing that as a defense/buddy post. Just saying.

[Yates]

Why the fuck did someone shoot aronis now.

Is the target as important as the result or what a day death implies? Honestly, the rest of it is wifom. Maybe it was someone who thought he bread crumbed doc. Maybe it was someone trying to make it look like he was killed by someone who thought he bread crumbed doc. Both are equally likely and uninteresting given how little we know.

There were so many better targets.

Name 3.

[Yates]

So I posted after him and influenced his post before me

This logic is flawless...

Thank you for restating my point. Josh claimed I was your scum buddy because I didn't include your "rolefish" in my summary of why Aronis's post wasn't a rolefish. I'm saying that your post obviously

did not

influence the post before it. Is that really unclear?

[Yates]

It seems to me you are assuming that the day kill is scum sided. What makes you think that?

Could also be SK. Not sure why you would assume Day Vig?

[Yates]

What makes you think that?

Sorry, was checking Jason games for day killers and I'm not finding one. So the last game I clearly recall having a day kill was in [ur=http://forum.mafiascum.net/viewtopic.ph ... #p4654410l]Harry Potter[/url] where Tammy was an SK. And that's memorable more for the "leashed SK" debate.

[Yates]

Link fix: Harry Potter

[Yates]

Happy Easter!


I'll be caught up tonight or [more likely] tomorrow.

[Yates]

@yates: better targets: Zzzx, kid A, scar.

I haven't really been paying attention to Kid A - what's your case on him? Sheeping or the "worst character ever" post?

It would be a defense of Pidgey, not Ruffling

Yes. Agreed. Not accurate, but more believable as a defense of Pidgey than an attack on Ruffling. Being that Ruffling himself concurs that my post was not an attack, you appear to be running out of legs to stand on in your continued attempts at misrepping my posts. Try again later.

I'm saying the Aronis fish was 20.

Fair enough - though I think that's also a mischaracterization. 20 - like 15 - didn't stand out to me as a rolefish either. It looked like a lulzy response to a silly post from Kid A. At least in 15 I could have

understood

the argument that he was trying to "breadcrumb" doc even though I would have disagreed with it.

What makes you think Aronis was shot for breadcrumbing Doc? That's a very specific assertion.

My current conversation with Josh wherein he was being accused in thread of rolefishing. He didn't really do much else that would explain drawing a kill. So that leaves WIFOM. I guess that's another reason I'm thinking it wasn't a Town kill. I could see either scum team making a wifom kill, I could see an SK making a random kill just to announce his presence, but I can't see Town shooting Aronis for no reason whatsoever.

[Yates]

Was this ever answered?

Yup:

@yates: better targets: Zzzx, kid A, scar. Other lurkers im forgetting.

[Yates]

How do you feel about displaced, ruflig voting on Aronis for post 20?

Same as I did when I thought they were voting for him based on post 15; not great. I maintain that wasn't a rolefish. Town flip supports that theory, I would think.

Also, ftr, rolefishing isn't a super scum tell. I feel like any scum worth their salt know not to rolefish and there are legit reasons for Town to force someone to hard claim if they see a suspicious breadcrumb. Really, the point of voting someone up to L-1 is to force a suspicious person to hard claim - and the end result is the same. So it's a weak tell at best anymore.

[Yates]

I shot because I honestly thought he had a good chance of being scum because my previous game with him he was a lot more active was trying to find scum unlike this game.

Why didn't you shoot your vote? Or press your target for reads/info first?

[Yates]

I have never had a day time kill before and got a little jumpy

Ok. So you understand now how your shot would be more useful towards the end of the day - especially as we acquire Town consensus?

[Yates]

I'm not sure what Yates has even done

How do you feel about having a "double voter" drone? And how do you feel about that drone being Kid A?

ok i have decided that Squirrel Girl is a doublevoter for the rest of day 1

[Yates]

Yates is a cunning thing.

[Yates]

Why are you being ambiguous here?

Ambiguous? My interaction was specifically characterized as "faction on faction" by Josh. I said I was Town and therefore his theory would only be plausible if he considered the Town a "faction." How is that being ambiguous at all? Moreover, how do you even determine if an argument is "faction on faction" versus any other type? That's a weird place to try to get specific, is not based on any logic, and makes no sense to me.

Also fake claims are super common in themes so you going "THIS IS JASON MOD META!" is head desk.

And yet we had someone who claims to have been operating under the assumption that scum were not provided fake claims. How is demonstrating that OUR MOD has a history of providing fake claims [and multifaction games] "head desk?" It's like you are not reading the game or are trying to take things as out of context as possible.

In 2.5 men weren't you telling us to wait on a shot until we had night info?

Antagon claimed Vig and shot at night [even though he was a Day/Night he said to lynch him if he ever shot in the day]. So I had to make my stance pretty clear when it came to holding him accountable for differentiating himself as a Vig as opposed to an SK. So my thoughts on the day vig pretty much mirror that but need to be updated to account for the immediate flip and VC reset. But yeah, as he said himself, the shot was premature and could have been better used - especially if he was planning on claiming the shot anyway.

[Yates]

I'm not sure what Yates has even done

How do you feel about having a "double voter" drone? And how do you feel about that drone being Kid A?

ok i have decided that Squirrel Girl is a doublevoter for the rest of day 1

how do you feel?

I feel like you are trying to absolve yourself of responsibility for your vote. And that's bad.

[Yates]

town can't really do anything about it [multiple scum teams]

Preach on. Why is Nero pretending he doesn't get this?

The "faction vs. faction" comment was him accusing you and SG of being on different scum teams.

No crap. That's precisely my point. As noted above - and in my previous post - how can you even make this assumption without the info required to confirm multiball? And, specifically, how can Town even ascertain the probability of of an interaction being faction on faction versus town on faction or town on town? Are you going to address this or keep pretending you are somehow confused by my post, still? This is beginning to look like you are trying to provoke an argument between Josh and I where there isn't one.

All you had to say was "hey its MS and the majority of theme games have fake claims."

Clearly not.

[Yates]

In 446 you said you "So in the interests of sparing this game more of this BS, I'm moving on. You probably should too."

I took this that you now had a town read on SG

.

I see. I don't have a Town read on SG in the slightest. What I meant by that post is that I was going to drop the semantic argument about scum hunting from my case and just read her going forward based on the rest of her play. Since most of my suspicion on her stemmed from that, I didn't have much of a case. Not having a case is not the same as Town reading someone, though.

This is a very nice summary of what continues to bother me but that I have "dropped" as part of my official public case:

I still don't understand what scum hunting Pidgey was doing that elicited your original statement. I don't think anyone does. The more I look at it, the more I think the comment was based on insider information.

And this is the other part of it that apparently *I* am unable to communicate:

It isn't scummy that you responded to NeroCain. It's scummy that there are no grounds for the claim you made about Pidgey's activity.

[Yates]

OMG this game. My head going to blow out. I have to do a huge amount of catch up. I am not following anything (((((((((((((((

Why do you keep doing this to yourself? Don't you think mini games would be easier for you to follow?

[Yates]

Hello, you realize i am a replacement right?

Yeah? You CHOSE to replace into a large theme game on DAY ONE. This is what? Our third game together? And in each game you claim to be "lost" or "behind" or "unable to follow" because of all the action. So if you can't keep up on larger games you start, why replace in to a game with 30+ posts to read when you know it's probably not something you'll be able to handle?

Whatever. I guess I see what you are saying. Just consider not replacing in to larger games in the future. Know your strengths/weaknesses and adapt accordingly.

[Yates]

I didn't see this:

Secondly, I suspect that at least one team already had this information.

Likely both teams would know if this is multifaction since typically each team is given a role that is expressly designed to find a member of another faction. Again, look at WWE 2.0 and check out the role pm for Scott Hall. Plus, if you are in a game this size, you are scum, and you only have 2 or 3 buddies? Chances are pretty much 100% there's another team out there so the logic isn't all that hard.

[Yates]

UnfriendlyNeighbors. A hydra of Mastin/Nero (who have, in games this size put up more posts than some complete Newbie games) with nothing to say is not VT or a town PR. They are scum.

This is a good point. Nero was also trying to provoke/continue arguments between myself and Josh AND SG while not so subtly misrepping. I'll buy it.

VOTE: UnfriendlyNeighbors

[Yates]

Wait.

UNVOTE: UnfriendlyNeighbors

UnfriendlyNeighbors is a Mac/Cabd Hydra.

[Yates]

Does not compute. PV and Yates both get dumb points.

Ninjaed.

[Yates]

bull shit Yates, I wasn't misrepping you or trying to start an argument.

Your needles during the Yates-SG stuff felt like prods.
Your needles during the Yates-JoshB stuff felt like prods.
Your "confusion" about thinking I somehow thought SG was Town because I was dropping the semantic argument point feels like a misrep.

*shrug*

Also, your "scum hunting" feels pretty hollow.

[Yates]

I'm putting our vote here for the time being for the multiball comment.

This is a really terrible excuse for a vote. Why are you ignoring the fact that there is a high likelihood of this being a multiball game - no inside info required? And further, that Josh wasn't the first person to bring that up?

Spoiler:

Could be inferred from the links provided in my post [though I will grant you I hadn't thought of it until someone else brought it up]:

Are you assuming scum didn't receive fake claims for some reason? My experience with Jason's games is that he does give them out:
WWE
Heroes of Comedy - it doesn't say in the end game but I had a fake claim of Ross Gellar
DC Universe
Inbetweeners Mafia

That, I think, should suffice to illustrate that Jason typically gives fake claims.

Displaced is the first person to actually

say

multiball:

I know from past experience he's a decent player and could help us catch scum (regardless of his own alignment, yes, before anyone goes crosseyed Im going to be assuming multiball. Sue me or something

I concur with that assessment:

yes, before anyone goes crosseyed Im going to be assuming multiball.

I will go on record as supporting this theory. Nothing to be ashamed of. It will likely sort itself out by morning - obviously - but there's no reason NOT to think this will be multiball based on all the big theme games Jason has moded in the past. Fake claims and multiball are mod meta.

So that's my last setup spec post of the day.

If you search his ISO, Josh first mentions multiball in post 602:

It makes me feel like the Yate's/SG war was Faction on Faction considering the misreps that were coming from both sides.

But Ctrl+F doesn't check the contents of the spoiler tags. Right at the top of that same post, this is said:

Pidgy486and/or Yates(499) alerted me to the probability of two scum factions in this game that has put behavior of several players into question.
At the beginning of the game(p1) 3 people came on strong as role fishing after Aronis claimed to have an awesome character.
Squirrel Girl
Ruflig
ZZZX
It isn't absurd to want to know who got what character, but the issue against these three is that both SG and Ruf were both like, "IS IT A DOCTOR?!?!"
And it was ZZZX's second attempt for role fishing, the first being against SG.

Then there's the follow up. Ruf praising SG for her knowledge(17) and SG giving a random, yet pointed role description of an antagonist character(18). I wish she would have called dibs. We'd be sure she was scum.
Forward to SG rolefishing KidA(not that far (21)) and Ruf voting Aronis and explaining his case against Aronis's "minor role fishing"(152) as opposed to his own full on role fishing mentioned before

Also, ThAd challenged him on this already and it was already addressed. These posts happened:

Yates(499) alerted me to the probability of two scum factions in this game

You're welcome. I also subtly hinted this is likely a multiball game in in post 579 when I said "there's no reason NOT to think this will be multiball based on all the big theme games Jason has moded in the past.

Fake claims and multiball are mod meta

."

And you challenged him:

If SqG is on

one of the Mafia teams

, do you think the "Pidgey scum hunting right out of the gate" comment was an indicator that Pidgey's displaced vote was spot on.

Quick Quesiton for anyone that cares to answer. Has multiball been confirmed?

Because if not we're powerlynching the fuck out of Josh_B right now.

Why would think anything different?

Hasn't it already been stated that multiball is part of Jason's meta

. I could start FoSing Team2 right now if you want, but they seem to be interested in rooting out Team1. With so many players in this game, and only getting one lynch per day, I think I'll stick with where I'm at.

So now I'm left to wonder if this is an intentional misrep or if you are legitimately not reading the game - or even posts DIRECTLY ANSWERING YOUR QUESTIONS.

[Yates]

And also i want to know how Arnois stabbed? Do we have a day VIG?
Are they any claims? If so, who and what are the claims. Thank you.

I shot Aronis and I am town. I shot because I honestly thought he had a good chance of being scum because my previous game with him he was a lot more active was trying to find scum unlike this game.

I shot because I honestly thought he had a good chance of being scum because my previous game with him he was a lot more active was trying to find scum unlike this game.

Why didn't you shoot your vote? Or press your target for reads/info first?

I have never had a day time kill before and got a little jumpy

I have never had a day time kill before and got a little jumpy

Ok. So you understand now how your shot would be more useful towards the end of the day - especially as we acquire Town consensus?

Yeah I realize that nowa

[Yates]

A single post sums it up pretty well.

Yes. That is a nice summary of misreps and logic reaches.

[Yates]

Holy shit. Is this guy new? Didn't he knew that all day Vig usually discuss first if they come out.
Is there any possiblity, this guy could be scum day vig? Is that allowed in this setup?

Well, his join date is from the end of January. No idea if he is an alt [my hunch is yes]. Also, he's claiming he has never had a day kill before. I guess that isn't the same as having never played in a game with a day kill before but whatever. His posts up to that point did not appear to be noobish in nature or those of a VI so there's that. I guess a day kill is possible for a scum team but it is far more likely to come from a 3rd party. My money is on 3rd party killer right now though I'm open to the possibility he's a vig given he did claim his kill right away in thread.

Personally, I'm up for allowing night actions to sort that slot out.

[Yates]

And Yates, this is for you. Do you Pidgey is Scum and also Squirrel is Scum?

I don't have a particularly strong read on Pidgey though in the process of defending against SG's misreps I found myself leaning Town.

I'll say I'm leaning scum on SG. My read on SG is a bit more complicated than that, though. My struggle with SG is that her logic and misreps are so obvious that anyone actually reading the thread can see right through them. So I don't know how scum SG would think she could get away with it. I think Josh has been doing a good job recently of pointing out many of her inconsistencies. And I'm glad because I know I can get tunnelly and sometimes allow confirmation bias to tint my reads on slots. So seeing someone else recognize the fail logic and to call her to task on it is making me happy on the inside. Now I'm just reading her reactions/responses to see if she will recognize the problems or pretend those problems don't exist and never adequately address them. So, essentially, I'm waiting to see if she's going allow posts to inform her reads or if she is going to find posts in a shallow attempt to justify those reads. One is clearly scum motivated and one is typically more town motivated.

[Yates]

So how is Nero and you getting along in this game? Can you give me your top 3 suspects list?

Typical abrasive conflict - right out of the gate.

I actually have Nero as more likely to be scum than SG - but not by much. A 3rd read is a little more problematic. I really do want to see confirmation that this is multiball before I can go too crazy. Without naming names, I suspect one of the people "backing me up" in my fight with SG is likely also scum. These reads come from the motivation for certain posts as much as for their content.

[Yates]

Josh isn't even calling me scum

, he's arguing that I'm town due to things that didn't happen!

And that's why he's a fair 3rd party to use for the purposes of this discussion. This is a fair summary of Day 1 events - especially as they relate to the Yates-SG-Pidgey-Displaced dramas:

Spoiler:

Read the Day Phase. Look at it again.
1. Pidgey put's a weak early vote on Displaced
2. SqG says Pidgey is scum hunting and therefore more town than Yates.
3. Yates says WTF to SqG
4. Pidgey says that he thinks "2" was a reference to Disney Princess Mafia that he played with SqG
5. Yates and SqG go at it over Pidgey without addressing the possible relationship between SqG and Displaced as the grounds for "2".
Scenarios-
1. SqG knows that displaced is mafia. She is commenting on Pidgey's expert randomness and calling it scum hunting.
OR
2. SqG doesn't even realize that she made that connection, or that such a connection could be made from her comments.
AND
3. SqG equates weak early votes to scum hunting which she believes is alignment indicative.

Conclusion-
SqG's ignorance on how Displaced fits into the equation seems legit. If there are reasons to vote SqG, they aren't here.

I'm not sure what 4 and 5 are in reference to but 1, 2, and 3 are all accurate. Scenario 3 is also accurate based on what YOU claim. So in this post where he's talking about something completely different, he accurately portrays how OUR interaction went in the early part of this day phase. Where we disagree is on intent. But that's a different discussion entirely.

[Yates]

You think Squireel is scummy because she is defending Pidgey more than she suppose too?

No. It's like this:

She claimed in a post to be leaning scum on me and leaning Town on Pidgey because he seemed to be scumhunting out of the gate. I thought it was weird because of the two of us I felt like my posts "out of the gate" had more scum hunting. It kind of spiraled into a crap storm of misreps and semantics from there.

So my initial concern with SG was what looked like a perversion of logic and lack of internal consistency. The continued misreps and word twisting are what has me continuing to believe she is likely scum.

I feel you & nero have some ego issues. Would you both ever consider to play as team instead of try to piss on each other all the time?
I am done with both of you.

Sometimes you have two players that rub each other the wrong way. Nero rubbed me the wrong way right off the bat.

Remember the last jason game?

The one where a Vanilla Town Nero inexplicably faked having a "QuickTopic Investigation" guilty on Town me? Yup. I would NEVER fake a guilty on someone as Town without admitting to a gambit. And Nero was deservedly shot in the head that night for doing so. Keep THAT in mind as you evaluate the hypocrisy and truth value of this statement:

I actually think Yates ego is bigger than mine. When he's wrong about something instead of admitting that he's wrong he'll argue that he's right even though the facts are not on his side. At the very least that's anti-town.

Unless you both can't work on issues between both of you.. We wont win this game.

So this sounds like you are assuming both Nero and I are Town? Do you actually have a Town read on Nero or are you just making a point?

Why are you pointing pieces from my post? I said more things about his play than one.

For the record - ^^^THAT is the kind of thing she's been doing all game and part of why I'm still scum reading her.

[Yates]

grow a fucking backbone. baby.

That's the problem. I have one. I saw you immediately troll me and called you out on it. Not sure what else there is to say about that. *shrug*

All I hear is wah wah wah.

About as mature of a response as I suppose I could have hoped for from you.

I was shot the next day without a chance to claim but its not like you use facts in your statements.

I actually do. You know, like I did in the portion of the argument that elicited the "wah wah wah" response since you aren't mature enough to take responsibility for your action or to recognize the anti-Town nature of your play.

if you want to talk about moral values

It's not about morals - it's about the information you provide to your team.

[Yates]

Either you are immature as fuck or you are scum.

Nailed me. I'm immature and I have an ego. You win the argument and the internet.

Is that what you want to hear? You've got it. Now grow up and play like a man yourself.

/last response to this off topic ridiculousness.

[Yates]

this is an awful post

Umbrage - meet ArcAngel.

[Yates]

Regardless of Joshy's alignment and regardless of multiball or not, I believe Yates is sour.

Why? What leads you to this "belief?"

[Yates]

I note that he calls me for misrepping and whatnot all the time - but I couldn't tell you what he thinks I've misrepped.

Right. Because I never told you what I thought you were misrepping in any of my posts.
post 286
post 300
post 659
post 855

I think that post does show his misreps and does show how he actually doesn't care about scumhunting right now, he cares about being able to make a stand and attack people that he thinks are weak.

Speaking of misreps...

Yeah. You are clearly the weakest player in this game. Well, it's a toss up between you and Nero, right? That's why I avoided some of the other wagons. Phear. [This is sarcasm.]

Serious question; are you and Nero on the same scum team committed to trolling me in this game?

This is opportunistic.

No. ^^^THIS is opportunistic. Let me show you something... You see this?

That's my point. I'd expect this from you, but not from Cabd. I'd expect Cabd-town to be having a bigger influence on the game than he has.

That's how I'd feel about a Mastin/Nero hydra. Did you happen to notice that like 60 seconds later, after reviewing the hydras in our game, I realized PV mentioned the wrong members of the hydra in question and adjusted with an immediate unvote? Yeah. Sneaky sneaky scum move there... [This is ALSO sarcasm.]

Your posting this game is not akin to 2.5 men banged your mother. It is much closer to (among others) You Could Be Anyone. I am not seeing the town thoughts. I am seeing thoughts that do a good job of looking town without being town.

That is incredibly non-specific and banal. Way to not tie yourself to your BS "read."

Alright. I'm going to be judging at TAP NY today. Needless to say, I likely won't be posting for the rest of the day.

[Yates]

I can't see you as town quick voting the hydra on PV's sayso and THEN checking. I'd imagine you'd check first. That was you seeing a cheap and easy reason for you to jump on a building wagon and then realizing that, oops, PV's reason was BS and someone might call you out on it. That wasn't you realizing your mistake. It was you backtracking.

No, I'd have been quick voting the hydra based on my Nero read - not based on PV's sayso. I'm in more than one game and there are a lot of hydras to keep track of. I simply lost track. It's not anything more nefarious than that. The rest of your statement doesn't even make sense. Regardless of PV's "reason" I was voting for the Nero part of the supposed hydra. And those reasons would have been legit if this was the Nero/Mastin hydra game. BECAUSE I'm in multiple games, I double checked and realized the mistake. That's not a "back track," that's a clerical error. How you can mischaracterize that as a "backtrack" is beyond me.

[Yates]

winning a logic war with Yates isn't hard to do.

I will pay someone a million mafia bucks to shoot this in the face. A MILLION.

[Yates]

I stand by my original comment.

Great. And do you stand by the misrep presented in that very same post? The one about me picking on weaker players?

[Yates]

I love how you single out that one part of my argument and skip over the most incriminating part: Where you had been arguing with Nero all game, and where he had not posted in a hydra once.

In my defense - Nero is bad at posting. See above. Also, people post out of hydra all the time. Also, also, I actually *did* address this. I'm in multiple games. I just forgot.

[Yates]

How 2 and a half friends banged your mother had a daykiller in it

I thought I had qualified that statement a little better but the killer in HIMYM was Day/Night. They did one day kill then promised to only shoot at night, if you recall. I can dig up the quote if need be. I realize that's a

little

nit picky but unless you are assuming this is also a day/night killer it

is

different. Anyway, JK has claimed his kill and has sufficient attention on his slot going forward. He also hasn't been scummy enough to play the "lynch it anyway" card. So really this is a pretty old thought given everything that has happened since.

[Yates]

I don't care whether the multiball comment has been made beforehand. The wording of Josh's comment was extremely strange given the circumstances, and it doesn't really match the town-thought-process of finding scum, regardless of whether they're on different teams or not

Maybe I just don't understand it.

Ok. So can you expand on this thought a bit? Like, what part of it didn't look like a town thought process? I guess *I* just don't understand what you are getting at. In the post I was responding to above, you just vaguely referred to his "multiball comment" so I hope you see where I'm not following.

[Yates]

Yeah this is a terrible wagon jump from rufflig and looks very self-preservationy

Yeah but do you think self-preservation is scummy? At best it's a null tell, imo. Pretty sure I've seen you do it as Town, am I wrong?