In post 46, Rob14 wrote:I like my vote exactly where it is. Let's take a look at BC's ISO.
ISO #1 wrote:Unvote:
Vote: roflcopter
found scum.
As I've said before, he grasps at an extremely small piece of "evidence" in order to make the extremely bold assertion that he's found scum after only ten posts by players. If he considered it a minor scumslip, it makes so much more sense at this stage to keep it to himself and wait to see if he can identify a pattern in roflcopter's voting. If he can identify a pattern of bandwagoning after he receives more evidence, then he would have a good case for roflscum. Instead, he winds up with a case that is extremely weak to non-existent. At this point, I don't think BC is scum, just dumb town.
ISO #2 wrote: In post 15, Rob14 wrote:
Not sure if serious. Since sarcasm transmits very poorly over the Internet, I'll be going under the assumption that you are.
That's quite a bold statement. I seriously doubt an experienced player would attempt to bandwagon a player in RVS as scum, especially when they're only the third player out of a necessary nine to lynch. There's nothing to gain from such an endeavor and quite a bit to lose. I would expect experienced scum to avoid being any more than a second vote on a person during RVS to avoid bringing any needless attention to themselves.
so you're saying we should be looking at all the players that either voted first, or did not put the third vote on someone?
When I point out what I had said above, he tries to put words in my mouth. He doesn't argue against me, attempt to prove me wrong, or offer an alternative position. He twists my words in an attempt to discredit me. This strikes me as scummy.
ISO #6 wrote: In post 30, roflcopter wrote:
if zab had simply said "miller claim. bc=obvtown" i would have thought nothing of this post. but no, its "wow," its "already," and it "seems legit," which makes zab "seem way too excited" to either already know who he doesn't have to nightkill, or be pushing his buddies millerclaim through to the town list (still too early to tell which, but we will kill you before too long too and find out, don't worry)
or you may have just outed the cop.
And he does it again. As rofl later posted, he never outed cop. If anything, BC did. He twists rofl's words. In addition to that, as town, there is no reason to make this post. If town-BC thinks that zab is cop, then you don't go out in the thread and say it. As scum-BC, he has two possible motivations to make this post. If zab is town, he makes this post to clue his partners into the fact that zab is a potential cop in order to ensure they make that kill if BC is lynched. If zab is scum, he makes this post to shift our read of zab towards town (or at least away from scum).
ISO #8 wrote: In post 36, roflcopter wrote:ebwop2:
and if that did actually "out the cop" its on you for saying that stupid shit out loud and not on me for saying something else entirely
(the actual argument which you ignored to spout your bullshit, which in this business we call a strawman)
oh bullshit. Any player could look at Zabriels post, and your reasoning behind it and deduce the same logic that I did. I had no read at all on Zabriel, but you immediately have a scum read based off his reaction to my claim, which might i add your reasoning for a scum read is shaky as hell.
And the bold above is just complete bullshit.
As for your questions in Post #26 i was mostly being sarcastic and trying to start the game. Sure, you weren't really sheeping. Everything before
my #29 (side from my claim) was nonsensical, and i was trying to start conversation.
Seriously? Are you talking about the same scum-read that you previously defended against both rofl and me in ISO #2? If you were joking, then you could have said so far earlier, especially considering I pretty directly asked you if you were serious in your read or not. This seems like you're backing away from your "read" of rofl because you realize that no one is buying it.
Also, even if players could independently come up with a cop read from seeing rofl's post (I didn't, for the record), why make the leap for them? Other players aren't guaranteed to see everything you see or interpret it the same way. Town has no motivation to state suspicions that someone could be a cop in-thread. It can never benefit the town to reveal a cop.
I think that what's going on here is fairly obvious. BC makes a miller claim. Zab immediately backs up this claim to solidify BC as town. Two people move their votes to Zab, and BC immediately does a vote on the last person to vote for Zab. When rofl states that zab, BC, or me could all be lynch options for the day, BC leaps to zab's defense. BC claims that zab could be a cop in order to explain away a scumslip and try to push our perception of zab towards a town-read.
BC and Zab are scum-partners. They each have attempted to shift our perception of the other towards town and BC has defended Zab quite a bit. We lynch BC today, and if he's scum, we lynch Zab tomorrow.
