In post 344, PJ. wrote:Hi
The scum team is Human Destroyer, goodmorning, and the Mehdi Hydra.
You're welcome
Vote: Human Destroyer
Very bold assertions, and my gut doesn't agree with them.
In post 358, PJ. wrote:
conforming to an anti town idea in order to fit in, the way he maddogged the josh wagon for silly reasons
Goodmorning for starting a stream of anti-town posts.
Mehdi is gut mostly along with his play between him and HD. I'd be willing to discuss the possibility of Serra being the 3rd scum instead of the hydra simply because he calls out the hydra for doing something antitown and then contradicts himself by doing something incredibly similar.
Not a big fan of the hammer offer coming from jacob with 2 replacements incoming and more then week before deadline. but he's likely town
Jenniferr is town(mostly because Joshw as town and her posting reaffirms)
@KX, unvoting because of a replacement is kind of silly. You're obvious new town but why the unvote? Do you find the Josh slot(now inherited by jenniferr) to be a town slot or a scum slot?
goodmorning reaffirming my heavy scum read on her with the whole unvoting the replacement thing and then voting another lurker. I'm very willing to switch my vote to her if the better and much more tasty Human Destroyer wagon doesn't happen.
I don't see how HD has "conformed to an anti-town idea" at all. I'll admit I don't have a solid read on him, but the case against Josh was pretty good. The reasons behind it weren't silly, to me they made sense. IMO HD was just following his most scum read at the time, as was I. Could HD still be scum? Sure. But the reasons you are bringing against him are weak.
GM leans town to me. I don't think her posts are anti-town. Correct me if I'm wrong, but you mean to say that the fact the she used scum lists makes her posts anti-town. However, her posts were providing reads, and she did at least cite other posts and provide reasons why she felt her reads were the way they were. Klick uses scum lists too, why don't you suspect him?
I think that Jacob could be town also
Josh did not seem town. I think you would have trouble making an argument that his posts were even null. No, to me Josh seemed very scummy, for reasons already stated. I find it strange that you would be so sure on your read on Jennifer.
This makes it sound like you just want to build a wagon, but I'll address that later this post with the help of a quote from KX.
In post 368, PJ. wrote: In post 366, Human Destroyer wrote:I always do scum lists. Just search around, you'll find them.
Except the case wasn't bad (it isn't applicable anymore because Jennifer strikes me as town on first impression but whatever)
It was definently bad, and listing scum suspects is scummy and anti-town
Could you explain to me why that is so?
In post 367, KX wrote:Btw, just an idea I wanted to throw in. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems to me like what Panzer is trying to do is pressure some who are generally considered town and, more importantly, have managed to slip past any major criticism. While I fully agree with and endorse this idea, at the current time, I think that trying it is rather impractical. Given the current situation, even if you're making a false case, there simply isn't enough to go off of for anything substantial to emerge. The idea behind making a false case should be that a person who's mainly considered town has been, in their own way, flying under the radar, and avoiding criticism. Your goal would be to create a probably highly biased case against them were you jump to many irrational conclusions, and test how they react to pressure and defend themselves. Ideally, this let's you confirm your belief in them being village while eliminating most doubts.
Of course, via this post I would somewhat ruin the point of it, but at this point you may be damaging people's opinions of you. Simply put, there just isn't enough to go off of, even if you try and present things in a tainted light. Ordinarily I would just let things run their course and see if you have anything you haven't said yet, but give the scarcity of the case, I think no good will come of it, and only harm will be done to you. Now, if you truly do think the players you've mentioned are scum, I have to question if you're village. While it's good to pressure those who are more "clean," a useful tactic if you want disruption is to play on people's paranoia and call out said "clean" people as scum, which spreads doubt and can make people fall out of the reach of logic in their assumptions.
So pretty much, if you're bluffing about it all, say so now and hold off until later before you hurt yourself, and if you're serious, then please say why, as I doubt I'm alone in wondering why and being unconvinced.
I REALLY like this post, because I thought the same thing. Maybe panzer is just trying to put pressure on players that haven't seen much pressure before. Pointing this out would surely ruin this play, but I doubt the effectiveness of the play. So I'm joining KX in saying, if you're bluffing it's time to stop, because I think you're scum.
In post 369, PJ. wrote: In post 367, KX wrote:Given the current situation, even if you're making a false case, there simply isn't enough to go off of for anything substantial to emerge. The idea behind making a false case should be that a person who's mainly considered town has been, in their own way, flying under the radar, and avoiding criticism. Your goal would be to create a prob
Cases are scummy. Creating a false case is probably more scummy. HD and Goodmorning are scum
Well if you think false cases are scummy, then I guess I have no choice but to think you're scum
In post 388, PJ. wrote: In post 378, Human Destroyer wrote:@Panzer
a) Why would a case more likely come from a scum mindset than a town mindset?
b) Which case(s) is/are false and why is/are it/they false?
Cases disrupt the town by causing a back and forth that distracts from scumhunting
KX implied I was making false cases or exaggerating my cases. I was saying that deliberately doing either is scummy.
In post 377, KX wrote:Pretty much just be more specific. You've made a number of claims so far, but call me stupid, I haven't been able to figure out how you arrived at those conclusions. Site specific examples and explain the reasoning behind your conclusion. I mean, you've made stabs at how your logic fits together, such as #358, but, at least for me, you never quite connect them together or to reality. I don't entirely disagree with you, as I said I find they should be investigated more, but I'm not seeing you doing that.
I'm not going to make a post by post case, because those are scummy. Instigating the use of scum suspect list is both anti-town and scummy as it directs the scum and does give the town any real benefit(good morning). Doing something with direct intent of gaining town cred to facilitate a mislynch(hd), Jumping from lurker to lurker to appear more town is scummy(good morning). i'm sure there's more but sleepy.
Cases can easily be scum hunting. The back and forth is very useful to scum hunting, how else are we supposed to look for slips and know where people's opinion's lie?
Well I like post by post cases. Are they always right? no. But they aren't necessarily scummy. Making assertions without backing up your reasoning is scummy.
Having said all of that against you, I'm not going to vote you today.
At the current state of things, that's ridiculous. He at least warrants suspicion.
VOTE: Jennifer
The case against Josh was good, and you have done nothing to diminish my suspicion of your slot.
