Open 473: Jungle Republic GAME OVER

[auspicious]

Vote: Whiskers

I honestly see no reason to wait to off the next obvious WW; the mafia can't kill, and thus can wait.

[Whiskers]

Right, if we lynch the werewolf.

The case on me is: "Whiskers defended the werewolf," right?

[auspicious]

Right, if we lynch the werewolf.

The case on me is: "Whiskers defended the werewolf," right?

Basically. You defended Aldus when there was no reason for you to. He hadn't dropped any towntells, and frankly, even if he was town, we would have been better off without him. While I can understand not necessarily scumreading him (and instead scumreading someone like Thor), there was literally no reason for you to townread him.

[Whiskers]

I thought I made a whole several posts about why I thought he was town.
It's not like Majiffy vs Rob, where there was literally no reason. I

had

reasons.

Also, recall that I was not the only player to townread Aldus. Iirc Rob townread him, HD townread him (after my case, iirc), and even 4nx had him as null.
I was wrong, but you can't say there wasn't a reason to townread him.

Btw, "dropping towntells" is a scumtell.

[Whiskers]

Even you didn't seem to have a good reason why Aldus could have been scum-- you mention him first here:

The way you switch your vote around makes me think you are just looking for an easy target, and TBH I am not very good at defending myself

Vote: ProHawk

This is actually exactly what I was thinking. Aldus could very well be lynched today (actually, I think he probably will be, tbh), so I think it's possible that Pro was trying to deflect the attention from himself by voting the next favorite for the lynch.

Still, I kind of understand his read. In fact, if ProHawk starts dropping more towntells, I'd be inclined to vote for you.

(And actually have already decided that Prohawk is probably town

Spoiler: In The Same Post

For now, I'm starting to feel like Pro's towntelling under pressure, so I'll

Unvote: ProHawk

setting yourself up for voting Aldus)

Next mention is 150 posts later, here (post 259), where you vote him but say nothing about him.

Two posts later (150 more REAL posts), you unvote him for your first choice (HD)

300 gameposts later, the HD wagon has come and gone, and you're saying you're still "cool with" an Aldus lynch (still for no reason)
Your next post (30 posts later), you're voting Aldus again.

Literally these five posts are the only ones in which you discuss (including voting) Aldus. Since you never hopped on his counterwagon, I'm guessing you're not a werewolf, but... This is scumplay, yes?

[Whiskers]

So-- basically I think You're scum (for "having reads" without actually having them), but I also agree that we should lynch the werewolf first if we can root him out, and believe that you aren't him.

[Majiffy]

What is 903 I don't even the number of horrible things in it.

[Whiskers]

What is 903 I don't even the number of horrible things in it.

Please feel free to point out at least one.

Ofc, then we might have to lynch you for changing your playstyle.

[Majiffy]

Please feel free to point out at least one.

I thought I made a whole several posts about why I thought he was town.
It's not like Majiffy vs Rob, where there was literally no reason. I

had

reasons.

1) Not a good analogy, as you're talking about a player with a town read vs a player with a scum read
2) Given the above, I reckon this was just thrown in to subtly attack me some more.

Btw, "dropping towntells" is a scumtell.

The point of a towntell is that they're town-alignment-indicative. So unless you can empirically prove that it was intentionally dropped - and then, empirically prove that only scum would intentionally drop them - this entire statement is just a giant wtf.

Ofc, then we might have to lynch you for changing your playstyle.

The fuck is this, too?

[Whiskers]

Why isn't it a good analogy? I

did

give reasons, you

didn't

. aus claimed there was no reason. It would be scummy not to give reasons no matter which side you were arguing. It's a great analogy.
And yeah, it was a jab to you. I'm assuming the reason you found innumerable things horrible in that post is that I insulted you.

Players may town tell, but do not "drop" towntells. Dropping towntells implies it's intentional.
On this note, towntells are pretty rare and seldom much actual good, so whether or not a player was towntelling (or "dropping towntells", however you want to put it) mean they shouldn't be townread or defended.

Unless you can empirically prove that it was intentionally dropped - and then, empirically prove that only scum would intentionally drop them - this entire statement is just a giant wtf.

Towntells aren't tells if they can be intentionally dropped. Only scum would

intentionally

drop a towntell, because if both and town

could

"drop" a tell, it's not town-telling anymore, just null.
Which is why towntells don't usually work.

Better to look for motivation.

On that note-- where's the motivation for me to all-out defend my buddy? Since I'm not the only one to have townread Aldus, but the only opponent to his lynch to make myself highly visible and in the spotlight as his lynch was carried out, where is my scum motivation?
Also, [self-meta], but I doubt you want to hear that.

[ProHawk]

I think whats more suspect about you Whiskers is the gigantic walls that you were posting while we were trying to lynch Aldu, the ones that make me want to avoid pages 33-35...

[Majiffy]

Why isn't it a good analogy? I

did

give reasons, you

didn't

. aus claimed there was no reason. It would be scummy not to give reasons no matter which side you were arguing. It's a great analogy.
And yeah, it was a jab to you. I'm assuming the reason you found innumerable things horrible in that post is that I insulted you.

Because the situation is completely different. Rob was a weaker scum read I didn't feel like following up on. Aldu was a town read that was actively getting attacked. The analogy is weak by the sheer merit of there being nothing similar between the two situations other than "hurr 2 players each and each has a read hurr"

Unless you can empirically prove that it was intentionally dropped - and then, empirically prove that only scum would intentionally drop them - this entire statement is just a giant wtf.

Towntells aren't tells if they can be intentionally dropped. Only scum would

intentionally

drop a towntell, because if both and town

could

"drop" a tell, it's not town-telling anymore, just null.
Which is why towntells don't usually work. [/quote]
So... they can only exist if they can't be dropped.
Dropping them is a scumtell.
But they can't be dropped.
Ergo... no fucking scum tell!

Hurrrrrr

On that note-- where's the motivation for me to all-out defend my buddy? Since I'm not the only one to have townread Aldus, but the only opponent to his lynch to make myself highly visible and in the spotlight as his lynch was carried out, where is my scum motivation?

Because there was a counterwagon and, as you have said, other people that had town reads on Aldu. Which means they could have jumped in and saved your buddy by pushing either against the Aldu lynch or for the ProHawk lynch.

(Hurrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr)

[Rob14]

Majiffy, you missed a reason why Whiskers post was terri-bad. I never had a town read on Aldu - I had a null.

[Whiskers]

ProHawk

- I believe him not to be the Werewolf because his wagon was the main alternative to Aldus's.

auspicious

-- As I listed above, I believe him to be mafia, but not the Wolf, as he supported the wagon with no reason or any interaction with Aldus.


Sky -

Kinda

limited activity. His posts look ok though. I know, I know what I said about him yesterday. Still: he didn't have anything to say about Alduskkel (or uctriton!) yesterDay except he included them in his list of "dodgy" people-- aka, null reads.

Thor665 - Is Thor. Aside from this, he disappeared toward the end of the Day, after having made a weak call for a Whiskers lynch and then showing support for a Sky lynch (even, as he points out, after having showing support for the Aldus wagon).

4nxi3ty - I don't read him as scum. I don't see him as a wolf (although he certainly didn't interact with Aldus in Day 1), and he might be mafia, but at the end of the Day the flipped mafia, uct, was his top scumread. It's gut, after reading his ISO (only 30-some posts-- scumpoints for inactivity?), but I

think

4nx is town.

Majiffy - makes unfounded attacks, his ISO is impossible to read because he has had

two

ultimately pointless quote-wall wars... I'll let you figure him out.
Human Destroyer - Also not reading his ISO at the moment. He was almost a lynch in the middle of Day 1, the original wagon vs Prohawk's, but itwas ultimately overturned in favour of Aldus, I guess.
Rob13 - Also not reading this ISO at the moment.
Tajun* - Also not reading this one. I don't remember for what, but he was attacking me for a while. OMGUS.

[Whiskers]

My bad. I guess I saw this

Is there any actual case against Alduskkel at this point other than the fact that he's chronically absent?

While skimming and just generalized.

Spoiler: Also, this?

I don't like how you lept (leapt?) off Aldu to put the ProHawk wagon in the position to tie with it.

I think that relational tell is invalid unless Aldu flips scum. If Aldu flips scum, then HD would be obvScum due to the switch.

You seem pretty transparent to me HD.

You don't do much when you aren't then center of attention. When you are, you post like a mad-man. You lurk with the excuse you are lazy.

You say little things about me, like you have some gut-scum read on me without making any specific attacks, pretty much attack Ald the whole day and then suddenly when it all matters (one day before the deadline), its Ald is town, and Hawk is scum.

*snip*

Whatever you wanna think guy

Won't matter to anyone when you flip scum anyways

Also you've been doin the exact same thing, have you not?

This, on the other hand, is bad now. Not only would a scum-flip NOT make the person's scum-hunting invalid because they would still have hunted the other team, but also you don't respond to anything PH said.

[Whiskers]

Unless you can empirically prove that it was intentionally dropped - and then, empirically prove that only scum would intentionally drop them - this entire statement is just a giant wtf.

Towntells aren't tells if they can be intentionally dropped. Only scum would

intentionally

drop a towntell, because if both and town

could

"drop" a tell, it's not town-telling anymore, just null.
Which is why towntells don't usually work.

So... they can only exist if they can't be dropped.
Dropping them is a scumtell.
But they can't be dropped.
Ergo... no fucking scum tell!

Hurrrrrr

As usual, you've changed what I've said and used mocking onomatopoeia to try to discredit me.
I did not say they cannot be "dropped", if that is the term we are using for it. I said they can not be

intentionally

dropped-- as you'll see in my quoted post above.
When I said they can not be dropped, I was referring to players trying to towntell, or "Dropping" tells. Actively, knowingly, intentionally.
I adjusted my argument to use aus's terminology.

On that note-- where's the motivation for me to all-out defend my buddy? Since I'm not the only one to have townread Aldus, but the only opponent to his lynch to make myself highly visible and in the spotlight as his lynch was carried out, where is my scum motivation?

Because there was a counterwagon and, as you have said, other people that had town reads on Aldu. Which means they could have jumped in and saved your buddy by pushing either against the Aldu lynch or for the ProHawk lynch.

(Hurrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr)[/quote]Having fun yet?

I didn't drive the ProHawk lynch. I didn't push for it. I pushed a third, alternative lynch.
Also, I didn't make myself a champion of Aldus-- I said I thought he was town, and continued fighting with you. If my goal was to save my buddy, and I was willing to make such an obvious target of myself, why wouldn't I have made walls of text in defence of Aldus, or in attack of ProHawk, or even Sky?

[Majiffy]

Majiffy, you missed a reason why Whiskers post was terri-bad. I never had a town read on Aldu - I had a null.

Lol.

Let me sum up Whisker's 915 IIOA for you folks.
ProHawk - Not Wolf by way of Aldu counterwagon. Colors him green. Lol.
Aldu - Scum
Sky - His posts look ok but etc. etc. - Null?
Thor - Is Thor. - Null?
Anx - I don't see him as scum. I don't see him as wolf, but he could be wolf. And he could be scum. But he had a scum read on a flipped scum. - Town
Majiffy, HD, Rob, Tajun - Not going to read. - Null?

So we have... one town read. One scum read. One not-wolf read with a town-suggestive green color.

I applaud you on your fantastic labor, Whiskers.

More in the next post.

[Majiffy]

^ Sorry, 913, not 915. Right link, wrong number.

[Majiffy]

I did not say they cannot be "dropped", if that is the term we are using for it. I said they can not be

intentionally

dropped-- as you'll see in my quoted post above.

Semantics. If they aren't towntells if they're intentionally dropped, then scum can't intentionally drop towntells. Ergo intentionally dropping towntells cannot be a scumtell as it is logically impossible.

When I said they can not be dropped, I was referring to players trying to towntell, or "Dropping" tells. Actively, knowingly, intentionally.
I adjusted my argument to use aus's terminology.

This still requires you to define - and thus, first, discern - an intentionally vs unintentionally dropped towntell. And to some degree of accuracy, should you feel adept to use it in an argument as you are.

I didn't drive the ProHawk lynch. I didn't push for it. I pushed a third, alternative lynch.

I... didn't say you did any of this?

Also, I didn't make myself a champion of Aldus-- I said I thought he was town, and continued fighting with you. If my goal was to save my buddy, and I was willing to make such an obvious target of myself, why wouldn't I have made walls of text in defence of Aldus, or in attack of ProHawk, or even Sky?

... You

did

make walls of text in defense of Aldu. And I won't comment on the other two mostly because I'm too lazy to look back to see if you made walls in attack of either of them.

[Rob14]

Majiffy/Whiskers: Could you both sum up what your wall-fight was about at the end of Day 1? I'm somewhat interested now that I have developing reads on the both of you, but ain't no one got time to read that shit.

[Majiffy]

That was a long time ago, and my memory is not that good. I'll go look and find out.

[Majiffy]

Him arguing the problems I had with Aldu's 699.

[Whiskers]

Actually, My list of reads was supposed to be along the lines of-- one town read, coloured suggestively green, and one scum-but-not-wolf read, coloured red. Everyone else is coloured some shade of null.

So, what was the point in quoting me, making another post to restate what I've said in a mocking way? Wouldn't it have been simpler, faster, to say "Your reads look bad" or "You have a lot of null reads"?

Semantics. If they aren't towntells if they're intentionally dropped, then scum can't intentionally drop towntells.

Ergo intentionally dropping towntells cannot be a scumtell as it is logically impossible.

This is actually my argument. Auspicious says I should have looked for dropped towntells, but I'm saying that any towntells that were intentionally dropped aren't towntells and, in fact, are actually scumtells.

Next: You said they could have jumped in and saved my buddy by pushing for the ProHawk lynch. If I wanted to save my buddy by getting people to push for Prohawk, why would I push for someone else, and

not

Prohawk?

Then: I will look, but I'm pretty sure I didn't make textwalls in defence of Aldus. I stated my opinion/case on him and talked about it a couple of times. The real walls were bickering with you. But I get the feeling this argument is going to end up as "at what size does a post become a wall?", instead of anything useful or game-related.

[ProHawk]

Lets all compromise on Thor.

[Whiskers]

Majiffy/Whiskers: Could you both sum up what your wall-fight was about at the end of Day 1? I'm somewhat interested now that I have developing reads on the both of you, but ain't no one got time to read that shit.

Him arguing the problems I had with Aldu's 699.

That's what it began as.

It ended up as:

W > "You said you'd make a Rob case if he became a better lynch than ProHawk. Later, you voted Rob. Either: A) He was a better lynch than Prohawk and you should have made a case on him, or B) He was not a better lynch than Prohawk and you should not have been voting him."

M > "A lot of things changed between when I said that, and when I voted Rob. I wasn't voting Rob to lynch him, just to move my vote off of HD."
Also a lot of semantic bullshit between us.

@Majiffy: Does that accurately sum up your side of the argument? I tried to do it without being biased toward my side, but I know what I meant a lot better than I know what you meant.