/Invitational 13: The battle of Yarmouk. Decisive victory!

[mykonian]

Initially, Vahan's plan seemed succesful. Both Muslim wings were pushed back by the unstoppable Roman legions, but were not broken. Could they push back in time to protect their pinned down center?

votecount

Kublai Kahn (2): chamber, deathrowkitty
mith (2): KittyMo, katsuki
KittyMo (2): Fishythefish, Rhinox
Katsuki (1): mith
DeathRowKitty (1): Kublai Kahn

not voting (0):

[Fishythefish]

OK. Reading people who have votes on them first:

- DRK. I'm getting a strongish town read off his posting. He makes a lot of sense, but there's something else; the posting just feels natural, like he's saying what he thinks without lots of editing. Looking at the KK case (or things KK said; not quite sure what is supposed to be a scumtell):
a) DRK was against a mith lynch, saying that the case against him was playstyle differences. Could possibly be a weak DRK-mith link, but not scummy.
b) DRK thought scum wouldn't be able to communicate/didn't know. Don't see how this is something scum would pretend.
c) Scumread on KK is "trumped up". I really don't get that from DRK's posting. I see a push on KK based mostly on his questioning of mith being a bit weird/useless.

- KK. I'm torn here. I very much agree with DRK's summary of the mith questioning here. It's perhaps mildly scummy because mith was sat at L-1, and scum might have wanted to find reasons to vote for him. But it doesn't feel to me like KK's questions are not intended to go anywhere (which is DRK's other point). Read 116 without really thinking about the content. It strikes me as a post from someone who thinks they've got a pretty neat case - not someone who's asking questions so it looks like they're doing something.
His push on DRK I find positively townish. It reads like KK is convincing himself that DRK is scum, in a way that only town can really do.

- mith. Can still easily see him being scum - he hasn't done anything that makes me think he's really looking for scum. But nothing specific I dislike.

- Kat. I see his "mith and panzer" idea as the kind of complicated conspiracy that scum don't really make up. His D1 line was "I thought panzer and mith were scum together, but mith wouldn't be lynchable until panzer was gone, so I voted for panzer until mith wagon started". I thik that's the kind of corkscrew thinking town can get themselves into, but scum don't fake.

@Kat: what did you mean by "Sigh" in post 142? When you were voting panzer, and thought mith was scum with him, why didn't you mention your scumread on mith?

- Kitty. Nothing's changed recently; her last post doesn't say much, and nothing controversial. She still has a post I don't like and has been playing it far too safe for my liking. I know she has LA and is ill, which makes me feel kind of mean, but she's my top scum read.

Other people:
- Rhinox - there's something I want to say about Rhinox, but I don't want to say it yet. Prod me for it in a few days.
- chamber - not much to say. His 175 looks honest, but it could probably be his honest thoughts about the right way to play even if he's currently scum.

[DeathRowKitty]

I was kinda hoping DRK was going to get to the point regarding #191.

This will not happen until KK either tries again or puts his fingers over his ears while yelling "I'm not listening".

[DeathRowKitty]

If he chooses the latter, my vote will not move from him until he is dead.

[Rhinox]

I was kinda hoping DRK was going to get to the point regarding #191.

This will not happen until KK either tries again or puts his fingers over his ears while yelling "I'm not listening".

Hasn't the latter already happened basically?

You're not really pressing the issue and I can't really see what point you might be trying to get it. What good are your threats to park a vote on KK if no one else can see what you're getting at? Right now you're a scum read of mine and KK is not so I'm more interested in hearing where you're coming from.

[DeathRowKitty]

Regardless of KK's alignment or what he thinks my alignment is, it does not benefit him to have a vote permanently glued to him. If, given this new context, he still chooses to not make an attempt, he will be making a strong statement. If so, I want him to actually make that statement, not just carry on waiting for me to budge.

I'll explain what I'm getting at after KK either tries again or blatantly refuses to. If you're so desperate for an explanation, press KK to do something useful.

[Katsuki]

@Kat: what did you mean by "Sigh" in post 142? When you were voting panzer, and thought mith was scum with him, why didn't you mention your scumread on mith?

When? Do you mean originally? I didn't express it then because I'm very weak as a town player, and while my reads are more often than not right, I'm generally unable to get my scumreads lynched. Especially in a game of this playerbase, I wanted to get panzer lynched, then be able to hammer mith lynch through D2 as there is no way I could stand toe to toe with mith D1.

tl;dr, I'd easily lose 1v1 with any scum in this game as my argumentative and language skills are very weak.


Also regarding reads, my panzer read was based off of my mith scum read + the things others were pointing out about panzers actions eg. the cheerleading on DRK. Mith was always the stronger scumread, I thought he was doing something I caught him doing in another game where he was scum.

[Katsuki]

Oh and the sigh was that this game is apparently not the easymode I thought it would be (aka easy mith panzer).

[Katsuki]

So I can't have more than 1 scum read, and the strengths of these reads can't vary? You sure say some interesting things, mith.

This is a really strange interpretation of what mith said. Can you point out where in mith's post you got each of those things from?

His supposed analysis of my posts.

[Katsuki]

Finish other read throughs probably tomorrow if paper done early.

[Fishythefish]

@Kat: what did you mean by "Sigh" in post 142? When you were voting panzer, and thought mith was scum with him, why didn't you mention your scumread on mith?

When? Do you mean originally? I didn't express it then because I'm very weak as a town player, and while my reads are more often than not right, I'm generally unable to get my scumreads lynched. Especially in a game of this playerbase, I wanted to get panzer lynched, then be able to hammer mith lynch through D2 as there is no way I could stand toe to toe with mith D1.

tl;dr, I'd easily lose 1v1 with any scum in this game as my argumentative and language skills are very weak.


Also regarding reads, my panzer read was based off of my mith scum read + the things others were pointing out about panzers actions eg. the cheerleading on DRK. Mith was always the stronger scumread, I thought he was doing something I caught him doing in another game where he was scum.

Oh and the sigh was that this game is apparently not the easymode I thought it would be (aka easy mith panzer).

I'm happy with these answers. mith, what do you think of them?

[mith]

Katsuki: "I thought he was doing something I caught him doing in another game where he was scum." - What did you think I was doing, and when did you first think this?

Fishy, #201: "His D1 line was "I thought panzer and mith were scum together, but mith wouldn't be lynchable until panzer was gone, so I voted for panzer until mith wagon started"." - Except he didn't vote for Panzer, and there was really no reason to think a mith lynch wasn't viable. On page 2, we have Katsuki voting DRK, followed by you switching from DRK to me, followed by Katsuki responding to you without a vote change, followed by you switching to Panzer, Panzer getting to L-1, and Katsuki stating willingness to hammer at the end of page 2 with no mention of me. I want to explore this more fully once Katsuki has answered the "when" part of the above question, but in the meantime I can't shake the feeling that you (and Kitty Mo, previously) are coaching Katsuki to some extent.

You say the mith/Panzer idea is "the kind of complicated conspiracy that scum don't really make up" (really? a suggested pairing qualifies as a conspiracy theory now?), but in ISOing Katsuki all I see is an opportunistic voting pattern which happens to include me and Panzer, with some vague "mith-related reads" thrown in to explain his willingness to hammer on page 2. I simply don't buy a scenario of Katsuki-town having mith-scum as his strongest read and not mentioning it even in passing despite previous suspicion directed my way. Instead, he only acts on this read after the opportunity for super-quick townie lynch has passed.

[Fishythefish]

The "complicated conspiracy" isn't just mith/panzer; it's Kat's line of reasoning that has him thinking you two are scum together, but voting panzer because panzer is the lynchable one.

Reading Kat's ISO, I see Kat switching from panzer to you when a wagon on you built. His justification was that he thought you were scum together, and that you weren't lynchable. That's just not the kind of thing I think opportunistic scum make up - why not just say you are scummy? "I was too chicken to vote for him before" is not something that's going to help lynch you, earn town points, make the switch easy,

anything

scum usually want to do there.

Kat not voting panzer is a red herring; he as good as voted (expressed intent to hammer at L-1).

[Fishythefish]

Dashed that off in haste, missed this:

"followed by you switching from DRK to me, followed by Katsuki responding to you without a vote change"

want to have another look at that bit, will do so tomorrow morning.

[mith]

Really want an answer from Katsuki before I get into some of this further (including the "red herring").

As far as "not the kind of thing I think opportunistic scum make up", the problem with your argument here is that opportunistic scum Katsuki wasn't saying most of this until trying to explain his behaviour today. Whether or not "I was too chicken to vote for him before" would have helped lynch me yesterday, earned him town points yesterday, made the switch easy yesterday, is all irrelevant because

he wasn't giving that explanation yesterday

. All that's in his ISO is that he was willing to hammer Panzer and then the implication that he didn't think a mith lynch was viable until you jumped back to me. Neither of these strike me as out-of-character for opportunistic scum at all.

[Fishythefish]

He did give that explanation yesterday - in 70 he voted you and said "Wonderful, didn't see this happening.". In 72, he explained this with "I thought we had to get through panzer first before getting this.". That's pretty clearly saying he thinks you and panzer are both scum, and wouldn't be able to lynch you. The explanation today fleshes out what was already out there.

Yep, I can see that there may be reason to stop talking about some this until Kat answers your 211. This includes something I want to say. OTOH deadline isn't

that

far away, which is why I'm still talking.

Oh, and on coaching; if I see an attack I disagree with on somebody I'm leaning town on, I'm often going to counter it and/or ask questions to get them to say the right thing (the latter was most of the reason I asked Kat questions in 201 - I was nearly sure I knew what he was going to say on the important one). Particularly if I think there's a good chance they are going to make a hash of it for reasons which have nothing to do with alignment.

[chamber]

Oh, and on coaching; if I see an attack I disagree with on somebody I'm leaning town on, I'm often going to counter it and/or ask questions to get them to say the right thing (the latter was most of the reason I asked Kat questions in 201 - I was nearly sure I knew what he was going to say on the important one). Particularly if I think there's a good chance they are going to make a hash of it for reasons which have nothing to do with alignment.

I remember you doing this in another game I think, and me finding it extremely annoying then, primarily because the questions I ask normally don't have straight forward intents, so this kind of interference is very unwelcome for any future questions I ask.

/needs to put way more time into this game but is too busy today.

[Kublai Khan]

VOTE: KittyMo

(leap of faith)

[mith]

Posting from phone, so I'll keep this quick. Fishy's post is a little over the top, but we're close to deadline and Kitty is more likely scum than KK, so let's do this thing.

UNVOTE: Katsuki
VOTE: Kitty Mo

[Fishythefish]

@chamber: Duly noted.

[Fishythefish]

So, here's why you should all vote for Kitty:

1. We're drifting towards a mislynch

Currently, the town is split. Noone has more than 2 votes, and we're only a couple of days out from deadline. With that being the case, and there being a large proportion of scum in the game, we're not going to lynch scum. People are going to move their votes around to get a least bad lynch. Some of these people will be town, but one or two will be scum. They probably won't end up voting for scum, and we'll have a mislynch. It will look random and messy, and it will be hard or impossible to tell who the scum were.

2. We need a town led lynch

Right now, the best thing we can do is try to be sure that scum aren't controlling the lynch. One way to do this is randomness, but that's no fun and nobody would agree to it anyway. The other way is for a townie to convince other people who is scum; clearly, we've failed at this. The final solution is simple; you pick someone to follow.

3. I'm the person to lead the lynch

To get a town led lynch in this situation the town has to trust someone, and I'm the obvious person. Nobody thinks I'm scummy. Several people think I'm town. I think those of you who know me respect the way I play the game.

4. To sweeten the deal, Kitty is probably scum...

Before she had LA, she really looked like someone avoiding attention and conflict. Her 62 smells like scum trying to egg on an early lynch without looking bad for doing so. And if Rhinox is town (which seems likely) we've got a wagon sitting there with two respected townies who post a lot. Why aren't the scum all over it? Because they don't like lynching scum.

5. ...but

doesn't matter

if she's not your top scumread

I'm not asking you to agree with me that Kitty is the mostly likely scumbag in the game - I'm just asking you to vote for her. The point is that if you are right in your suspicion of Kat/DRK/KK/whoever, you aren't going to get the lynch - the scum aren't going to let you. If you are wrong, you might well get the lynch. By far our best chance of avoiding this trap is rallying to this town-led wagon.

So, if you think I'm likely town come and join Kitty wagon. I can't promise you she's scum, though I think the odds are good. I can promise that the scum aren't controlling our lynch, and if you don't join me they definitely are.

[Fishythefish]

My posts were affected by the time problem on the server - my last two posts were before KK or mith voted. I've also been unable to post since then (because the forum thinks my last post was in the future, so it won't let me post).

@mith: my post is a bit dramatic, but I think it's pretty much true and needs saying to try to get a lynch without a last minute scramble scum are controlling.

[DeathRowKitty]

Oh KK, you like seeing me angry, don't you? You like it rough, don't you?

This post. Oh that post. You wanted to write it off as me being unclear, didn't you? Well you know why I made a big deal out of it? I bet you do.

The issue is that it has nothing at all to do with me being unclear

. It has everything to do with you

selectively and blatantly responding to things I didn't actually say

. Let's look closer, shall we?

It doesn't seem implausible at all in my mind. Scum get night talk in normal games and mostly just discuss who they're killing. Do scum need communication to function during the day? Considering you're the second person to tell me (or heavily imply, in your case) that scum do get daytalk in nightless games, clearly I was wrong.

You've been here since 2009 and the only thing you've ever used night-talk is to discuss who to kill?

This isn't even to being a response to what I wrote. For one thing, it's practically responded to

within the post he's responding to

. "Scum get night talk in normal games and mostly just discuss who they're killing." There's two ways I would be willing to believe someone interpreted that:
1) Most scum teams just talk about who they're killing.
2) Most night talk of the average scum team is in reference to who they're killing.
Regardless of which way he read that, his question is completely irrelevant. Perhaps more importantly, he blatantly missed the point of my response. He was supposedly asking this to find out if it would make sense for me to believe scum wouldn't have any form of private communication. The important thing he should have taken away from my post if he actually cared about my response was the "Do scum need communication to function during the day?" that sums up the "mostly just discuss who they're killing" part of the post that he seemingly completely ignored. But that's okay because who needs to respond to the actual content of a post when following an

agenda

(more on the agenda thing later because it runs soooo deep).

What answer were you expecting out of that question that would have been useful?

I'm pursuing this line of questioning because in post 103 you suggest that I'm scum because I'm "coaching" Panzerjager. I'm observing that you're doing something that I call "spaghetti-ing". You're throwing all sorts of bullshit to the wall and looking for something to stick.

In this quote, KK tries his hardest to one-up himself in failing to read anything I write and amazingly manages to succeed. I don't think that requires a drawn-out explanation and I don't think one exists beyond

is it even possible to read my question and think that was a valid response to it?

I think it shows something better though:

he didn't care what my answer was

. I mean, I suppose he made that sufficiently clear in the previous thing I quoted, but if you didn't believe it there, oh how he drove home that point here. Remember that

agenda

thing? Yeah, is there any doubt at all that he was asking these questions to lead to a conclusion he knew he couldn't support if he actually had to care about responses?

Here's where I initially said that I found you scummy. Tell me why at that point in the game I would decide I "wanted to read [you] as guilty" and why I would include an offer to give reasoning if I didn't actually have a reason.

But you didn't have a reason. You had a gut feeling. You didn't try to follow up that gut feeling by asking me any questions, you just starting making misinterpretations to justify a desire to lynch. That is scummy behavior.

I think I would find this post funny if I weren't legitimately angry right now. "Why would I offer to give reasoning if I didn't have a reason?" "You didn't have a reason." Smooth. Not only does this one fail to respond to what I said, it also fails at reading the post I linked:

I'm not really liking KK. I'm going to be lazy and pin it down to gut for now, but I could identify a couple quotes/patterns that lead me to that read if anyone actually cares about it.

How did he get "you didn't have a reason" from "I could identify a couple quotes/patterns that lead me to that read"? Welcome to first grade reading comprehension; failures: Kublai Khan. Except he's not that stupid. He's not stupid enough to have actually failed at reading any of my post that badly.


The big theme here is: he asked me questions without caring what the answers were. Heck, they were practically loaded questions. "You've been here since 2009 and the only thing you've ever used night-talk is to discuss who to kill?" Why yes KK, I did stop beating my wife, how nice of you to notice. He wasn't asking me questions with the intention of gaining information; he was asking questions in order to ask follow-up questions that weren't even dependent on my answers in order to lead to the conclusion he started out with in mind. And he had the

nerve

to accuse me of this:

You didn't try to follow up that gut feeling by asking me any questions

Yes KK, you are clearly following up on your gut read on me by asking me questions and ignoring the answers.

And even better,

this pattern of asking questions and ignoring the answers is the exact same thing he did with mith earlier

. See this post for a summary of that line of questioning.



So why did I make this big a deal out of KK taking another shot at reading comprehension? Failing that badly at reading my post once is damn near impossible. Failing that badly at reading it twice, knowing that he did so the first time would leave no question that he was doing it intentionally. The fact that he refused to take a second try at it tells me he didn't want to read my post correctly and I don't doubt that he reread my post and just didn't say anything. But hey, let's not sell him short here. He didn't actually refuse to try again. He pretended my request didn't exist and just didn't post anything. Is there any reason for that other than to impede my line of posting? I'm supposedly his big scum read...why doesn't he want me to post? I for one love it when my scum reads post things. In fact, it would be nice if KK posted things more often or if he ever posted anything remotely useful, but now I'm making this personal, aren't I? Oh KK, you wanted me to look like a fool sitting around waiting for you to make an acknowledgement you were never going to make, didn't you? But please, don't respond to anything now. If you do, I'll be forced to play to your level and respond with "NEENER NEENER NEENER" in all caps. I figure that should be simple enough for you to understand.

[DeathRowKitty]

I'm a man of my word and my vote will not move from KK until he is dead. If that means today's lynch has to be me or KK, then so be it. That just means he's forced to try to squirm his way out of this.

[Fishythefish]

That wall post is pretty good, and I want to see KK's response.