Micro 213 - Scumhunter's Speed [GAME OVER]

[Fifty Ways]

let the record show that lucky has already forfeited his ability to ignore the case due to its supposed baselessness, etcetera

[Antihero]

Vote Count #3

Bertkerberos - 2 (Samuel L Jackson, JKMatthews)
lucky2u - 2 (Fifty Ways, Xegarus)
Makiavel - 2 (Kcdaspot, lucky2u)
Samuel L Jackson - 2 (Makiavel, Bertkerberos)

Not Voting: No one

5 to lynch

Deadline: (expired on 2013-08-15 00:23:20)

[Bertkerberos]

Soooooo.......

Fifty Ways is Psyche, huh?

Why hello there, Psyche <3

[Bertkerberos]

Do talk to me now

don't you run away from me now

[Fifty Ways]

i use this alter ego when i don't want to play like a scientist / terribly

[JKMatthews]

Need I remind you that we are two people, and 93 was Bert (hence my signature) while 94 was Nacho (hence the "nacho says town" comment)?

"This slot is a hydra so it can be as inconsistent as it wants" doesn't work as a response for me...

[Xegarus]

Shit guys, sorry. Weekend got way bigger than expected. My head's throbbing and I need to post in a bunch of games, but for now I'll
VOTE: Bert

More depth when I find time at work tomorrow (in 14ish hours)

So, about this.
Gonna post more in depth?

[JKMatthews]

Rereading now so I can lay my thoughts out properly... lots of games starting at the same time makes me scattered...

[JKMatthews]

Ok, my thoughts on the game as a whole so far:
The Bert/Lucky/Fifty interaction during the transition out of RVS is just bizarre. There's lots of subtle accusation/defending all around the triangle, but I can really figure out any motivations one way or another there. In a vacuum Bert's reactions seem the most natural, and Fifty's seem the most synthetic, with post-vote justification, but when trying to draw possible links/motivations that falls apart a bit. It'll definitely be worth looking back at once we've had a flip or two.

Wtf is going on?
UNVOTE:
VOTE: JK
This is exactly what scumDBK did last game.
I didn't like it then, I don't like it now.

This confuses me. Could you please explain how analysing me under somebody else’s meta makes sense…?

Post 48 one of Bert’s heads votes Samuel L Jackson as though it’s a sure thing, when there’s nothing to go on as far as I can tell. This is where my Bert read starts to waver.

I WANNA HAVE FUN, BUT THE GAME ISN'T FUNNY YET. HELP MOD PLEASE.

This is after two pages, with plenty of non-RVS activity going on. Seems like a fairly pointless post.
Then Bert’s response:

I WANNA HAVE FUN, BUT THE GAME ISN'T FUNNY YET. HELP MOD PLEASE.

sorry it's not funny yet!
do you wanna sheep me while you figure things out so this scum is a little closer to death?

I feel like Maki should’ve been called out for posting such chaff. Why wasn’t this questioned at all…?

you're keeping the vote on cuz im acting 14...

Kcdaspot is still giving me the shits, but unfortunately this line rings a bit true. I’m pretty good at confusing people who annoy me with people who I want to see lynched. It’s possible that that’s

exactly

the smokescreen scum would hide behind, but really there are better targets for my suspicion.

no, maki is just bad

Trust me, I've mislynched him before.

I

really

don’t like this. Surely everybody playing this game has mislynched somebody and been mislynched themselves… how is that an argument for not voting Maki?

damn maki
making a big deal about every word a person says is how you play the game
stop being so jittery

…coaching?

Ok, so that’s all the stuff that I think is worth quoting. My other general feelings on the game are:
I’m feeling better about Lucky since we’ve moved out of RVS – he seems to be genuinely trying to read into what’s going on in the game.
Xeg’s the towniest player in my eyes… everything he does is pretty straight down the line.

At the moment I’d most like to lynch Bert, but if we need a lynch I’d settle for Maki or Fifty Ways…

[Fifty Ways]

no one in this thread lacks a good reason to vote lucky
and yes i am talking to you potential bussers as well

[Fifty Ways]

jkm
if i wanted to coach maki and we we scumbuds, i would have done it in the first 48 hours of the Day

I don't think maki is town because I've mislynched him; i think maki is town because the same reasons he's being voted now are the same reasons he got mislynched in my last game.

I justified my vote when I made it, and began pointing out how lucky's further posting justified keeping it there. My case is the least bullshit case of all of them in this thread; it is not synthetic in the least.

[JKMatthews]

I lack a good reason. I think any suspicion there is stale perceived scumminess coupled with tunnel vision/confirmation bias...
Care to convince me...?

P-Edit: Total WIFOM nonsense. I was talking about you coaching a specific bit of Maki's play, which happened more than 48 hours after the day started...

At most that should read "I think it's a null tell because..." Calling Maki town for it is ridiculous.

I was talking about the RVS conversation and vote seeming synthetic. And "lucky's further posting justified keeping it there" is pretty much in line with me thinking you're either tunnelling as scum or suffering from confirmation bias.

[Fifty Ways]

I lack a good reason. I think any suspicion there is stale perceived scumminess coupled with tunnel vision/confirmation bias...
Care to convince me...?

See my currently three-point detailed case. Sir.

P-Edit: Total WIFOM nonsense. I was talking about you coaching a specific bit of Maki's play, which happened more than 48 hours after the day started...

all of maki's posts are jittery; don't you see?

At most that should read "I think it's a null tell because..." Calling Maki town for it is ridiculous.

no, pretty sure it should read "I think he's not scum because..." since his play was town last game and is like his play this game. Nice try.

I was talking about the RVS conversation and vote seeming synthetic.

It was designed to end RVS. I had to force it to stop bullshit circle-voting.

And "lucky's further posting justified keeping it there" is pretty much in line with me thinking you're either tunnelling as scum or suffering from confirmation bias.

This would be a somewhat valid deduction if I didn't have a 3-point case explaining why lucky is scummy, and if you could point out that the case is substanceless.

But even lucky can't do that.

The fact of the matter is that I'd vote for someone else if lucky had done nothing else scummy from pages 2-5.

[Fifty Ways]

do i need to quote my case?
i recognize that some people in this thread have problems reading isos

[Fifty Ways]

iso agnosia, if you will

[JKMatthews]

I lack a good reason. I think any suspicion there is stale perceived scumminess coupled with tunnel vision/confirmation bias...
Care to convince me...?

See my currently three-point detailed case. Sir.

The one that was made early on and was reasonable at that point in the game, but since you've just said "oh look that fits into the case I've already made so I'll continue to only look at lucky"? Yes, that one. Hence "stale suspicion with tunnelling/confirmation bias".
Don't get me wrong, I hardly think lucky is confirmed town. I just think the extent your pushing the case is somewhere between shortsighted and scummy.

P-Edit: Total WIFOM nonsense. I was talking about you coaching a specific bit of Maki's play, which happened more than 48 hours after the day started...

all of maki's posts are jittery; don't you see?

Yes, I do see. And I'd rather people didn't point out scummy things to potential scum. Hence "coaching".

no, pretty sure it should read "I think he's not scum because..." since his play was town last game and is like his play this game. Nice try.

So you're extending "Maki is playing like Maki" to "Maki was playing like Maki one time he was town. Maki is playing like Maki this time, so he must be town". Forgive me for not getting on board.

It was designed to end RVS. I had to force it to stop bullshit circle-voting.

At the time you seemed to think it was unreasonable of me to think it was forced…

This would be a somewhat valid deduction if I didn't have a 3-point case explaining why lucky is scummy, and if you could point out that the case is substanceless.

Things with substance can still suffer from confirmation bias.

The fact of the matter is that I'd vote for someone else if lucky had done nothing else scummy from pages 2-5.

If you’re town, then there are 3 other scum in the game. You’re saying you can’t see anything else that might be worth scrutiny?

[Fifty Ways]

The one that was made early on and was reasonable at that point in the game, but since you've just said "oh look that fits into the case I've already made so I'll continue to only look at lucky"? Yes, that one. Hence "stale suspicion with tunnelling/confirmation bias".
Don't get me wrong, I hardly think lucky is confirmed town. I just think the extent your pushing the case is somewhere between shortsighted and scummy.

you need to learn to evaluate cases on their merits like good townies do

[Fifty Ways]

Yes, I do see. And I'd rather people didn't point out scummy things to potential scum. Hence "coaching".

it's not scummy; its maki
please keep up

[Fifty Ways]

So you're extending "Maki is playing like Maki" to "Maki was playing like Maki one time he was town. Maki is playing like Maki this time, so he must be town". Forgive me for not getting on board.

no, I'm saying that maki plays this way as town, and is playing that way right now. Come on.

At the time you seemed to think it was unreasonable of me to think it was forced…

No, it's unreasonable to call my case synthetic.

Things with substance can still suffer from confirmation bias.

So you are admitting that my case has substance but are criticizing me for sticking to it.

If you’re town, then there are 3 other scum in the game. You’re saying you can’t see anything else that might be worth scrutiny?

We can only lynch one player a Day, and we only have a week to do it. I devote my time accordingly.

[Fifty Ways]

ever since I posted my case, lucky has been active lurking and avoiding confrontation just like scum always do

he's hoping that someone changes the subject; it is my job as town to make sure the subject is always lucky until lucky gives me reason to think it should not be lucky

Staying focused on whom one thinks is scum in a game with a 7-day deadline is not irrational or scummy; it's optimal play
I'm not the one in this thread doing it wrong.

[JKMatthews]

Condescension to try to make it seem like my opinions are worth less than yours aside, let me spell out my evaluation for you, because you don't seem to be getting it:
At the point in time you made your case against Lucky, the content of the case didn't overly bother me, as it was early days so there wasn't a wealth of information to go on. However, since then, more information about everyone has come to light, but all you've done is slotted Lucky's behaviour into the points you'd already made, and not gone any further than that.
That is my evaluation of your case on its merits, including saying it had some substance but blindly sticking to it is poor play.

it's not scummy; its maki
please keep up

So you're extending "Maki is playing like Maki" to "Maki was playing like Maki one time he was town. Maki is playing like Maki this time, so he must be town". Forgive me for not getting on board.

no, I'm saying that maki plays this way as town, and is playing that way right now. Come on.

Please tell me you understand the difference between necessary and sufficient points. It's not enough to say Maki plays this way as town therefor Maki is town. You need to also be convinced, and to convince others, that Maki

doesn't play this way as scum

. At the moment your case has a point that is necessary to be able to read Maki as town, but it's not sufficient to be able to call Maki town. As such, it should be null. Please keep up.

At the time you seemed to think it was unreasonable of me to think it was forced…

No, it's unreasonable to call my case synthetic.

Firstly, at the time you said:

Explain how I am/was "forcing it" and how "forcing it" makes me scummy.

If you knew you were forcing it, why wasn't this post just the question "Explain how forcing it makes me scummy?"
Secondly, I've only ever said that at the time your case seemed synthetic. I currently think the fact that you're sticking to your case so blindly is the dodgy part.

We can only lynch one player a Day, and we only have a week to do it. I devote my time accordingly.

I'm not saying you should be voting for multiple people, but you've made your case on Lucky and have your vote there. Fine, I think it's nonsense, but whatever. It doesn't mean you can't also hunt elsewhere. You can still use your time to hunt while also advocating a Lucky lynch...

[Fifty Ways]

You still are failing to evaluate my case on its merits.

[Fifty Ways]

Condescension to try to make it seem like my opinions are worth less than yours aside, let me spell out my evaluation for you, because you don't seem to be getting it:

Condesension follows from a belief about your opinions, not a desire to cast your opinions in a certain way.

At the point in time you made your case against Lucky, the content of the case didn't overly bother me, as it was early days so there wasn't a wealth of information to go on. However, since then, more information about everyone has come to light, but all you've done is slotted Lucky's behaviour into the points you'd already made, and not gone any further than that.

No, all of my points stand independent of one another. The scumminess of lucky's active lurking is not contingent on the quality of my case, and the disingenuousness of lucky's page 2 post is independent of what happened on page 2.

That is my evaluation of your case on its merits, including saying it had some substance but blindly sticking to it is poor play.

No, this is an evaluation of my thinking process, not my case.

[JKMatthews]

I don't think your case is very strong based on the environment in which your making it, so I think it has little merit. Better?

[Fifty Ways]

Please tell me you understand the difference between necessary and sufficient points. It's not enough to say Maki plays this way as town therefor Maki is town. You need to also be convinced, and to convince others, that Maki doesn't play this way as scum. At the moment your case has a point that is necessary to be able to read Maki as town, but it's not sufficient to be able to call Maki town. As such, it should be null. Please keep up.

No, characterizing something as town-maki's play implicitly excludes its opposite. At this point, all I need to convince people is that maki isn't the lynch for today.

If you knew you were forcing it, why wasn't this post just the question "Explain how forcing it makes me scummy?"
Secondly, I've only ever said that at the time your case seemed synthetic. I currently think the fact that you're sticking to your case so blindly is the dodgy part.

Two things: the question was about what you meant by forcing.
I am not sticking to my case blindly. I've explained the reasoning for my case, and the conditions under which I'll drop it.

You've failed to explain how sticking to a case is scummy.

I'm not saying you should be voting for multiple people, but you've made your case on Lucky and have your vote there. Fine, I think it's nonsense, but whatever. It doesn't mean you can't also hunt elsewhere. You can still use your time to hunt while also advocating a Lucky lynch...

I don't think you understand. I don't need to make any posts to hunt for scum; that occurs implicitly as I read posts. I AM ALWAYS HUNTING.