Marvel Avengers Alliance - Game over

[beastcharizard]

I don't think that post is particularly alignment indicative, anyone can construct a rational argument that describes exactly what just happened, though perhaps not in so articulate a fashion. I am starting to lean town on Yates though.

How do you catch scum then if it isn't based on how they post? I am a little confused.

@Person who asked me about ZZZX:

He didn't say it was for info until later from what I recall. Also him saying: "I am playing badly to test everyone." just looks absolutely horrible to me. It is an easy excuse to use when you realize you have messed up. I know town do it sometimes too but it is just an excuse for bad play and at this time I think it is coming from scum because he uses that excuse to cover everything he had done to that point and not just a single thing.

I claim that one post is not alignment indicative, and get "how do you catch scum if it isn't based on how they post". This obviously is ludicrous.

You imply that how one posts in general doesn't effect your scum read on them. Does it or does it not?

I don't think that post is particularly alignment indicative, anyone can construct a rational argument that describes exactly what just happened, though perhaps not in so articulate a fashion. I am starting to lean town on Yates though.

How do you catch scum then if it isn't based on how they post? I am a little confused.

LOOK AT THIS

LOOK AT THIS SCUM BULLSHIT

"I don't think this post is very useful" = "I DON'T CATCH SCUM BASED ON POSTING" APPARENTLY

I MEAN SERIOUSLY IS IT POSSIBLE TO MAKE A MORE USELESSLY BANAL INTERPRETATION?

so yup I'm fully on the beastcharizard wagon now

VOTE: beastcharizard

Squirrel can wait

Now, what are you going to call that comment when I flip town? Also, what do you think of what I said about ZZZX and what is your general opinion on that slot? I don't remember you saying anything about them so your opinion would be greatly appreciated.

This is where it gets better. First of all, our reaction to ONE VOTE is appealing to shame. And then asking the person who voted him to look at something else that has figuratively nothing to do with anything, which looks to me like an attempt to distract him with shiny things, followed by thinly veiled flattery (oh your opinion is soooo important despite the fact that you are currently using it to call me scum- I would expect a town mindset to write this off)

I already explained why I asked the question to Umbrage and the whole "flattery" thing is something I just do. Asking a scum read their opinion on another scum read is a good way to later gauge potential relationships after one of the scum reads flips. It is directly helpful to finding the scum.

When I found out it was a daykill my mind went to compulsive or D1 only shot. It the role is town then D1 only would be powerful but quite a two-sided blade. The compulsive would be as less of a two-sided blade though but IIRC if you don't use a compulsive thing your target is chosen randomly which would be a bad thing since Town should outnumber scum.

@Chandra/Umbrage:

Can you tell me how I am obvious scum? Umbrage I think you are upset I voted you and Chandra I think you are just sheeping Umbrage. So clarification would be fantastic. If you won't do it for me do it for the actual town people whom you are trying to trick into mislynching me.

But wait, there's more! Now we're attributing reasons for Umbrage's vote and my own; Umbrage's vote is now OMGUS (even though 587 very clearly spells out why Umbrage is voting for beast). And apparently I am "just sheeping Umbrage" which implies that I'm town honestly following another's opinion, BUT WE THEN PROCEED TO PLAY THE VICTIM CARD AND CALL ME SCUM. Also, the very sentence "

If you won't do it for me do it for the actual town people

whom you are trying to trick into mislynching me

" is massive cognitive dissonance. Break it down:
Green: Assumption that I am town and want to do things for the benefit of town players.
Blue: Assumption that I am scum and trying to lead town astray.

The green part isn't an assumption you are town. It is saying that you have to make yourself look town in order to not be lynched. Since you aren't town you have to do it for the people who are actually town. I guess it could be read as me saying I am not town but it doesn't seem you read it that way. If you could explain how the green part is me assuming you are town that would be great. Also, if I would scum why would I have to assume you were town rather than knowing that you are?

Chandra completely avoided my question on why they think I am scum. They just said they would get back to me. It seems like they need to search for some BS reason to call me scum since they don't remember why they thought I was scum originally and they can't look dumb going back on their read.

And now I supposedly need to search for some BS reason, even though according to you a few posts ago I was supposedly sheeping Umbrage (oh, I'm also full blown scum now for no discernible reason??).

You had to search for "reasons" because you didn't want it to look like you were sheeping Umbrage. Also, scum can sheep town players. Sheeping isn't just for town to do with other people, unless when scum do it there is a different word for it.

You are scum because you didn't take the time to give reasons for the person that you were voting at the time. You said to wait up since you were busy with something else. Now I could have accepted that if your next post was reasons or something along the line but it wasn't. You just waited until you could spin my posts to look scummy.

UNVOTE:

VOTE: Chandra

Also, I grade it a C+ because it was hard to understand at points.

[Umbrage]

confirm VOTE: beastcharizard

[Nero Cain]

Why are you being ambiguous here?

Ambiguous? My interaction was specifically characterized as "faction on faction" by Josh. I said I was Town and therefore his theory would only be plausible if he considered the Town a "faction." How is that being ambiguous at all? Moreover, how do you even determine if an argument is "faction on faction" versus any other type? That's a weird place to try to get specific, is not based on any logic, and makes no sense to me.

The "faction vs. faction" comment was him accusing you and SG of being on different scum teams. You had just got done saying that you were "moving on" with SG. To me that sounded that you started town reading her, or do you still think she's scum and your going to stop arguing with her 'cause you can't get any traction? So SG is still a scum read?

Also fake claims are super common in themes so you going "THIS IS JASON MOD META!" is head desk.

And yet we had someone who claims to have been operating under the assumption that scum were not provided fake claims. How is demonstrating that OUR MOD has a history of providing fake claims [and multifaction games] "head desk?" It's like you are not reading the game or are trying to take things as out of context as possible.

All you had to say was "hey its MS and the majority of theme games have fake claims."

[The Rufflig]

@UniversalSlutBus: The inactivity does bother me (missed almost a full week). I've liked that you have town reads. I've also liked that you are poking at players again. You had early scum reads on: ZZZX, beastcharizard and Umbrage. However, these seem to have fallen by the wayside and I'm not sure if you find them suspicious anymore. In fact, I find myself unsure of who you find scummy currently (aside from mozamis). Could you update your scum list for me?

---

Cabdhead is gonna datamine this and catch up officially tomorrow, so hold me to it.

Tic, toc. Tic, toc.

---

@Chandra: I grade it a C. Your first point shows that you do not understand what beast is saying (bc misunderstood you as well). The second points are a little better - though I don't agree with all of them. The third points ... the green and blue is fine - not so much for the rest. The fourth point is an evasion. You also forgot to vote.

[Yates]

town can't really do anything about it [multiple scum teams]

Preach on. Why is Nero pretending he doesn't get this?

The "faction vs. faction" comment was him accusing you and SG of being on different scum teams.

No crap. That's precisely my point. As noted above - and in my previous post - how can you even make this assumption without the info required to confirm multiball? And, specifically, how can Town even ascertain the probability of of an interaction being faction on faction versus town on faction or town on town? Are you going to address this or keep pretending you are somehow confused by my post, still? This is beginning to look like you are trying to provoke an argument between Josh and I where there isn't one.

All you had to say was "hey its MS and the majority of theme games have fake claims."

Clearly not.

[Josh_B]

specifics-

That was mentioned 300 posts before 742. Why would you word it that way based on a single post 15 pages before?

Because it didn't occur to me how to use the information at the time.

Spoiler: Friendly Post Reduction

That was my question. How did it pop into your brain at post 742, "2 teams! Squirrrel is on one!"
It didn't. The thought "Is there evidence of two teams in the DP?" occurred to me. And I feel like there is, so I'll assume that there is UFN.

Because I hadn't reread the DP yet.

DP? Death post? What info in it points to 2 teams?

DP=Day Phase. I reread it with two teams in mind. Informed associations between multiple players.

Because my association reads weren't lining up with my scum reads.

Reads are reads not facts. Not sure how associations not lining up lead to "2 teams!" and not "my scumreads might be wrong".

Yea, I was looking for that too. My reads were confusing me. There was too much bussing, legit attacks, and awkward defenses for me to prove associations.Assuming Two semi- informed teams gave me a more reasonable sense of player actions.

Considering the possibility of two scum teams made more sense when reading minor players and questionable posts that contradicted with the patterns of other players.

No flips except a VT. No patterns exist except between unknown players and a single town player. Not getting this

.
Not true. My Vote on Ruflig is clearly defined by his aversion to put a vote on Displaced, and his reasoning for doing it being a contradiction to his own actions.(Pattern Identified) I also see some questionable interactions between him and SqG. Especially SqG's recent defense of him as town.

Occam's Razor

Simplest reason? I'm asking why it came up in your brain at post 742. I don't see evidence of it.

I had a chance to reread the Day Phase at that time. Despite it being a possibility before hand, My reread showed a likelyhood.

I don't know what to call the scum teams yet. I have it in my notes as Team1 and Team2. (NO I won't show you my notes. They'll probably get me killed +we only get one lynch per day and I've probably already said too much).

This is the first we are hearing that you suspect multiball.

How so? I provided public information from the DP that indicates everyone should be considering multiple scum factions.

Publicly disclosing certain suspicions is a way to confirm or deny those suspicions based on the reactions of other players. i.e. my methods of scumhunting.

Yes, I get that. If you are looking for scum, makes sense. If you are looking for scum on the other team, then that makes you scum.

Why in the F would I disclose that there are two teams, if I'm on one of them. Don't you think that's information that the scum teams would like to keep hidden? And why disclose it at nearly 1,000 posts if I had kept it hidden so long. Either I'm really dumb at being scum, or I'm town that want to share information that I think will be helpful to other towns for determining reads. Secondly, I suspect that at least one team already had this information. The suspicion for the team having it comes from the DC game where the scum factions were named WWE1 and WWE2. Don't you think that if you had a "2" in your QuickTopic, it would be an indicator that there was a one. I'm just Theorizing here, but -occam's razor.

Spoiler: super friendly post reduction

Is your concern over me suspecting two teams, or is it over the people I've FoS'd? And why draw attention away from the FoS'd suspects?

The two teams thing. Don't know who you have FoS'ed.
Since my attention wasn't on your suspects, I doubt it's moving away from them. Plus multitaksing FTW.

This doesn't make sense. I'm not sure what the second part of your statement has to do with the first part. Where was your attention, and where is moving to?

Do you not find the FoS's adequate enough to prove the likelyhood of my suspicion?

Umm, no? Not sure what this means in relation to my question.

Ok. Let's say that I am individually suspicious of ZZZX and individually suspicious of Ruflig. The next step is to go back and find associations between them. Are the skipping over each other's posts, are they simultaneously attacking the same person on more than one occasion, do they step in and defend or attack a person who has a votes for the other party, or do multiple people defend the same person?- you know common scum tells that would indicate that a player already knows the reasons for the other person's actions, so they aren't trying to point out how scummy the other person is acting.

This post is too long.

[The Rufflig]

Actually, I'm just going to go ahead and be a bit more verbose.

#582 Chandra: I don't think that post is particularly alignment indicative
#586 bc: How do you catch scum then if it isn't based on how they post?
#587 Umbrage: "I don't think this post is very useful" = "I DON'T CATCH SCUM BASED ON POSTING" APPARENTLY

Umbrage got it wrong. bc does care about postings (he just misinterpreted what Chandra said):

#230 bc: Can you explain how that post is town for me because I really don't see it.

#767 Chandra: I claim that one post is not alignment indicative
#775 bc: You imply that how one posts in general doesn't effect your scum read on them.

No, bc, Chandra claimed the original post by Yates did not invoke any feelings of towniness or scuminess in her.

As far as I can tell, Chandra parroted Umbrage's case without actually looking into it.

[The Rufflig]

Yes, I've cut the posts down considerably. I'm trying to zero in on specific points. I do not believe that I've altered the meaning of the posts in any significant way. Links to original posts provided for verification.

#592 Chandra: As much for 590 as the original problem. Who responds to "this point is scummy and makes no sense" with "wah but I'm town and you should look at this completely unrelated thing!!!" ?
#650 bc: how I am obvious scum? Chandra I think you are just sheeping Umbrage. clarification would be fantastic
#654 bc: Chandra, are you going to answer the question or not? Also quoting posts would help too.
#662 Chandra: @BC: I'll get to you later.
#741 bc: Chandra completely avoided my question on why they think I am scum.
#767 Chandra: And now I supposedly need to search for some BS reason, even though according to you a few posts ago I was supposedly sheeping Umbrage

In post #650, bc asked Chandra why he was scum. Yes, he accused her of sheeping, but that really wasn't the point. Chandra replied in #662 that she would get back to him. Her reply indicated that she had more to say on the subject. She did not follow through with her answer.

This is what I don't like about #767. Chandra is trying to tie "bc claims I was sheeping Umbrage's vote" (#650) to "bc changed his mind about me sheeping and wants me to explain my vote" (#741). Even if I interpret bc's #650 as a charge of sheeping instead of asking for clarification, Chandra's attack on bc doesn't hold up. Chandra's post #662 would cause bc's change in stance. She implies that bc is being inconsistent in his attack on her (#767), because of this change in stance. This twisting of things seems typical of her and I still don't like it.

VOTE: Chandra

[BulbaFenix]

Here's my problem with those posts, Rufflig. Your analysis shows that you have a clear understanding that this is a misunderstanding between Chandra and Beast, yet you take a complete 180 at the end and use it to frame an attack on Chandra. Essentially you're WKing Beast so that you can attack one of your most vocal attackers.

-Bulba

[The Rufflig]

Here's my problem with those posts, Rufflig. Your analysis shows that you have a clear understanding that this is a misunderstanding between Chandra and Beast, yet you take a complete 180 at the end and use it to frame an attack on Chandra. Essentially you're WKing Beast so that you can attack one of your most vocal attackers.

I do not claim to be objective towards Chandra. Given how much Chandra and I have yelled at each other, I do not expect anyone to take me at my word on matters pertaining to her.

Quick question? What did you think of the interaction between Umbrage and Chandra (if anything)?

[Josh_B]

When I found out it was a daykill my mind went to compulsive or D1 only shot. It the role is town then D1 only would be powerful but quite a two-sided blade. The compulsive would be as less of a two-sided blade though but IIRC if you don't use a compulsive thing your target is chosen randomly which would be a bad thing since Town should outnumber scum.

@Chandra/Umbrage:

Can you tell me how I am obvious scum? Umbrage I think you are upset I voted you and Chandra I think you are just sheeping Umbrage. So clarification would be fantastic. If you won't do it for me do it for the actual town people whom you are trying to trick into mislynching me.

But wait, there's more! Now we're attributing reasons for Umbrage's vote and my own; Umbrage's vote is now OMGUS (even though 587 very clearly spells out why Umbrage is voting for beast). And apparently I am "just sheeping Umbrage" which implies that I'm town honestly following another's opinion, BUT WE THEN PROCEED TO PLAY THE VICTIM CARD AND CALL ME SCUM. Also, the very sentence "

If you won't do it for me do it for the actual town people

whom you are trying to trick into mislynching me

" is massive cognitive dissonance. Break it down:
Green: Assumption that I am town and want to do things for the benefit of town players.
Blue: Assumption that I am scum and trying to lead town astray.

The green part isn't an assumption you are town. It is saying that you have to make yourself look town in order to not be lynched. Since you aren't town you have to do it for the people who are actually town. I guess it could be read as me saying I am not town but it doesn't seem you read it that way. If you could explain how the green part is me assuming you are town that would be great. Also, if I would scum why would I have to assume you were town rather than knowing that you are?

Still seems a bit dissociative, but I can see where you are coming from. I probably would have used a self inclusive term, but you do what you have to do. Plus it wasn't what Chandra was saying, and everything else pretty much had to do with you naming Chandra and Umbrage as a team. Do you really think that Chandra and Umbrage are part of a mafia team? Can you find a possible third person that they are linked to? Generally, to get a good read on a relationship like this, there's at least one third player that can synch a definitive link.

[Squirrel Girl]

I do not claim to be objective towards Chandra. Given how much Chandra and I have yelled at each other, I do not expect anyone to take me at my word on matters pertaining to her.

Why do you feel justified voting her then? And why dress it in a case first?

[Nero Cain]

town can't really do anything about it [multiple scum teams]

Preach on. Why is Nero pretending he doesn't get this?

What the absolute fuck is this?

The "faction vs. faction" comment was him accusing you and SG of being on different scum teams.

No crap. That's precisely my point. As noted above - and in my previous post - how can you even make this assumption without the info required to confirm multiball? And, specifically, how can Town even ascertain the probability of of an interaction being faction on faction versus town on faction or town on town? Are you going to address this or keep pretending you are somehow confused by my post, still? This is beginning to look like you are trying to provoke an argument between Josh and I where there isn't one.
[/quote]
Yeah that's it! I'm trying to provoke and argument between you and Josh.

In 446 you said you "So in the interests of sparing this game more of this BS, I'm moving on. You probably should too." I took this that you now had a town read on SG.

In 602 Josh says that he thinks ya'lls (you and SG) back and forth was scum on scum action but that you guys are from different groups.

In 608 you respond "possibly, I'm town." Which implies that you don't have a town read on SG. So maybe your 446 WASN'T a town read on SG. But if you still think that's scum then why call it "BS" and "move on"?

So in 777 I ask...

or do you still think she's scum and your going to stop arguing with her 'cause you can't get any traction? So SG is still a scum read?

Which you, conveniently, ignored.

So you are getting mad why?

vote:Yates

@Beast-either start sheeping me or die.

@Josh, you are town, I am town. Help me kill scumYates.

[Josh_B]

The "faction vs. faction" comment was him accusing you and SG of being on different scum teams.

No crap. That's precisely my point. As noted above - and in my previous post - how can you even make this assumption without the info required to confirm multiball? And, specifically, how can Town even ascertain the probability of of an interaction being faction on faction versus town on faction or town on town? Are you going to address this or keep pretending you are somehow confused by my post, still? This is beginning to look like you are trying to provoke an argument between Josh and I where there isn't one.

I'm sorry that I didn't address this specifically earlier. I didn't really have much to go on at that time. But in the argument, there did seem to be some minor misreps on both parts. I usually find misreps to be a keen scum tell. After reading the pages again today, it could be that Yates was trying to get a read on SqG, or entice a slip. SqG seems to be back peddling on not such a weak target. Although I have a FoS on SqG for other reasons, I read Yates as null leaning town, and SqG as null-leaning scum at that particular time. I have a more confidence in some of my other reads that have nothing to do with that argument. On the other hand if Yates is scum, the "I'm town, what faction are you on?" comment was pretty convincing. -and I'm town btw if you haven't figured it out already.

[Squirrel Girl]

SqG seems to be back peddling on not such a weak target.

Who am I back peddling on?

[TheUnderachivers]

me. SRSLY, watch the fuck out when you back up your bike.

[Josh_B]

vote:Yates

@Beast-either start sheeping me or die.

@Josh, you are town, I am town. Help me kill scumYates.

Yea. That's semi important. Can we Lynch Ruflig first? That dude is S-C-U-M
and Yates doesn't actually fit into any of my association reads. So he's doing well for now.

[Umbrage]

still haven't seen a lynch candidate that rivals beastcharizard...

[Josh_B]

- The main crux of my problem with you is that I didn't think you were being consistent with YOUR standards.
- You claim you saw pidgey scum hunting out of the gate.
- I challenged you on that.
- You were unable to adequately justify your stance because you were just tossing out posts that you claim indicated pidgey was scum hunting.
- Pidgey has since come in and basically said, "I have not yet begun to scum hunt." [click spoiler for exact words]

Spoiler:

I pretty much agree that squirrel girl calling me a super scum hunter for my first posts is weird lol dunno if its town or scum but it does look like trying to get allies and getting on my good side?

- So pidgey wasn't scum hunting [by his own admission], I was and continue to be scum hunting, and you appear to have faked reads on my slot and pidgey's slot.

THAT is where we are at. Ball is in your court.

1. Okay.
2. Yes, I did claim this.
3. Yes, you challenged me on it.
4. I guess I was unable to do so in your opinion, but feel I did justify my stance.
5. Actually his post doesn't say that he wasn't scumhunting

at all

- that's either you trying to read into it a lot or just sort of twisting his words and choosing to run with it.
6. Pidgey was scum hunting. I don't think you were. I did not fake my reads.

The ball has already left my court because I'm voting you and continue to be pretty happy with that vote. I think you're pretty wildly trying to rephrase the nature of the debate because I'm on to something with you, and that makes me more focused on my vote. It's especially good for me because now people can click that spoiler and see what you're calling "basically saying that he's not scumhunting" and should be able to draw their own, very clear, opinions about which of us is looking fake in what they're selling.

I think this post decently sums up the entire argument between Yates and SqG. and to think it all started with

I don't have much of anything to off Pidgey on, but will admit to a slight gut townish on him moreso than Yates simply because he appears to be trying to scumhunt right out the gate which Yates did not. I would neithe rparticularly support nor oppose either being lynched at this stage.

It was very peculiar for SqG to say Pidgey was scum hunting at that time, and the "[he] doesn't say that he wasn't scumhunting

at all

disclaimer looks like back peddling. The "right out of the gate" scum hunting claim was negated.

[TheUnderachivers]

@Josh you really don't the BS that Yates is spouting here?

town can't really do anything about it [multiple scum teams]

Preach on. Why is Nero pretending he doesn't get this?

What the absolute fuck is this?

The "faction vs. faction" comment was him accusing you and SG of being on different scum teams.

No crap. That's precisely my point. As noted above - and in my previous post - how can you even make this assumption without the info required to confirm multiball? And, specifically, how can Town even ascertain the probability of of an interaction being faction on faction versus town on faction or town on town? Are you going to address this or keep pretending you are somehow confused by my post, still? This is beginning to look like you are trying to provoke an argument between Josh and I where there isn't one.

Yeah that's it! I'm trying to provoke and argument between you and Josh.

In 446 you said you "So in the interests of sparing this game more of this BS, I'm moving on. You probably should too." I took this that you now had a town read on SG.

In 602 Josh says that he thinks ya'lls (you and SG) back and forth was scum on scum action but that you guys are from different groups.

In 608 you respond "possibly, I'm town." Which implies that you don't have a town read on SG. So maybe your 446 WASN'T a town read on SG. But if you still think that's scum then why call it "BS" and "move on"?

So in 777 I ask...

or do you still think she's scum and your going to stop arguing with her 'cause you can't get any traction? So SG is still a scum read?

Which you, conveniently, ignored.

So you are getting mad why?
[/quote]

[Nero Cain]

@Josh you really don't the BS that Yates is spouting here?

town can't really do anything about it [multiple scum teams]

Preach on. Why is Nero pretending he doesn't get this?

What the absolute fuck is this?

The "faction vs. faction" comment was him accusing you and SG of being on different scum teams.

No crap. That's precisely my point. As noted above - and in my previous post - how can you even make this assumption without the info required to confirm multiball? And, specifically, how can Town even ascertain the probability of of an interaction being faction on faction versus town on faction or town on town? Are you going to address this or keep pretending you are somehow confused by my post, still? This is beginning to look like you are trying to provoke an argument between Josh and I where there isn't one.

Yeah that's it! I'm trying to provoke and argument between you and Josh.

In 446 you said you "So in the interests of sparing this game more of this BS, I'm moving on. You probably should too." I took this that you now had a town read on SG.

In 602 Josh says that he thinks ya'lls (you and SG) back and forth was scum on scum action but that you guys are from different groups.

In 608 you respond "possibly, I'm town." Which implies that you don't have a town read on SG. So maybe your 446 WASN'T a town read on SG. But if you still think that's scum then why call it "BS" and "move on"?

So in 777 I ask...

or do you still think she's scum and your going to stop arguing with her 'cause you can't get any traction? So SG is still a scum read?

Which you, conveniently, ignored.

So you are getting mad why?

[/quote]

[Josh_B]

still haven't seen a lynch candidate that rivals beastcharizard...

You seem to be the only one that thinks so at this time.

[Squirrel Girl]

I think this post decently sums up the entire argument between Yates and SqG. and to think it all started with

I don't have much of anything to off Pidgey on, but will admit to a slight gut townish on him moreso than Yates simply because he appears to be trying to scumhunt right out the gate which Yates did not. I would neithe rparticularly support nor oppose either being lynched at this stage.

It was very peculiar for SqG to say Pidgey was scum hunting at that time, and the "[he] doesn't say that he wasn't scumhunting

at all

disclaimer looks like back peddling. The "right out of the gate" scum hunting claim was negated.

I have never changed from my opinion as expressed there. The disclaimer you're talking about is something Yates said I believe - not something I said. The 'right out of the gate' was not negated except via Yate's misrep.

[Josh_B]

@Josh you really don't the BS that Yates is spouting here?

town can't really do anything about it [multiple scum teams]

Preach on. Why is Nero pretending he doesn't get this?

What the absolute fuck is this?

WTF am I going to do about multiple Scum factions except use the information as a reason to vote certain people. Of those people, let's say I figured out the exact people on each team already. I still only get to VTL one per day. When I got the information about multiple factions, I applied it to the posts that were already in the DP and my scum list made more sense. For the time being, I'm asserting that Ruflig is the better target and I'm not ready to get of my horse on that. Bring me a list of his probable associates and we'll talk.

[Josh_B]

sclaimer you're talking about is something Yates said I believe - not so

I still don't understand what scum hunting Pidgey was doing that elicited your original statement. I don't think anyone does. The more I look at it, the more I think the comment was based on insider information.