Mini 1671 - Eclipse Mafia - Total Eclipse (Game Over)
-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
Read through page 10.
Everyone recognizes that BBT is scum, right?"This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
Because, as of Page 10:
D1: early on, pretty uninsightful play; not particularly alignment indicative, but certainly not town. then went AWOL
D2: comes back with a flash of bad or completely alignment neutral observations posing as activity to net town points"This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
In post 282, Albert B. Rampage wrote:I thought we were speaking in hypotheticals, pie in the blue sky type of conversation, fathoming random possibilities. Isn't scumhunting a bit like pulling the petals off a flower "he loves me", "he loves me madly", "he loves me not"...no? Then make a better case on me because my time is precious.
lol
ABR has the best turn of phrases.
clapclapclap"This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
VOTE: BBT
Get back on the good wagon, ABR."This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
BBT Play:
1.BBT is present for the first part of D1 (up to page 4 out of 9). Nothing really worthy of note. Disappears, allowing his vote to stay on Skold. Not particularly alignment indicative, but not the engaged and probing BBT-town we all know and love.
2.BBT shows back up after D2 begins. Has a series of "catch up" posts.
A.I've made this point before in other games, but excessive use of these types of posts are alignment indicative, and trend towards scum. It essentially permits scum to look more active and engaged than they actually are. These posts aren't helpful to the town, especially when there is a large quantity of posts being responded to. This tactic becomes more alignment indicative the more often it is used, as town will do the occasional "catch up" post covering a multitude of posts that they missed while away from the game for whatever reason.
B.Specifically w/r/t BBT's use of these catch up posts, it is alignment indicative trending towards scum because a lot of BBT's points are read as forced, or are simply just not alignment indicative fluff observations.
C.The fact that BBT keeps coming back to this well - he keeps finding a reason to make "catch up" posts where he responds to a bunch of posts with surface-level reactions or non-alignment indicative observations - is troubling for BBT's alignment.
3.The BBT/ABR interaction looks bad for BBT. The BBT/Scarab interaction looks bad for BBT. BBT's points are bad, his focus is off, and he's trying to pick fights, which suggests that he's looking to find reasons to vote someone.
4.Everything else just feels off. I don't like his on-and-off of the Skold wagon. I don't like his push against Scarab or my slot. I don't like any of his reads."This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
Oh.
So you're just going to attack my alignment as a means of discrediting suspicions about your own scummy play.
Thanks for confirming that you are, in fact, scum."This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
In post 688, BlueBloodedToffee wrote:Normally,I would accuse you of being bad at reading me. But we both know why your 'read' is bad this game, amiright?
Wait. Is this a reference to META?
You are scum."This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
Glad you responded to the joke. And not the real criticism."This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
Zoronos
What do you think of BBT?"This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
In post 698, BlueBloodedToffee wrote:GC, did you actually just say you're scum reading me for the way I catch up?
Is that the bullshit you're actually trying to push right now?
*wiggles eyebrows*
Last two times someone reduced it to that, and then got indignant about it, they were scum.
Thanks for the birthday wishes."This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
yeah, easy to find scum: BBT
In post 754, Green Crayons wrote:I know I used the term "active lurking," but that's not really the idea I'm trying to get at with:
In post 693, Green Crayons wrote:2. Her posting frequently/format resembles that of scum. She'll go inactive, come back with a massive quote/respond post, have a smattering of smaller posts, and then go inactive again for a few days. The inactive - sudden activity flurry - then inactive again allows her to not be in the center of thread consciousness. Her massive quote/respond posts make her look active, but most folks will probably only skim, and therefore she evades real scrutiny.
Clarification That I Made In Another Game: (<-- the links still work if you follow that)
I'm not saying her V/LA is fabricated. I'm saying that going absent and then coming back with a serious of catch up posts -- and this is her habitual play this game, not a one-time event -- is aligned with scum play.
Oldie Mafia 2. The scum that was constantly doing catch up posts was porochaz. He had a legitimate excuse for his V/LA (funeral and other bad IRL experiences), but he kept doing posts like these: Post 444, Post 596, Post 676.
Also, I just got finished with a game where this happened again. Mini 1609. The scum that was constantly doing catch up posts was massive. Once again, a legitimate reason (no weeked access), but he kept doing posts like these: Post 2434, 2497, and Post 3336.
Once again, it's not so much that someone has V/LA, and then decides to make catch up posts. It's the heavy emphasis of using catch up posts, as it allows a person to look like they are providing the town with a lot of activity, but it isn't really all that substantive and useful for the town.
Of course, being V/LA was the predicate for farside relying heavily on her catch up posts, but it's the catch up posts and not her V/LA that is the suspicious part of her play for purposes of that line of suspicion. And as I pointed out when Riddle wanted me to do the work for farside, farside could have jumped in and made a (what would have been a pretty convincing) meta defense: that she has been doing similar catch up posts in all of her games.
For the record, farside was scum in that game, too.
It's an easy crutch to use if you're scum, and that's why I think it is more likely to come from scum than town. And while I don't think it's a sure fire tell, for me it helps solidify the good aspects of the case I've seen Hero make against slimer."This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
It's alignment indicative, you did it, you're scum."This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
Also:
In post 684, Green Crayons wrote:1.BBT is present for the first part of D1 (up to page 4 out of 9). Nothing really worthy of note. Disappears, allowing his vote to stay on Skold. Not particularly alignment indicative, but not the engaged and probing BBT-town we all know and love.
In post 684, Green Crayons wrote:3.The BBT/ABR interaction looks bad for BBT. The BBT/Scarab interaction looks bad for BBT. BBT's points are bad, his focus is off, and he's trying to pick fights, which suggests that he's looking to find reasons to vote someone.
In post 684, Green Crayons wrote:4.Everything else just feels off. I don't like his on-and-off of the Skold wagon. I don't like his push against Scarab or my slot. I don't like any of his reads."This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
1) Answer:In post 684, Green Crayons wrote:1.BBT is present for the first part of D1 (up to page 4 out of 9). Nothing really worthy of note. Disappears, allowing his vote to stay on Skold. Not particularly alignment indicative,but not the engaged and probing BBT-town we all know and love.
2) Answer:In post 684, Green Crayons wrote:3.The BBT/ABR interaction looks bad for BBT. The BBT/Scarab interaction looks bad for BBT.BBT's points are bad, his focus is off, and he's trying to pick fights, which suggests that he's looking to find reasons to vote someone.
3) Answer:
[/quote]In post 684, Green Crayons wrote:4.Everything else just feels off. I don't like his on-and-off of the Skold wagon. I don't like his push against Scarab or my slot. I don't like any of his reads.
Your play is bad, and you are not a bad player. You toyed with the Skold wagon while it was advantageous to do so. You have made bad cases against Scarab and my slot."This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
You're not a bad player in the sense that you make good cases."This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
I don't feel like going through your ISO and handholding everyone. Effort.
They can ISO your interactions with ABR and Scarab, or recall from memory, and agree or disagree with me."This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
I was probably wrong about slotting Zoronos as a scum after a reread. Good to know."This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
Nobody would read a big wall ole text anyways, BBT. Stop trying to bait me into doing one."This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
(More than I have already done.)"This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
I grow weary of such things.
META!"This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
The only thing I'm being obvious about.
Is being certain that you are scum.
Nothing scummy about that.
Make a case other than "obvious scum," brotha."This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
Have you given a Peace-scum case, yet? I thought Peace has been p town this game."This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
In post 744, Kalimar wrote:
If scum is on BBT-wagon, then it is PK."This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
mmmm
Well, I say that, because I'm a bit iffy on reading PK.
But I was reading Scarab as strong town.
I guess that shuffles out to medium town.
Peace is also a medium town read.
So... I don't know. I guess either, if there must be scum on your wagon. But I'm not inclined to think that there must be scum on your wagon."This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
Like.
Shit.
I'm not even sure how to respond to the really horrible proposition of "these three players are voting BBT, therefore 1 must be scum"!"This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
I don't believe you honestly think that, if you are town, the mere fact that you are town and 3 players are voting you, means that 1 of those players is scum.
Like. Shit. Town vote town all the time.
I'm sure there's a proper fallacy title that goes along with that flawed reasoning, but I don't know what it is.
Your counter-wagon argument has at least some game-specific reason for you - if you are actually town - to think that scum is on your wagon. But, from my position, I don't see any reason why people agreeing with my suspicions is more likely to come from scum than like-minded town."This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
hats can't copulate
you'll never be able to find a fucking hat to eat
empty promises"This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
GC, PK, PB
town, medium town, medium town"This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
IF you're town
THEN I'll certainly look your lynch voters over"This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
So
I'm scum because I have bad town reads
PK is scum because whatever reasons you had against Scarab
PB is scum because he's on your wagon
BAM BAM BAM we're all scum all on your wagon
Really?"This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
In post 412, BlueBloodedToffee wrote:I think scum are very likely in Scarab/Skold/SNS/Peace. Game is won if we lynch these four people."This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
Juls is not a bad scum suspect.
Make a case."This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
In post 781, BlueBloodedToffee wrote:I feel like these two VC's paint a pretty telling picture.
Those two VCs do not look good for Juls.
Then again, they appear to be random VCs - 1.3 and 1.4.
Why those two?"This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
I generally only look at lynch VCs. Give me context as to why those VCs are important. That's what I'm asking for.
lol @ your pants, because they are all shitty now"This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
Well now I have to go and read (that part of) the thread again.
JEEZE, BBT. Makin' me work.
I'll get to it today."This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
@Zoro:
In post 826, Zoronos wrote:Green Crayons - You kind of ignored me when I asked you why you thought Peace was town. Any chance you can enlighten me?
I was waiting for Peace to respond to your case instead of preemptively defending Peace by way of my reactions. And then, once you were like "oh, I guess that's a semi-town response," I basically back-burnered it.
Work got busy, so I'll have input later."This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
Spoiler: thoughts on Peace, all for Zoro"This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
Lynch counts:
Day one wrote:Vote Count 1.5
(7): Albert B. Rampage, Scarab,Prolapsed Brain, PeaceBringer, Juls,Clusk92Jeanne11, Garmr
Juls (2):Ankamius, Prolapsed Brain
PeaceBringer (1):Skold
Zoronos (1):Sotty7
Skold (1): BlueBloodedToffee
Not Voting (1): Zoronos
Day two wrote:, Albert B. Rampage,Skold (6): Sotty7, PeaceBringer,Green Crayons, pisskopBlueBloodedToffee
snscompt1 (1): Skold
pisskop (1):RedCoyote
PeaceBringer (1): Juls
Not Voting (2):, ZoronosEquinox
Day three wrote:, pisskop, PeaceBringer, Juls, Albert B. RampageBlueBloodedToffee (5): Green Crayons
pisskop (2):Sotty7, BlueBloodedToffee
PeaceBringer (1): Zoronos
Not Voting (1):Equinox
I'm thinking Pisskop, Juls + Zoro:
- Pisskop, ABR and Peace have been on every lynching wagon.
- The pisskop slot ends day two and three with only confirmed townies voting him.
- Looks like at least two scum on the back of the BBT wagon.
- Zoro is looking prob scum. No vote on both day one and day two. Ends day three on a going nowhere wagon.
- Zoro has been itching at me the last day or so, with how he latched onto Sotty after their initial disagreement. As soon as Sotty came out day two calling Zoro town suddenly Sotty is a strong town read of his.
- Juls picking on Zoro's voting record could easily be bussing.
Alternative theory of the crime - Juls/ABR/Zoro
- Juls defending ABR from an early RVS wagon + her flimsy push on Zoro."This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
Most interested in Equinox's thoughts, hope he shows up and plays. <3"This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
I don't know if my heart can stand any more broken promises, ABR."This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
Alrighty, so ABR wants to vote PK.
Which I appreciate, in the sense that ABR actually gave a proto-vote, as opposed to a useless 3-person mafia spec.
@PK:who do you want to vote?
@Zoro:who do you want to vote?
@Peace:who do you want to vote?
@Juls:who do you want to vote?
One name only."This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
Sotty thoughts:
Juls, (PK or ABR), (Zoro or PB)
Sotty harbored Scarab/PK suspicions the longest. But she wanted a Juls lynch the most right before night concluded.
I think it's interesting that Juls showed up on everyone's list of 3 scum, but nobody wants to lynch her. I dunno if that's worth anything, though.
I'm inclined to vote Juls unless if Equinox has some mind shattering insight. Which he might! So I'll wait."This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
In post 982, Green Crayons wrote:Juls, (PK or ABR), (Zoro or PB)
Interestingly, PK/ABR and Zoro/PB have sort of set themselves up for 1v1s. So Sotty did a good job pairing off!
That leaves Juls as the lone scum without a pairing."This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
In post 985, Juls wrote:So I am on everyone's scum list and that makes me scum? Why wouldn't it be the other way around? Only 1 of the people saying that is ACTUALLY town you realize?
Sotty + Me + 1 other town + who knows what Equinox thinks of you > 1 person
Also, it's not just that you're on everyone's list. It's that you're on everyone's list but nobody said that they want to vote you. It's the best of both worlds for scum."This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
In post 986, Zoronos wrote:(This is a little rough, so please bear with me. The underlying idea is sound, I think.)
From my seat, the lynch that is least likely to lose the game outright is Peace. It would require an ABR / Juls / Pisskop scum team. Which means 2/3 of the scum team is bussing, and Pisskop is on a 50/50. They might all be waiting for me to wrongvote Peace, but if that's the case we're already hosed since Peace and I cross-suspect each other.
Before ABR's post, I thought the scum team were going direct and trying for the mislynch today. That meant it was a coin flip between Juls and Piss for the town slot. (Either Piss is wrong and scum will follow on his vote, or Juls is wrong and scum will follow on the PK vote). The reason ABR was scum in the direct case is that ABR-town would require a Peace / PK / Juls scum team. That would mean Juls was busing her entire team on D2 and is busing again now, which if scum are going direct can't be the case. After doing a full re-read I was leaning towards Juls as the town slot in this scenario.
ABR's post against PK wrong-footed that. Unless there are only two scum, there's no way that both Juls and ABR are town. That means it's two coin flips; [Juls | ABR] vs PK and if PK flips scum Juls vs ABR. If PK isn't town, at least one scum must be busing right now, but I don't have a good feel for if it's ABR or Juls. If he is town, then ABR and Juls are going direct (which just puts me back into the earlier PK vs Juls case), with Peace as the follow on. But in none of those scenarios is Peace town.
I think the right vote here is Peace.
If it's Zoro v. PB, I assure you I'm not voting PB."This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
In post 986, Zoronos wrote:It would require an ABR / Juls / Pisskop scum team.
ABR & Juls want to vote PK.
I don't see an ABR/Juls/PK team, I agree.
I do think you have a good chance at being scum, though."This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
Well then don't make it Zoro v. PB."This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).