Open 602: Making Friends and Enemies (Game Over)

[superbowl9]

VOTE: Green Crayons

Not a creative color.

[superbowl9]

bublb do you have and completed scum/town games that i can look into?

Here
http://forum.mafiascum.net/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=61875

I was also in this game.
He acts the same way he does here, basically VI.

[superbowl9]

Lol, read the game linked. I had the same thought process as you; his reads were all over the place, he was playing anti-town and downright scummy, and he didn't make much sense at all to me, and he was bp. Not saying he'e not acting scummy right now, and I agree with all the points you and crayons have against him, just saying he was VI in my previous game with him, so I'm holding onto that as a strong possibility here.

[superbowl9]

town poe
from
me

null poe
everoyne else

I think I'm just dumb, but I can't understand this. What's poe mean?

[superbowl9]

Wait, so who's eliminating what here? Sorry I feel really stupid right now

[superbowl9]

Oh, Okay. I read it so that from was actually like the word from, not the player who is part of your list. I got it now. Carry on.

[superbowl9]

Can't say I agree with 98.

Doesn't look to me like texcat is trying to wait it out and go with the town flow; he actually goes against the pretty widespread townread on fro and he brings up two reads of his, however his reads aren't very solid at this point in the game and "hardly anything vote worthy" seems like his way of communicating that.

Pistachi0n has a similar post as well (86) where she puts out two reads and justifies why she's not voting them ("I'm waiting for him to say something else" and "but he's easy lynchbait right now.") These seem pretty similar content-wise to me, so why on one and not the other?

[superbowl9]

@ika What do you mean how he's going about it? Can you expand a bit?

[superbowl9]

@ika What do you mean how he's going about it? Can you expand a bit?

FMPOV text stand and how shes doing it looks more like an infomred postiotion and that if she were to lynch one of the she can do it w/o getting her hands dirty

its hard to atriculate but mayeb the best way to put it is that text stance looks faked

I don't see how text's post looks more informed; and pistachi0n's post does the exact same thing; they both makes very flexible reads. If it's just the feel of the posts then that suggests to me that it's writing style that's the issue, which isn't what quaroath had a problem with, judging from her post.

[superbowl9]

Hope everything goes well quaroath

Ika, you've only really given us one example of how the style rubs you the wrong way (152), and it's a poor one. If he's playing differently from his scum game, the obvious implication is a town indication. Tex is giving info on meta, which some players may find useful, while also indicating a townlean on from. Hardly "just words and no stances". I think your argument's weak on this point.

I agree that the tex vote did seem very forced, especially after 113 and 98, which pretty much tell texcat that unless she votes or actually starts furthering the game, she'll still have votes on her. So she moves her vote for a not very good reason, and then, surprisingly, this somehow satisfies pistachi0n. (just noticed this, but she votes ika for nitpicky prods, the same thing she said was not vote worthy for fromage)

I'd say tex's vote is pretty non-indicative because it's equally as likely to come from town or scum, but the way in which she does so seems very lazy and it kind of seems like she's grasping at something to get the votes/attention off ASAP. Wouldn't a townie wait until they actually saw something vote-worthy or stick to their previous "nothing's vote worthy" statement?

Speaking of active lurking, 158. He says the texcat vote is "all right" and "decent" (whatever that means) and then repeats that he won't be moving his vote before the lurkers post.

As for 160, really? That's all it takes for your read to change? You tell someone to do something or you'll keep pressuring them, they put out a forced response doing what you wanted, and that wins them town points? That's like a police officer asking someone wearing a ski mask walking out of a flaming bank "did you commit the crime?", they respond, "nope sure wasn't me", and the officer responds, "Okay, you're free to go, sir." That's either a gullible cop or a partner in crime.

Speaking of forced votes, 165 seems to me like it's grasping at straws. I don't see how vet's reasoning in 88 is scummy; he says he's annoyed (presumably because he doesn't like getting quick-lynched), and I don't see how his little extraneous statement is alignment indicative. I'm not liking pistachi0n right now.

UNVOTE:
VOTE: pistachi0n

[superbowl9]

I actually played my first game with vet, where I scumread him for the same thing (not participating that much) and he was town, so although I don't like his lack of posting/active lurking, I'm a bit reluctant to scumread him again.[/metatangent]
@pistachi0 what is t exactly that you're basing off your previous meta with him? I think I said that town and scum would be equally likely to preform the action if we're looking at it out of context of the actual post, however even if we're looking at it as a null action, why would you unvote because of it or "want to see it from him"? What is the "it" you're basing off meta? I can see how you would have a scumread on vet, but that's not why you originally unvoted, and your vet vote was prompted and originally had some reasoning that seems like a strecth.

[superbowl9]

186: Lol sorry Quaroath, bulb's use of she to refer to everyone must have caught on. Your reasoning for flagging one and not the other makes much more sense now. I think tex is more likely scum because of how forced his vote seemed after pressure from you and pistachi0.

187: It's kind of customary to reveal information you find to everyone else unless it would advantage scum more than town, because that helps the town get more info and helps them win the game. Not revealing things you know that could help town is anti-town.

194: Doesn't make your vote sound any less graspy or forced.

YOU

made a comment about vet seeming worried in 86, and vet made a direct response to that in 88. I don't see how we "moved on" in ONE POST (which, might I add, was about 86 as well). Are we looking at the same game?

Might as well make a reads list.

Towny: Quaroath, Fromage, GreenCrayons
Scummy: Pistachi0, tex
Null: SimplePlan, Z0, BBT, ika
Other: Bulb VI

[superbowl9]

Towny: Quaroath, Fromage, GreenCrayons
Scummy: Pistachi0, tex
Null: SimplePlan, Z0, BBT, ika
Other: Bulb VI

Super, can you explain town reads on Qua and Fromage please?

Are you scum reading Tex based on what Qua has said?

On Quaroath, after giving a satisfying explanation to his seeming double standard that I flagged, his play is overall very towny; he makes prods at people, asks good questions that yield pertinent info and challenges things he doesn't like.

For Fromage, the PSA was good and I thought originally that his questioning was towny because ika's 89 made sense to me, but you've given me another look at it. Not sure where my read of him will go ATM, I need to look at him a little more before I make a decision.

Nope, I'm scumreading tex because of his forced vote.

Can you elaborate a bit on your pistachi0 read?

Also,

Way to comment on the situation without actually commenting on it.

is an original comment and doesn't sheep anyone.

Except for that it's a comment on nothing. He is making an empty comment about someone making an empty comment. I don't see the difference.

Did nobody see 167, where I say the exact same thing directly before Soren?

I didn't agree with the vote but I could see why Tex could come to that conclusion.

Which conclusion?

[superbowl9]

@tex On the forced ika vote

You agree that people were attacking you for coasting before the vote.
I don't believe that your vote was purely a reaction to ika "smudging" you, because you didn't have such a reaction to quaroath's 98, which clearly paints you as scum for the same post as ika did.
So if it's not a reaction to ika's posts, then it must be a forced vote to make you seem more town by appeasing your aforementioned critics, which, surprisingly, worked.

[superbowl9]

Don't agree with GC vote, and more scummy posts from pistachi0. Been busy this weekend so hopefully I can get a post in tomorrow.

[superbowl9]

People will start thinking we like each other or something.

Got a closet to come out of GC?

[superbowl9]

Fromage Read:

Was scumlean after BBT pointed out that the PSA is not rly indicative, and I agreed that his early questioning of bulba seemed like trying to look like figuring out bulba before jumping on his wagon.

However, after reviewing the Fromage-BBT exchange, fromage has had a (IMO) good answer to almost every one of BBT's other criticisms, which tells me that fromage must have some sort of logical, non-scummy thought process for all his play that BBT flagged (otherwise he'd have weaker arguments or have more trouble coming up with valid, logical points, and that, since I agree with his counterpoints, I agree that his play (besides that first unaddressed point) has been non-scummy.

Besides this, there are a few sprinkles of towniness I see in his play here and there while looking through his ISO, like 205. I also like how he's strong with his reads, but not to the point where they're completely set in stone.

So I don't have too strong of a read on him one way or another, but I don't see his play as scummy except for the very start, of which I'm only going off BBT's theory, to which fromage has not yet proposed a countertheory. So although BBT's theory makes sense, I haven't heard fromage's side of it. If fromage gives a good explanation, then my read's going to be slight townlean; however if I don't find fromage's explanation as likely or satisfactory as BBT's, then it'll go slight scumlean.

@fromage can you outline your thought process during your intial questioning of bulb?

Right now I'm reading Iceguy as mistaken town, because although I completely disagree with the GC vote, he goes against the majority as soon as he comes in and draws a lot of attention to himself.

I'm townreading BBT for similar reasons, including him pointing out that half the game is scumreading tex and him going against the widely held fromage townread. I think his persistance with fromage was a case of confirmation bias, as his initial scumread was very strong.

@BBT so you think that ika saying that something about the style in which tex's post was written rubbed him the wrong way is enough to conclude ika's scum?

[superbowl9]

Fromage's answer was satisfactory to me.
His style seems to be inquisitive, and he seems to like to gather all the info he can before making decisions, which fits in with his explanation.
It makes sense to me how he could ask a question, get an incomplete answer, and follow it up with more questions instead of a vote, even multiple times.

[superbowl9]

BBT has the same number of posts as you though. I agree, I can also work with a Soren lynch.

[superbowl9]

I agree, I can also work with a Soren lynch.

Why? Are you no longer scum reading Tex? If not, why not?

Lurker policy lynch. I don't see how these two are related, but no, I'm still scumreading tex. I don't like her two most recent posts; she's saying that appeasing someone is scummy behavior, yet she did the exact same thing a while back with the ika vote? How do those two things make sense together in her head?

[superbowl9]

Super, I'm not sure what you're saying?

I'm saying that you have said that "I found Soren's claim fishy only because he claimed the exact thing that you said you would unvote", but your exact same logic can be applied when you voted ika (it was the exact thing that would get people to unvote you).

Lurker policy lynch. I don't see how these two are related, but no, I'm still scumreading tex.

OK, well, they're related because you appear to have a genuine scum read and instead of pushing that you're deciding to push a PL instead. That's scummy.

"I agree, I can also work with a Soren lynch." I'm not pushing the lynch, I'm just not against it.

[superbowl9]

Yes Sorry about the prod reading tonight.

How did this go?

"I agree, I can also work with a Soren lynch." I'm not pushing the lynch, I'm just not against it.

Sure, I'm not overly interested in semantics. You support a lynch on Soren, when IMO, you should be pushing your scum reads.

Your vote is still on Pistachion, do you still think she is scum? If so, why?

Again, I'm not actively supporting a Soren lynch (hence why my vote is not on soren); I simply wanted people to know that I am willing to lynch soren if we don't lynch either of my scumreads. Semantics are kinda important here because there's a big difference between pushing a lynch and being okay with a lynch. I am still scumreading pistachi0n for the same reasons I and others have already outlined.

[superbowl9]

Sure. Might not get to it today (I just started a summer job and am still getting used to the schedule change) but it should be done by tomorrow.

[superbowl9]

Pistachion:

Firstly, she decides to slap a vote on texcat after quaroath and vettrock (98 and 102(and kinda fromage in 104)) voice against tex. That's all well and good, but after tex votes ika, pistachi0n unvotes tex because that's "what she was hoping to see". This, first off, is weird because if you tell someone what to do to get you to unvote them, then it's kind of obvious that they'd do this as scum (and town), so it's not something you'd expect an unvote from. Second, it tells me that pistachi0n's read didn't really have any conviction behind it, which, combined with the fact that people were starting to go against tex before pistachi0n's vote, makes it seem a lot like pistachi0n is simply going with the flow and sheeping whatever is accepted at the moment; obviously scummy.

Second, right after this, after being prompted by GC pistachi0n votes vettrock on just about the weakest position I've ever heard (because vettrock made a semi-relevant hypo in one of his posts). This looks a helluva lot like a forced vote; if she didn't have anything vote-worthy, she could have simply said so, but in order to appeal to the town, she felt pressured to respond with a vote like GC's post kind of implies that she should. Not to mention how quickly her reads swung from one prime scumspect to another, again showing a lack of conviction. 209 then shows that her vet read is shaky as well, and kinda feels like a dodge of the question to me.

Next, she once again sheeps someone and says that she could possibly go for a GC wagon (which also had some trash logic behind it). To steal from GC,

Post 253 is a prime "test the waters" post. Voice support for a BW that hasn't yet gotten off the ground, creating a basis for you to join in the BW picks up; but leave enough of hedging so you can step away from the suspicion if the BW doesn't go anywhere.

To steal from BBT,

OK, but you obviously will have seen GC's vote on you when he made it because you posted not long after it so I'm left wondering why you didn't call it out at the time he made it?

I don't buy pistachi0n's response to this at all.

As for the reads list after being put at L-1, I don't see why that's very towny. Couldn't it be scum putting out final reads to misdirect the town?

Then we've got some more bad logic in 473, and another read reversal for not the most solid or well-explained of reasons, this time on GC.

And that's why pistachi0n is my top scumread and lynch candidate.

texcat:

I still think the vote was forced and I don't really like 242 either because it feels like hopping on to an easy wagon that is clearly ika's style, which tex should know having played with ika before. Nothing else really jumps out at me as town about her, so she's in the scum pile as well.

bulb:

Still playing like VI to me (I say VI and not newb because he said he had some sort of experience in our other game), and overall his style is pretty consistent with how he played in our first game together.

I feel like I just did stuff on fromage, BBT, and iceguy. Those are the same. It's in this post 287.

green crayons:

Seems very towny. Interacts with lots of people, has real-looking reads that can fluctuate but have solidity, and views the game much the same as me, it seems.

simple plan:

My mind wasn't really working that well when I read his catch-ups, but from what I've seen he seems to be conforming to the majority view on things. Null-scum.

quaroath:

Still feels town to me because of his willingness to go against the flow or to bring up points about people not really being talked about.

ika:

Hard to judge for me, because although his actions might be anti-town at times this is consistent with his style. Null for now.

soren:

I wish he would be more productive, but I can't make too good of a judgement from what he has posted. Null as well.

vett:

I don't like his level of activity either, but I've played with him before and this rubbed me the wrong way in that game too. He got mislynched. So aside from that, he's made a couple of insightful comments which struck me as town (101 for example). Slight townlean.

[superbowl9]

VOTE: pistachi0n an anti-town icing to top the scum cake.

[superbowl9]

Phonepost/prodge. I'll post tonight.

[superbowl9]

Well my mom surprised me with a new car.

Also, I actually think that wagon on Soren is all town

Why?

VOTE: IceGuy

Sheeping BBT. IceGuy did come into the game and park his vote on Green Crayons.

Before the "mason tell". Even if it was after, Ice could've just not seen it as a mason tell, just like ika and me. I don't see how you justify this other than that.

VOTE: IceGuy

I would ask why, but in your next post you say you actually have no idea why you thought he was scum. Can we please lynch this already?

I refuse to believe BBt is scum due to the fact that he is too town to be scum.

Lol

I don't like Iceguy's 519. It looks like rolefishing to me.

Really? I think it was a good inquiry. This post kinda seems OMGUSy.

his inactivty (already stated)
his lack of push on people and laying in the bacground
his lack of scum hunting aslo

like do you have a town case for him or...?

That's not a good case. BBT has already shown you it's not true.

I really hope not_mafia read the votecounts before he started throwing his vote around everywhere... don't replacements usually unvote first in case there's a wagon or something?

I saw that Pistachion possibly exposed the other mason early today. What is the rest of the case on her?

Are you kidding? There's been about a million posts on why pistachion is scum. Have you not been reading?

I think NM is town.

Why?

BBT, can you explain your not-scumread on pistachi0 and your scumread on ice? You said that wrong=/=scum, right? Why is ice scum aside from his flimsy arguments?

[superbowl9]

Why do you think everyone on the soren wagon was town?

So do you disagree with my multiple cases on pistachio, GC's case on her, And your own points as to why she is scum? Do you think her broadcast of what she thought was a mason soft was not anti-town? Would you like to have someone who broadcasts softs and votes for no reason in lylo? Because what I'm seeing right now is you agreeing with all these and yet, because of one (two?) posts that "feel town to you" are'nt willing to scumread this person. Aren't ypu grasping at straws here? Also, if I'm not mistaken, wasn't ice going after you, fromage, and tex in that last push?

[superbowl9]

I do disagree with people calling Pistachion scum. I see town do bad things all the time (like role fishing), it doesn't make them scum, just someone who hasn't thought through what they posted. Incidentally, this trait is much more likely to come from town than scum.

So are you saying anti-town behavior is more likely to come from town than scum?

[superbowl9]

Okay, but that's not the basis of my scumread. Do you disagree with 483 and 262? I was saying that your pistachi0n townread was grasping at straws because she's done so many scummy and anti-town things.

[superbowl9]

iirc you said you liked 262 and didn't say anything about 483, so what changed your mind?

[superbowl9]

? so then what was "I do indeed diagree with those posts" directed toward?

[superbowl9]

Okay. Read the posts, then tell me if you disagree with them instead of using your confirmation bias to dismiss them.

[superbowl9]

It would be nice if you could briefly outline why you disagree as well, since you're already there.

[superbowl9]

If this was the case, then why did Pistachion unvote? You're saying she voted Tex because it was an opportunistic vote and other players were likely to do the same, so the unvote is a direct contradiction to this accusation, no?

My main point was that pistachi0n's reads are shaky and don't seem genuine, however your point is not correct. Consider this; pistachi0n sees everyone voting tex and hops on the wagon, but then when she sees tex do the thing everyone's on the wagon for her not doing, pistachi0n thinks that the tex wagon will no longer be pushed, so steps off it. What I'm saying is that pistachi0n could have been sheeping up until the point where her reason for sheeping became invalid. This also ignores the possibility that pistachi0 and tex are both scum, and pistach is distancing/conforming with no plan of staying on tex if she can get out of it.

Town are much more likely to be flip-floppy with their reads than scum are.

You've been saying "town is much more likely..." a lot; is this from personal experience or do you have reasoning behind why this is the case or both or neither? Also I have to disagree with you on that, I think townies are much more likely to tunnel or have confirmation bias, especially with their top scum/town read.

I disagree that the vote looks forced; I agree that the case was bad. You're again accusing her of opportunistic voting, if this is the case, she didn't need to unvote Tex in the first place given Tex is still a viable wagon at this point.

See my above case; and once again I don't really see how this addresses my main point. Are you arguing that pistachi0n would have voted tex instead of vet had she felt pressured?

I don't see a problem with 209.

My problem with it is that it makes it seem like she has certainty in her reads (which she doesn't), yet still leaves the door open for an escape if need be.

A reads list like that, especially unprompted with no attempt to fight off the lynch, is much more likely to come from town. I will be highly surprised if Pistachion is scum.

Do you think people would even take a second look at that reads-list if she was scum? No, they wouldn't.

I agree that not attempting to fight off a lynch is pro-town (if you're VT), but scum do pro-town things all the time. In this instance I think it is a null action because if pistachi0n put out a reads list as town I wouldn't take a second look at it either considering that town are wrong all the time with their reads.

473 is my post...

Sorry, I don't remember which post I meant, but her GC read changed quickly, which now makes sense because of the "mason tell".

Even so, I'm not interested in this Today. Ice is much, much scummier.

I feel the same way, except in reverse. Can you tell me why ice is scummier than pistachi0?

[superbowl9]

I would ask why, but in your next post you say you actually have no idea why you thought he was scum. Can we please lynch this already?

Why, because I realized I had sheeped someone and decided I'd think for myself instead of coasting along?

No, because you sheeped someone with no reason and were just coasting along.

[superbowl9]

okay you do that ika

[superbowl9]

Or you wanted to go back to vett. Maybe you think he's a better lynch than ice, and after realizing that switched back votes.

[superbowl9]

Yet another person off the pistachi0 wagon for "bad feelings".

[superbowl9]

So there's no reason why it's not a good wagon, it's just a bad wagon because feelings?

[superbowl9]

I realize, but a general "I don't like the feel of this" is usually not a good basis for reads nor where to place your vote. You have to take a combination of actual fact, analysis, and feeling into account. If you play purely off feeling, you'll never get anywhere.

[superbowl9]

I don't like that you didn't feel the need to reevaluate any of these reads.

Was a while ago but iirc your three posting styles hadn't really changed much since then and u weren't doing anything to change my reads so they were the same.

So, how do all of these posts line up with your reasoning for town reading Qua?

Hard to explain this but it doesn't matter if he goes with the flow a lot of the time, because that's kinda normal (usually people can agree on at least a few players), but when he shows he's willing to go against the flow that's what's significant because scum don't want to go against the flow at all (or as little as possible).

This is town. Scum never post this in a million years.

WIFOM

With this in mind, Qua's 458 is scummy as fuck. I think Qua is fishing for a potential mason buddy for GC by asking GC specifically about players he might think are Mason with GC. What other reasons would he have for asking GC this question?

Wouldn't he have asked which person he most townread? Doesn't make much sense as rolefishing to put 3 people and ask which is scummiest, that leaves 2 left.

Why are people treating the "how do u know scum has qt" as such a big deal? This is the person who said "I refuse to believe BBt is scum due to the fact that he is too town to be scum."

After seeing BBT's post about ASP and actually looking at him a little, I agree, his posts are filled with neutral language like "not sure how i feel about this" or "this looks bad", and he conveniently straddles or hops on the main wagon...well, the whole game. He's in scum as well.

[superbowl9]

That said I'm basically going to vote whoever annoys me the most right now.

VOTE: bbt

I hate people that manipulate information to match their needs. And you are doing everything you can to paint me asking GC a fucking question as scummy. You are using post flip information to slander me on a post from the middle of day 1.

Asking GC who he thought was scummier/est was unlikely to yield mason partner info, even if you had somehow divined that GC was a mason. I can't imagine that asking GC a question like that could be construed as scummy. That said, I'm wondering whether voting the annoying is a good technique for lynching scum.

Probably not, but he's asking leading questions that paint me as scummy for misguided and/or underhanded reasons. It obviously wasn't scummy/rolefishy to as someone that I didn't know was a mason what his reads were, but BBT is trying to make a case of it.

Scum do that sorta thing

Lol didn't BBT say rolefishing is more likely to come from town

[superbowl9]

I do disagree with people calling Pistachion scum. I see town do bad things all the time (like role fishing), it doesn't make them scum, just someone who hasn't thought through what they posted. Incidentally, this trait is much more likely to come from town than scum.

[superbowl9]

I would only hammer ice if it looks like an nl otherwise (e.g. a couple hours before deadline). I don't like his bulba wagon out of nowhere, but it's not enough to shake off my townread.

[superbowl9]

He's willing to go against flow and stand out with vanity wagons. I had another reason but I forgot as I was typing, when i t comes back to me I'll put it.

[superbowl9]

Looking at his iso he also scumhunts a lot and has some well-placed questions

[superbowl9]

In post 605, Not_Mafia wrote:
^Scum


So, why aren't you voting for me?

Oh yeah this was the thing
I liked how he was willing to draw more attention to this instead of just letting it go unnoticed

[superbowl9]

Oh that was at me? No it's not opportunistic because there's no opportunity that he's jumping on (that's what opportunistic is rite?)

[superbowl9]

He should only claim if someone is intent on hammering him.

+

Whatever, D1 and the only wagon that isn't me

VOTE: Iceguy

Just in case though, what is the case on IceGuy?

= policy lynch.
VOTE: St. Constantine

[superbowl9]

He should only claim if someone is intent on hammering him.

+

Whatever, D1 and the only wagon that isn't me

VOTE: Iceguy

Just in case though, what is the case on IceGuy?

= policy lynch.
VOTE: St. Constantine

A policy lynch? We haven't lynched a single scum yet at day 3, and you want to call for a policy lynch? I get that the lack of effort may seem scummy, but at this stage, I'm not exactly comfortable with a policy lynch. Do you think St. Constantine is scummy, or is your vote solely based on the idea of a policy lynch?

767 feels town IMO- willingness to replace if it would benefit the town is a pro-town thing to do.

@Bulb: what, aside from the dumbhammer, do you not like about SCTH?

We have a mislynch, and I don't want him in lylo. We let something like this slide last game and scum made us look dumb. Unannounced hammers are a policy lynch.

[superbowl9]

me?

[superbowl9]

Can you put all of your reads on here? I want to have something to look at.

Town--Me, ASP, Kitten, texcat
Scum--Bulb, superbowl, NM

Can you explain why you're scumreading me?

[superbowl9]

I agree that it's probably Bulb. He was active on Day 1, less so for the rest of the game. Like he felt more secure as scum. After every new day started, he made vague comments trying to sound surprised that really had no content. First look at 505. Then 759. Finally his comment today about having to do a reread. Okay, what's your reread?

I've played previous games with Bulb, and he was town. Every time there was a wagon on him, he got desperate. When people called him out on it, he said he was usually desperate as town, and as scum he was more reserved. I'd say he had no completed scum games. Well, this is his scum game. He was far more reserved than in any of his other games when people casted suspicion on him on day 1. (The games I'm referencing are over, btw.) He was even town-reading someone early on for raising doubts about him in 32, that really doesn't fit with his meta.

I like ASP's iso. He was idle at the beginning of the game, but as soon as he's off V/LA he jumps in and starts discussions. He can't be sheeping the general reads because he's the only one who's posted a reads list. 665 is an example of why I'm townreading him. He answers the questions people have about his play and his reads, he's keeping an open mind about players and not going for easy sheeps. Explains his vote and why it's there. ASP is my strongest town-read at the moment.

This is what we call scum ladies and gents. When a scummy player proposes a lynch candidate right after nightphase and then someone else sheeps and suddenly moves them from null to top town read (aka I'm not lynching him today), that's scum. Especially considering the rest of the game for pistachi0n, she should be lynched today.

[superbowl9]

Ugh my post got deleted
Basically ASP's posts suck and we should lynch pistachion.

[superbowl9]

One of you's gotta be first, and I'm tired of lynching people who are not pistachi0n. You can go next.

[superbowl9]

-Townreads Bulb based on similar play in a previous game.

I've played two games with him where he's town, and in both games, when there was pressure on him, he said he'd be more reserved if he were scum.

I am still very confident in scum-reading Bulb.

How are these different?

[superbowl9]

You imply that mine is a bad read, then use the exact same logic for yours.

[superbowl9]

Throughout the game actually.
But I don't see how that really clears up why my read's bad and yours is good...

[superbowl9]

So...

That was kinda fast... did you read the rest of the game, bringer? Wanna give some sort of analysis?

[superbowl9]

So my thoughts based on that little vote is that super, bulba, and trxcats are scum.

Why?

[superbowl9]

If it's not gonna be pistachi0 I will do ASP

[superbowl9]

Do you think something is going to happen in the next 9 days that will change your mind on who you want to vote for?

No.
VOTE: pistachi0n

[superbowl9]

So...
Are you still basing that on randomness bringer? I'm willing to lynch either pist or ASP; my third scum is tex but I'm not as confident about her.

Now to play the waiting game.

What does this mean?

Texcat I have faith you're town

Why?

Willing to do pistachion if that's what has the consensus

Please do.
We should probably not have our votes spread out because quickhammering. You should all join pist wagon to negate this.

[superbowl9]

Why may I ask?

[superbowl9]

Yes that's what's called a quickhammer. I doubt that, if scum is competent and tries to quickhammer, you will be able to see it, notify everyone, and get people to unvote fast enough to prevent the quickhammer from happening. It's more likely, if not equally likely, a town wagon, no?

[superbowl9]

UNVOTE:
VOTE: firebringer

[superbowl9]

Lol

[superbowl9]

I think we got scum. The speed was not expected but I'm pretty sure of he were town, one of the scum would have said "okay good game" by now.

Gg m80

[superbowl9]

You'll see

[superbowl9]

Lol its a good thing town kept pist alive or i would have had to actually scumhunt

[superbowl9]

Not rly I had a good case

[superbowl9]

In lylo, sure, but like D1 and D2 I had a good case, and I just extended it to D4. I do actually tend to tunnel a bit as town (based on my 2 other games), but not that much.

[superbowl9]

Nope

[superbowl9]

lol i logged on and i was like wait... I can hammer

[superbowl9]

gg everyone

[superbowl9]

Looks like I didn't do too bad my first scum game
I'm likin this scum thing, I should get it more often