Mini 1785: Game Over!

[Postie]

Okay big borhter, what do you think of Calvary?

[Heat]

VC 1.12

Lapsa (1):

acryon

Garmr (3):

MURDERCAT, Lapsa, JarJarDrinks,

JarJarDrinks (3):

Mr Meeseeks, Fire Assassin, Garmr

Postie (2):

Calvary, nnn_thekushmountains

Calvary (1):

I Am Innocent

MURDERCAT (1):

RadiantCowbells, Expedience

Not Voting (0):

With 13 alive, it takes 7 to lynch.

Deadline is in (expired on 2016-04-26 12:00:00)

Notes

Lapsa has requested replacement.

[Expedience]

I'll tell you tomorrow

Good luck with that then, I hope you return before you've been lynched.

[MURDERCAT]

Me too

[RadiantCowbells]

Im not quite sure tbh.

do you think shes scum?

[Postie]

I had a slight townread originally because of how clear all of Calvary's thoughts were and how they made sense but I'm re-ISOing now and like... there's lots of explaining but not a lot of actually taking any stances?

[RadiantCowbells]

ok but liiek

do you wnt voe or no?

[Postie]

I think I'm liking Calvary more for scum, yeah.

VOTE: Calvary

They're doing a lot of digging into and questioning other people's reasoning, but providing barely any of their own; they're doing stuff but they're not really making an conclusions from the stuff they're doing, so it reads like fake scumhunting. They did do a pretty extensive case on Fire but I found the reasoning really lacklustre and mediocre.

[RadiantCowbells]

ok

VOTE: calvyar[/vote[]

dot be scum

[JarJarDrinks]

garmrm is town

really dont think so

[Expedience]

VOTE: Cavalry

JarJar, vote Cavarly as well or you could be lynched because you are a competing wagon.

[Garmr]

VOTE: Calvary
Still on my scum list after the case I made. With lapsa leaving (thank god) it kinda makes me feel I might be wrong about that slot. JarJar can be proven day 2.

[RadiantCowbells]

VOTE: calvary

[nnn_thekushmountains]

Dunno how close calvry is but id want to refilter. The lynch doesn't strike me as bad though.

Regarding meeseeks, those consprcy theories are easier for mafia to fake than people realize. I'm gonna have to re-read it.

[I Am Innocent]

L-2

Calvary, come out come out wherever u are!

[Lapsa]

VOTE: Calvary

[nnn_thekushmountains]

I disagree with this wagon.

I think I'm liking Calvary more for scum, yeah.

VOTE: Calvary

They're doing a lot of digging into and questioning other people's reasoning, but providing barely any of their own; they're doing stuff but they're not really making an conclusions from the stuff they're doing, so it reads like fake scumhunting.

They did do a pretty extensive case on Fire but I found the reasoning really lacklustre and mediocre.

The bolded directly contradicts the first part of what you are saying. There is a huge case on fire, with counterpoints considered, and the case is pretty damn good for being that early in day 1.

[nnn_thekushmountains]

They're doing a lot of digging into and questioning other people's reasoning, but providing barely any of their own; they're doing stuff but they're not really making an conclusions from the stuff they're doing, so it reads like fake scumhunting.

This is fake scumhunting actually. Speaking in generalities, and flat out wrong.
Calvary talks a lot about her reads.
Here's just one example where she explains her vote on autti:

@Cavalry, mind explaining your scum read on Autti?

I am in the process of rereading his posts, but the main reason is that I feel like he is going for the easy player criticisms/ targets. Something about the way he words his critiques is insincere, like he's chiding players as opposed to legitimately hunting for scum. Going through the motions, as it were.

In Calvary, the auttislot has found a great target who has been afk and isn't here to defend herself. And you sheeps went onto the wagon without even reading Calvary's filter. Shame on you.

[Garmr]

I disagree with this wagon.

I think I'm liking Calvary more for scum, yeah.

VOTE: Calvary

They're doing a lot of digging into and questioning other people's reasoning, but providing barely any of their own; they're doing stuff but they're not really making an conclusions from the stuff they're doing, so it reads like fake scumhunting.

They did do a pretty extensive case on Fire but I found the reasoning really lacklustre and mediocre.

The bolded directly contradicts the first part of what you are saying. There is a huge case on fire, with counterpoints considered, and the case is pretty damn good for being that early in day 1.

Kush was I wrong about you is Calvary your scum buddy? Because that debunk is terribad. You can post an extensive case and have it be bad. Also I debunked the fire case and if you thought it was a good case I would question your credentials as a mafia player.

They're doing a lot of digging into and questioning other people's reasoning, but providing barely any of their own; they're doing stuff but they're not really making an conclusions from the stuff they're doing, so it reads like fake scumhunting.

This is fake scumhunting actually. Speaking in generalities, and flat out wrong.
Calvary talks a lot about her reads.
Here's just one example where she explains her vote on autti:

@Cavalry, mind explaining your scum read on Autti?

I am in the process of rereading his posts, but the main reason is that I feel like he is going for the easy player criticisms/ targets. Something about the way he words his critiques is insincere, like he's chiding players as opposed to legitimately hunting for scum. Going through the motions, as it were.

In Calvary, the auttislot has found a great target who has been afk and isn't here to defend herself. And you sheeps went onto the wagon without even reading Calvary's filter. Shame on you.

I honestly don't think her case there is good. It just uses fancy words only a sucker would fool for that with out looking into it. It basically says "he is just pretending to scum hunt on easy players." Which I would argue is subjective and I disagree with, because my reads were similar to his early game and I am town, I Don't know if they are the same now through.

[nnn_thekushmountains]

Garmr, it really doesn't matter if calvary's case is bad. It negates the first part of Postie's argument that Calvary isnt' giving opinions of her own.

Furthermore, calvary later changed her read on fire. She knew it wasn't a definitive case and she never treated it as that.

[nnn_thekushmountains]

Well here case against Autti isn't great, but against someone with low activity, you can't really make a great case. But that example is just there to show you that Postie is full of shit.

[Garmr]

Garmr, it really doesn't matter if calvary's case is bad. It negates the first part of Postie's argument that Calvary isnt' giving opinions of her own.

Furthermore, calvary later changed her read on fire. She knew it wasn't a definitive case and she never treated it as that.

Well there is my case which is pretty good. Also barely doesn't mean never gives own opinions. It just means a lack of them. A majority of cavalry posts tell us nothing.

[JarJarDrinks]

VOTE: Cavalry

JarJar, vote Cavarly as well or you could be lynched because you are a competing wagon.

Don't like this post at all. Don't worry, I'm aware of where the votes are now and obviously If it comes down to me vs Cavalry (or any player), I'll vote out of self preservation since I'm 100% sure of my own allegiance.

But I don't like being told I better vote someone or risk getting lynched.

[JarJarDrinks]

acryon may notb e town but

im not voting v/la

VOTE: calvary

acryon has posted more recently than calvary. Explain urself.

[JarJarDrinks]

Regarding meeseeks, those consprcy theories are easier for mafia to fake than people realize. I'm gonna have to re-read it.

Reread it yet?

Also can u think of any scum motivation for him to put forth that theory and basically flipflop his read of you and Lapsa?

Cause to me, it looks like a natural thought progression of someone that is tunneled on me being scum.