Mini 1782 Game Over

[Ircher]

Vote Count - Day 3 VC #3

Titus (1) - FA_Q2
Mhsmith (0) -
Huntress (2) - Rosh, Titus
Froot (0) -
Johnny (0) -
FA_Q2 (0) -
Garmr (0) -
Plain (1) - Garmr
Lowell (0) -
Rosh (2) - Lowell, Huntress
No Lynch (0) -
Not Voting (4) - Mhsmith, Johnny, Froot, Plain

Deadline

Day 3 will end on May 13 8:30 PM EST or in (expired on 2016-05-13 20:30:00).

Lynch Threshold

With 10 alive, it takes 6 to lynch.

Mod Notes

None

[Roshar]

Semantics. You'll be 'around' your computer. Until end of day. Monitoring the thread (I.e checking from time to time). In an attempt to divert the lynch.

[Garmr]

I'd like to ask some people about their reads on certain other people. The names I ask about aren't arbitrary, but I don't want to say why I picked them.

@FAQ:

What are your feelings on Johnny, Rosh, and Garmr?

@Garmr:

What are your feelings on Johnny, FAQ, and Titus?

@Huntress:

What are your feelings on FAQ, Lowell, and mhsmith?

@Rosh:

The scumslip you mention in 1581 might be something. However, my past experiences tell me to treat such things with a grain of salt. In looking at my own scumlean on Huntress, I see that it was mostly due to Jeanne's Jake vote and Huntress's general unhelpfulness, which isn't a strong read. That combined with Huntress's response to your push having felt town to me makes not eager to lynch her (I would give her the smallest of town-leans atm).

Johnny
I don't know with johnny I'm going to say maybe town he posted around the same amount of constant in the last game and he still has that attitude of thinking his actually contributing.

Faq
null but I do agree with him on some point.


Titus- is pretty iffy with that jump between rochs wagon and huntress's it seems out of place.

[Titus]

@Huntress, They are the VCs I was using to make my determination.

[Froot Loop]

@Titus - do you have anything about Huntress or Pisskop/Johnny? You've identified the line of investigation but haven't actually investigated.

Semantics. You'll be 'around' your computer. Until end of day. Monitoring the thread (I.e checking from time to time).

In an attempt to divert the lynch.

(my bold)

This rhetoric is out of control.

I don't get the problem here. Huntress suggested other alternatives (1210) and Clumsy responded (1212.) Nos asked what people thought of Lowell (1219,) you (1221) and I (1231) posted about Lowell and what we thought. After this, Huntress comes back in and votes for Max (1239.)

1. I don't think what Huntress did is scummy. She suggested two alternatives; she acknowledged that you weren't likely to be lynched but there was more discussion about Lowell; and she'd mentioned that she didn't love either Clumsy or Max because of the way her reads had changed.
2. Nos did almost the exact same thing and they were town.

Vote: mhsmith

Smith hasn't come up with any scumreads on his own and his play in general has been asking questions or coming to watery/town conclusions. He did some meta and then voted for Clumsy but said he was open to other cases (1137.) He speculated about the neighbour - whatever you think about this, it's empty posting at best. His speculation around the time of the Max lynch (1501 and 1503) wasn't helpful and he again asks for any other cases which he'd listen to (1501.)

[Titus]

@Froot Loop, Now who is talking rhetoric? I am wanting to see what people do with my theories and where they push. Huntress' rationale is not impressive and Johnny is pretty town.

[Froot Loop]

You think I've been using rhetoric? When?

There wasn't really anything to respond to before you posted about Huntress and Pisskop/Johnny. I don't think this is the time to be waiting to see how other people respond to so little. That's my opinion but I don't think it's that helpful.

[Roshar]

First of all, Nos did not do, "almost the same thing". Nos asked if anyone thought Lowell was town, and was willing to discuss his play style compared to previous games and generate something useful. He didn't disappear after claiming he wasn't comfortable with a Max lynch and was up for a Lowell lynch. And it's kinda interesting to note, two players actually responded positively to Huntress' suggestion of a Lowell lynch. Yet, when she came back, she never pushed it. She just repeated herself. You'd think if someone is truly interested in changing the lynch to Lowell, they'd actually make a case against him. Like I'm not even expecting a case at this point. Just point to something mildly scummy that Lowell did. She never put any effort because,

in my opinion

, she wasn't serious about a Lowell lynch. You ask why this is scummy? Because she's appearing to extend a hand to help, when she has no intention of helping,

imo.

Difference between Nosferatu and Huntress is that Nosferatu thought of Max as town, while Huntress said she didn't find his posting town.

Difference between Clumsy and Huntress is that Clumsy was the main D1 wagon and 1) didn't want to be forced to vote for someone just to save his own skin 2) Had town read Max.

Yes, there was more discussion about Lowell. That she wasn't a part of. She never said she found him scummy herself.

[Roshar]

@Froot

Huntress was much more willing to lynch Lowell over Max D1, correct?

D2, what changed? What made her switch that stance?
She puts a scum association with Lowell and APF. She said she buys my side of the story more than Lowell. So, she's starting to articulate her scum read on Lowell. Indirectly, but better than nothing. Notice she's never directly scum reading Lowell. Anywho.

Max must have done something worse though. He was her number one scum read D2. Let's ISO her, shall we? We're left with her 1299 and 1323 where she's not liking that he's saying 'she's struggling with her reads."
But wait, Max said the same thing D1.

But D1, she was really reluctant in lynching Max.
D1 she preferred a Lowell lynch.

Why then, D2, does she reverse her stance?

In my opinion

, she never actually thought a Lowell lynch would go through D1. She continued to show interest in lynching Lowell 8 hrs before end of day but doesn't bother giving one reason why Lowell is a better lynch. That is why I think it's not a genuine attempt at trying to lynch Lowell.

D2, she conveniently tucks Lowell into number 2 scum position, and hops onto the max train. (all in my opinion ofc)

Let me be clear, in case anyone may still not be getting what I'm driving at. I think Lowell and Huntress are scum buddies.

I will only lynch Huntress today though.

[Roshar]

Yo, Huntress. You haven't made a case on me ever since D1 where you said you had a gut read and didn't like that I was scum reading people based on play style.

You've barely articulated your scum read on Lowell as well.

I think it's about time you ISO your two biggest scum reads and build a case.

[Roshar]

Lowell, where are you, old friend? You can't just scum read me and disappear like that. Tell me where I'm trying to hard. ISO me. Build your case.

[a plain farmer]

@Titus:

We know Clumsy is town. Max is town too. We have Pisskop, Huntress and Max who are refusing to do anything here. Huntress later takes a stand but doesn't really push anything.

Given we know that Clumsy and Max are town, Pisskop and Huntress are the ideal places to sort next.

What about the Maverick/FAQ slot? As I said a few pages ago regarding that slot's lack of pushing during this time:

FAQ: Maverick votes Clumsy in 962/963 but doesn't seem to have any conviction in it. Then when FAQ replaces in, he doesn't acknowledge his predecessor's vote, but allows it to stay there through the lynch and doesn't mention Clumsy aside from asking a question.

@Rosh:

@APF, how would you evaluate that 'slip' if Huntress flipped scum? And what would you think about Lowell's stance on Huntress? I'm mainly referring to the fact:
1)She was on his list of people he was not okay lynching D2
2) That he thinks people voting him are, "opportunistic as hell". Yet, when Huntress was apparently willing to divert two L-5 lynches on him D1, he didn't comment.

If Huntress were to flip scum, then I might see that as her distancing herself from Lowell. As for what Lowell's stance on Huntress would mean, I really don't know. I do think that Lowell had more reason to feel threatened when he had an emerging wagon on him on D2 than when it was late D1 and there were already two wagons at L-2, so that could be why he responded on D2 but not D1.

[a plain farmer]

@Froot:

What's your read on Titus?

[a plain farmer]

FAQ:

I like his play so far. He's made some good points.

Faq
null but I do agree with him on some point.

What are these points you guys like?

[Garmr]

the titus point.

[JohnnyFarrar]

Gar, Froot and Roshar did yesterday analysis things and none of them were very moving.

Had to ISO myself to remember what's going on.

VOTE: rosh I don't remember if there's a reason this never gained steam. But look, she's a try-hard, trying hard to look like she's participating.

Slight scumlean on titus as well. Townreads on johnny and huntress. And also I'm sure there's other players.

Lotta not explaining shit in this post, but the try hard point just made your case look like a name-calling wet fast.

I was asking why on all of those while Roshar asked just on Garmr.

Oh. Gar was covered, I trust you to do better as scum to end the day when the main wagon is on town, and Froot is presenting neat and new ideas without ignoring people. I can't imagine her working with anyone else rn

VOTE: huntress let's do this thing.

Not voting farm boy for now, his reaction to Titus' vca is really neat.

Smith is boring.

[Froot Loop]

@Roshar - ok, let's see what they say. I think Huntress' posts are quite deliberate, so when I read her comment about Lowell (1121) I took that to indicate that she's thinking about that slot. She responded to Max in 1171 and asked him about his motivations. She posted to say why she felt conflicted in 1196 and her explanation about Max matches her earlier play. She said she didn't want to vote the same way as you in 1209.

I do think it's strange that she didn't come back and have a conversation about Lowell. I can't think of a better response to a flashlynch suggestion that what she got, really, which makes that surprising.

@Froot:

What's your read on Titus?

I think she's been quite involved and asked some good questions to get clarification and make decisions which is good. I do feel like I don't know a lot about her interpretation of players in the game and she focused a lot on Max yesterday, or more than I expected/thought/I don't know.

I think her second comment in 1574 is odd and that she missed/mis-answered FA_Q2's question. I'll also see what she says about my comment just now.

[Titus]

@Plain, It's worth considering. I don't expect all the scum to be off the major two wagons and weak votes would fit the profile as well. Given the blowback that happened when I voted Huntress, I am more comfortable here at the moment. Yet an FAQ2 vote isn't bad, just not my preference.

@Fruit Loop, Don't know about my interpretation of players? Are you asking for my reads? How do you feel I misanswered FAQ2s question? If so, why not highlight it then?

[Froot Loop]

I'm not asking for your reads explicitly, it's a part of your profile for me. That point is connected to the play with Max yesterday, because that was the only strong inclination I got from you.

FA_Q2 asked a question about why you assumed the mislynches on town players were pushed by town players. You replied that people play to their wincon. It's a fairly abstract point considering you guys hadn't determined who you were talking about.

I think I didn't mention it because I was talking to Roshar and thinking about other things.

[mhsmith0]

Given the blowback that happened when I voted Huntress, I am more comfortable here at the moment

Yeah, it's been interesting to see the board's reaction to the huntress wagon. I'm carrying a bit of sympathy to Roshar's argument but still need to go back through and make sure I agree that what she is saying is actually correct (possibly today, definitely by saturday). Off the cuff, I'm a bit worried we might be lurker lynching, but we're definitely not seeing DADV here, that's for sure.

[Titus]

@FruitLopp, Yup. Scum rarely push another mislynch when they have options open (Clumsy ftr). So it makes it more likely that Max and other mislynches were pushed by town.

Second, I am abstract.

[Titus]

DAVD?

[mhsmith0]

DADV = Dead Air Dead Villager. Basically, the idea that if a wagon isn't getting any resistance, it's probably not against a mafia.

[FA_Q2]

I am here and reading but I do not have the time to put up a reasonable post. I should have some time tomorrow for some content.

[Huntress]

I didn't have time to deal with this today, but tomorrow I'm going to do a summary of my case on Roshar.

I do think it's strange that she didn't come back and have a conversation about Lowell. I can't think of a better response to a flashlynch suggestion that what she got, really, which makes that surprising.

There weren't enough people responding to it to make a lynch viable. Only three I think, and we needed seven to bring it off.