In post 3021, ssbm_Kyouko wrote:okay so i suspected Cabd was multi shot because no 1-shot would check titus
Why?
In post 3022, Alisae wrote:Can we lynch Tywin. I have a feeling he has a BP.
Why?
In post 3042, Elbirn wrote:I bring his "vote" to his attention no less than 80 bamillion times and at no point does he indicate that his vote was real/fake, counts/doesn't, was a joke/was serious. It just sits there waiting for someone to look like a dumbass over it, and scum gets a lynch where we could have maaybbeee had the mason actually claim.
As I told Cephir last night, that traditionally speaking, only bolded votes count.
In post 2955, Elbirn wrote:Bold your votes friend
Unless that's just a giggle yer havin'
This is what you actually said. You told me to bold my vote if it was a serious vote and I would have thought that it was clear that this was a joke vote since I didn't go back and bold it. Also note how I kept posting and playing and even claimed intent to hammer later on b/c I didn't even think my vote counted.
Of all tyrannies,a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end they do so with the approval of their own conscience.
In post 3250, Titus wrote:Pine, I am not lynching Alisae if she shoots scum the night before. You would be wise to adopt this.
UNVOTE:
I trust Titus. I may be overreacting, but I've been fooled by Vig/SKs before. Alisae intimidating people away from questioning her is extremely sketchy, but it can wait until we've eliminated more of the scumteam.
Vote will go back on Tywin when we've heard more from the people who've been absent.
In post 3274, ssbm_Kyouko wrote:Conclusion: Scum avoided Lapsa wagon because they thought he was traitor. Scum voted mozamis knowing he was town (duh). Players on mozamis but not on Lapsa are more suspicious. [Aj, Nero, Elbirn]
I would include Pine in there as well. It could be likely that he never saw the Traitor crumb since he was struggling to catch up most of day 1.
You mean... Mozamis and an inactive Syrana? Rofl nice one. Can't use "scum voted for Lapis" because that's you. Gamma/Pine on both and Titus is chasing you off Pine. Little options for your conclusion, insufficient backing of evidence and really a weak delivery is all I noticed from that post.
In post 3274, ssbm_Kyouko wrote:Conclusion: Scum avoided Lapsa wagon because they thought he was traitor. Scum voted mozamis knowing he was town (duh). Players on mozamis but not on Lapsa are more suspicious. [Aj, Nero, Elbirn]
I would include Pine in there as well. It could be likely that he never saw the Traitor crumb since he was struggling to catch up most of day 1.
What Traitor crumb? Lapsa wasn't a traitor, ergo, there WAS no crumb.
In post 2475, mozamis wrote:Bollocks, forgot the "Pine didnt know Cabd was joking about Masons thing", which seemed a pretty good town tell.
Pine back to town then I guess. Still, be good to get more from him.
Okay, ordinarily I just plain wouldn't comment on supposed Towntells regarding me, but I'm on an "educate new players" kick, and everything about this is terrible.
1) Mistaking the player list is NAI. It happens to be correct here, which is why I let it go, but if you'd said that about someone else I'd fight you on it. It is arguably evidence towards a read, but it's pretty weak sauce.
2) If someone Towntells on D1, they've Towntold. It doesn't get stale. It doesn't go away. If you make the decision that scum wouldn't do that, scum wouldn't do it. Period. That is, definitionally, the difference between a "tell" and a "read". A tell is a solid, reliable indicator. A read is a general feeling, which may change. All of this applies to scumtells, too. If someone slips and says something D1 that is irredeemably scummy, like not knowing that VTs are called "Adventurers" in this theme game, that doesn't get stale either. It doesn't matter that they acted Townish later.
End lesson. Continue to read me Town, as it is correct this game, just sharpen your game.
I don't like the bolded part. It's like he's asking for town cred.
It's not even taken into consideration that the towntell could have just been scum trying to towntell.
In post 1588, ssbm_Kyouko wrote:oh yeah I thought I saw that one but it wasn't in my quote list. Are you going to give a serious answer to what 762, the traitor crumb in question, was in response to?
In post 3021, ssbm_Kyouko wrote:okay so i suspected Cabd was multi shot because no 1-shot would check titus
Why?
I asked Cabd direct questions about why he checked Titus yesterday. 1-shot GS would check the Vig/SK suspect. Cabd probably claimed 1-shot in hopes that he would live long enough to verify Alisae had a gun as well.
In post 3274, ssbm_Kyouko wrote:Conclusion: Scum avoided Lapsa wagon because they thought he was traitor. Scum voted mozamis knowing he was town (duh). Players on mozamis but not on Lapsa are more suspicious. [Aj, Nero, Elbirn]
I would include Pine in there as well. It could be likely that he never saw the Traitor crumb since he was struggling to catch up most of day 1.
Scum have daychat. If it was a team decision to avoid lynching Lapsa it would have been made in the PT, which I'm sure is not nearly as hard to stay caught up on as this thread is.
You mean... Mozamis and an inactive Syrana? Rofl nice one. Can't use "scum voted for Lapis" because that's you. Gamma/Pine on both and Titus is chasing you off Pine. Little options for your conclusion, insufficient backing of evidence and really a weak delivery is all I noticed from that post.
In post 3274, ssbm_Kyouko wrote:Conclusion: Scum avoided Lapsa wagon because they thought he was traitor. Scum voted mozamis knowing he was town (duh). Players on mozamis but not on Lapsa are more suspicious. [Aj, Nero, Elbirn]
I would include Pine in there as well. It could be likely that he never saw the Traitor crumb since he was struggling to catch up most of day 1.
What Traitor crumb? Lapsa wasn't a traitor, ergo, there WAS no crumb.
Scumteam didn't have any way of knowing that Lapsa wasn't a traitor until Lapsa got lynched. Traitor knows identity of scumteam, scumteam does not know the identity of the traitor.
In post 3287, Aj The Epic wrote:Smells like discrediting? You literally stated "A lot of town weren't on Mozamis' lynch" of which constituted the one being lynched and an inactive.
Are you sure he's not refering to the people on other wagons?
In post 3286, ssbm_Kyouko wrote:Scum have daychat. If it was a team decision to avoid lynching Lapsa it would have been made in the PT, which I'm sure is not nearly as hard to stay caught up on as this thread is.
Um...Okay this is awkward...Um...
I dunno how to respond to this...This just seems very awkward...
Is this a scumclaim? I genuinely can't tell.
HELP! I'M SO CONFUSED!
In post 3287, Aj The Epic wrote:Smells like discrediting? You literally stated "A lot of town weren't on Mozamis' lynch" of which constituted the one being lynched and an inactive.
5/9 players voting Lapsa were town. 6/9 from my PoV.
2/8 players voting Mozamis were town. 3/8 from my pov.
The difference between 45% and 25% (neutral PoV) and the difference between 66% and 37.5% (town!Kyouko, town!Pine, town!Gamma) POV is pretty significant.
I think it's worth looking at, especially for town!Pine and town!Gamma
Moz had a chance to explain the thing that made me wary of him but instead went to bed. I didn't know my unbolded vote on him would count.
Of all tyrannies,a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end they do so with the approval of their own conscience.
I'm conflicted about Tywin, I was less conflicted about you.
I'm definitely in line with you on thinking that Tywin is town.
Honestly Nero right now I'm moreso null reading you then scumreading you. Unbolded lynch mostly was the reason for a scumread.
Gamma hasn't flipped town yet you talk about him as if he is town, why?
In post 3274, ssbm_Kyouko wrote:Players on mozamis but not on Lapsa are more suspicious. [Aj, Nero, Elbirn]
this also leaves out Sonia.
I mean I can only speak for myself here but I'm actually good at this game and don't need to be scum to be able to be competent.
vote:SSBM
Of all tyrannies,a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end they do so with the approval of their own conscience.
In post 3293, Alisae wrote:Unbolded lynch mostly was the reason for a scumread.
It wasn't my fault though. I clearly did not think it would count. Just an FYI. My current vote on SSBM is unbolded but it
IS
a serious vote. If Cephir is now counting unbolded votes I see no need to bold it.
Of all tyrannies,a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end they do so with the approval of their own conscience.
In post 3293, Alisae wrote:Unbolded lynch mostly was the reason for a scumread.
It wasn't my fault though. I clearly did not think it would count. Just an FYI. My current vote on SSBM is unbolded but it
IS
a serious vote. If Cephir is now counting unbolded votes I see no need to bold it.
THAT SHADETHROW THO
So are you back to null reading me?
Of all tyrannies,a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end they do so with the approval of their own conscience.
