Case for lynching Eidolon first
1) Intro
Eidolon starts off the game by claiming that she can "read me like a book." In many cases, it turned out to be true in our play at debate.org so I never contested her claim.
Her push on me starts right after McStab made a case against me. She claims that his case was what convinced her to push a lynch on me. It starts at post
251 where she claims that I am much too "calm" to be town. She is hoping that I get frustrated and make myself an easier lynch target.
Post
227, she calls me the "most likely lynch option" yet she won't vote me until she hears from the others. Why not vote if she thinks I am scum?
2) My case against her based on how McStab's initial accusation of me was wrong:
Eidolon, never explains what about McStab's case on me convinced her. McStab was a townie who accused another townie. I think mafia bandwagoned by not providing good reasoning for the bandwagon. The vast majority of the content of McStab's case was based on my push of Pasch's lynch so it applies to Eidolon as well. Now I understand McStab suspecting me but I DON'T understand Eidolon suspecting me because the Pasch lynch applied to her as well. By claiming McStab's case, she is by extension claiming that I am scummy for pushing Pasch's lynch, something that she did as well. I didn't find her suspicious for pushing Pasch's lynch because I too had the same suspicions. I then asked her that she tell me in a concrete way why you want me lynched. She doesn't give any response.
I have a very hard time understanding her motivation for this if town. Post
140. She doesn't accuse me but she tells grey that Om called an RGF/RC scumteam based on his gut and she wants him to keep that in mind. Hinting that she and Grey should push my mislynch. Post
141, she says you doesn't buy McStab's case on me. She then points out that I didn't find people on Pasch's wagon suspicious if he flips VT. She never mentioned this before McStab's case. Scum motivation - she wanted to make sure she had town-Stab's support before she stops buddying me and pushes my lynch instead.
Post
177, she says that she is not sold on me being scum.
I unvote McStab and respond to his case. She ignores my response yet you continue saying that my lynch should occur because of his case. Why would she only reference the case while not explaining why the responses weren't considered? Since she wanted me lynched based off of his case, I'd expect her at least consider the responses.
McStab's response was: You're scum gg no re, nothing else for tonight.
3) My case against Eidolon for pushing a lynch on me:
In post 327, rapidcanyon wrote:Okay, I typed up this long post in the morning. Things changed since then but I want to respond to why I was suspcious of Eidolon. She denied pushing my lynch saying "where did I ever do this so I am pulling these quotes up as proof. Most of them implicitly place suspicion on me while the last one calls me "the
In post 309, Eidolon wrote:WHEN DID I EVER push hard to lynch you? you are making that up. I said most of the time that i was either leaning town or undecided. I made one post about "this has sealed the deal" but that post was scummy. You are twisting it against me to make it seem like i am out to get you. if i was out to get you i never would have kept mentioning your townmeta. wtf?
Yes, you did say most of the time that you were leaning town or undecided. I am glad we agree. You also pushed for my lynch the hardest. Those two weren't mutually exclusive (although they should be). You should push lynches on people you think are scum, not on people who you think are "leaning town" or undecided.
As for why you kept mentioning my town-meta, it is because we are not at MYLO. you would be under pressure if you had said I acted with my scum-meta and I flipped town. Especially because you started Day 1 by saying you could "read me like a book," a fact I accept. Mentioning my town meta and allowing me to be lynched gives you town cred and makes it easier on you the next day.
I explained that I unvoted McStab because I didn't want to OMGUS and because I questioned McStab's guilt based on your behavior. I defended myself against McStab's case and then turned to you who were my bigggest scumread. You ignored my explanation and continued saying that I should be lynched.
Oh, and since you deny that you were trying to lynch me, let me pull up the quotes:
In post 251, Eidolon wrote:
You are being much too calm right now for town. I can read you well most of the time but im not the best at reads in general. I didn't think you would have opened with such a heavy mislynch case before as town. but there is other evidence to support that you did.
So, here in the post where you accuse me, you also try to discredit your own reads. You say you can read me like a book. But you don't accuse me based on such a reads. You say you are "not the best at reads in general." So, that's your exit strategy and it contradicts the fact that you can read me well.
In post 259, Eidolon wrote:
I think his unvote there after that question was telling but if you don't perceive it as that than so be it.
Here, you won't directly tell whiskers "I can read RC very well. He is scum." You ask whiskers to consider the unvote and say that it was "telling." Yet you continue saying that I am playing to my town meta.
In post 262, Eidolon wrote:Heavy/risky pushing doesn't necessarily mean stubborn. You are more stubborn as town, imo. You altered your behavior based on someone's behavioral analysis of you which makes me think scum.
That being said, i still don't effing know. Gut is saying town, head is saying scum.
Here too, you push the fact that I unvoted yet you still hold back and say that your "gut" is saying that I am town.
In post 266, Eidolon wrote:
Also, I have a strong town read on mcstab. His case on RC started convincing me even though I for the most part thought
rc was playing to his town meta.
There is no reason to assume that RC would not use the "not going after a chosen" thing to his advantage. he even SET THIS UP in one of his posts before pasch flipped.
This, plus rapidcanyons backpedalling on mcstab make me
think scum
.
I'm
not positive
though excpet for the fact that IF someone on the lynch was mafia it's either him or you O.o
In this post, you again say that I could be scum but follow it up with your uncertainty. I was waiting for you to directly accuse me yet every accusation comes with you being "uncertain" about me.
Finally the post where you said that I should be lynched:
In post 277, Eidolon wrote:@ Mod: I will be v/la over the weekend. I might be able to check in here and there as best i can.
I could say that RC's preying on my indecision on him but what good would that do? we're getting into major wifom territory here.
from my perspective, up until a certain point i was pretty convinced that rc was playing to his town meta. but evidence based off a strong townread's case leaves me thinking it is possible plus a few slip ups from rc.
I think that RC is the most likely option as of right now
, but we can't be certain until we hear more from other players. I don't want to continue arguing with RC as I want to get a better overall picture before I make up my mind on him. And i'm not holding whiskers out as an option either.
So, yes you were trying to put suspicion on me for many posts concluding with the post where you said I was the most likely option.
You never honestly look me in the face (figuratively) and say that you think I am scum. It is always a "townread" yet I am your best option for a lynch. If you have a "townread" on me, there is no reason for you to lynch me. Also, I felt you used me to get the mislynch on Pasch and make me look suspicious and then you tried to push a lynch on me.
4) My case based on her response
In post 350, rapidcanyon wrote:Okay, here is my response. At first I was about to type a response saying that I believe Eidolon and we would give each other a hug (figuratively of course). I like her quite a lot outside mafia games and she is well aware of that. Most of her response seems geared towards putting aside our argument in favor of a belief that we are both town. It was tempting, of course to stop arguing with her especially since I felt so drained after our last argument. But that was coming from an emotional standpoint as opposed to a rational one and requires me to forget my arguments and embrace her.
And then I take the time the time to look at the facts and still none of them add up.
1) Eidolon didn't explain why she lied about trying to lynch me. I pointed out where she said I was her best lynch option. I then showed the post where she denied that she was trying to lynch me in my post
327. Why deny it as opposed to admit that she wanted to lynch me but was mistaken at that time? She basically lied about whether or not she tried to lynch me.
*Expects whiskers to poke more fun at me for accusing people who accuse me* - I'll give a pre-emptive response. It is not so much that she tried to lynch me as much as it is about a) she maintained that she had a townread while pushing the lynch and b) she lied about it.
In post 345, Eidolon wrote:
RC, how many times have we argued page after page after page in a game only to find out that we were both town? Thing is, when things start getting heated, you start plucking my nerves, and i start seeing scum in everything you say. I can't help it. You play scummy as town. You refuse to believe that anything you do can be perceived as scummy and thus start thinking i am scum for attacking you.
Even more important than that is the fact that most times we were both town and I am under suspicion, you are usually the person to defend what I am doing since you know I act like that as town. Somewhat like what Whiskers is doing now except in a less harsh way. I've hardly ever seen you use my "scummy town" behaviour to your advantage when you were town.
In post 345, Eidolon wrote:
I honestly can't remember one single time where i tried to argue with you as scum.
Off the top of my head, I can't either. But DDO is an environment I am familiar with and the game mechanics are such that I can develop good reads and defend myself. I also know what to expect and hence lead the day phase. This makes me a poor mislynch target for the mafia and it isn't in the mafia's best interest to go after me.
On mafiascum, not a single person is listening to me. Even whiskers who thinks I am town makes fun of my reads and refuses to take them seriously. I didn't understand a lot of the concepts inherent to mafiascum and to a game like this one. This makes me a much easier target to pick on and get mislynched. The fact that it is whiskers as opposed to you who pointed this out speaks volumes of your affiliation and motivations.
In post 345, Eidolon wrote:
You are pointing out things that aren't a scum tell. Like how i changed my mind from a grey/rgf scumteam to a whiskers/rgf scumteam. What is so scummy about changing my mind when i see something that someone did and think it is scummy?
It was more of your panic at being accused along with your scumbuddy. You started trying to link other people with Grey.
In post 345, Eidolon wrote:
But it's pointless if you keep going on about it because picking apart my posts and adding scum motive behind them doesn't mean that i'm scum. If you think i'm on a scumteam with grey, okay. Lynch grey. try getting me lynched tomorrow.
I was thinking about lynching grey but I am starting to question myself. Let's say you and grey are scum.
- Day 2 - Lynch Grey
- Night 2 - You would killed whiskers
- Day 3 - 5 players will be left (you, me, McStab, Crypto, RGF) - we would likely lynch an inactive since McStab won't lynch you.
- Night 3 - You kill the other inactive
- Day 4 - You, me, McStab. McStab buys that you are town.
I don't know. The two inactives have made the town very weak. But I'll probably settle for lynching Grey since I think he is scum and scum lynches are never bad for town. For me, it is between you and Grey on who I'd place my vote for a lynch.
I still want to hear your response - a real one with facts that doesn't just say "forget that pushed your lynch and later lied about it, we are both town" because I have hard time believing you are.
[/quote]
