Newbie 1143 - Game Over

Thor665 · Post Post #421 (isolation #0) » Sat Sep 03, 2011 8:35 am

Hullo,

I am replacing Dangerous Mitt.

I may not be a better player than him, but I am sexier than him - this is a proven fact and needs no further doubting.
I am going to be reading up through Day 1 and whatever chunk of Day 2 has been worked though. I will then provide a big honkin' wall of reads*
This will hopefully remind you of interesting stuff that has happened in the past, as well as provide you a gauge on my opinions and attitudes so you can start assessing this slot even better by having more reads from the same period.
If there are lingering questions for my predecessor feel free to ask me them - but my stock answer will probably be "I don't know what he was thinking - but here's what I think" I *am* working on my psychic powers though, so feel free to try anyway

I usually manage to read around 7 pages at a stretch - so I should be caught up no later than Monday, will probably be caught up by Sunday, and, if I get fiesty tonight, might do it all - it sorta depends how boring it is (so if it takes a long time, I suspect you onl have yourselves to blame)
Also - at that point - I'll provide my vote.
If this slot is already voting than I'll currently endorse that vote because, hey, I like do different things and watch the shocked reactions.
Also - hullo to Haylen and Lunita, I owe Haylen a lynch and Lunita usually looks town to me - so let's just call them scum and town respectively for yucks. Solid reads - I'll go to lylo with those.

*

reads

- as used by Thor generally means a lot of jokes, vaguely veiled insults, repetitive complaining, and sarcastic wit, as well as a few jokes that were probably stale and dated by around 1950. Truth be told he always votes the person he thinks has a lesser beard than his...which is everyone.

Thor665 · Post Post #423 (isolation #1) » Sat Sep 03, 2011 6:04 pm

Okay…here we go, let’s see if this thread enraptures me (my prediction – claims of imminent death if I read any more by around page 6). Behind the spoiler is a huge wall - the core reads are summarized below. Take your pick.

Spoiler: Honkin' Wall of Stuff

Bleh – Page 7 is done and so am I. I’m really conflicted on the whole Wolf/Haylen interaction and suspect them both pretty strongly.
I’ve then got a *lot* of people in the scum pool and the sagging and mushy middle and I’m not really fond of any of them. Probably Lizk would be my next top suspect.
I’m placing effortless and Ozzie into very strong town reads, and Travis is sort of chumping along as he really hasn’t done anything much brilliant since like Page 2, but that still puts him as more townish than the rest so…there you are.

Should be attacking this again tomorrow – reasonable chance I’ll get through it all. Monday at the very latest.
Then it will be full bore beard all up in here.

Thor665 · Post Post #424 (isolation #2) » Sat Sep 03, 2011 6:06 pm

In post 422, Haylen wrote:
Gen_Wolf wrote:My thoughts at the moment are I am suspicious of Haylen trying to put pressure on me when I'm pretty sure makority of the game have said they think I'm town, seems scummy like haylen is pushing for another mislynch!

Just because the rest of the game thinks your town, doesn't mean you are and it doesn't mean I'm scummy for having bad vibes from you.

Gen_Wolf has become thought of as likely town? Oh man, that will be awesome to see how.
$5 says I end up mocking the reasoning.

@Haylen - have you taught lizk how to scumhunt yet? If she's doing the same stuff ten pages into the future I will be judging you harshly for it

Thor665 · Post Post #432 (isolation #3) » Sun Sep 04, 2011 3:32 pm

Basically I have 11 pages left to do – I’d rather like to manage it tonight so I can get to the fun stuff – so let’s see how we fly;

Spoiler: Final Wall o' Win From Thor

And I’m CAUGHT UP! I’m going to mock and respond to a bit of Page 18 in actual regular posts, but thus endeth my wall.

Effortless, Ozzie, and lizk are town.
Gen Wolf is scum and we’re lynching him today and I have a strong eye on Haylen as well. Lunita needs some time in a pressure boiler to sort out what’s happening with that slot, but thus far I’m underwhelmed. Daybid is really the last mushy middle, and how mushy and middle he is. He’ll be spending time in a pressure cooker as well.

Vote: Gen_Wolf

Is Haylen on this wagon yet? C'mon, you don't get to bus your buddy everyday y'know.

Thor665 · Post Post #433 (isolation #4) » Sun Sep 04, 2011 3:39 pm

In post 426, Gen_Wolf wrote:As for Thor(Welcome to the game ) I really enjoyed reading your post, made it a little more entertaining with sarcasm and wit thrown in there... However, as what you said about me was 100% completely wrong, how am i meant to trust your reads on anyone else... you could be pushing for a second mislynch and giving your scum partner the "O i think he isn't scum" and you hide this all in a bit of wit and sarcasm and throw them all into the pool.

You voted Thomith and were 100% wrong, so how can I trust you being honest when you say you're not scum?

Are we doing gradeschool debate logic here? Let me know and I'll bring enough candy for everyone.
Till then - we're lynching you because you're obvious scum clinging too strongly to town reads from others to bash those who challenge you, and are also so blatantly opportunistic as to make my left pinkie tow hurt - and it has a 100% accuracy 33% of the time in spotting scum. True story!

In post 428, Haylen wrote:@ Thor - How can you not see how my questions are crucial to an IC and as a player of a game?
really?
. If you want to tell me how to do my job then try reading between the lines first.

As a player? I don't think they're crucial in any way, shape, or form, unless you think scum would later lie about that info to try and cover something up - and I've never seen that happen.
As an IC I can begrudgingly accept them as having some mild usefulness...but not really

. Even with other mafia experience a newbie to MS is still a newbie.

I don't want to tell you how to do your job and in a general sense I'm fine with your play as an IC (except actually with that lizk thing when she said she didn't know how to scumhunt and you didn't even try to offer her thoughts - which though I will happily admit isn't required from an IC is a moment I really think an IC should be stepping in and doing something). I do have issues with your current Mafia play, which is something else and is totally within my purview to judge.

Why is lizk town - in your own words?
Also, are you voting Wolf yet? You should. You've got town support now via me.

Thor665 · Post Post #434 (isolation #5) » Sun Sep 04, 2011 3:48 pm

@Ozzie - you're pretty much obvious town, but your effortless vote is one of the suckiest things since the vacumn was invented. What are your reads on Haylen and Gen_Wolf?

@Lunita - sheeping onto Lizk via a dead man is one of the most terrible things since the last time I shaved off my beard. I'm going to add onto that the accusation that your case on effortless is based on silliness, misrepresentations, and derp (double scoop thereof) and effotless was just too nice to call you out on it. Why are you not the obvious scumbuddy to Wolf or Haylen? To answer this I'd actually like to see you explain your town read on Wolf please. Specifically, go to the end of Day 1 and tell me how his actions equated to 'good scumhunting' that would be awesome!

@lizk - In your catchup I'd like to get your opinions on my Haylen and Wolf suspicions. I'll also add that 1. You shouldn't feel bad about being "wrong" about Thomith and, 2. you should be very careful about becoming so sure about a suspicion on Day 1. Day 1 is generally filled with herpa-derp-doo-dah cases and gut. Never worth going to the wall with those - keep that in mind moving forward in other games.

@Daybid - Your read on Haylen with any sort of reasons why (all I need is about three sentences, tops), go!

Thor665 · Post Post #436 (isolation #6) » Sun Sep 04, 2011 4:03 pm

Well, Haylen might have been scum fishing for soft support, so in some minor way I agree he should have reacted negatively. But, yes, his defense is very questionable and my belief is Gen is far more independently scummy than Haylen (who is mostly scummy for fail at game and weak accusations and sidelining).

Out of curiosity (whatever else I think of her slot) I agree *strongly* with Lunita that there is one scum in Thor, Lizk, Lunita, Gen Wolf, and Effortless. Do you understand the logic we're using to draw that particular list of scum? Also, with that as an idea do you have any particular scum reads from that group?

Thor665 · Post Post #438 (isolation #7) » Mon Sep 05, 2011 3:08 am

In post 437, Gen_Wolf wrote:Thor, mate you can lynch me today but when i turn up town, and I will turn up town it might be a short day 3 for you!

Your fear tactics don't work on me because I don't know the meaning of the word fear. I don't know the meaning of a lot of other words too.

Why do you think effortless is scum?

Thor665 · Post Post #440 (isolation #8) » Mon Sep 05, 2011 4:43 am

Actually they were addressed to the small magic fairy that lives in my beard and helps me scumhunt.
But - yeah - it'd be cool to get your response as well, thanks for the offer.

Thor665 · Post Post #445 (isolation #9) » Mon Sep 05, 2011 1:53 pm

@Lunita - lizk is such obvious town it hurts. What newbie town comes out to another town with "yeah, if you're not scum feel free to lynch me next!" Seriously now, that's a giant flaming wall of town tell right there.
Could you expand on your current read of Wolf? I feel like you were easing off the townread somewhat already. Maybe you could quote me some of the good scumhunting he did? Because he has, by far, the most opportunistic vote record of anyone in this game - and that's saying something with how the votes were flying Day 1.

--------------effortless case dismantled below...it wasn't hard---------------

Let's hit your effortless case point by point (you can go back and check what I'm answering to)

1. How did he not explain what he thought? You don't show that at all. He did explain why he thought she was scummy so...?

2. Total misrep in a direct sense - in the post you quoted he explicitly explains that he sees them as different. Which means, if you want to make it a scumtell you need to explain how they aren't...you don't do this, you just claim he agrees they're the same.

3. If he was trying to do this he would admit it because...also, unless you think his posts *lack* content (I don't) I fail to see how this has any bearing as a tell whatsoever. At best it was just a joke and at worst it...was an awkwardly timed joke that you're bending to take as scummy.

4. This actually makes perfect sense - he's saying the best lynches are scum, but even if TravisB is town he's the "third best" lynch because he's fail town. It makes 100% sense, and if you really think *that* is scummy your brain should melt with every fourth post I make.

Hey, look 50% of your case is based off taking something serious that is probably a joke.
The other 50% suggests you're either not getting good reading comprehension or intentionally twisting his words.

So, your entire case is based off of interpreting things in the opposite way I think they should be interpreted, and thus the case is probably fail.

Thor665 · Post Post #446 (isolation #10) » Mon Sep 05, 2011 1:55 pm

Also, wow, one entire Day and it's Lunita and me.

Hey, Lunita, wanna sheep me a bit and be promoted to obv. town just for participating?

Thor665 · Post Post #448 (isolation #11) » Mon Sep 05, 2011 2:13 pm

With liz - it's not a question that she's effortless, I AGREE with that. The question is - how are you using the effortless as a scum tell as opposed to a newb tell. Also, you'd need to crush my read on her as town which I've explained twice now.

As far as Grey - I'm guessing his scumhunting can't be too impressive considering you're willing to check out his lynch, but, sure, feel free to try and awe me.

Thor665 · Post Post #452 (isolation #12) » Mon Sep 05, 2011 4:39 pm

As non-newbie I'd probably be all over her. But the play you're describing is not one I would expect from a player who is unsure about how to even scumhunt. I think it's far more likely she was just mistaking omgus energy for being 'sure' about something. Also, what newbie scum would go gung-ho with town and volunteer to be lynched if they flip town? Do you think as newbie scum she'd have *any* confidence that wouldn't happen? I don't. If it was just her calling him obv. scum over and over it would be different, but the specific stance is something else and comes from a town mindset I believe.

Her first post strikes me as a null post alignment wise. Are you angling for the 'congratulate the doc' tell here? I've found that one to be questionable at best, especially in newbies.

Thor665 · Post Post #455 (isolation #13) » Mon Sep 05, 2011 5:11 pm

@lizk - Eh, PR 'rolefishing' is some sort of taboo around here, though not as big as you might be thinking it is. The point is you didn't actually rolefish, and at that point you're just sort of generically fishing for the setup, and I don't see that really hurting town except in some ways that I don't want to specifically narrow down right now, but if you remind me endgame I'll provide. I personally think Lunita was working off one of Tarl's tells - which is that scum are more likely to congratulate doc/JKer/RBer/et al after a no kill night than a town player is. It's not a totally unreasonable tell, but even Tarl noted it as being a tell to be paired with others, and not a super valid one in and of itself. (plus, the meta has probably shifted on that one the instant he posted the list - derp)

@effortless - to sort out the thoughts. Outline why Glove was scum. Outline why Wolf was town. Weigh how valid each tell really is, and then you'll be closer to getting an actual feel for how valid the cases as a whole are. Don't make me have to do to you what I just did to Lunita - she had Wolf as town, sure, but in reality it was off a vague gut feel at best. As soon as I asked 'why' she realized she didn't have a true answer, and admitted points I had made were legitimate and not contrived. Part of scumhunting is getting your reads, and part is bouncing them out and around and making sure they hold up - and then abandoning the ones that don't pass muster...unless you're me and want to stubbornly cling to a read like a whiny man-child...but I'm vaguely correct in a manner with higher percentages than random, which, to my mind, is the best one can hope for, so it makes me guarded about my reads more than some (and less than others...).

Thor665 · Post Post #456 (isolation #14) » Mon Sep 05, 2011 5:15 pm

Also - be mindful about the 'well spoken = town' paradox. I get that a lot when replacing in - I don't mind it (because I'm always town, natch

) but I've noticed that I usually look more town than people I was replacing because I'm an aggressive poster, who makes his thoughts very clear, and is able to convey them in a way that tends to make people believe I know what the fug I'm talking about (fooled you, I just roll dice and pull names from hats!). Inherently that is usually better than whoever I'm replacing because they were replaced due to lack of time to play, possibly discovering they didn't like/understand the game and, in some instances, language barriers.

If I'm making the slot town off just that then either your case was inherently silly, and I should get a town read. Or, you're forgetting the core of the case, in which case I should still be held accountable.

Thor665 · Post Post #459 (isolation #15) » Tue Sep 06, 2011 6:24 am

In post 458, Gen_Wolf wrote:@Thor, your new to the game yet your posting the most and you could say "almost taken charge of the scumhunt" don't you think this is a little bold being a new player? Also, starting bandwagon on someone who will turn up town (AKA me) will only be detrimental to you but also the town! So think before you act!

Let's take this in steps;

1. Yes, I have taken charge (someone should be leading the town) I think it's a great idea because I'm town and I'd rather have town leading the vote then scum. If people don't like it then they should also start leading and being more aggressive and active, this will then make it harder for scum to slime along and lurk and vote like weak little sheep. Also - I'm a player now, whether or not I'm new has very little meaning to how accurate my reads are (except, frankly, sometimes I think new players tend to be more accurate)

2. Starting a bandwagon on someone who will flip town...well...gosh, thanks for the AtE and fear tactics, I suppose? I'm pretty sure everyone in this game will claim 'town' if I ask them, so pretty much we're going to lynch someone who says they're town. I personally believe you're lying when you say you're town, so I think you're a smart bet.

I'd like to note neither of your 'questions' were really questions. Both were actually defensive remarks, made to get me to back off of you - but out of fear or uncertainty rather than actually addressing the case on you. In oter words - they were scummy defense not town questions.

Also, a question back at you;

You claim your mind changed between the two posts I noted. In one post you were pressing on effortless (for reasons that weren't legit) and claimed you were going to rephrase the assault.
In the next you were voting Thomith.
Today you're back at effortless via sheeping Ozzie.

Could you explain your effortless suspicion and also clarify how Thomith became a better vote yesterday when you hammered him?
I think it looks scummy as all get out, but you're saying it's all quite reasonable - so probably you just need to explain it to me.

Thor665 · Post Post #462 (isolation #16) » Tue Sep 06, 2011 7:33 am

In post 460, Gen_Wolf wrote:Thor, Sheeping Ozzie really? haha thats a good laugh actually i enjoyed that!

Okay - so maybe then you'd be willing to explain why you're voting him and why your 'rephrase' of the case on him yesterday became a vote for Thomith then?
For someone chiding me for not answering things you actually totally avoided addressing the question I asked you in my last post.

In post 460, Gen_Wolf wrote: WHEN I DO TURN UP TOWN, DO YOU NOT THINK THAT WILL BE DETRIMENTAL TO YOU, AND TO TOWN?? There was no IF in there it was a WHEN, its not a scare tactic it was the truth!

Okay, so let's treat if like the truth!
Exclamation win!

Basically, if you flip town I will be sad that a town player played in such a scummy way - but I will be happy that via PoE you will have moved us closer to finding the actual scum.

Thor665 · Post Post #464 (isolation #17) » Tue Sep 06, 2011 8:38 am

@Gen_Wolf - last page you made your case by sheeping Lunita's case. Maybe you should repeat it again just for yucks.

Why not such a gung-ho method? Your real world example is a straw man rebuttal. I'm not supporting lynching everyone, I am supporting lynching my scum reads and you're acting like that somehow makes me a bad player...whut?

I certainly hope I'm a credible player, but will admit I often wish I was better. Still - I seem to have accurate reads more often than random chance dictates - and that's not a bad place to be.

Retarded players = scum? How does that work?

Thor665 · Post Post #465 (isolation #18) » Tue Sep 06, 2011 8:40 am

In post 426, Gen_Wolf wrote:This is such a convincing case put forward by Lunita I dont see how you can look past it really, my vote stays with effortless!

Here is the case from last page on Effortless.
I'm not really sold on it - even apparently Lunita isn't sold on it.
When did you make *your* case on effortless - could you link me to it and let me know if that is still your entire case?

Also, please explain why you hoped on Thomith after saying you were going to rephrase your Effortless case yesterday - I still don't understand how that happened. COuld you walk me through it (I'm a terrible player, so please use small words).

Thor665 · Post Post #471 (isolation #19) » Tue Sep 06, 2011 10:12 am

In post 468, Gen_Wolf wrote:Hmmm, I thought I was sheeping Ozzie...

Me wrote:
I absolutley 100% agree with ozzia above!
/quote]

So, basically what I hear is that - yes - you sheeped off of Ozzie and Lunita but only because your phone posting didn't allow you to present your own case?
Yes, I'll look forward to when you get around to doing that.

In post 468, Gen_Wolf wrote:
Also, ran out of cap on my computer so will be using my phone until I get my internet back but I will post my thoughts but will be a little tricky to quote and vote!

I will just say...you're apparently managing to quote and vote when it comes to defending yourself.

In post 468, Gen_Wolf wrote:I don't understand what your asking here:

Thor wrote:Also, please explain why you hoped on Thomith after saying you were going to rephrase your Effortless case yesterday - I still don't understand how that happened. COuld you walk me through it (I'm a terrible player, so please use small words).
Could you use smaller words please? but seriously, what do you want?

I'm happy to use small words.

Timeline;

Here you're "not sure" about lizk, and strongly suspect effortless.
Here lizk calls you out for the silliness in your effortless push, you admit you are wrong and want to reread so you can rephrase your case.
Here in your next post, you don't mention effortless at all - you say you suspect lizk and Thomith...and then you L-1 Thomith. You do not discus effortless again that day, but at the start of day you suspect him more than anyone.

Well...why do you suspect him more then anyone?
What happened to your suspicion on lizk?
What happened to your suspicion on effortless when you decided to hop on Thomith for "pressure" (which is called distancing from a town lynch, in my book)

Thor665 · Post Post #472 (isolation #20) » Tue Sep 06, 2011 10:12 am

In post 470, Gen_Wolf wrote: Sorry Thor and All!

I took no offense at all - no worries.

In post 470, Gen_Wolf wrote:@Thor/Lunita: I noticed just before you swapped in (I think its the post before Thor was swapped in) Haylen started accusing me of suspicions from there side, did you see that and did that bias your opinion or is that fully from reads before you got to that point?

I was aware that Haylen was pressuring on you certainly by the time I read and posted my reads on pages 8-18. I don't recall if I was aware prior to that, but it wouldn't surprise me, I seem to recall reading the page I replaced into. I don't think it colored my case particularly - I outlined my issues with you and Haylen really didn't outline hers, so it would have been hard for me to copy a case. If there was some subtle mental undertone that affected me it is too subtle for me to be aware of - but I will say (and Haylen would probably agree) the liklihood of me getting excited to sheep a case of hers is exceedingly low.

Thor665 · Post Post #475 (isolation #21) » Wed Sep 07, 2011 3:00 am

@Mod - I recognize this is starting to get silly, but Haylen has been inactive for around 72 hours now and needs a prod too. Also, Daybid is pressing up on 5 days without a post and might need to be replaced along with Ozzie apparently.

Thor665 · Post Post #481 (isolation #22) » Wed Sep 07, 2011 9:14 am

In post 480, Haylen wrote:Thor, why did you join this game specifically?

Specifically?
I was in the Newbie queue signing up and saw Flame's request, I checked the player list and saw you and Lunita, and so I asked to fill in if the slot was open.
This is going somewhere?

Also - you missed my question to you - why is lizk town?

Thor665 · Post Post #496 (isolation #23) » Fri Sep 09, 2011 4:57 am

My top suspect is conditional based on Wolf's flip and the night kill. I think my reads in general are well enough known that there is no real value in getting too specific about it prior to going into night.

I think Lunita had some good advice for Wolf. I certainly wouldn't mind hearing his Haylen/Effortless thoughts.

Also;

V/LA Saturday - Sunday this weekend. Expect nothing from me.

Thor665 · Post Post #500 (isolation #24) » Fri Sep 09, 2011 6:07 am

In post 497, effortless wrote:Thor firstly because Hazard was as scum as they come. His LAL comment on Thomith was really bad. I think he honestly believed he could get Thomith lynched with it. But I'm not sure that as town he would have thought it was something worth going after. Then his whole reaction to getting called out was weird.
And as far as I can see Thor didn't post anything on this.

1. When I replaced in I specifically asked if there was anything outstanding about my slot people wanted to ask me about.
2. No one asked me anything.
3. You have issues with me not addressing something you never asked me to address.
4.

5. I know he was town so I'm not wasting time "scumhunting" the slot.

To address it...I'm functionally no more able to address it than you are. I would tend to just chalk it up to newbness - a lot of newbies get really excited about 'wikitells' and the whole LaL thing is not an uncommon standpoint for a newbie to take. "Hey, this guy is lying, he must be scum because town aren't supposed to lie" it's certainly flawed but the core mentality behind it is not intrinsically flawed.

The rest of your point is based on an ephemeral belief that he would do that as scum, but not as town. The best way to address this is for me to ask you WHY you think he would do it as scum and not town? Do you have experience with his scum/town play to show this? If so, present it and you have a case. If not, then this case is "gut" at the moment, and though I'm fine with "gut" as a case you should be fine with my inability to address "gut" accusations.

I'll address his "weird" response if you outline the weirdness and what you'd like me to address about it.

In post 497, effortless wrote:In general I don't really trust Thor's posting. I think he's misreading or misrepresenting some of the stuff that happened on day 1. For example he says:

Thor wrote:
Liz does a nice awesome bit of OMGUS, and continues her habit of not actually discussing things. Newb tells are flinging from her pores and splattering all over me. I’m going to edge her into newb scum territory and leave her in the pool – I want to see where she goes when Thomith is eventually mislynched.

Meh…methinks I can guess how Thomith gets eventually mislynched.

But we never find out the reason.

1. I am not misrepresenting *anything* in that comment. Pure fact.
2. Nor are you showing me misreading anything.
3. This is not an example.
4. You do show me not explaining something that no one ever asked me to explain and that there was no purpose for me to explain.

The reason I believe Thomith got lynched was for the crime of being standoffish, which was apparent in him by that stage of the game. Players who tend to be a touch belligerent in explaining their reads are often lynched because "only scum wouldn't explain - whateverthefugwewantexplained" It was very clear he was getting a lot of negative sub-emotions from other players, and that's the sort of energy that leads to a lynch, because it helps generate easy support for a wagon.

In post 497, effortless wrote:I also agree about the day 2 scumtell. Hazard certainly didn't mean: "Oh, Smurf we didn't kill anyone" but he could have meant "Oh, Smurf, we lynched a townie. Look at me everyone: I'm upset at lynching a townie so I'm must be townie too". This of course would make him scum

I actually agree with this scumtell in general - though I think it needs support and isn't a functional case in and of itself. Newbie town often bemoans/congratulates at the start of the day and you need some other vibes to pair with the tell to have it be of much accuracy.

In post 497, effortless wrote:Sorry for the piecemeal posting but I consider this a slight town tell. Realistically, it's much easier to lynch me than Thor. This could be an OMGUS fueled by indignation, which would make Gen town.

I disagree - if only because at this stage of the game I've tossed in defense of you, so to get you lynched he'd have to downplay/deal with me anyway. Besides, it's very clear there's not enough traction to get an effortless lynch at this stage of the game.

Thor665 · Post Post #502 (isolation #25) » Fri Sep 09, 2011 9:54 am

In post 501, effortless wrote:That's not the point. It was an important event in itself. I would have thought you'd want to comment on it even without being asked.

There were multiple events in this game that other people took as 'big things' that I didn't address. I addressed what I thought was important.

In post 501, effortless wrote:Now you're just confusing me. You say you're no more capable of addressing it than me and then you come up with a reason that I couldn't have thought of.

In post 501, effortless wrote:It's obvious why he would do it as scum. As town he might find the fact of lying suspicious but his reaction would often be something less certain.

So, basically you're saying any level of certainty is a scumtell then? I disagree pretty strongly.
He had the "fact" of lying in a player - at that stage it's just a question of whether or not he considers that a viable standalone scumtell. Without evidence to the contrary there is no more value in me saying 'yes, he finds it solid' as in you saying 'there's no way town would find that solid' and therein lies the impasse of the discussion for us being outsiders looking in. All I can say for certain is, he was town, so he probably believed it more than you think he did.

In post 501, effortless wrote:Maybe it's not the best example. It is an example of ignoring something that is significant.

I didn't ignore it (and think it's pretty subjective to call it "important" that I had my own theory about how the mislynch happened).
I didn't explain it to other people until asked - there's a difference.

In post 501, effortless wrote:A more direct example is when you say about liz "Actually…some of her later jousts with Thomith where she’s basically saying any mistake=scumtell"

When actually what she says, quite sensibly, that some mistakes are significant while others aren't. Like her missing a post.
Maybe you meant that tongue in cheek, sometimes it's hard to tell.

So you're taking issue with me calling her town?
I think her post 206 is functional to my interpretation of the events and is not misrepresenting.

In post 501, effortless wrote:But there is a purpose. It could help distinguish between scum and misguided townies on the wagon.
Ignoring the issue however allows you to use mere the fact someone voted on Thomith as an argument later in the game.
Or if I do decide you're town it allows me to check your arguments for myself.

1. Yes, so the players who want that information can ask for it.
2. I noted my belief about the wagon, and *clearly and explicitly* noted the votes on the wagon I found questionable and why.

In post 501, effortless wrote:First I don't see why that would be true, second even if it was I'm not sure Gen would see it that way anyway.[/spoiler]

1. You don't get to lynch someone easily if someone with a strong town presence is defending them. You certainly don't get to sit there for uncertainly stated and sheeping reasons, and perhaps want to hop off instead of addressing the multiple requests to state your actual case on the player in question.
2. It's possible, but I think considering the heat he gained for his position there he made a strategically defensive move to distance from the wagon. Whether he did it as a reasoned choice or a emotional gut feeling is open for debate - but the core action is not inherently a town tell in my opinion.

Thor665 · Post Post #522 (isolation #26) » Mon Sep 12, 2011 2:39 am

In post 511, effortless wrote:Conveniently forgetting about the post where Gen explains his reasoning. A reasoning that I happen to agree with. Come on Thor, how do you miss something like this? It's right above the vote post!
Seriously, Thor has some explaining to do and until he does we should not lynch Gen_Wolf.

He explains his reasoning on Thomith - I never said he didn't.
What he doesn't explain is what happened to his effortless/lizk situation and that's what I'm calling out. Let me spell out the flow so you can see the issue I'm pointing at.

Wolf: The scummiest situation is Player A and Player B
Player B: Player A isn't doing what you say they're doing - I'm doing it.
Wolf: Oh, snap, right you are obvious scumspect Player B - let me re-read and I'll clarify what I meant.
-Meanwhile - Player X is taken up as the new bandwagon of choice, one of the primary leaders being Player B and Player A expresses general support of lynching Player X.
Wolf: Player X is very, very scummy. I suspect him and Player B. I will not clarify what happened to my suspect of Player A, I will not discuss why my new top suspect is neither of my old top suspects, I will not discuss why I am supporting a wagon my two top suspects are on about, but I will suddenly gear shift to the leading wagon of the day...also, tomorrow I will immediately vote for (via sheeping) ...Player A, the person I'm not even discussing right now...because...y'know...I STILL super suspect them, even though I'm not saying why I just dropped my case on them like a bad habit.

Seriously effortless - this is *really* clear and *really* obvious. Please point out any other confusions you have with my case, I will crush them like fragile eggs.

@Haylen - third time is the charm? Why is lizk town?

@Universe - why is the Wolf wagon disintegrating over here? This makes no sense.

Thor665 · Post Post #526 (isolation #27) » Mon Sep 12, 2011 3:55 am

In post 525, effortless wrote:So did you see the explanation or did you not? If you did why did you say:

Fri Aug 19, 2011 7:16 am –
his next post
, no rephrase…just a vote for…effortless…no, wait, that would make sense, instead he votes Thomith! Obv. Scum is obvious.

I said that because it was true - could you please point out to me where I said at any point in there anything about him not explaining his vote on Thomith?
Wait...I *didn't* say anything about that...?
In fact I'm pointing out how my issue is the sudden reverse from effortless to Thomith?

It's almost like this makes perfect sense, amirite?

In post 525, effortless wrote:
I will not discuss why I am supporting a wagon my two top suspects are on about, but I will suddenly gear shift to the leading wagon of the day

There's so many things wrong with this I'm not even sure where to start. You just admitted he explained his reasoning on voting Thomith and now you're saying he would not discuss why he's supporting the wagon. I find it confusing that you keep on contradicting yourself.

Let's trim this down to the relevant points.

Thor: He's not explaining his shift from suspecting Players A and B to suddenly be on X.
effortless: You're saying he didn't support the vote on Thomith.
Thor: No - he did that. my issue is the mental twist to supporting a wagon (clearly because he was just supporting any large wagon)
effortless: No, you're contradicting yourself - he explained why he voted Thomith
Thor:

I agree he explained the vote on Thomith as far as that goes.
But his issues with you and liz totally or partially evaporated in that post (question: do you see/agree with that?)
THEN - at the start of the next day he was suddenly back voting you, a player you're saying he never had a strong issue with (do you see/agree with that?)
THEN - he only does it off of sheeping others (again, do you see that?)
THEN - he never got around to clearly defining his case on you (see that?)
And also, note that when he was about lynching you yesterday you were getting a lot of heat, and Thomith wasn't, and he didn't mention Thomith. Then when he comes back Thomith has heat and you don't, and suddenly his vote magically switches. Then when he comes back the next day you have heat, and guess where his suspicions are again (DO YOU SEE THIS!?!)

The rest of your post is basically explaining how he never had a strong suspicion of you which I say, GREAT because that makes my issues with him stronger, not weaker in any way, shape, or form. Also, whether or not he had strong issues with you, he was clearly working up to voting you yesterday up until the wagons shifted, and then he followed where they went. He doesn't have real reads because he's scum.

Thor665 · Post Post #533 (isolation #28) » Mon Sep 12, 2011 6:14 am

In post 531, effortless wrote:I wasn't just saying he's lying, I gave an example. He lied about Gen saying he found both liz and Thomith suspicious. Gen said he
used to think
that
one of them
was scum and after reading through their conversation decided it was probably Thomith.

If he used to think one of the two of them was scum - then he found them suspicious. Now you're just splitting hairs awkwardly. Stop it.
Also, when he voted Thomith he specifically noted liz as still his top suspect. I think you're starting to confuse yourself here, by saying Thomith but meaning effortless - though my comments still hold firm in that question.

[quote="In post 531

Thor wrote:But his issues with you and liz totally or partially evaporated in that post (question: do you see/agree with that?)

Liz and Thomith were at each others' throats, it's not surprising that as he found Thomith more suspicious liz became less so.
I wouldn't necessarily expect him to explain his reasoning in detail. But I think he said enough that you can figure out what he was thinking if you try.[/quote]
1. You're not noting how he dropped you totally and then returned to you totally.
2. If he thought liz was scum (as previously stated) then it is an unusual mental shift to agree that her top suspect is scum - but still comment on her being scummy. That's called getting on a mislynch while still elaving yourself open to mislynch the next one. I'll agree he is doing exactly what you're saying - but it's hardly looking town motivated.

[quote="In post 531

THEN - at the start of the next day he was suddenly back voting you, a player you're saying he never had a strong issue with (do you see/agree with that?)

Yes, he did vote me on day 2. I fail to see the point of this question.[/quote]
This is so close to the core of the issue it at least explains your confusion, but I'm starting to get lost as to how to explain this clearer. Let's try again; PLEASE tell me where I lose you;

His top suspects are you and lizk.
He re-reads and suddenly top suspects are lizk and Thomith (aka easy wagon du jour) NO MENTION is made of you or his issues with you.
Thomith i slynched.
He opens Day 2 sheeping other people's cases trying to get you lynched.
If he suspected you so much where did it go Day 1?
If he didn't suspect you much on Day 1...where did this come from Day 2?

[quote="In post 531I guess it's the same question twice. My impression was that he wasn't very sure about his vote at first but found your (Lunita's) vote convincing. So yeah, I guess that's sheeping. I fail to see it as a strong scumtell.[/quote]
See above.
Also - he actually sheeped both Ozzie *and* Lunita - we sussed that out a few pages ago when he tried to claim I was misrepresenting him.
What do you think was his mental journey from Day 1 to Day 2? If you think it makes sense and I'm off my gourd, where was he coming from?

[quote="In post 531As I said before this is partially untrue. Thor tries to tell a story of Gen going for whoever is getting the most heat. Except the facts don't support it.[/quote]

Well, I go back to read and put this together, and I'll agree in the very specific there wasn't a huge thing on you (though, I do think the pressure you were getting over the "inflating" comment and his eagerness to hop onto that is fairly telling). So, I'll withdraw the hunt for easy lynch as regards you specifically - but let's look at the core claim of 'hunt for an easy lnch'

Here is the Hazard wagon at peak L-1:
Ozzie72, Thomith, Haylen,

Gen Wolf

Here is the Tomtih wagon at peak L-1:
Hazard With a Glove, lizk000, TravisB,

Gen_wolf

he has cast *both* L-1 votes in this game thus far.

When he was called on the L-1 vote on Hazard he went back to his Travis vote - a vote he had made for random bandwagon reasons - he still didn't explain why it was a good lynch for his own reasons yet, so that vote is meaningless. He also tells Thomith to put his vote back on Hazard (all while taking his off).
When asked why he thinks Travis is scummy he unvotes and says he really doesn't. (though, read that post and I challenge you to tell me he's not mud slinging on Travis as he gets off)
He then puts Daybid to L-2 (sheeping Thomith to do so, and calling him out on things he had literally just done himself)
He then slips around onto Hazard again for a spell before hopping on Thomith L-1 (a few posts before he'd been digging at effortless for finding Thomith suspect)

I very much believe he's hunting for easy lynches. Why am I wrong?

Thor665 · Post Post #534 (isolation #29) » Mon Sep 12, 2011 6:18 am

Spoiler: Tags from above fixed - derp!

Thor665 · Post Post #536 (isolation #30) » Mon Sep 12, 2011 9:55 am

In post 535, effortless wrote:Stop changing what people said and I'll stop correcting you.

He called them both suspicious.
I said he found them both scummy.
Are you seriously arguing that scummy and suspicious are so totally different that I'm misrepresenting his calls?
Dude, hairs, splitting, stop.

In post 535, effortless wrote:
Also, when he voted Thomith he specifically noted liz as still his top suspect. I think you're starting to confuse yourself here, by saying Thomith but meaning effortless - though my comments still hold firm in that question.

No, he said liz used to be one of his top suspects. Go back and read his post again.

You go back and re-read it. He says he thinks one is scummy - isn't sure which, basically says he's "starting" to suspect Thomith. then votes Thomith.
Well, Thomith was town - so where is his lizk suspicion? Oh, wait, never mind he suspects you because people made a case on you.
They were his top two suspects - flat out fact per his own commentary.

In post 535, effortless wrote:
His top suspects are you and lizk.

That's your guess. It's probably wrong too.

By that logic - this is your guess and it's probably wrong too.
There's a reason I was asking *him* to clarify his thoughts and what happened. Stop being pedantic, and if you're having issues with my take on what he's saying at least zip it and allow him to defend himself when I'm asking him to explain exactly what he's thinking, make sense?

In post 535, effortless wrote:Again you're pushing your interpretations as facts. He asked for clarification on the inflating comment.
You aren't wrong about just this specifically. You're wrong about a bunch of little things and they add up.

There's a big difference between me offering up my views and opinions and me saying they're facts.
By the same logic I could say your 'facts' are wrong about how you think I'm advancing the case.
As soon as we go down that road madness ensues. At thi sstage you're basically accussing me of making up my interpretation of what happened which...no.

In post 535, effortless wrote:Except you said putting Hazard/you at L-1 was a strong town play. Which one is it now?

Cute duck of me showing he is hunting easy wagons. I will note, that you're "lying about the facts" now just as much as what you claim I'm doing. That said, there isn't any lying on my part, and I doubt there is on your part.

I had *two* comments about the L-1 push.

1. I said Wolf was scummy for how he got on the wagon.
2. I said that putting someone to L-1 isn't inherently a scumtell.

There is no conflict in those opinions nor in my current expressed case on Wolf. Let me know where it's boggling you and I'll clarify.

In post 535, effortless wrote:
I very much believe he's hunting for easy lynches. Why am I wrong?

I'm guessing it's either because you became too attached to your theory and it's clouding your judgement or because you're scum and think that his unusual play makes him a good lynch target.

Dude...seriously. For a guy accusing me of being too tunneled you just flat out dismissed the evidence I showed of his hunting for easy lynches (except for some of it that you agreed with). You're basically arguing with me for the sake of argument at this stage, yeah? I showed how he's hunting easy lynches, which supports my accusation thereof. You need to either show how it's not him hunting easy lynches (which...I guess you could argue he's just town who is very comfortable with lynches and very comfortable voting people he doesn't suspect, and very comfortable sheeping players to advance his own unvoiced cases) That's a reasonable argument to want to make if you wish to approach it like that. But just waving your hand and dismissing my case and citing it as inherently bad when you're not actually dealing with the core value of said case but are instead picking at disagreements with how I've worded stuff does NOT help us scumhunt.

In post 535, effortless wrote:or using your own interpretation as a starting point for the discussion.

This is not wrong or improper in any way, shape, or form. In fact I submit it's highly needed in Mafia games.

Thor665 · Post Post #541 (isolation #31) » Mon Sep 12, 2011 12:36 pm

If you're being lynched the wagon isn't dead, and vice versa.

Also, two questions for you Wolf;

1. If I was to accuse you of having no solid basis for any vote you make, and your votes changing more than a traffic light - what would be your answer to this?

2. What, specifically, do you think was a good point effortless made against me? (feel free to pick more than one, just as long as you describe why they're good points).

Thor665 · Post Post #542 (isolation #32) » Mon Sep 12, 2011 12:36 pm

In post 540, effortless wrote:
In post 538, Gen_Wolf wrote:

And lastly, i'm going down fighting

I hate to say but you're not. You need to explain your thought process behind chosing to vote Thomith over lizk on day 1 and then again not voting lizk on day 2.

Thor approves.

Thor665 · Post Post #543 (isolation #33) » Mon Sep 12, 2011 12:49 pm

In post 539, effortless wrote:No, you said he called Liz the most suspicious when he voted Thomith. He actually said he
had
thought one of them was scum before the re-read. Huge difference.

I agree - I don't believe I said that, and if you think I did I think you're misunderstanding what I wrote. Could you quote it to rub it in my face, please?

In post 539, effortless wrote:You're taking the word "starting" out of context.

No I'm not - you're thinking I am. I actually never defined the word 'starting' other than noting that he'd said it. If you read the case as "starting to suspect Thomith *more*" then my words still hold true and your issue goes away in a puff of purple smoke.

And you're saying he didn't say the bolded or I'm misrepresenting it? He very much said that, it's practically a quote. Here's the actual words;

"I also thought that either Thomith or Lizk was scummy but didn't know which one! After re-reading i'm starting to suspect you Thomith"

He thought Thomith and Liz were scummy (I will HAPPILY accept he said it was an either/or situation - but I never claimed otherwise or used that as an issue against him in any way) Then he says he's decided it's Thomith. I don't see how I'm shifting/changing/twisting that at all. Could you dial me in to your point, I'm missing it - clearly.

In post 539, effortless wrote:Woah, you're saying you're allowed to put words into his mouth and I'm not allowed to call you out on it?

I'm saying you calling me out on "putting words in his mouth" when I specifically say "this is how I see things - could you clarify what went down from your angle you filthy scum?" is kind of silly. If you agree I asked him about it then my misrep (which isn't) is hardly a devious plan. If you disagree with my opinion - but have no idea what he really meant - then you should be happy to let him answer. You chose a third path and are now acting like I'm out of my gourd all while horribly misusing misrep as a case.

In post 539, effortless wrote:And I actually agree that he should clarify what he was thinking.

Derp! Careful, you're starting to agree with me that there might have been unclarified shenanigans and that our only difference is I see them as scummy and you don't...oh, wait...I'm still lying, right? Derpy-doo-dah.

In post 539, effortless wrote:I think we're way past that as I have no idea what you're trying to say here. So let me back up a bit. Based on what I read I don't think you have a case. And I think you're trying too hard to show that you do.

That's fine.
Now explain why it's scummy as opposed to scumhunting and we'll be back on the same page in every way.

In post 539, effortless wrote:See that's the problem. We aren't disagreeing about wording we're disagreeing about facts.

Actually, I feel we're disagreeing about what *is* a fact - which is really a debate about wording. But sure. Could you show the specific facts I'm misrepresenting? That would own my face and make it easy to lynch the obvious scum, yes? So far we've been quibbling about them - which means probably they're not as fact like as you'd prefer to think. As far as I can tell the main one is I disagree with you on how to phrase "suspects both" and you claim my timeline is off in some manner, but I'm still not sure how. Clarity?

Thor665 · Post Post #546 (isolation #34) » Mon Sep 12, 2011 1:46 pm

In post 544, effortless wrote:He said he suspected them before the re-read. He never said he still suspected lizk after re-reading. The most natural interpretation is that he didn't.

I see that as a not unreasonable interpretation - I don't see it as intrinsically superior to mine to the point it's a lie. Even you're using the word interpretation in your answer - which suggests it is 'open to'

If you go with the theory of him not suspecting liz in any way or form at the point he voted Thomith you believe that recasts all his actions prior and post that into a town vibe?

Thor665 · Post Post #547 (isolation #35) » Mon Sep 12, 2011 1:47 pm

Also - to clarify - he *did* say he still suspected her after the re-read, but he was starting to suspect Thomith (more) which I'll accept could be interpreted as suspecting liz less as part of the either/or scale.

Thor665 · Post Post #550 (isolation #36) » Mon Sep 12, 2011 2:23 pm

I personally believe, logically, she was a top suspect. Here's my breakdown of the "facts"

1. I think you'll agree to me he mentioned them both and said he was really sure one of them was scum.
2. He then voted Thomith - personally, I don't believe this means assurance of making lizk into town.
3. Your head asplodes.

Here's another view of the same structure;

I want to eat hot dogs or hamburgers tonight. I'm planning to eat hot dogs.

Does this mean I no longer want to eat burgers? Or does it just mean I'm edging towards hot dogs as more likely. That's the same breakdown he gave using different words. Personally - if I had two people and I was sure one of them was scum, even if I voted one of them it would not mean I had given up all possibility of the other one being scum. Clearly you disagree with this - but it is not a factual failure on my part, it's an interpretive disagreement.

Am I still dodging?

Also, could you address my last question - do you think even believing that lizk was absolutely positively town in his eyes that it defeats my case? Because there's still a giant question mark about what his manuvers at the start of Day 2 turned out as considering he was of the belief one of lizk or Thomith was scum.

Thor665 · Post Post #566 (isolation #37) » Tue Sep 13, 2011 1:37 pm

@Wolf - Well, you clearly don't always provide reasoning for your votes. I mean, today you have gone from effortless being obvious scum to obvious town and it seems totally based off his defense of you rather than any functional change in his actions. If there's always thought behind your vote could you explain to me the return to the Travis vote after the "pressure" L-1 on Hazard Day 1?

Also, as asked repeatedly - could you explain the thought process behind the lizk/Thomith opinion shift.

@Lunita - I appreciate the backup, but I don't like the Wolf/effortless pairing. Yeah, they've had awkward defenses back and forth, but I find it unlikely newbie scum ould do that. Also, if you read effortless with the idea he's very pedantic and exacting all of his issues make microcosm sense and don't feel attack oriented for the sake of attack. I still am not sure what he's driving at, but I am sure he's town. This drive makes no sense as a scum drive, and consequently your pairing is not one I suspect to see happen.

@effortless...seriously? If I'd just pointed out the two posts were three minutes apart and obviouslly all one and the same post you wouldn't have had an issue about it? Instead I make a valid dismissal of it even being an issue and that sets you off? I had presumed you were aware they were adjacent in location and time and had issues with me beyond that because it was too silly to presume that was your boggle. Also, I never raised issues with him not explaining his vote on Thomith - I raised issues about him not explaining his vote on you at the start of Day 2 outside of sheeping and the thoughts as regarding you and liz that shifted on Day 1, which though in the realm of what you're discussing is not what you're specifically citing. I had issues with how he timed and maneuvered his Thomith vote, and have said as such. Does this mean you're lying now?

Yes, I still don't understand what you're on about. I've shown repeatedly that my "lie" is a difference of opinion on interpretation and that your "fact" is your interpretation and not mine. I'm fine with that except for how you keep calling it a lie when it's clearly an opinion and was stated as such, and also that you keep calling it lieS when you've only, functionally, presented one. And now look at Wolf lap to it in the most vague way possible using your exact language.

Thor665 · Post Post #573 (isolation #38) » Wed Sep 14, 2011 9:55 am

In post 569, Flameaxe wrote:Gen_wolf [4] (Thor665, Lunitawolf, Haylen,
Gen_wolf
)
Thor665 [2] (effortless, racerman13)
Haylen [1] (
Gen_wolf
)

@MOD ^^^

@Haylen - thank gawd

I hope you and Quil are getting a lot out of that debate.

Thor665 · Post Post #584 (isolation #39) » Fri Sep 16, 2011 3:38 am

In post 582, effortless wrote:I had an issue with you not mentioning Gen's explanation of why he voted Thomith.

Even though that had nothing to do with the scumtell I was advancing? I also didn't mention what timezone he was in.

In post 582, effortless wrote:I also have an issue with you finding his vote on you on day 1 scummy. There's nothing scummy about putting someone at L-1 to try to get some reaction (unless you think they're town ofc).

I have repeatedly noted my issue with it was not the L-1, but rather the motives of how he got there and the timing thereof, especially when paired with his later vote moves.
If you keep strawmanning me I suppose I can look weird, but nothing here is what I've been making a fuss about - it's what you're saying I'm making a fuss about. I even specifically argued *against* you guys taking my slot off L-1 - why would I do that if I thought L-1 was scummy?

In post 582, effortless wrote:I also have issues with you acting like sheeping was automatically scummy.

Double sheep on a slot previously suspected under dubious circumstances while saying you've made a case, when in fact you haven't, and failure to provide the case after repeated questions is scummy.
Sheeping is null.
Heck, look at your next comment;

In post 582, effortless wrote:I don't really have an issue with you acting like everyone should be following you. It makes sense whether you're town or scum. I just don't think we should play along.

So I want people to sheep me, but I think sheeping is scummy? It's amazing how my stances make no sense through the filter of your view, and yet I don't appear to be a bumbling dunce who can't hold real/made up belief systems. So...either I *am* a bumbling dunce, and have luckily avoided it in all my other games through denying the Bell Curve, or you're at least misinterpreting a few of my stances here, yeah?

@Poro - you still scumhunting Lunita, or are you going to offer up some reads?

Thor665 · Post Post #585 (isolation #40) » Fri Sep 16, 2011 3:42 am

In post 584, Thor665 wrote:
In post 582, effortless wrote:I had an issue with you not mentioning Gen's explanation of why he voted Thomith.

Even though that had nothing to do with the scumtell I was advancing? I also didn't mention what timezone he was in.

Ugh.

To be *specific* for your sake, because that answer was even on the flippant side for me. You keep getting hung up about this.

My issue was the sudden shift to the popular wagon on an unforeseen and uncertain "prior case". The timing was the suspect issue to me. Yes, he presented reasons, yes, they are "good enough" reasons. No, I don't care about the reasons because the shift and timing is scummy, and scum would have presented reasons for the shift so the reasons themselves are immaterial to the discussion.

I noted he was pressing in other directions, and then suddenly was on the big bandwagon. This was not a surprising habit from him by that stage. It is a scummy habit - hence it's a scumtell.

Make sense?

Thor665 · Post Post #588 (isolation #41) » Fri Sep 16, 2011 7:03 am

In post 586, effortless wrote:Not sure what you're saying here. My point is that if you start following you based on your experience (or even worse skill) it could lead to a disaster. You're not a confirmed townie. In fact your slot was close to the top of the list of suspects. People should keep that in mind when they read your posts.

1. What I was saying is it's a little awkward to say that I believe sheeping is scummy *and* that I believe people should sheep me. Probably one of those is either a mistake on your part - or the most silly and glaring scum tell on my part. You should figure out which it is.
2. People should feel more than happy to keep me as a suspect or move me to a town or vice versa. You shouldn't keep me as a suspect just because I was once a suspect though, unless the case still holds valid water.

In post 586, effortless wrote:And I had an issue with how you presented it. I think it fits well with how you'd play it as scum.

Do you have meta evidence to support that this is how I'd play scum and not town?
Also - I was very open in how I presented it - your issue is one of contrived importance of issues.

In post 586, effortless wrote:Anyway, I don't really see the point of discussing this with you.

I'm fine with that if you're dropping the case, which I think I'm whittling down effectively. If you're dropping it and plan to keep saying I'm scum for not thinking the same things are important that you do - then we should really suss it out because it will be an issue down the line. Here's where I stand;

1. I think you are town.
2. I think you have a serious issue with defining fact and opinion as the same thing.

This concerns me. Now, either I'm correct on both counts in which case I want to solve #2 because otherwise you're not helping me. Or, I'm correct on just #1 in which case *I'm* having problems with facts and opinions, and we should solve that too. Finally, if I'm wrong about #1 then I don't want to let you wriggle off and leave this as a hanging and "valid" case (too good to be argued with fool scum like me, natch) for later if it comes to trying to mislynch me.

In post 586, effortless wrote:Apparently I'm not very good at it

I think there is some sort of barrier, yes. I actually think you convey yourself well, but have confused preconceptions which is where the hangup is happening. Personal suggestion note - try to stick to 1-2 examples at a time. Keep comments short and succinct. If something takes 5+ quotes and 8+ rambling sentences to explain, then it's probably not very valid as a tell unless there is some core concept the listener should buy into first and the fluff is just further evidence.

Thor665 · Post Post #589 (isolation #42) » Fri Sep 16, 2011 7:06 am

In post 587, Porochaz wrote:Thor I havent read the game yet, as I say Im on V/LA at the moment.

Well, if you want *my* breakdown of the events of the game, let me know

What I'd like from you is (and I know this will hurt, walls ahoy, dear sir) another third party look at the Thor/effortless thing. I'm fairly certain you and he are town, so I want your take because;
1. I suspect I can trust it.
2. You're experienced enough not to slurp around with newb tells and probably figure out the fact/opinion debate.
3. Either he or I are town who are being headbanginly stupid (I think it's him) and I want a referee to make a call on the flag on the field so hopefully we can move forward functionally.

Also - your scumreads, when you get there. Those would be good too.

Thor665 · Post Post #594 (isolation #43) » Fri Sep 16, 2011 9:53 am

In post 590, Haylen wrote:Lizk thing coming tomorrow, Thor. Sorry, been job hunting all day.

No worries, I've been waiting a few weeks, what's a few days? (possible sarcasm included

)

RE: Quil's case - I think he's dead on the mark about your lurking and lack of substantive content, I have said as much myself. I think a lot of his "opportunistic" stuff is a potential stretch, as though you have made "opportunistic" votes, you didn't exactly make too many on screaming huge wagons, and generally seem to be piddling around. Frankly your innefectualness at advancing any case I'm taking as a

slight

town tell, as it feels like you're here and going through the motions, But I'm thinking it's just legitimate lurk out at this stage.

I find most of your defenses pretty weak, and the best you've managed thus far is saying 'yes, I'm lurking' which, though a valid defense to the meat of his case, is still not that great to hear.

If you're town you're hurting town.
If youre scum you're playing sub-optimally, but more in line for scum than for town.
Feel free to adjust to rub this in my face, I won't mind.

Thor665 · Post Post #596 (isolation #44) » Fri Sep 16, 2011 10:07 am

It is wonderful that you mentioned your V/LA - I also never indicated desire to lynch you today for your lurking so...claws, retract them.
I disagree that your content has been substantive while you've not been on V/LA, though I certainly agree you post more often during those periods.

You really think both scum are voting you?

Thor665 · Post Post #659 (isolation #45) » Mon Sep 19, 2011 12:09 pm

Hey, Poro - am I scum because you think my reads are superficial or because I ask people to sheep me and they do? I'm not quite sure what your accusing me of.

Also - still on record for wanting your take on the effortless/Thor exchange.

Also, also, you're lizk, not effortless.

Thor665 · Post Post #660 (isolation #46) » Mon Sep 19, 2011 12:17 pm

In post 654, Gen_Wolf wrote:Are they not more likely to be town than scum purely based on the fact that if it was a scum role the replacements would be more likely to work at making time to play rather than asking for a replacement? It is a little bit of a risk but lets be honest it is more exciting to be scum that townie!

Only if they like playing scum more than town.

In post 650, Haylen wrote:About Prozac's post (game post 620), I'm not sure why the vote on Thor here, personally

My prediction: I don't think I've ever played a game with Poro before, so he's at meta loss with me.

In post 650, Haylen wrote:Raise of hands please. How many people think the Hayl/Quilford thing was town v town? Scum v scum? town v scum?

I could see all of them, depending on other alignments, he answered from the fence.
I, personally, think it's too early to tell, and I've never been sure how people get these town v. town reads - I've never advanced one unless I had independent reads of the players involved. Neither his case on you nor your defense towards him is particularly bad, though. Worst I can say is you calling him out for having a weak case when it's really just a debate of weak scumtell - his case was functionally put together. I consider you more scummy than Quil in general, but the current debate hasn't changed my read on either of you in any way (also, I skimmed a lot of it).

Thor665 · Post Post #664 (isolation #47) » Mon Sep 19, 2011 4:07 pm

In post 661, ShadowJetX wrote:Vote:Thor665

Because I'm not feeling to strong about his defense/argument here at the moment.

No worries - explain the case on me and I'll offer you defenses the like of which even gawd has never seen.

That's right, sarcasm, dismissal, *and* a nerd reference all in one go. I'm awesome.

@Quil - if I'm so awesome that voting me is a scumtell, then...whut?

Thor665 · Post Post #665 (isolation #48) » Mon Sep 19, 2011 4:08 pm

In post 663, ShadowJetX wrote:Sorry about that, thought I had but I guess not;

Vote:
Thor665

He'll probably count this - but officially it should all be in bold - even the "Vote:" part.

Thor665 · Post Post #671 (isolation #49) » Tue Sep 20, 2011 3:49 am

In post 669, Porochaz wrote:Any post I made regarding you (barring the first one) is why Im voting you.

Orly?
Because in that case your "case" on me is that you think my reads are "superficial" (are my reads awesome when I'm town? Because that's the only way this is a scumtell - and I don't think you know me enough to make that call...did you read my meta any to see if my reads are normally awesome?)
Also - I commit the scumtell of asking someone to sheep and having them sheep me...

You appeared to express issues with Gen_Wolf as well - issues that, to my mind, are as *least* as strong as these. How about we lynch him while you're doing the homework for this meta case and then we can see how you feel about me later? I know I got on Gen_Wolf for superficial reasons, but, hey! At least you with awesome reasons found him too

Thor665 · Post Post #672 (isolation #50) » Tue Sep 20, 2011 3:52 am

Also - I missed page 26 in its entirety until today.

@effortless - I have no idea how to rank IC "skill" since I personally think an exceedingly few number of players of this game actually have legitimate and verifiable skill.
If we go by ego then I'm #1.
If we go by any ranking method and find my accuracy in spotting scum is over 33% then I'm pleased with myself.
Other than that - ::shrug::
Also - if you think I'm scum under 50%, but over 33% - you really ought to be voting me.

Thor665 · Post Post #676 (isolation #51) » Tue Sep 20, 2011 12:20 pm

What do you gain from a Thor lynch other than less joy in the thread?

(hint: the things you say we gain from a Wolf lynch if he flips town aren't true)

Thor665 · Post Post #678 (isolation #52) » Tue Sep 20, 2011 1:13 pm

@effortless - you're seriously now claiming I haven't addressed your case? Be fair and don't be a dork - I've addressed the hell out of that thing, and it's you who backed off to the 'I feel you're scummy, but I want to stop talking about this' not me. Unfair, uncool, get over your bad self and re-enter the conversation, but it's not helpful to snipe from the sidelines unless you're trying to erode my read on your slot.

As to the first half of your reply;

1. Congratulations - that's not an answer. Seriously, if you're going to badmouth the Wolf wagon for this, can't you talk up the Thor wagon for it? (hint: no, you really can't, hence your dish on the Wolf wagon is weak and is the point I'm really trying to make here)

2. Neither you nor Poro will look more town for being against a lynch on town - because scum do that too. You guys look town because of your overall play, and will still look town if Wolf flips scum, quite frankly. Especially Poro, though you might gnarl me down in annoyance later considering my first paragraph in this response. But, in any case, the flip won't shine brilliant light of win on either of you regardless of how the flip goes. Hence, your proffered concept of the gain from a town flip of Wolf is, in my opinion, non-functional.

Thor665 · Post Post #679 (isolation #53) » Tue Sep 20, 2011 1:14 pm

@effortless - oh, and if your snide dig at me was about Poro's case - I replied to Poro's case as functionally as it could be replied to. Please quote me everything in his case that I didn't reply to and I'll immediately claim scum and vote myself. Pinky swear!

Thor665 · Post Post #681 (isolation #54) » Tue Sep 20, 2011 2:14 pm

In post 680, effortless wrote:Most of the conversation was a complete waste of time. I think there's less than two people who actually read all of it in detail (that includes the two of us). I have no intention of going back to it, and I don't see why you'd want to.

I don't.
I also don't want you to act like I didn't address your case either - spot the point? For a guy taking issue with my "lies" seriously, whassup?

Thor665 · Post Post #684 (isolation #55) » Wed Sep 21, 2011 6:30 am

Deadline is tomorrow - so everyone ganking around on a useless wagon should probably get in gear.

Thor665 · Post Post #686 (isolation #56) » Wed Sep 21, 2011 6:31 am

And, sweet Mary, I'm on a wagon that currently has two votes and it's tied for biggest wagon...

Thor665 · Post Post #688 (isolation #57) » Wed Sep 21, 2011 7:11 am

I listed 5 out of 8 players...then ruled out the ones I had called town...then voted from the remaining. Normally this is called scumhunting.
As to the rest - your case is "I disagree with how Thor gets reads" since my reads appear to be at least as good as other players (and generally better than random chance dictates) I personally disagree with that tell. Also, again, this is a meta case, and you are avoiding looking at the rest of my games to see how I play there and if my read method is different in those games (bad or good - it isn't) consequently your case is functionally not there and is based on a null tell, which horrifies me that you can't spot that.

"I suggest people join me on the thor wagon."

^^^For the record, i don't consider advancing a wagon that way scummy. You calling me out for doing the same sort of thing is annoying however - I think for some strange reason you're tunneled on me and aren't stepping back to honestly appraise your case. I strongly advise you to do so.

A Wolf vote would be very beneficial right now

(ooooh, snap, I'm being scummy again!)

Thor665 · Post Post #692 (isolation #58) » Wed Sep 21, 2011 9:25 am

I disagree with your logic, but have no functional ground to stand on with the case as you make it. I still strongly advocate a Wolf lynch over me. He is actually scummy.

Thor665 · Post Post #740 (isolation #59) » Sun Sep 25, 2011 1:01 pm

Well, I'm happy with a no lynch - bring it on Haylen, because you'll *totally* be killed tonight, amirite?
Let's get her reads and answers out for kicks.

Gen_Wolf and Quill were the blind leapers. Note for tomorrow.

Thor665 · Post Post #742 (isolation #60) » Sun Sep 25, 2011 4:22 pm

Because she's absolutely 100% believable? If you are on that wavelength I'd agree that no lynch is stupid. But, worst case she dies, is revealed as cop, and you have confirmed scum in me. Worst case for lynch is you lynch me and town loses, so...

Thor665 · Post Post #744 (isolation #61) » Sun Sep 25, 2011 4:40 pm

In post 743, Quilford wrote:You were going to be lynched, anyway

Orly?

I'm not being lynched with a *cop claim* on me - so I think I'll counter by saying - the case on me...it's not what you would like me to think it is.

Thor665 · Post Post #751 (isolation #62) » Sun Sep 25, 2011 4:55 pm

@Quill - did you ever express anything against me yesterday? Because I totally don't recall that, I would have thought I'd have noticed that I was your scummiest person.
As I recall you were trying to lynch Haylen and I was agreeing with you...shock.

Thor665 · Post Post #768 (isolation #63) » Mon Sep 26, 2011 5:49 am

@Haylen - you do recognize that you big, brilliant insight on lizk I made too...without needing to claim it came from being a cop.
Lunita is still looking very town, but I've been saying that for a while.
Wolf and Quill are definitely the questionables - my money is that this gambit was not planned out as well as scum would have liked.

Thor665 · Post Post #770 (isolation #64) » Mon Sep 26, 2011 6:29 am

Yeah...Lunita might totally be scum...because scum would have me totally coach and buddy them like I did yesterday. Because, y;know, those are awesome components of a scum case. Keep selling, Haylen.

Thor665 · Post Post #781 (isolation #65) » Thu Sep 29, 2011 5:16 pm

Vote: Thor

Suckers!

Thor665 · Post Post #782 (isolation #66) » Thu Sep 29, 2011 5:16 pm

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_tKKEMy8_Sao/T ... pology.gif

Claim: Scum

But - seriously, I think you guys are taking this all wrong. We can still be friends.

Thor665 · Post Post #783 (isolation #67) » Thu Sep 29, 2011 5:17 pm

There, that's sexier.

But, as I said, all the killing...I mean, c'mon, I had a fiar chance to kill scum too, right? I am trying to get help for this problem.

Thor665 · Post Post #784 (isolation #68) » Thu Sep 29, 2011 5:19 pm

Really, I think it's probably about time society accepted its culpability for my problem. Seriously, all this lynching and paranoia...I think it's time you all looked in the mirror and realize you're killing just as much as me, we're *all* a bit mafia inside, aren't we? And, from that common ground I think we can really grow and learn to love a little better.

Thor665 · Post Post #830 (isolation #69) » Fri Oct 07, 2011 5:10 am

In post 823, Porochaz wrote:If this is correct, which it looks then yay! If I were scum though, I'd have kept Haylen alive and killed probably me off instead.

We discussed, but there's an inherent risk in that one as well.

Really - the only question was whether scum thought they had more chance with a Thor vs Haylen choice or a Quill vs. Lunita choice - that was the debate. I was personally indifferent, but Quill felt confident enough that I was happy to let him run with the latter. You were dead no matter what in either setup, naturally.

Thor665 · Post Post #833 (isolation #70) » Fri Oct 07, 2011 6:32 am

I have no issues with posting it - my meta is (apparently thus far) examination proof

Also, Lunita - yes, we *definitely* need to play sometime on the same side.

Thor665 · Post Post #836 (isolation #71) » Fri Oct 07, 2011 7:04 am

In post 835, Thomith wrote:Everyone gets lynched early game sometime, this wont be the first time for me i am sure either.

I actually made a pact with dark powers to prevent this ever happening to me. It works great

As a clarification 'everyone' actually doesn't get lynched early game (I honestly never have been) but there's a fair number of playstyle choices and attitudes you're obligated to go with to prevent this from happening. Early lynches tend to be run on players for a variety of reasons;

1. Newbie energy - basically they say/do something that's silly/scummy (silly, more often than not)
2. Profit loss value - similar to Newbie energy, but generally people who are lynched early are though of in this way; "even if they're town, they're probably not a big loss"
3. Bad attitude - if multiple players start thinking of you as a bit of a twat, you're morelikely to end up dead, rudeness equates to lynchings.
4. The crime of being different - is your playstyle outside of the "accepted" playstyle? Do you change your vote every post? Do you refuse to vote? Welcome - prepare for higher early lynching chances.
5. Scumhunting? - Part of the above, but do you play in a way that leaves people unsure if you're scumhunting? You might be an early lynch.

Those are the big 5 that usually get people lynched Day 1 in my experience. To avoid it you need to do a couple of things;

1. Scumhunt - even if it's faked (*cough*) or weak, if it looks clearly like you're doing it, you're less likely to get rope. Lots of questions about motive and action are good.
2. Write clearly and legibly, try to sound competent - it's shocking how far clean and well written posts will get you.
3. Arguments - avoiding getting sucked into a big argument is usually a safe move - people often get this either/or scum feel off big fights.
4. Look like you're having fun and are active (I refer to this as being charming) people don't like to kill charming players, straight up. They'll let you live because you make the game fun.
5. Play here for a few years, then people will start mistaking length of stay with "skill" and won't want to lynch you because you're a "good" player

My thoughts on that - experience is a big overall effect to it, but being cordial, active, well written, and clearly scumhunting will get you a long way.

Thor665 · Post Post #838 (isolation #72) » Fri Oct 07, 2011 7:10 am

In post 837, Thomith wrote:yeah i guess thor is right.
I was lynched for basically argueing with lizk/hazard and then vote hopping, although i dont really see why vote hopping is scummy if you dont vote hop every post.
I am a little annoyed that people found me scummy for being "too active" though but whatever.

I actually don't think vote hopping is scummy at all, I think it's scumhunting, you'll find that one bites you in the backside more often in newbie games than in the rest of the board.

Thor665 · Post Post #843 (isolation #73) » Mon Oct 10, 2011 8:52 am

Aw man, now I need to try and remember if I was calling everyone nasty names in that QT...

Thor665 · Post Post #844 (isolation #74) » Mon Oct 10, 2011 8:57 am

After looking, I realize I only really mocked my scumbuddy and was sadly accurate as regards Haylen, thouhg in a way that makes me feel better about her play so...win/win? We'll claim that anyway

Thor665 · Post Post #847 (isolation #75) » Mon Oct 10, 2011 12:42 pm

I said in QT I thought you played badly unless you were a PR trying to fly under the radar. If that was your intent - you played quite well.
If it was not your intent then...yeah, I think you played badly. If you had us read as scum so functionally you should have done a lot more to get one of us lynched sooner. Let's be honest, that's what you need to do with scum reads instead of letting them rampage around and lead lynches.

Thor665 · Post Post #849 (isolation #76) » Tue Oct 11, 2011 4:04 am

In post 848, effortless wrote:Wow, I really need to tone it down for my next game, first choice for both night 1 and 2.

Tone what down? That's a compliment, not a bad thing. As VT that's *exactly* what you want to happen.

Thor665 · Post Post #851 (isolation #77) » Wed Oct 12, 2011 7:18 am

I apologize agin for this annoyed thing - this is the second time we've had it crop up and I've offered to talk over whatever it is and/or to replace out/avoid games with you in them. Please, stop sliding that in sideways at me (this is the third game, right?) and let's address it via PM or something - I'm not trying to be a jerk intentionally and I am not fond of feeling hurt every time you bring it up when I feel I've tried to address it. Let me know what I need to do to stop getting those remarks, please.

Without your cop report - I wasn't going to be lynched. I wasn't lynched with it and that was with my scumbuddy hard bussing