Posted: Thu Oct 13, 2016 11:14 am
In post 1437, Zoronos wrote:@Boring - You didn't answer the question I posed last night. The short version was "Who is your best non-Eager scum read, if you want you can assume Eager is scum for the sake of this exercise."
I would like to lynch eager today, but if it's absolutely not going to happen, I'd be willing to settle for LUV. He's the most probable scum when I look outside the CC-related wagons. By that, I mean it seems like regardless of eager's flip, LUV could be scum. I admit that part of my reasoning is that he keeps trying to push S_s, which is making zero sense to me. That, and his eagerness to accept bizarre theories just to keep the S_s suspicions going.In post 1444, MariaR wrote: Hm I see your point but I don't see any other better lynches then LUV and that clearly isn't happening
So, rather than lynching scum (or at the very least learning from a town flip), you're suggesting we give them a free night kill, and start this mess up again tomorrow? We're better off lynching today. Even if it turns out to be me (though I'd hardly call that "plan A").In post 1451, eagerSnake wrote:What about nolynch?
I only recently learned this myself. I'm going to assume you don't know it (though I plan to read through your old games for no lynch discussions now).In post 1455, eagerSnake wrote:But yeah I think you're scum even more after that last post
VOTE: boring
Precisely.In post 1456, nn30 wrote:I only recently learned this myself. I'm going to assume you don't know it (though I plan to read through your old games for no lynch discussions now).In post 1455, eagerSnake wrote:But yeah I think you're scum even more after that last post
VOTE: boring
No lynches in games with odd numbers of people give an advantage to scum. Assuming lynches don't hit scum for the rest of the game we'll get to LYLO with one less total lynch attempt than if we had just lynched on day one.
Games with even numbers of people don't have this problem. The impact of a no lynch with an even numbered game does not "steal" a lynch from town.
Can we please lynch this?In post 1451, eagerSnake wrote:What about nolynch?
AggghhhhhIn post 1451, eagerSnake wrote:What about nolynch?
This is kinda reasonable...In post 1452, boring wrote:In post 1437, Zoronos wrote:@Boring - You didn't answer the question I posed last night. The short version was "Who is your best non-Eager scum read, if you want you can assume Eager is scum for the sake of this exercise."I would like to lynch eager today, but if it's absolutely not going to happen, I'd be willing to settle for LUV. He's the most probable scum when I look outside the CC-related wagons. By that, I mean it seems like regardless of eager's flip, LUV could be scum. I admit that part of my reasoning is that he keeps trying to push S_s, which is making zero sense to me. That, and his eagerness to accept bizarre theories just to keep the S_s suspicions going.In post 1444, MariaR wrote: Hm I see your point but I don't see any other better lynches then LUV and that clearly isn't happening
My fault buddy.In post 1452, boring wrote:In post 1437, Zoronos wrote:@Boring - You didn't answer the question I posed last night. The short version was "Who is your best non-Eager scum read, if you want you can assume Eager is scum for the sake of this exercise."I would like to lynch eager today, but if it's absolutely not going to happen, I'd be willing to settle for LUV. He's the most probable scum when I look outside the CC-related wagons. By that, I mean it seems like regardless of eager's flip, LUV could be scum. I admit that part of my reasoning is that he keeps trying to push S_s, which is making zero sense to me. That, and his eagerness to accept bizarre theories just to keep the S_s suspicions going.In post 1444, MariaR wrote: Hm I see your point but I don't see any other better lynches then LUV and that clearly isn't happening
I think this is fair, but is typical of me on d1. It's relatively rare for me to get a scumread on d1 that I'm confident enough on to want to try to steer the conversation. Much more common is for me to get a townread that I'm confident enough to try to steer the conversation on, which you can probably see is the case with eager and to some extent shadow.Zoronos wrote:Now, on Implosion. He's been thin all game; that is, my general impression is that he doesn't do a lot to try and steer the conversation. He comments on this, but doesn't push. I am suspicious of anyone willing to just float along.
This is such an incredibly tepid response for someone who has been pushing eager so consistently since shadow claimed. Compare penguin's reaction, and Zoronos's reaction, and even nn who remarks that it's worth looking at his old games based on this. boring's reaction just reeks of scum who doesn't know how people are going to react and wants to test the waters before committing to saying something like "oh my god, only scum would possibly suggest a no lynch, can we please lynch him already." Which I would expect from town-boring here (obviously not in those words but etc).boring wrote:So, rather than lynching scum (or at the very least learning from a town flip), you're suggesting we give them a free night kill, and start this mess up again tomorrow? We're better off lynching today. Even if it turns out to be me (though I'd hardly call that "plan A").
I didn't even vote no lynch I'm just fielding it as an idea because we have 2 claimed ascetics which means pr's have a better idea of who to target
I'm certain PRs will have an even better idea with a flip.In post 1464, eagerSnake wrote:I didn't even vote no lynch I'm just fielding it as an idea because we have 2 claimed ascetics which means pr's have a better idea of who to target
Agreed on the Boring thoughts. My vote stays where it is rn.In post 1463, implosion wrote:I think this is fair, but is typical of me on d1. It's relatively rare for me to get a scumread on d1 that I'm confident enough on to want to try to steer the conversation. Much more common is for me to get a townread that I'm confident enough to try to steer the conversation on, which you can probably see is the case with eager and to some extent shadow.Zoronos wrote:Now, on Implosion. He's been thin all game; that is, my general impression is that he doesn't do a lot to try and steer the conversation. He comments on this, but doesn't push. I am suspicious of anyone willing to just float along.
I have a similar opinion wrt eager's mention of nolynching as a possibility as those who have weighed in, it really just doesn't make any sense at all. It could be a scum ploy but why the hell would he do it as scum, but also why the hell would he say it as town, etc. Not ultimately super meaningful I think.
On the other hand, I hate to beat a dead horse of almost-everything-boring-says-sounds-scummy but I really dislike boring's reaction... again.
This is such an incredibly tepid response for someone who has been pushing eager so consistently since shadow claimed. Compare penguin's reaction, and Zoronos's reaction, and even nn who remarks that it's worth looking at his old games based on this. boring's reaction just reeks of scum who doesn't know how people are going to react and wants to test the waters before committing to saying something like "oh my god, only scum would possibly suggest a no lynch, can we please lynch him already." Which I would expect from town-boring here (obviously not in those words but etc).boring wrote:So, rather than lynching scum (or at the very least learning from a town flip), you're suggesting we give them a free night kill, and start this mess up again tomorrow? We're better off lynching today. Even if it turns out to be me (though I'd hardly call that "plan A").
That paragraph from boring does not read like town talking to their top scumread. It does not read like town with a strong investment in lynching the person they are talking to. I could buy it as town talking to someone that they're trying to make up their mind on. But I can't buy it as town talking to their top scumread. It just sounds like detached, rehearsed advice.