Mini 1316 - Last Will Mafia IV (Over)

[Lastsurvivor]

VOTE: Malee for flaking on one of my past games (lost in the crash ofc).

Malee is last on my will for the aforementioned reason.

DDD, if you think asking for the last person in a person's will is "useless information," then why did you ask the question in the first place?

[Lastsurvivor]

DDD, if you think asking for the last person in a person's will is "useless information," then why did you ask the question in the first place?

oooh good point

Rhinox, do you always BS your way through RVS like you are now? Or is this just how you play your scum games? (srs question)

Most of your "scumhunting" so far has been related to DDD. By that, I mean deflecting his question back to him and this post above. What do you think of DDD, Rhinox?

DDD, good answer.

[Lastsurvivor]

So I agreed that you have a good point and you accuse me of BSing? Thats kinda a low blow. I'm going to completely ignore your obviously loaded question even though you tagged it as a "srs question"

I didn't expect much less.

As for your "analysis" of my "scumhunting".. A) its still early in the game, I haven't considered anything I've said to be serious scumhunting, moreso just trying to get into the game and get out of the RVS and stuff, like everyone else.

So you get out of the RVS by making fluff posts? This is your first real post that I'd consider to be content, ftr, and it's defending yourself. Also, don't say you don't post fluff, because when I posted last, a majority of your posts were fluff.

I don't think anything about DDD right now,

Nothing at all? Strange. So even though I made a good point about DDD, according to you, you think absolutely nothing about him?

and C) as for "deflecting" his question, lrn2buzzword kthx. I answered his question, which is directly opposite of "deflecting". Asking him to answer his own question is not "deflecting". Usually when people ask questions in the RVS, they answer their own questions. DDD didn't provide his answer right away, so I asked him for his answer. And now for my big finish, a snarky and obviously sarcastic mocking of your "attack" against me:Lastsurvivor, most of your "scumhunting" has been misconstruing what others have said. Do you always push BS like this? Or is this just how you play your scum games? (srs question)

This is so adorable. <3

UNVOTE: Malee
VOTE: Rhinox

@Alice: It is a RVS vote but it was my first post so...eh. If you want to accuse me of placing an RVS vote during RVS then I guess I'm guilty.

[Lastsurvivor]

Also, Alice, could you give your thoughts on three players for me? They can be any players you want, but preferably players you can actually say stuff about.

[Lastsurvivor]

So all I really get out of that is you wanted to make sure someone else was going to support voting for me (fishy) before you would vote me yourself.

I was waiting for you to reply to my first post before I voted for you. I don't give a damn who votes for you before I do. But nice job trying to discredit me just because someone else happened to find you scummy and I wasn't at the computer immediately after you replied.

LOL at making a big deal about "fluff posts" less than 24hrs into the game, while its still RVS time, and not everyone had even posted yet.

I find this interesting. I'll say why later.

(lol harder that you think defending myself is a scumtell)

Did I ever say that? :3

DDD asked a question, that was obviously just a device to spark conversation about something. Not a town or scum tell. It was a good point (not a strong point or a scum point) you had but it says more about you than DDD. DDD gave the expected answer. thus, I am not leaning town nor scum towards DDD (or anyone) right now. Not enough information yet. Anyone that thinks thats a problem 24hrs into a game is either rediculously naive or scum.

But see, it was much more concise to just say I don't think anything about DDD right now, rather than a useless paragraph that amounts to "I don't think anything about DDD right now".

The paragraph tells me a lot more than "I don't think anything about DDD right now," so ty. If you don't think anything about someone I want to know WHY, since DDD has actually posted after all.

This is so adorable. <3

There it is, the definition of deflecting . We're gonna end up friends, I can tell already.

Okay, here's what I was referring to earlier. If you think that what I posted was reflecting (which it really wasn't since what you confessed that what you posted was just snarky gibberish anyway), then isn't you just saying "LOL" to my points definitely reflecting?

Um. Anyway, Rhino, are there any players you do have thoughts about? They don't have to be solid (we aren't that far into the game after all), but you've gotta have some alignment indications.

[Lastsurvivor]

Hm. Rhino's ok for now; my vote's staying because he's the best option atm though. Just gonna reply to a few things...

You certainly implied that it was a negative thing that my first real post (as defined by you) was defending myself.

To clarify, it's just a null tell for all the reasons you provided. Obvs you can't help that your first meaty post was defending yourself if you got attacked. The only reason I mentioned it was because defending yourself is really iffy content. But yes I can see how you'd see those implications etc etc.

No, my last sentence, which I separated from the rest, was snarky gibberish. You chose to ignore/lump in the part about me accusing you of buzzword scumhunting by saying I deflected DDD's question (which I didn't) and using it as part of your justification for why I'm scum. Deflecting is when you ignore/make light of/minimize/etc points or questions you're uncomfortable addressing. I did not deflect DDD's question, but you certainly did deflect the point I was making about you.

Yeah, I wasn't using deflect in the buzzword context. Deflect was the wrong word there, might have been thinking of reflect or reciprocate or something. Basically a word that means to turn the question back to him. If you look at the context of the sentence, you can tell I didn't mean the buzzword at all.

And good answer @ the last bundle of paragraphs. And I totally understand what you're saying about my forced questions but you have to understand that that's exactly why I ask them. I'm seeing what people make out of the little information we have.

[Lastsurvivor]

@Nacho: Half assed reaction test for Rhino, but mostly I didn't feel like unvoting. Since you called me out before he did, no real point in keeping the vote on, so

UNVOTE:

[Lastsurvivor]

@Rhinox:

Rephrase: Iffy content compared to other content (questioning players, providing reads etc.) it's still content.

And there's nothing wrong with asking him to answer his question. I never said there was.

I did a quick reading of thread anyway, to submit initial Last Will, so may as well answer two questions that i've noticed. The last name on my will is Alicewondering - i don't know him/her, and his/her presence in this game is practically null so far. And from the player list i know DDD (completed a game together, that is lost in a crush), hiplop and 4nxi3ty (playing in other games with them atm).

How do you know hiplop? And what do you think of their play so far compared to their play when you last played with them?

-----

VOTE: Sleepless Assassin

Mainly because of the "you seem on edge" accusation he threw out towards fish, and the lack of justification. Here's his justification for reference:

Fish, I don't knoow, it's just a vibe I get from your posts. And I don't remember what I saw from malee. Let me ISO after this post.

Rhinox, id love your vote if I can get some solid reads at some point.

Throw out an accusation to look like your scumhunting -> "Oh it's just a vibe" when asked instead of pursuing the lead.

I don't like how he asked for Rhinox's votes either. Seems like he was trying to manipulate what he thought was a frustrated Rhino.

[Lastsurvivor]

PEDIT @kortul: When I say "what do you think of their" I mean all the players you listed that you know, not just hiplop.

[Lastsurvivor]

Lastsurvivor, I can do the whole quote wall thing when I get to a computer, but from a phone, a lot of my reasoning is going to look very general. Id say check my recent meta but I crashed the site back to november to erase it just so you couldn't see it.

Uh huh...

Is there some reason why I shouldn't check your meta from

before

the site crash?

[Lastsurvivor]

Malee's not giving me warm fuzzy towny feelings with this mess of a case on Nacho.

Alice, make sure you read post #50!

[Lastsurvivor]

Lastsurvivor, anything you'll find before november was before I spent time away from the site. I was living with my parents then, so I had access to a computer every day and rarely posted from my phone. Therefore, the games before the crash won't show you a lot of phone posts from me.

Is that a reason to not check your meta? I still think it'd be useful even if you might post from your phone more now.

And stop fence sitting. Who is scummier: fishy, malee, or DDD?

[Lastsurvivor]

hip, what do you think of SA?

[Lastsurvivor]

Which post are you talking about? The one I pointed out in my vote of him or another?

A thing I noticed with SA at first is that he's talking about a whole lotta nothing. Which is what I pointed out in my original post and his floppy reasoning with the fishy attack. His last post definitely has that as well. If you look at that big paragraph, it's a bunch of fence sitting and jibberjabber. Why expand on the DDD/Nacho conflict if a) you have nothing to say and b ) DDD isn't even your top scum choice? Because it's an easy thing for scum to talk about, that's why.

SA's biggest scum ITT.

[Lastsurvivor]

Meh. Malee was really scummy as town in the last game I played with her, and she did stuff similar to this. Granted, she was drugged up during that entire game, but still. One man SA BW is where it's at.

@SA:

Last, nothing you are saying about that post makes any sense. Of course I'm going to point out DDD when it catches my attention. If I catch a scum vibe and let it go, id hate to ignore it all game, see him win as scum, and come back like "yeah, he looked scummy. I just never said so". And what do you see as fence sitting in there at all. I felt I was pretty clear with all of it.

The reason I have a problem with you expanding on DDD is because you didn't expand on Fishy/Malee who are your top two scum picks. And don't say you've expanded on them already, because you definitely have not. Shouldn't you be expanding on your vote instead of a distant third choice?

Fence sitting: Your post that I was referring to really doesn't say anything about anything. You say absolutely nothing about Fishy nor Malee except " I'm trying to decide whether fish is still scummier than malee or not," and then you just ramble on about how DDD might be scum. At this point, you've given more reasoning for DDD being scum than your top two picks combined. But you know DDD isn't going to really call you out on it too much because he's not your top scum pick, only a distant third.

As much as I like the malee hate, is reaching really scummy in the first few pages of the game?

What? Didn't you say this was scummy about Malee?

Oh yeah, the whole skimming over reaction thing was what I didn't like about malee.

I could be wrong, but from here, it looks like you're referring to Malee's reaching case (I say I could be wrong because you're kinda vague, going back to that talking about nothing thing). Y so contradicting?

[Lastsurvivor]

@SA: So you have no idea when you're getting internet back? :/

Yo, funkybike, what's up? Give us your thoughts on, like, players and stuff.

Kortul did you see post 72 (and 73 afterwards).

NVM you answered carry on.

[Lastsurvivor]

Malee's not giving me warm fuzzy towny feelings with this mess of a case on Nacho.

How do you feel about DDD's case?

Nacho definitely needs to do more than just asking questions. Like giving reads etc.

That said, I'm not seeing the cruise control thing (probably because I've never seen him play more).

What do you think of SA?

[Lastsurvivor]

Yeah that's what I meant SA. Computer/interwebz.

Anyway, I think you could still at least expand on Fishy/malee in the same way you did DDD. If you need to, just point to post numbers (In post X fishy did balbhalbh) and don't quote posts. It's just as effective. And I don't expect a lot since you're on your phone, but some stuff would be nice. More than "it's just a feeling."

I just don't understand, if it's such a problem to expand on Fishy/Malee, why you were able to expand on DDD. Or why you're able to explain your thoughts on other things.

@4nx: So the stuff I've said about him is invalid to you?

[Lastsurvivor]

The playing on a phone explains doesn't explain much other than the fact that he makes short posts. What bugs me about SA is that he is able to elaborate on some things (e.g, DDD) but not elaborate on the important things (e.g, his vote).

DDD posted kinda regularly until Friday. Maybe he's just been busy this weekend (was St Patty's day yesterday after all). His posts haven't really been blah though.

Can you point to some things Rhino's done that give you that "forced" feeling? I'm not seeing it.

[Lastsurvivor]

Hm. Well, I think I see what you're getting at w/ Rhino. Don't necessarily agree with it though, but I'll let Rhino defend himself before I go into it.

[Lastsurvivor]

K hi.

In general SA is starting to bug me less now that he's actually playing. That said, he hasn't convinced me he's town yet.

Anywho

This post feels fake to me (see #95 and #97 as well.)

Why?

FTR I like what you're saying about Hiplop.

This post feels fake to me (see #95 and #97 as well.)

That's very townish to say,

but it was genuine. I thought nacho voted you, but even without that vote, he still skimmed. I wasn't paying attention enough, my bad.

This looks like the second best example of pandering so far this game, and the best example of scum pandering so far this game. The casual "Oh, well, that's very towny of you," while going on to disagree lamely. The reason I put this as the "best" is because Vincent's comment wasn't even a towny comment. It was a vague observation. Ergo, I have no idea why the hell Malee would want to point out that it's very towny when it's barely anything.

But we talked about the "good point" comment already so I'm not sure what more I can say about it. "good point" probably wasn't even the right wording anyways, maybe "interesting point" woulda been better. But it was all just about gauging reactions from you and LastSurvivor, not that I ever intended suspecting you as scum for it.

Confused. Are you saying that your "good point" post was a reaction test?

[Lastsurvivor]

yay funky posted things.

Funky, do you agree with the proposed meta about you (by Rhinox I think) that you enjoy playing more as scum?

Also, why is pandering not legitimate on D1? I think trying to flatter your aggressor would work no matter when it happens during the game. And flattery is definitely a popular scum tactic. People think twice about who they're fighting against if that person calls them townies, compliments their arguments etc.'

Also, Funky, you left out a few people in your reads list. Was that intentional? What are your thoughts on Sleepless Assassin?

[Lastsurvivor]

UNVOTE:
VOTE: Malee

L-2.

SA's not looking too bad to me anymore. Malee, on the other hand, is just a mess whenever she appears. The thing that bothers me the most is the pandering. I know I defended her because she played like this in another game, but she never pandered even when she was under fire. I feel like she just saw that in some "how 2 be gud scum" article and copied it.

He's vouching for her in a way that doesn't exactly feel genuine to me.

Why doesn't it feel genuine?

Nacho's stuff on Funky is definitely nice. And, no, I don't really like his reads. Especially don't like the fact that they don't include everyone.

@Vinc: Why did you quote me in your post?

[Lastsurvivor]

Hm.

Malee, I want a reads list from you. On every player. Looking through your ISO, I cannot tell what you think about a majority of the players.

Feel free to format it however you like, but your thoughts on every single player must be there. If you think nothing about a player, say why.

[Lastsurvivor]

Nacho makes an excellent point on funky. Also Kortul. Consider me persuaded, though I'll keep my vote on Malee for now. I'd probably be willing to switch to funky whenever.

Also, I don't understand why SA was suspicious earlier to some people. I like post 151's reasoning, though it does seem a little hesitant to express strong opinions, not a scumtell by itself by any means though.

SA was suspicious because his earlier posting was crap and he wasn't playing the game. Everyone that was on the SA wagon has already said that SA has improved (except hiplop, but meh), so you making that statement is irrelevant other than to suck up.

FTR I find that, along with what DDD said, bad.

While I agree with Rhinox's general sentiment about Malee's site flake, it's not really indicative to alignment. She did it in every game. So don't think that me asking her for a reads list made her crack or anything (although I'm sure none of you were).

That said, her successor has got some work to do and they better give me that reads list.

[Lastsurvivor]

@Funkybike:

yay funky posted things.

Funky, do you agree with the proposed meta about you (by Rhinox I think) that you enjoy playing more as scum?

Also, why is pandering not legitimate on D1? I think trying to flatter your aggressor would work no matter when it happens during the game. And flattery is definitely a popular scum tactic. People think twice about who they're fighting against if that person calls them townies, compliments their arguments etc.'

Also, Funky, you left out a few people in your reads list. Was that intentional? What are your thoughts on Sleepless Assassin?

Plz respond k thanks.

[Lastsurvivor]

I think DDD has played with Nacho. Dunno if he has a "deep past" with him.

[Lastsurvivor]

Pedit: I assume that from the "You're better than this" comment he made earlier in the game.

[Lastsurvivor]

Mmm. I'm content with sticking with Malee for now. Malee does have a few more points than just what you mentioned in #194, Nacho. I've mentioned one, and Vincent has mentioned at least one.

In general, I was expecting an exodus off the wagon after Nacho's post. Slightly surprised that only Anx hopped off.

General question: What does everyone think of hiplop?

Also

FUNKYBIKE

WHY ARE YOU NOT ANSWERING MY QUESTIONS? PLEASE ANSWER MY QUESTIONS THAT I HAVE QUOTED ON THE TOP OF THIS PAGE THANK YOU.

@SA: Malee only has 4 votes atm. I'm assuming you didn't realize this?

[Lastsurvivor]

Why did you leave some people out?

[Lastsurvivor]

Ah...now Anx and Alice are off the wagon.

Alice, what encouraged you to switch to funky? That's a textbook wagon hop right there.

Also Alice

He's vouching for her in a way that doesn't exactly feel genuine to me.

Why doesn't it feel genuine?

Plz answer k thanks. Not letting you get away with the "Oh, you know, it just

doesn't feel right

," card.

@SA: Alright, good that you didn't realize. But I recall that the difference between Malee and Funky on your reads list was quite substantial. You said Malee was scum, but your conclusion about Bike was that you were "Really not liking" him. That seems like a big difference to me. Is it not as big as I think it is? And if it is a big difference, you really should hop onto the Malee wagon. There's plenty of room.

If you haven't answered my question yet, please do: What do you think of Hiplop? The answers so far are kinda surprising, but I think I may just be misconstruing things. But yeah, please answer thank you thank you.

[Lastsurvivor]

It seems like it should be, but I'll take your word for it.

And sorry, the question was directed at everyone, not you. I saw that you answered.

[Lastsurvivor]

@Alice: K thanks for the evidence.
@Hiplop: Do you still think Rhinox is scum? If not, then pinpoint some scumreads ASAP. If so, then to do some convincing ASAP.

This is why Hip bothers me @everyone who finds him ok. His vote is stuck on Rhinox, but he hasn't really pushed it. And now he's saying that two others might be scum.

[Lastsurvivor]

Eh, the phrase dream up can have some negative connotation, I don't agree with this, however. Dreamers are what keep the world great.

DDD and Rhinox are scum, imo. Maybe even Nachomama instead of DDD. Nacho is doing what every player who has been "Scum-meta'd" does, "CHANGE THEIR PLAYSTYLE" in heavy air quotes (its more fashionable that way). And quite bluntly, I see a connection between rhinox and nacho. DDD feels independently scummy, some for his lurking, some for his actual posts.

Nothing on Malee or Funky then? I find it uncomfortable that you said you lacked the "competence" to pinpoint which one of them is scum, especially since now neither of them are scum. Also, I feel the connection between Rhinox and nacho can be explained in another way, but I'll let them explain it.

Also, why can't Rhinox, DDD, and Nacho be scum? You act like it has to be either DDD or Nacho.

@Funky: Do you like...read the thread? I'm pretty sure there are other things people have asked you that you haven't answered, and you just stumble in here posting random irrelevant nonsense.

About new discussion topic: I haven't read through the previous games, but I would think that it would be a smart scum strategy for scum to buddy up on townies. I haven't really been searching for it, so I can't say it's a really risky strategy either. Did anyone who played the Last Will games see that scum buddied up on townies?

@4nx: How do you come to the conclusion that funky's town? At this point he's null for reasons I stated earlier in this post.

Also, lampshading (warning tvtropes link may waste hours of your valuable time) the fact that you BW hopped doesn't really make it any less bad.

[Lastsurvivor]

@4nx: BW hop's the wrong phrase, but changing your vote without explaining is still lame. But if you're going to explain eventually, then I'll be looking forward to it.

Did you see what I asked you about funky?

[Lastsurvivor]

@fishy: as you said earlier. It appears that Hip is gunning for Nacho/Rhino, so it doesn't seem like he's being apathetic towards the both of them. I just found it odd that, according to hip, both DDD and Nacho were scummy but apparently only one or the other could be Rhino's partner. Was wondering if there was an actual reason or just because it seemed implausible to him that he found the entire scumteam. It seems to be the latter.

@hip: Thinking you have found the entire scumteam isn't arrogance, it's ingenuity and confidence!

Ahem.

I think the scummy difference between Malee and Funky is clear cut, personally. Malee was def more scummy than Funky. Also, just compare their ISOs if you need to refind that connection. I certainly saw a connection by doing that.

[Lastsurvivor]

Has Vincent been posting in other games? That's pretty lame.

@hip: But you don't think people's play can generally be classed into a "style?" There's a difference between pre-emptive strategy and how someone plays the game. I think the confusion kortul's seeing is that you don't get the terminology.

Spring boarding off of Kortul's question...

DDD, what do you think of Nacho's play style change? Do you think the change was scum motivated?

I dislike Rhinox's disappearance as well as Vincent's. His posts have become rather infrequent.

[Lastsurvivor]

@hip: Hm, I suppose I wasn't really looking at it in context and thus I was the one being picky about terminology.

Anyway

I think Nacho should really address your point, since I can see a logical explanation for the play style switch and I'm surprised he didn't explain it as soon as you brought it up.

[Lastsurvivor]

It's kinda making me sad that all the centers of attention are posting prod dodges or are otherwise absent. I wish Malee's replacement would show up soon, but there are like 20 replacements needed for games. Le sigh.

Anyway.

All those who have recently posted "Prod dodge": I want a reads list in your next post of at least five players. You must find at least two of those players scummy.

GO!

[Lastsurvivor]

@Rhinox: Your catch up post has placated my hungry wolf desire for content.
@Hip: I mirror Rhinox's last question to you.

People who still need to placate my hungry wolf desire for content via a reads list/catch up post/preferably both: Vincent, Funky, Malee's replacement

But let's be honest, Funky's catch up post would be a reread of the entire thread.

Speaking of that....

SPRINGBOARD

Does anyone find the fact that Funky clearly doesn't read the thread scummy? I'll answer when others answer.

[Lastsurvivor]

I really need to reread when I find the time.

First and foremost

@theo: Ty for placating my hungry desire for content.

First and foremost about Malee: All of the problems with Malee come AFTER the post you quoted.

Now, when you ask "Why?" I assume you mean "Why did this big case come up"?

The biggest problem I had with her is her out of place complimenting. In post #138, she says something vincent said was "very townish to say," even though, quite honestly, it was not very townish to say. That sunk the deal at the time. The other points are her mess of a case on Nacho. I.e, voting him even though it's clear that she didn't think he was scum.

Theo, why do you think hip is scummy for having odd scum targets?

[Lastsurvivor]

I think funky does read the thread, he just only comments on what he wants to, doesn't care what anyone demands of him, and doesn't care if people find him scummy for it. I don't think funky is scummy, I think if you actually read what he is saying, he's been making some decent points.

I can't say I agree with you that he's making decent points.

Ok. let's assume that funky actually does read the thread and sees everyone's questions. Why do you think he doesn't answer them? And don't say "because he doesn't care." Well, I guess you can say that if you want, but I'd prefer you say more than just that.

I really cannot make heads or tails of this Rhinox/hip argument. I feel like Rhino has reactionary tunnel vision on. IMO, OMGUS at this stage in the game has become more of a town tell these days. Hip's behavior is confusing me though, as usual. It kind of bothers me that Hip accuses Rhino of having a lack of competence, when he doesn't even understand that Rhino isn't on V/LA yet (FYI he goes on V/LA on Thursday not today). And I don't know why he's getting so angry.

TL;DR: ATM Rhinox is becoming better, Hip is becoming worse.

[Lastsurvivor]

@Nacho: Hum. If your vote is only based off of a joke I've been making based off of Rhinox's post 254 (read the last sentence and his use of the word "placate," and then look at my avatar and scroll down to #258 where I first used the joke if you don't get it), and a slight disappointment that I haven't changed my vote in awhile, then hopefully you won't mind if I disregard your vote for now.

@Kortul: Yeah, I'm pretty sure I got it right. If she were talking about her own posts, wouldn't she say "That's very townish to say,

and

it's genuine"? If I'm understanding what you're saying, anyway.

Gonna spend the afternoon doing ISOs. Just replying to stuff directed at me.

[Lastsurvivor]

@theo: Ah, I see what you mean by the "Why?" now.

Anyhoo, I was under the impression that Malee had gotten over her health issues. You realize that when she was talking about being on medication and such during a prior game from like...January right? (Well, she flaked in January, the game went on until the crash)

I'm pretty sure the reason she flaked was not because she had health issues, but because she was playing four games and couldn't handle it. That's not a reason to excuse any mistakes she made.

Why are you defending her actions, anyway?

And about hiplop: I think I might be misunderstanding you or you might be misunderstanding me. When you said why you thought he was scummy, your reason was, "because of the wavering around on votes / who he thinks is scummy." I took the "who he thinks is scummy" part as having strange scum targets. Are you referring to something else?

The ISOs are going slowly, mostly because I keep on nodding off. <_<

[Lastsurvivor]

PEDIT: *You realize that

when

she was talking about being on medication and such during a prior game from like...January right?

[Lastsurvivor]

I've done all the ISOs but one, but I doubt I'd find anything interesting there anyway.

I've concluded that this hiplop/rhinox argument is town/town and pointless. Honestly, both of them are using arguments that are so illogical that this has to be two people with bad tunnel vision on each other.

Instead, we should focus our attention on Alice.

UNVOTE:

VOTE: Alicewondering

Throughout this entire game, Alice has been making contradictory arguments that clearly show she's just trying to blend in. First thing I noticed while going through her ISO? Alice calls me out for making an RVS while, allegedly, RVS has ended.

Spoiler: quote #1

VOTE: Malee for flaking on one of my past games (lost in the crash ofc).

Malee is last on my will for the aforementioned reason.

DDD, if you think asking for the last person in a person's will is "useless information," then why did you ask the question in the first place?

This seems like a random-ish vote to me. Is it random? If so, what is the sense of prolonging RVS?

I made that post in post #27. Look at the post below it, post 28 by funkybike. What is it? A RANDOM VOTE.Why didn't Alice call out this random vote as well as mine? Because Alice really doesn't care about finding scum. Why? Because she is scum.

Spoiler: quote #2

If Malee flips scum, LS becomes scummier.

Post #102 above is an example of Alice trying to fit in. I had just defended Malee because her play was consistent with a previous game I played with her. Alice made the profound observation above. Obviously, if Malee was scum and I defended her, I would look scummier. But when someone asked her why she made this observation, Alice gave a vague answer instead of an obvious answer. She said, "He's vouching for her in a way that doesn't exactly feel genuine to me". Really? That doesn't really say anything.

Later on in that same post I linked to, Alice says, "Her posts look a

little fake in general (though I hate that sort of reasoning).

"

So hold up, Alice? You dislike calling people's posts fake, even though you use that sort of reasoning twice (towards Malee and I)? Why do you feel so comfortable using a sort of reasoning you dislike? Because somewhere along the line, you're lying?

re switching from malee to funkybike: I can see the reasoning, sort of. However, Alice repeats multiple times that Malee is still her top scum read even though she has switched votes. Which, again, I can understand.

What I DON'T understand, however, is that Alice has not interacted with Theo at all. Instead, she is voting Hiplop. It is like she forgot who her top scum read was...or, you know, Malee/Theo was never her top scum read.

TL;DR:

Vote Alice. Four reasons.

1) She does not care about finding scum. See quote 1. Alice calls me out for RVS voting when funky RVS voted the post after mine.
2) Alice is clearly trying to fit in by making observations that seem legit at a glance but really aren't. See quote 2.
3) Alice is hypocritical. See the paragraphs after quote 2. She is ok with calling others out for things that she thinks are fake, even though she does not like using that kind of reasoning.
4) Alice repeatedly stated that Malee was her top scum read, but she has not interacted with her replacement. Instead, she hopped onto Hip's train. See, "re switching from malee to funkybike"

[Lastsurvivor]

My other reads will hopefully come tomorrow.

SA, what do you think of my post #298?

[Lastsurvivor]

@Hip: Hey, you should take a step back from Rhino for a minute and read 298 (it's a bit long, sorry). Then read the posts after that by Alice and I. Then vote Alice!

@Alice: Hey, Alice, you interacted with your former primary scum read! It only took...me prodding you. Nice. Alice, why didn't you interact with someone who you said was your primary scum read multiple times until now?

Wait, so now you like Hiplop? Seriously, two people call you out on your vote (Nacho and I) and you back off. At least try to show some conviction with your vote, jeez. It doesn't seem like you have any fake scum reads now, either, Alice.

Also, not replying to any of my argument is nice. "Instead of even looking like I'm defending myself, I'm just going to say 'lol.'" Good strategy. But I'm not going away just because you know how to laugh out loud.

[Lastsurvivor]

1. Because I had nothing to say

I find that hard to believe. So what did you think of the post then?

2. Yes

By not saying "Ono lol I'm actually searching for scum," you're only digging yourself into a deeper hole, Alice. Just saying "Yes" was definitely the wrong answer.

3. I have nothing to say. You are just so wrong.

Oh, wow. This is the best answer ever. I am totally convinced.

UNVOTE: The wonderful Alicewondering

...

Jk lol

VOTE: Alicewondering

WHY am I wrong? You're making yourself look worse and worse. Seriously. I broke that post down into four core points in the TL;DR section to make it easier for you. But you're not doing anything other than saying "No! You're wrong! LALALALALALALALALALA!"

- Scum tend to be rather wishy washy about their reads. "So and so is kind of town, but could be scum." This gives them a chance to change their reads in the future where convenient. While hiplop has changed his reads, I don't think it has been done in an unnatural way, and he has consistently been (very) adamant about who his top scumreads are, at least recently.

Scum also find it convenient to have no reads at all. Instead of finding scum, they do useless things like mediate on conflicts that they clearly have no interest in. This is what you are doing.

- Scum tend to avoid conflict and not draw attention to themselves, which is completely the opposite of what is going on here. That's why hip's arguments against you read genuinely to me, though they may be somewhat unjustified.

You are avoiding conflict 100% by saying "Lol you're wrong LALALALALALALA."

I think basically your case is that hiplop changes his votes/reads, and he does not justify his claims.

BUT WAIT!

Wasn't your reasoning for the hip vote something like...

LOL Hip can't even remember his reads.

UNVOTE: VOTE: Hiplop

Isn't it possible that Hip just changed his reads? Did you not realize this when you voted him? Why do you enjoy changing your views so freaking much?

Plz more Alice votes.

[Lastsurvivor]

PEDIT: Sorry, but I am doing a wall too. :(

Half the ISOs I did yesterday are gone <_< thankfully I got most of the important ones. Just gonna go into it.

4n: Weak town read (Town null lean, if you will). When are you going to justify your Rhinox vote like you said you would here?


DDD: He's being quite lazy. I've only played one game with him, but in that game he was proactive and had a strange methodology. This game he's being quite unspectacular. I feel like his Nacho case generally boils down to "you're better than this" and not much else. His reply to a question I asked him was way too wordy to be comfortable for me and, to be honest, I'm not sure he answered it. I don't like it. I also don't like how he started viciously defending hiphop, even going so far as to attacking Rhino, after Hip hopped onto the Nacho wagon. The Nacho wagon is a lazy wagon, and IDK why DDD is still pushing it.


Fishy: I think Fishy's town, but it's mostly gut. I dunno. He explains himself well, I guess, and usually makes sense. People who seem to be having a problem with him I'm thinking have played with him before, so perhaps I'm just lacking a meta read.


Funky: Sweet jesus Funky is one of the most confusing players ever. I think he's scum though.

Spoiler: quote #1 (big quote)

The wonders of Comcast being useless over a weekend... Here's a few of my reads.

To me, it looks like this wagon on

Malee

is sort of forced; there is no relevant reason for her to be scum more than anyone else. LS's argument is based on pandering, which I find not to be a valid scumtell Day 1. However, I respect other people's opinions, and if this behavior continues from Malee, it will be very hard to dig out of the hole she created for herself.

Vincent

, seems to be acting overly townish. I think he's vanilla town (at least for right now).

LS

is leaning town, definitely. I simply don't believe scum would post like that.

4nxi3ty

,... active lurking. No information as of yet.

Hiplop

has contributed to the town's discussion, but I can't get a read of his posts.

Kortul

, I can say, is safely town until proven otherwise.

Rhinox

has changed his behavior from previous games quite a bit, he's played here like a decent townie.

Nachomamma

is scum. I can't see any other possibility.


Nacho, how about you answer your own question?
Post 110: "When you're defending yourself, what other objectives should you have?"

Lots of things wrong with this:

1) See Malee's read. He says he thinks the Malee case is forced. Then he goes on to say that if her behavior continues, it will be very difficult to dig herself out of whatever hole she's in or something like that. Shouldn't he find her behavior fine if he finds the case forced?
2) 4n's, hip's reads literally don't say anything.
3) Kortul is safely town until proven otherwise? How so? He gives no explanation for this (hell, none of them have explanations)
4) No vote on Nacho. This leads me to my next point.

Post 173: Funky says Nacho provided an explanation for his behavior. If you go through Nacho's ISO...he really didn't explain his behavior.

Spoiler: quote 2

I did not vote Nacho because I was waiting for him to respond to my question.

ORLY? He's referring to his random ass question at the end of quote 1. I find this very hard to believe. Why not just vote and then ask the question? Avoiding conflict IMO.

But yeah anyway we've clarified that Funky thinks Nacho's innocent. Except, according to Read 218, Funky agrees with Hip that Nacho's scum now.

TL;DR Funky's scum.


Kortul: Null. There's not a ton of content there. A problem I have is that his initial reads list are mostly neutral. Kortul, could you turn those neutral people to town or scum (I know, hypocritical of me since you have a null read from me, but if you do that you might become town!)


(Now we're getting to the points where I have no notes, so these will be shorter then they would have been...unless the ISOs are short on their own).


Theo: Theo doesn't look good either. His first post looks like he's just defending himself. The obvious example is when he tries to explain his predecessor's actions. But further examples are his attack on Fishy. I don't really get the attack on Fishy, since both the things Theo is attacking Fishy for were explained multiple times. Also, look at the quotes around his attack on SA? What is one word they all have in common? Malee.

Now, this wouldn't really be bad if the case weren't illogical. The "OMG contradiction" Theo notices in 220 comes right after SA did a reread of ISOs and such. Obviously his reads are going to change. Theo is leaning scum, I guess.


Nacho: I had more specifics about Nacho, but they were lost when I lost my notes so...TL;DR I think he's town.


Hip/Rhino: Their conflict says they'e town/town. They've both got extreme tunnel vision and are overly defensive (Rhino proved the latter part to me at the beginning of this game), and they just happened to jump on each other.


SA: I actually didn't do his ISO, but my gut says town. Can't really be sure though, so town null lean.

Vincent: Oh yeah, I almost forgot to do his. There's a lot of narcissism (or what other have called "egocentrism") in his posts, that I actually kind of like. Otherwise there isn't a lot of content though. Weak town read.

[Lastsurvivor]

@4n: Hip basically did the same thing to rhino (PEDIT: Referring to making big things out of little things in his posts).

4n, read alice's 311, specifically the bottom where she defines how scum plays. Don't you think Alice has been avoiding conflict this entire game? And atm she has absolutely no scum reads at all. She was definitely waffled on her hip read once I called her out on it, for seemingly no reason. Don't you think that's...bad?

Also, don't you think it's odd that she's just saying "LOL no you're wrong," towards my case instead of explaining why I'm wrong? Could she possibly not be explaining why I'm wrong because...I'm right, 4n?

[Lastsurvivor]

Well, LS, since you seem so interested in a response, I'll humor you just this once.

Thanks!

You are avoiding conflict 100% by saying "Lol you're wrong LALALALALALALA."

I'm pretty sure this creates more conflict than posting a proper defense. I'm not really all

that

interested in defending myself right now. I almost always get wrongly accused of being scum, but I haven't been mislynched yet.

Yes, this is true, it does create more conflict. However,

you

are not the one creating conflict by avoiding it. Others are. You are avoiding conflict. You haven't been lynched yet? Well, most people that defend themselves haven't been lynched. Ergo, I would become more interested in defending myself if I were you.

Isn't it possible that Hip just changed his reads? Did you not realize this when you voted him? Why do you enjoy changing your views so freaking much?

Misrep here. It's not that hip chnaged his reads, he lied about what he said about his reads previously. That was why I voted him. Changing reads/votes is fine, lying about previous reads is not.

fishy

should this point.

Where did he lie about his reads? The way I'm reading it, Hip's reads changed and you were the one misrepping Hip.

@DDD: FTR, in every game I've seen amished tell in, that person was town. But that's not really a lot of games, so meh.

@Rhinox: Why is Alice town? I'm not gonna attack you; I genuinely want to know.

@Everyone who has expressed discontent with the Alice wagon: You better start convincing everyone why your vote is scum, or else we aren't gonna get anything done.

[Lastsurvivor]

VOTE: Alicewondering - You're giving horrible, inconsistent reads.

What do my wagonmates think of this?

[Lastsurvivor]

(Anyone else can answer too if they want, but I specifically want their input)

[Lastsurvivor]

K everyone Alice is at L-1 if I've counted correctly.

EDIT: Nvm, with Fishy's unvote Alice is at L-2.

Funky's vote definitely leaves me feeling uncomfortable. My biggest problem with a Funky lynch is that it leaves us with practically no information if he comes out town.

@Alice: Weren't you telling me I was wrong when I posted my case though? So now the points are valid?

Also, I find it really hard to buy that you're actually scumhunting since you don't have a vote on anyone. What you're doing now looks like questioning with no real purpose, which we really don't have time for this close to the deadline.

[Lastsurvivor]

...Fuck it, an Alice lynch is no good.

UNVOTE: (For realz this time)
VOTE: Funkybike1

I have already stated my reasoning here, but i will extract it for the lazy:

(Note, the bolded point was not in the original post)

Funky: Sweet jesus Funky is one of the most confusing players ever. I think he's scum though.

Spoiler: quote #1 (big quote)

The wonders of Comcast being useless over a weekend... Here's a few of my reads.

To me, it looks like this wagon on

Malee

is sort of forced; there is no relevant reason for her to be scum more than anyone else. LS's argument is based on pandering, which I find not to be a valid scumtell Day 1. However, I respect other people's opinions, and if this behavior continues from Malee, it will be very hard to dig out of the hole she created for herself.

Vincent

, seems to be acting overly townish. I think he's vanilla town (at least for right now).

LS

is leaning town, definitely. I simply don't believe scum would post like that.

4nxi3ty

,... active lurking. No information as of yet.

Hiplop

has contributed to the town's discussion, but I can't get a read of his posts.

Kortul

, I can say, is safely town until proven otherwise.

Rhinox

has changed his behavior from previous games quite a bit, he's played here like a decent townie.

Nachomamma

is scum. I can't see any other possibility.


Nacho, how about you answer your own question?
Post 110: "When you're defending yourself, what other objectives should you have?"

Lots of things wrong with this:

1) See Malee's read. He says he thinks the Malee case is forced. Then he goes on to say that if her behavior continues, it will be very difficult to dig herself out of whatever hole she's in or something like that. Shouldn't he find her behavior fine if he finds the case forced?
2) 4n's, hip's reads literally don't say anything.
3) Kortul is safely town until proven otherwise? How so? He gives no explanation for this (hell, none of them have explanations)
4) No vote on Nacho. This leads me to my next point.

Post 173: Funky says Nacho provided an explanation for his behavior. If you go through Nacho's ISO...he really didn't explain his behavior.

Spoiler: quote 2

I did not vote Nacho because I was waiting for him to respond to my question.

ORLY? He's referring to his random ass question at the end of quote 1. I find this very hard to believe. Why not just vote and then ask the question? Avoiding conflict IMO.

Also, it's an irrelevant question. Is that question really important enough to hold off a vote for? I don't think so.

But yeah anyway we've clarified that Funky thinks Nacho's innocent. Except, according to Read 218, Funky agrees with Hip that Nacho's scum now.

TL;DR Funky's scum.

Add in the Alice vote for no original reason whatsoever, and I think we've found lurker scum.

[Lastsurvivor]

@4n: You have said that funky is probably town. Why?
@kortul, hiplop: You two should totally vote funk.
@alice: As much as I agree with your points on DDD (hence why I was doubting my read and switched my vote), you're not going to get enough momentum for a lynch before deadline. So you should totally vote funky too.

[Lastsurvivor]

Good catch on Theo's flip flopping Alice read. Theo, care to explain the flop?

I feel really good about Funky though. The scumminess that he's been caught in is probably the most concrete so far. I really can't see a townie having the interactions he had with Nacho.

[Lastsurvivor]

I've been mulling over this for some time:Immediately after this post LS decided to ISO some people and than later came up with a case on funky and alice, looks like he was worried he wasn't providing enough content.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Correlatio ... _causation

Yup, after Nacho voted me I did do some ISOs. But I was going to do those ISOs anyway because I wanted to get some solid reads on people. Sorry if that's scummy.

On one hand LS has been pressuring a lot of people to explain themselves but on the other he has been overstating the scumminess of others.

Once I realized my Alice case was bad I unvoted. If you wanna prove how I'm overstating scumminess on Funky, then I'll buy this point. But please do that first.

On one hand LS has been pressuring a lot of people to explain themselves but on the other he has been overstating the scumminess of others. It has gotten to the point where I feel he is just been trying to get a mislynch going on multiple people while masking his actions as pro-town by asking a lot of questions.

Summary: "My reads disagree with LS so he must be scum pushing for mislynches. He asks a lot of questions. That couldn't possibly be part of his playstyle; he must be scum."

Tell me I'm wrong.

Also, I have no idea how you could think that funky's thought process was logical. He referred to events that didn't happen. I.e, he said Nacho explained himself when he didn't. I don't know how a townie could look through Nacho's posts and see an explanation.

He said he didn't vote because he was waiting for Nacho to answer a question. The question, imo, doesn't seem like enough to hold off a vote for. I think he's lying.

But please tell me where you see the logic. I want to be enlightened.

The hungry wolf comment was quoted as an example of one of the times you demanded more content. That would've been clear to you had you read my posting. As for "slight disappointment", it's more than that. I never suggested it wasn't.

Honest question: Do you really think I haven't been providing content since you've been gone? Your argument's irrelevant ATM.

(Also, don't even think about replying that your prodding made me provide content.)

And, didn't even acknowledge your "out of place complimenting" bit. Can we try again and answer people's suspicions against us seriously?

How am I supposed to reply to "This is not ok!!!" especially when I thought it was perfectly fine. How about you quit it with your lazy argument and vote someone else. You told me to shit or get off the pot. I did. How about you do the same?

You're looking at the arguments as opposed to the people themselves. This is scummy.

Uh huh. That's why at least three other people were saying it was a town/town argument, right? Were they all my scumbuddies?

Furthermore, how is it scummy. Shouldn't I be evaluating their arguments to see if they're town? You're not making any sense.

----

I want to see Theo reply to the flip flop on Alice, since I feel there is an explanation that town could make. If he explains well, my vote stays on Funk.

[Lastsurvivor]

I'd really love some evidence for Funky town that isn't based on crashed-game-meta evidence. Because I've gone through his games that are actually still here, and his scum game actually looks closer to this game honestly.

Theo also needs to show up. He's stalling this game and we're two days until deadline. <_<

[Lastsurvivor]

Lovely.

Just in case it isn't clear to everyone: We're lynching either funky or theo today. If you aren't on either of their wagons, stop lollygagging and hop on.

I'd rather you hop on funky, but you know.

Pretty sure almost everyone is on either one wagon or another at this point, save Nacho and the two wagoned individuals themselves. I could be wrong though.

[Lastsurvivor]

Hmm..

If theo comes back, he really needs to explain his flip flop. If it's not a good explanation, I have intent to hammer.

If he doesn't come back, then we should probably let the replacement do some explaining before we think about stringing him up, since we will get a deadline extension.

[Lastsurvivor]

Hi everyone

I don't have time to read through right now, but will soon.

And don't hammer me.

Vote: VoidedMafia

Soon better be, like, soon. Don't stall.

But yeah nobody hammer until he reads. (

Looking at you, FUNKY

)

[Lastsurvivor]

Hm.

I find the fact that I'm the focus of Macro's first catch up post unsettling. I'm just wondering if it's because I had the most posts at the time and he decided to latch on to every word I said. He accuses a lot of my cases of being overblown, but they're early game cases. They're going to be based on weak things if they're two pages in. And why did he flip flop after all that attention he put on me? I don't think I've acted any more townie since the game started.

In general, I just find that the catch up post starts to say less and less. And like someone already said, he wants to vote for someone that isn't mentioned at all in the post.

I'm fine with a macro lynch.

UNVOTE:
VOTE: macrophage
L-2

unvote, vote: Lastsurvivor

I'm just gonna assume this is a joke vote. Unless, of course, you're going to justify it with a case that I haven't already picked apart and blown out of the water.

When you do that, feel free to call back. Otherwise, plz submit a serious vote.

[Lastsurvivor]

LastSurvivor: What has made you aware of how townie your posts are?

I'm generally posting the same way I have been all game, so I'm not sure what made you obtain a town read on me, especially since it seems I was your top scum read. Most of your concerns about me seemed to be about how I constructed cases, and I don't think I've really changed that.

[Lastsurvivor]

- really tries to paint rhinox as scum here yet:

waits for fishy to place a vote before placing his; Also unvotes after fishy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Correlatio ... _causation

Second time you've invoked this. Fishy voting had nothing to do with my vote. Fishy did convince me to unvote because he helped me see the towniness in Rhino though. I'm confused. How is this scummy exactly? It's not.

moves on to SA(no longer following fishy's tail, I believe fishy mentioned something about LS following him before this):

-the bolded parts are overstatements with a hint of buzzwords

OH MY GOD NOT BUZZWORDS!!!!!!!

You haven't said anything so far. Exaggerating isn't really scummy, especially in the early game when there isn't much to go on. Nor are "HINTS OF BUZZWORDS" scummy.

-overstating again; malee did agree she made a mistake and unvoted, it never got into pandering territory

Misrep (OH MY GOD A BUZZWORD). You don't even know what I'm referring to when I say pandering. I'm referring to this:

This post feels fake to me (see #95 and #97 as well.)

That's very townish to say, but it was genuine. I thought nacho voted you, but even without that vote, he still skimmed. I wasn't paying attention enough, my bad.

malee wagon dies and than he moves onto alice and funkybike

The Malee wagon pretty much died with my unvote. But nice try.

-immediately jumps to flipfloppng, fails to consider that it could just be a change in reads or a tentative read.

Yeah you missed this post apparently:

I want to see Theo reply to the flip flop on Alice, since I feel there is an explanation that town could make. If he explains well, my vote stays on Funk.

TL;DR: I did consider what you just said. In fact, there's nothing even in the original post that you quoted that implies that I hadn't.

jumps to accusing macro of flipflopping as well.

K why is this scummy.

Also, it is odd that after all that effort spent to prove to us that alice and funky are scum he just changes his mind and pushes a theo/macro lynch

OH MY GOD HEAVEN FORBID MY READS ON ALICE CAN CHANGE AFTER INTERACTIONS.
You're. Not. Saying. Anything. That. Makes. Me. Scum.

Funky I've given up on for today because it's clear he's not getting lynched. Plus, he's probably gonna get replaced tomorrow.

These aren't the actions of town pressuring a wide variety of people to understand their alignments, this is aggressive scum looking for a mislynch.

That's an interesting conclusion because you haven't proven it at all.

what does bother me, is that LS has repeatedly hopped from wagon to wagon and for most part gets a town read on someone when their wagon isn't moving.

To be fair I've basically created almost half of the wagons I've been on (Rhinox if I had gotten on before Fishy, Alice). But yeah, wagon hopping isn't scummy. Nice try.

Oh, and gee. I get a town read on someone when I unvote them? Don't you think that might indicate that I'm unvoting them because I actually believe they're not scum?

----

Now, please provide a case that does not do on any of the following.

1) Points out arbitrary things about my play and saying that they're are scummy when they're not at all (E.g, "LS SAID MACRO FLIP FLOPPED OMG HE MUST BE SCUM." "LS UNVOTES PEOPLE AND THEN BELIEVES THEY'RE TOWN, HE MUST BE SCUM." )
2) Relies on logical fallacies.
3) Is inaccurate (E.g, not knowing what I'm referring to when I say pandering or missing my posts)

When you do this you can keep your vote. Otherwise, stop wasting our freaking time and lynch scum.

[Lastsurvivor]

There is no way for me to read your mind and actually know what caused you to do something, I'll I see is waht happens in thread.

And you shouldn't be assuming that I'm scum just because Fishy made a vote before I did. Especially since I'm pretty sure I've already explained my actions about it.

Why do you the need to provide a wiki link instead of just explaing why you waited to vote rhinox?

It's fun! Linking to logical fallacies is fun!

Exaggerations are fine when trying to get reactions, your exaggerations tend to fall more towards pushing a lynch rather than reaction test.

I can't deny that I exaggerate, but it's not intentional. I normally just write down what I think and tone it down, but sometimes I don't tone it down.

Why do you think a funkybike wagon is no longer viable?

No one seemed to be responding to my prods for the vote a few days ago. I assumed that everyone just thought that Funky had too few posts for a vote.

I'm not going "OMG WAGONHOPS SCOMZR", I am showing that the timing of your hops happen after someone else has jumped off and that you always end up on the next biggest wagon.

Meh. If you look at the vote count archive, that's not really true. Well, someone might always jump off before I unvote, sure, but I don't always end up on the biggest wagon.

Why do you dismiss my points as arbritary instead of trying to understand my perspective?

Not all your points are arbitrary. Just those two I think. That said, they shouldn't be in your case.

[Lastsurvivor]

pedit: *sometimes I don't tone it down enough.

but whatever.

[Lastsurvivor]

Lastsurvivor's 422 is a way bad post; he sells out for a lesser lynch than his prefered target and he gets that kind of snotty tone that I get when I'm scum and have people suspecting me for what I think are wrong reasons.

And that shouldn't be a consideration at all? It's not as if he tossed aside everything he said perviously to take an easy lynch; he simply moved within his own suspicions to a wagon that might actually flourish.

I'm sorry, were you contradicting yourself, DDD? Keep in mind that I've had every single occupant of the Malee slot on my scum list. So it's not as if I tossed aside everything I said previously to take an easy lynch; I simply moved within my own suspicions to a wagon that might actually flourish.

Also, because you have a snotty tone when you're scum, everyone who has a snotty tone must be scum? Right.

----

@SA: What do you think the "town explanation" is? Personally, I'm not seeing it. I actually followed along with his catch up, and I wasn't really agreeing with a lot of the stuff he was saying. Then again, most of it is "I like player x" or "player y is weird," so I don't really have much to go on with his thought process.

[Lastsurvivor]

No, not-VT, and no.

Yeah, sorry, you need to claim. Claiming non-VT is useless because you could literally be any role. Yes, even VT (we have no idea if you're just trying to soak the NK). But honestly, claiming non-VT just affirms to me and plenty of others that you're scum.

Why are you using unexplained reads against me when you could easily ask for explanations?

How about you explain your reads yourself?

Response to Nacho in 24: The combination of lack of good reasoning for a vote while repeating what he said back at him.

Wait, how does this make her town? If I made a post called "Why Malee is scum," I would put in what you just said verbatim honestly.

83 After complaining about someone else skimming, scum don't make a mistake like Malee did. It would likely make them subject to contradiction accusations from their PoV.

That's a...broad generalization. Scum can make mistakes too.

And I can see where Malee is coming from in 138. I agree that calling someone's post fake is a slight towntell.

:/ you can't really tell me shouting "these posts look fake!!!" without any reasoning tacked on is a town tell. Anyone can do it, both town and scum alike.

The big thing though, is his going from a townread on Alice to an Alice-wagon in the next post. How can any of you honestly see that coming from scum?

The better question: How can you see that coming from town?

I certainly cannot.

----

TL;DR: Macro needs to formulate a fakeclaim so someone can drop the hammer.

[Lastsurvivor]

Yes they can, but aren't they less likely to? I'm really sick of this whole "but scum can do that too!" attack that you, fishy and rhinox have been using. Can you actually consider things properly?

Erm, no not really@first statement. We've gotta consider that Malee is rather inexperienced. I don't think she's ever finished a game. She's just as likely to make a mistake as either alignment TBH.

I don't know why he did it, but I know he was town. Looks like you can't answer my question though.

Oh, I thought I already did answer your question. I can see that coming from scum fairly easily.

Why are you even bothering to defend your predecessors anyway?

Also, the ad hom attacks really aren't helping you out in any regard.

[Lastsurvivor]

This is disgustingly hypocritical. For one, you're falling into the same fallacy you called anxiety out for. And two, Alice laughed off your case. Which is coincidentally the same reaction you had to mine.

FTR, I don't think 4n is scummy for using correlation does not imply causation. It's just bad case making. So you've proven that my Alice case was bad, which...I've already acknowledged.

Yeah, I laughed off your case. I never said you didn't have a right to get mad at me for it, did I? Hell, I expected you to get mad about it. Thus, I think I have the right to get mad at Alice for blowing off mine.

I don't think I've been hypocritical.

I can get into your case itself if you'd like, but while it was long, it was terrible.

You're right, the case was pretty bad. I realized that and unvoted. Perhaps you should do that same.

Then you bitch at her for ignoring your case, follow up once, and... drop it. Then, you unvote her for her points on DDD? Which have been brought up multiple times before?

I unvoted her because I thought over it all again and realized she was probably town. DDD didn't have anything to do with it and I'm not sure where you're getting that from. The post you quoted about DDD had nothing to do with why I unvoted her. I was just trying to get Alice to unvote DDD and vote Funky.

And now, the macrophage vote. He attacks you, you talk about how townie you've been and how he's scum for doubting your townie self. And then you criticize his catchup post for "saying less and less"? Tell me, have you ever done a catchup post before?

Yeah, typically I just don't say a lot throughout the entire catch up post. But I'm always consistent.

Anyway, you picked out a few of my posts, but your post doesn't even answer my question. Am I or am I not providing content?

[Lastsurvivor]

That's not an answer to my question.

Well, I figured I already answered it anyway. But to elaborate, I think he just thought that Alice was the sure lynch target and hopped on, thinking that his previous reads would be forgotten. I'd think a townie would elaborate why there was such a sudden jump from town read -> scum read.

So I don't get lynched. I wouldn't bother otherwise.

...Fair enough, I guess. I don't really think it's helping you out though.

What ad hom attacks?

Can you actually consider things properly, what's your problem etc etc.

-----

This doesn't make sense. Why did you just laugh off the case, then?

You didn't really say a lot and there wasn't a lot that I felt like I could reply to. You voted me for being on the Malee wagon for too long. I agreed, and I was going to do ISOs that day so I knew I was going to, as you said, "get off the pot." Then you said "out of place complimenting" was bad, and...I still don't see why. So I just decided to be a dick and get on with my ISOs, because I figured you'd see that I was actually getting shit done.

But that didn't happen I guess.

You're not sure where I'm getting that from? You said, blatantly, that the reason you doubted your read and switched your vote was because of Alice's points on DDD. Not because you realized the case was bad. But because of Alice's points on DDD. And now you said that had nothing to do with it?

Well, your acting as if I ONLY unvoted Alice based on her points on DDD. That's not true. It was because of her play in general and my rethinking of the case that caused me to unvote. So, yeah, DDD did have something to do with it. But you're overstating the significance.

In the statement you bolded, you could replace hence with "which was one of the reasons," and it'd have a more accurate meaning.

Generally, people start out strong and lose stamina over time. Like writing a paper or doing homework.

Eh. I don't do page by page ISOs, so that might be why I couldn't sympathize.

[Lastsurvivor]

PEDIT: *I don't do page by page catch up posts.

[Lastsurvivor]

@Macro: Maybe I'm just misremembering what adhom is. idk. If I'm reaching or something, then just disregard.

And are you sure you aren't finding me scummy because I'm attacking you?

What does everyone think of Macro's claim? Some of us seem to find it a town tell, but I'm not so sure.

----

@Nacho:

First point: I didn't really care if you thought my reaction to your vote was pro-town. But that doesn't make me scum. But I figured you'd see that my Alice case (which I thought was good at the time) and following ISO analysis post and see that I was providing content.

Second: I mistyped/lied when I said that her points about DDD had nothing to do with me unvoting.

BUT you're still misinterpreting the post. I saw Alice's general posting after I posted my case and started doubting myself. Basically I started doubting myself when she actually replied to my case. Then I looked back on my case and realized it was crap and unvoted.

Yes, DDD had something to do with it, but it was only a part. If you think of it in that context, I'm not sure how what I originally said doesn't make sense. I think you're just being too literal with your words.

----

Meh. If you look at the vote count archive, that's not really true. Well, someone might always jump off before I unvote, sure, but I don't always end up on the biggest wagon.

the three main wagons of today have been funky, alice, and macro; the vote count may not show it but you have pushed all of those lynches when they were the center of discussion. You have moved on to someone new everytime there was and indication of discussion shifting. You can not simply pass this off as "correlation is not causesation".

Alice and Funky weren't the center of discussion when I voted them. I basically made Alice the center of discussion, and while maybe Fishy was talking about Funky...I definitely would not call him the center.

So, yes, Macro was the center of discussion when I voted him. Shoot me.

And, erm...I've moved on to someone new everytime there was an indication of discussion shifting? I mean, maybe? You've obviously looked into that one more than I have. When I switched from Alice to Funky that was because...I thought Alice was town. I didn't think "OMG the discussion is shifting! Better unvote!" It was a switch because my reads switched. What a shock.

Funky to Macro was because I figured a Funky lynch wasn't going to happen. So, yeah, I guess you could say it was because of a discussion shift. I don't see how that's necessarily a bad thing though. I had already previously stated that I thought the Macro slot (Malee/Theo) was scum, so it's not like it was a big surprise.

[Lastsurvivor]

You accused me of a scummy reply when I replied to your case. So not sure what you're saying here.

I'm mostly referring to this reply, not the previous one. After that I started looking back over your posts and my case and stuff.

[Lastsurvivor]

My original case was that he had been sitting for Malee for too long, and had been asking for a lot of content, but not delivering. This response not only misreps my case, but brushes it off completely. LastSurvivor's explanation for this post is that he agreed that he had been sitting on Malee and he was doing ISOs that day anyways so I was going to see his protown light shine through. If you believe someone has genuine concerns, then why brush them off? Or, better yet, if you agree with problems someone raises against you, why the hell would you misrepresent them?

How does this prove I'm scum though? If I were scum, do you really think I'd react the way I did to your case? No, because it would just make you angry when a simple "I'm gonna do ISOs and 'get off the pot' later on today" would have sufficed.

Reacting to your case that way was a stupid thing to do, yeah. But there's no way that doing that blatantly misrepping a case when you don't have to would further a scum's agenda. If you can find the scum intent behind this point, then by all means enlighten me. Otherwise, you've just proven that I was being a dickwad that day.

You mistyped/lied. Okay. Can you answer the original piece, then? Why were Alice's points about DDD special when we heard them all a thousand times before?

I really only liked her points because I agreed with them. There's nothing really "special" about them. But if you look at the original post...

@alice: As much as I agree with your points on DDD (hence why I was doubting my read and switched my vote), you're not going to get enough momentum for a lynch before deadline. So you should totally vote funky too.

The intent of the post is not "Oh, hey, your DDD points are really unique and special." It's "You should get off that DDD wagon and vote Funky." So you're still misinterpreting the post. I'm not thinking as highly of the DDD points as you think I am.

-----

Hasn't mentioned, interacted with, or pressured funky's replacement at all; instead he has continued to push the lynch of the person with the most attention.

I've been defending myself against you/nacho and barely attacking macro. Lousy excuse, I guess, but attacking DCL isn't really high on my priorities right now.

This is what I was getting at earlier about him using questions to mask actions as a pro-town stance. The main motivation of that statement is to place doubt into macro's claim being a towntell.

Others (Hiplop e.g) have said that that macro's claim is not a town tell. There are two sides to the issue. I'm not trying to "place doubt," into anything. I'm trying to get people's opinions since not everyone has put in their input.

Last is trying to portray himself as this uber-towny who generates all sorts of discussion.

Err, that's a broad expansion. I say, "I moved Alice into the center of discussion" and you take it as "LS tries to portray himself as uber-town who generates all sorts of discussion."
Anyway, prove that I didn't move Alice into the center of discussion.

4n's case seems to consist of "LS is pretending to be pro town!!!!" Nothing that proves I'm scum.
Nacho's case proves that I'm a prick, I guess. Not that I'm scum though.

@Macro: How many games of mafia have you played before (roughly)?

[Lastsurvivor]

This isn't the post of someone who thinks that Nacho has a point. It's too dismissive. If someone has a point and you're going to improve on that score, you should admit it. But failing that, you at least don't call their vote a joke.

I reacted that way because I was being stupid. At this point I really don't know how to boil it down any other way. You and Nacho are looking for some pro-town motive behind that reaction when it's clear that there wasn't other than the fact that I was irritated and felt like being a dick. Nacho's "out of place complimenting" is bad point irritated me and I just decided to dismiss the entire case because of it.

Yeah, it was a brutally stupid thing to do. But why would scum do it? How is scum furthering his agenda by disregarding a case like that? If the above paragraph isn't good enough for you, I ask you to answer those two questions for me.

So, LS knows that Nacho's argument wasn't irrelevant when he made. He must also know that what happened could easily be construed as Nacho's prodding making LS provide content. Again, if you agreed with an argument and think you need to do something, you don't do that thing and then call the argument irrelevant.

I think I've already addressed this above. If not, let me know.

---

I'd still rather lynch Macro today. But to avoid a NL (inb4 4n accuses me of trying to look protown), I'd also support a DDD lynch.

---

I'll reply to DC in my next post, but the case looks pretty lame so far.

[Lastsurvivor]

I'm going to mostly ignore the post where I'm apparently sheeping Fishy because if I do then I'm guessing DC will say I'm defending Fishy. But I will say that most of the reasons that I did a lot of the things I did according to DC are misreps. So there's that.

Anyway.

Alicewondering: I'm having a hard time understanding the reasons for this wagon, what I did notice is that both you[fishy] and LS abandoned it to jump onto the next wagon. LS was the first on the alicewagon, you were the third and you sheeped, theo and LS in voting Alice. Then you jump off when Alice gets to L-2, LS jumps off when Alice gets to L-2 again. Had you both followed through on you vehement "alice is scum" reads, Alice likely would have been lynched.

Yeah, I feel like I've explained this three times, but I'll do it again.

I hopped off the Alice wagon because I realized that Alice was town. Simple as that. Yes, if I had kept on going with the alice is scum thing, she may have gotten lynched. Good thing I didn't.

[Lastsurvivor]

@Voided: Between fishy and I? Looking at the list, yeah, there's a connection. But I believe DC is taking that connection and blowing it way out of the water.

@DCL: If you promise not to accuse me of defending Fishy, sure.

You've definitely uncovered a connection. I think Fishy and I vote the same people because we generally have the same scum reads (well, until recently). About the closeness of our hops? I dunno because I never noticed it until you brought it up. Perhaps it was something at a subconscious level? But I don't think I've ever consciously thought "Fishy's unvoting, shit, I guess I better unvote too." I've always been voting/unvoting based on my own changing reads.

@Fishy: Mm, I think you might be misinterpreting me, or I you? Are you referring to this?

Honest question: Do you really think I haven't been providing content since you've been gone? Your argument's irrelevant ATM.

(Also, don't even think about replying that your prodding made me provide content.)

I'm just not sure what you're trying to say. Yeah, I knew the point wasn't irrelevant, as I've said before, but I was annoyed so I decided to dismiss it anyway. I dismissed his argument in #372 for a legitimate reason, however: I had been provided content. And I included the bit in parentheses because I was going to do those ISOs anyway, not because of Nacho's prodding.

I'm not being dense on purpose if you're actually asking something. I really don't understand what you're asking that I haven't already addressed...

[Lastsurvivor]

IDK. If you accuse someone of not posting content, and they post content, that doesn't mean your argument was irrelevant and dismissing it is still strange.

Well, if you accuse someone of not providing content, then they provide content, but you STILL accuse them of not providing content, the argument is irrelevant, no? I wasn't saying that his argument ORIGINALLY was irrelevant. I was saying his argument was irrelevant at that moment (hence the inclusion of "ATM") since I was providing content.

@Macro: 15 games? Mk. I figured you were an alt or at least played off site, but I wanted a number.

I don't really have a problem with interacting with Fishy. I've never really noticed the connection beyond the extent that we vote the same people, so really I think that DCL's just noticed it and decided to create a crazy conclusion based off of it instead of a more logical one. I guess I had a problem with defending him after being linked, which brings me to your next question...

The reason I didn't want to respond to the post and defend Fishy was because I figured DCL was going to use it as ammunition to "link us" together. Basically the paranoid parrot in me thought it was a trap of sorts. Link the two of us together, and then when I attempt to severe the connection, DCL just misconstrues my response and makes the connection tighter. The response I gave didn't really defend Fishy nor can it really be misconstrued, so in hindsight I should have just answered.

[Lastsurvivor]

Misrepping a case against you is a pretty fucking simple way to make it seem like there isn't a case against you. Just saying that you would do ISOs today and alleviate my concerns would require acknowledging there WAS a case against you, and I don't think you wanted to do that. Being a dick does NOT justify consciously and purposefully misrepping someone's case. When I'm angry, I use colorful words, but I don't intentionally MISREP SOMEONE'S CASE.

Oh, come on. You cannot honestly think that it's smart scum play to blatantly misrep a case that consists of six lines. Scum misreps larger cases because it's harder for town to pick out the misreps. Anyone with half a brain cell could pick out that I was misrepping your case hard. You can accept that's true right?

If yes, then why would have it been smart play for me to do it if I were scum? The only thing it accomplished was making me look suspicious and giving you ammo for your case against me. Clearly, those two things go against the criteria of "[making] it seem like there isn't a case against [me]."

But you told her that's why you unvoted her. What is the point of the parenthesis otherwise?

It's

part

of the reason why I unvoted her. I've already explained this to you. "Hence" was the wrong word to use in those parentheses. Replacing it with "Which was one of the reasons why" (Or a more concise way of saying that) would have been better. You're just taking the post way too literally and misconstruing it into a scum point.

And i still don't understand why you blatantly lied about the DDD bit. I set it to the side for a moment because I didn't really understand why anyone in their right mind would do that, but maybe you can help me out with that. And when I did call you out on it, you tried to shuffle the blame onto me for your lies because I "acting as if [you] ONLY unvoted Alice based on her points on DDD", despite the fact that it was all you told us. More pushing, and you change your game and admit you lied. So why the hell did it take so much to get the truth out of you? Did you think my case sucked so horribly that you could say whatever you felt like and it would go away?

This is the only thing I recall admitting to "blatantly lying" about...

Second: I mistyped/lied when I said that her points about DDD had nothing to do with me unvoting.

Is this what you want me to justify? Because it was just me mistyping, which you're conveniently not including in this paragraph. I followed it up with...

BUT you're still misinterpreting the post. I saw Alice's general posting after I posted my case and started doubting myself. Basically I started doubting myself when she actually replied to my case. Then I looked back on my case and realized it was crap and unvoted.

Yes, DDD had something to do with it, but it was only a part. If you think of it in that context, I'm not sure how what I originally said doesn't make sense. I think you're just being too literal with your words.

The same thing I've been saying all along. You didn't get the "truth out of me," or catch me in a blatant lie. You caught me typing a bit too fast, but I still have the same story: You're taking my words too literally about a minuscule point and over-blowing it. Now can you please stop beating this dead horse? I'm getting tired of repeating myself.

[Lastsurvivor]

I know this point has been said before, but Macro's survivalism is really starting to bother me. In the beginning of the game I was trying to disregard it as a tell since, after all, he was coming in with a BW on him. But now I think it's clear that he has a shot since there are two counterwagons. Yet, he's still going on.

The behavior doesn't consist with a VT either. A VT might have panicked while they replaced in, but I don't think they'd still be in survival mode now. I'd think they'd be doing what Nacho suggested Macro should do. Find the scum before they get lynched and leave the town with something to work with from their flip.

PEDIT: Oh boy, I see DCL's post and I will reply to that ASAP.

[Lastsurvivor]

#1: Eh. You've gotta keep in mind that this happen in the very first pages of the game. Of course there's going to be "reaching" involved in my case. But that's what creates content, discussion, etc. I basically knew the case was ridiculous going in, but I was just seeing how Rhinox would react. He reacted fine, so I backed off but did a reaction test. The post looks appeasey because I wanted to see how Rhinox would react when I didn't unvote after I totally put on a different tone. Nacho called me out first, so I didn't even bother following through with the test though.

Basically, it's pretty unfair of you to call this case scummy for all the reasons you said it was unfair for me to do it: It was early game, and I was trying to jumpstart it and create content.

#2: :/ Why even bother making a point if you're just going to say "Yeah, and I know how he's going to defend himself, but I don't believe him!" I mean, sorry that I don't blindly charge on with my reads if I start to doubt them. But feel free to continue calling this a scum point!

#3: Oh, wonderful, now you're beating this dead horse too.

I really don't feel like repeating myself, but here we go...

First quote: "Hence" was the wrong word to use in those parentheses. Replacing it with "Which was one of the reasons why" (Or a more concise way of saying that) would have been better. You're just taking the post way too literally and misconstruing it into a scum point.

Second quote: Mistype. I forgot about Alice's thoughts about DDD in this quote because they were minor in my rationale for voting her. The only reason I mentioned it in the first quote was because I wanted her to vote Funky.

Third quote: This is the truth, yo.

Fourth quote: This says the same thing as the third quote and is the truth, yo.

#4: Er, sure, I have been involved in all the major bandwagons. But how many of those bandwagons have I actually hopped onto?

Rhinox: Wasn't really a major wagon when I hopped on. Only had one vote: Fishy. You might not count this as a major wagon since it never got more than two votes, though, but I'm assuming you are since you thought it was scummy.
Sleepless Assassin: I was the first person to seriously vote SA (Alice had a RVS vote on him). So he definitely wasn't a major BW when I voted him. Two others voted SA, so I guess you could consider this one of the major wagons. But I arguably made it one of the major wagons.
Malee: Wagon hop.
Alice: I was the first person to vote Alice. It's quite unfair to accuse me of being involved in a major BW for Alice when I could not have known that it would have been a major BW.
Funky: I guess I was the third person to hop on this wagon, so it was barely a wagon hop.
Macro: Wagon hop.

So...3/6? Yeah, you're overexaggerating on this point. You can't really accuse me of being involved in major wagons if the wagons haven't materialized.

#5: Err, no. Wagon hopping is a null tell and become a scum tell depending on context.

#209: Was a question. I was trying to figure out the motivations for the wagon hop since there was little explanation provided by Alice.
#223: Yeah, context is important in this quote bro. 4n tried to lampshade that he was hopping as if that would make it less bad. Really, it was the lampshading that bothered me, not the hop. Later on, I say that as long as he explains why he changed his vote later I don't mind.
#434: Yeah, BW hopping really isn't bad if you just explain your vote and stuff. Then it's a null tell: Not really anything.

[Lastsurvivor]

I disagree, I think survivalism is a trait shown by town and scum alike. Townies should try to not get mislynched because that does set the town back.

As a townie I definitely try to avoid getting lynched, because I know my lynch will hurt the town.

Yeah, I get what you mean. I'm not saying he should just go down without a fight and ignore attacks directed at him. But it's just the degree that he's doing it. Posts like this...

Considering that pretty much everyone off my wagon has said that they think I'm town and/or won't be voting for me, why aren't you trying harder to convince them?

Are just unnecessary and don't seem like something a VT would do.

LS has focused on trying to prove that the points against him are wrong. One would think he would be more suspicious of me, nacho, and dc. I would expect him to focus more on figuring out why we are attacking him if he were, yet his efforts have been towards winning the arguements. I would even say his recent posts show more survialistic tones than macro's.

Who says I'm not suspicious of you guys? I'm generally keeping it to myself though because it's very hard to look at your arguments neutrally since you're attacking me and not someone else. But I can't believe you're accusing me of being scummy because I'm trying to "win" the arguments against me. Really? What do you want me to do, just let all the points stand?

[Lastsurvivor]

PEDIT: Also, about the survivalistic tones bit: Of course I'm going to appear survivalistic if I'm defending myself! I have a problem with Macro's survivalistic posts such as the one I posted before and posts like this. I'm not bothered by the posts where he's defending himself, but those random posts that aren't really necessary.

[Lastsurvivor]

Um, you could ask why I posted those posts... I don't actually see what survivalism has to do with it, but you're the one accusing.

Sure. Why did you post those posts?

Hm, it seems like you are saying it's ok to do things scummy things early game in order to get the discussion moving. Not sure how I feel about that.

I'm skeptical of the whole "reaction test" stuff, it just seems to me like it can be an easy out.

The case was so over the top I figured people would see it was a reaction test. I didn't really care if people didn't because I assumed people would call me out on it less than ~500 posts later into the game. But yeah, if you look here:

And good answer @ the last bundle of paragraphs. And I totally understand what you're saying about my forced questions but you have to understand that that's exactly why I ask them. I'm seeing what people make out of the little information we have.

I have already said I ask forced questions and I know it. So it's not like I'm pulling that "reaction test" thing out of my ass.

Well, I put this in as part of the reason I don't believe your jump off of alice. As far as beating a dead horse, I was simply being thorough in explaining why I consider you scum. Again, not trying to start the argument all over again with you.

Why is my defense wrong? So far it just looks like you're going "lalalala I don't believe you I have five mediocre points that's good enough to get you lynched nope don't wanna hear it!!!"

If you're going to make a post saying why you're voting me, don't just say that you're not going to argue back.

I made two claims in point 4.

1. You were on all the major wagons.
2. You had voted for the 5 people to get the most votes over the course of the game.

1) Isn't really scummy...
2) You didn't exactly prove that either.

Rhinox was not a major wagon, neither was sleepless.

I'll give you Rhinox. Sleepless was the only wagon at it's time and got three votes. I think that's enough to classify it as a major wagon. So 3/5? Still not good enough to prove anything.

Secondly I said you had voted for the 5 people to get the most votes over the course of the game and not for anyone else. My post 518 proves that.

Oh, wait. So you're fine with striking Rhinox/Sleepless from the record when major wagons are concerned. But when it comes to getting votes OH NO NO NO. They can stay.

But yeah, you still haven't proven the "get the most votes over the course of the game" part. Honestly, I'm not even sure what this means.

I disagree, first quote implies wagon hopping is bad.

Look at my Alice case. Is "Alice BW hopped that's scummy" in there? No, it isn't. Because I didn't find it scummy. I find the motives behind BW hops before I start calling them out as scummy. Hell, in the case, I even say that I can see the reasoning for the BW hop!

re switching from malee to funkybike: I can see the reasoning, sort of. However, Alice repeats multiple times that Malee is still her top scum read even though she has switched votes. Which, again, I can understand.

So clearly I thought it was situational there. I just mentioned "Hey that's a BW hop" in the question. to add pressure or whatever.

Second quote, "4n tried to lampshade that he was hopping as if that would make it less bad." Wagon hopping seems to be viewed as bad if it something can be done in an attempt to make it "less bad."

Again, it was more that he lampshaded it. I was thinking that he thought he could get away with not explaining his vote if he just said "hurr durr inb4 people call me out on this." If he hadn't done that, I probably would have just asked, like I asked Alice.

Again, look at the thing I said later:

@4nx: BW hop's the wrong phrase, but changing your vote without explaining is still lame.

But if you're going to explain eventually, then I'll be looking forward to it.

After 4n says he's going to explain later, I drop the point. So, again, clearly I thought it was situational there too.

Third quote. however when wagon hopping is applied to you it becomes a situational tell. How convenient.

No. Have I called anyone else out who wagon hopped that hasn't explained why they changed their vote? You're being ridiculous.

For those keeping score at home:

#1: Busted. I already said it was a reaction test early on in the game way before anyone called me out on it.
#2 + #3: Are dead horses that I've already debunked. DCL is unwilling to reargue them, so I'm striking them from the record.
#4: DCL provides two subpoints: That I've been on all five major wagons, and that I voted them to "get the most votes." Subpoint 1 doesn't really prove anything scummy, but he is right, I have. He hasn't proved the second one. The post he provided as evidence for the second point (#518) proves the first point. But not the second point whatsoever.
#5: Busted. DCL can't look at context, even though he claims he can.

.5/5 this case gets a 10%.

[Lastsurvivor]

nope you're sidestepping the point, anybody can want to win a debate. Your behaviour shows that disproving arguments is a higher priority for you than figuring out alighnments(ie. you care more about how people percieve you than you do about scumhunting).

That's not what you said...You said that I should be suspecting you, DCL, and Nacho instead of just defending myself. But is it really fair to say that I should be suspecting you, Nacho, and DCL when I'm gonna suspect all three of you because you're attacking me? It's very difficult to discern bad arguments from scum trying to push MLs when you're the one who's being attacked. I believe Rhinox said something similar earlier on in the game in response to my attacks.

[Lastsurvivor]

Doesn't matter if the words are different the idea is the same; You prioritize disproving the points me, nacho, and dc bring up over figuring the motivations behind our points. Your lack of suspicion through out your posts prove this idea.

I have to disagree with it being tougher to discern alighnments from people attacking you, I believe it is more player-dependent.

For example, SA is one of my strongest town reads specifically because of the way he attacked me. That doesn't mean everyone who attacks me will be easier to read.

predit: ...cause he is probly town

:/ Oh dear, you really just aren't listening are you.

Yes, I am considering the motivations behind the attacks. But I'm not going to attack you guys back right now for two reasons.

a) Under pressure, it is very difficult to look at an argument against yourself and see if the player is scum or just providing a bad argument. This isn't true for all of the players attacking me. I'm pretty sure one of the players attacking me is town because he actually provided a decent argument and didn't rehash the same points against me over and over again. But I can really only tell if it's a GOOD case. For everyone else attacking me, I can't really tell if they're just town making bad cases or scum. And while under pressure, I'm not really sure I could make that decision.
b) Town and scum alike have a tendency to look at a player attacking his attackers and say "Lol he's flailing he must be OMGUSing scum!!!" So what's the point of attacking you guys if you're just going to turn it around and put it back in my face?

I'm better off presenting my suspicions tomorrow when I can look at the cases with a clear head and when I won't be flailing.

Starting rereading. May take hours, i tend to lose focus analyzing walls that go back and forth over the same points.

I apologize for this, even though most of the blame goes to those who keep on rehashing the same points against me.

About post 57: What the point of reaction testing someone if you are going to hint strongly at it? Wouldn't that defeat the purpose?

Not really. Nothing I said in that post said "Hurr durr I'm doing a reaction test right now." It said, "All those unreasonable questions I was asking you were reaction tests." I don't know how Rhino would have got that I was doing a reaction test then.

Anyway, my issue was that you left your vote on him after you had seemed to try and appease him in post 57. Nachomama calls you out in post 58 on leaving your vote and you reply "reaction test." in post 59

Yeah, I don't see the issue. I'm never that "appeasey" (I love how everyone is just stealing their cases on me from Nacho. They're even stealing things he said before the case existed) in general, and I wanted Rhino to notice.

Is your issue that I didn't keep the test going? Because I've explained that too. What's the point of doing a reaction test if someone else has already called you out on it? There isn't. So I just said "fuck it" and unvoted.

First, I was not aware that you had power to strike things from the record. /sarcasm

Secondly, I brought these points up to explain why I'm voting you and to convince other people to do the same [consider it a "recap' of sorts]. Not arguing them does not make the issue a moot point. because there isn't much point going further with these because it is becoming a yes,no,yes, no,yes,no issue.

And I feel that I've adequately defended my actions. You have not said otherwise, so I'm striking them from the record.

About #4: (Not gonna quote the entire thing): Maybe I twisted the accusation because I don't understand what you mean. To me, it looks like what you said in #578 and what I said are the same thing. So, what do you mean by "2. You had voted for the 5 people to get the most votes over the course of the game."?

I would say involvement in all the major wagons and

not being involved in anything else is scummy.

WHAT. Weren't you the one saying Rhinox and SA were not major bandwagons? And I was involved in those. So, even if you accept that SA was a major bandwagon (I doubt you have), I have been involved in things other than the "major bandwagons"

quote 1, post 209: The quote from 298 is completely irrelevant to this post. Context? Are you saying I should look 100 posts away to find some fucking context? I've gone through and looked at post 209, I didn't take anything out of context there. To claim that post 298 provides context is ridiculous.

Why doesn't it provide context? Are you saying that, because it happened 89 posts after the post you think is scummy, it cannot explain my actions? Because that makes no sense.

And yes, it is relevant to the post, if you pay attention. I'll even bold the relevant part for you!

re [Alice] switching from malee to funkybike: I can see the reasoning, sort of.

However, Alice repeats multiple times that Malee is still her top scum read even though she has switched votes. Which, again, I can understand.

That's it! If I really said BW hopping was scummy in #209 like you think I did, don't you think I would have said "Re [Alice] switching from malee to funkybike: This was a terribly scummy bandwagon hop!" Sure, you could accuse me of lying again, but what would the point of that be? I could have just said that BW hopping was scummy and made Alice look even more scummy! But I didn't. Why? Because I don't think it's scummy unless you don't explain your reasoning!

quote 2, post 223: Again what you are trying to do is quote from other posts to say I was avoiding context. The context of a post is the information in a post, not stuff from outside the post.

It's context because it's directly relevant to the posts that you're saying are scummy. Does the post I quoted not explain my actions? Do you still think I think BW hopping is scummy?

quote 3, post 434: "But yeah, wagon hopping isn't scummy. Nice try." this does conflict with what was said in context.

How?! Also, it'd be nice if you actually answer the question I asked you in the post. It wasn't rhetorical. Have I called anyone else out who wagon hopped that hasn't explained why they changed their vote?

Basically LS has accused me of ignoring context, but his definition of context can be posts that were nearly 100 slots away. bs.

Context:
the parts of a written or spoken statement that precede or follow a specific word or passage, usually influencing its meaning or effect:

So, I dunno, my definition of context seems to be the dictionary definition. Does my post about Alice follow what you're trying to make look scummy and does it influence it meaning? Yes. Is the same true for my post about 4n? Yes.

In all seriousness, I can see why you wouldn't see the Alice post. Although, I really hope you would since you're obviously trying to build a good case on me and not just picking out quotes that look good. But you literally have no excuse to not see the 4n quote since I'm assuming it's fairly close to my lampshading accusation in my ISO.

But anyway, let's stop splitting hairs about our definitions of context. Do the quotes I provided explain my actions or not? You're ignoring the actual point by shouting "LOLWUT HOW IS THAT CONTEXT???"

[Lastsurvivor]

@Kort: It doesn't really influence my read on him either way. Nacho spins an interesting take on how scum looking for a non VT reaction would follow up, but I don't see why scum can't just gambit and not follow that path. And it'd be an incredible gambit too. By setting up that you're a non-VT, those that think you're scum are expecting a fake PR claim. And when you smash that expectation, people voting you begin to doubt themselves.

That said, while reading Macro I'm trying to ignore the claim just because of it's WIFOMy nature. But that's my take: I don't see how the claim is a town tell.

[Lastsurvivor]

@Macro: Any specific rationale for your vote? Preferably specific stuff.

[Lastsurvivor]

PEDIT: Pardon my redundancy in the above post.

[Lastsurvivor]

#565 - I just realized after looking at it that I was looking at it out of context. I saw Nacho's reply to your post in #566 and assumed you were talking to him and were asking him to convince people to unvote. That's why it came off as extremely survivalistic to me, since I basically thought you were begging Nacho for help to convince those on your wagon to get off of it.

#560 I think I understand too looking back at the interaction you two had. Although it comes off as survivalistic, it's not really that bad since it's not out of the blue.

So yeah, the reason it appeared I didn't believe the survivalism point to you was because I can't look at context properly like DCL. Oh well.

But long winded question to you: Is it really unreasonable that I might not prioritize scumhunting over defending myself when I had three people attacking me (Nacho, 4n, DCL)? Most of the time I devoted to MS these past few days has been writing those massive wall posts to defend myself, and by the time I finished, I didn't really feel like "searching for scum."

----

I'm not feeling good about Macro. Just because it's one day to deadline doesn't mean I have to stay on a ML.

UNVOTE:
VOTE: DDD

Feel free to add one more tack onto my BW hopping count, DCL. I don't really give a damn. I've already explained why DDD is scummy in my ISOs evaluation.

[Lastsurvivor]

It's not unreasonable, but I do think it is scummy.

It's reasonable that I might focus more on defending myself, but it's also scummy? What do you mean?

What do you mean by this?

Oh, my b. I meant I'm not feeling good about a Macro lynch.

[Lastsurvivor]

Hmm, so with Alice's vote I'm at L-2.

I won't be on tomorrow until ~7-5 hours before the deadline. If I make it to L-1, please don't hammer me before then.

[Lastsurvivor]

I'm a VT.

I'm still thinking about whether or not I should adjust my will or if it's fine as is. So please no hammer yet.

Also, if there's any scum that has been attacking me today it's DCL. His case was the worst and the way he argued with me just seemed very scummy. Please keep him accountable to his argument tomorrow.

Also, I'm pretty sure my vote's on scum ATM.

So, yeah. Don't hammer me yet. I'm gonna look through some ISOs and figure out if I should change my will or if it's good as is.

[Lastsurvivor]

Yeah, my will's fine. Feel free to drop the hammer.

[Lastsurvivor]

Rhinox: Macro prob isn't scum. Lynch either DDD or I today. I'd prefer DDD, obviously, but I think my lynch is inevitable at this point.

[Lastsurvivor]

Yeah I'm still a VT.

[Lastsurvivor]

DCL's the only one I definitely think is scum. I repeat:

Make sure you keep DCL accountable to his crappy case.

Kortul's probably the second most scummiest. But I'm not sure if he's scum.

The rest of you except 4n are prob town. none of you are getting my vote though because you MLed a townie, thus you can't be trusted with it.

(Hopefully the person I gave my vote to can)

Voided's actions were sticking out to me in the end. Watch him closely.

[Lastsurvivor]

Kortul has always been largely null. But his case against me is largely misreps. Posts 565/560 are Macro's "survivalism" point, and I was explaining that I largely misinterpreted them. They weren't really why I unvoted him other than the fact that I dropped a point. But Kortul is saying otherwise...

Also, I don't understand how DDD is an easier target than Macro. I could have stayed on Macro and potentially got a lynch on him. But I didn't and got a lynch on myself. But Kortul's misinterpreting this point and trying to make it into a scummy one.

That said, DCL's case is still a lot worst. You guys should lynch him or DDD tomorrow.

[Lastsurvivor]

Also, the reason I said "except 4n" is because he's null. His case was pretty bad, but not bad enough for me to look at it and say "scum!"

Also, question: Have you guys ever seen scum that posts at the least almost 2x more than everyone else? Yeah, sure, I've seen active scum, but come on. Why would I have any encouragement to post at least 2x more than everyone else?

Sigh. It's too late for that now.

[Lastsurvivor]

yes!!! :shrug:

Holy mother sweet jesus

[Lastsurvivor]

Although that is a newbie...so maybe he was just on that mafia kick and didn't think of the consequences.

*shrug*

[Lastsurvivor]

Yeah but I'm definitely not Faraday.

I'll retract my point.

[Lastsurvivor]

If I have time, I'll write up why DCL's post was bad. But I already explained why kortul was bad.

[Lastsurvivor]

Hm...I was kinda right. In my flailing at the end of D1, I called both kortul and DDD scum. I was just wrong on the third...Macro not DCL.