*nods*In post 404, Patrick wrote:Kublai Khan replaces Tigris.
Will try to have a full read and analysis by later tonight.
*nods*In post 404, Patrick wrote:Kublai Khan replaces Tigris.
I am, sorry. Thought I was going to have time this weekend and I'm making time now to read. I've made it to Page 15 (Site Crash/Return). Going to keep slogging until I fall asleep.In post 540, MrBuddyLee wrote:@KublaiKhan, are you having trouble motivating yourself to find the scum in this game?
Sorry for the big delay. School is finally done and I've posted all the grades. Summer has officially started and I'm free from any teaching obligations at present. I'm about 9 pages from the top so I should be read up and be a full contributing player by tonight.In post 480, Green Crayons wrote:@Kublai:
I know you're still in your read through phase. But at some point, because you put a lot of emphasis on the first impressions, I would like to see you point out the first-impression posts of the players you find scummy, and then explain why your first impressions are of scum rather than town.In post 448, Kublai Khan wrote:But I've read the first four pages and lately I've had the belief that first impressions are far moar important then we generally give them credit.
<snip>
Scum
sotty7
LML
VitaminR
porochaz
Seol
I think LoudmouthLee is pretty scummy. petroleumjelly doesn't seem scummy. Just getting started on analyzing BooKitty.In post 810, Glork wrote:Tease us with a vote~
In Post 278 you give a stern warning to VitaminR that scum aren't going to be caught based on small "common" tells. Then you spend an inordinate amount of time attacking Save The Dragons and Untrod Tripod for wagon-jumping. Even making up an Excel worksheet to make your simplistic scum-hunting look more in depth than it really is.In post 815, LoudmouthLee wrote:Still haven't seen it.In post 809, Kublai Khan wrote:I'm writing stuff. Calm down Glork.
In post 829, Glork wrote:FTR, KKscum directly implicates STDscum at this point.
A no lynch is preferable?In post 854, chamber wrote:I'm not going to lynch LML
How did LoudmouthLee earn your town rating?In post 860, DrippingGoofball wrote:YESIn post 859, Kublai Khan wrote:A no lynch is preferable?In post 854, chamber wrote:I'm not going to lynch LML
Thought that too. Even thought maybe it was a signal for his scummates to start bussing him. But it's the dying words of a leading scumwagon at deadline so it probably isn't worth dissecting.In post 879, VitaminR wrote:The freudian slip was weird. I wouldn't be surprised if that was deliberate on LML's part.
I don't think the attempt was to lynch. I think it was an attempt to create another option to further divide/demoralize the town and create possibility of no lynch.In post 936, Save The Dragons wrote:Did/do people seriously think that KK was possibly getting lynched yesterday? He had (I think 4), can anyone find 8 other players that expressed a modicum of interest?
I'm from Quebec too. I know the nursery rhyme. It's a fairly ubiquitous Mother Goose story. Just asIn post 994, DrippingGoofball wrote:Yeah I had to look this up, I'm French, I never heard of such things.In post 992, petroleumjelly wrote:Acting like she did not understand the Hickory Dickory Doc(tor) claim is not credible.
Why are you unlikely to read D1 after a scum lynch? That doesn't make any sense.In post 1005, inHimshallibe wrote:Highly unlikely to read D1 right now.
That makes it more likely that the "bus" comment was deliberately slipped in to create discord and confusion, IMO.In post 1013, MrBuddyLee wrote:I think it's important to make it clear that busing his scumpartners has historically been a huge and even pathological part of LML's play. I posted this last Tuesday, about twelve hours before LML "slipped" that he was being bused:
Oh, and the deflecting, too.In post 1041, DrippingGoofball wrote:Tell me more about your undo suspicions.
Replace mathcam with DrippingGoofball and you with me and I'm wondering why you aren't voting DrippingGoofball instead of distracting from it.In post 1046, Albert B. Rampage wrote:I start out the day by voting mathcam, then he votes for me with flimsy half-baked characterizations, and then accuses me of OMGUS. He's caught. Lynch him.
Yes really.In post 1048, chamber wrote:But not really, right?
That didn't really answer my question.In post 1049, MrBuddyLee wrote:I don't want PJ lynched today. He caught scum yesterday by spotting a bad argument and I'm hoping he continues to do so.In post 1045, Kublai Khan wrote:@MrBuddyLee - Why do you have petroleumjelly as scum?
At what point in time are you asking? Scum-wants changed as the situation grew dire for them.In post 1049, MrBuddyLee wrote:Do you think scum wanted LML lynched, Bookitty lynched, or a no-lynch?
Because DrippingGoofball is scummier.In post 1052, Albert B. Rampage wrote:Why aren't you voting mathcam?In post 1047, Kublai Khan wrote:Replace mathcam with DrippingGoofball and you with me and I'm wondering why you aren't voting DrippingGoofball instead of distracting from it.In post 1046, Albert B. Rampage wrote:I start out the day by voting mathcam, then he votes for me with flimsy half-baked characterizations, and then accuses me of OMGUS. He's caught. Lynch him.
Well, obviously Albert B. Rampage isn't a cop, so...In post 1098, DrippingGoofball wrote:ABR is so obvious, Sherlock. I didn't "reveal" anything.In post 1096, mathcam wrote:That does not suitably convey how ludicrous it was that you thought you would reveal your cop suspicion.
No problem. I understand that I'm among mental giants here. Do me a favor and explain the scum motivation behind post 1144.In post 1148, Glork wrote:I'm not going to vote you KK, because there's actually a pretty good chance you're town, but I am going to mime bopping you on the head for that comment.
You didn't think LoudmouthLee was a sinking ship until after the "bus" post?In post 1155, Yosarian2 wrote:I don't know. For most of the day, LML didn't look like a "sinking ship"; there were long periods where I couldn't get more then a few people to say on his wagon. He didn't really look "doomed" until the end of the day, which is when you changed course and got on his wagon.In post 1142, Glork wrote:Yos, there's a difference between "X defended scum" and "X tied himself to the sinking ship that was his doomed scumbuddy."
Well, I'm annoyed because I wanted Glork to answer first. Glork's vote on Albert B. Rampage feels like a "Something's off! Let's focus on that!" distraction.In post 1166, petroleumjelly wrote:And second, Albert B. Rampage alleged he had "looked into the players bussing LoudmouthLee" and decided mathcam was the worst (and maybe CrashTextDummie), but neither of those players had voted LoudmouthLee. Even if I was charitable enough to think hemeantBookitty when he said LoudmouthLee, the use of the word "bus" would still be wrong unless Bookitty is also scum (which then begs the question why Albert B. Rampage is not voting for Bookitty). It suggests that Albert B. Rampage has fairly artificial suspicions given that his single sentence must be read to havetwomistakes in order to make any sense.
Yes, plenty. You could always boot up the scumputer instead of scrambling to be on the forefront of whatever new trend is sweeping the game.In post 1173, DrippingGoofball wrote:Is there any move I could make that you wouldn't consider a scum move LOL?In post 1172, Kublai Khan wrote:DrippingGoofball's vote on Albert B. Rampage... Now that's a scum move.
Same reasons you didn't criticize it?In post 1177, chamber wrote:how has undos post not gotten more criticism?
Was it? You're just sorta announcing that it deserves it. Not actually bringing any criticism forward. It's like you're criticizing everyone except for undo.In post 1181, chamber wrote:But my post was criticizing it?In post 1179, Kublai Khan wrote:Same reasons you didn't criticize it?In post 1177, chamber wrote:how has undos post not gotten more criticism?
Okay.In post 1188, chamber wrote:I was criticizing everyone that posted in that interim as well as undo, yes, I'm efficient like that.
BTW, This is why I've held off criticism as well. It's an info dump, but he acknowledges it with promises of analysis later.In post 1189, Save The Dragons wrote:I think I'll reserve further judgment until undo gives the analysis, though.In post 1165, undo wrote:I am aware this system is not precise and objective – it was not intended to be so. It’s just a way of helping me (and hopefully some of you) look into the right players.
I have yet to analyse this results and interpret them in depth -- I will do it as soon as possible, but for now I’m not making any comment because I don't want to be rash. This may not bring anything new to your table but I personally felt I needed to do this to be sure about my next steps.
Is that it? It kinda sounds like you're taking the towniest of the people on the LoudmouthLee wagon and choosing to view their actions through a WIFOMy "must be bussing" filter.In post 1303, MrBuddyLee wrote:PJ made a vote-switch late yesterday that made an LML lynch more of a possibility. His vote simultaneously took the race from like Bookitty 9, LML 3, PJ 3 to 9-4-3. So in addition to the vote being critical to the building of the LML-wagon, it also removed pressure from the PJ-wagon. I've felt that LML bused a scumpartner, and PJ is one of the options in that direction. I am conflicted on PJ, and don't feel today is necessarily the time to focus on him. When people are lynching scum, you generally keep them around.
1. It's a possibility.In post 1303, MrBuddyLee wrote:My question was in response to this comment of yours:KK wrote:At what point in time are you asking? Scum-wants changed as the situation grew dire for them.MBL wrote:Do you think scum wanted LML lynched, Bookitty lynched, or a no-lynch?So basically, I'm asking: do you really feel all three remaining players (MBL, Glork, DGB) from the KK-wagon were voting you to demoralize the town? I can understand "divide"--yes, offering you as an alternative was an invitation to step off other wagons. Of the three of us, only DGB showed a willingness to no-lynch.KK wrote:I don't think the attempt was to lynch. I think it was an attempt to create another option to further divide/demoralize the town and create possibility of no lynch.
I'll break my question down:
1) Do you really think my voting you yesterday and keeping that vote there until deadline-day was designed to result in a no-lynch?
2) Do you think Glork's switch to you 16 hours before deadline was designed to result in no-lynch?
3) Do you believe DGB found both LML and Bookitty too townish to vote for yesterday, or is that implausible?
4) Are you pretty sure that Bookitty is scum? Because if she's town, wouldn't it make more sense for one or more of scum-Glork, scum-DGB and scum-MBL to push for her lynch at 9-3 or 9-5 Bookitty instead of no-lynching or risking an LML lynch?
Glork voted LoudmouthLee directly after (and because of) LoudmouthLee making his "bus slip". So absolutely yes it could be a partner vote because the door was swung wide open. (Like holy shit. Context.)In post 1374, MrBuddyLee wrote:@KK, what do you think of Glork's vote for LML that made it 8-8? Is that really the kind of play scum makes on a partner a few hours before deadline, when no-lynch is a more likely possibility? Please walk me through how that makes sense to you.
A) I don't think Glork cared who I would vote for and b) Why are you defending Glork so much?MrBuddyLee wrote:Glork also pestered you for a vote 16 hours before deadline, knowing full well that you suspected LML from an earlier post. Why the fuck would he do that as scum instead of shutting up and hoping for a nolynch?
It's mafia. Likelihoods are gonna get stretched. And yes, I think that makes Glork likely scum. The two main wagons were Bookitty and his buddy LoudmouthLee. Glork doesn't really want LoudmouthLee lynched, but the alternate wagon is on someone that he's gone out of his way to insist that she is town. So the solution is start a ruckus on a third party and see if momentum can be gained.MrBuddyLee wrote:Also, you think Bookitty is very town.. so from that perspective, do you REALLY think Glork's protection of her all day combined with the fact that the alternative wagon was scum combined with the fact that he was the vote that tied it up between Boo and LML, etc etc points to Glork as likely scum?
I mean, it's possible, but it really stretches likelihood.
So.. You're going to work hard analyzing the game and if the analysis is rigorous, then people should lynch who you think is scum. Wow, that's the same deal that every town player explicitly makes by joining this game as town. What a bargain!In post 1393, DrippingGoofball wrote:I'm willing to put some work and give you all my 100% analysis of the game but unlike the dumbos of Pikmin Mafia, I need that some of you promise to lynch the players on my scum list to give my game ghost some peace in the Dead QT.
Do we have a deal? I don't want to be wasting my time like I did on the Pikmin FAILtown.
Contracts with scum aren't legally binding.In post 1424, Untrod Tripod wrote:I'm sorry undo but I have an oral contract with Glork to ignore him until 3p lylo
Glork.
That's a hell of a twist on my words. MrBuddyLee thinks it's a stretch. I don't.In post 1452, Glork wrote:You're pushing a case that you yourself admit is a "stretch" of a possibility.
Are you scum or just incapable of sound logic?
That only works if he's correct on his reads. He's already sworn that scum is town (LoudmouthLee) and that town is scum (petroleumjelly). So why have a (horrible) meta policy on him?In post 1469, DrippingGoofball wrote:Glork is usually top priority for the NK.In post 1466, mathcam wrote:Can someone explain this?
Everyone should call him UNLYNCHABLE TOWN.
If he's still alive on Day 4 with everyone refusing to ever lynch him... he's scum!
Okay, you got me. You didn't technically use the word "swear". But your "reads" were perfectly clear.In post 1639, Glork wrote:KK, please indicate where I "swore" that anyone was of a particular alignment.
I'm reading. I'm going over ISOs in my spare time. Sorry if I don't want to post fluff. Working on substance.In post 1889, Bookitty wrote:@MOD:
Can we please have a prod on Kublai Khan? He hasn't posted yet this game day.
Also:
@Kublai Khan:Who are your top suspicions now that Glork has flipped town?
with the logic that goes behind the scumputer?In post 1210, DrippingGoofball wrote:DrippingGoofball (7) -- Untrod Tripod, Kublai Khan, Sotty7, Save the Dragons, Porochaz, CrashTextdummie, Albert B. Rampage
All but one scum is on that shit wagon.
In post 4726, mathcam wrote:In post 4721, Kublai Khan wrote:
3/5. Not a bad scum-detecting record based on Day 1 first impressions. People need to remember to trust those.
3/6.FOS: KK.Never believing you again.