Micro 745: Beyond Death [Endgame]

[CheekyTeeky]

First!

VOTE: Chip Get off my shoulder.

[CheekyTeeky]

Hopkirk are you implying that scum don't make errors or are you being sarcastic? Also, NSG is female.

[CheekyTeeky]

On reading it again, it looks like sarcasm ^^...something is pinging me though. I can't put my finger on why 10 feels awkward.

[CheekyTeeky]

Hopkirk are you implying that scum don't make errors or are you being sarcastic? Also, NSG is female.

The (sarcastic) implication is that town can't make errors.
People have accused me before of mixing 'scum' and 'town making mistakes' up too much.

Oh, good to learn from your mistakes

Why aren't yall helping to wagon the guy who planted his RVS vote on a player who is replacing out and then disappeared from the thread?

I wondered if he missed that rc is replacing out. We should see how long he sits on it for lol.

[CheekyTeeky]

Wow micc are you always so LAMIST?

[CheekyTeeky]

Cool, everyone has checked in. I disagree with BTD6 (did you really make that game?), I think Cabd not voting is NAI, based on one game I've played with him. In the game he was town, but we see he is aware that he's played with me from his newbie comment earlier ITT. Cabd, being a meta genius, probably knows to not RVS vote again to have me assume a town read on him. So, the potential self-awareness of his opening move nullifies me reading him as a town lean, based on that one point alone. I feel there are other points that raise my suspicion on Cabd. First off he enters without providing any indication of early reads, when there's only one page to go off, so it wouldn't be hard to skim and then enter announcing any thoughts to help progress the game. Second, his "loaded gun" response to being questionned about not RVS voting, feels dramatic and out of place, like the emphasis is on being reasonable about voting, but we're not out of the RVS woods yet. Third, he comments on his own replacement slot by saying that rc doesn't like town, thats probably why he replaced, but that the point is also null. I'm not sure what the point of this comment is, if not to subtly put in our minds that his slot is town.

Overall I'd say I have an early scum lean on Cabd.
VOTE: Cabd

[CheekyTeeky]

The setup isn't anything too complex, I will note we will NOT get flips night one; and no-lynching in this setup is almost always the wrong move.


The two "self-docs" here should be treated somewhat like you would bulletproofs in the matrix 6 setup, with the note that them claiming early like the matrix 6 BP strat is a bad idea.

How can you judge the set-up to be not too complex but also not understand the set-up?

[CheekyTeeky]

Ok fair. I'll move my vote when something else pings me.

I do agree that not lynching is the wrong move, because even if we lynch wrong we get the players voice as conf. town during the next day phases. It might be a good strat to sort experienced/high contributing players first, and if there is enough consensus that the player is likely scum, they would be an ideal first lynch.

[CheekyTeeky]

cheeky why did you abandon your push on cabd when he responded to at most one of the three points you raised against him?

Well that's a skewed interpretation if ever I saw one. He's answered at least 3 points, I use my vote as a tool to gain insight rather than as an accusation. Saying I'm abandoning my wagon is pretty strong, given I haven't even moved my vote yet. And, it's pretty weird that this half-assed push on me about intending to seek information elsewhere is the only part of the content I've provided that you care to comment on. Are you feeling threatened by Cabd? Why do you think town cares about how their vote changing looks to town?

VOTE: Sobo

[CheekyTeeky]

Post 67 is more specific. I thought you meant overall, as I have noticed 3 comments from him on his play. I did notice that he didn't answer certain points, but that give me info. If I tunneled someone everytime a question went unanswered I'd probably get nowhere fast. I think I need to put it out there that I change track very quick, I play unpredictably and do a lot of OMGUS type play. I do analyse what is said and what is not said. For example when you did not answer the questions I posed to you, I assumed you are more likely town than scum for doing so, but that is just one point. Your stances feel more townie than I initially thought, but I'm happy where my vote is for now.

[CheekyTeeky]

okay but you still didn't really answer my question which was

did you still believe those two unanswered points were valid when you made 63?

Like i'm asking is it the case that:
a) you didn't believe those points were valid when making 59 and thus also didn't believe them when making 63 even though nobody else discussed them;
b) you did believe them when making 59 but changed your mind before making 63 for some reason; or
c) you did believe them when making 59 and still believed them when making 63 but other things cabd did overrode your otherwise valid reasons to scumread him?

if its c - which i suspect it is - what did cabd do in his responses to make you tr him? was it solely the fact that he didn't rebut your case point by point?

Ok this is kinda overwhelming. I'm going to go with D. I believed the points and believed that I have some info to go off and am looking for info elsewhere. I thought I said that already.

[CheekyTeeky]

still think 66 was unnecessarily abrasive but we can table this discussion for now

Sorry, abrasive is my playstyle :/

[CheekyTeeky]

VOTE: Hopkirk what do you think about micc? I think Cabd indirectly asked you a question about RVS shortly after your last post too.

[CheekyTeeky]

i know cheeky's conclusion here was that it's null, but why even mention all this? this is what i mean when i say artificial.

I started off with the premise that Cabd not RVSing is NAI futher to BTD's town read of this point, that's why I felt the need to elaborate on a null point. I prefaced the whole post with "I disagree with BTD blah blah blah" and outlined my points on cabd in contrast to BTD. I think you're fishing for something that isn't there with my push on Cabd and that you're intentionally ignoring my strat spec post, where I indirectly point out why my first push is Cabd.

What is it that you think you know about my town playstyle in RVS, that you're not seeing here? I'd also like to make the point that I don't have enough meta for there to be consistency in my play yet, but that's my subjective opinion. I don't like that you've spent the time to make me your biggest announced scum lean, yet you don't vote me. Instead you place another RVS vote on someone...why?

[CheekyTeeky]

I mean if Cheeky starts channeling Awoo I'l gladly string her up but nah.

Lol @ this.

[CheekyTeeky]

It might be a good strat to sort experienced/high contributing players first, and if there is enough consensus that the player is likely scum, they would be an ideal first lynch.

Here NSG.

Ok so it feels forced, but breaking out of RVS requires discussion (not just complaining about it eh Micc), I bring up thoughts and opinions to stimulate such and make reads based on the points. Sometimes the points are useless or feel forced because I have almost nothing to work wot to try and make something. I don't believe my itention looked like a way to create a Cabd wagon, particularly when I announced the intention to move my vote after some back and forth. And also after the discussion with sobo where I said I use my vote to get info rather than as an accusation at this stage... so I don't know why everyone is getting so precious about Cabd?

[CheekyTeeky]

rude!! we're still sort of in rvs so i don't feel bad about this!VOTE: micc

Really tho. what's up with this vote northsidegal?

You're clearly analyzing the game at this point and thus not in RVS anymore...but I was being rude so I get a vote...and its ok because RVS?

How would you interpret this as AI micc? Like what would make this townie and scummy in your opinion?

[CheekyTeeky]

uhh neutral I guess. If I felt like I already had a read off of it I wouldn't be digging into it by asking questions

That's very "Switzerland" of you lol. I think your logic is bad though. You can have expectations prior to receiving a response, and get a better read by digging asking questions. I assume that you already have a read on me then, since you're not digging and asking me questions?

I really want Hop to answer my question before I move my vote but FoS: Micc.

[CheekyTeeky]

UNVOTE: Hopkirk

VOTE: north

I'm afraid the random vote - reaction test - serious vote just seems scrambling almost

I think you may have unvoted scum, to vote scum.

[CheekyTeeky]

I like this town

I'll respond to questions soon.

[CheekyTeeky]

I like this town

ORLY?

You don't? Everyone is active so far, I likey.

[CheekyTeeky]

Why would you expect me to not answer if you removed the vote, and why are you treating the question of 'what do you think of x player (that you don't explicitly scumread)' as so significant?

Some players need a push to answer I've found. Also a vote can make a question feel more loaded to scum. I wanted to test a Hopkirk/micc possibility with the question. I don't know what to do with your response just yet. You were an initial scum lean.

[CheekyTeeky]

Given you've asked me for my thoughts on Micc when I hadn't mentioned him yet, (and given, though slightly less so, that you haven't really mentioned me outside there) I find it surprising you didn't mention why you're scumleaning on me. I'd like to hear your thoughts there.

Readlist incoming.

[CheekyTeeky]

UNVOTE: Hopkirk

VOTE: north

I'm afraid the random vote - reaction test - serious vote just seems scrambling almost

I think you may have unvoted scum, to vote scum.

what about me this game seems to you to show an anti-town motivation or a playstyle difference that would indicate i'm scum?

You were very awkward breaking out of RVS. Your RVS vote on micc was straight up bad, don't care if it was a reaction test. You presented a scum interpretation of my Cabd push, but denied you thought I was scummy. Being pro-town != not scum. You seem to be playing it safe, you tried to stick your neck out with me but quickly withdrew when you saw your points were defeated by logic. I'd have to assume that you hadn't read the entire thread before your push on me, for the illogical arguments to make sense. I don't believe that to be true as I've assumed an attentive, thoughtul player image of you.

I do want to vote you but I don't like how quickly your wagon is building up so I'll reassess shortly.

[CheekyTeeky]

Given you've asked me for my thoughts on Micc when I hadn't mentioned him yet, (and given, though slightly less so, that you haven't really mentioned me outside there) I find it surprising you didn't mention why you're scumleaning on me. I'd like to hear your thoughts there.

Readlist incoming.

wait cheeky i'm still interested in seeing this

Noted, please be patient, I like to use my PC for my works of art. Don't hold your breath

[CheekyTeeky]

Still at my mums, no pc, so after digging through ISO's this is briefly where I'm at:

Chip Butty, Hopkirk, Sobolev Space
northsidegal
Micc
Kawso, BTD6_maker
Cabd

I have some interesting points on Cabd, including what I think is a scum slip, which I will go into at some stage, a strange feeling about micc and NSG but I think I'll have to PoE these slots when I get more from my null reads, I'll say null town on them for now.

[CheekyTeeky]

Almost forgot VOTE: Cabd

[CheekyTeeky]

The setup isn't anything too complex, I will note we will NOT get flips night one; and no-lynching in this setup is almost always the wrong move.


The two "self-docs" here should be treated somewhat like you would bulletproofs in the matrix 6 setup, with the note that them claiming early like the matrix 6 BP strat is a bad idea.

Can anyone else see it here? I'm being vague intentionally.

[CheekyTeeky]

I was right lel.

As town I would have expected you to have a different reaction. I'll confess I don't base anything on meta so there is a chance I'm wrong, which you'll get to refute when I point it out what it is I see. Hint: it's not the setup error.

[CheekyTeeky]

I know it's not the setup error~

There's another good reason to make the slip you think is a slip.

Does it only make sense in the context of your overall entrance?

[CheekyTeeky]

Are we playing mafia, or lateral thinking puzzles?

BY all means though, proceed, senator.

Lol! Sorry I'm trying to maximise on the potential of this push so that it will provide reads on others' reactions as well as on yours.

[CheekyTeeky]

Ok I'm here I only really wanted Sobolev to answer, so I'll proceed.

[CheekyTeeky]

The setup isn't anything too complex,

I will note we will NOT get flips night one;

and no-lynching in this setup is almost always the wrong move.


The two "self-docs" here should be treated somewhat like you would bulletproofs in the matrix 6 setup, with the note that them claiming early like the matrix 6 BP strat is a bad idea.

Ok so the bold is what pings me. We know, and Cabd has admitted, that he rushed in and didn't read the setup. If he were vanilla town he would have received the role PM which gives us the "lingering spirit" ability. He would not know that scum cannot whisper and kill the same night if he did not receive the scum role PM. His mistake with the two-self docs initially alerted me to the fact he hadn't read the set-up, so one can assume that he's only read his role PM and that is the information he's basing this post on.

Therefore I believe Cabd is scum.

[CheekyTeeky]

is this the sole reason you're scumreading cabd, cheeky?

No his unanswered questions still ping me along with his general lack of sorting. I do think Cabd's playstyle probably pings me more than it should were I familiar with his play.

[CheekyTeeky]

my theory was that given this post:

I realize the creator of this setup is here, but my itch to try and break setups will never truly go away.

cabd had at least seen the setup or had some familiarity with it from before (it won some open setup contest in 2015 iirc?) and remembered the nk mechanics for scum but not the exact distribution of town prs - which makes sense because the mechanics are much more unique.

Yeah that was his only logical out. I also didn't like that it seemed like he knew he scummed slipped, when I didn't specify what I saw. I'd expect town to act like there's no possible scum slip because they're confirmation biased to their alignment.

[CheekyTeeky]

You expect lots of things.

I do :/

[CheekyTeeky]

interested in seeing where this is going to go but unfortunately i have to log off for the night to finish this econ pset. hoping to see some answers/content from cabd when i get back tomorrow

final question:

Ok I'm here I only really wanted Sobolev to answer, so I'll proceed.

cheeky what were you hoping to glean from my answer? why just me?

I wanted to make sure you weren't his buddy or at least to get a grip on the relationship. The fact you couldn't see anything made sense and your tone was genuine curiosity rather than discrediting. It reinforced my town read.

[CheekyTeeky]

-_-' seriously? Sorry Cabd.

[CheekyTeeky]

My bad :/ Ok well now that you're conf. town I'll have to reassess. I think you should just protect yourself each night

[CheekyTeeky]

Oh yeah lol UNVOTE:

[CheekyTeeky]

NSG do you have a readslist?

[CheekyTeeky]

VOTE: NorthSideGal

[CheekyTeeky]

I mean yeah NSG's approach to this game has been very weird; but can somebody explain why it's SCUM-weird?

Yep. Why is she pointing out weird stuff but hesitant to make a proper stand/push? It feels very scummy to me. I might change my mind if she produces evidence of reads, but I'm pretty sure she's saying stuff just to say stuff.

[CheekyTeeky]

a strange feeling about micc and NSG but I think I'll have to PoE these slots when I get more from my null reads,

You and her were hovering above the null reads, her last post raised my suspicion.

[CheekyTeeky]

I asked for one read explination that you should have had already. This is a clear dodge.

I planned on explaning my read progression in the readslist but couldn't be bothered while I was out. I was biased on you from entry and your posts seemed too surface level, but when I townread Sobolev, and he town read you, I went back through your ISO more objectively and saw there was little reason to see you as scum apart from my initial gut feel.

[CheekyTeeky]

I can't figure out why Hopkirk used 236 in his line of questionning of micc. O_o

[CheekyTeeky]

I liked this, because it shows [NSG] is reading carefully, and i think scum would have let Micc's misreading slide through.

I don't agree with this. Scum are more likely to pick up on anything to build a case/cast shade with. I noticed micc's overstatement but gave that room to see where it would go. I thought NSG jumping in prematurely cut off the push as micc complained about earlier. The interaction feels like SvT, I'm just not 100% on which one is S yet although I'm leaning towards NSG.

[CheekyTeeky]

CT, what did you make of Micc's 'overstatement'? Does it look like a plausibly genuine misreading to you?

I thought it was a push. He's a suspect because of his LAMIST play style including this. Whatever alignment he is I think I can safely say NSG is not.

Micc do you have some town games I could look at please?

[CheekyTeeky]

NSG do you have a readslist?

[CheekyTeeky]

cheeky never responded to 144.

I didn't see anything specific you wanted me to respond to, and understood that you were just providing your perspective. You said that I admitted that my case was forced, which I didn't. I said OK it seems forced to summarise your key point in the previous post. I then went on to explain why it could possibly seem forced to others looking in, during the breaking out of RVS stage. I think it would make sense for scum to point out strange things without really scumhunting. I don't see you scum hunting. I just see a 180 on your RVS stance of voting people to get reads to now just pointing out things that seem strange...but not scummy...and you can't even form an opinion on each player when everyone has provided content. How hard is it to rank players from scummy to least scummy? It's probably difficult for you because you're not actually scum hunting or coming up with helpful lines of enquiry against others. Pushes help town gather info. Providing a wishy washy opinion (x seems strange) of others scum hunting does not help us sort slots imo.

[CheekyTeeky]

why were you interested specifically in a me/cabd team? if you townread me wouldn't you think its more likely that cabd's partnered with someone else?

Your interactions around your push on me made me wonder about the nature of your relationship. I also wanted you because you seem the most logical/objective this far, so you'd be able to tell me if what I was seeing was warranted suspicion or not. The second question is disappointing. Surely you don't believe scum always act obviously scummy?

[CheekyTeeky]

Because he didn't put you in the suspicious section, and I find you suspicious, so want to know why.

But what does this have to do with the post you referenced? What am I missing here? In the post you referenced micc concedes that NSG might be town. He hasn't provided any lists? I find it suspicious that you chose this quote when a couple of quotes later he says he is still suspicious of NSG. It seems like you're choosing a quote that puts micc's suspicion of NSG in a better light and which has nothing to do with me...so you quote that then ask how micc feels about me.

Why are you suspicious of me? Don't make the weak mistake of saying I'm suspicious with nothing to back it up, while providing a null leaning case of NSG...

[CheekyTeeky]

Chippy, do you have any scum or town reads yet?

Pedit I'm a mind reader

[CheekyTeeky]

why were you interested specifically in a me/cabd team? if you townread me wouldn't you think its more likely that cabd's partnered with someone else?

Your interactions around your push on me made me wonder about the nature of your relationship. I also wanted you because you seem the most logical/objective this far, so you'd be able to tell me if what I was seeing was warranted suspicion or not. The second question is disappointing. Surely you don't believe scum always act obviously scummy?

i included the second part to highlight that i wanted to know what special relationship you thought i had with cabd. like unless i was thought specific interactions were worth investigating a priori i'd be more interested in looking for partner relationships between my scumreads than my townreads was the argument i was making

Are you expecting me to respond to this? It's not clear if you're asking me something here.

[CheekyTeeky]

no i was just clarifying why i included that part

Ok just making sure lol.

[CheekyTeeky]

NSG cont.

83 and 88 defends Cabd against CT. Seems thoughtful and reading carefully.

The vote on Micc at 84 is...not good.

More later...

Chip, from this I cannot understand your stance on NSG. You've pointed out posts that you think are townie and a post that you think not good. Was the "More later..." in reference to NSG or just a promise of more content later?

hopkirk is back to null for now

Sobolev, can you please expand on this? What post(s) made him drop from you liking him to falling back to null and why?

[CheekyTeeky]

Chip and Micc, what are your thought on Sobolev? We all seem to be town reading him, it would be good to know why you two are town reading him?

[CheekyTeeky]

This feels like TvT...just saying.

[CheekyTeeky]

Because he didn't put you in the suspicious section, and I find you suspicious, so want to know why.

But what does this have to do with the post you referenced? What am I missing here? In the post you referenced micc concedes that NSG might be town. He hasn't provided any lists? I find it suspicious that you chose this quote when a couple of quotes later he says he is still suspicious of NSG. It seems like you're choosing a quote that puts micc's suspicion of NSG in a better light and which has nothing to do with me...so you quote that then ask how micc feels about me.

Why are you suspicious of me? Don't make the weak mistake of saying I'm suspicious with nothing to back it up, while providing a null leaning case of NSG...

Because his reads list was in that post. I was asking purely because you were not on the reads list in that post.
I'm suspicious of you based on what I've mentioned already- your reads progression is confusing, and the odd lack of jutifying your read on my by saying you'd do a reads list instead, when that wasn't what had been requested.
Why is my case null leaning? If you think I'm town (based on last reads list), then why not try and persuade me I'm wrong to prevent a TvT?

Oh I see what you mean now.

If you're confused about my reads progression that's your own problem, you should be asking me questions if it's killing you to know. I've already suggested my play is not linear. Anyway confusion on my points is NAI. I've answered your question about my read progression of you and why I didn't do it immediately when requested, so you can drop that line of enquiry or start a new line.

Your case on NSG was waffling on but never came to a conclusion. You need to tell her why you're leaning one way or the other on her and put your vote where your mouth is. The point is that you had time to "analyse" her actions in depth without an indication of your read, but then you just throw out your suspicious read on me without justification. Why?

[CheekyTeeky]

Because he didn't put you in the suspicious section, and I find you suspicious, so want to know why.

But what does this have to do with the post you referenced? What am I missing here? In the post you referenced micc concedes that NSG might be town. He hasn't provided any lists? I find it suspicious that you chose this quote when a couple of quotes later he says he is still suspicious of NSG. It seems like you're choosing a quote that puts micc's suspicion of NSG in a better light and which has nothing to do with me...so you quote that then ask how micc feels about me.

Why are you suspicious of me? Don't make the weak mistake of saying I'm suspicious with nothing to back it up, while providing a null leaning case of NSG...

Because his reads list was in that post. I was asking purely because you were not on the reads list in that post.
I'm suspicious of you based on what I've mentioned already- your reads progression is confusing, and the odd lack of jutifying your read on my by saying you'd do a reads list instead, when that wasn't what had been requested.
Why is my case null leaning? If you think I'm town (based on last reads list), then why not try and persuade me I'm wrong to prevent a TvT?

Oh I see what you mean now.

If you're confused about my reads progression that's your own problem, you should be asking me questions if it's killing you to know. I've already suggested my play is not linear. Anyway confusion on my points is NAI. I've answered your question about my read progression of you and why I didn't do it immediately when requested, so you can drop that line of enquiry or start a new line.

Your case on NSG was waffling on but never came to a conclusion. You need to tell her why you're leaning one way or the other on her and put your vote where your mouth is. The point is that you had time to "analyse" her actions in depth without an indication of your read, but then you just throw out your suspicious read on me without justification. Why?

On you
We’ve already discussed these points, so why are you acting like I’m just bringing it up now? It’s also not from nowhere- because we’ve discussed it. You’re less suspicious than NSG, but you’re still a scumlean.

On NSG- what?
1.) You say ‘never came to a conclusion’- I literally wrote a section titled conclusions.
2.) On you need to ‘tell her why you’re leaning one way or another’- what do you think I was saying throughout.
3.) On ‘put your vote where your mouth is’- It was on her before I made the case, while I made it, and Hasn’t left her.
4.) How am I not reaching conclusions on her? Could you seriously not see I scumread her?

I really don’t see how you can reach the conclusions you did from my posts. Could you reread my NSG case before responding to the above.

You're missing the point. This is clearly a dodge lol.

[CheekyTeeky]

Oh no are you scum chip?

[CheekyTeeky]

VOTE: Cheeky

If you don't respond to my questions then my vote isn't moving.
You said demonstrably untrue things- such as explicitly saying I wasn't voting someone I was- and are still sticking to them.

Looks like your vote is useless then. You still haven't got the point.

[CheekyTeeky]

Oh no are you scum chip?

No, but we haven't interacted much in this game, so we probably should do that for a bit. What's on your mind?

Why are you inciting confusion? I find all your justified confusion, and LAMIST ISO digging a bit disconcerting, but I don't want you to be scum :/

[CheekyTeeky]

If my confusion is justified, why is it disconcerting? Now i really am confused.

LAMIST? Should i not ISO dig? Or just not mention that I'm doing it? My point was that NSG has so many interactions that i need to ISO a bunch of other people to understand her ISO properly.

I should probably think of some penetrating questions to ask you...

You can mention it, I've just noticed that a few of your posts mention that this game is confusing and that everybody else is confused also. That in combination with, what looks like, you unsuccessfully trying to game solve, leads me to believe this is more of an act than not. I'm still trying to sort this feeling out.

[CheekyTeeky]

I look forward to his promised ISO digs. I note that BTD6 is following the same line of suspicion as NSG on my scumhunting Cabd. I look forward to more from him too.

[CheekyTeeky]

Yeah I'm not sheeping conf. town...It's nice to have a free town read though. Is sheeping conf. town AI?

[CheekyTeeky]

I think we're doing ok, everyone is just waiting for the two inactives to give their reads.

[CheekyTeeky]

Why the fuck am i the only person voting Cheeky when she's explicitly refused to engage with evidence that undeniably contradicts what's she's saying.

Why are you ignoring the point that you went out of your way to cast shade on NSG but then put in zero effort on your scum read on me? Were you hoping to get away unquestioned with your scum read? You're still trying to use your case on NSG to drown my point in. I don't like inconsistency or you dodging the point when you've accused me of dodging yours.

[CheekyTeeky]

Oh good a proper case from NSG. I've already responded to those points so she's entitled to sum it all up from her perspective OMGUS style.

Micc I know I was wrong. Let me do my thing.

[CheekyTeeky]

Yes I'm deflecting attention away from myself by rubbing people the wrong way. I'm not worried if I'm lynched because my conf. town voice gets to haunt you ^^

Micc, I can do what I like.

[CheekyTeeky]

I think doubt is getting close to zero on NSG. More eloquent thoughts later.

[CheekyTeeky]

@Mod I need to replace out also. Apologies

[CheekyTeeky]

Hi guys I'm back, will respond to Hopkirk shortly. It's nice to see BTD6_MAKER is in the discussion.

[CheekyTeeky]

OK so Hopkirk, I rushed my NSG vs Cheeky scum read analysis which I put together to push you on why you were pretty descriptive of her read but kinda fishing for read on me by just throwing out the word suspicious without much to back it up. In rushing through your NSG case I made some obvious errors whic I was happy to play with to see your reaction and others. Now I see that your initial suspicion on me is for "read progression" do you mean of yourself? If you do I think that has been addressed. If you'd like to discuss this further I'd be happy to.

The reaction I got from Hopkirk was pretty convincing frustrated town. He didn't hesitate to vote me and push my wagon. Micc intervening gives him ++town points also (although I'm aware of the benefits of defending others as scum so we'll see how this town lean goes).

The truly useful reaction I got was from NSG which pretty much solidifies my scum read on her. The timing of her push on me is very likely to come from scum. After I presented my points on her she didn't respond until Hopkirk voted me and pushed for my wagon. I believe it is typical of scum to feel safer going for a push under the cover of someone else leading in order to diffuse suspicion after my flip. E.g. Hopkirk should be more suspicious as he started the wagon... I've recently encountered this same "get em while they're down" tactic from scum on me. Waiting for a spot to vote me shows scum self-consciousness which is not common coming from town.

And then we have this:

okay, here's about the gist of it:
cheeky is lying and coming up with false / disingenuous reasons to further suspicion on me. i think it's likely she's doing this to deflect attention away from herself and to achieve a mislynch. the reasons she cites as to my scumminess are forced and don't make sense upon deeper inspection.

Where am I lying in my case on you NSG? To date, essentially, all you've done is call me scum for scum hunting. When you got a spot to vote me you call me a liar knowing that those reading my Hopkirk case will assume it's true. Call it forced or disingenuous but I have made no errors in my responses to you.

So far I only have NSG in my lynch pool. I need to relook at Chip, SS and BTD.

[CheekyTeeky]

i'm fairly confident i pointed out a few cases where you're lying in the big post i made. there comes a point in someone else's interpretation of something where it goes beyond simply being mistaken or forced reasoning and starts becoming lying. i believe that's the case with some of your posts regarding me.

by the way, this game is going to be pretty awkward if we're both town. luckily, i don't think that's the case.

Sorry to be a pain, could you please quote specifically where I'm lying? Why are you AtEing my push on you? I'm not afraid to be wrong and am still on good terms with people I play with/scumread.

[CheekyTeeky]

Cool thanks.

The first quote I refuted in 289 . Not agreeing is NAI, which is relevant to all these points. The third quote was directed towards our discussion in 88

Disagreeing is not equal to lying. Considering the term is a bit strong to use to support your case, I interpret that as opportunistic desperation. Yes we could be wrong about each other and that's why this discussion is important.

Can you please explain the timing of your vote on me? Surely you can see that the timing of the vote is odd, as you've been calling my scum hunting weird and forced almost from Day start, so why vote me when someone else is finally pushing a wagon on me, instead of from the beginning of your suspicion on me?

[CheekyTeeky]

this entire arguement is countered by the real life fact that i was just kinda busy and didn't have too much time to type up that massive post. truthfully, i haven't really been able to follow hopkirk's scumread on you. it didn't play any role in the timing of my post.

I can buy this but it doesn't explain why you didn't vote me earlier. As you proved with Micc, you were happy to cast votes without a wall post, so why not just cast one on me without the elaborate justification? I'm pretty sure people were assuming you were scum reading me so it's not like you had to worry about just voting me earlier as the justification was implied.

[CheekyTeeky]

Ok I understand your response, if this is your scum game I'm impressed. I still have my reservations and will keep my vote where it is but I'm going to focus on sorting others now.

NSG what are your thoughts on Chip and micc?

[CheekyTeeky]

This is why this suggests that CheekyTeeky is looking to cast shade on Cabd more than a genuine scumread. Scum are more likely to try to point out contradictions. If scum can make an honest mistake look like a slip, this furthers their goals. Indeed, they are perhaps slightly less likely than Town to refer to an honest mistake as simply an honest mistake (unless, of course, their partner made it, and Cabd is Town). This leads me to a very weak scumread on CheekyTeeky.

Hi BTD, your playstyle strikes me as very cautious. I'm not aware of your meta, however I think your style is on the opposite end of the conservative spectrum to mine. I don't know who is scum or not so I push (perhaps too aggressively) to find out. If I were casting shade I would just highlight my suspicion and move on. I play by getting reactions because they're easier for me to read. As was discussed around the time of my Cabd push, I predicted one logical reaction as an out for Cabd. I also said that I THOUGHT it was a scum slip. This is another argument that attacks my scum hunting style instead of trying to figure out my intent. Would it not make sense for scum to be a little more subtle in their scumhunting? If Cabd had not claimed, I admit I most likely would have death tunneled him until he was lynched. If he flipped vanilla town that would've guaranteed my lynch next phase. I don't see these actions coming from scum who would care more about self-preservation. Of course this could all be loaded with WIFOM and I am biased because I know my own style.

You have every right to suspect me and I you. What bothers me about you is that you're so careful and measured yet you skip/neglect to mention a lot of content that should be helping you read others. Do you have reads on everyone yet? I'd like to know where you're standing with your top reads to get a better grip on you.

[CheekyTeeky]

I hope that this does not become like Open 642. That was far too inactive and apathetic. It was great for me, because I was scum and the apathy led to two No Lynches, but of course I hope this game doesn't turn out like that.

Let's start with these:

Have you read the game?
Who do you want lynched today?

I have skimmed the game.

I cannot say I want any one person lynched at the moment. My reads are still very weak and flexible. I will be able to give a better answer later today, perhaps. I do have a very weak scumread on the CheekyTeeky slot, but that slot is being replaced and I will have to read the replacement.

I don't understand how these quotes line up. In one you say you don't want a state of apathy, in the next you say you've only skimmed the game and you ask, for the second time (not quoted part) if anyone has something for you to look at. To me this is asking for direction, when town don't want a state of apathy, they are proactive. You can't fear apathy and yet skim read the game asking for direction, that is very contridictory in intent. The only way I can see this lining up is if you're scum concerned about looking like you care about the game state and not wanting to give away too much with stronger reads or pushes, but looking for someone else's opinions to ride on to divert any blame from yourself.

[CheekyTeeky]

Also, what makes my scumread on Cheeky more likely to be a bus than any other scumread?

This is a weird question. I can't put my finger on it just yet but I'll probably come back to this. Something about asking about bussing rather than all the other possible responses to Hopkirk.

[CheekyTeeky]

thoughts on btd6 and zito's entrances and the votes on btd6?

Honestly I don't know what to think about Papa. In regards to the votes on BTD6:

Not much point leaving my vote where it is when it’s waiting for a replacement.
VOTE: BTD6

383 – Gives light scumread on Cheeky, doesn’t follow it with a vote, and promises more content later.
421 - Two days later. No further catch up. Follows up slightly on Cheeky but no vote. Complains about activity (kind of ironically).

Don’t really like the entrance. Both those posts look longish, but have no significant content in them. I could very easily see the Cheeky vote as a bus.

I like this as town reasoning. I follow it and can agree with the points (apart from bussing lol)

Yeah, im on board with this.
VOTE: BTD6_maker

Because I agree with Hopkirk's points, I can't criticise micc for this. It's almost too opportunistic for it to come from calculated scum intent. Also BTD pointed out his prior scum read on him before the vote somewhere on page 18.

Aight I read the things. This game is surprisingly dense.

Cabd is a big fat liar and I wanna see my file. Where do I send my FOIA request.

VOTE: BTD6

Don't know what to make of this just yet. Need more from Papa.

[CheekyTeeky]

Don't know what to make of this just yet. Need more from Papa.

More what.

More content than

Aight I read the things. This game is surprisingly dense.[snip]

VOTE: BTD6

Like you read things but what do you think about it all? Did you get any reads? Why are you voting BTD6_MAKER? What made him scummy to you?

[CheekyTeeky]

Lol micc I just read your interactions with BTD and I lock town you for seeing the same things as me.

[CheekyTeeky]

@Cheeky: Where had you read up to while you were discussing with North near the top of this page? There’s something confusing me that this might help me answer.

I read your posts and NSG's just before I was going to sub out when I was responding to them. Then I ISO'd BTD, and had a look at micc vs BTD. Skimmed zito. Why?

[CheekyTeeky]

Like you read things but what do you think about it all? Did you get any reads? Why are you voting BTD6_MAKER? What made him scummy to you?

yeah see this is a much better post than complaining

I do have reads yes and unlike Friend BTD6 I had no trouble getting strong reads.

I'm voting him for reasons I don't want to get into at this time.

Complaining? I said I need more...like more information to make a conclusion. I didn't say omg why is Zito not posting more game content. That's a pretty strong reaction to a pretty neutral statement. Prefacing your post like that makes withholding your read seem more scummy than I'd otherwise find it.

[CheekyTeeky]

Kind of crazy Kawso's slot is going for a 4th player without the slot really having posted.

Do you think that's AI? I'm starting to think rolling scum into this game might be putting people off the slot. Yes I'm aware this is a stretch but surely this is beyond a coincidence now?

[CheekyTeeky]

Unlikely to be because it's a micro. I've seen the opposite be true where all 8 players were scummy as hell lol.

[CheekyTeeky]

Ok hammertime!

[CheekyTeeky]

Lol just joking. Seriously wtf people get off Chip. The whole case is bad and I know Cabd better be reaction testing when he helped build the wagon or else he doesn't actually read the thread and needs to be ignored. NSG spotted the gaping logical flaws in Papa's case and she fell into the background. This is the strongest proof to me so far that she's either town or scum distancing, but we won't know until Papa flips. For now I'm going to say she's town.

Please can we have some more unvotes. Chip you neglected my slot in your updated reads.

UNVOTE:

There is scum on this wagon, I can smell it.

[CheekyTeeky]

I'm happy to vote in Papa or BTD today.

[CheekyTeeky]

Wtf Cabd?

[CheekyTeeky]

Still upset at my lolhammer?

Yep. Zitos case made no sense. I'm glad we got scum but it should have been because of something that made sense. I respect Zitos gut reads now, I'll just ignore his logic lol. Also mad that you did nothing to discuss anyone D1 Cabd; and that you hammered without discussion.

What are the chances of scum bussing D1? I'm feeling like that's pretty low but it would explain why Papas case made no sense.

[CheekyTeeky]

VOTE: NSG

[CheekyTeeky]

NSG should be modkilled for referring to ongoing games.

[CheekyTeeky]

Micc was more likely than Zito to be bussing imo. But his posts this day phase look obv. town.

[CheekyTeeky]

Dunno how you figure we're getting to lylo. Only way we're making it that far is if you fakeclaimed which I doubt because you would have been CC'd today with only 1 scum left.

[CheekyTeeky]

so what's your case on me cheeky? if you're voting me based on not agreeing with the chip wagon, consider that you did the same thing.

I've wanted you gone since you voted micc D1. See D1 for my case.

[CheekyTeeky]

In fact just ISO me. My whole ISO is tunneling NSG and our conf. town lol.

[CheekyTeeky]

Papa Zito made a lot of good points. I think he had a solid case.

Can you please quote his case and break down how it made sense to you?

[CheekyTeeky]

Micc you're doing the interfering thing again

[CheekyTeeky]

Saying words and criticising is not equal to a case. If you had actually paid attention to the interaction you'd know that all of zito's points weren't true. Chip was actually doing the things Zito said he should be doing as town.

You not seeing the hypocrisy makes me feel like you're not reading the game properly because you know people's alignments. Also you attacking BTD feels like a cheap push. Your hesitation to vote NSG makes me believe she could be town. One of you two are scum and it could very well be you.

VOTE: UCV

[CheekyTeeky]

If I were scum, my best move would to support the NSG case. It is a way easier wagon than BTD6!

That is the obvious move not the best move. In your case your intent feels pretty townie.

VOTE: NSG

[CheekyTeeky]

Micc I like playing with you, hopefully you get how I work one day.

[CheekyTeeky]

Do others see what UCV sees in BTD6?

[CheekyTeeky]

Yeah I hope one day to get my title as "The Schizophrenic" if that's not too offensive, it's not intended to be derogatory as I'd be proud to have that unreadable connotation. Anyway...

BTD6 was a likely candidate D1. When I compare their play it's not unusual that BTD and Chip didn't read each other as they hardly read others. BTD however gave reads when he was pushed whereas Chip waffled on about how hard it was to get reads which pinged me D1 but I'll admit I'm a sucker for witty/humorous players to be town (I'm working on this).

BTD could be scum but what makes NSG keep your vote Micc?

Also UCV I'm very impressed with what you presented and picked up

[CheekyTeeky]

NSG is another one who needs to get me. But it looks less likely that she will lol.

[CheekyTeeky]

BTD would you be so kind as to link me to your favourite scum game?

Pedit an explanation for what?

[CheekyTeeky]

She's not pushing, she's presenting a case, otherwise it would be directed at me instead of to the rest of you. I'm terrible at caring about cases on me, especially when I think they're coming from scum intent...but I will refute it because you asked Micc.

[CheekyTeeky]

You know I'm glad I just put myself in isolation with Chip because I can now say that NorthSideGal is scum doubt = zero.

All the points she's pushing as scum on me also apply to her. But the biggest giveaway is when Chip kept saying he would ISO NSG but didn't update his read on her and when I pushed him on it for clarification he didn't respond at all but started discussing other reads. I think NSG is trying pretty hard to divert the wagon away from herself right now. Her timing of the push on me is laughably scum-like. I will be presenting a ddtailed case on her when I get to my laptop.

Pedit if you stop cherry picking my posts NSG you'll see that I can't be scum because of my reaction to Chip's wagon. And you'll see that I do want to townread you but have always thought you were scummy. I'm not one to hedge my bets scum or not. That is town objectivity and paranoia that you're misrepping.

[CheekyTeeky]

Also where is Hopkirk?

[CheekyTeeky]

Hey guys I'm sorry but I'm replacing out of all my games. GL hopefully the replacements are more useful. xx

@Mod please replace me.