Open 713: Jungle Republic [Game Over]

[Thor665]

VOTE: Beefster

It's a good policy lynch, and, hey, maybe a wolf or scum to boot.

[Thor665]

VOTE: Beefster

It's a good policy lynch, and, hey, maybe a wolf or scum to boot.

VOTE: Thor665
No protown player does this in RVS. Semi-serious vote.

No protown player does what?
Because I'd love to see you support this logic. It's the opposite of everything I know and have ever seen on this site, so either I'm really wrong, or you're full of hoo-hah.

[Thor665]

From my experience, a policy vote on someone, plus saying that they could be scum on top of that, inferring that you meant that there was a 5/12 chance of them being scum so the policy wagon is somewhat justified, seems scummy to me. It seems like an outright scumtell.

Why do you have this experience? Can you show me scum doing it in your games?
I can *assuredly* show you town doing it many times - would that adjust your opinion or no?

Bolded: Or he's really new. Like his reasoning doesn't make much sense to me but it appears to make sense to *him*. By presenting

only

those two options, you kinda transformed this discussion into a you-vs-him type of situation.

If he's really new and he believes his reasoning (your argument for a third category) I would suggest that what you're saying is 'he's really new and doesn't know better'. If you take that to a logical end it's - 'he's honestly wrong' if you compare that to 'you're full of hoo-hah' I submit you will find they are one and the same.

How do you think my setup unfairly cast the situation into a false setup (since I would suggest my setup was 'either Thor is wrong or Paradox is wrong')
Because the only other options are 'we're both right (difficult) or we're both wrong (also difficult).
So...?

VOTE: Beefster

It's a good policy lynch, and, hey, maybe a wolf or scum to boot.

What was the purpose of this post? Was it a joke post, or somewhat serious, or were you actually proposing a policy lynch on Beefster with the justification that there was a 5/12 chance of him being scum on top of that?

The purpose of the post was to;
1. Vote Beefster.
2. Explain why I voted Beefster.

There is a joke in there.
There is a policy lynch statement in there.
There is (with only the mildest of squints) an argument that I'm saying 'hey 5/12 let's roll dem bones' to the point I'm willing to agree I was saying that also.

I stand by all of the above and you absolutely caught me doing each and every one.
What of it?

[Thor665]

Also, for those of you not voting Beefster - by the time he generally agrees I have a point with my policy lynch...
Just saying, we could use more Beefster votes.

[Thor665]

I'll also add;

Soft town read on BuJaber
Soft scum on Montash

[Thor665]

Admittedly this is my first time playing with you.
But townreading me makes no sense and

adding soft to it feels like a cop out. "Like come on guys it wasn't really a townread".

I shouldn't be anything more or less than a nullread.

But this continued discussion between you and paradox is intriguing.

If I were forced to choose I'd say paradox is scum here not you but it's still too early for me to feel comfortable with that read.

My vote was an RVS prodge honestly. I skimmed over the initial posts and I wasn't sure when game started.

First off - can you justify the two bold sections in context to each other - because it sounds like a double standard to me.

Also, since I townread you off basically no posts, if my read wasn't called soft it was soft by obvious inference, and if it wasn't soft then that should be *more* worrying, no?

Just to explain myself, Thor's frustration with my playstyle is fresh and looks very town. His defense of half-jokingly PL'ing me is genuine.

Why couldn't I be scum and also honestly consider you a valid policy lynch?

This is 90% town. I like your response and it feels genuine.

I would hope it feels genuine, it's game theory - the odds of lying about that are pretty small.
That said, why didn't you answer any of my questions? They're real questions - I'm scumhunting you right now, and you hiding from questions feels scummy.

[Thor665]

Also, random thought - Wilky is buddying me.

[Thor665]

Why couldn't I be scum and also honestly consider you a valid policy lynch?

Can you explain why you think Beefster is worth a policy lynch? I've never played with him before, but I'm getting Town vibes from him at the moment.

He becomes a blind unreadable sheep.
Go ahead and ISO a few of his recent games and get back to me if you love his play.

[Thor665]

You kind of went a bit aggressive in explaining how non-scummy my post was as opposed to sitting back and allowing me to justify it as non-scummy.
That's pretty much the definition of buddying.
You're trying to make me like you by defending me.

[Thor665]

I don't expect to convince you that you're buddying me.
But your defensive reaction is telling also.

No, I don't think you were buddying Paradox.

[Thor665]

How do you think my setup unfairly cast the situation into a false setup (since I would suggest my setup was 'either Thor is wrong or Paradox is wrong')
Because the only other options are 'we're both right (difficult) or we're both wrong (also difficult).
So...?

I don't know if 'unfair' is the right word. Like it isn't that I think it was *unfair* of you to frame it like that, so much as I think it was unnecessary. Like if the two of you are having this discussion, it'll play out and people will think whatever. It might become a thing, or it might blow over.

But since you framed it as a you-vs-him, you've made this into an *issue* and a *conflict* between the two of you and are implicitly encouraging people to take sides by presenting the two options. Like you're forcing people to pay attention and pick a side.

And that worked so far - we're having this conversation, and bujaber is siding with you.

And from what I know of you and what I'm seeing of Paradox, I think you win most arguments with him. And I think you see that too.

It's not that I think it's an inaccurate or unfair portrayal of the situation, or that I think that both of you are right or wrong, so much as I think that you're deliberately forcing/highlighting this conflict and encouraging people to pick sides in an environment likely advantageous to you.

tldr: I think you're cultivating low hanging fruit.

VOTE: Thor

So if I get this right you think I'm scum because;

1. I voted someone to get somebody to attack me.
2. I intentionally set up the attack on me to obligate people to react to it.
3. I knew they'd be more likely to agree with me than whoever I argued with.

Is that what you're calling me scum for doing?

[Thor665]

Also, if you think I'm doing that - why are youthen leaping in to agree with my attack on Wilky?
Isn't that then me still doing the same thing?

[Thor665]

Oh man, Skitter set me up in an argument where people would have to choose sides!

[Thor665]

@korina huh.. I don't get your last question? Skitter's theory is far-fetched for sure but the advantage for scum!thor is obvious.

That's interesting, as I don't actually think it is.
What's the advantage for me if I'm scum to put myself into a 1 v 1 situation?

@thor
I agree maybe it feels weird that I would call something you did scummy and yet townread you in the same post. But that is how I feel. Town can do a lot of scummy things. I weighed the scummy thing you did (imo) against the townie things and the townie things outweigh it.

Actually it wasn't the town read - it was that you offered a soft town read while also calling me out for giving a soft town read.
You left yourself as much of a backdoor as I did. So why is it when I did it = questionable, but yet you're doing it also?
That's the double standard.

Like why would you even bother stating a read on me there anyway?

It helps me remember what I was thinking at any given point when I'm assessing the game later.

[Thor665]

Is where you're setting up a false dichotomy. Like, you can be wrong, he can be wrong. If he's wrong, then he's not necessarily full of Smurf. You're not just saying one of who you is wrong, you're saying that you're wrong or that he's being disingenuous.

Hoo-hah is not a synonym for excrement.
It's a synonym for 'noise'
So "you're full of hoo-hah" = "you're full of noise" = "your stance isn't supported"
That's a bit different than saying 'you're full of bull-poo and are scum!"

So does the actual definition of the word (and no evidence that I was calling him scummy for believing what he said, and instead asked simply for him to back up his beliefs [which we're still working on]) change your take of my "false dichotomy?
Or no?
If no - why not?

[Thor665]

@Laser - I sort of liked the core idea of yours behind 'maybe scum are egging it on' but the permutation of the inference is leaving em a bit colder.
That's a super common logical fallacy that town do all the time, no?

[Thor665]

Well I read through your ISO and you don't ever say he's scum or make a similar implication anywhere else. But "you're full of noise" != "your stance isn't supported". To me it more suggests something along the lines of "you're full of empty words". As in you're saying nothing while trying to appear to be saying something. I don't want to nitpick language here, if your meaning was along the lines of you don't agree with his stance than that's fine.

I agree, it is fine - I'm just curious why you automatically decided to attack me over a theory concept of my desire that was unsupported in anything I did or said (Skitter's doing it too, and I suspect the reality is both of you are equating aggressive with scummy - but that's such an obvious fallacy that I want you to unpack the thoughts and lay them on the table so I can be sure).

The only weird thing is that you're going at him aggressively for a first post. I expected RVS, and you came right off the bat with this PL vote. Like, I'm not surprised it got someone to respond.

The "only weird thing" is that I used my RVS in a way that was nearly assured to generate a response...
What am I supposed to use RVS for? Something that *doesn't* generate a response?
I would suggest that's bad/scummy play.
Why do you consider the opposite to be true?

3 - yes, I basically think you decided to force the conflict and present it as binary and as being an *issue* (as opposed to letting it become a thing to not become a thing naturally) with Paradox because I think you know that you can probably get more people to agree with you than Paradox can

Okay, so I, as scum, saw someone post a questionable attack.
I didn't call the attack scummy (feel free to prove me wrong on that), but brought it up as an issue and asked for more info and clarification/support on the stance.
In doing so I set up a situation where other people could assess the issue and offer their thoughts.

Does that describe your case?
Because, and maybe it's just me, that describes "scumhunting" to me.
If the above doesn't describe your case - clarify where I'm misrepping it.
If it does describe your case - can you describe how you think it differs from scumhunting.

Everything else is burden of proficiency, yeah?
Just because I'm more capable of winning a debate with someone does not mean that, by definition, I am scum and they are town. It is quite possible I am town and am just capable of winning debates...yeah? I'm pretty sure I'm allowed to scumhunt people I can debate better than and still be protown.

It's multiball. You can be scum and still scumhunt and make legitimate points against someone else.

Statistically it's better to find someone who you think is town and sheep their random vote, then to sheep anything by scum at this stage of the setup.
So...meh.

I'm saying that I think Thor deliberately instigated/highlighted/framed/created a conflict that he could probably win that might not have existed otherwise by presenting it as binary.

Can you describe the non-binary possibilities of the disagreement?
I'll wait.

But the actual diction/semantics/word choice is not the point. Like you already agreed with me that you set it up as binary:

I agree I set it up as binary.
I disagree that I set it up as scum/town, which you appear to be implying for your case to make sense. I look forward to being proven wrong about that.

As for the advantage it's basically what skitter said in 68. If you are scum you can probably win the argument, get people to lynch whoever you choose to engage (paradox in this case) while also appearing like town because "where is the town motivation?" As wilky and others have asked.

You've already secured a town read from most players even those arguing that you could be scum. So even if you don't get paradox lynched a scum!you would have gained a lot of value from the fight you instigated.

1. How does me being better at debating someone suggest I am more likely scum?
2. I'll agree that other players are noticing that I am using logic and appear to be scumhunting. I'll also agree that a roughly equal number of players are calling my aggressiveness/being town read scummy. So...?

[Thor665]

Also, I'm going to do this;

VOTE: skitter

Until he can describe how he isn't calling me scum for scumhunting.

[Thor665]

I think it's probably fairly good play. But it doesn't feel like the norm exactly. Does it really surprise you that people reacted to that? Like, I think i'm getting that your style of play is to after

every

thread of info hard, but I can't believe you've never had people being off put a little by just how hard you go at it.

Whether or not I'm used to people being offput by my play does nothing to suggest how often I find scum trying to claim that 'different' equates to 'scummy' nor how often I manage to catch them after doing so.

You spent a whole lot of words to avoid answering the question - you're basically admitting nothing I did actually was particularly scummy, yet are defending your right to attack it on a vague conceptual basis without being willing to say that you yourself found it suspect for xyz reasons.

Why is that?

My vote on Thor is because I get a serious scum vibe from what he was planning. I can't describe it any other way.

Can you describe what you think I was planning?

ie this isn't doesn't accurately represent what I'm arguing. My problem isn't that you highlighted some issue and brought it to everyone's attention so that people can discuss it (ie scumhunting). My problem is that I think you artificially framed the issue as a you v him conflict (ie you highlighted the conflict aspect) which encourages people to pick sides (which is what happened shortly thereafter, people were saying they agreed with you or paradox), and I think that it was an opportunistic/manipulative way of getting people to side with you because you can most likely out-argue paradox.

How could I have "scumhunted" him without setting up the false situation you're claiming I set up exactly?

I also note that you did not take up my offer to explain how I could have framed the questioning *without* the so-called false dichotomy - should I take that as tacit admission that you're admitting I couldn't have? Which would then make me wonder about you calling it a scumtell.

You set it up as a conflict between you and him. I don't think you were necessarily setting it up as scum/town, but my point is that you set it up so that there would be *sides* where they didn't necessarily naturally exist.

How do 'sides' exist beyond humans having differing opinions?
I agree I set up sides - do you think my side looks artificially created and that his side is the more objectively correct stance? Because if so I would ask you the same thing I asked him - how do you come to that conclusion?
If you think my side *IS* the more correct one (and I am 99.9% sure it is) then how the hell are you getting off suggesting I artifically created it for game advancement?

a) she

b) this is kinda a bad/awkward/weird vote, and no, not because it's on me.

I don't think you're actually calling me scum anywhere; if you are, I missed it and I'd appreciate a tldr. If you're not calling me scum, why are you voting me exactly? If I don't give you an answer you like, you just gave yourself an excuse to votepark me forever. And if I do give you an answer you like, like what was the point?

a) apologies
b) How is it awkward?

I'll agree I haven't called you scum before this - but now that you dodged the answer I'll go ahead and shift to 'yes, I am calling you scummy now'.
Of course, for that to be awkward I'd kind of have to have called anyone scum - and I really haven't yet this game (until just now) so I fail to see the awkwardness you're claiming - explain it?

If you don't give an answer I like, yeah, I'll probably vote you - in a theoretical world where I votepark and you otherwise behave townish I'll agree that would look suspect for me, I don't see how that's an issue right now though - explain?
If you give an answer I like I'll *gasp* probably move my vote, and that would be the point, because I scumhunted you - can you explain why that's such a strange and unusual idea for you? Do you *NOT* ask questions that people can give answers you like to? Like, if every question is supposed to make people go deeper and deeper on their vote then that's pretty weird.

NM so you scumread Thor?
Why? Why not?

Upon rereading I have comvinced myself that skitter v Thor is definitely TvS. Or in this game possibly SvW. So I'll be voting there and only there. Whether you like it or not Thor you made it binary.

I agree and have often stated that I made it binary.
Even Skitter is having to agree with that now, the weird thing being is she's expanding it to I forced some artificial choice upon people...which kind of ignores that the opposite stance (which was used to vote me) is slightly nonsensical and assuredly unsupported, and also ignores literally every other instance in this thread where someone set up a stance vs. stance situation (which is, as I've noted, what scumhunting is all about) and Skitter sits there not calling out a single one.

Which says we should all be voting her to my mind.

Going to admit before I get asked I have not read skitt v thor.

You should, or at least read my very short paragraph in response to BuJaber right above this reply ^^^
Because either I'm crazy, or Skitter is blatantly misrepping the entire concept of scumhunting to call me scummy.

I do want to point out that you should pay attention to the speed in which my wagon is growing and what that implies. 2 people in the game wouldn't vote each other and 3 wouldn't vote each other. Somebody being voted by everyone who posted is incredibly suspicious.

At the point of this quote you had three votes on you.
Can you describe which were unnaturally fast specifically as opposed to generally?
I don't think it was fast at all.

[Thor665]

Yes, the versions that I wrote inherently imply that there's disagreement and conflict too

. Your version highlights and frames that conflict and casts it explicitly as 'I am right and you are wrong'

I'm not arguing that there *can't* be sides or that there *shouldn't* be sides or that there *aren't* sides in a conflict.

I'm arguing that you highlighted the sides/conflict

when you didn't have to.

So now the issue isn't that I created a conflict, it's that I made it somehow bigger than I needed to, when I could have created a smaller conflict?
Do I have that right?

So yes, I think it's entirely possible to ask questions and scumhunt without explicitly framing it as 'Either I must be right or you are'.

Even though you admit that the questions you asked are doing that exact thing also - just in a smaller/more subtle way.

I don't think that your goal is to understand the other person's POV or to understand where they're coming from, but rather that you're trying to win arguments.

I don't need to win an argument that is objectively already won.
I do need to ask questions to understand his stance.
I *could* have just gone "this is obvious bull-hookey and here's why" and voted him over it if my goal was to create conflict and not understand what he thought, yeah?

With me, my argument isn't like that complex or anything, and I've restated it many different times, and I'm kinda having a hard time believing you fundementally don't understand what I'm trying to say.

I actually think i do understand what you're trying to say - and I'm saying it's scummy and am trying to paint you into a corner where everyone else understands it's scummy also.
Because either that will happen, or you'll answer in some way that shows I am misunderstanding you.
Currently it is favoring the former for me.

In each iteration of this back-and-forth, you've been reframing what I'm saying and trying to transform the discussion into being about something else, into something more general/innocuous (how is this not scumhunting!) or loaded questions ('How do sides exist beyond humans having differing opinions?').

I don't think that's true at all and would call you a liar.
Please show me how I'm re-framing your stance exactly rather than just generically claiming I am.
Because I'm not.
Unless I'm wrong but I think your claim is hoo-hah

Like if I'm scummy for dodging a question *when I answered it*, I don't really think you're trying to engage me in good faith or that you actually care what my answer is.

You didn't actually answer it though.
Look at your current answer - "Thor asked the question in a way that was more setting up a conflict than a less setting up conflict answer could have been" is a pretty long stride from your initial call against me, and also pretty much is now implying awareness that what I did is called 'basic scumhunting'.

And that's why I think the vote is bad/awkward/whatever the right word is, because you can always declare I didn't answer it satisfactorily.

That is true - the real issue is whether I can back up the claim that I find it unsatisfactory and whether you can back up the claim that it is satisfactory and then how other people interpret and assess those claims.

I've been very clear about why I find it unsatisfactory, yeah? if not, ask for clarification.

I don't understand the bolded.

It was based on a theory that maybe you found it awkward because I hadn't called you scum before voting you - which is what your words implied to me, and explaining why that stance held little water.

Make sense now?

Italics - like I said above - I don't think my answer actually matters and that you're going to use whatever I say as a reason to continue the argument and/or scumread me; ie that you can always declare me to be wrong and find me scummy for it.

Sure...but let's then go back to "wouldn't that then just be based on a presumptive of me being scum"
You're complaining that I gave you no "out" before even trying to fulfill the "out" making your prediction self fulfilling (though I feel you went that way because you recognized that you couldn't back up your made-up scum case hoo-hah.

Underlined: More loaded questions and I don't even get what you're trying to ask me with them.

I'm explaining what would happen if you gave an answer I liked.
Then I'm asking why anyone would ask a question if that *wasn't* a possibility.
It's mostly pointing out how you're setting up false predictions based on suggesting no one scumhunts the way basically everyone scumhunts and then using that as evidence to call what I'm doing scummy.

I'm also kinda done with this back-and-forth because I don't think anyone else is actually reading it and I feel like you've been misrepping me so I don't really see the point in continuing this, so yeah.

Where and how am I misrepping you?

(I also notice that you dodged my observation that in creating the 'sides' thing you got your townreads, which is the fundemental point of my argument).

I'm ignoring it because it's requiring me to be either
a) a mindreader
or
b) as scum to think that what I'm doing is pro town and seen as pro town and therfore something I'd do as town making it not a valid tell.

I will agree that my mindreading predicative powers that I only use as scum and not town (and ignoring that my power is apparently useless and results in equal scumreads if even one person slightly questions me) is part of your case - I just don't see them as valid or worth debating because they're nonsensical. Feel free to address this rebuttal if it excites you.

[Thor665]

It's not that I think it's an inaccurate or unfair portrayal of the situation, or that I think that both of you are right or wrong, so much as I think that you're deliberately forcing/highlighting this conflict and encouraging people to pick sides in an environment likely advantageous to you.

Yes, the versions that I wrote inherently imply that there's disagreement and conflict too

. Your version highlights and frames that conflict and casts it explicitly as 'I am right and you are wrong'

I'm not arguing that there *can't* be sides or that there *shouldn't* be sides or that there *aren't* sides in a conflict.

I'm arguing that you highlighted the sides/conflict

when you didn't have to.

For the tl:dr of why Skitter is scum.

Initial claim is the first quote.
Clarified claim is the second quote.

She has not actually shown me encouraging people to pick a side in any way.
She has not questioned anyone else for setting up any sort of disagreement.
She agrees I wasn't unfair in my question.
She has now agreed that there was already inherently conflict (indeed, it was created by the person she is claiming is town in this exchange)
She agrees that her best examples of how I could have questioned the player *also* caused conflict.
So her basic claim is, I asked a question that was a little more standoffish than it should have had to have been.

And she's doubling down on it as a valid issue to call me scum over this.
(and has now expanded to me misrepping her)

I would suggest that if she can't show me misrepping her that people should vote her more.
I would also suggest that the above is a pretty valid reason to vote her, as she has and continues to try to frame me asking a question as scum intent.

[Thor665]

Oh, and I did all the above because I knew I could win an argument and get insta town read.
But thankfully she saw through it and questioned me, causing me to get scum read - which apparently my scum plan didn't anticipate as a possibility in a game based around questioning why people are doing things.

Yeah.
Think about that.

[Thor665]

@Laser - what are your thoughts on viewtopic.php?p=9975923#p9975923 ?

[Thor665]

My vote on Thor is because I get a serious scum vibe from what he was planning. I can't describe it any other way.

Can you describe what you think I was planning?

@Korina - I actually do just post to hear myself talk, but since I read all of my own posts back to myself in a sultry voice I like to think everyone else can read them, or at least scan them, once also.

[Thor665]

my best explanation, is that by some roundabout way you convince us that you're town by doing that. I don't see someone with town motivation doing that.

How did I manipulate anyone into townreading me by doing 'that'?
Bonus points, what is 'that'?

[Thor665]

1. I voted someone to get somebody to attack me.
2. I intentionally set up the attack on me to obligate people to react to it.
3. I knew they'd be more likely to agree with me than whoever I argued with.

This is what I'm referring to by "that".

I don't see anyone town-motivated player doing this.

What makes you think I did that as opposed to just asking a question?

As for the speed it was within 5 hours or so that 3 people declared they agreed with espeo. Laser didn't actually vote for me but he stated willingness. Fanta especially comes in votes for the hot wagon and leaves yet again.

Slight goalpost move, but okay.
I really see little reason to suspect Laser right now - do you honestly have him as scummy for expressing general interest in a case on you without a vote?
I'll agree Fanta is giving about spit to read them over, but I don't quite equate them to general opportunism yet. Just leaping on me now is leaping on a pretty stale situation, and they did so with a thin, yet at least new, claim of scumminess - does that effect your read there at all?

She did call out BuJabar for saying that exactly one of the two of you is scum in 181, which is a similar sort of thing.

I can agree very loosely with that - but *literally every debate in the game is about people having a disagreement over something*.
Like, just now this second, you and I are disagreeing.
She and I are disagreeing.
BuJaber and you are disagreeing.
If this is an actual scumtell she has she should be hitting reactions off of it literally constantly.
That's why she had to reinvent it to 'you did it in a certain more forceful way' to try to distance from the reality I had pointed out about this.

Does that not twig you at all?
It's twigging the hell out of me, and I don't see any way I'm reading it wrong.

[Thor665]

@Fanta - considering your personal vote count, why did you get off a wagon with 4 votes to get on one with 1 vote? What's your current BuJabber take?

[Thor665]

it had more to do with your reaction to people's surprise.

Can you quote my reaction and maybe explain why it's strange?

[Thor665]

Because - short answer - I don't think I had a strange reaction, and I'm generally used to the idea of people thinking I'm aggressive.

[Thor665]

From my experience, a policy vote on someone, plus saying that they could be scum on top of that, inferring that you meant that there was a 5/12 chance of them being scum so the policy wagon is somewhat justified, seems scummy to me. It seems like an outright scumtell.

Why do you have this experience? Can you show me scum doing it in your games?
I can *assuredly* show you town doing it many times - would that adjust your opinion or no?

@Skitter

By the by, as I was going back to scan my iso to try to figure out what Montash was on about (since I'll admit to a feeling he's going to duck my request) and I found this gem.
You're really holding on to the very first interaction I had with Paradox to try to sell that I was overly aggressive, but...man, gotta tell you, the second interaction seems to be very reasoned, responsible, and interested in him explaining himself more than setting up some sort of strange scum gambit of choices to be townread over.

How does that fit into your scumThor narrative exactly?

[Thor665]

Actually, Fanta wanted to stay on BuJaber but I kinda stole our vote from them, so.

Mostly because the BuJaber wagon has built really quickly on a really flimsy "case" and I don't find any of his posts particularly scummy, so.

Without your own partner's vote the wagon hasn't built quickly, so...?

I can’t tell if you’re being serious on this, or not. If you’re being serious about all of this, please, explain what you mean by each of those points you brought up.

I'm being serious.
How do the points confuse you - they appear quite self evident.

Care to explain why?

For direct value call and for opportunism.

So, my entire thing about that, is that I honestly have never seen town trying to set up arguments where they know the exact outcome. It seems like something mafia/wolf would do.

How would I know what the outcome would be?
You're, like Skitter, accussing me of being a mindreader/master manipulator with zero evidence to support said claim, and then acting like it's a valid call.

Also, personal nitpick, spoiler large-ish posts please. thanks.[/spoiler]
No thank you.

Yes, that's basically what I've been trying to say this entire time

Don't facepalm me - there is *ZERO* in your first post that makes that clear.
Feel free to show how it's clear there and I'll immediately apologize - but you ARE changing your words.
There's a reason you had to admit that conflict was inherent.

Misrepping. In your quote at the start of this post, I bolded a phrase. You're misrepping me there because that was *never* my argument, but you're framing it like I've suddenly changed positions when that never happened. I've been arguing the same thing this entire time.

I literally quoted you explaining your case.

I don't even get what I'm supposed to have changed positions *from*.

You opened with I forced a conflict.
You've changed that to I turned a conflict into a (by some degree) bigger conflict.

You've been doing it (misrepping) elsewhere and if you need me to I can make a seperate post about it.

Please do.

Bolded: That's been a fundamental part of my argument this entire time so I have no idea where you're getting the italics from.

Quote it from your first three posts on the subject.
I'll wait.

And again, I think this is scummy (ie and differs from 'basic scumhunting') for reasons outlined in 46 and again elsewhere in this post

And those reasons are summed up as "it's a bigger conflict than it needs to be" which is bollocks.

I don't understand why you find it unsatsfactory.

That your claim of how it differs from normal scumhunting strikes me as the pretty clear major issue.
"Yeah, it's a conflict and inherently conflict happens but you made it bigger because you knew you would win, and oh, look, your second post with them isn't conflicty but I'll act confused about how that applies to my case - ignore it - and chive on"
Yeah, that's weaksauce.
That you find it a complete and satisfactory answer concerns me.
That you have the top wagon and Lurk fake wall Korina as your prime supporters should concern you, if you're town.

Q: how is what thor did different from basic scumhunting?

A: he highlighted a conflict

when he didn't have to

and in doing so he created an environment where people were likely to choose sides, and in doing so, he got people to townread him and scumread paradox. He took advantage of a non-issue to get himself townreads and to make paradox look scummy. It's manipulative (highlighting conflict when it didn't need to be framed that way) and oppurtunistic to get townreads and make someone look scummy.

I've already said this like four different times, and why on earth are you not considering this an answer?

For starters, what you italicized and I bolded is *already a change from your last answer*.
I asked you for a non-conflict response I could have used and YOU COULDN'T MAKE ONE.
So you *know* this is a bogus argument but are still making it.

a) You can gauge gamestates and anticipate how certain arguments will likely play out and what the reception to your posts will be without being a mindreader. In fact, I'd posit that this is an incredibly important skill to have in this game. You're like taking a fundamental part of the game (gauging how your posts will be perceived) and stretching that to an extreme that clearly isn't possible (mindreading) to discredit my position of 'thor anticipated that people would likely agree with him over paradox'.

b) I don't understand what you're trying to say.

a) That your position can be described as 'mindreading' and you're having to argue that what I'm doing is "stretching" as opposed to "making something up" should concern you without further debate from me being needed.
Please find me anyone who can or will honestly claim they can predict what a given action will do and I'll show you a fool or a liar. Just take something like meta. Half the site says it's great, half the site says it's garbage - so how do you predict how a meta case will be received? RVS, claims, L-1 wagons, gut reads, VCA - literally everything in the game has people with fluctuating opinions on it and what is/isn't a scum or town tell.

b) If you presume I have the powers you proscribe to me in a) then it is silly to suggest I wouldn't have forseen how my attack was overblown and antagonistic and would have had some people scum read me - and if I knew that then why would I do the "plan". Your cumtell requires me to have powers, but also requires those powers to be very weak and not actually that good (which, incidentally, also proves that I'm right about a), that no one actually has that ability )

This entire post misreps everything I've been saying this entire time.

No, it doesn't.

I would suggest that if she can't show me misrepping her that people should vote her more.

This post, repeatedly.

You say that, but I'm literally quoting you above offering *one* and saying you could offer more.
So, literally you're lying in your tl:dr

Sorry I didn't read your pronoun. Username kinda sounded male so I went with he. I'll try to get it right from now on.

Yes fine it happened. We can move on now.
Would you have an issue with voting/lynching Korina? Or does it have to be Thor in your opinion?

How are you following Thor v. Skitter well enough to have an opinion and missed that Skitter and I had an exchange over pronouns already?

[Thor665]

Actually, Fanta wanted to stay on BuJaber but I kinda stole our vote from them, so.

Mostly because the BuJaber wagon has built really quickly on a really flimsy "case" and I don't find any of his posts particularly scummy, so.

Without your own partner's vote the wagon hasn't built quickly, so...?

I can’t tell if you’re being serious on this, or not. If you’re being serious about all of this, please, explain what you mean by each of those points you brought up.

I'm being serious.
How do the points confuse you - they appear quite self evident.

Care to explain why?

For direct value call and for opportunism.

So, my entire thing about that, is that I honestly have never seen town trying to set up arguments where they know the exact outcome. It seems like something mafia/wolf would do.

How would I know what the outcome would be?
You're, like Skitter, accussing me of being a mindreader/master manipulator with zero evidence to support said claim, and then acting like it's a valid call.

Also, personal nitpick, spoiler large-ish posts please. thanks.

No thank you.

Yes, that's basically what I've been trying to say this entire time

Don't facepalm me - there is *ZERO* in your first post that makes that clear.
Feel free to show how it's clear there and I'll immediately apologize - but you ARE changing your words.
There's a reason you had to admit that conflict was inherent.

Misrepping. In your quote at the start of this post, I bolded a phrase. You're misrepping me there because that was *never* my argument, but you're framing it like I've suddenly changed positions when that never happened. I've been arguing the same thing this entire time.

I literally quoted you explaining your case.

I don't even get what I'm supposed to have changed positions *from*.

You opened with I forced a conflict.
You've changed that to I turned a conflict into a (by some degree) bigger conflict.

You've been doing it (misrepping) elsewhere and if you need me to I can make a seperate post about it.

Please do.

Bolded: That's been a fundamental part of my argument this entire time so I have no idea where you're getting the italics from.

Quote it from your first three posts on the subject.
I'll wait.

And again, I think this is scummy (ie and differs from 'basic scumhunting') for reasons outlined in 46 and again elsewhere in this post

And those reasons are summed up as "it's a bigger conflict than it needs to be" which is bollocks.

I don't understand why you find it unsatsfactory.

That your claim of how it differs from normal scumhunting strikes me as the pretty clear major issue.
"Yeah, it's a conflict and inherently conflict happens but you made it bigger because you knew you would win, and oh, look, your second post with them isn't conflicty but I'll act confused about how that applies to my case - ignore it - and chive on"
Yeah, that's weaksauce.
That you find it a complete and satisfactory answer concerns me.
That you have the top wagon and Lurk fake wall Korina as your prime supporters should concern you, if you're town.

Q: how is what thor did different from basic scumhunting?

A: he highlighted a conflict

when he didn't have to

and in doing so he created an environment where people were likely to choose sides, and in doing so, he got people to townread him and scumread paradox. He took advantage of a non-issue to get himself townreads and to make paradox look scummy. It's manipulative (highlighting conflict when it didn't need to be framed that way) and oppurtunistic to get townreads and make someone look scummy.

I've already said this like four different times, and why on earth are you not considering this an answer?

For starters, what you italicized and I bolded is *already a change from your last answer*.
I asked you for a non-conflict response I could have used and YOU COULDN'T MAKE ONE.
So you *know* this is a bogus argument but are still making it.

a) You can gauge gamestates and anticipate how certain arguments will likely play out and what the reception to your posts will be without being a mindreader. In fact, I'd posit that this is an incredibly important skill to have in this game. You're like taking a fundamental part of the game (gauging how your posts will be perceived) and stretching that to an extreme that clearly isn't possible (mindreading) to discredit my position of 'thor anticipated that people would likely agree with him over paradox'.

b) I don't understand what you're trying to say.

a) That your position can be described as 'mindreading' and you're having to argue that what I'm doing is "stretching" as opposed to "making something up" should concern you without further debate from me being needed.
Please find me anyone who can or will honestly claim they can predict what a given action will do and I'll show you a fool or a liar. Just take something like meta. Half the site says it's great, half the site says it's garbage - so how do you predict how a meta case will be received? RVS, claims, L-1 wagons, gut reads, VCA - literally everything in the game has people with fluctuating opinions on it and what is/isn't a scum or town tell.

b) If you presume I have the powers you proscribe to me in a) then it is silly to suggest I wouldn't have forseen how my attack was overblown and antagonistic and would have had some people scum read me - and if I knew that then why would I do the "plan". Your cumtell requires me to have powers, but also requires those powers to be very weak and not actually that good (which, incidentally, also proves that I'm right about a), that no one actually has that ability )

This entire post misreps everything I've been saying this entire time.

No, it doesn't.

I would suggest that if she can't show me misrepping her that people should vote her more.

This post, repeatedly.

You say that, but I'm literally quoting you above offering *one* and saying you could offer more.
So, literally you're lying in your tl:dr

Sorry I didn't read your pronoun. Username kinda sounded male so I went with he. I'll try to get it right from now on.

Yes fine it happened. We can move on now.
Would you have an issue with voting/lynching Korina? Or does it have to be Thor in your opinion?

How are you following Thor v. Skitter well enough to have an opinion and missed that Skitter and I had an exchange over pronouns already?

[Thor665]

Misrepping. In your quote at the start of this post, I bolded a phrase. You're misrepping me there because that was *never* my argument, but you're framing it like I've suddenly changed positions when that never happened. I've been arguing the same thing this entire time.

I literally quoted you explaining your case.

I just wanted to pull this one out, because it's the core of Skitter's claim of misreps from me - which is what pretty much Skitter's entire wall is about.
There is a claim I'm misrepping - by quoting a post of hers where she's explaining the case and bolding the opening line to the explanation.
Yet Skitter also claims she's never changed her story about what her case is.

So, I ask you, how do i misrep her when literally what I quoted was her answering a question about what her case is unless either her story has changed (which it has) or she's straight up lying in a wall and hoping people will buy it (which I believe she's doing).

If I was misrepped more by people quoting my own words I'd be a happy man.

[Thor665]

So, my entire thing about that, is that I honestly have never seen town trying to set up arguments where they know the exact outcome. It seems like something mafia/wolf would do.

How would I know what the outcome would be?
You're, like Skitter, accussing me of being a mindreader/master manipulator with zero evidence to support said claim, and then acting like it's a valid call.

@Korina - I knew the outcome would be you missing the question, but let's go with this a second time.

[Thor665]

@Korina - frankly I'm starting to feel like you're taking me outlining Skitter's case as me admitting I did something - which makes your vote on me even iffier.

[Thor665]

@thor - pronoun discussion is irrelevant to the game I ignored it.

So you started to read it, realized what it was, skipped it, and then forgot about it?

[Thor665]

I think that you're deliberately forcing/

highlighting

this conflict

What did you mean by the forcing part of the quote then?

[Thor665]

Like if you're arguing that the notion of 'making the existing conflict bigger' hasn't been in my argument this entire time you're basically telling me that you don't think that the phrases 'highlight conflict' and 'making an existing conflict bigger' encapsulate the same idea. Or if you think I suddenly introduced the idea that 'he didn't have to,' you're telling me that you think 'unnecessary' and 'didn't have to' don't encapsulate the same idea. Like is that really what you're going with?

Pretty much, yes - but I wait for you to answer the above before I go further into it.
You assuredly wasted a lot of air getting away from the "highlight" if that was your original crux.

I want that apology now, thank you very much.

What do you think I did that was rude and needing an apology for?

Are you like ignoring this or ...?

Well, I can address it, but I don't see a lot of value to it; but okay;

You offer an example of me catching you as scum - I was very clear and repetitive of what I found you scum over (indeed, I *ahem* even maybe forced a conflict with you, yeah?)
You, as scum, tried to duck me - and it didn't work.

Now your argument is apparently something along the lines of "if I was scum, I would try the same failed strategy that I am highly aware of even though i know it doesn't work" If you're claiming that, you owe yourself an apology - my crime is presuming you would learn.

Also, frankly, you showing a game where you are HIGHLY AWARE THAT I'M CONFRONTATIONAL AS TOWN and then also having your current case on me?
Makes me want to flip you more, not less.

I quoted this, in which you claim to paraphrase the latest iteration of my argument after quoting it; I agree that you accurately paraphrased that. In this quote, ie with the bolded words, you also claim that it differs from what I said originially. I'm saying that the bolded words here are a misrep because you aren't accurately representing my original argument - the original argument is the same as the version in 182 because I haven't changed my position.

How do you define misrep? I want to make sure we're discussing the same thing.

Also I resent this on like a personal level because I'm not Smurfing lying.

I resent you doing either a fake AtE or being confrontational about something you have to be aware that I have no actual ability to verify other than having a conversation about it - and noting that you're not backing up your claims.
I note that I still lack this "list of misreps".
I figure you're ducking that or lying at the moment, prove me wrong by giving me the list?

[Thor665]

@skitter, @thor

I think you are both Town, but I am seriously contemplating pushing for a policy lynch on one of you at this point in time just so we won't have to put up with you bickering for the rest of the game. You are aren't getting anywhere and are making the thread more difficult to read and keep up with. Please move on.

We are getting somewhere.
Also, what else would you like to see addressed?

[Thor665]

viewtopic.php?p=9587277#p9587277
viewtopic.php?p=9590644#p9590644

@Skitter - like those are my first two posts in a game where you know I was town.
Please describe how those are not like the "highlighting" I did here and if your answer makes even 50% sense I'll drop the case on you till at least tomorrow.
I'll even let Laser be the judge of "sense" in this case.

If you can't, then people should start voting you now.

[Thor665]

Half of the posts in this game have essentially been you going after people hard for every single post. First with Paradox and to a greater extent, and more annoyingly due to the sheer length of it, with skitter. Like, you seem intent on just keeping this going on and on. You two are just arguing for the sake of arguing, but it doesn't feel like either of you have said anything new since the first few pages, yet this has eaten up a good portion of the game despite the fact that I really don't think there's anything here.

This is not just directed at you, skitter ought to have probably let this cool down for a bit by now and get on to other things. But you're the worse culprit because you just keep going. The only time anything seems to be moving in a different direction was those few days when you weren't posting, but while you're here it gobbles most of the attention up.

Now maybe what bothers me about you is that I just can't get a ping off of you. I can imagine a town motivation to be thorough and explore every thread of info, and I can see a scum motivation to deliberately obfuscate and prevent any meaningful reads from being parsed out, at least while people try avoid this whole clusterSmurf of an argument, which seems to be the majority approach. Given your level of play, I don't believe either play is beyond you.

You're covering a lot of ground here, so I'm going to hit them up in a roughly chronological order;

1. I note that you, despite writing three paragraphs, didn't actually explain what I'm doing that is strange in my reaction to 'people's surprise' - want to take another swing at that?

2. If you read our debate you will note that actually neither Skitter nor I are arguing for the sake of arguing,a nd are being very focused on assessing each other's scumminess with reasoning offered by both. That does require you to do more than skim it, but...

3. Why do you think there's nothing there considering there are 5 scum, we could be TvM, TvW, MvW, or even WvW or MvM. What makes you end up at TvT? Both you and Laser have said this now, and I kind of feel he was foolishly innocent to suggest it, but you just feel sheepy to his idea.

4. I'm sorry that me being gone makes the game feel like it's progressing to you - I would suggest that whatever you were doing then you could still be doing even when I'm here. What other conversations would you like to see at the forefront?

5. You then (after spending two paragraphs complaining about my play) admit that it could be good town play, and admit you can't get a clear read (despite making a few crass generalizations about what the conversation is about which shows me that you're skimming the debate and not even reading my short blurbs about it, which makes me sad as I'm doing that and even Skitter is tossing in tl:drs at the end of posts). If you'd like to try to figure out if it's obfuscation or scumhunting, i would suggest the best solution is to read it and see if it is indeed flim flam or if there is meat to the debate. If that isn't something you're willing or able to do, the next best option is offered in my #4 - direct some conversations yourself, or even in my #1 answering a conversation I also appear interested in that is not about Skitter.

[Thor665]

@Thor: I think I'm just going to ignore you for a bit, no offense.

I don't take offense at thing sthat aren't offensive.

That said, i do think you owe me an answer to my very reasonable, direct, and clearly alignment indicative question of how you differentiate my play in this game from how you are well aware of how I play town in the game I caught you in that you linked - because you are clearly aware that I play aggressively and yet are calling me scum for being overly aggressive and I'd like to hear how you see the two as different levels of aggression. One - that you know is town level, and this one, that you believe is scum level.

Do that and we can drop everything else, even though I will consider it a strategic drop on your part.

To be honest if you two are gonna have such wildy conflicting opinions it's gonna be tough for us to keepp you around.

We talked about this decision off-site before making it, I'm confident with Peppers scumreads (that is why we created this hydra after all, she's very good at reading people and I'm not so much.)
I stand behind her choices and reasoning, don't worry :>

Also sorry but it's nearly 4am and I've been out all day, I'd write longer but this is all I have energy for right now.
-Fanta

When Pepper gets back I'd love to hear my question last asked of your slot answered - how did he consider the wagon fast without counting his own slot's vote? And if he did count his own slot's vote - how does that make the wagon scummy fast?


If BuJabber actually replaces out I'm calling that slot even a stronger townread and would like to see the wagon dissipate.

[Thor665]

So, my entire thing about that, is that I honestly have never seen town trying to set up arguments where they know the exact outcome. It seems like something mafia/wolf would do.

How would I know what the outcome would be?
You're, like Skitter, accussing me of being a mindreader/master manipulator with zero evidence to support said claim, and then acting like it's a valid call.

@Korina - I knew the outcome would be you missing the question, but let's go with this a second time.

@Korina - third time's the charm?

[Thor665]

From what I can remember I had Beef as my top TR. I also had Town leans on Thor, N_M & TGP.

I like these reads except for N_M - I would say he's literally done *nothing* alignment indicative.
How in the world is he a town lean?

[Thor665]

If it's a soul read why is it only a lean?

[Thor665]

If it's a soul read why is it only a lean?

Because I -obviously- can't provide you with hard evidence! And -as I said- I was WRONG about him in a recent game where THREE TOWNIES (including myself) defended him and he flipped Scum so it's not 100%

The evidence bit doesn't have anything to do with anything, right?

[Thor665]

The evidence bit doesn't have anything to do with anything, right?

I'm not exactly sure what you mean. Like "I have a Town READ on N_M" .. "Why?" .. "Because I

feel

his play is Town" .. "Awrright! I agree then!" (????)

My definition of a "Town Read": Someone I will DEFEND all the way and will probably SR those who push 'em.

My definition of a "Town Lean": Someone I wouldn't be voting myself, but I understand if someone else wants them lynched and won't fight it back tooth and nail because I don't have a good argument aside from my own feelings about the slot.

And while at it..

Scum Lean: someone I suspect but don't really have a case, so I'm willing to join their wagon if someone else has a case

Scum Read: I am convinced this is scum and won't be listening to anyone else's opinion on he matter

Have you ever explained this read methodology in any other game?

[Thor665]

One - that you know is town level, and this one, that you believe is scum level.

I think that there's a difference between agressively asking questions and framing conflicts as a direct 1v1. Like look at the two posts you linked me. You didn't do the latter there.

I think you're doing the same thing with me as you did with paradox. You're perpetuating the conflict and and people are taking sides ('I think the argument is tvt', or tvs or whatever people are saying), and when you don't like their stance, you're grilling them on it in an attempt to get them to change their minds. You do it with Montosh on the previous page or whatever.

The former is an attempt to understand others' POV. THe latter is an attempt to perpetuate an argument in order to encourage other people to pick sides in an argument you think that you've won.

I note a strong lack of examples here.

I would note that what you're describing as my scum play here is exactly how I would describe my play against you in that game.
How do you not?

[Thor665]

I note a strong lack of examples here.

I would note that what you're describing as my scum play here is exactly how I would describe my play against you in that game.
How do you not?

Yeah, no. I've described my position as best as I can and I don't really know how else to say it at this point. I don't think that continuing this is useful.

You literally haven't described the position.
And you literally have an entire game where you know I'm town to use as an example to illustrate differences with.

Remember when you told me your scum game involved you running away from explanation because you didn't have an answer?

@skitter, @thor

I think you are both Town, but I am seriously contemplating pushing for a policy lynch on one of you at this point in time just so we won't have to put up with you bickering for the rest of the game. You are aren't getting anywhere and are making the thread more difficult to read and keep up with. Please move on.

We are getting somewhere.

Also, what else would you like to see addressed?

Other than skitter, who are your scumreads?

Korina.
There is also a large pool of 'happy to lynch' that would include the people not actually participating, like Fanta, N_M, and Espe, but that both begins and ends my ability to describe why they're scum.
After that it's going to be more about flips, because there are too many soft town reads that are clearly wrong.

[Thor665]

You said so yourself.

I did say that - but I literally only said it to make sure I understood a case being presented against me - I never actually claimed I was doing those things, so...?

180 is a post where you misrepresent me. You act as if I have been going after you up to this point claiming you were scum, which was clearly not the case, and was more interested in how people were reacting to your posts I had liked your play up to that point because I thought it seemed thorough.

I am accurately pointing out that you claimed there was some issue with me reacting with surprise to the reactions to my initial play.
This *is* something you have said.
This is *not* a misrep.
And you *still* haven't managed to explain where you even get the idea it happened - can we try for the third time?

I did that. I said why I thought those two posts were different from how you treated paradox and me this game. You ask for examples but I can't give you examples of things that aren't there ffs.

C'mon - all you did to "explain" it was go "yup, there's differences".
So *YES* you ought to be able to provide examples of those differences.

I chased you last game.
I've chased you this game.
How are the chases different exactly other than claiming they're different?

This little bit looks pretty genuine and also makes me think it's pretty clear that if Thor flips red, then BuJaber is in the clear.

Scratch this, still trying to get into the multiball mindset. Fml.

@Pepper
How would this change your read on BuJaber/Almost50?
Are you thinking you'd be left with no read or a townlean/read
Or could it perhaps be a MvW?

I don't exactly want to cause a head v head argument but I'm curious for the sake of the game what your thoughts are on this potential flip
- Fanta

Why did you decide to communicate to Pepper in thread here instead of using the normal method of communication you've been using for the rest of the game?

Also

@Pepper - still waiting on an answer about the wagon speed. Are you intentionally ducking that, or should I just keep asking?

[Thor665]

@Pepper - still waiting on an answer about the wagon speed. Are you intentionally ducking that, or should I just keep asking?

You can keep wasting your time, like you seem to be so set on doing.

Maybe I do like to waste my time - do you find the question too difficult to answer?

[Thor665]

@Pepper - still waiting on an answer about the wagon speed. Are you intentionally ducking that, or should I just keep asking?

You can keep wasting your time, like you seem to be so set on doing.

Maybe I do like to waste my time - do you find the question too difficult to answer?

Are you going to scumhunt at all this game or continue filling it with giant Smurfposts? I'd be happy to PL you.

-Pepper

If you find my "bad posting" to not be scumhunting and so wasteful, why not just describe your analysis of the wagon speed and shut me up/force me to actually go deeper than empty pestering you for ducking a simple question?

Also, aren't you already voting me for being scum? Don't see why a PL would work into your reads exactly.

[Thor665]

For now, i'd be a happy to lynch in Dr Fanta, Korina and less so but will compromise on Almost50 (Buj was definitely scummy but I'd still like to see Almost get a chance to redeem the slot).

Why do you read BuJaber's replacement as coming from a scum slot exactly?

[Thor665]

So, basically, your argument is; he's so wimpy as scum, that when he can't out argue you he ran away and hid like a baby?
And you find that MORE likely than, he was town, was immensely frustrated with a situation he found totally wrong, and walked away rather than waste time being ignored before he was lynched?

Seems thin to me.
Especially since I actually agreed with him more than you in that debate you were having.

[Thor665]

He's misrepped me (which I demonstrated) and is manipulatively perpetuating a useless argument imo. You think town!Thor is doing this because ....? Like I don't really see the town motivation for this and no, I'm not getting off of him unless like my vote is needed at deadline elsewhere to ensure a lynch happens.

That is certainly one version of reality that is not well backed up if people actually read your posts wherein you answer questions with 'I can't give examples' and then claim you've already explained something.
But I'm misrepping because you disagree with me?
Suuuuure.

[Thor665]

People who've actually read through the argument have been agreeing with me that you've misrepped me (montosh and dr fanta) so I think you're just making stuff up at this point and I don't know why I'm continuing to respond to you.

You're continuing to "respond" while pointedly ignoring the questions I'm asking.
I presume you're doing it for smokescreen.

You're misrepping me because you said I changed my position mid-argument, and I didn't, and demonstrated that I didn't, and you still haven't back down from this claim but are actually doubling-down on it.

Again, as you haven't answered, how are you defining misrep here?
Because even if you want to go 'Thor was wrong' and 'Thor was proven wrong' or even 'Thor is a dunce who didn't get me'
The same argument could be made on my side when you were taking forever and a day to explain your read, and also ducked explaining the 'forced' part after your clarification.

And like the examples thing is you asking me to demonstrate you didn't do something. I explained why it's different and I can't give an example showing that something isn't there better than saying 'look it isn't there!'. Like you're saying I'm scummy and evading the argument because I can't prove a negative ffs.

I'm still asking what the difference is.
Can you quote you describing the difference?
I'll do my best attempt for you;

I think that there's a difference between agressively asking questions and framing conflicts as a direct 1v1. Like look at the two posts you linked me. You didn't do the latter there.

That's it.
And I'm asking *what* is that difference? And why don't you quote me asking these other questions where I "didn't do it" and then quote me doing it here and show the difference? Since youought to at least be able to show me doing something here and then show I didn't do it there, right? Because that isn't impossible.

But you're twisting really hard to not do that - because you need to keep it vague, because you're lying.

[Thor665]

Well, I mean that's just one isolated part of the whole scum read on that slot.
If you agreed with him in the debate what made his vote on NM more substantial and less scummy than espe's one?

You talking about the 'whole case' still fails to describe how

I actually was not overly impressed by either his nor Espe's votes, but I wouldn't go so far as to claim either looked particularly townish or scummish. That said, I can understand the basic concept of someone voting 'X' to disagree with someone elses' reasons for voting 'X' and them not needing to be connected to their own reason for their own vote - that makes perfect conceptual sense and I fail to grasp why you're acting like it doesn't.

[Thor665]

describe how the replace out isn't townish*

[Thor665]

That's weak if you can't describe it in one sentence you're wasting everyone's time.

Why did Robb lean town to you exactly?

Here I am, as town, asking...what kind of looks like a confrontational question, yeah?
But that's *different* then what I did here, right?
How?

How about this?

If it was strong enough to not want to vote him, why would someone else voting him no longer make it strong enough to not want to vote him?
I don't feel like this is a strange idea from my end, I'm weirded out that you're acting like it's normal to do what you did.

That one is almost *exactly* what you're calling me out here for, but clearly I'm wrong, because you know that's my town game, so explain the difference?

Your Skitter read is out of nowhere and I strongly disagree. After watching your weak case on Misere I am almost scared to ask but...what was in Skitter's posts that looked town to you?

Here's townThor pushing scumSkitter - tell me how this is totlly different than my antagonistic 1v1 setup here Skitter?

[Thor665]

It's almost as though my entire gameplay is based around aggressively pushing myself into confrontations with people.
Strange that Skitter didn't notice that during our game, yeah?

More Skitter votes please.

[Thor665]

Will lynch pool from most to least want.

A50 > NM > Korina > Thor

Why do you scumread all of these people more than Dr. Fanta?
Also, if you do believe this, why not address my "replace out was aggressively town" stance I've literally been arguing in thread?

Are you actually kidding me? Your entire play for

the whole game

has been based on how people reacted to that initial vote and the argument that ensued has eaten up the entire. Yet you continue to lie about what people are saying, both about skitter and I.

You're acting as if I haven't answered your question. You are blatantly lying about our discussions here. This level of misrepresentation and obfuscation is scummy af.

VOTE: Thor

Please state, clearly and succinctly, without embellishment, what question precisely you wish me to answer. I don't think there's anything you can point to which I have not answered sufficiently over these last few pages.

So you're going to call me a liar...while still then wanting to doublecheck what you're saying I'm lying about?
Okay;

1. I note that you, despite writing three paragraphs, didn't actually explain what I'm doing that is strange in my reaction to 'people's surprise' - want to take another swing at that?

Feel free to quote where you answer that question.
And while you're at it - why don't you explain what I'm lying about? Because you *DID* say that, derp much?

@Thor: I think I'm just going to ignore you for a bit, no offense.

Yeah, I'm totally unsurprised you have to avoid the debate - even though you claim to still scum read me, and the ongoing debate appears to be one you're winning despite getting more anti-town vibes for doing it.
Oh, wait, that *doesn't* make sense for town.

Thor may be able to help here.

N_M said it, but Amish was the original creator - Amished Tell.

I'm pretty happy with skitter as town. I don't agree with all her stances but I think the slot is town. I pretty much never do meta. NM here is an exception because of how little there is to use.

Outside of town more often being wrong, ergo; making her town, what is your argument for her being town? Or is that enough to avoid someone noting meta and someone else noting that she is literally calling my very playstyle scummy when she has absolute proof that isn't true?

[Thor665]

I don't scumread Dr Fanta, I only dislike them in relational to their random unvote which I really only see as coming from either town or a buddy of BuJ.

You find nothing else they've done scummy?

The replaceout is NAI.

Replacing out is NAI - but the manner you replace out in can be alignment indicative.

skitter makes more sense than you do in your argument outside of the first handful of pages. I think your premise for her being scum is flawed and I don't see scum motivation to her actions, in fact I see a lot of protown coming out of her. You can argue fabrication, but it seems genuine to me.

I think I have objectively shown fabrication - why do you disagree that I haven't?
If I haven't shown fabrication I've at least shown that Skitter doesn't connect past actions to current reads - yeah? That's the reality of what has to be happening if she's town, yeah? if not - why not?

The scum motivation is lynching someone who she knows can spot her scum game.

What do you think is flawed n my premise?

[Thor665]

I quoted it, but you basically called her out for being wrong, which is not a scum trait. Everything that followed that was entirely semantics of what constitutes scum, and I don't see any mentality behind her posts that isn't town minded.

I agree I called her out for being wrong.
I also called out Paradox for being wrong.
I'm only calling one of them scum i want to lynch.

Lets say skitter fabricated a read. What about that makes it indicative of scum in a multiball game?

Scum actually get to play as town while progressing their win condition, this style of read will not fly in this game because it simply is based on a different style of game and setup.

That's an interesting concept and I don't see any immediate holes in it other than the obvious one;
Try to describe how she's town and fabricating a read.
Or explain how I'm wrong about the fabrication.

Because the read is literally bonkers with the info she has about me, and she can't describe it and is coming really close to objective lies in trying to claim she has, so...?

[Thor665]

Also, frankly, the slow support building on me while other wagons have frayed but with people basically starting to pull out 'policy' as their shield for voting me says the wagon is the only one both scumteams are getting behind, so we know there is scum in that adventure from both teams already.

[Thor665]

The simple answer is that fabrication of reads and being town are not mutually exclusive.

Town can posture for the purposes of building sway and momentum. Town still need to manipulate people.

I'm entering the realm of hard defending someone other than myself. But the takeaway is that I don't see skitter as scum at the moment.

That literally pains my head as a concept to try to wrap around.
You're literally using as your defense of her play - basically agreement that she's playing like scum.
I don't know how I'm supposed to react to that, frankly.

[Thor665]

Also, I'm trying to figure out if N_M hoping off me to Wilky is town (the argument against is that he's not actually suggesting why others should move)
Or scum scared of being called out (the argument against is doing it so blatantly after I call out the wagon is...blatant).

[Thor665]

@N_M - does that mean you don't scumread me now, didn't ever scumread me, that Wilky became more scummy, or what?

@Espeo - I hear you talking, but their is a *giant* difference between a Vig and how they present reads and a Seer or a VT and how they should present reads and you are well aware that's a rather select and specifically minor exception that not even most people agree on even then. None of that applies to what she's doing here though - so why are you acting like it does?

[Thor665]

No, I actually do agree that two people can vote for the same person yet disagree on the others reasoning but Buj was disagreeing with reasoning that was very similar to his own.

You're overstating the distance that read went to start calling it hypocrisy.

Like day1 you were saying me or MariaR could be scum. Day2 it was me or misere. The whole time you were trying to figure out Mulch, and you were also looking for who might be defending me and like trying to find partners.

Something I'm, incidentally, doing here within the limiting context provided by multiball - and also something that is utterly a new stance from you on the differences, since up till now the claim was I am overly aggressive and overly forcing choices.

Offhand I can't think of any other significant positions you've taken beyond 'bujaber's replace-out was town' (I strongly disagree with this btw).

Yeah, as long as you ignore my clear opinions on Laser and BuJaber. Ignore the pretty heavily implied position on Espeo (and at least that there's aggressive scumhunting there) and ignore the pretty clear statement on Fanta.

Yeah, my reads are really hard to spot as long as you ignore those.

You then note my "low hanging fruit/handwave lurker value call" without actually addressing that it's objectively true. Anyone claiming really clear or strong reads in that batch, is stretching. I'm calling Fanta and I feel like I'm stretching for that one because he's clearly ducking engagement and issuing threats - but at least that's *something* to call him on. Look at my last exchange with N_M and tell me my read should be anything other than 'willing to lynch' with a straight face.

(Aside - if you flip someone in the middle category, how would their flip help you sort the last category even? If they're not participating you're not getting much info out of their flip anyways. And if you flip me .... like what does that imply for anyone else from your POV? Like the bolded sounds nice but I don't really see you developing the idea much.)

Show me a theoretical wagon composition with the flip and the NK and I'll explain how VCA and NK analysis work.
Or go read a newbie game with me as an IC.

I'm also finding it kinda mind-boggling that you think this game remotely parallels my scumgame. I'm like leagues out of scumrange here, and I feel like you ought to know that.[/spoiler]
I'm not claiming you have an unchangable meta nor that I understand it - that's your stance on me.
One you have ducked backing up, and now one where you're changing direction on again, to now me being overly focused on you is a scumtell somehow.

[Thor665]

Also, show of hands on people down to lynch NM as a policy compromise?

I would, but considering people are expressing interest in Korina or Fanta I have doubts why I'd choose N_M over either of them.

Like you asked me how I thought this game differed from that one so I answered in a holistic sense? Not really sure what you're objecting to tbh. Also don't really think 'overly aggressive' accurately represents my position.

You literally just agreed with me that 'Thor pushed a confrontation more than it had to be pushed' was a valid way to describe your position on me and now 'overly aggressive' is flim flam?


I also agree you described the difference in a "holistic sense" because your description is so vague and unsure that I will now sum it up just as clearly as you did in reverse;
"Last game Skitter's play was different because of the way she was analyzing people in context to her pushes - I don't see that here."
It's words saying bupkiss. You know it, I know it, and I'll keep repeating it till others notice.
You don't say "I holistically described it" when you've actually described it - if you'd actually described it you'd just tell me you'd described it and quote it.

Like you're basically faulting me for incorporating new information (ie a holistic overview of the argument/day phase and how that compares to your behavior in a different game that shares the feature of you thinking you caught scum!me) into my read instead of just allowing it to stagnate on your first post?

I'm not doing that - I'm pointing out that your claimed differences are silly, don't make sense, and actually show marked identical play to my town play you're analyzing.
It's why your stance has to stay so vague, any look at details shows my play is the same.
That's not to say it proves my play here is my town game, I specifically try to match my scum play to my town play, but the ridiculous claim it's different is provable hogwash.

This doesn't really rebut the argument that your other significant scumreads are 'happy to lynch' players. (Also I disagree with the notion that your read on Laser has been clear; if I have to ctrl-F your ISO to pick it out via implication, it isn't.)

I'll agree it doesn't rebut the claim that my reads are what I said they are.
It DOES rebut these claims that you made though;

1. That Thor doesn't have reads.
2. That the reads Thor has are strangely weak.

Neither of those statements are true.
So if your argument is simply 'I wish Thor's reads were stronger' while you agree with me that a large percentage of the playerbase isn't playing in a way to allow reads to be formed then you're accusing me of a BS standard of play. It's like saying I'm scum because I'm wet, while ignoring that it's rainging and half the playerbase is holding hoses and spraying them randomly. It's a silly statement that lacks logic even if you can prove it within the narrow window you've created.

You're kinda ignoring my point. Yes, I'm *very* happy to lynch all of those players cuz I think they're being useless, and I don't think that the assessment 'happy to lynch' is unfair or inaccurate (ie this is what you appear to be objecting to)

My point is that in the context of the fact that your only significant scumread is me, the fact that your other scumreads are 'happy to lynch' players is kinda shallow. IE town!Thor needs to find five scum out of 11 players, and after a dayphase the best you have is {me and 'happy to lynch' players}. Like it's just .... lackluster and I kinda expect more from town!you after all of this.

See, here you are admitting my above is right. Here's my rebuttal;
https://wiki.mafiascum.net/index.php?ti ... roficiency

You've been referencing how I played that game and comparing that to my behavior in this one, so your read is at least partially meta-based, and I'm saying that I think it's a ridiculous read given the context you're referencing.

Quote me making these claims.
Because I haven't.

@Korina, Montosh, Thor, Almost50

: Neither Thor nor skitter is going to happen today. I would strongly urge you to join one of the other wagons. We will never get a lynch if the vote is split five ways.

Skitter remains one of the largest wagons at the moment.
If I was on her alone I'd have hopped off days ago, but I'm on what is functionally the 2nd strongest wagon in the game (albeit tied with like four of them, but...)

[Thor665]

Like, Skitter, let's just look at these reads Thor isn't developing vs. the one (and only one) you claim I have.

With you I spotted something fishy.
I addressed it.
You rebutted.
We went back and forth.
In the process of that I formed a scum read on you.

Compare that with Montosh, Paradox, or Espeo - I did the exact same thing with them but have pointedly not called them scum and, indeed, would suggest in certain ways they may even have "won" their debates, or at least argued to a point I tend to believe that they believe what they're arguing.

Compare that with N_M, Korina, or Fanta. With them I *also* formed a conflict (fascinating repeat of my supposed scum strategy ) but whey skipped an important step. They dropped the rebuttal stage or responded with sheer derp. It's pretty hard to form a read when faced with pure derp or inability/refusal to describe a position. Are they just dolt heads or are they scum? I can't draw a conclusion from thin air. Therefore I choose to say I'm willing to lynch them, based on reasons ranging from 'might be scum' to 'meh, unreadable ponces should die soon'.

So, basically we see my scumhunting method.
Can see I've applied it to almost every player in the game.
Can track my thought process through ISOing me (even though you appear to whine that this is difficult)
And can, *gasp*, see how it proceeds and why *double gasp* a lot of this playerbase is lynchable as hell.

But apparently I'm not offering reads clearly enough - even though I would challenge you to name the player offering better or clearer reads then me.

[Thor665]

This is 100% skitter's town meta. Like, to a T. Anyone on skitter right now is either obvscum or just.. really, really Smurfing dumb. Or both, in the case of Thor.

Speaking of which, can we lynch scum now? wilky or Thor are my acceptable lynches.

-Pepper

Please describe Skitter's town meta for the really, really dumb amongst us.

[Thor665]

They dropped the rebuttal stage or responded with sheer derp.

Oof, outright lie because I didn't answer your stupid question that didn't deserve an answer. You make this too easy.

-Pepper

So me saying you dropped it and you saying you didn't answer is a lie on my part?


Okay,let's dance.

VOTE: Dr. Fanta

This is 100% skitter's town meta. Like, to a T. Anyone on skitter right now is either obvscum or just.. really, really Smurfing dumb. Or both, in the case of Thor.

Speaking of which, can we lynch scum now? wilky or Thor are my acceptable lynches.

-Pepper

Please describe Skitter's town meta for the really, really dumb amongst us.

So this site has this really cool feature where you can see other games a player has been in previously, and you can read those games and see what alignment they were. You could even draw conclusions from their behaviors as different alignments. Pretty neat trick, huh?

-Pepper

No, I'm too stupid to do that. I'd like your reasoning, since people who can't see it are stupid it should be fairly simple to describe.
Go on, just 2-5 sentences and maybe one example.

[Thor665]

So even though I literally said what you did you call it a lie.
And you can't explain the town meta that other people are too blind to see to a point you need to yell and scream about it?

Oooookay.

[Thor665]

Probably town, would lynch though

VOTE: Thor

That's scummy as fuck but okay

[Thor665]

I pretty sure I am scumhunting.

Would you like to tell more lies and scream and cry, and avoid answering questions while complaining that someone isn't scumhunting?

[Thor665]

Hard to go through those gymnastics to back your buddy's play while still distancing from it, huh?

[Thor665]

Korina paired with Wilky makes more sense to me than paired with Fanta.
I'm not sure why either of you are particularly scumming on Laser.

[Thor665]

[Thor665]

Thor are you scum with Laser?

The implicationbeing he's so obviously scummy that townreading him makes me his scumbuddy by default?
He'll have to wait in line behind Skitter's Thor/A50 case (or maybe presume we're all mafia) but, meh.
This line of questioning is as shallow and empty as all of your other pushes this game.

No, trying to figure out how to apply the things that work for me in singleball to this gamestate.

Right now the best model I have to explain what's going on is {Thor/A50/???} as scum and {korina/Dr fanta} as wolves.

If you think that's legit than voting mafia over wolves is a claim of not grasping how the rules work.

But relying too much on associatives tends to majorly mess me up, so I think that I ought to just go with who I find scummiest, especially since it's day 1.

Naturally - which brings me back to my original comment about your gymnastics.
Maybe you should try talking holistically about your associatives? Then you can avoid these sort of problems by ducking specifics

[Thor665]

The implicationbeing he's so obviously scummy that townreading him makes me his scumbuddy by default?

The implication being you haven't engaged him at all and in fact only ever refer to him for light, fence-sitty defense of him.

I don't see how my defense is fence-sitty exactly.
It's just an outright defense.

I'll agree that I haven't particularly engaged a slot I've thought of as town throughout the game.
That seems pretty normal, frankly.

[Thor665]

Skitter is, once again, creating a case based around calling scumhunting scummy. Even in the theory world where A50 and I are scum - she's accusing us of thinking;

That Fanta was scum.

VOTE: Skitter

[Thor665]

@Skitter - how is conceptualizing a scum team scummy? Because that's assuredly as close as I came to "chaining lynches".

[Thor665]

Honestly? Post count. I just looked at it and picked two people.

Initially I was kinda 'meh' on Laser's question because the obvious answer was 'proven town via flip' and 'proven town via role PM'.

But your answer is *ewwww*.

[Thor665]

Korina and Almost50 even have the exact number of posts, so...

[Thor665]

Korina and Almost50 even have the exact number of posts, so...

Not a fan of this. Why do you get to dictate how I randomly choose who to ask? Even if they are the same amount of posts? Posts count is NAI. So why does this even bother you that I picked that method to randomly ask people?

I'm not dictating anything to you, it's a question.
I brought up number of posts because you claimed you looked at the post count to pick - why look at the post count to pick if number of posts was meaningless?
Also, you didn't pick people to randomly ask - you're claiming you randomly picked people to sheep reads on/agree with.

It's more like I feel like you're calling me scummy no matter what - if Fanta had flipped scum you were obviously going to argue that I was partners with them, but they flipped town and you're still saying I'm scummy without like re-evaluating anything.

So I basically feel like you were going to use a Fanta scum!flip to push for scum!me if the flip had happened, but it isn't really something you believe given that the townflip doesn't actually change anything for you. Like a lot of your Fanta thing was actually about me and associatives with me and how they couldn't/wouldn't describe their townread on me, so it kinda feels like you went there because you couldn't get a wagon on me to stick, and at eod you were focusing on how Fanta made *me* scummy. Like your Fanta thing was about me to a certain extent.

You called me scummy for it *before I had even had a chance to post in the game thread post flip*.
How does that make sense?
And your claim that me "lining up lynches" is, as you already agreed, illogical.
My current issue with you is it's now Day 2 and you've created a second case based on calling people scummy for doing basic scumhunting, and you're already kicking up a dirt cloud again.

I agree my Fanta thing was about you - how is that scummy?
I'll wait.

He just replaced in and I don't think the fact that he randomly chose two players to start with without reading the OP means much tbh.

He didn't just randomly pick two players - what did he "randomly" pick them and then do with them?
Because if you can see me as scum for lining up a lynch and predicting my interactions with others as arguments that will get me townread how can you not see the much less twisty issue with what he just did? this is the sort of stuff you were howling misrep over with me yesterday - except yesterday I'd ask it as a question, and here you're just empty immediate attacking while showing no understanding of my issue/what actually happened.

[Thor665]

viewtopic.php?f=2&t=74154

I'm going to have to look through this before I weigh in on the policy thing.

I agree my Fanta thing was about you - how is that scummy?
I'll wait.

Right, and my point is that since it was about me you were just using it to expand your scumread on me. Like it wasn't really about them, but rather about setting up the next round of this argument - that's why I'm saying it felt like you were chaining lynches; if they flipped scum you were obviously going to use that to go after me next. Like it felt you only cared about them wrt to how they could be used against me, and not for sorting

them

as a slot independant of me.

I think I asked this before, but why do I feel like your whole game is about me?

this is the sort of stuff you were howling misrep over with me yesterday - except yesterday I'd ask it as a question, and here you're just empty immediate attacking while showing no understanding of my issue/what actually happened.

OK, then I don't understand what your issue is or what you think actually happened wrt Tchill.

Yes, I still think you misrepped me.

[Thor665]

viewtopic.php?f=2&t=74154

I'm going to have to look through this before I weigh in on the policy thing.

I agree my Fanta thing was about you - how is that scummy?
I'll wait.

Right, and my point is that since it was about me you were just using it to expand your scumread on me. Like it wasn't really about them, but rather about setting up the next round of this argument - that's why I'm saying it felt like you were chaining lynches; if they flipped scum you were obviously going to use that to go after me next. Like it felt you only cared about them wrt to how they could be used against me, and not for sorting

them

as a slot independant of me.

I think I asked this before, but why do I feel like your whole game is about me?

Okay, so we agree it isn't actually inherently scummy.
At that point your complaint is one of "It's scummy because I think Thor was basing his reads off of his other reads".

I'll start with two points;
1. How is *that* scummy?
2. I had independent opinions on Fanta expressed days before his wagon was brought up - so even if I did have issues with him in connection to you (I did) to claim that I only had those issues in connection with you is outright balderdash.

So that again brings us around to your case on me being calling me scummy for scumhunting.

[Thor665]

That feels too scummy to be scummy.

[Thor665]

Amished tell isn't about defending your slot.

[Thor665]

Thor, before I get entrenched in another argument with you, I want you to answer this:

I think I asked this before, but why do I feel like your whole game is about me?

I would ask you to justify it as factually true enough for me to waste breath on disabusing.
Because the best you could claim is this "Thor is highly focused on his primary scumread and makes a lot of posts about them" which is absolutely true.
But to that I would ask - so what?
Beyond that my question would be "how do you claim that multiple of my reads are based around you and what subjects do you think i'm avoiding/not discussing?"

Because you can't actually functionally answer that question your premise is shown to be the gak it is.

And I want to know why you're ignoring me when I ask you about that, and why you're ignoring me when I ask you to talk about other people - most recently the tchill thing. I don't think his opener is significant, but you apparently feel his opener is worth probing, and disagreed with my opinion that it wasn't AI. Why'd you drop it once I asked you about it, only to instead continue an argument about how you think I'm scummy?

I ignored the question because, as stated, the premise is so inherently flawed it's silly to give it the time of day.
I haven't ignored you about other players - or, more importantly *I* haven't ignored other players but will agree I haven't spent a lot of time debating scum about my reads.
You dropped the Tchill conversation, not me. Your last point in the conversation was that you agreed that you didn't understand my stance - which is what I claimed as reality. That ends the conversation for me - because all the conversation was was you attacking me for bupkiss - I don't need to keep following it up after you admit to the bupkiss.

It kinda looks to me like you're trying to narrow our conversation to the topic of why I find you scummy and vice versa.

I agree that I have on many occasions tried to narrow down your claims and you have actively avoided that situation.
I don't see that as showing me in a bad light.

[Thor665]

+1

I will add that I can't get either of them to explain townreads on the other - Thor's been ignoring my requests and A50 has been saying he'd do it later, but hasn't.

That's a straight up lie.
I explained my read here.
viewtopic.php?p=9986710#p9986710
I also explained the read multiple times to multiple players.

[Thor665]

Where'd you even try to get me to discuss the read?
In my ISO I appear to be discussing it with other people exclusively.

[Thor665]

Where'd you even try to get me to discuss the read?
In my ISO I appear to be discussing it with other people exclusively.

viewtopic.php?p=9993797#p9993797

You said that replacing out under pressure *strengthened* (268) your townread of him, and I want to know where that came from initially, and honestly yeah, it looks like he replaced out cuz he couldn't handle being scumread and didn't know how to respond to wilky. I usually read 'avoiding pressure' as a scumtell.

I expressed my soft town on BuJaber pretty early as a simple ISO search would have shown you.
My other core interaction with me was me banging against a handful of his reads and, unlike you, not finding giant gaping holes to walk through so that basically they fell by the wayside because I couldn't describe them in a scum light - which looks townish last I checked.

Right, and my point is that I don't get why you're doing that:

I would think it's self obvious why I would want you to be able to actually clearly state your stance.

You *have* spent a lot of time debating your primary scumread about your read on her.

And I would note that I'm not debating you to convince you.
I'm debating you to show holes to convince others.
Which is pretty clearly shown by my play at multiple points wherein whenever I think i scored a good point I immediately started to ask people their thoughts on that point, and then was filled with wroth as they handwaved it.

And that's why I think you're super-focused on me, given that you think I'm scum but you keep trying to continue an argument with me about your read on me

I happily agree I'm super focused on you.
That's different from a claim that all my reads are based off of you.

Like just looking about your posts this day-phase - I'm the primary subject (you talk about Tchill too). You're not even trying to talk to other people about why I'm scummy, but you're instead just telling me why you think I'm scummy. Just like .... why? Why do you keep on trying to continue this argument with me when you think I'm scum?

Like, just reading your posts this day phase (and handwaving things that prove my thesis is wrong) I can make claims about your play
- skitter

And just like - I'm your primary scumread. I don't think I'm getting wagoned right now. Instead of telling me why you think I'm scum for the umpteenth time, wouldn't your efforts be better spent developing other scumreads instead of tunneling me?

I have other scumreads.
Doesn't mean I don't want to lynch you first.
Which runaway alternate wagon do you think I should be excited by exactly?
I thought Korina was scummy, but the current Tchill push (that Thor has discussed while only talking about Skitter) is based on derp which makes me skeevy.
The Wilky wagon had legs for about three seconds, and if it comes back I'd go somewhere with it, but it's currently in the doldrums.
And you're being a scumbutt.

No, that was me asking you to explain it cuz I didn't get it. That doesn't mean I think I'm wrong or that I'm dropping it, but rather means I don't understand your side and I'm trying to get you to explain it.

What about my stance don't you understand? If you want something answered there are these magic things called 'questions' you can use to seek info.

(At this point I think at least some of this argument is that we're *really* not communicating with each other well tbh)

Like how you are still skating away from the core point that you're calling scumhunting scummy and can't explain that stance for a hill of beans?

[Thor665]

wilky, thor, almost, NM is my lynch pool. They're ALL on this.

IF almost flips anything other than town espeonage may not be town.

i was pretty worried about laser and beef being on the fanta wagon. Glad to see im not the only one.

[Thor665]

But that's literally just listing everyone on the wagon at that point, so - yeah, duh, town lynch, lynch off the wagon.
The core logic makes perfect sense.

Pegging out your top four and ruling out two *also* makes sense.

But then acting happy someone else is calling out your two rule outs?
That doesn't make sense.
You ruled them out for a reason.
You shouldn't be happy they are getting pushed on unless your ruleout was daft.

[Thor665]

I'm not debating why you ruled them out.
I'm debating the logic of cheering them being attacked after you ruled them out.

[Thor665]

It'd be like me saying "Awfully happy to lynch Skitter or Tchill today from the pool of Skitter, TChill, Almost50.
Ad then later quoting someone going "Almost50 is soooo scum' and me posting 'yeah, super happy Almost50 is getting attention as a scumspect, he deserves that!'

It
makes
no
sense.

[Thor665]

That feels too scummy to be scummy.

Surely with your join date you can't be that dumb.

Will ISO Thor.

You're correct, I'm not dumb.
So, let's then explore that idea - why is too scummy to be scum a dumb thing in your opinion?

-------------------

For those keeping track.
Skitter engaged me today.
Lost repeatedly.
Complained I wasn't responding to her points.
Got owned on those.
Then used the excuse that people weren't reading the debatto drop everything again.

Hint: you don't do that if you're winning the points. Just saying.
I expect people to continue to ignore this, but...meh, some of you can't be her scumbuddies.

[Thor665]

Since no one is particularly scumreading Beefster...okay?

[Thor665]

Even if the mod came down and 100% verified that they weren't scum together it still wouldn't tell us much at this point.
If you flip Beef, then...okay, maybe it's something. Sorta.
Just felt like a very random bit of info to share.

[Thor665]

@Thor: Well, are you up for a wagon on Beef or what? You're sitting alone on Skitter and I was alone on LG, so let's make Beefster a competing wagon and see what happens. Shall we?

I don't particularly scum read Beef, so you need a different dance partner.

I kinda won already though tbh given that people are largely finding you scummier than me.

Appealing to other people making poor value calls does not clarify your stance as correct.
Example: Most elections ever.

If other people are concerned about the points you raise I'll talk to them about it.

I know you don't want to debate me.
I keep asking awkward questions like "how is your case describing scum actions in any way at all?" and you keep being unable to actually answer them.
Its got to be awkward.

[Thor665]

Kinda praying I'm right on my Almost read.
Not because it would be good for the town.
But because it would at least, without doubt, put Skitter enough into a theory lynch so people could stop handwave ignoring the case there because 'ooooh, long posts!'.

[Thor665]

Final Votecount

(6 LYNCHED)

Almost50 - voted by: skitter30, wilky, LaserGuy, Beefster, Tchill13, Not_Mafia.

(2)

Beefster - voted by: Montosh, Almost50.

(1)

Tchill13 - voted by: Espeonage.

(1)

skitter30 - voted by: Thor665.

Almost50 has been lynched!

Definitely worth it to lynch on the wagon for this one, because we gotta hit a wolf sooner rather than later.
I vow to sheep anyone who wants to claim Mafia.

Looking at Day 1, I like the idea of lynching Wilky *or* N_M.
I'm going to spend a bit of tomorrow reading each in relation to Almost and seeing if I can do better than anyone else on finding a wolf clear - there has to be one in there or Laser was bombing big time for the team.

[Thor665]

Why not skitter?

Lack of Skitter in Day 1 wagon.

And to answer your other question - yes, and I actually like them both, so, as I said, I'm going to read both of you in relation to Almost and see if either of you look smore like Mafia - then I'll vote the other one.

[Thor665]

Final Votecount

(6 LYNCHED)

Almost50 - voted by: skitter30, wilky, LaserGuy, Beefster, Tchill13, Not_Mafia.

(2)

Beefster - voted by: Montosh, Almost50.

(1)

Tchill13 - voted by: Espeonage.

(1)

skitter30 - voted by: Thor665.

Almost50 has been lynched!

Definitely worth it to lynch on the wagon for this one, because we gotta hit a wolf sooner rather than later.
I vow to sheep anyone who wants to claim Mafia.

Looking at Day 1, I like the idea of lynching Wilky *or* N_M.
I'm going to spend a bit of tomorrow reading each in relation to Almost and seeing if I can do better than anyone else on finding a wolf clear - there has to be one in there or Laser was bombing big time for the team.

This post sucks hard but I'm not sure if it's Thorsuck or scumsuck

Coming from you that's rich.
You can go suck an egg.

[Thor665]

VOTE: Montosh

Suggesting we leash him is idiotic.
If he's dead town gets say and analysis 100% of the remaining kills.

[Thor665]

If we leash Montosh

Mafia lynch - Mafia NK = Lynch Montosh and win
Town Lynch - Mafia NK / Mafia Lynch - Town NK = Town forces no lynch and Montosh is forced to aim for scum, then we lynch Montosh and win
Town Lynch - Town NK = Mafia win

If we lynch Montosh we go straight to LyLo

In your examples;

1. That's the same as my plan, but with a different order.
2. That actually puts us in mylo - same as my plan, but runs the risk of a quick Mafia victory at 1v1v1 which mine doesn't.
3. That is the same as my plan, except with a NK town doesn't control.

What are you even smoking with this plan?
Mafia do benefit leaving the Wolf alive very slightly if they're gunning for a slightly quicker 1v1v1 and are counting on bad wolf kills, but it's still risky.
But for town it is abjectly stupid.
Which alingment are you claiming again? Town, right?

Lynch the obv. wolf, derpwad - and learn to play.

[Thor665]

I'm guessing Tchill/NM Mafia, frankly.
Two people trying to claim that they don't want to lynch a busted Wolf and "leash" him off no actual mathematic benefit except to a Mafia team?
C'mon.

[Thor665]

I'm not a wolf. I'm leaning tchill/Esp as mafia.

Thor, what do you think about the skitter kill?

My presumption was to set me up - Skitter's last claim yesterday was that I should be lynched if she died.

[Thor665]

Also the slot was pretty obviously not a Wolf, so in that vein it was generically an okay shot, I suppose.

[Thor665]

I don't think we can win if Thor is town, fingers crossed he's mafia

Is this the extent of your rebuttal for me pointing out your plan is nonsensical?
I literally just showed that town has more control and sway of the vote than a theory leash, and also that the theory leash doesn't actually enhance any wincon except Mafia.

And you got nothing.
Lynch the Wolf.

[Thor665]

I think ww's are on A50 lynch wagon.

Why do you think they'd bus at that point?

So it's 3-2-1

Town death 2-2-1, game over if ww doesn't kill mafia, have to lynch ww in mylo to go to lylo.
mafia death 3-1-1, ww kills mafia mylo, ww kills town, same as above.
ww death 3-2, two days of lylo.

We should be trying to lynch not town, with an emphasis on mafia.

How do you get to this conclusion?
Explicitly your WW death line is the most beneficial for town and doesn't hand game over situations to scum.
You're smarter than this - walk me through why you think you're right, or I'll know you're lying for an agenda.

[Thor665]

Also it wouldn't be two days of lylo - if town lynches correctly they'd actually have the ability for *two* lynch attempts at the last mafia.

That's two scum in three lynches.
This is so bog obvious.

[Thor665]

Actually yeah you're right bc if we get the ww wrong presumably they can not be an idiot and hope to sway.

Then it's just I don't be an idiot.

And scum Thor wants this bc can win off partner potentially.

vote:beef

And, from a slew of posts I was about to rage on - common sense.
Think you'll have any luck talking to TChill and NM? They're both pointedly ignoring me while still advancing bad lynch theory, which makes me convinced at least one, if not both, are scum, because it's really obvious I'm right if you stop and look at things, yeah?

Why do you see Beef as more likely Wolf than Montosh? I asked you earlier methinks on this same point, and it's a really big point for the day.

[Thor665]

I'll admit I do consider it well within NM's playstyle as town to advance really bad lynch theory.
i don't know enough about TChill to say one way or the other, but he hasn't struck me as obvious daft prior to this.

[Thor665]

I was hoping someone else would just field it.
But Espeo's "slip" of forgetting Mafia can't kill.
Too daft to be legit considering it's the entire concept of the setup, or obv. town?

[Thor665]

I mean, I want to kinda call him scum just for gunning for me - case closed.
But, that he ttried to gun for me and then reversed off bad logic with a 'oh yeah, mafia can't kill...' like, that's an intense moment and looks either like people should read it as him being blatant obv. scum or blatant obv. town.
I feel like I'm the only one who noticed it.

[Thor665]

I'll admit my current take is favoring town - just because it's not like I looked like trouble to lynch at that moment.

[Thor665]

I mean, he should be town, lolwolf, or obv. buddies Mafia with me at that stage, right?

[Thor665]

@Beefster - without using your role PM as the reasoning, how does Thor/Esp make more sense than Beefster/Esp?
I'll also accept Tchill/Esp if you can't handle the above, I'm just making a point.

[Thor665]

Actually yeah you're right bc if we get the ww wrong presumably they can not be an idiot and hope to sway.

Then it's just I don't be an idiot.

And scum Thor wants this bc can win off partner potentially.

vote:beef

And, from a slew of posts I was about to rage on - common sense.
Think you'll have any luck talking to TChill and NM? They're both pointedly ignoring me while still advancing bad lynch theory, which makes me convinced at least one, if not both, are scum, because it's really obvious I'm right if you stop and look at things, yeah?

Why do you see Beef as more likely Wolf than Montosh? I asked you earlier methinks on this same point, and it's a really big point for the day.

@Espeo - bolded the question for your ease.
Please stop avoiding it, otherwise I'll just wagon you out of spite.

[Thor665]

Do you really think you have the cred to start a wagon right now?

If you're talking to me - yes, I do, especially since logic is on my side and you're trying hard to ignore it.
I'll agree you're currently on a larger wagon, but at least one of the votes there thinks it's a wolf, so my overall concept is winning, now it's just a matter of sorting the wolf.

If you're talking to me because you think I want to start a wagon on someone other than Montosh - no, and you're being silly.

I'm not sure how to determine a WW from a scum.

I would suggest looking for associations with flipped scum - it's the same as forming any scum read after flips.

[Thor665]

I'm starting to have doubts about Montosh just because he isn't leaping onto Beef.

[Thor665]

@Montosh - looking at your iso, frankly, even if you're town why aren't you on Beef? What pushed Espeo into more likely wolf territory exactly? You've been gunning for Beef for ages.

[Thor665]

N_M seems like such an unlikely wolf to me though, if that was a bus it did a brilliant job distancing him. That feels like he legit wanted that flip.

[Thor665]

I dunno, my reads have been dreck all game, but it doesn't feel likely.

[Thor665]

Bc montosh was not active in lynching a50.

Agreed, he was active in a pretty robust defense though. Why do you think wolves would have opted to not defend at that stage?

I sorta agree, but I'm having a hard time reconciling that with his terrible ideas today.

With N_M my big advice is to try to assess the motivations of the actions, not the logic.
I still kinda don't think that looks like a bus.
I can't personally remember his bussing meta, but I tend to presume it's not near tunneling for multiple phases.

[Thor665]

Like, if there were two wolves alive today, wolf's chances would be looking *really* good right now.

[Thor665]

How does Beef being town clear me of being Mafia?
That makes no sense if you think I'm Mafia only if Beef is.

[Thor665]

It doesn't it just makes Tchill the best kill

That literally makes no logical sense.

[Thor665]

It does

Walk me through the sense or I'll just keep on presuming you're claiming Mafia.

[Thor665]

Also, A50 tunneled me pretty hard on D2, so that would imply that I'm not mafia. I recognize that doesn't clear me from wolf, but I don't care.

Now see that's a good point.

UNVOTE:

@TChill - why are you Mafia hunting?

[Thor665]

Yeah, I think Tchill is probably some flavor of scum.

Unvote: Montosh

Montosh is try-harding so well it's really selling me right now.
So if Espe is town for the slip, and Montosh is town for actually trying to sort anything in the phase most important for town to sort stuff since game start - that's the three town.
But that means I'm totally wrong about one of them, or I'm wrong about N_M and the odds of bussing.

So for me the real question is - does TChill/Beefster make sense?
I think my town read I'm most likely to be wrong on is Espe, as that slip is absolutely within his scum game both as an intentional fake slip and as a 'derpa-dee!' real accidental slip.

@N_M - you bussing, is that worth clearing you over or is it within your town game to aggressive bus? I want to hear some self meta.

[Thor665]

Why the hell hasn't espionage been talked about too much?

Probably because he has been by people you haven't been randomly sheeping.

[Thor665]

@N_M - I don't want to give you up and hurt you either, but you're ducking the question, why?

[Thor665]

Why the hell hasn't espionage been talked about too much?

I'm going to revisit this question a bit more seriously now, especially considering how it curls my toes slightly that this question came right after I said I was going to look at the two of you in context to each other.

@Espeo
@Tchill

There was some mild attention from the Espeo slot against the Tchill slot when the Tchill slot was Korina.
After that, Espeo threw up the soft little policy/replace stance that went nowhere fast.
After that you both basically stopped interacting and both of you had the other as soft town for no readily discernible reason.

Can both of you explain from your own perspective your overall thoughts towards the other during the game and how/if they changed?
Because if I was saying policy or replace I feel like I would have needed a revelation not to have that be a thing for me going forward.

[Thor665]

Also Thor, sell me on this Montosh turnaround because I don't see it.

The activity under the pressure at the start of the day feels reminisce of BuJ, and as the pressure dissipates, the play quality goes up. Does that not count as scum points instead of the opposite?

For the Montosh turnaround - if anyone else felt slightly close to the effort he was putting into gamesolving it probably wouldn't have swayed me. But his stance paired with his position as regards the Beef wagon feels more likely to be town than wolf to me - why do you not get that at all?

As to your TChill situation - why didn't you interact with him much for werewolf sorting even if you did clear him as Mafia?

@N_M - I don't want to give you up and hurt you either, but you're ducking the question, why?

I answered

The extent of your answer was 'I bus' without actually providing any meta.
Everyone buses to some level - that's not what I asked you.
You're literally sitting around doing nothing - you're not even trying to advance your scumreads - why do you care so little at such a pivotal point?

[Thor665]

So your theory is Montosh is mafia, came under suspicion as a werewolf, and upped his game when he realized Mafia should favor a werewolf lynch?
He seems to be doing a decent amount of Mafia hunting though, which is not how I would describe some other scumspects play (like, specifically, TChill) so why aren't you twigging there in any way? Or are you twigging but just taking exception to Montosh being town piled by me for some reason?

[Thor665]

Effort shouldn't be his saving grace.

What's your reasoning for lynching him?
Last I checked you were voting Beef but unvoted when someone suggested he was less likely Mafia, I asked you about that and you never responded, and now you have an issue with me thinking Montosh is town, and now Beef (who you may or may not wolfread, i have no idea) has voted him.

Like, see, the nice thing with Montosh is I could actually describe to you where he stands currently, even if I don't fully agree with it.
I can't do that with a lot of the rest of you.

That sort of effort *is* pretty telling in my opinion.

[Thor665]

Why are you not voting either of them?
Are you just hunting for the last Mafia or something else?

[Thor665]

Effort shouldn't be his saving grace.

What's your reasoning for lynching him?

[Thor665]

I feel like half this game is just starting to randomly vote people to see what catches.

[Thor665]

@Espeo - why the Tchill vote right there?

@Montosh - semi-crazy theory but I'm feeling it right now; Tchill is the wolf, he's mafia hunting, ducked explaining why, has actually kind of avoided voting you all phase despite calling you the wolf. What are your thoughts on that case and would you move off Espeo to pursue it?

[Thor665]

@Beef
@N_M

How about each of you weigh in with your thoughts on Tchill as a theory wolf also? You're both too quiet and I'm bored.

[Thor665]

Not really sure.
If anyone is at L-1 right now it's probably Beef.

I'm not currently voting, I think Tchill has 1-2 votes on him, and Espeo might have 1 on him.

[Thor665]

Do you think he's a wolf?
Compared to Beef which would you prefer to lynch and why?

[Thor665]

It's really Tchill that's causing the slog.
Makes me really confident he's scum, but the question is if the wolf read is right or not.
That he appears to have zero supporters feels...pretty good on that score, though I suppose if I was Maf and my buddy was going down in flames I'd at least distance or something.

[Thor665]

Lemme digest, but I thought skitter or I were dying night 1 so idk about the kill spec stuff. Possibly trying to distance from the kill.

Also I think Thor WW kills skitter anyway to try and avoid the lynch. But also not overly likely, Thor is better shot of being Mafia at this point.

I don't see Montosh ww either because I think ww's are on A50 lynch wagon. So I think that Beef is the best bet for ww folowed by TChill. Thor/Montosh/NM is my mafia pool in that order.

once again. thor montosh scum. beef ww.

Your theory is that I, as Mafia, spent a few game days bussing my buddy while arguing that three town (you, Espeo, and N_M) were straight up morons for wanting to lynch Beef all so I could later turn around on him in a manner that *totally* didn't get me questioned?

This read feels alignment motivated, not evidence motivated.

Also, what makes Beef werewolf exactly? I suppose after my switch you could try to argue there's buddying energy with Montosh and I, but where's the beef Wilky connection exactly? If you think buddying/protecting is alignment telling why not a Montosh wolf? That was literally my case on him at day start and you ignored me.

Also, A50 tunneled me pretty hard on D2, so that would imply that I'm not mafia. I recognize that doesn't clear me from wolf, but I don't care.

Now see that's a good point.

UNVOTE:

I'm not sure what i was smoking here. I seem to have forgotten i believed Beef was ww NOT scum. So this unvote and reason is pretty invalid. I now understand why this caused a lot of confusion and am terribly sorry. Once again not used to phrasing "the bad guys" by two different terms. Honest mistake here.

But you're literally quoting someone saying he isn't mafia but might be wolf and then, while responding to that quote, are forgetting there's two scum teams?

idc if we lynch scum or ww tbh. I might be missing something of course.

You are.

[Thor665]

The more I read it, the more 1045 looks like straight out evidence that Tchill is the wolf.
Anyone not seeing what I'm seeing? I can explain it to you.
Anyone have an explanation where what I'm seeing isn't evidence he's a Wolf I'd like to hear it.

[Thor665]

VOTE: Tchill