[Game Over] Open 743 - The Crown of Misery

[Thor665]

VOTE: Leodanny

Non random posts are the best sort to sheep.
Could also lynch Dunnstral.

Also;

semi v/la till December 17th

- I'll be around, and I'll be posting, especially Wednesday and Thursday, but with the AD/DP war I'm dealing with right now on set I'm wanting the excuse to just go home and to bed without worrying about posting.

[Thor665]

Something_Smart, why have you not voted yet?

I don't usually feel like random voting, I don't think it's the votes that spark D1 discussion but just people talking to each other.

And I don't put down real votes often, especially early on. I find it leads to confbias as I'm asked to justify it, and I don't think most players are easier to read under pressure.

If you believe this why are all your other posts able to be quoted by going; "First, what?".
Shouldn't you be trying to drive some conversation?

[Thor665]

My "non-serious content" is "LAMIST"?

What's the issue with that claim?

I try never to force anything. If I don't have anything I want to talk about, I won't try to force myself to get people talking. So I won't ever make a post with the intent of "driving conversation." I'll make a post with the intent of "talking about X." And I'll do this when, and only when, such an X comes to my attention.

So you don't drive content via questions or votes, but generically drift, let others drive content, and then react to it.
I find a non-proactive playstyle inherently questionable for helping town wincon.
You can be a scum lean now.

LAMIST is a buzzword and a bullSmurf tell.

true

It seems as valid as any other tell.
Town try not to look scummy, but so do scum, and it's valid to suggest scum would try to do so harder, so...?
You feel kind of like you're sidelining and sticking to tearing down other things. You can also be a scumlean.

I'll toss Auro and rb into a town lean pool to see how well they float, though I'd be happy if rb dropped the imo joke, because that horse has now been dead forever I feel, and wasn't exactly healthy to begin with.

[Thor665]

You feel kind of like you're sidelining and sticking to tearing down other things.

Same can be said about you

It could - except with me there would be a dearth of evidence to support the claim, whereas with you there is plenty.
So I don't see that as a particularly worrisome rebuttal.

Town try not to look scummy, but so do scum, and it's valid to suggest scum would try to do so harder, so...?

It's valid to SUGGEST, but it's not valid to BELIEVE without any evidence...?

How is it valid to suggest if it's not valid to believe it? I don't see the connective absence there.
It's valid to suggest because it IS valid to believe that scum would try to look town, and might do so poorly.

So playstyles which don't help town wincon auto-earn scumleans from you? Or do you mean you're "tossing" him into a scumlean pool and would sort from there?

Yes, playstyles that don't help town wincon earn scum leans from me - it seems silly to do anything else, why would this confuse you as a stance?

I don't see how that helps you sort more accurately, can you explain? This applies to the townleans as well.

It doesn't help me sort - it's supposed to help others sort me - I've already done sorting.

Sorry I don’t live in the same time zone as most of you, so all the action happens when I’m asleep.

What would you have discussed if you'd been around? Because here you're not discussing anything, which continues to make me want to lynch you.

[Thor665]

Well I would have replied to auro’s question, with... um... rb. He’s just like wow so true imo lynch lamees

Then why are you voting Auro?

[Thor665]

This is not thrilling to me.

[Thor665]

Okay

Um want to say anything else?

Not really, for someone complaining of a lack of interaction you're not being very proactive when you have interaction - I was mostly just pointing that out to get more votes on you.

Eh, ambiguous wording on my part. I don't think you can logically deduce that town are better at looking town than scum are, when they specifically attempt to. That would have to be something that you'd learn from experience, and in my experience it depends very much on the person.

All tells do

Also, LAMIST is not putting in a lot of effort to look town. It's very easy to say "I'm town" as either alignment, and there are reasons town players might do it that's not to look town. (i.e. because one school of thought as town is that you should just say literally whatever you feel like you want to say.)

I'll agree there is questionable value to town doing the things being noted as LAMIST - which to my mind justifies using LAMIST as a viable scumhunting tool, really.

Why are you so interested in attacking a scumhunting style when you acted defensive when I questioned your style? Isn't that hypocritical on your part?

It confuses me because that looks like a sub-optimal way to scumhunt -- some players have playstyles that feel anti-town or scummy in most of their games, so by doing this, you'd end up lynching them every game.
Don't you agree it's important to separate play from playstyle? If a player's doing something scummy, but did that in previous town games as well, we have to judge the player on other parameters. No?

Some players do have playstyles that 'feel' anti town or scummy. But that's a long way different from a playstyle that is reactive as opposed to reactive. Scumhunting is an activity - lack of scumhunting is scummy. I'll agree this might lead to players who play very poorly being lynched every game - hopefully it will teach them to not play poorly. I fail to see the issue.

I agree it's important to separate play from playstyle. That said, if a player plays scummy, Day 1 is the optimal time to root them out since apparently you can't discern their alignment from play, no? Are you arguing we should not lynch scummy looking players Day 1? Clearly you're not, because that would be daft - so what is your suggestion of who we lynch Day 1? I submit it is best to lynch someone who looks scummy - and that can include playstyle. You're either right, and huzzah, or you're wrong and you get info. Both are preferable to lynching someone off an inherently bad case, which playstyle is not.

If you're done sorting and your vote is still on Leo, I'm assuming you SR him? Who else do you think is scum?

Probably you could infer by me saying I scum leaned Dunnstral that I scum read him also.
Why are you asking me such an empty question considering I blatantly stated a second scum read? Are you just skimming and pretending to effort, or what?

[Thor665]

Buzzwords kill.

Buzzword is a buzzword.

[Thor665]

When you said "I've already done sorting" I assumed you meant you sorted *after* the previous posts, and that meant your current sorts had information beyond the inferred scumlean on Dunnstral.

You read me incorrectly - but even if you did read me correctly why are you asking for more reads when I'd offered a second already and had apparently decided not to share others if I had them?

In the abscence of a good case, I'd be down to lynch a scummy player even if it's just playstyle -- but scumleaning them early just for that seems like it'd only lead to conf bias.

List me all the games ever with a good case on Day 1.
I expect the number to be x<1
I'll wait.

I think we've beaten this point quite into the ground; I don't think LAMIST is a useful tell and I've stated my reasons why. Let's move on.

What would you like to move on to?

I find concern with you attacking someone else's scumhunting while not committing your own and desire to still explore that point, but I'm open to other topics of conversation if you have them.

[Thor665]

I think we've beaten this point quite into the ground; I don't think LAMIST is a useful tell and I've stated my reasons why. Let's move on.

What would you like to move on to?

I find concern with you attacking someone else's scumhunting while not committing your own and desire to still explore that point, but I'm open to other topics of conversation if you have them.

@Something_Smart

Your reads help us sort you, as you said -- so if something changed/got added from the previous post, asking you to post them would be useful.

Agreed - but after I had already answered I was posting my reads to help people read me, you would then have to presume either I had forgotten my purpose in posting reads or was lying in my answer to have your question make sense.

Also, what would be my scum motivation in "looking like I'm efforting", considering I've actually efforted in my scum games, especially when I'm questioning why someone townleaned me for doing that?

Just because you efforted as scum in the past does not mean you always will - or are you claiming it does?
I'm not sure what your motivation for it is - but it appears fairly factual you're doing exactly that so now I'm exploring it. It does make more sense to me you'd do it as scum, and it ASSUREDLY makes more sense to me you'd try to cover it up as scum as opposed to admitting it.

I'm feeling more like these answers are deflections than responses. Meh, then again you do answer in questions a lot like I do.
Please delve deeper into that first response and my rebuttal - I feel like the answer to your alignment is there.

I had a great case on scum!Volxen in my just-completed Newbie 1900 he was tunneled on me, I kept engaging him on that, showed how his vote shifts were inconsistent and dishonest. I'm actually curious -- I can link you to the posts, tell me why my case (even if correct) was not a "good" one?

You can post or link it.
I'm willing to bet my answer will be 'there's a difference between being right and being good'.
Day 1 lynches are, with few exceptions, educated guesses with very limited info. I submit it's impossible to have them be good - the only goal is to have them not be trash.

Leo needs more votes I think. Persi, Thor, and Auro all seem like town to me so far, so I don't think scum are pushing a lynch there. Seems like a good choice.

Though admittedly I started to quaver on my Auro read earlier, this was a similar thought process to what I had - it was extra interesting because other wagons were being shopped around with cases that are fairly similar to the case on Leodanny (like Yyotta is basically an expy of Leodanny and each case could functionally be tossed at the other effortlessly).

I suppose you could be the theory scum hopping on, but I don't feel like you'd hang a hat on that hook on your way in the door.

Let's toss you in the town pool.

[Thor665]

I effort as both alignments. I'm not covering up that I'm efforting, am I? O.o
I'm saying there's no special

scum motivation

for me to effort, when I know that efforting alone won't make me look any townier. So if you're going to evaluate my alignment based on that question, it shouldn't be for "trying to look like you're efforting". Agree?
Therefore, an accusation of me "trying to look like I'm efforting" shouldn't hold any weight.

I'm saying you're not efforting and are trying to cover it up.
Address the presented attack, pointing out that you can effort as scum AND town is utterly meaningless to my presented issue. I'll agree - I think you can effort as town and scum, I still don't think you're being fully honest about your effort here.

If you think this case isn't "good", do tell me your definitions of it, because I think a lynch off this case is superior to someone whose playstyle is naturally scummy.

Your case was "you're playing inconsistent" That's a fine Day 1 case.
So is "you're playing pro-scum"
I find both of equal worth.

Please delve deeper into that first response and my rebuttal - I feel like the answer to your alignment is there.

Also, interesting that you use the term "rebuttal" -- I simply asked a question based on an assumption I made and an inconsistency I felt, which wasn't AI -- I never made an argument that you were scum for it, so why was your response a "rebuttal"?

"The grass is blue."
You can rebut that without me even being involved in a game of Mafia. I challenged your stance, you offered a reason why you did what you did, I showed that it was illogical - that's a rebuttal.
What even is this question?

Also remember that my initial question was about you "tossing" people into pools based on their playstyle, and starting from there; something I felt then was different from actual "reads".
"I posted about my tossing people into pools so people could sort me"
"I'm done sorting now" (in a later post without mentioning any updated reads)
If you explicitly said you were *scumreading* Leo/Dunn earlier, instead of the "pool-tossing", I probably wouldn't have made the incorrect assumption when you said "I've already done sorting".

"I'm done sorting" was offered as an explicit answer to your question about how what I was doing would help me sort my town and scum reads.
To expand that to suggest you believed my answer was "I'm done sorting everyone/more people than I've offered sorts on" is a reeeeeeal stretch, yeah?
This looks wonky as a thought process.

How do you feel about Lamees?

I think Lamees is town. The attack on her is weak, and her attack on rb is so silly it reads town to me.

And, I think you're not using "attacking" correctly. Attacking implies aggressive intent; so I would be wanting to call someone either scum or a bad player-- but clearly I don't want either of those things. I'm just giving my opinion on the value of a tell.

If you downplay something you are weakening a stance/belief/player - that's an attack. You pointing out you're doing it while not assessing scum/town intent actually is my point. You're sidelining and not gamesolving while still attacking.
If you want to call it an avocado instead of an attack - that's fine with me, but it doesn't change the meaning of what I pointed out. You're avocadoing other people while sidelining.

[Thor665]

I don't see how that helps you sort more accurately, can you explain? This applies to the townleans as well.

It doesn't help me sort - it's supposed to help others sort me - I've already done sorting.

Yes, I do find it a stretch.

There was no scum motivation in doing it.
There was evidence of not efforting - which is what I said, and I think there is scum motivation in not efforting.

[Thor665]

Yes, I do find it a stretch.

There was no scum motivation in doing it.
There was evidence of not efforting - which is what I said, and I think there is scum motivation in not efforting.

Okay, so we've established that there was no scum motivation -> this implies my thought process WRT the post was genuine.
In the universe where I hadn't asked that question, would you call my play "not efforting"?
Because this is supporting evidence at best; so if you don't think I was "not efforting" apart from that, it's a weak attack.
If you do think I wasn't "efforting" in that universe, we can talk about that further.

As already discussed - there is scum motivation in covering up your lack of effort by claiming you're efforting.
Hence, again, as I already flat out stated, why I'm exploring your thought process to see if it makes sense.
Why is this suddenly something you're forgetting?
I do think you weren't efforting, I am starting to think you're fake efforting and word spewing emptiness.

[Thor665]

That you're - halfway through the discussion - kind of trying a gear change makes me feel like you're worried I was coming too close to reality.

[Thor665]

Where did I "claim" I'm efforting?
You've already picked at my thought process about that question, to see if what makes sense?
So you're saying I'm not efforting *because* of that question, or as a whole?

1. Are you claiming you're not efforting?
2. In an ongoing process, yes. This is an empty question.
3. I'm saying it is evidence of not efforting, I would suggest it's as a whole, yes.

Where have I changed gears here, Thor?

By trying to step out of the conversation.

Every time I incorrectly interpret something you say, you seem to be calling me "gear-changing", "fake-efforting", "word-spewing".
Why don't you correct me and allow me to rebut the correct version of things, without attacking me for it?

Why do you keep misunderstanding me by inventing things I never said or even implied?
I've corrected you twice on the effort thing, and I've had to remind you of things I've said like 2-3 times as well.
At some stage, considering my raised issue is I don't think you're trying to actually solve, but just look busy, am I allowed to suggest this ongoing "confusion" is scummy?
Maybe you should read twice to make sure you grok things before demanding I define and defend "rebuttal" as a word choice (And then hard drop the conversation, and many others while not changing gears)?

[Thor665]

Are you just skimming and pretending to effort, or what?

Like, how do you read this and establish my attack on you as you efforting as opposed to not efforting?

[Thor665]

3. Then how come you townleaned me earlier to that question? Also, you'll have to show that every post of mine appart from that was fake-effort.

I'm allowed to change reads with new info.
I don't have to show how every post you make does that, that is silly. I have shown it in more than one instance which suggests it's an ongoing reality.

Which part of the conversation did I hard drop? I thought I was constantly engaging you o.O

You are - but, like I literally just said, you dropped the rebuttal thing (and others) so I literally answered the question you're asking here in part in the post you're responding to. This all feels fake.

Thor, this conversation is becoming unnecessarily bloated -- just cut down to your attack, and explain it in clear terms to dense me, without saying "I've already said it earlier".

I'm not sure what your motivation for [efforting] is - but it appears fairly factual you're doing exactly that so now I'm exploring it. It does make more sense to me you'd do it as scum, and it ASSUREDLY makes more sense to me you'd try to cover it up as scum as opposed to admitting it.

[Thor665]

[fake efforting]

[Thor665]

Fair enough on that - you are asking a lot of ridiculous questions that go nowehere fast with you responding with 'I'm confused' after being called on them though.
Makes me feel like I'm boxing with smoke.

[Thor665]

I'm not sure what your motivation for it is - but it appears fairly factual you're doing exactly that so now I'm exploring it. It does make more sense to me you'd do it as scum, and it ASSUREDLY makes more sense to me you'd try to cover it up as scum as opposed to admitting it.

This is the attack? Cool.
So you think I'm fake efforting, even right now in the process of our engagement, cool.
And your attack on me is that you don't know what my motivation for efforting would be; but I would try to cover my non-efforting up as scum instead of admitting that I am not efforting. Correct? Gosh.

You asked for the case - I didn't expect you to agree with it.
My primary goal was to showcase that it was simple and clearly stated already.

[Thor665]

Agreements or not aside, my paraphrasing of your case; is it correct?

If you take out the 'I don't know what the motive is' part and replace it with 'I see a motive to do this as scum, but not one to do it as town' then yes.

What I don't get is why Thor keeps on about it.

What experience do you have with me that would expect me to let something go if I thought it was scum indicative?

[Thor665]

wow can we cop check thor and auro just because i started reading their interactions and now i have depression imo

Good

[Thor665]

DarkLightA (L-3)

: NotNova, Lamees, bristep123, Persivul

rb (L-4)

: Leodanny, Something_Smart, DarkLightA

Dunnstral (L-6)

: rb

Leodanny (L-6)

: Thor665

Egix96, Malakitty, Dunnstral, Auro

Cool, so that's your attack. I think it's pretty convoluted and plays around with definitions and semantics.

Except that it doesn't do either of those things.

What experience do you have with me that would expect me to let something go if I thought it was scum indicative?

The thing is that I don't see why you would see expending effort as scum indicative. Town is supposed to expend effort. Scum therefore have incentive to expend effort. So, effort is NAI.

I agree with everything you said - but fail to see how it applies to my case.
Scum DO have incentive to look like town, and town DO have incentive to effort.
That doesn't mean that scum will, by definition, effort - and does suggest they may fake effort because they know it looks town to effort.
So?

Replace "effort" with "posting worthwhile content" and explain how your logic works? Maybe it will help you understand my logic also?

If anyone thinks RB is scum after this interaction, feel free to go ahead and case him.

How does that interaction make him look like town?

The only other insight I got from all those pages is a town read on Something.

[Thor665]

However, he expressed frustration and seriousness during his DVa exchange -- something I'm not able to fit as part of a scum agenda for him. Clearly DVa was attracting votes (even if for meh reasons) and he wasn't being scumread, so I fail to see why he would go to the extent of faking said frustration in that context. I don't think it's likely here that scum!RB gets frustrated genuinely especially considering his prior play.

Can you highlight the frustration you saw?
I could see 'seriousness' from his interactions but fail to see frustration.

I'll also take your silence as admitting my case lacks semantic/definition wordplay.

[Thor665]

A few of his posts from that interaction, along with the self-vote which points to frustration.

All o fthat felt about as real as him wow, imo stuff to me.
I guess if you read it as legit it reads town - but that feels like cart before the horse, no?
He's town cause it's real, but it's real because he's town?

I'm not going to be pulled into this kind of an argument again -- I do think your case is convoluted, and I'll wait for anyone else to actually parse and push me there.

There is nothing convoluted in a case that is "I think you're faking effort, therefore are scum" that's a very simple and easy case.
There is also no definition wordplay at all.
Your defense is scummy here.

[Thor665]

There is nothing convoluted in a case that is "I think you're faking effort, therefore are scum" that's a very simple and easy case.
There is also no definition wordplay at all.
Your defense is scummy here.

If it was this, I think I already have responded. You thought I was fake efforting because of that "Who's scum then" question I threw at you, and I explained my thought process behind it. You thought it's wonky, but I did show how it was genuine. I also asked you to show me how I'm "faking effort" independent of that question and our interaction after that, and you said it's silly to ask that. I also pointed out that it's my scum meta to effort hard, so I have nothing to really gain by faking effort instead of playing naturally.

I can't possibly "prove" that my effort is "real", and I'm not sure how you'd evaluate it off one question -- but again, I'm not interested in needlessly throwing pages upon pages on this right now. I will be, if any other player sees what you're seeing and doesn't think it's a weak case.

You're now changing the goalposts and not supporting either how my case is convoluted or definition/semantic based.

I'll agree that you offered your reasoning behind why you asked a pointless question - please agree back that I disagreed with the logic of it, and you hardly "showed it was genuine" that's silly.

I agree you asked me to show how every post you made was faking effort and I called *that* silly.

I can agree you effort as scum. Please explain how that precludes you from ever not efforting - and also feel free to explain which alingment I should expect you to be if I detect shallow effort and scumhunting. Because if it's town you need to change how you play.

As regards rb - he was the one getting more negative attention than DVa in that interaction. I see motivation to try to look town, and I think the way people often interpret frustration suggest that's a valid scum play to fake. Is it fake? Not sure. But I don't see it as slam dunk enough to want to call it town, that slot is pretty iffy in all other ways.

[Thor665]

Only if you join us.

[Thor665]

Again, independent of that question, tell me where you think I was empty efforting.

I don't understand what you're asking me here.
It sounds like 'ignoring your evidence, explain your evidence' so I think I'm misunderstanding it - reword?

[Thor665]

Now, is there any other evidence you have where you feel like I'm faking effort?

Not as clearly defined.
I might toss in your reaction to DVa/rb as super shallow, but I'm not sure if I think you're faking that or not.
You bringing up the convoluted/definition thing is also very suspect to me as it's blatant hogwash - but that's a different tell.

Are you saying you're sloppy enough as scum you'd keep doing the same tell I'm attacking you over and my lack of ability to show it again then proves you're town?

[Thor665]

DarkLightA (L-3)

: NotNova, Lamees, bristep123, Persivul

rb (L-4)

: Leodanny, Something_Smart, DarkLightA

Dunnstral (L-6)

: rb

Leodanny (L-6)

: Thor665

Egix96, Malakitty, Dunnstral, Auro

Where has that sentiment disappeared this game?

Don't think it has, you don't show me ever agreeing that not reading is good - you do have me showing I'd be happy to see you (or me if you wish) get Copped
What's the attitude change there exactly?

pls no more Thauro665

Why?

DarkLight is the one I would lynch first. If he flips town I might look at Smart next.

Why Darklight?

All town

Why do you townread Nova?

[Thor665]

I like their content and they look like town to me

What do you like in their content?

[Thor665]

The lack of pot/kettle awareness here is kind of funny.

[Thor665]

I really love being told what I 'have' to do in these games.

Yeah, it's rough when people demand you play differently.
Though...aren't you trying to tell him to play differently also?

I dare submit neither of you are actually wrong or right here.

Let's vote Leodanny some more while we ponder that insight.

[Thor665]

I like their content and they look like town to me

What do you like in their content?

@Dunn

Also, I'm currently voting Leodanny, so if you move and Pers votes him, that's a three vote wagon which would make it amongst the biggest currently. So...?

[Thor665]

Thor, you think RB's slot is iffy, don't you think that flip is better?

I don't think it's better, and there's more support for Leodanny.
You town read him - why are you trying to redirect from a null/scum read of yours to a town read?

Thor, I want to talk about this more - I think it's a horrendous idea to gate a cop check to one or two people, since if there's a cop it's almost guaranteed that we have a framer/GF or both.

Why were you happy at that suggestion?

You say this like GFs aren't near constant issues with Cops in basically every game.
I'm happy with the Cop targeting.
I'm happy with the Cop targeting me or a top scumspect of mine.
If I opposed any part of that then I'd need to oppose the COp targeting anyone.
Do you fear Framer/GF so much you think the Cop shouldn't target? Unless your answer is 'yes' I fail to see your issue here.

Why is he scum? I get the "not cotributing" part, but that isnt alignment indicative. I town read him because he isn't pushing for a scum wincon imo. Like you get players who troll around and don't contribute/lurk. But they still push aggressively for mislynches as scum (see notmafia in that game we played together) and kind of what rb was doing earlier this game. Leodanny isnt doing that.

He's currently voting the biggest wagon that isn't him.
Before the wagon on him he was on the biggest wagon.
His vote isn't doing nothing.

[Thor665]

Leodanny (L-2)

: Thor665, Persivul, Dunnstral, rb,
Egix96

rb (L-4)

: Leodanny, Something_Smart, DarkLightA

Malakitty (L-5)

: Lamees, Auro

Egix96 (L-6)

: Nako

DarkLightA (L-6)

: bristep123

Malakitty

I do think RB is town -- however, I felt a possible inconsistency in your read on the slot versus your vote, so I called that out. Similar to how I'd question a case on a scumread if I felt it inconsistent, I can also question why someone isn't pushing a townread of mine if it looks potentially inconsistent with their previous sayings and clarify.

What inconsistency did you see from me to provoke this line of questioning?

Encouraging the cop to check someone (or two) is bad, IMO, and they should keep in mind the existence of framers and GFs when deciding who they target.

Welcome to every closed game, and a fair swathe of Open games of Mafia ever made?
I responded with 'Good' not 'Oh yeah, Cop should totally only check one of the two of us'. Bit of a difference.

You know when I voted that? Way before my wagon formed. And I did not jump on that without reason.

I never, at any stage in my posting, claimed otherwise.
So...sure?

He voted rb first according to the VC. So him being on that wagon is just him voting for who he thinks is scummy? How does him voting rb make him scum necessarily?

You claimed that him not pushing for mislynches was townie. I pointed out he is on a quite successful wagon - so unless you know for a fact rb is scum where do you get the justification to claim he isn't successfully pushing for a mislynch?

I dont think you answered my question here.

The rest of your question was "why is he scum".
I've offered my reasoning, which is best summed as "he isn't really scumhunting, so let's flip him".
I stand by that case fully.

[Thor665]

I haven't played with him but if he was scum, he would try to pocket townies instead of war of the walls.

[Thor665]

What inconsistency did you see from me to provoke this line of questioning?

Potential*
Your vote then vs the RB read.

So I was voting one scumread, and saw multiple people expressing interest in the wagon - I pushed on that interest and created a solid wagon on Leo instead of switching to rb who had a lot less wagon interest.

No, seriously, describe the inconsistency.

[Thor665]

So I was voting one scumread, and saw multiple people expressing interest in the wagon - I pushed on that interest and created a solid wagon on Leo instead of switching to rb who had a lot less wagon interest.

No, seriously, describe the inconsistency.

Me: *Asks question*
Thor: *Answers question*, "Why ask?"
Me: "Potential inconsistency"
Thor: "Where's the inconsistency?"
Me: "Potential*"
Thor: "Seriously, describe the inconsistency"

Is Thor *this* thick usually? The purpose of *asking* questions is to iron out potential inconsistencies and get to know someone's stance clearer. "Why Leo over RB" is a

perfectly

fine question, because Thor did admit RB was iffy although he voted Leo, and now he's had to describe his stance on why Leo. This incessant nitpicks are starting to annoy me. Perhaps he's doing this with the intention of making me back off from asking questions, which I won't, or to start huge wall-wars again which no one's going to read.

Okay, so the inconsistency was one not yet committed?
What's the future potential inconsistency you saw?
Maybe I am thick - but asking you to describe what you saw feels like a fairly simple and reasonable question if asking about an inconsistency that doesn't exist is fine why aren't my questions fine?

@Mala - I townread Lamees without the claim. The play seems very straightforward and functional. I fail to see the issue with asking a question that went nowhere about what PRs people would choose as scum. Like...what scum advantage is there to asking that? What's he doing, rolefishing scum?

Can you describe your issue there more? I'm bothered that we have such opposite reads on a slot.

[Thor665]

Okay, so the inconsistency was one not yet committed?
What's the future potential inconsistency you saw?
Maybe I am thick - but asking you to describe what you saw feels like a fairly simple and reasonable question if asking about an inconsistency that doesn't exist is fine why aren't my questions fine?

Yes, it was not one yet committed.

Potentially

, if I judged that your reasons for voting Leo were too weak to not justify pushing RB, a slot that you said you find scummy, I would've then concluded that your (weak) vote was inconsistent with your (strong) RB read.
The question was (functionally equivalent to) "why Leo over RB". Now, I repeat -- I ask questions to figure out someone's thought process, and make observations about where their actions seem inconsistent with their thought processes, and in this case, said action was the Leo vote, and the thought process, RB scumread.
I never said your answer to "why Leo over RB" was inconsistent or bad, I accepted it.
If you think it's an empty question, I would disagree -- it has achieved some purpose in that I got a better peek into your thought process regarding RB/Leo, which is a good thing, and also FMPOV, made you clearer on your stance on that to town as well.
No doubt it's a reasonable question, but when I said "potential" two times, your treating it as though I had painted some existing inconsistency was what I'm referring to.

[Thor665]

Thor, you think RB's slot is iffy, don't you think that flip is better?

[Thor665]

My issue is it's so empty it worries me.

Basically you had two pieces of info.
Thor is voting and says he scumspects Leo.
Thor says he scumspects rb
(we can add in, Thor says he scumspects Auro - which you didn't explore)

There was no info from me on one read being stronger or weaker than another besides maybe an inferred one from where my vote was placed (Leo) or who I was spending the most time talking about (Auro).
Literally some people other than me brought up the idea of voting Leo but didn't act on it.
I reacted to this to create a Leo wagon.

You, while moving your vote to Leo, asked me why I wasn't pushing rb as a better flip.

It just makes no sense. It's an empty question, there was no inconsistency - nor can I even imagine what answer I would have given to show an inconsistency beyond an insane one. It all seemed like noise doing nothing, which is one of my stated issues with your play this game. When asked to explain the inconsistency you act bewildered that I can't see a theory future inconsistency that doesn't exist, and seems unlikely to ever exist.

You then act bothered I'm exploring it - which is trying to avoid scumhunting or explaining your motivations all while mewling that your motivations are super clear.
I disagree with you. Your motivations look like empty mud. I wnt to understand them.
Can you justify this gak or no?

[Thor665]

Like, describe what the theory future inconsistency would have been?

Wouldn't I have had to answer, "LOL, yeah, I never said it before but I totally suspect rb more and agree he's a massively better flip VOTE: "

Like, anything less than that and you have nothing, yeah?

[Thor665]

Go ahead and just case me, get others to see the great ThorLogic that I'm apparently flail-derping as I try to combat it.
You now have two instances of my "empty questions", both for which I've explained myself.
You're trying to convince ME that they're empty, and I disagree.

I am casing you by attacking you.
Don't complain about me "trying to convince you" after you ask me to explain my issue.
That's daft, empty, and silly.

My issue with your timeline is it ignores where my vote is and also ignores that you apparently were comfortable with my answer without me explaining my case on Leo - literally all I did was say 'no' to your question and you dropped it. You apparently don't see that as empty. I very much do.

[Thor665]

This^ is you explaining your case on Leo. You're saying if I asked you why Leo over RB, I shouldn't be satisfied by this answer?

Hell, Lamees and Leo both questioned you on this explanation IIRC -- there you go, your response to my question did instigate an attack from Lamees and Leo.
So there was some positive utility in my asking you that question and your explaining it.

I agree that Leo and Lamees followed up on my answer to your question and seemed to actually be seeking info from my answer unlike you did, yes.

[Thor665]

Actually really only Lamees did - Leo did an empty defense on a straw man and I called him out on it.
As long as you're complaining about me not holding others to what I'm holding you to.

[Thor665]

@Lamees - how does that not apply to Leodanny?

[Thor665]

Eh, actually in looking back that's a pretty slant accusation on my part. Withdrawn.

[Thor665]

VOTE: rb

[Thor665]

To the town pool?
Thank you.

[Thor665]

@Lamees - vote rb with me.
I think Darklight is town.

[Thor665]

@Lamees - vote rb with me.
I think Darklight is town.

Case RB, please.
I think you, Egix, RB, S_S all look bad if Mala is scum here

"Give me a case for rb, I think rb looks like scum if Mala is scum"

[Thor665]

im scum because i said a thing i say in nearly all the games i play when there's wallposters that i don't wanna sort

*slow clap*

gotta go to work now so no time to post more right now, but i'm pretty happy with how fast my wagon's built

I'm pretty happy with how fast your wagon's built too - probably means at least one buddy is bussing you.

Still don't really buy that RB's post was some huge damning slip.

Nice quickwagon on RB, and if he flips town setting up mine and DLA's lynches because of stretchy logic while avoiding looking into other super scummy slots.

Who are these scummy slots you think we should be looking into?

All the DLA/Lamees back and forth was pretty "meh" to me and still left me with a townread on both.
rb's flail looks like scum trying to muddy the waters and make sure his votes can't be analyzed today.
He still isn't lynched yet for some reason.
Thus endeth the update.

[Thor665]

I'd also like some more attention on Creature and Nako.

Creature replaced Yyotta Cat and is reasonable to call a townread for the moment.
Nako replaced NotNova and I'll agree that's a "bleh" slot but I don't see you doing anything to explore the slot, so I find myself asking why you're complaining that others aren't - couldn't you just, y'know, do the thing you want others to do?

@Thor: When he got to L-2, the wagon was - Thor, Lamees, DLA, Something_Smart.

If you think RB was scum and he got bussed, which one is it? You're townreading all the other three on that wagon.

Maybe you should note that I was responding to rb claiming his wagon was "fast" when I made that comment and it might be tongue-in-cheek.
Just saying.

[Thor665]

No one's really paying attention to her slot, Creature even townreads her.
Her analysis posts from D1 I'm not reading alignment from, her recent posts are really bad as I point out.
I'm pointing that out to get her to post more, I *am* trying to direct attention there in an attempt to explore.
I'm very well justified making that complaint, that I'm not doing anything is a flimsy accusation.

I'll agree Creature's readlist is a joke - doesn't actually create scumhunting on the slot though.
I'll agree, again, that her slot is bleh - but just going 'yo, this slot is bleh' isn't actually a way to interact with the slot. Is all you want people to agree that the slot is bleh?
You aren't scumhunting the slot - if you think what you're doing is scumhunting then allow me to redefine my point for clarity; "you're not engaging with the slot to try to make it produce information or provide reads in a way to allow you and others to potentially garner enough information on it to draw a more definable assessment of its thought process in the game on a town/scum alignment scale but are instead weakly, and very skantwise, are generically attacking it while complaining now about someone else generically deciding it's town while not seeing how both reads are equally empty and basically identical besides where they fall on the alignment scale"

Does my point make sense now?

[Thor665]

rb (L-3)

: Thor665, Something_Smart, Lamees

Lamees (L-5)

: DarkLightA

DarkLightA (L-5)

: Egix96

Malakitty (L-5)

: Auro

Auro (L-5)

: rb

Thor665 (L-5)

: Creature

Nako, Leodanny, Malakitty

I can agree you didn't read the slot as town and don't recall people townreading the slot.

[Thor665]

That's all very well, except I

can't

engage with a slot if there's nothing to engage on.
The

only

option I have in this scenario, is call them out for active lurking, and then wait for them to produce content.

You're right, that's what everyone does in RVS to generate content and it's the only way.

I'm pretty definite in my recall that no one townread YC, do correct me if I'm wrong.

You're clearly wrong because I'm claiming a townread. I'll agree I might not have said it, but that's immaterial to your questioning of my claim today. Also you're forgetting other players that may magically be the same slot, so...

My question is, what does Creature replacing into YC's slot have to do with Creature being a reasonable townread?

Well, blatantly, if someone townread the previous slot holder it has *everything* to do with it.
To explain my thoughts - in a Newbie game (now finished but ongoing at the time, so relax your panties) Yyotta admitted in the PT that they were under a lot of stress, and had their partner point out that lack of posting was insulting to other players.
I hate to have to then dance around the rather silly and I swear constantly changing rules of this site but Yyotta didn't replace out of all their games.
Also, if you look at the Newbie game in question and assess their scum play while feeling overwhelmed you can get the vibe that;

1. They were more relaxed here.
2. They cared about the group and recognized they weren't going to be the best here.

Now, to a certain extent I would like to see some flips in theoretical other places, but I suspect an early replace out here to be more likely from town than scum. I can see an argument made in the reverse to suggest that it was feelings of failure as scum and fleeing from doing so again, and I don't dislike that argument, but suggest the outward showing from the initial posts here do not match up well with that scum game.

So I tend to favor town, and barring something more exciting than "Creature's reads are narf!" I'm not going to scumread that slot, and rather question anyone who does.
Also, that slot, across the various slot holders, has a perfectly decent amount of posting to assess, unlike your more reasonable complaint about the Nova slot.

[Thor665]

Yeah, it's an inconsistency. Sadly I can't tell if it's a town or a scum inconsistency because that kind of inconsistency has been happening a lot lately.

You're kind of hard bending over to call Auro's issue immaterial though. That's oddly aggressive defense of objectively poor analysis.

[Thor665]

Even if rb is scum, he's not the one furthering scum's win condition now more than just basic survivalism.

Sure? But he's only on survivalism because we're advancing a wagon on him. No one with a high chance of being lynched is advancing their team's wincon regardless of alingment.

He did potentially advance scum wincon yesterday though when he was free to act.

Do I not understand the point you're making?

[Thor665]

wow so many bad posts

Wow, you're probably right. Can you describe them in your opinion?

[Thor665]

rb (L-3)

: Thor665, Something_Smart, Lamees

Thor665 (L-4)

: Creature, rb

Lamees (L-5)

: DarkLightA

DarkLightA (L-5)

: Egix96

Malakitty (L-5)

: Auro

Nako, Leodanny, Malakitty

too much effort

Color me unsurprised.

@Creature - if you really town read this dreck you probably ought to get back in here and defend the hell out of it. Otherwise it's an awesome lynch.

[Thor665]

for real spat out my water laughing when i read that

How To Identify Awesome Lynch
- Creature defends it? Not awesome
- Creature doesn't defend it? Awesome

ok m8

That's a good point, when you combine something you're misrepping me as saying with something...DA said I think, then it sounds kind of silly if you then pretend it was the same person.

Oh man, good scumhunting, good scumhunting.

[Thor665]

I'd rather do Thor. Persivul was getting into him and his vote on rb looks agenda-y.

How was Pers getting into me?

If my vote looks agenda-y then all votes look agenda-y.

[Thor665]

I'd rather do Thor. Persivul was getting into him and his vote on rb looks agenda-y.

How was Pers getting into me?

If my vote looks agenda-y then all votes look agenda-y.

[Thor665]

You think I felt enough pressure from that to dictate scum team's kill?

[Thor665]

Why do you think that? I wouldn't describe my scum play that way.

[Thor665]

rb (L-4)

: Thor665, Something_Smart

Thor665 (L-4)

: Creature, rb

DarkLightA (L-5)

: Egix96

Malakitty (L-5)

: Auro

Nako, Leodanny, Malakitty, DarkLightA, Lamees

rb I would argue against as he looks eminently lynchable unless someone saw a PR crumb.
Auro I'd be fine with as he wasn't absorbing a lot of lynch energy yesterday.

This doesn't actually answer the question.

[Thor665]

1 scum between Thor and rb.

What evidence/thoughts do you have to support this idea?

By "that way" you mean specifically dictating the NK, yes? How is that relevant?

Because Creature is using it as a case on me - I don't actually think it's a valid casing method and am trying to get him to show enough cards to reveal it's an empty claim.
Why are you asking me to defend Creature's case on me as relevant?

rb I would argue against as he looks eminently lynchable unless someone saw a PR crumb.
Auro I'd be fine with as he wasn't absorbing a lot of lynch energy yesterday.

This doesn't actually answer the question.

@Creature - are you intentionally ignoring me because you're scum or are you just scared I have a good point and don't want to admit you're wrong?

[Thor665]

I checked that PT.
Yes, they admit they were under a lot of stress. However, the posts in the PT gave me the impression that said stress wasn't due to being scum in the game, rather some external factor that caused him to "forget the forum". I think it was just co-incidence that he didn't replace out of all then; plus, got lynched by the time he probably would have in that particular one.
I think you're drawing too much a comparison with that game based on 4 posts and the premise of "being overwhelmed" which I think wasn't due to the game itself, so I think that slot doesn't deserve a townread for it.
And I'm not particularly impressed by Creature's reads either, so... yeah.

I never said he replaced out from the pressure of being scum.
Why do you think he only replaced out of one game and not all games?

[Thor665]

idk, just that Persivul kill feels like something a scumteam with you in would do considering Persivul is an older player.

I agree he's an older player.
Not sure how that makes me more likely to kill him than other players here, but as long as you're saying 'feel' can't really debate it.
Help me lynch rb?

Also you still give the feels that your posts are just walls and nothing more. Like, staying on rb while leaving others on their own.

I'll agree I'm not really trying to talk about other people.
I'll note that I'm still interacting with Auro, Gamma, Nako, You, and to a light extent Lamees.
The remaining players are already listed as town reads/leans by me or are Mala and Leo who are barely here.
I'll agree I'm focused on rb - but, y'know, I'm kinda trying to lynch him so...yeah, that's how you get lynches so that's what I'm doing, but to suggest I'm avoiding/not interacting with other players is objectively untrue and if you're town and basing a read off that you need to shape up your read and get better.

I do agree with you that it's not a valid casing method by itself.
However, I don't think Creature was really "casing" you just based on that in the first place.
You were in his PoE pool, and the NK is consistent with the possibility of your being scum, whether or not you dictated the kill or not.
I *think* this would be enough for him to have voted at the time, given his play.

I agree that if he randomly decides I'm in his PoE pool (with little to no logic) and then he mentions 'hey, a guy died that because of 'feels' Thor is more likely to kill then, yeah, sure, he can vote me over that.
I'll poke at it to make him (and apparently you) have to defend it on those merits so that, hopefully if you're town you'll wake up or if you're scum you'll reveal yourself. Switch my name with anyone else in his pool (or outside of it) and the case remains functionally unchanged - which is why it's a poor case.

I don't get the point of this post from you.

[Thor665]

VOTE: Thor665
1 scum between Thor and rb.
Hopefully, Creature is town.
Lamees did not die so she is also a scum?

Why Thor over RB?
If you're (or were) considering the possibility that Lamees is scum, why can't Thor v RB be TvT?

I thought of that because they are voting each other and I am assumint they know each other well.

Why do you assume this?

[Thor665]

I think it's all a matter of PoE and scum are obviously gonna attack whoever I am townreading (such as rb or Lamees) if I happen to be right.

I agree with you on Lamees you dolt. I thought he was town prior to the claim nonesense even.
Your town read on rb is about as sensible as you complaining I'm not talking about or interacting with other slots.
Stop doing the shallow crud and go for some meat already.

[Thor665]

Whoever isn't voting him, please explain why the cases on him are bad.

Oh please, allow me...

Now, wait, what are the cases on me?

Creature has that dictate trash.
You think I'm scummy for pointing out the dictate trash and steering a cop investigation on me by saying 'good'
Mala thinks I haven't been helpful enough (which ignores that my pushes have generated wagons but then town doesn't flip who i want them to)
SS is basically the Mala case and isn't even strong on it (which says town to me).
RB is trying to white knight right now, which should say something about my alignment no matter which alignment you think he is.
Laamess basically doesn't care.

Whoop-de-doo on that case on me.
Like, seriously, what are you asking people to argue against?
It's empty and dumb.
Open your eyes, vote RB, or I'll accept a Leo or Mala wagon as a salve.

[Thor665]

It actually boggles my mind you're asking for a defense to be offered on emptiness.
I'm sure you'll have a wall to explain how the case isn't empty - allow me to head you off; you're blatantly and objectively wrong.

[Thor665]

I will say I really don't like the look of Thor's two posts above. He doesn't seem to be responding to the threat of being lynched the same way that he was in my first game with him.

This is not valid analysis. You might as well be saying you want to lynch me for having red in my avatar - at least that would be something we could factually talk about.

@Thor yeah bud, no town points for that hypersimplification and misrep. I am down to lynch Mala if not you if you can get a wagon going there.

This is ridiculous - you are not actually addressing the valididty of my statement that the case on me is empty, and are then challenging me to defend myself by making a wagon for you to justify you moving off a wagon you can't defend. If you are town this is lazy and blind. If you are scum this is fine play.

[Thor665]

Thor665 (L-1): rb, Nako, Malakitty, Creature, Auro
Malakitty (L-5): Lamees
rb (L-5): Thor665

Not Voting: Leodanny, DarkLightA, Something_Smart,Egix96

So, clearly the core issue with the game is that almost half the players aren't voting.
I personally am town reading three of those lurksacks, so that's kind of sad - and for some reason people don't want to lynch Leodanny because...?

Let's do this just to shake things up and make fun of Auro;

VOTE: Malakitty

Hey, Auro, I've now created the SECOND LARGEST WAGON IN THE GAME! JOIN US!
Whoop-de-doo.

My wagon remains empty and fast - I've never seen one of those flip well.
All of you may continue to lie to yourselves and claim there's a justification for the "Case" on me. You are wrong on both counts, and hopefully after this game (though a few of you are too long in th etooth for me to hold out much hope) you'll learn to spot an empty as hell wagon.
Creature is my only objective town read on my wagon - not much of a shock. His case remains a joke.

Proceed.

[Thor665]

I'm not saying I have a brilliant, solid amazeballs case on you, but whatever I do have is pretty much enough

That's a subjective value call - but you have presented me saying "good" and claimed I was trying to direct a cop investigation (which also requires me to be the GF, so...it's a stretch on the "directing" and *also* a stretch on my role). And then you think me disagreeing with literally what Creature claimed his case was, while not digging deeper into his thoughts is just "scummy".

If you honestly think this is good enough (unless your goal is just to justify your vote moves) I am very sad with the quality of your play.

Creature was saying the possibility of scum!you fit with the NK, and gave other reasons.

Describe these theoretical other reasons.
Using a quote.
I'll wait

I think you're scummy not just for the weird "Oh I wouldn't dictate, not my scumplay" defense and the copping encouragement, but also your continuous shade towards me. The only other person who actually read it thinks you're prolly scum if it's not a TvT.

First off - me tossing shade at your play is a claim i could make of you towards me, or frankly half the playerbase towards me. Shade is also called "offering an opinion" it's not a valid scumtell unless you can suggest it's full of lies or specifically describe the angle.
Secondly, you just suggested your case was valid because someone thinks I'm scum or town...isn't this a giant warning to you about the validity of the thought? (incidentally, this might be shade throwing again)
Thirdly, I agree that most players haven't read my posts - that this doesn't worry you in light of the flash wagon on me well...*shade*

You just keep calling everything empty.

I will, and after I flip, if you're town, how will you disagree with me then?
You need to be able to say why things aren't empty - I'm saying why they are.
A blind man should be able to see the case is empty - are you more blind than blind?

[Thor665]

Creature never said you dictated it.

He said Persivul was on to you, which you responded with something like "You think I was under that much pressure so as to dictate the NK?" and

he responded saying you would dictate

, which you combated saying it wasn't your scumplay.

And yeah, good enough comparatively. I was on to RB's inconsistency earlier, but it does make sense that HE could make those inconsistencies as town, and I was simply using a wrong baseline to make a judgment. I recall asking you to make a case on what else was scummy about him, but you didn't.

Until this phase when I started pushing him after new flip information as opposed to yesterday?
Yeah, you're right.
How is that scummy for me exactly?

Also, the information gained by your scumflip is gonna be useful, as I pointed out. Clears both RB and Mala, and I'll go after Something_Smart next.

Any scumflip is useful - welcome to empty example #524

"Shade" here is your continuous hounding of me calling everything I do empty, and having me post extensively to prove it isn't -- which I doubt was even necessary. I've been asking people to read, I do want them to get involved as much as you do -- but your wagon having grown fast in this context isn't the same as usual, could simply imply you're being bussed, and/or have buddies within the no-vote slots. I'll make a note here to analyze this further when I'm actually free. I'll also note that I didn't like a couple of votes on your wagon, especially Nako's.

How dare you ask me to back up things I say!
I've been asking other people to back up things, just like you!
The wagon building on you fast means your buddies must be bussing you!
I agree some of the votes are scummy even as I keep supporting the wagon and arguing with you that the votes aren't empty even as I claim some votes are scummy!

"Insert shade here"

If you're town, I have no idea what you were aiming for, and your being town doesn't mean I can't disagree. I still *will* disagree on that, and sure, we can argue ad infinitum post-game. The case isn't empty.

The case is empty - you're basically describing an empty case.
Oooh, there might be a GF so Thor saying goood directs an investigation to him who therefore must be the GF - solid case.
Oooh, people are voting Thor in a scummy manner - must be bussing, shouldn't vote them doing that *even though that is blatantly more scummy than anything I can describe Thor doing*
Oooh, Thor's reads changed as more info became available - that's not how to play town.
Why is Thor questioning the brilliance of my play?

Seriously dude, what the hell?

[Thor665]

shouldn't you be voting auro at this point

What do you think the scum case on him is other than poor ability to read the game and understand what constitutes a good lynch?
I'm not a fan of the slot, but I'm not as convinced it's scum as your sidelining and non-scumhunting butt.
Want to try to empty push lynches and fights with snide remarks while not actually offering insight on anything?

I am boggled that people think I'm scum and you're town. i mean, I am pretty sure at least one of them is your buddy (or two are scum and you're town, which could happen, though I'd be sad) but c'mon - don't pretend to ignore blatant reality.

[Thor665]

my issue here is that i don't want to lynch the people you want to lynch, which is me/mala it seems? i'm town, mala is my 2nd best townread (after creature who if he's scum he just won at this stage) and i'm having a real hard time with 3 lower activity slots.

I've been claiming Creature is town for some time, so I don't get your point there?
Your townread on Mala is based on empty air - feel free to describe it.
I offered up Leo also if you want to lynch an inactive (while ignoring that Mala is an inactive - frankly my preferred lynch pool is 66% low output posters, so...)

Yeah, on further thought Thor getting to lynch range with NO significant counterwagon with all scum alive implies pretty much his wagon was scum-motivated. Although I still think Thor has good scum equity, I'm not gonna vote there today.

Wow, you noticed the blatantly obvious - while complaining that I had issues with you not noting the blatantly obvious.

@Thor, you locked on to RB being scum post flip. But isn't his Dunn push only mostly scum indicative if Mala's scum? What scum motive would he have otherwise? Also, you were scumreading Dunnstral as well, so FYPOV Dunn would have been a good vote.
If you agree with me on the first question, why weren't you pushing Mala over RB?
Also, speaking about Dunn, you scumread him for similar reasons IIRC and he flipped town. Why isn't this simply RB's playstyle?

Good work taking an RVS scumread, ignoring that late Day 1 I was trying to wagon build with him, and then complaining that I don't have a leg to stand on in calling a bad wagon bad. ::shrug::

It might be rb's playstyle, in fact I'm pretty sure I've lynched him before when both of us were town. That said - it is also a pro-scum playstyle, and since a lot of the other optimal competition are town reads I have that have nothing to do with a specific blindness toward's rb's playstyle, after the lynch he became a far more viable option.

Any scumflip is useful - welcome to empty example #524

Eh, compared to Leodanny - that slot's basically a gamble (which should flip town more likely), and a scumflip there gives us nothing. I'd rather that a PoE lunch at this point, I guess.

Describe what info you would get from a scumflip from, let's say Mala, that you wouldn't get from a scum flip from Leo.
Then town flip each of them.
Then compare/contrast the wealth of info vs. the dearth.
I don't think you'll find much of a difference.

Explain to me how reading you based on simple meta is not valid analysis?

Well, for starters, you didn't explain the meta - you just claimed i'd play different for...some reason?
Non explained meta suggests that either it is made up, or poorly conceived.

In Newb 1893, at the start of that game's LyLo phase, you openly recognised that you had a chance of being lynched even though you knew it would lose you the game.

Here, we're still two more mislynches away from LyLo but you're quick to say that the cases on you are "dumb" as you put it. Doesn't sit right with me.

I agree that in these two different situations I reacted to them.
How is being aware I'd potentially be lynched in LyLo different than suggesting the case on me is dumb?
I don't get how that's different play from different alignments.

Everyone should sheep me. This "madness" is because of too many lurkers. Now is the right time to policy lynch. Either there is lurker scum, forcing town to eat eachother alive or there is lurker town and we are outnumbered anyways. Also the slot I'm on is obv scum. So feel free to sheep whenever.

Hint: Mala is a lurker. (incidentally, so are you, so...)

[Thor665]

I think Lamees is correct lynch tomorrow if we mislynch today. Apart from that I need to read more and come back later sorry

If we massclaim that potentially makes sense, otherwise I don't see your logic.

[Thor665]

You're saying the above two didn't imply more than an "RVS" scumread?

You're unironically claiming that a post made at 115 and confirmed at 212 (mostly to make fun of your inferal work) isn't?
I mean, I might suggest that's pretty early in the game where you're drawing 100% of your evidence from to support my really wild claim here.
Just saying.

Okay.
Scumflip Mala -> Clears {Thor/Lamees}, Scum in {S_S/Egix/RB}, very probably RB.
Scumflip Leo -> Clears Thor, doesn't point to scum. Meh

Why would a Mala scumflip clear me or Lamees? Leo I could see for me, sure, but I pointedly ignored Mala until my neck was on the block, and Lamees is doing what there?
Why does Mala scum narrow the scumpool to S_S/Egix? I see your rb thought (though will explain why I doubt that's valid in a moment) but the other two?
Why doesn't a Leo scumflip offer a thought on rb and Lamees - the only two semi-valid pushes he's made?
Why doesn't a Leo scumflip suggest potential scum in people who've defended the wagon?

However, you've not answered the earlier - what's the scum motivation in trying to start a Dunn wagon so close to the deadline instead of letting the Mala lynch go through, unless he's scum *with* Mala? That's far from optimal move in that situation I think.

Please show me the point you think this switch happened? I don't think it's remotely as potent as you're suggesting.

As to why without them being buddies? Well, simple possibility - both Dunn/Mala are town and rb is scum, in which case he could be white knighting, could be hoping to be off the wagon when Mala gets flipped, or could legit just not care and been fine if either Mala had gone through in which case he could push Dunn the next phase, or been happy to have Dunn go through in which case he could still have the Mala mislynch on the table.

I don't think these are shocking or unlikely scum plays, I assuredly do them, and have seen them a lot. You haven't?

[Thor665]

I note that the entirety of your rebuttal to every point I made can generally be summed up as 'well, yeah, but here's why I'm not choosing to think that even though I admit it's a valid alternate view'
At which point I don't get why you're walling at me still - you know I'm being valid on all these points, and I'm way not as excited as you to try to theoretically be 'right'.
I already know I am

[Thor665]

I don't think there's much point in me asking if you're like that too (you'd only say you're not )

Well, if you want to claim it's meta - you could probably *easily* research the question and come back with info on it since I'm pretty sure I have more than one town game for you to use as the entire basis of your meta case on me.
I'm also willing to bet the case on me in that other game was vastly superior to the one here...like, seriously, you just admitted your meta was one other game - why *wouldn't* I react negatively to that?

[Thor665]

UNVOTE:

nah he's scummy let's not. hm.

I'll bite.
Why am I scummy?

[Thor665]

UNVOTE:

nah he's scummy let's not. hm.

I'll bite.
Why am I scummy?

You’re spending most of your time outlogicking people instead of convincing them to vote the person you are voting.

I'm spending most of my time outlogicking people that are calling me scummy - I can't get them to sheep me until I defeat their initial bad premise.
Also, I'v espent a *lot* of time arguing for my scumreads -do you need post numbers? How do you justify claiming it as not spending time trying to get them lynched. Frankly half of my "outlogics" are about me explaining my case while people call my case scummy.
Back up this empty accusation please and thank you.

btw im feeling alive now

still want a thor flip

I bet you do.
How's that "case" thing going?
Y'know, the one you don't have?

[Thor665]

Wow, lazy much? Not even trying to defend your premise? Okay, here we go...

Just from today;

1182
1196
1352
1391
1395
1400
1436
1501
1508
1562
1570
1609
1614

Also, looking at my last phase's posts makes me realize your claim only has a hint of defendability if you only pay attention to the last 7 days (and, at that, basically only pay attention to the walls with Auro - which Auro is initiating...) so, what the hell is up with your empty ass case?

[Thor665]

Thor's analysis on himself was right, I don't get his whole rb attack (?), but that's on par for Thor-town.

Can you explain why you thought it enough to vote me over?
Even with you claiming to have only read back a few days the claim is paper thin at best to vote on.

Also;

v/la till Sunday 13th - I'mma go to Disneyworld

Sorry, kinda expected night phase to eat more of that.

[Thor665]

@rb - why is succinct a bigger issue as a lurker considering that yesterday he at least had a vote in play while BBMolla nd Something who were both there and active opted to sideline themselves?

[Thor665]

Especially considering BB entered today saying I was a valid vote option - thinking about it, that's a strange position if he wasn't willing to deadline vote me yesterday.