Micro 887: the coaLITion [game over]

[Alchemist21]

@NC What are your reads looking like right now?

[EspressoPatronum]

Spoiler:

I'd vote Alchemist

Why are you considering voting outside the coalition?

I think limiting the lynch pool solely to those who were in the failed coalition is more likely to lead to a town loss.

We're not doing it the whole game, just starting there day 1.

LUV was the first one to suggest, that limiting lynches to just inside coalition was antitown but no one so far, has explained why.

Espresso agreed but just not on D1. So, if we vote inside coalition today and if we don’t get a scumflip, why is this different after that? @Espresso, your take on that confuses me.

@NC that's Gamma's quote, not mine

@NC this is my stance:

I think limiting the lynch pool solely to those who were in the failed coalition is more likely to lead to a town loss.

I think you're right in the long term, but I see no reason why voting outside of it now is a good idea.

Imo, we should probably vote within the coalition until we hit a scum bcz we're certain at least one is in there + our chances of hitting one increase each time we're wrong.

[NC 39]

I'd vote Alchemist

Why are you considering voting outside the coalition?

because Alchemist is scummy?

I really wish RC would explain his case, especially because of that. I’ve played 3 games with him. 1 where I correctly tl him, another where he completely fooled everyone and one where he was imo, blatantly scummy.

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=80240&user_select%5B%5D=24636

While it’s definitely possible I may be biased since we were buddies in that, I still think he’s playing differently here, especially his later posts.

[NC 39]

First link was from scum!Alchemist in PFUPs. I was in Avengers hydra.

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=79422&user_select%5B%5D=24636

Scum!Alchemist from Starcraft 2. I was one of the Powerpuff girls.

viewtopic.php?f=56&t=77824&user_select%5B%5D=24636

Town!Alchemist in Overkill 2.

[NC 39]

I was in DVa.

[NC 39]

@Great: explain your hectic and NC scumreads please, and why you think there's exactly 1 scum in there

typo. my real lynchpool is hectic/expresso/alchemist21

[NC 39]

sky give extension

-nsg

This plz
The short deadline kinda makes forming a decent coalition hard. Even if we just get an extended D1 deadline I'll be happy

The bitching about the deadline is annoying. The coalition is not isn’t the be all end all. I’d be pissed as scum right now if Sky granted this.

@Espresso:

Outside of the coalition, I would lynch LUV>Great

torn about LUV though, like the quote above, how likely is Sky to extend the day if scum are so openly against it in the thread like this?

but then i don't like LUV's pop ins this game and i dislike his buddying of RCMA so i'm not sure

LUV was inside the coalition, so why then Alchemist > GREAT?

Why aren’t you voting LUV or GREAT then?

[NC 39]

NC-LUV

- NC clearly didn't understand the purpose of voting within the coalition

, so it's possible they would try to put both scum in the coalition + try convincing people to vote outside of it.

I think you’ve completely misunderstood what I did and didn’t understand about the mechanics of this game. As I have already explained, the ONLY thing I was confused about, was the

timing

of the finalizing of the lynch part of it.

I played this game before as well as GS, so I totally do understand how coalitions work but we won D1 (or so I thought) in Skitter’s game, so the lynch part of that, never came into play and in GS, we voted coalitions and lynches on SEPARATE days, not

simultaneously

.

So, what I had understood, was that any lynch would obviously be voided in case of coalition pass but I thought, we had to have decided on it, BEFORE we knew the outcome of the coalition and then we were suddenly expected to rush the vote, before we had any real info to process - coalition result . Thank God, Sky granted us an extension.

I hope you are now clear on this?

Thank you for the clarification. This is the post I was referring to btw:

Assuming we pass a coalition and it fails, nobody should be voting to lynch outside of the 5 coalition members.

Why not? IF coalition fails - unless you think there’s two scum in it - unlikely. So, for today and today only, IF we lynch, it makes the most sense to lynch amongst the two scummiest players NOT in coalition. It was definitely GREAT for me, until Hectic decided to sub himself for Gamma pretty much immediately after voting the coalition.

I see how the timing misunderstanding coloured your interpretation of who we should be voting for. While that's good to kniw, I'm not sure if it changes my pairings observation.

Scum operating under your assumption above would likely want two scum in the coalition if they thought town would be voting outside of the coalition. In the case at hand, you advocated to remove LUV from the coalition once you learned about the timing. It was probably nothing, but it's why I think an NC-LUV pairing is possible while all the other in-coalition pairings seem unlikely.

I actually expected a no lynch in the event of a coalition fail. Do you need me to repost the VCAs to debunk this?

[Alchemist21]

First link was from scum!Alchemist in PFUPs. I was in Avengers hydra.

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=79422&user_select%5B%5D=24636

Scum!Alchemist from Starcraft 2. I was one of the Powerpuff girls.

viewtopic.php?f=56&t=77824&user_select%5B%5D=24636

Town!Alchemist in Overkill 2.

You linked the wrong Starcraft game. I was Town in the one you linked.

THIS is the Starcraft game where I was scum: viewtopic.php?f=3&t=78296

[NC 39]

VC 1.17 Mod note: The coalition of [ EspressoPatronum, Gamma Emerald, Lil Uzi Vert, NC 39, RC most awesomest ] has failed! Hectic (2): YOUAREGREAT, Spangled Lil Uzi Vert (2): Gamma Emerald, EspressoPatronum Spangled (1): RC most awesomest Alchemist21 (1): Hectic EspressoPatronum (1): Lil Uzi Vert Not Voting (2): Alchemist21, NC 39 With 9 players alive, it takes 5 to reach a majority. Day one ends in (expired on 2019-09-12 18:00:00).

@Espresso, what do you see in here, that would lend you to think I expected a lynch to even happen? We need a majority of 5 players voting for one. That clearly wasn’t happening. I was also trying to get Alchemist back in the coalition and LUV out. I was far more confident in coalition succeeding with Alchemist > LUV.

[NC 39]

HURT: ALL
HEAL: Hectic, NC 39, Espresso, LUV, RCMA
will sub myself out for Gamma if required

What are you doing? Why not Alchemist or Spangled?

@Espresso

[NC 39]

I'd vote Alchemist

Why are you considering voting outside the coalition?

I think limiting the lynch pool solely to those who were in the failed coalition is more likely to lead to a town loss.

We're not doing it the whole game, just starting there day 1.

LUV was the first one to suggest, that limiting lynches to just inside coalition was antitown but no one so far, has explained why.

Espresso agreed but just not on D1. So, if we vote inside coalition today and if we don’t get a scumflip, why is this different after that? @Espresso, your take on that confuses me.

@NC that's Gamma's quote, not mine

I think limiting the lynch pool solely to those who were in the failed coalition is more likely to lead to a town loss.

I think you're right in the long term, but I see no reason why voting outside of it now is a good idea.

[NC 39]

@NC What are your reads looking like right now?

I’m getting concerned that Espresso continues to misinterpret my posts. I initially thought that I hadn’t explained things clearly enough but now that I have, I’m getting annoyed with his what is looking like to me, a mischaracterizing of my posts about that. I still think he’s not getting it but I don’t know how much clearer he needs me to be. I explained very clearly that I fully understand how the coalition mechanics work and he keeps insisting I don’t. I’m now getting a but paranoid that LUV may be town, because of that. I don’t understand why he keeps ignoring what I’ve said about both Skitter’s game and GS.

My misunderstanding of the timing of the deciding of the lynch doesn’t cancel that out.

[EspressoPatronum]

Spoiler:

I'd vote Alchemist

Why are you considering voting outside the coalition?

I think limiting the lynch pool solely to those who were in the failed coalition is more likely to lead to a town loss.

We're not doing it the whole game, just starting there day 1.

LUV was the first one to suggest, that limiting lynches to just inside coalition was antitown but no one so far, has explained why.

Espresso agreed but just not on D1. So, if we vote inside coalition today and if we don’t get a scumflip, why is this different after that? @Espresso, your take on that confuses me.

@NC that's Gamma's quote, not mine

I think limiting the lynch pool solely to those who were in the failed coalition is more likely to lead to a town loss.

I think you're right in the long term, but I see no reason why voting outside of it now is a good idea.

See post 851 for my reply to this.

What's your stance on how long we should vote within the coalition?

[EspressoPatronum]

@NC What are your reads looking like right now?

I’m getting concerned that Espresso continues to misinterpret my posts. I initially thought that I hadn’t explained things clearly enough but now that I have, I’m getting annoyed with his what is looking like to me, a mischaracterizing of my posts about that. I still think he’s not getting it but I don’t know how much clearer he needs me to be. I explained very clearly that I fully understand how the coalition mechanics work and he keeps insisting I don’t. I’m now getting a but paranoid that LUV may be town, because of that. I don’t understand why he keeps ignoring what I’ve said about both Skitter’s game and GS.

My misunderstanding of the timing of the deciding of the lynch doesn’t cancel that out.

I think you're reading into my pairings post a little too deeply. It's not a scumcase.

If you read the beginning of the post, you'll see that I posted it to get discussion flowing on possible pairings. Aubrey and A50 did this in nsg's game. While they ultimately won with the coalition, I think their discussion of pairings may have been helpful if the game continued. I wanted to do the same in this game.

I'm not saying you're scum (as I still tr you), but I'm saying that IF you were scum, LUV is a potential partner. If LUV is town, you're even more likely to be town imo (note - I have said all of this in my past posts). I even considered adding myself and possible pairings, but I decided against it because it wouldn't be very genuine.

What result are you trying to achieve by citing the VCAs and your stance on Alchemist?

[EspressoPatronum]

For ease of reference, at post 777, I said:

I'm going to start our pairings discussion. It's not super important to complete it until after we figure out the lynch, but I want it out there to get people thinking about it.

It's woefully incomplete rn, but it's a first step. [Snipped the list of pairings]

[NC 39]

Spoiler:

And NOW we have a problem.

3 people outside of the Coalition voting for it is a red flag.

HURT: Gamma

HEAL: Alchemist21

Who’s the 3rd?

Spangled

Spangled has GREAT in his. It isn't the same.

Okay, that’s a relief then. I think this is probably a winning coalition then. And you were the only one outside the coalition voting it, so I think it plus you is probably alltown. If we do add you, I would probably sub out LUV over Gamma, since I’m liking his recent posting.

This unfortunately comes after me establishing that we should vote within the coalition.

While I still believe you're town, I think I'd rather keep it {RCMA, LUV, Gamma, Espresso, NC} in the event that scum!NC tries to get 2 scum out of the coalition.

@NC

Yeah, I worded that poorly.

I was trying to say scum!NC wouldn't want 2 scum in the coalition and with want to take one out.

i'll be honest, i don't really have much clue what's going on this game

but Espresso, why is it favourable for scum!NC to get 2 scum in the coaliton, don't scum want exactly one in there since we're inclined to lynch from the coalition since we now know there's at least 1 scum in there?

That's exactly what I'm saying. Scum don't want 2 in.

If scum!NC and scum!LUV, NC would want to remove LUV in favour of someone else.

1-1 is the best outcome for scum.

I'm going to start our pairings discussion. It's not super important to complete it until after we figure out the lynch, but I want it out there to get people thinking about it.

It's woefully incomplete rn, but it's a first step.

Possible Pairings

Gamma-Hectic

- I don't recall either of them having each other in the coalitions. Hectic's might have had Gamma for a while, but I think it was brief.

Gamma-Spangled

- pretty sure Spangled started pushing Gamma into the coalition after we removed Spangled. Spangled's vote on Gamma could be a scum gambit.

NC-LUV

- NC clearly didn't understand the purpose of voting within the coalition, so it's possible they would try to put both scum in the coalition + try convincing people to vote outside of it.

There are a few others, but I can't remember them off the top of my head. Imo, it's a red flag if someone in the core coalition (me, RCMA, NC, Hectic for most of the day, and Spangled for a little while) vetoed anyone else bcz a scum in the coalition would want to avoid having another scum in the coalition.

Unlikely Pairings:
(In progress, but it's pretty much all of the in-coalition pairs)

Impossible pairings

(>=50% chance of 1 or more being town)
Alchemist-Hectic
Alchemist-GREAT
Alchemist-Spangled
Hectic-GREAT
Hectic-Spangled
Spangled-GREAT

NC-LUV

- NC clearly didn't understand the purpose of voting within the coalition

, so it's possible they would try to put both scum in the coalition + try convincing people to vote outside of it.

I think you’ve completely misunderstood what I did and didn’t understand about the mechanics of this game. As I have already explained, the ONLY thing I was confused about, was the

timing

of the finalizing of the lynch part of it.

I played this game before as well as GS, so I totally do understand how coalitions work but we won D1 (or so I thought) in Skitter’s game, so the lynch part of that, never came into play and in GS, we voted coalitions and lynches on SEPARATE days, not

simultaneously

.

So, what I had understood, was that any lynch would obviously be voided in case of coalition pass but I thought, we had to have decided on it, BEFORE we knew the outcome of the coalition and then we were suddenly expected to rush the vote, before we had any real info to process - coalition result . Thank God, Sky granted us an extension.

I hope you are now clear on this?

Thank you for the clarification. This is the post I was referring to btw:

Assuming we pass a coalition and it fails, nobody should be voting to lynch outside of the 5 coalition members.

Why not? IF coalition fails - unless you think there’s two scum in it - unlikely. So, for today and today only, IF we lynch, it makes the most sense to lynch amongst the two scummiest players NOT in coalition. It was definitely GREAT for me, until Hectic decided to sub himself for Gamma pretty much immediately after voting the coalition.

I see how the timing misunderstanding coloured your interpretation of who we should be voting for. While that's good to kniw, I'm not sure if it changes my pairings observation.

Scum operating under your assumption above would likely want two scum in the coalition if they thought town would be voting outside of the coalition. In the case at hand, you advocated to remove LUV from the coalition once you learned about the timing. It was probably nothing, but it's why I think an NC-LUV pairing is possible while all the other in-coalition pairings seem unlikely.

So which is it @Espresso? Before coalition result, you link LUV/Me because scum!me wouldn’t want 2 scum in the coalition and afterwards, you do a complete 180 on this and say, scum!me would want that?

I don’t understand why you keep maintaining I don’t understand coalition mechanics? I’ve now played 2 games with that particular mechanic? Why would you think I’d expect a lynch to happen at all in the event of coalition fail,

considering I believed we had to decide this before it passed with no clear majority

?

There is 0 evidence to suggest anything other than a no lynch would happen in case of coalition fail.
Maybe you are the one who isn’t fully understanding the mechanics in this game?

[EspressoPatronum]

I did a quick skim of Alchemist's town SC game, town Overkill game, and the scum SC game and I honestly can't tell the difference between them.

If I had to pick something, he seemed a bit more proactive in the scum SC game compared to the others, but not by much.

[NC 39]

First link was from scum!Alchemist in PFUPs. I was in Avengers hydra.

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=79422&user_select%5B%5D=24636

Scum!Alchemist from Starcraft 2. I was one of the Powerpuff girls.

viewtopic.php?f=56&t=77824&user_select%5B%5D=24636

Town!Alchemist in Overkill 2.

You linked the wrong Starcraft game. I was Town in the one you linked.

THIS is the Starcraft game where I was scum: viewtopic.php?f=3&t=78296

Oh sorry about that. It was 2, you were scum in, with Pint and jj not Volxen/Wisdom/Cerb.

[NC 39]

Spoiler:

I'd vote Alchemist

Why are you considering voting outside the coalition?

I think limiting the lynch pool solely to those who were in the failed coalition is more likely to lead to a town loss.

We're not doing it the whole game, just starting there day 1.

LUV was the first one to suggest, that limiting lynches to just inside coalition was antitown but no one so far, has explained why.

Espresso agreed but just not on D1. So, if we vote inside coalition today and if we don’t get a scumflip, why is this different after that? @Espresso, your take on that confuses me.

@NC that's Gamma's quote, not mine

I think limiting the lynch pool solely to those who were in the failed coalition is more likely to lead to a town loss.

I think you're right in the long term, but I see no reason why voting outside of it now is a good idea.

See post 851 for my reply to this.

What's your stance on how long we should vote within the coalition?

Until either we find scum or someone outside does something so blatantly scummy, we would be fools to ignore it. RC is a really good player and would really like to see his reasoning on why we shouldn’t do that. LUV’s as well.

@GREAT, do you have an opinion on this?

I’m sorry Espresso but need you to clarify why your stances on both why you think both my misunderstanding the timing of the lynch mechanic = my misunderstanding coalition mechanic and why anyone would logically assume - based on my misunderstanding of that - anything other than a no lynch would happen in case of coalition fail - given the fact that

there was no clear majority lynch at the time that coalition passed

. Can you please answer my question?

[EspressoPatronum]

Spoiler:

And NOW we have a problem.

3 people outside of the Coalition voting for it is a red flag.

HURT: Gamma

HEAL: Alchemist21

Who’s the 3rd?

Spangled

Spangled has GREAT in his. It isn't the same.

Okay, that’s a relief then. I think this is probably a winning coalition then. And you were the only one outside the coalition voting it, so I think it plus you is probably alltown. If we do add you, I would probably sub out LUV over Gamma, since I’m liking his recent posting.

This unfortunately comes after me establishing that we should vote within the coalition.

While I still believe you're town, I think I'd rather keep it {RCMA, LUV, Gamma, Espresso, NC} in the event that scum!NC tries to get 2 scum out of the coalition.

@NC

Yeah, I worded that poorly.

I was trying to say scum!NC wouldn't want 2 scum in the coalition and with want to take one out.

i'll be honest, i don't really have much clue what's going on this game

but Espresso, why is it favourable for scum!NC to get 2 scum in the coaliton, don't scum want exactly one in there since we're inclined to lynch from the coalition since we now know there's at least 1 scum in there?

That's exactly what I'm saying. Scum don't want 2 in.

If scum!NC and scum!LUV, NC would want to remove LUV in favour of someone else.

1-1 is the best outcome for scum.

I'm going to start our pairings discussion. It's not super important to complete it until after we figure out the lynch, but I want it out there to get people thinking about it.

It's woefully incomplete rn, but it's a first step.

Possible Pairings

Gamma-Hectic

- I don't recall either of them having each other in the coalitions. Hectic's might have had Gamma for a while, but I think it was brief.

Gamma-Spangled

- pretty sure Spangled started pushing Gamma into the coalition after we removed Spangled. Spangled's vote on Gamma could be a scum gambit.

NC-LUV

- NC clearly didn't understand the purpose of voting within the coalition, so it's possible they would try to put both scum in the coalition + try convincing people to vote outside of it.

There are a few others, but I can't remember them off the top of my head. Imo, it's a red flag if someone in the core coalition (me, RCMA, NC, Hectic for most of the day, and Spangled for a little while) vetoed anyone else bcz a scum in the coalition would want to avoid having another scum in the coalition.

Unlikely Pairings:
(In progress, but it's pretty much all of the in-coalition pairs)

Impossible pairings

(>=50% chance of 1 or more being town)
Alchemist-Hectic
Alchemist-GREAT
Alchemist-Spangled
Hectic-GREAT
Hectic-Spangled
Spangled-GREAT

NC-LUV

- NC clearly didn't understand the purpose of voting within the coalition

, so it's possible they would try to put both scum in the coalition + try convincing people to vote outside of it.

I think you’ve completely misunderstood what I did and didn’t understand about the mechanics of this game. As I have already explained, the ONLY thing I was confused about, was the

timing

of the finalizing of the lynch part of it.

I played this game before as well as GS, so I totally do understand how coalitions work but we won D1 (or so I thought) in Skitter’s game, so the lynch part of that, never came into play and in GS, we voted coalitions and lynches on SEPARATE days, not

simultaneously

.

So, what I had understood, was that any lynch would obviously be voided in case of coalition pass but I thought, we had to have decided on it, BEFORE we knew the outcome of the coalition and then we were suddenly expected to rush the vote, before we had any real info to process - coalition result . Thank God, Sky granted us an extension.

I hope you are now clear on this?

Thank you for the clarification. This is the post I was referring to btw:

Assuming we pass a coalition and it fails, nobody should be voting to lynch outside of the 5 coalition members.

Why not? IF coalition fails - unless you think there’s two scum in it - unlikely. So, for today and today only, IF we lynch, it makes the most sense to lynch amongst the two scummiest players NOT in coalition. It was definitely GREAT for me, until Hectic decided to sub himself for Gamma pretty much immediately after voting the coalition.

I see how the timing misunderstanding coloured your interpretation of who we should be voting for. While that's good to kniw, I'm not sure if it changes my pairings observation.

Scum operating under your assumption above would likely want two scum in the coalition if they thought town would be voting outside of the coalition. In the case at hand, you advocated to remove LUV from the coalition once you learned about the timing. It was probably nothing, but it's why I think an NC-LUV pairing is possible while all the other in-coalition pairings seem unlikely.

Maybe you are the one who isn’t fully understanding the mechanics in this game? [/quote]
Honestly, maybe you're right. I feel like what I'm saying isn't very contentious, but it evidently is. Hopefully I can work this out in this reply to you.

If that doesn't work and I'm still misunderstanding your posts, can you help me out by stating, as succinctly as possible, comments the following:
- what is the purpose of EP's pairings post?
- where, specifically, is the point of contention between NC and EP?

So which is it @Espresso? Before coalition result, you link LUV/Me because scum!me wouldn’t want 2 scum in the coalition and afterwards, you do a complete 180 on this and say, scum!me would want that?

Ok let's take you and me out of the equation here. I'm going to use A, B, C instead. If I unfairly impose an assumption on A/B/C, don't apply it to you. I'm just working within this micro example here:
1. A and B are partners.
2. A thinks that voting outside of the coalition is town's likely avenue.
3. A therefore wants B in the coalition

4. C says something that disproves what A thought at step 2.
5. A now thinks that town's likely avenue is to vote within the coalition
6. A therefore wants B out of the coalition now.

In this example, A's sudden want to remove B from the coalition is suggests to C that A and B may be paired together.

Bringing it back to the case at hand, your recent posts have demonstrated that the actual events are far more nuanced than my example.

Assuming for a moment that the statements in the example are all true (which you have demonstrated they aren't, but work with me here), and that A=you, B=LUV, and C=EP, does it seem reasonable for me to conclude that you and LUV may be connected?

I don’t understand why you keep maintaining I don’t understand coalition mechanics? I’ve now played 2 games with that particular mechanic? Why would you think I’d expect a lynch to happen at all in the event of coalition fail,

considering I believed we had to decide this before it passed with no clear majority

?

I was perhaps being too general here + we may be talking past each other.

I don't think you don't understand all of the coalition mechanics. The specific mechanic I was referring to was setting up a vote before the coalition and why we should do that.

You understood it a different way because you've played games in this mode before. Totally understandable. I wasn't trying to attack your competency... my point of highlighting the misunderstanding was me jumping to the conclusion j of the ABC example (above) without explaining the specifics.

There is 0 evidence to suggest anything other than a no lynch would happen in case of coalition fail. [...]

On my reading, I assumed we would go right into the lynching phase of D1. Given our limited amount of time, I tried to complete the coalition and get ready for lynching. My posts in my ISO will support this.

[EspressoPatronum]

As a note - I always post on my phone. Please ignore small typos, formatting errors, etc.

[NC 39]

@NC What are your reads looking like right now?

I’m getting concerned that Espresso continues to misinterpret my posts. I initially thought that I hadn’t explained things clearly enough but now that I have, I’m getting annoyed with his what is looking like to me, a mischaracterizing of my posts about that. I still think he’s not getting it but I don’t know how much clearer he needs me to be. I explained very clearly that I fully understand how the coalition mechanics work and he keeps insisting I don’t. I’m now getting a but paranoid that LUV may be town, because of that. I don’t understand why he keeps ignoring what I’ve said about both Skitter’s game and GS.

My misunderstanding of the timing of the deciding of the lynch doesn’t cancel that out.

I think you're reading into my pairings post a little too deeply. It's not a scumcase.

If you read the beginning of the post, you'll see that I posted it to get discussion flowing on possible pairings. Aubrey and A50 did this in nsg's game. While they ultimately won with the coalition, I think their discussion of pairings may have been helpful if the game continued. I wanted to do the same in this game.

I'm not saying you're scum (as I still tr you), but I'm saying that IF you were scum, LUV is a potential partner. If LUV is town, you're even more likely to be town imo (note - I have said all of this in my past posts). I even considered adding myself and possible pairings, but I decided against it because it wouldn't be very genuine.

What result are you trying to achieve by citing the VCAs and your stance on Alchemist?

I obviously don’t want to mislynch. I understand you’re not scumcasing me but prior to coalition, your linking me with LUV was based on my not wanting him in coalition and now it’s the opposite, hence my confusion.

I posted the VCA because you suggested that scum!me, due to misunderstanding coalition would be somehow influenced by that but at the time, there was no clear majority. So, I just don’t understand why you mentioned that. If there’s no clear majority at the time of the coalition passing, then how could scum be influenced by that at all? That just made 0 sense to me.

You also posted non-coalition pairings as being less than 0 or something but I don’t know why you’d even bother with that, since we know now with 100% certainty that one scum is in failed coalition, so isn’t kind of redundant to post that?

[NC 39]

For ease of reference, at post 777, I said:

I'm going to start our pairings discussion. It's not super important to complete it until after we figure out the lynch, but I want it out there to get people thinking about it.

It's woefully incomplete rn, but it's a first step. [Snipped the list of pairings]

Is there some reason you have Gamma linked with Spangled but not GREAT and why isn’t LUV linked with either?

Didn’t both Spangled and GREAT have both Gamma and LUV in their final coalitions?

[NC 39]

I did a quick skim of Alchemist's town SC game, town Overkill game, and the scum SC game and I honestly can't tell the difference between them.

If I had to pick something, he seemed a bit more proactive in the scum SC game compared to the others, but not by much.

So, how are you reading him here by comparison?