Open 86 - Lovers Multiball (Game Over)

[cerebus3]

I

really

need to reread this game. For now I will just respond to the case against me. Hopefully I will be able to actually contribute tonight.

OK, my case on Cere & Harvey, who I believe are werewolves:

Cere

(post numbers are from "see all posts by"):

uhhh.. that was the point crazy. You said the whole scum tell thing is bull if she is scum, which implies that you are judging the whole merit of the scum tell based on Adel's alignment and not on the actual scum tell itself, which does not follow you saying that you know what the scum tell is.

Here he misinterperts Crazy for it to sound like the entire tell is based on Adel alignment, rather than what he actually said which was that Adel can't be scum because she knew about the tell that he perceived as secret. He then doubleposts saying that he misread Crazy and unvotes him, then one post later:

I admitted to misinterpreting him, so do not try to say I was strawmanning him. Saying it is one post later is misleading. There was a whole page of posts between those posts between them. He continued to insist that only townies would know what the scum tell is, and also refused to elaborate on it. but when I looked at my townie PM I didn't see anything that only a townie would know. Sure, the PM did not contain a link to the daytalk thread, but I thought that was true for everyone, and it was public knowledge anyway, so I decided there was nothing there that only townies would know, and that he was full of crap.

IcemanE is fitting with my townie read on him I have at the moment. Still tentative though.

I dont think crazy knows what the scum tell is. If there even is one, this game is open, so town have no information the scum don't.

vote: crazy

Basically, defending Iceman for unexplained reaons, which he did on other posts I'll leave out for brevity as well, and attacking Crazy without explaining what changed since the unvote for "misreading" him. In addition, there's the comment that he isn't sure the scumtell exists, which seems like wishy-washiness - he wants to attack Crazy, which was a popular target at the time, and back up Ice, without comitting himself on an opinion on the scumtell one way or the other. Seems odd that he throws out not being sold on the scumtell's existence as sort of an aside, I would think his opinion on Crazy would've changed substentially based on whether or not he thoght there actually was a scumtell for Crazy to pretend to see.

How is IcemanE fitting into my meta of him unexplained? People were voting him and calling him scum, and I said his play reminded me of his play in other games. Charter did this as well, so what do you think of him? Me and Charter can't both be IcemanE's scum buddy.

At that point, I did not think the scum-tell could not exist in the fashion that Crazy was describing, and was inclined to believe that crazy did not know what the scum tell was, and I was not very sure that if a scum tell even existed in the first place. The fact that he did have a scum tell in mind completely derailed this line of thinking.

Or adel is making it up completely, and you are running with it to buddy up to her.

Here he completely ignores that Iceman claimed to know the scumtell as well. If he really thought the scumtell was completely made up, why defend Iceman instead if treating him with the same amount of doubt he treated Crazy with? Then later:

Here, RR seems to think that my argument is tied to IcemanE, which it is not. I never said IcemanE would not be guilty of this as well if the scum-tell turned out to be a sham, but just because I am lazy, can you please show me where IcemanE says that he knows what the scum tell is? I remember him speculating that it would probably have something to do with voting patterns, but I don't think he ever said that he knew for a fact what it is.

Gah, I keep going back and forth on this.

His scum-tell was a flop, but scum-crazy would have really had to pull that out of the nowhere don't you think?

That really depends on whether he saw the notice at the beginning of adding daytalking. If he didn't see it, I just don't know where scum-crazy would even come up with such an idea. It is possible that he saw Adel hint at a scum-tell and came up with this as scum, I guess.

If he did see it, then it becomes a question of whether scum crazy would actually come up with a scum tell that he knew would not work. The fact that he deliberated with farside about the scum tell means that maybe they could come up with it together.

As town, both he AND farside would have to have missed the notice that daytalking was added for everyone late though...

If crazy didn't know about that post, then scum-crazy would have to come up with that out of thin air, and if he did know about the post, then he would have come up with a plan to suggest a crappy scum-tell that he knew would not work in order to confuse people, which his posts do not seem that thought out.

I am confused, but it looks like it points at town crazy.... Am I over thinking this?

Take away the whole scum tell shenanigans, and crazy seems really scummy to me though, Voting for yourself is anti-town, and when confronted with a wagon, what does he do? He declares that he shall lurk on purpose.

Gah....

How many votes are on crazy right now?

This is from when the Crazy wagon was starting to lose steam, after I explained why I don't think he's scum despite his odd behavior and Adel started questioning the Crazy voters. What I see here is cere making a big show of his inner conflicts on Crazy, somewhat echoing parts of what I previously said about him while at it, and then somewhat dismisses them by saying that he is "overthinking" and not moving away his vote. Basically, sets up doubts about Crazy that he can either keep ignoring but mention later after Crazy is lynched if the wagon continues growing, or use to unvote if it doesn't.

Hmm... I think what gives weight to this argument is that I did not unvote. You are claiming that my indecisiveness is me just trying to go with the path of least resistance, which I must grant is a plausible interpretation of my post. All I can say is that I really was unsure of what to do at that point.

Then he votes Firestarter,

I think me and neko are on the same wavelength. I was gonna say that!

unvote, vote: firestarter

Continuing to push a wagon when the wagon is proven false is pretty weird.

Taken out of context there's nothing wrong with this post, but I think he was trying to distance himself from scumbuddy fire due to later posting.

You admit there is nothing scummy in this post, so why do you present it as evidence that I am scum? Yes, it is

possible

I was bussing, but there is no evidence to that in the post itself. This does nothing for your case.

I see where IcemanE is coming from. I mean, what started the firestarter wagon?

Here he responds to Iceman attacking dybeck for voting SSF out of the blue when discussion centered on other people. This post is very odd because:
1. There's a key difference between what Fire and dybeck did, which is that Fire's reasons were complete bullshit, and he didn't remove his vote even after people explained very clearly that his case had nothing to do with reality. This wasn't the case with dybeck, so the way he essentialy says the two did the same casts fire in a better light.

I think it was. Dybeck's vote on SSF was weak reasoning in my book, and looked very similar to what Firestarter tried to do. May I ask you how it was different?

2. It feels like he is trying nudge others to move from Fire to dybeck, while staying on Fire himself. You have to wonder why he doens't move to dybeck or say anything further about him if he truely think he's the scummiest player along with Fire.

What?

a)If I was scum with IcemanE, Why would I keep my vote on my scumbuddy, when I have an equally sound reason to vote someone else? (I know this is going to be dismissed as WIFOM, but at least think about it. Even with wifom involved, it is still bad play for scum in my book)

b) You are overstating what I said. like really badly. Where did I ever say that Dybeck was the scummiest player in the game?

C) Why would I move my vote? Dybeck being scummy does not change the fact that Firestarter was scummy.

3. It's phrased in an extremely confusing way, that made panda understandably think he was dissmissing the Fire wagon completely. He then went on to say panda's suspicion of him is unjustified because he took this post as read.

What part of this point makes me more likely to be scum in any way shape or form?

Then cere disappears for a while, and a wagon forms on Ice. His next substantial post:

I read through, but I don't really have much to say.

I think the firestarter/IcemanE lynch is the right move.

Darla putting IcemanE at L-1 while conversation is still going strong is noted.

I see what erratus is saying about Alabaska.

Anything else I forgot about that people want me to comment on?

This post is really, really scummy. After defending Ice throughout the game, it becomes apparant he's gonna be lynched and suddenly he's "the right move". No explanation on this extereme flip flopping, this is the first negative thing he said about Ice since the start of the game, and there were like 4 instances where he agreed with him. I'd expect quite an exlanation for this big change of heart, cere doesn't provide one. He also keeps his vote on Firestarter, just to make sure he looks like a supporter while not actively contributing to the lynch. Also points fingers at Alabaska and DBE, perhaps so he'll look better when voting them in the future.

Wowzers, what a misrepresentation. IcemanE became the right lynch when he was shown to be Fire's lover. I HAD been on the firestarter wagon for a long time, so this is in no way shape or form a flip flop. I did not move my vote because he was at

L-2

. Also, you are claiming that I am saying I see the point of the Alabaska wagon to remain popular, which is once again not evidence that I am scum, merely an possibility for why something happened. It is also possible that I, you know,

actually agreed with them

.

Then:

@689: Oh noes, someone had a similar stance as scum, he must be scum as well! What about the other 10 people on the crazy wagon?

...
Also, for the record, do you think I am IcemanE's scum buddy or on the other scum team? Because your pointing out my similar stance as IcemanE wants to say I am his buddy, but that doesn't fit with me "doubting the fire wagon" yet keeping my vote there, which would indicate me being on the other scum team. You can't have it both ways.

No it doesn't, it indicates he tried to distance from Fire/Ice by voting Firestarter and passively supporting their lynch, and at the same time tried to make Fire look better without unvoting him and ignored how much he defended Ice in the early game. Also this entire second paraghraph gives me a terrible vibe, something I can't quite put my finger on reeks of scum trying to defend himself to me.

I was thinking from the perspective that passively doubting the lynch was something scum on the other team would do when they expected him to flip town, when you can come up with a good reason to doubt the wagon of your scum buddy, it seems illogical to me to keep bussing, but that is really WIFOM anyway. I can't defend against vibes.

More lately:

Oh, and because I didn't say anything earlier, I am ambivalent towards a mass claim.

Goes for a safe place in the middle.

I did not really care whether we claimed or not

We have not daytalked at all tbh. I said a little about what I expected to see in this game up front, and then we haven't said a word to each other. I have not been really invested in this game, nor does it seem he has. So I can't really tell you why he has done anything. I will leave that for him to answer.

While feasible, this claim is more likely to come from scum since a lack of daytalk is far easier to fake.

I knew someone would say this, but all I can say is that it is the truth. Neither me nor Harvey have been that active in this game

That was much longer than I expected it to be...

I shall return tonight.

[destructor]

.::] Vote Count [::.

*

OpposedForce (3)

- Adel, Crazy, Knight of Cydonia

kloud1516 (2)

- ThAdmiral, Erratus Apathos

Cerebus3 (1)

- SleepyPanda

Crazy (1)

- OpposedForce

somestrangeflea (1)

- charter

pwnz (1)

- Alabaska J

Knight of Cydonia (1)

- pwnz

Harvey Pew (1)

- Raging Rabbit

Not Voting (11) - sekinj, somestrangeflea, Harvey Pew, DarlaBlueEyes, Cephrir, neko2086, cerebus3, armlx, WaltWishbone, wolframnhart, kloud1516

Twelve

votes to lynch.

Note that the

deadline

is one week away.

[neko2086]

During rereads, I noticed that the HP/Cerebus team seemed to offer the most defense for the iceman/fire pair. I keep reading Cerebus’s question about what started the firestarter wagon wrong, though, and I’m thinking RR is doing the same. It doesn’t seem so scummy when taken in context.

I don't see the case on AJ/dybeck/kloud as very strong other than just telling people they're wrong. I think one instance of AJ doing this was in reference to dybeck, so, that would make sense anyway. They're not high on my list.

OF and wolf - The case against Crazy is just filled with bad info. OF is taking everything out of context, from Crazy's early viewing of Adel as town, to Crazy's enlisting of Adel's support now. I think it may have been somewhat lazy for Crazy to ask Adel to push the wagon more, but I don't think there is necessarily anything scummy about it. I don't see Crazy using Adel as a crutch, as OF would have us believe.

vote: OpposedForce

btw, We should start consolidating votes. There are currently votes for both HP and cerebus, as well as Knight and Crazy.

[Adel]

During rereads, I noticed that the HP/Cerebus team seemed to offer the most defense for the iceman/fire pair. I keep reading Cerebus’s question about what started the firestarter wagon wrong, though, and I’m thinking RR is doing the same. It doesn’t seem so scummy when taken in context.

I don't see the case on AJ/dybeck/kloud as very strong other than just telling people they're wrong. I think one instance of AJ doing this was in reference to dybeck, so, that would make sense anyway. They're not high on my list.

OF and wolf - The case against Crazy is just filled with bad info. OF is taking everything out of context, from Crazy's early viewing of Adel as town, to Crazy's enlisting of Adel's support now. I think it may have been somewhat lazy for Crazy to ask Adel to push the wagon more, but I don't think there is necessarily anything scummy about it. I don't see Crazy using Adel as a crutch, as OF would have us believe.

vote: OpposedForce

btw, We should start consolidating votes. There are currently votes for both HP and cerebus, as well as Knight and Crazy.

this post is full of goodness.

[armlx]

Rereading, past the random stage where multiple people dice-failed.

I agree with a claim. I don't see anything anti-town that could happen from it.

Adel's announcement of a "Super secret scum tell" I do not like. Its basically an early way of trying to ensure she lives till D3.

What bothers me more is dybeck's utter refusal to be able to agree with a town decision.

Crazy talking about the secret scum tell makes me feel he is just saying he is in on it to back down from his position, which is valid if he believes Adel.

Crazy, if you were lying about seeing the scum tell, say now. If you aren't, I'm willing to admit my original read of the Adel post was wrong as well as my desire to mass claim and wait.

Alabaska def jumped the gun on the OF wagon. If there were a couple more pages/vote of it I would agree.

iceman's RR vote is not out of character. And dumb.

Disagree with Adel's promotion of policy lynching, esp 128.

Pwnz's 152 = face + palm.

OF's 169 is a definite attempt to flop without people paying attention.

FOS OF

.

I slightly disagree with Adel's 191. Early game "sure" reads are possible.

Also, odd scenario where adel = scum is she told her group about the tell pre-game, and it just wrecks the other group when its revealed. This seems beyond irrel though.\

Crazy at the end of Pg. 8 is just...... wrong. See what I said about Adel at the start of this.

201 is def right, and that tell borderlines on rule breaking under PM quoting. Adel just BSing is definitely possible, but IDK.

Adel's 212 =

Pwnz is capable of more valid play then this. I know it.

Logic behind farsides 235 would be nice.

Crazy's 255= appeal to emotion by far. Self vote doesn't help either.

288 = classic buddying w/ attacker.

Adel's 180 on the wagon on pg 13 is noteworthy.

I'll just post this to make it not too big for now. More later possibly.

[sekinj]

During rereads, I noticed that the HP/Cerebus team seemed to offer the most defense for the iceman/fire pair. I keep reading Cerebus’s question about what started the firestarter wagon wrong, though, and I’m thinking RR is doing the same. It doesn’t seem so scummy when taken in context.

I don't see the case on AJ/dybeck/kloud as very strong other than just telling people they're wrong. I think one instance of AJ doing this was in reference to dybeck, so, that would make sense anyway. They're not high on my list.

OF and wolf - The case against Crazy is just filled with bad info. OF is taking everything out of context, from Crazy's early viewing of Adel as town, to Crazy's enlisting of Adel's support now. I think it may have been somewhat lazy for Crazy to ask Adel to push the wagon more, but I don't think there is necessarily anything scummy about it. I don't see Crazy using Adel as a crutch, as OF would have us believe.

vote: OpposedForce

btw, We should start consolidating votes. There are currently votes for both HP and cerebus, as well as Knight and Crazy.

this post is full of goodness.

That's my lover he's a smartee

I agree with neko mostly, but I find the hp/cere pair more scummy than OF. Hp's lurking and wagoning just rub me wrong, and cere doesn't help the team by defending fire/ice/penguin. I'll be looking back at these two again. Cere put up a pretty good defense to RR's case, but it may just be smoke and mirrors.

OF going after Crazy just seems like yesterday's news. Like he's just trying for the easy lynch. I don't think Crazy has been the greatest townie, but given that fire/ice were scum, it seems unlikely crazy was a buddy. of course he could be on the other scumteam, but it just doesn't seem like it.

[Raging Rabbit]

I'm only gonna adress my major point, your interaction with IcePenguin, to keep this from turning into an overly long discussion only the two of us will read and to save time.

How is IcemanE fitting into my meta of him unexplained? People were voting him and calling him scum, and I said his play reminded me of his play in other games. Charter did this as well, so what do you think of him? Me and Charter can't both be IcemanE's scum buddy.

Charter said he "did basically the same thing" in previous games as town, you agreed and later said he "fits your townie read". "Read", as far as I know, hints at a pro town vibe that is independent or stronger than a pure meta call.

Here, RR seems to think that my argument is tied to IcemanE, which it is not. I never said IcemanE would not be guilty of this as well if the scum-tell turned out to be a sham, but just because I am lazy, can you please show me where IcemanE says that he knows what the scum tell is? I remember him speculating that it would probably have something to do with voting patterns, but I don't think he ever said that he knew for a fact what it is.

It's tied to Iceman because of the simple fact that Crazy wasn't the only one "running with it", and yet you chose to leave Ice completely out of the spotlight. It doesn't matter that you never said he wasn't guilty of this, you never said he was either and this convienient miss coupled with your "pro town read" makes me think you were at that point trying to defend a scumbuddy.

Iceman clearly saying he knows the tell:

Yes to what adel implied. I would have preferred to keep it less obvious by sort of dancing around it a bit more, but it should work regardless.

I think it was. Dybeck's vote on SSF was weak reasoning in my book, and looked very similar to what Firestarter tried to do. May I ask you how it was different?

There's a very clear difference between weak reasoning and bullshit reasoning that Fire kept holding onto even after people explained exactly how he was wrong. Saying the two are the same casts Fire in a better light.

a)If I was scum with IcemanE, Why would I keep my vote on my scumbuddy, when I have an equally sound reason to vote someone else? (I know this is going to be dismissed as WIFOM, but at least think about it. Even with wifom involved, it is still bad play for scum in my book)

It's called distancing.

b) You are overstating what I said. like really badly. Where did I ever say that Dybeck was the scummiest player in the game?

C) Why would I move my vote? Dybeck being scummy does not change the fact that Firestarter was scummy.

a. You're voting for Fire, and thus think he's the scummiest player.
b. You say Dybeck is guilty of the exact same thing Fire's guilty of.
Conclusion: you think Dybeck is the scummiest player along with Fire.

You did not necassarily have to move your vote, what you should've down cosidering that statement is keep an equal eye out for Dybeck and Fire.

Wowzers, what a misrepresentation. IcemanE became the right lynch when he was shown to be Fire's lover. I HAD been on the firestarter wagon for a long time, so this is in no way shape or form a flip flop.

You you had a pro town read on Ice that you never implied changed, and wanted him lynched only for being partners with Fire? Lets assume this position makes sense even cosidering you didn't bother saying so for the minute (not sure it does, I'm doubting Fire's attack on me made you

that

sure he was scum), why not, at this point, switch to Dybeck which is guilty of the same thing as Fire according to you and

doesn't

have a lover you consider pro town? I maintain that you wanted to be a (passive) part of a scumwagon.

when you can come up with a good reason to doubt the wagon of your scum buddy, it seems illogical to me to keep bussing

Untrue, both before the Icewagon grew where it's simple distancing and especially one their lynch became inevitable.

[Raging Rabbit]

I can understand that armlx wants to show us he's reading the game, but he threw tons of page 8 and earlier thoughts out there that have no relevance to the game whatsoever, which makes it harder to see if he's onto anyhing that hasn't been explained yet.

I'm not sure what I think about OF, his argument with Crazy gives me the vibe of two townies going for each other's throats. Can someone explain the case on him more clearly?

On another note, Knight of Cydonia's avatar is giving me a headache.

[pwnz]

Spent all weekend moving back into college, will post later tonight.

[Knight of Cydonia]

RR - it's just an eye, blinking. Calm down. The OF case is that he appears to be deliberately misinterpreting Crazy's posts in order to try and jump on what could be percieved as an easy wagon, if it hadn't already broken down yesterday.

[armlx]

RR: I'm progressing through the game. I only got to page 14.

[Harvey Pew]

Harvey Pew...

I thought about point-by-point defence, but I don't see the need with such epic reaching. Essentially RR thinks I am scum because I haven't posted a lot, I voted incorrectly on the D1 lynch and posted the thinking behind my vote.

I really don't see that RR and sekinj's behind-the-post thinking--in that a vote for the D1 lynch clears someone and a vote elsewhere D1 is incriminating--is in any way credible. There are fifteen players who were not on the lynch, twelve if you wish to be pedantic. No scum in on the lynch? So unlikely I can't give it any credence--you'd be better off scum-hunting in the nine lynchers than the rest.

33% 27% 40% six off 22% two on 44% four on

[Harvey Pew]

EBWOP

Ignore the last line, it wasn't supposed to be part of the post.

[armlx]

Moving into college is going to interfere with my rereading tonight or tomorrow.

[Raging Rabbit]

RR - it's just an eye, blinking.

It's the blinking part that gets me, the constant movement on the side of the screen is really annoying when I'm trying to read. Maybe it's just me.

RR: I'm progressing through the game. I only got to page 14.

I completely understand that you can't immediately catch up, take your time. Thing is, nothing can be gained from your post since like 90% of it has already become irrelevant, why don't you wait with posting thouthts until you're finished reading through?

Harvey's post is an extreme misrep, anyone who takes the time to read will see my case on him has a lot more to it than being a lurker and wrong. Probably lazy scum who figured he can avoid a direct defense by just dismissing what I wrote as BS, happy with my vote.

[armlx]

I completely understand that you can't immediately catch up, take your time. Thing is, nothing can be gained from your post since like 90% of it has already become irrelevant, why don't you wait with posting thouthts until you're finished reading through?

Are you complaining about having extra information about my early game reads?

[sekinj]

I completely understand that you can't immediately catch up, take your time. Thing is, nothing can be gained from your post since like 90% of it has already become irrelevant, why don't you wait with posting thouthts until you're finished reading through?

Are you complaining about having extra information about my early game reads?

It's not extra info. It is stuff we have already discussed. It's not going to helop anything if we drag up all the old arguements we have already been through. It confuses the current issues. If you keep reading you will see that most of that has been resolved. Maybe you should just keep notes and cross stuff off after you come to the part that answers it. THen you can post the rest.

[armlx]

So lets say I read, make a post. Then 10 pages after, what I said turns out to have become something scummy. Sounds like a good thing I posted chunk by chunk, amirite?

[Adel]

I think it is a good habit, and it shows how armix is filtering the informations as he reads.

I can't give it any credence--you'd be better off scum-hunting in the nine lynchers than the rest.

please expand and elaborate upon this idea.

[cerebus3]

Charter said he "did basically the same thing" in previous games as town, you agreed and later said he "fits your townie read". "Read", as far as I know, hints at a pro town vibe that is independent or stronger than a pure meta call.

Ok, what about the phrase "Still tentative"? If you are going to go all semantics on me, at least acknowledge that I said that my read was unreliable. And now Armlx has also said that Iceman was just acting like Iceman in the post above yours. You have to admit this was not coming out of nowhere.

Iceman clearly saying he knows the tell:

Yes to what adel implied. I would have preferred to keep it less obvious by sort of dancing around it a bit more, but it should work regardless.

Hrmmm... I did not see this post, but yes, now that I have seen it, IcemanE would also be guilty of faking it.

You you had a pro town read on Ice that you never implied changed, and wanted him lynched only for being partners with Fire?

As I said, I did not think that my read on IcemanE was reliable, and it is not like the only thing to have happened between then was that Fire was revealed at Ice's lover. You keep acting like I had said that IcemanE was obv town or something. I did no such thing, merely that he fit what I thought he would do as a townie, and that was MUCH earlier in the game anyway. Stop taking my statements out of context.

Lets assume this position makes sense even cosidering you didn't bother saying so for the minute (not sure it does, I'm doubting Fire's attack on me made you that sure he was scum), why not, at this point, switch to Dybeck which is guilty of the same thing as Fire according to you and doesn't have a lover you consider pro town? I maintain that you wanted to be a (passive) part of a scumwagon.

Now you are the one trying to cast the Fire and Dybeck cases in the same light in order to make me look bad. I merely stated that I thought the way he voted for SSF was very similar to the way Fire voted for you. Fire had continued to act scummy after the fact, a fact that you only seem to bring up when it is convenient for you. You admit that the Firestarter case is stronger, but call me scummy for sticking with him. What kind of total bullshit is that?

[sekinj]

I think it is a good habit, and it shows how armix is filtering the informations as he reads.

I can't give it any credence--you'd be better off scum-hunting in the nine lynchers than the rest.

please expand and elaborate upon this idea.

look at his next post.

[sekinj]

@hp: I don't think you can take something like that back. Even if you didn't mean to say it, I agree that we need to see your thought process there.

[Erratus Apathos]

I apologize my case is so long, and hope everyone will still take the time to read into it. I really think I'm on to something here.

I somewhat agree with AE about Kloud/Ala as well, but to a much lesser extent. Dybeck defended Ice so strongly it actually makes me doubt they're partners, I believe he'd have gone more for distancing if that was the case. Alabaska is just acting really odd. I have them pegged as possibly mafia, but my case on Harvey and cere is much stronger imo.

Dybeck didn't really defend Ice so much as condemn his attackers. The difference is subtle but big - I've seen townies strongly defend scums often enough to know that it's a very weak scumtell if it's even a scumtell at all, but scum are much more likely to "attack the attacker" than townies.

[Harvey Pew]

@hp: I don't think you can take something like that back.

Sorry if I was unclear but the line I was taking back was "33% 27% 40% six off 22% two on 44% four on" which is meaningless without context

not

"you'd be better off scum-hunting in the nine lynchers than the rest."

The percentages are actually my thinking about that scum hunting. If there were no scum on the lynch then you should look in the non-voters, but there are two mafia factions and if the second faction put any weight into the lynch the percentages are about equal, and if the werewolves considered bussing its even better. Although I don't believe there was bussing, while one-on one-off would seem reasonable I'm not sure it would work as well in a lover game.

Also, RR, I don't believe my reading of your case is a "extreme misrep". The basis of your argument, not the mis-readings you add after quoting me, is that I have lurked and voted for someone other than "IcePenguin." The fact that you "think at that point things looked completely the other way around" is not, in itself, compelling. Indeed it smacks both of 20/20 hindsight and deciding someone is scum and then reading everything they say from that perspective. That my explanation for my vote is read by you as a "smokescreen" merely exemplifies that.

Not thinking in lock-step with RR does not strike me as a bad thing, let alone a scummy thing.

[Adel]

I think you may be on to something there HP.