/in-vitational Game 8 - Nito City (over) after 1015

[Sando]

Don't rolefish.

Vote: Jack

First to accuse of rolefishing is scum.

And yes I'm serious, rolefishing is one of those accusations that is incredibly easy and safe to make as scum because it is seen as one of the most anti-town thing you can do and it is very easy to make a fairly innocuous statement look like rolefishing.

[Sando]

See? I am in no way rolefishing, yet you see how easy it is to turn my words around and make it seem like I am? It's such an easy accusation to make, it's made for scum, especially early game.

[Sando]

You obviously never played with Jack. I dubbed him the person to always do something scummy for reaction purposes. It's why I like playing with him. He gets the game going that way.

Ummm, what? I'm accusing him of doing the EXACT OPPOSITE. You say he does things that look scummy, I'm saying he's doing things in a deliberate attempt to look town.

I'll dig up an example for you Magna later today.

Funnily enough, having not played a significant number of games with anyone here, I can't really contribute to the meta discussion, doesn't really bother me though, I hate meta arguments.

Accusing Sotty of trying to draw attention away from himself by accusing someone else is retarded. I expect anyone under pressure to keep scumhunting, to not scumhunt and only defend oneself, especially this early, is particularly scummy. To then say that said scumhunting is scummy... yeah that's just stupid.

[Sando]

So you're saying that accusing someone of rolefishing really early in the game is in fact normally seen as scummy, and therefore fits within Jacks meta?

[Sando]

Wait, you're saying that people had to 'stretch' to accuse someone of scumminess when you yourself say his reasoning was 'rediculous'...

Uh huh.

[Sando]

No, but it's not a 'stretch' that ridiculous comments be seen as scummy, as you are making out.

[Sando]

Why am I responding to comments directed at others?

For the reason's that Jack stated I would say it was rediculous. The votes on him and reasoning was by far more scummy and a stretch hence my questions and comments towards others that voted for Jack.

I'm voting Jack and have provided reasoning. I assumed I was included in your very general comment.

[Sando]

Farside, does Jack get better later at least? Or do we have to put up with this the whole time?

Zach, you were listed as one of MOI's top suspect, yet you accuse him of only attacking 'lurkers'. So you're saying that you're a lurker?

[Sando]

Farside, what has Charlie missed?

I agree about his L-1 on MOI, you don't do that no someone you're divided on just because you're scared of a quickhammer. It looks like Charlie is trying to show that he's not completely sold on the MOI lynch, but throws up his own strawman argument to justify why he'll put him at L-1. My point, wanting to overcome hesitation to put people at L-1 has absolutely nothing to do with the divided view on MOI, which is the real reason the vote should not have been placed.

[Sando]

Mine apologies, I shall be putting something in an hour or so during my lunch break.

[Sando]

I'm not really seeing the MOI thing at all. I've only played with him once, so I can't really comment on meta, but he's actually providing well reasoned responses, unlike many others...

IKD makes a good point about Jack, and I'd like to add that people like Farside have written off things as meta that actually have little to do with his play so far:

Sando: Jack is pretending to scumhunt in an effort to appear 'pro-town'
Farside: Yeah, but Sando, Jack often does things that look scummy in order to get attention on himself and generate discussion.

It's an oversimplification, but it doesn't address my point, Jack wasn't trying to 'look scummy' or the like, hence the meta of Jack doing that with any regularity is not applicable.

Also, vote-hoping is null, it is not pro-town, depending on the reasons for it, it could be either scummy or pro-town. The act itself is null, the motivation can be a tell either way.

[Sando]

The point was whoever hammered (although the chances were slim) would be under intense scrutiny the next Day. You're going to have to take my word for it that I was confident that this would not happen. I cannot explain it any other way unless I lie.

Crap, I missed this. You don't put someone at L-1 without thinking that there's a risk they'd be hammered. There's every chance that there's some other jackass posting the same thing at the same time. Also, there's the assumption that the person who hammered would be under intense scrutiny tomorrow. There's only 1 reason they'd be under intense scrutiny, and that's if they hammered town, someone who hammered scum in that situation wouldn't be under scrutiny. So you are assuming that the person you put at L-1 is town...

Unvote, Vote: Charlie

[Sando]

I put faith that this /in-vitational game is jackass-free (we were somehow selectively selected by each other and all...). Anyway, I'm having trouble understanding the logic above... I would think that both the person who hammered and the person who put the lnychee at L-1 would be under scrutiny.

Only if the person hammered is town, you seem to be assuming that there would be scrutiny tomorrow, and that will only happen if the person is town...

Therefore, you are assuming the person is town.

[Sando]

I'm really not liking that Poro is basically defending wishy-washy not taking a stand by saying he's VLA. Yeah, he was VLA (I can vouch for this, he's VLA in another game in consistent timing), but that's not the point.

Saying 'I've caught up' means that you've read the whole thread and absorbed the whole thing. You can't then defend not having an opinion by saying you were VLA, you had fully caught up and yet still didn't have an opinion.

[Sando]

You are missing the whole point of Sando’s statement.

There would be no pressure on the person who hammered if the lynched person was Town

. It’s not a WIFOM trap.

Why is this true?

It's not, change that 'town' to 'scum' and you get the point.

[Sando]

Vote: Jack

Accusing of rolefishing at every opportunity, I've already stated why I find this scummy.

Also, this whole 'hammer person is scum' is old, the hammer was ~6 hours pre-deadline, and no other lynch was possible, it needed to happen. Farside gets scumpoints for latching onto it, Jack gains them for happily going along with it.

Jack is muchos scummier.

[Sando]

Accusing me of boilerplate scumtells Vollkan... Cute.

[Sando]

22: Sando jumps on it seriously (showing no actual reflection on Jack's motives), and repeats the boilerplate attack against people who accuse others of rolefishing. Sando+1

Unvote, Vote: Vollkan

I can't fully explain this, it relates to an ongoing game, but I'll paraphrase.

1: Vollkan is saying that I am using a 'boilerplate' attack and that that is scummy. By boilerplate he is loosely refering to the idea that I'm playing wiki-mafia, just going by easy attacks that are pretty bad accusations to make.

2: Vollkan thinks boilerplate scumtells are terrible because they have no real basis or empirical data to back them up, they're all talk, no action basically. He thinks that they're basically a gut attack, that I've just been told that this is a scummy thing, and I can't actually back up why.

3: Vollkan has incontrovertible proof (this is the bit relating to an ongoing game) that not only is using a boilerplate scumtell against someone NOT always scummy as he is accusing me of here, but that me using them is in my town-meta. How does he know this? He has lynched me in an ongoing game because I used 'boilerplate' scumtells, and I flipped town.

194: Sando only posts to make a lurker attack on Prozac Sando+1

Care to explain where I attacked Pro for lurking in this post? Not having an opinion and Lurking are two very different things.

[Sando]

Prozac had been abundantly clear that he was RL-busy. Yes, he should have caught up properly by that. But he clearly hadn't, at least to the point of being able to post. That sucks, it's anti-town, and it simply spreads the cancer that is lurking, etc etc - but it isn't scummy.

What? My post quite clearly states that HE had said the he had caught up.

Saying you are caught up, but have no opinion, is scummy.

[Sando]

His post said he had "caught up", but he also said he didn't have scumreads. In a situation where you know as a matter of FACT that he is busy, it is ridiculous to think that he should therefore have proper suspicions formed. It's very easy to read a game, without having all the benefits that come from being an active player, and not be able to find anybody scummy, particularly where, as was clearly the case with Prozac, you are otherwse busy

So, uh, where did I accuse Poro of lurking like you claimed I did?

[Sando]

MOI:

I think I've made it clear that I think Jack is quite scummy. I think that considering his play from Weeds mafia, Ythan is looking very different from his previous play, and as that was town-play, it must be considered scummy.

Ythan is a VERY active and very arrogantly assertive player from the game I've played with him. There are some other parts of his play that are also very distinctive, but I don't really want to coach him on how to fake his town-meta. But suffice it to say, this is about as far away from his town-meta as I think is possible. However, I'm basically attacking him for lurking at that point, and I'm not prepared to go after someone for lurking in the first week after they replace in. Replacing in is hard and requires a fair bit of time investment, and it can take a while to get into the flow of things.

In terms of linked to Vollkan, basically only Poro, and it's fairly tenuous. But as Farside said, giving Poro a free pass is pretty dodgy.

Jack not considering the possibility of PRs when there was no NK last night... Amusingly stupid.

[Sando]

That seems like an awful lot of research to do in 80 minutes...

[Sando]

I was thinking of 'weak doc + other doc', not specifically a plain doc. Fair enough then.

[Sando]

hmm sando has visited but not posted.

One or two things strike me as just plain weird in iso so atm I'm inclined to say zajnet is still the lynch. But I will go over it and think about it.

I logged on just 5 minutes ago... well probably like 20 by the time I'm done, but yeah. I quickly checked the topic before work this morning, but didn't have time to post then.

Anyways, fair cop from Locke and Poro (not including Poro's quote, I'll get to that) and I pretty much expected it since I pushed back against the CC and didn't really push the wagon/claim on Jason. Not much I can say about my play prior to the claim, but I tend to vacillate around things like CCs etc as both scum and town.

Having expected it, I tend to want to look at those bringing it up first thing, as I think those are the most likely to have thought long and hard overnight about who they're going to go after. This is particularly pertinent considering it's Poro and Locke, Locke mentioned that he modded me as scum, and mentioned that I was buddies with Poro.

For starters, unless they think I was setting up a meta by lying in the scum QTopic, they know I'm perfectly happy to hammer a partner, and could deduce that I'm fairly inclined towards bussing in general, considering I strongly recommended to Poro that be buss me.

For Locke, you might notice that in the Qtopic I specifically stated that I was going to be deliberately playing non-commitaly to avoid confirming any town etc as I assumed I'd be the lynch target:

Parama is going to go hard on me, you guys should be ready to bus if required. ICE should be a legit lynch target at some point, I'm going to avoid attacking anyone we legitimately think will be a lynch target later to avoid any confirmation of towniness if I'm lynched.

Poro's case is particularly general, can't really answer much. In terms of the quote about 'boilerplate scumtells', my response was a sarcastic response because he had literally just gotten me lynched, as town, in another game using that exact same argument that I was simply using boilerplate scumtells and that was scummy. Since I covered this in a later post, I'm not sure what Poro is on about.

FYI, after that game, I got the very distinct impression that Poro is very anti-bussing.

farside I have stated my thoughts on already, Im sure she's scum

Sando - from his response to vollkans points against him (and I dont just mean the post quoted above) to his reaction against me and his general posting style thus far. vote sando

farside is 2nd, zaj 3rd

This doesn't make sense, you're 'sure' farside is scum, yet generally don't like my posting style, and haven't actually posted a real case?

Yeah right,

Vote: Poro

[Sando]

1 quick peak into Poro's recent posting on the site.
This alone makes me want to vote him as scum. He's posting fine in other games and active in comparison to this game.
I still want to go look at the analysis of him as scum vs town consider this an

FOS: Porochaz

This is very similar to what he was doing in our last scum game.

BTW Farside, when have I played scum against you? Link to what non-ongoing game? One where I was what? Why is me deliberately not joining another game a sign that I'm actively lurking? Surely that's an indicator that I know I can't dedicate a lot of time to mafia? And I'm only rude when people are morons, noone is being a moron, I'm a legitimate target for today, I've merely outlined why Poro is likely scum, but that's based on me knowing I'm town. In all likelihood that will only count for something after I'm lynched.

Also, I basically deliberately actively lurked in that game Farside, I'm not here, I said that in my last post.

But hey, I did completely ignore Jason, wasn't deliberate, but I don't expect you to believe it. But watch Poro not engage with my posts against him now that he's got the ball rolling on my wagon.

Jack, you seem to spend your entire time saying 'Zajnet is DEFINITELY SCUM, but let's lynch this other guy...'.

[Sando]

That's a pretty odd game to look at for scum-play Farside, as I said multiple times throughout that game, scum actually want to scumhunt properly, and I was actually trying to scumhunt that game as scum. Also, very weird/bad game in terms of replacements and activity.

This is a game with me as scum, Farside and Poro were both town: viewtopic.php?f=3&t=13699, read the scumchat if you want, I specifically don't avoid talking about my partner(s) as scum. This is probably one of the more normal/active games of me as scum.

So Locke, you're actually basing an argument for me being scum on a 3rd person being scum, a 3rd person you don't know is scum? It's only null to you if Zaj is scum... Yet you want to lynch me first? You're as bad as Poro and Jack, 'Hey Zaj is DEFINITELY scum, but let's lynch this other guy first'.

Locke/Poro/Jack, questions for you:
Am I more/less/null scummy if Zaj is scum?
Am I more/less/null scummy if Zaj is town?
Is Zaj more/less/null scummy if I am scum?
Is Zaj more/less/null scummy if I am town?

[Sando]

You're choosing to completely ignore the REASON for ignoring my buddies in 984, which was that I was going to be the obvious target for the day. This was not the case in this game yesterday.

So null either way, yet Zaj has confirmed as scum because he's buddied with me?

Zajnet: are you serious? Really? Sando doesn't mention the lynch target at all on D2. That's a lynch target who turned out to be scum. It's nice of you to confirm you're Jason's other scumbuddy, though.

Contradict yourself much?

[Sando]

Yeah no s***, I was scum and tried to derail my buddies wagon and push a counter-wagon, I consistently maintained a stance on him and eventually was on BVs lynch. If you honestly don't see any difference between that game and this one... By my count I mentioned BV 8 times on D1 when he was lynched, and voted for him, and actively attacked people who tried to derail his wagon. And yet you want to claim that no mention at all of 'my buddy' in this game is the same thing?

Is this you exaggerating again?

[Sando]

Yes, you're quite right, I didn't tunnel down my scum-partner... That clearly makes me scum here...

I didn't feel the need to contribute anything to the Jason wagon, my feel on him wasn't particularly solid, it built to a near-lynch quite quickly, and I didn't have a strong enough feel to push it over the line. I always feel that game-days tend to be too focused on one player, so I tend to deliberately look at someone else unless my read on the person is exceptionally strong or there's another reason like deadline approaching.

I'm happy to accept that my not commenting on Jason is seen as scummy, that's fine. I just want people to realise some of the stupid arguments being brought up as soon as you're remotely questioned, as well as what I feel is a fairly opportunistic attack straight out in the day, almost as if it was agreed overnight that 'hey, that Sando guy didn't comment on the Jason wagon, reckon we can get an easy mislynch there'.

You want to say that I'm scummy for ignoring the scum, and also want to say that my play is similar to a game where I specifically did not ignore my partner, in fact voted for him and consistently placed him as one of my biggest suspects...

Your argument is conflicted, and you're now trying to pull it back to this game now that you've been caught out.

[Sando]

Where did I say that I missed Jason or comments about him? It's not like I forgot that he was around, or didn't notice that he was getting wagonned. I felt no need to contribute to that line of reasoning and wasn't getting a strong read, and felt that I could be best served looking at other things.

Do I think you're Jason's partner? Well I definitely think 1 of you and Poro is scum, not entirely sure which. Poro is worse in isolation I feel, you definitely get partner-points though for Jason having nominated you as his protection. You and Poro aren't scum together though, happy with that read.

[Sando]

I can't remember my feelings on that comment in particular, or if I noticed it at the time, I certainly had no idea what you were talking about when you quoted it just now. It happened right around the time of Vollkan and his 'boilerplate' scumtell comment which got my attention and pissed me off.

But I certainly felt no compunction to address anything surrounding Jason, I didn't have a strong read and there were plenty of people going back and forth on it to force the issue, they did, got the claim and the hammer in the end.

I'm tending towards Locke being the scum out of Poro/Locke now, Locke is just reaching and reaching for an easy lynch here. I was happy to accept suspicion for lack of interaction with Jason, and I've copped that from a few people, fair enough, but Locke wants to push that to say that I literally haven't mentioned Jason or Zach all game, which isn't true.

People are attacking me for meta, Poro and Locke have attacked me for similarities between this and our last game, which I think is a bit BS, but nothing major. But Locke wants to turn every example of me as scum in a previous game into it showing I'm scum here. Read D1 (iso me, D1 is long) in Karma mafia and compare it to what I'm being accused of here, it's completely different, but Locke wants to twist it into another tell against me.

Locke is obviously really trying to sow up a lynch here, I think he's deliberately stretching a lot of things, I think that's scummy.

Unvote, Vote: Locke

VLA for ~24 hours from now.

[Sando]

Do you have a link to support this vague assertion? And what are you trying to say with this statement? That if Poro is scum you can’t be a buddy because he doesn’t bus? Can you explain the why the inherent WIFOM of that conclusion should be ignored?

From the quicktopic in Mafia 94 I said this:

Bugger, I'd suggest that Jalyn/replacement stay on ICE, and Poro push on me tomorrow.

I specifically wanted the next day to go quickly on myself, I was obviously going to get lynched, and did, and I stated to Poro that he should bus. Poro utterly refused to push on me that day, read 984, just the day I get lynched if you want.

This is fairly serious, since he was voting Jack partially for this point.

Really? You're actually equating Jack and Farside voting the hammerer straight out of night with Jason's 'interesting question'? That's a joke right?


Locke, you might not need to push hard to actually get the lynch, but scum want my lynch to happen as quickly as possible. For that reason, despite knowing that I'm quite possibly the lynch today, and probably deserve to be lynched for ignoring Jason, I'm going to push back on those who want my lynch to happen quickly specifically. You're not just pushing for my lynch, you're deliberately exaggerating and stretching the truth in order to get it quickly. You claimed I never mentioned Zach, which is incorrect. You claim that my play in Karma is similar to here, which it isn't.

Others are at least coming up with original points and asking questions, you're trying to turn everything I say into a scumtell and just stating that I'm scummy.

[Sando]

I brought up your ISO and did a “find all” for both Zach and Jason. You mention Zach once and never mention Jason until he is dead. It is clearly true.

Do you not understand the word 'literally'? It's part of a consistent stretching by Locke, it's not as though I'm claiming 'ZOMG HE LIED, LAL!!!', I'm simply pointing out that he's stretching the truth.

I've also seen Poro play this exact way as scum, you know one of those games we've all been talking about as meta for me as scum? Yeah that one...

[Sando]

That's hardly extreme for me

I've voted Jack for most of the game, I've decided that I'm best served highlighting the things that I find wrong with Poro and Locke at the moment. I'm also not sure if he's a real jackass or acting, people seem to think he acts like a jackass a lot of the time. I hadn't noticed your points around his interactions of Jason, I will look at it in the next day or two to see what I think.

[Sando]

Erg0, you say that my point about Jack and Zajnet is a good one, yet don't include him in your likely scumteam? The reason I don't like it is because it's pretty classic distancing on your partner, it's exactly what I did in Karma mafia as scum, basically constantly say 'this guy is scum, but let's lynch this other guy', and you're all set when it comes to lynching them and you look pro-town when they flip.

What motivation do you see for Jack scum to do that to a townie, which Zaj would have to be for it to be me/Jack as the last 2 scum?

[Sando]

And Zaj, there's only 2 people discussing Zach at the moment, and one of us isn't even voting him, and hasn't actually contributed anything to the conversation about him being scummy, and yet you can't come up with anything original?

If you weren't pushing a counter wagon to myself I'd assume you were pushing a counter-wagon to your partner... Damn.

[Sando]

I brought up your ISO and did a “find all” for both Zach and Jason. You mention Zach once and never mention Jason until he is dead. It is clearly true.

Do you not understand the word 'literally'? It's part of a consistent stretching by Locke, it's not as though I'm claiming 'ZOMG HE LIED, LAL!!!', I'm simply pointing out that he's stretching the truth.

I've also seen Poro play this exact way as scum, you know one of those games we've all been talking about as meta for me as scum? Yeah that one...

Semantics, ick.

This is where I repeat the fact I have seen Poro play this way as town and that maybe it isn't his town meta, or scum meta and that it's just

his meta

. So if you want me to entertain a possible PoroScum you are going to have to do better than “META!”

I feel like I have had this discussion in this thread before.

Oh wait...

A lot of other people have made the distinction, he didn't, it's not semantics.

And I'm not attacking Poro over meta, merely pointing out that he's played this way as scum before as a counter to you saying that he's playing to town-meta.

[Sando]

But in your example I didnt play that way. In fact I played the opposite. Stop saying otherwise.

The example I'm giving is 984, and you played very similarly there, with me as your partner.
viewtopic.php?p=2297458

[Sando]

I know the exact example you were meaning. Your speaking rubbish though, I was active in that game, and anyone who is seriously taking this argument into consideration I implore you to take a look into that game and see.

Yes, please do. I'm not trying to lynch you on meta though, I'm not even trying to lynch you right at the moment. I'm merely stating that there is an example of you playing this way as scum, Erg0 is saying you play this way as town, therefore it's null in my mind.

Over-react much?

[Sando]

Noted, and yes I did mean Jack, I shouldn't post when stupidly late at night it seems...

[Sando]

First thing I noticed when ISOing Jack was this:

Oh jason. If I hadn't mislynched you once before.

Basically giving himself an excuse to not vote Jason. I really really hate this from Jack.

Then I started to realise that Jack is obsessed with voting people for non-case reasons. By this I mean he hasn't actually posted many/any cases against someone's actual play. All of his pushes before pushing me have been based on things like Lynch-All-Lurkers, pushing a claimed-masonizer-lynch, etc.

His push on MOI 'didn't need to be explained', then he claimed masoniser and that MOI was obv-scum. Then pushed Zaj, which again he doesn't explain, ever. Then you get to Iso 42, and it's startling in it's difference from his other posts, it's actually an argument. Suddenly he's pushing Ythan because a forum-thread told him lynching lurkers was a good idea. This is the first time he seems to put in some effort, and he takes no responsibility for his attack on a lurker, puts it all back on a good forum post that told him to do it.

In ISO 47, Sotty goes from being top-4 scum suspect to being top-4 townie player, and the reason for this is because another player becomes scummy... Yeah that's odd. Also, Sando suddenly becomes obv-town, the reason for this, or why I become obv-scum later, is never explained (good point from Erg0 on this one).

ISO 56-57, votes Jason... for 15 minutes.

Zajnet becomes the scummiest person, and from then on has been the most consistently scummy person for Jack, and the only case he ever posts is basically Lurking.

Jack promises to read me in ISO and 'post tomorrow' in ISO 73. ISO 74 he gives a 'teaser' which is just a random quote of me. ISO 75 only a few things strike him as odd about Sando, Zajnet is the lynch for today. 76, he 'loves' that everyone thinks Sando is scum. ISO 77, suddenly Sando is the lynch for today, not Zajnet. I'll quote these for lol's:

One or two things strike me as just plain weird in iso so atm I'm inclined to say zajnet is still the lynch. But I will go over it and think about it.

I love how everyone is just like 'sando? ...yeah he's scum' once they look at him closely.

He isn't, sando is the lynch for today see my posts last page, I have my own reasons for not voting yet.

So he asks us to look at his previous posts... So I did that, and the only post between Zaj being scummier than Sando and Sando being scummier than Zaj, is a post by Jack saying that he loves that everyone thinks Sando is scum. So according to Jack himself, the only reason Sando is scummier, is because everyone else thinks so...

Unvote, Vote: Jack

Gotta say at this point (this is total WIFOM, but screw it), this is a really weird day as one of the wagons. I find it interesting that 2 wagons have gone up so so so so easily on two players, while pushes on other players haven't gained any traction. I happen to know that at least 1 of them is town, but I think that people should seriously consider the ease with which these wagons have occured. I've just put Jack at L-1, and Jack put me at L-1 earlier today. Not entirely sure what to make of it, but I certainly feel that as town, the wagon on me was too contrived, but hey, you guys can't know it without having the benefit of my PM I think people should think about it, if nothing else, it's interesting, but I think there's probably something to it.

[Sando]

Overall most of his ‘scum-hunting’ revolves around meta attacks, which he states in ISO 2 he dislikes (emphasis added)

Other than Poro and a single post on Ythan, who's scum-meta have I even mentioned? I've defended my own meta, I haven't attacked anyone over their own meta. And my 'attack' on Poro was merely to Null a town-meta read from someone.

Can you find me somewhere where I said that someone had to be scum because of how they were playing?

[Sando]

No, when I said 'I'm not sure what to make of it', I meant that I'm not sure what to make of it. I found it interesting though.

[Sando]

Nope, I'm not sure if it makes me think that we're less likely to be scum together, because I know for sure that we're not, so I don't know if I'm thinking in an un-biased way with that.

I've made my feelings known pretty well on my own wagon.

MOI looks like the bus-iest person on Jack-scum, Zaj looks like the most opportunistic wagon-jumper on Jack-town.

[Sando]

Very limited time till Sunday my time I believe at this stage.

I'll claim, Townie, as you may wish to lynch me pre-me being back. I may have some access, just going to be stupidly busy with general life stuff for a few days.

[Sando]

Sweet, got a few hours free finally, not much after this though for 24 hours I think, then I should be all sweet again.

MOI:

Overall most of his ‘scum-hunting’ revolves around meta attacks, which he states in ISO 2 he dislikes (emphasis added)

Here you say that most of my attacks revolve around meta, and you implicitly attack me because that doesn't gel with my 'hating meta', fair enough so far.

Other than Poro and a single post on Ythan, who's scum-meta have I even mentioned? I've defended my own meta, I haven't attacked anyone over their own meta. And my 'attack' on Poro was merely to Null a town-meta read from someone.

Can you find me somewhere where I said that someone had to be scum because of how they were playing?

My response, saying that no, I'm not attacking anyone over meta really. I've responded to a claim to Poro is acting to town-meta by showing that he's also acting like scum-meta, ie null. And I've said that Ythan was playing well outside his town-meta, but too early to base anything off that.

That’s really my point. You really haven’t done much attacking / questioning of anyone in the game. Except for your very recent post on Jack you really have only gone after vollkan and poro. Thus even though your haven’t talked much meta what you have talked about has constituted a large part of your scum-hunting.

Are you saying the only reason that you even have questioned Poro is not because you think he is scummy but because someone else had a Town read?

Firstly, your question, no, I only mentioned his scum-meta because someone else mentioned his town-meta. I have questioned Poro for non-meta reasons and that has nothing to do with others reads.

Secondly, my very first post was an attack on Jack, so no, I haven't just gone after vollkan and poro. Until my last vote, I was voting Locke and 486 to 499 is completely me and Locke going after each other, so again, I haven't gone after just vollkan and poro. I've also interacted a bit with Erg0, but don't find him scummy.

So when you say I've only gone after vollkan and Poro, I've actually gone after Jack, vollkan, poro and Locke. So your point of 'you haven't attacked' is, in my view, incorrect. As to your assertion that I've mainly attacked on meta, I haven't mentioned either vollkan or Locke's meta, I've only asked other people about Jack's meta, I haven't proffered my own opinion. And on Poro, I merely don't want people to say he's town-meta, when I've seen him play like this as scum. I am not asking people to vote/lynch him based off of scum-meta, I just think his meta should be null.