kaiveran, 304 wrote:I'm a townie (as far as I know). I've tried to be a productive member of the town, but it looks like I've played myself into a bit of a hole. I didn't think straight early on, and my crappy playing might just cost me my life. I'm ready to accept that, if need be, as a developing player of mafia. I'd much rather someone else be lynched (especially someone I find suspicious), but I think that's somthing that can apply to all of us.
I don't like this blatant AtE.
kaiveran, 305 wrote:I balk at the thought of hammering myself further into the mold of a wagon rider
This is also very bad.
a2rudeboy wrote:posts 1-2 : standard beginning of the game stuff
post 3: rapidfire bandwagon ending on agar. votes himself in the middle. possible distancing technique? no one would take the post seriously, after all
4-6: AtE? Ehh whatever not much here...
7-8: more jokes, tries to start the AGar wagon officially
This was RVS/trying to get out of RVS (7-8) with a serious bandwagon. Things changed quickly soon after, as I found a good place for my vote.
a2rudeboy wrote:10: based on theory argument, switches his vote back to AGar. at this point has established as someone who was against xite for a little while, then turned around and went back to his seemingly tunneling on Agar, which may or may not be mostly based on previous games at this point. true, ag flipped werewolf, but there wasnt enough info floating around at this point for him to seem that scummy. also, doesn't seem too upset at the possibility of losing a town pr.
Your forgetting that I FoS'd AGar along with Xite in my original post, and the vote for Xite had reasoning that was disproven valid. You are also forgetting that my original AGar reasoning had no logical backing behind it . . . I was trying to start a bandwagon to lead us out of early discussion, as I often do in the early point of the game. There wasn't enough info? I posted for bandwagoning on the unCC'd Mason claim that AGar was scummy. How is this not enough information? I, seeing no scum motivation for the Mason claim, found it suspect.
a2rudeboy wrote:11: retraction, another unvote. at this point we are halfway through his iso, and the tally is (including RVS so feel free to judge as needed) : 8 votes, 2 FoS. Every post seems to vote or unvote.
You are counting my post where I voted three times (joke), self-vote (joke), and opening RVS vote. This feels like an attempt to take something out of context in order to bolster your argument - which isn't a town trait.
a2rudeboy wrote:Yes, there was scum on the wagon before, but you got off quick enough in time to make this post. This post reeked to me of trying to distance everyone from the Mysterio/Xite argument, as a simple case of town v town. True, as dj said, most times there is an argument like this on d1 that turns up both people as town. In this post, you both buddy up to the un cc'd mason and try to deflect the heat off of Xite a little. This seems like a perfect combo of moves for Xite's scum buddy. We could say that Xite was flailing due to baseless attacks...but we know now that that's not the case.
I agree with everything except the last sentence. I had no idea Xite was scum, as I said I believed it was town vs. town. You calling the arguments not baseless is not a valid argument. Yes, Xite flipped scum. This does not make the arguments used to get him lynched valid, especially the early debate with Mysterio. I still see no base for the Mysterio attack on Xite . . . because at that time, there was no info about Xite's alignment. While information can be gained by how people joined the wagon, etc, the wagon was started on what I feel was a not-well-performed gambit.
a2rudeboy wrote:You then drop another vote on AGar, largely based on meta. You are doing a sort of rapid flailing of your own at this point, dropping votes and unvotes and FoS all over the place. Scummy.
Already answered why I am not doing a rapid flailing, but I want to point out that this is why iso scumhunting can be dangerous. You risk taking posts out of context, and then misrepresenting your target. (Although, it's hard to believe that you could seriously say the triple vote post was serious.)
a2rudeboy wrote:More AtE.
A little bit of analysis, some valid points, not much here. Keeps the pressure on AG, while trying to argue that it isn't solely based on meta.
It is partially based on meta, partially based on camping out on a wagon being scummy. So yes, I am trying to argue that it isn't solely based on meta. I don't see your point here.
a2rudeboy wrote:14:Smashbro's town read on Xite is wavering, CA calls him scummy. CA also asks that Johnson do a read through of the thread instead of just voting whoever the top lynch candidate is (not a problem, standard) but also feels the need to again state how he thinks Xite isn't scum.
Still don't see anything scummy here. Smashbro saying his Xite read is wavering is the perfect setup for a scumpartner to drop his vote on the wagon after previously defending him. He saw the wagon growing large, and wanted to distance from him in case he got lynched.
a2rudeboy wrote:15: vote change to bv, gives a little analysis. largely seems to be voting an active lurker.
What's the problem here?
17:Says Agar would be the one more likely to go for xite being town, out of a possible Werewolf team of AGar/SSS. Not quite sure what to make of it, but it definitely doesn't seem all kosher. Thinks the wagon was scum-powered, yet he was one of the first on the wagon. Votes bv again, despite his vote already being there. A little careless?
I outlined my reasoning for this. Try reading the post. Your "definitely doesn't seem all kosher" statement makes me think you are suffering from confirmation bias. Why don't you agree with the post?
