Mini 1190: Game over

[TheFool]

So with that in mind, who do you find scummy?

[monk]

DISCLAIMER: I'm pissed off at games at another site and this game isn't going anywhere atm.

unvote, vote: The Fool

PJ & Thomith are very tempting, but if one is bad, they both are.

Make sense androgynous personage!! We are not going to lynch Masons!! Case on TheFool that doesn't boil down to he's linked to xvart or sleepykrew!! This post screams scummy!!

xvart top scum other than the masons with a friggin case go!!

TheFool you're starting to look town but your posts are still IIoA what are your thoughts on anything at all!!

[TheFool]

TheFool you're starting to look town but your posts are still IIoA what are your thoughts on anything at all!!

Yeah, that's a bad habit of mine. Let me throw together a list of reads here.

From scummiest to towniest:

xvart: I had a townier read on him coming into the game, but don't like the recent play; his avoidance of the SK wagon doesn't help, and the comment in 920 about him looking better in ISO caused me to reread.. I think that's part of where my initial town read comes from

Sundy: play has been fluffy lately, ISOs 33 and 34 still seem like cognitive dissonance to me (34 indicates a long-standing desire for a panzer lynch, 33 has him 'trending town'), trying hard to ignore the xvart case (scumbuddies?)

monk: has good, well thought out posts, but man what was up with CC

Empking: been definitely coasting lately, but I like his earlier play

Heliman: I believe the vig claim for now and have obvious doubts towards a scum-vig, but he's been very fluffy (still no vote), Sunday's play was pretty odd, and Toro's not that great either, so worth keeping an eye on at least

Thomith: masonry aside, there's not much to go on, but I have a slight gut town read on Thomith

Panzerjager: I still like the case on him, but I believe the masonry claim for now

PBuG: good posting, push on SK doesn't read as bussing to me

Hoppster: also good posting, and I doubt even more that his huge-caps SK yelling is bussing

I'm not really sure how to order those last four, so I just threw them in there.

[Sundy]

DISCLAIMER: I'm pissed off at games at another site and this game isn't going anywhere atm.

unvote, vote: The Fool

PJ & Thomith are very tempting, but if one is bad, they both are.

Make sense androgynous personage!! We are not going to lynch Masons!! Case on TheFool that doesn't boil down to he's linked to xvart or sleepykrew!! This post screams scummy!!

GREAT FANTASTIC. My post isn't on either of the mason claims, so I don't see what your problem is. My reason for mentioning them is why I'm crossing them off for a lynch this round, which is what you did recently as well. Although it's too bad there's not more consensus, because I think Xvart's points about the weirdness of someone "forgetting" what their PM said are more plausible than simply the fact that day-talk is allowed for other masons. BUT ANYWAY.

I'm not trying to ignore the Xvart case, but it just hasn't been that convincing to me. He generally digs down pretty deep when going after a case, and I find a lot of it persuasive.

Monk

Sundy

(town)
Hoppster

Thomith

(mason claim)

Panzerjager

(mason claim)

Heliman

(apparently vig)
Xvart
TheFool

PBuG

(i like, although one recent case did catch my attention)

Empking

(i like)

And I'm not a big fan of the Xvart case. I guess Monk is being more productive now, though if you ask me I'm NOT totally convinced it's a town slot, I don't like how he's called a couple people townie and then accused them of being scummy, opportunistic, wot wot?

That leaves Hoppster and TheFool.

What are good reasons for voting TheFool?
1) Jakesh left a bad taste in the mouth
2) His transition from Monk to Xvart felt weird to me, and only explained in retrospect

[Thomith]

Blast, so close to having scum out in the open.

could you explain this in different words that mean the same as what you meant please, as this could be read in more than one way.

[PJ.]

Hey spoon I voted xvart in 929

[xvart]

xvart top scum other than the masons with a friggin case go!!

Well, changing my alternative reads a little bit, I would say you are scum if Panzer and Thomith are not. Despite what others have said about how townie your entrance to the game was your behavior has been anything but protown. I think it's funny that you are asking me for a "friggin case" when you have given anything but an actual case on anyone, but that is neither here nor there.

Monk hasn't put together a single coherent case on anyone despite his best efforts to appear that way. His read on me has flipped several times with insufficient information justifying the reads:

Scumersons

• Xvart

monk is Towny McTownperson. I say we turn this wagon around and lynch Xvart.

Let's run with this for the moment:
VOTE: xvart

UNVOTE: xvart

reasoning to come momentarily

In the end I think he's closer to being town though he's fine enough staying in null so let's ISO his original pick for scum: Hoppster

xvart goes back to scummy read, in ISO he's not scummy but when you actually go find the stuff he's pulling up it's non-existent/quotefarmed beyond recognition.

xvart however doesn't seem to have any major links to SK pending on PBuG and I guess panzer showing me these, I'm not too sold on it, though I still need another scum read. I'll have another read through the thread.

VOTE: xvart
Horrible post was horrible

That's pretty much it except you're bloody scummy so we're taking you down first if scum are smart they could leave the masons alive I mean take 1175 for an example, just finished up and the masons stayed alive also as I said id rather lynch thomith if we had no other leads

Monk says I'm scum right out of the gate. Then he ISOs me and I'm town. Then he ISOs hoppster and realizes that I'm scum again. The biggest issue with coming back around to thinking I'm scum is that he does it based off of someone else's ISO. If he really believed that opinion he would have thought my actions were scummy independent of that, since I repeatedly quoted and referenced Hoppsters posts that apparently now condemn me. Furthermore, by this time he had already read the thread in entirety what appears to be three times so my level of scumminess should have been apparent through any one of those rereads in the context of the entire game. Plus, your predecessors behavior (which you seem to agree upon).

Can you articulate your case on me? Why do you think I am "bloody scummy"? I have yet to see a coherent post (from anyone) explaining how my behaviors are more likely to come from scum.

UNVOTE:
VOTE: Monk

Going back to Hoppster, I really dislike how he has been relatively unengaged with the game once I stopped pressuring him. Essentially, his entire D2 has revolved around asking people why nobody listened to him about SleepyKrew or why nobody is explaining why there were ignoring him. There have been some other peripheral comments (some in relationship to his large font SleepyKrew condemnation) and some other non committal comments. If Hoppster is scum with SleepyKrew then he could have just started pushing him while he was under attack to save face, maybe save himself, or if he did flip to clear SleepyKrew.

The whole "let's talk about yesterday" attitude is underwhelming and not constructive unless he identified people who he thought was deliberately ignoring him to save SleepyKrew (as town would do); which hasn't happened. His only concern appears to be that he be recognized as the driving force on SleepyKrew.

I also forgot about the question he asked asking everyone for their read on volkkan. What was the point of this question? We all knew he flipped town so what exactly was he trying to get at here? Again, if there was something to indicate scum from this question why was there no follow up? It is just a fluff question otherwise. Plus, the whole railing on me for something he says is a null tell and then talking about his blood boiling is interesting.

And I guess I shouldn't be surprised by now that Panzer has once again avoided responding to my commentary on his claim/voting record...

Panzer

- No response to your obvious voting motivation failure in conjunction with flipped scum and your alleged inside knowledge? I can't say it enough: Based on everything Panzer has said at the time of his vote on Empking and all the alleged role information that he had that

he knew without a doubt that SleepyKrew was lying scum, yet voted someone else.

And at the risk of continuing to be the crazy uncle at Thanksgiving that won't shut up and nobody listens to, the point Panzer made was that daytalking masons was standard fare, not that it has happened once before. The fact that he won't even put in the effort to look up this information is moderately concerning, but he has shown a level of disinterest in actually providing examples or doing any sort of leg work to get what he wants, so again, I'm not too surprised.

[Twistedspoon]

Hey spoon I voted xvart in 929

gah. I said put votes on the start of a new line.

[Twistedspoon]

Votecount 2.9

Did you know?: only 1 in 20 children are born on the day predicted by the doctor

Monk(2) - PBuG, Xvart

Xvart(5) - Monk, Thefool, Hoppster, thomith, Pansy
Thefool(2) - empking, sundy

Not Voting (1): Heliman

With 10 Alive it takes 6 to lynch, 5 to no lynch.
The deadline is 13th July GMT 08:00[/b]

[/size]

Deadline is Friday, 08:00 GMT :0

[xvart]

I seriously don't know what panzer was doing, but you have more scum points

Please articulate why I have more scum points than Panzer. You have neglected to differentiate our play in comparison to each other and relative to scum motivations of each. In fact, you haven't made a single comment regarding Panzer's alignment other than your first list grouping him in the town category.

[Hoppster]

Hoppster

- I never said it was a

good

defense. It tied hand in hand with what I was saying with motivation and intent behind specific behaviors. I believe my behavior to be town motivated, in that I am advocating and trying to get scummy people lynched. I have yet to see anyone discuss my scum intent and motivations. Furthermore, if it is a null tell why does it fill you with bloodlust? And, if it is a null tell then what exactly am I being accused of doing?

IF IT'S NOT A GOOD DEFENCE

WHY MAKE IT

IT'S NOT EVEN A DEFENCE

THERE'S NO TOWN MOTIVATION FOR MAKING A STUPID DEFENCE LIKE THAT


You are also, as you were on Day 1, not reading my posts.

I did not say your defence was a null-tell, I said your play-style (the one you were harking as a town-tell - "HEY NO SCUM WOULD DO THIS GAIZ FOSHO" was a null-tell.

Your defence is stupid and scummy.

I'm only restraining myself because I have seen town do that stupid defence before, otherwise, believe, I would be baying for your blood on the basis of that post

alone

.


Explain to me, xvart, why it was that on Day 1 you were able to respond to my walls but you somehow selectively chose not to respond to the bits where I called out SleepyKrew as scum.

Your vote on monk is bad bad bad. Changing your mind is not a scum-tell. In this case I'm inclined to believe it's a town-tell as from time-stamps etc. there's clearly a train of thought. You like talking about how there's no scum motivation for your posts - explain the scum motivation for monk saying you're town and then changing his mind before anybody has posted. (I'll give you a clue - the only one is WIFOMic.)

Give us a list of reads. "X and Y are scummy" is not what I'm looking for. I mean a player-by-player list of reads.


This post from TheFool is a very good post and a lot of what he is saying strikes a very good chord (ie. I'm thinking similarly).

And I'm not a big fan of the Xvart case. I guess Monk is being more productive now, though if you ask me I'm NOT totally convinced it's a town slot, I don't like how he's called a couple people townie and then accused them of being scummy, opportunistic, wot wot?

Hypocritical much, wot wot?

PBuG

(i like, although one recent case did catch my attention)

I guess Monk is being more productive now, though if you ask me I'm NOT totally convinced it's a town slot

While you strike both of those off your lynch list you're leaving your options reaaaaaally open should there be a push in either of those directions.

And yours is much worse than monk, because you're doing it more subtly.

2) His transition from Monk to Xvart felt weird to me, and only explained in retrospect

'Zis is not a scum-tell.

But hallo, hypocritical much, wot wot?

unvote, vote: The Fool

1) Jakesh left a bad taste in the mouth
2) His transition from Monk to Xvart felt weird to me, and only explained in retrospect

I'm not trying to ignore the Xvart case, but it just hasn't been that convincing to me. He generally digs down pretty deep when going after a case, and I find a lot of it persuasive.

Yah-huh.

So the case didn't convince you, so you thought you wouldn't bother explaining to everybody on the wagon why they were wrong.

@ Mod: Could we get another extension please? Considering PBug hasn't checked in (due to internet troubles) for, umm, ages.
Also please fix past VCs to take Panzerjager's vote into account kthx.

Empking: compare TheFool's read list and Sundy's read list and tell me why TheFool is a better lynch than Sundy.

[Twistedspoon]

fine, I'll give you a deadline extension.... Wednesday max. Then you'd have had 3 weeks

If PBuG doesn't turn up then I may have to do like my 10th replacement or sumthin

[Sundy]

While you strike both of those off your lynch list you're leaving your options reaaaaaally open should there be a push in either of those directions.

Yeah big deal. I'm not sure who's scum, so I consider ALL my options open if a good enough case is presented, thank you. From a scum perspective, sure, that's me keeping my options open for a mis-lynch. But from my perspective, I'm just town with limited information.

And yours is much worse than monk, because you're doing it more subtly.

By "yours" I assume you reference the way I'm keeping my options open and/or changing my mind. Like you said, changing one's mind alone isn't scummy. Like you ALSO said, what you need is a train of thought. I've had a train of thought for my actions. I don't see Monk, both in the case of Xvart (as laid out above), and in the way he did an ISO on me, and then started pushing the idea I was scummy simply because I voted The Fool. That's not a train of thought.

But hallo, hypocritical much, wot wot?

Wow, the "wot wot" bit must have really annoyed you for you to repeat it twice, wot wot?

So the case didn't convince you, so you thought you wouldn't bother explaining to everybody on the wagon why they were wrong.

I did just that often.
MOST FREQUENTLY in response to you Hoppster. Plz read.

Actually, re-reading my ISO I am going to go ahead and assign scum points to whoever said I was trying to ignore the Xvart case, for blatant lying. Let's see, who was that?

AH YES. THE FOOL.
Great, so there's a 3rd reason to be voting him.

[Empking]

Empking: compare TheFool's read list and Sundy's read list and tell me why TheFool is a better lynch than Sundy.

Well, Sundy's reads are sensible and TF is smoking crack. Not really a tell from either of them from those two posts.

[xvart]

I'm only restraining myself because I have seen town do that stupid defence before, otherwise, believe, I would be baying for your blood on the basis of that post

alone

.

As I said, it's the only thing I could say because no real substantive case has actually been presented on me being scum (and if it has, a link to it will shut me up). It's also a comparison of play, specifically to Panzer. I have detailed exactly why Panzer's behavior, posts, and commentary come from a scum mindset and the best that I have actually seen presented on me is this WIFOM "his attacks are so scummy."

Explain to me, xvart, why it was that on Day 1 you were able to respond to my walls but you somehow selectively chose not to respond to the bits where I called out SleepyKrew as scum.

Oh good. Now that I've called you out for never following up on your "HEY WHY WAS NOBODY LISTENING TO ME YESTERDAY???" with no follow up or determination of people ignoring you being indicative of scum you bust out how I was selectively not responding, implying scum motivation? When I have someone pegged as scum I rarely listen to them and who they think is scum as their opinion can be sorted out as a bus or whatever after they flip. When I thought you were 100% scum I didn't care who you thought was scum because you were, in my opinion at the time, scum. Once I started questioning my read on you I went back (as I have said) and was looking at what you were saying.

Do you think my "selective reading" of your SleepyKrew suspicion yesterday was scum motivated? If so, why are you just now bringing this up???

So the real question is why did you make such a big deal out of nobody listening to you yesterday and never assigned any reads based on the people that ignored you? With no follow up to that line of questioning it seems awfully close to just wanting to show off how you were the proponent of SleepyKrew lynch and nothing else. That is only compounded by your relative lack of contribution today outside of making a big deal out of nobody listening to you. Those two behaviors combined look an awful lot like scum trying to not make waves today and attempting to ride the town cred you established by pushing the SleepyKrew case.

Your vote on monk is bad bad bad. Changing your mind is not a scum-tell. In this case I'm inclined to believe it's a town-tell as from time-stamps etc. there's clearly a train of thought. You like talking about how there's no scum motivation for your posts - explain the scum motivation for monk saying you're town and then changing his mind before anybody has posted. (I'll give you a clue - the only one is WIFOMic.)

I am quite aware that changing one's mind is not a scumtell; in fact, we've discussed this before. The problem, as was the case with you, is that there was no logical explanation of the changing read or justification for the changing read that is especially concerning. That is compounded by the logic presented for his changing read seemed disingenuous at best and opportunistic at worst.

Give us a list of reads. "X and Y are scummy" is not what I'm looking for. I mean a player-by-player list of reads.

That's not going to happen because it isn't how I operate. I rarely get town reads or assign town tells to people. I hunt scum. Typically I have scum reads and everyone else is a null read. In rare cases I'll see something that someone says that is unique to a town vantage point that would almost certainly not come from a scum mindset, but that is rare. I've given to everyone on a platter where my opinions lay based on possible setup permutations.

[monk]

xvart top scum other than the masons with a friggin case go!!

Well, changing my alternative reads a little bit, I would say you are scum if Panzer and Thomith are not. Despite what others have said about how townie your entrance to the game was your behavior has been anything but protown. I think it's funny that you are asking me for a "friggin case" when you have given anything but an actual case on anyone, but that is neither here nor there.

Monk hasn't put together a single coherent case on anyone despite his best efforts to appear that way. His read on me has flipped several times with insufficient information justifying the reads:

Scumersons

• Xvart

monk is Towny McTownperson. I say we turn this wagon around and lynch Xvart.

Let's run with this for the moment:
VOTE: xvart

UNVOTE: xvart

reasoning to come momentarily

In the end I think he's closer to being town though he's fine enough staying in null so let's ISO his original pick for scum: Hoppster

xvart goes back to scummy read, in ISO he's not scummy but when you actually go find the stuff he's pulling up it's non-existent/quotefarmed beyond recognition.

xvart however doesn't seem to have any major links to SK pending on PBuG and I guess panzer showing me these, I'm not too sold on it, though I still need another scum read. I'll have another read through the thread.

VOTE: xvart
Horrible post was horrible

That's pretty much it except you're bloody scummy so we're taking you down first if scum are smart they could leave the masons alive I mean take 1175 for an example, just finished up and the masons stayed alive also as I said id rather lynch thomith if we had no other leads

Monk says I'm scum right out of the gate. Then he ISOs me and I'm town. Then he ISOs hoppster and realizes that I'm scum again. The biggest issue with coming back around to thinking I'm scum is that he does it based off of someone else's ISO. If he really believed that opinion he would have thought my actions were scummy independent of that, since I repeatedly quoted and referenced Hoppsters posts that apparently now condemn me. Furthermore, by this time he had already read the thread in entirety what appears to be three times so my level of scumminess should have been apparent through any one of those rereads in the context of the entire game. Plus, your predecessors behavior (which you seem to agree upon).

Can you articulate your case on me? Why do you think I am "bloody scummy"? I have yet to see a coherent post (from anyone) explaining how my behaviors are more likely to come from scum.

Here is my original case on you:

in ISO he's not scummy but when you actually go find the stuff he's pulling up it's non-existent/quotefarmed beyond recognition.

Case on you: horrendous amounts of misrepresentation, huge song and dance about you being picked on because you're verbose, suggesting we should lynch the masons, which flies in the face of all reason. I have stated this and you haven't seemed to comment on it, more misrep of someone who is actively participating with you. So let me put this out clearly:

What on earth is the TOWN reason for blatant misrepresentation of someone and distraction tactics of going, oh look over there "have a post wall where I've chopped and changed the friggin case on me beyond recognition"

Please oh please, is there someone out there with intent to hammer, so we can get a friggin claim?

[PJ.]

As I said, it's the only thing I could say because no real substantive case has actually been presented on me being scum (and if it has, a link to it will shut me up). It's also a comparison of play, specifically to Panzer. I have detailed exactly why Panzer's behavior, posts, and commentary come from a scum mindset and the best that I have actually seen presented on me is this WIFOM "his attacks are so scummy."

This is entirely untrue. I have stated several times why you are scummy, and why your attacks are scummy but you either have horrible reading comprehension or are deliberately twisting the words. Honestly I'm about to quit responding to you all together, and have been deliberately ignoring your case on me because it's shit.

[PJ.]

also, I echo monk's statement's entirely.

[Heliman]

Heliman: I believe the vig claim for now and have obvious doubts towards a scum-vig, but he's been very fluffy (still no vote), Sunday's play was pretty odd, and Toro's not that great either, so worth keeping an eye on at least

Ugh, yeah, sorry. It seems I'm not very good at replacing after all; I've been blocking a good bit on this game.

Xvart, despite what I said in 970, seems to be the best second option. After rereading the last game I played with him again, He actually seems even more defensive then he was in the last game, if that's even a possibility.

Ok Xvart, I'm threatening a hammer on you (again). What's your claim?

[xvart]

Here is my original case on you:

in ISO he's not scummy but when you actually go find the stuff he's pulling up it's non-existent/quotefarmed beyond recognition.

Case on you: horrendous amounts of misrepresentation, huge song and dance about you being picked on because you're verbose, suggesting we should lynch the masons, which flies in the face of all reason. I have stated this and you haven't seemed to comment on it, more misrep of someone who is actively participating with you. So let me put this out clearly:

What on earth is the TOWN reason for blatant misrepresentation of someone and distraction tactics of going, oh look over there "have a post wall where I've chopped and changed the friggin case on me beyond recognition"

The problem, as I have explained, is that there is a disconnect about your "original case" on me when you came to the realization that I was being scum and misrepping people. You called me scum in your first real post of the day (no commentary). You even voted me a little later (no commentary). The disconnect occurs when you read me in ISO and then unvote me and put me in the leaning town/null category. Then you ISO Hoppster and come to the conclusion that I am scum based on Hoppsters ISO, presumably because I misrepped him and quote farmed into oblivion or whatever. If you truly believed this why did it take you a read through, an ISO of me, and an ISO of Hoppster to come to this conclusion? And if you really did just come to that conclusion at that point in the game why were you originally voting me? If you believed that when you first replaced into the game when you accused me of being scum and voted me, why did you unvote me?

Your voting pattern and justifications do not align with what you are saying, unless there is some mystical reason you thought I was scum before you ISOed me.

Oh, and not for nothing, but your final area tagged is a failed example because you are asking what is the town benefit and not asking what is the scum benefit/motivation. There is a distinct difference.

Case on you: horrendous amounts of misrepresentation, huge song and dance about you being picked on because you're verbose, suggesting we should lynch the masons, which flies in the face of all reason. I have stated this and you haven't seemed to comment on it, more misrep of someone who is actively participating with you.

Where was my "huge song and dance about [me] being picked on because [I'm] verbose"?
Wanting to lynch a claimed mason does not fly in the face of all reason because Panzer is so incredibly scummy it is sickening. Not lynching someone who has committed such atrocious scumtells flies in the face of all reason. Regardless of all the contradictions that Panzer has done and his overall scummy behavior the sole fact that he didn't want to lynch SleepyKrew on D1 when he thought SleepyKrew was being serious with his mason miller claim and knew there wouldn't be two mason groups in the same game is basically claiming scum in my book.

This is entirely untrue. I have stated several times why you are scummy, and why your attacks are scummy but you either have horrible reading comprehension or are deliberately twisting the words. Honestly I'm about to quit responding to you all together, and have been deliberately ignoring your case on me because it's shit.

It isn't shit as much as you wish it were true. The fact remains that you thought SleepyKrew was serious with his mason claim. You said as much on a few separate occasions. You then said you didn't think there would be two mason groups in the same game. SleepyKrew flipped scum. You then claimed mason.

The other pertinent thing you have been avoiding answering directly correlates with your "case" on me (something a town person would want to sort out to help lynch the person they believe to be scum),

that being that you agreed with a majority of my points on Hoppster and then when I put the full court press on you those same things you agreed with all the sudden become the basis for your case on me.

Town have nothing to hide and you seem to be hiding the answers to these questions well.

Xvart, despite what I said in 970, seems to be the best second option. After rereading the last game I played with him again, He actually seems even more defensive then he was in the last game, if that's even a possibility.

Ok Xvart, I'm threatening a hammer on you (again). What's your claim?

To be honest, once I'm lynched in this game I believe I will have been lynched more the past two weeks than in my entire mafiascum history combined. For what it is worth (probably not much), I don't think I have a solid meta against me but with the limited number of times I've been lynched I think the closest to meta someone can find on me is I stay calm and collected when getting lynched as scum whereas I am more desperate as town because I know the lynch on me is a mislynch.

I am a Vanilla Townie. I still want to go back and research Panzer's archived games to dig up his mason experience (since his town mindset is to do the absolute minimum to prove he is town when under suspicion). Also, if it comes down to lynching a VT, I would highly suggest lynching Monk instead due to his obvious disconnect and voting patterns. People that do not have consistent voting are more likely to be scum. CC was a decent lynch back when he was in the game and Monk's behavior makes it a better lynch now.

Anyways, drop your hammer as you wish. No hard feelings. It was a fun game. I have failed the town and for that I apologize.

[monk]

What can't you understand that when I look at your arguments for a hoppster lynch and look at where you say he's being scummy and what you are pulling him up on it's just not there or deliberately misrepresented in order to get you some form of town standing.

[xvart]

One final thought, in concise manner: Tomorrow, you'll need to look at the people on my wagon and specifically their reasons for joining my wagon. Each I have already deconstructed but for easy of reference tomorrow:

Monk

:

The problem, as I have explained, is that there is a disconnect about your "original case" on me when you came to the realization that I was being scum and misrepping people. You called me scum in your first real post of the day (no commentary). You even voted me a little later (no commentary). The disconnect occurs when you read me in ISO and then unvote me and put me in the leaning town/null category. Then you ISO Hoppster and come to the conclusion that I am scum based on Hoppsters ISO, presumably because I misrepped him and quote farmed into oblivion or whatever. If you truly believed this why did it take you a read through, an ISO of me, and an ISO of Hoppster to come to this conclusion? And if you really did just come to that conclusion at that point in the game why were you originally voting me? If you believed that when you first replaced into the game when you accused me of being scum and voted me, why did you unvote me?

Panzer

:

The other pertinent thing you have been avoiding answering directly correlates with your "case" on me (something a town person would want to sort out to help lynch the person they believe to be scum),

that being that you agreed with a majority of my points on Hoppster and then when I put the full court press on you those same things you agreed with all the sudden become the basis for your case on me.

Town have nothing to hide and you seem to be hiding the answers to these questions well.

Another question that needs to be followed up on tomorrow if it isn't answered before I die (directed to Hoppster):

Do you think my "selective reading" of your SleepyKrew suspicion yesterday was scum motivated? If so, why are you just now bringing this up???

So the real question is why did you make such a big deal out of nobody listening to you yesterday and never assigned any reads based on the people that ignored you? With no follow up to that line of questioning it seems awfully close to just wanting to show off how you were the proponent of SleepyKrew lynch and nothing else. That is only compounded by your relative lack of contribution today outside of making a big deal out of nobody listening to you. Those two behaviors combined look an awful lot like scum trying to not make waves today and attempting to ride the town cred you established by pushing the SleepyKrew case.

Another follow up to something:

Your vote on monk is bad bad bad. Changing your mind is not a scum-tell. In this case I'm inclined to believe it's a town-tell as from time-stamps etc. there's clearly a train of thought.

Is it the reason behind my vote that is "bad bad bad" or the fact that I am voting Monk? Because you were previously voting him (in a post where you said I was town). I also don't know what occurred between your vote on CC and your vote on me that convinced you I was scum. The things I am now accused of are not new revelations, so what specifically made you change your mind about me? My WIFOM defense?

[xvart]

What can't you understand that when I look at your arguments for a hoppster lynch and look at where you say he's being scummy and what you are pulling him up on it's just not there or deliberately misrepresented in order to get you some form of town standing.

You are missing the relevant direct question: was this the reason you voted for me in your first post? If not, why did you vote for me in the first place? The basis (and seemingly sole reason) for voting me is my attacks on Hoppster, which you only disclosed after you unvoted me and said I was leaning town/null. Did you miss the entire argument and my alleged misrepping on your first read through?

[monk]

What can't you understand that when I look at your arguments for a hoppster lynch and look at where you say he's being scummy and what you are pulling him up on it's just not there or deliberately misrepresented in order to get you some form of town standing.

You are missing the relevant direct question: was this the reason you voted for me in your first post? If not, why did you vote for me in the first place? The basis (and seemingly sole reason) for voting me is my attacks on Hoppster, which you only disclosed after you unvoted me and said I was leaning town/null. Did you miss the entire argument and my alleged misrepping on your first read through?

First vote based on gut from a quick read of the thread. Then I read you in ISO and because the misrepping cannot be obvious from just one ISO. On reading Hoppster's ISO I saw this and so was switching back and forth reading the argument.

You still haven't answered my question as to the town motivation behind misrepresentation of players and their cases on you.

[PJ.]

I'm at my girlfriend's place so

V/LA until tuesday or beyond

And I'm just flat not reading or responding to xvart's post for the entirity of him being on this game. He's ridiculous.