In post 1744, I Am Innocent wrote:Why is just about everybody ignoring who voted them!?!?
IAI 1749 wrote:He was not confirmed before he died, he never claimed.
My analysis was day 2 after the flip
In post 1745, RedCoyote wrote:Confirmed now doesn't mean anything. You're attacking Bob for voting Drew before his death. Bob isn't voting Drew now.
In post 1177, I Am Innocent wrote:Going to do some vote count analysis, for Dessew/RC/guessing CyberBob when he checks in, we have two dead townies. Do you know how many times those dead townies received my vote? ZERO.
How about analyzing the wagons yourselves to see where scum is on there. Cyberbob's vote early D1 (3rd on Reinoe) got my attention early. It was why I jumped on him. Guarantee that scum was on those wagons, so how about "analyzing" them rather than OMGUS'ing, RC? Dessew, same challenge goes to you.
In post 1182, I Am Innocent wrote:RC, I know your lazy/OMGUS'ing, but me, pops, and Farside were not on that Reinoe wagon of 5. Neither was beck or dessew.
So 5 of ur 6 scum reads are not on the wagon...do u really think Beck or Dessew could be the last scum and that none of the 3 scum were on that Reinoe wagon?
In post 1186, I Am Innocent wrote:Hi Bob, how predictable.
I notice you on both those wagons, huh? Very curious...
In post 1188, I Am Innocent wrote:Wow, actually 5 of you on both those wagons. The ones of you that are town, I'd think you'd be looking real hard at the other 4 players.
So what does that say about RC/Bob who just vote me to start this day with no real analysis.
In post 1199, I Am Innocent wrote:So come on, you got me, the scum avoiding the town wagons, and now cooldog, the self voting VT claimed second scum on both wagons, whose your third?
This is fun Bob, give it to me!
In post 1757, RedCoyote wrote:Look, I really wanted to talk to SK or Goofy. farside is too far in the tank for IAI and IAI is clearly biased. I had no intention of making a zillion posts here, but IAI's scuminess knows no bounds.
If SK or Goofy comes online and tells me straight up, "RC, in my heart of hearts, I think pops is a better lynch than IAI and you should hammer", I will hammer pops in my next post. Contrasty, if they want to discuss the game with me, I will be willing to do that as well.
In post 1733, RedCoyote wrote:I missed this during my skim of 1226. This is an outstanding catch, Dessew. Everytime I try to go back and read this game, something new comes up that makes me want to dig my heels in. SK, did you see this point?
In post 1627, Squirrel Girl wrote:I think my IAI issue is actually what he's saying kind of feels like multiple little slips because of the town case he's trying to sell on himself that doesn't make much sense unless he knows the alignments of unflipped players or expects his detractors to.
The lie thing I'm indifferent about, it's kind of a derpy misrep, but it is honestly about the same as Pops getting the wrong(?) vibe from IAI as to what IAI was selling - which actually seems reasonable considering how bouncy he is. I'm mostly pinging on it just because multiple Pops voters (Sleepy and Farside) have issue with lies - but no issue with that lie, which has to be just as big of a lie. Heck, it's actually a less interpretive lie, really, so it's probably objectively a purer lie - and it's also being used to present scum reads. SO I really don't get why one is an issue and the other isn't.
I'd also really like farside to sell me on the non-scumhunting thing. i happily agree that's bad, but unless Pops is normally an active scumhunter when town it seems like a playstyle tell being dressed up.
Vote: Farside
I'm putting that out to clarify my own thoughts currently as to the vote I'd want if it was up only to me.
Depending on some answers I get I may move.
Or if I get a lot of sudden sheep I may notJust saying.
In post 1591, Squirrel Girl wrote:@Farside - thanks, also I think I got to see the IAI lie thing Sleepy was talking about now, yeah? That explains why I didn't recall seeing it earlier as it's functionally the same thing he was saying about Sleepy, so I guess I just combined them. I'm going to say that your case, to a large degree, does look the same as the case Sleepy has - your big issue does also seem to revolve around the belief pops expressed of a scum lean towards RC and the theoretical soft push on RC and you're also having issue with the Drew vote.
I'll admit I don't get the Drew vote issue - that seems reasonable as an action paired with his stated beliefs. Maybe I'm just dumb and am missing it, but I don't really see the fire there.
I'll also admit - I have no idea why scum would even sweat a bodyguard. Frankly, bodyguard always sort of struck me as a dumb role, really. Like, if I was scum and someone was a bodyguard it's like 'meh, who cares?' The only way it matters is if they happen to protect an investigative role, really. Maybe I'm coming from a weird position there, but I have no idea why scum would even bother soft pushing on a Bodyguard. Don't tell Sleepy I said Bodyguard though...
@Cyberbob - do you have any reason at all I should think IAI is scum? I keep looking at these cases (and drunk rambles) for why pops is town and I'm all like 'oooh, they're long, and have *quotes* in them!" so I'm all like, guess maybe they must be true! Can you explain why you're not voting for pops already and seem to have this insane belief that poor IAI is scum?
In post 1630, Squirrel Girl wrote:In post 1629, farside22 wrote:So instead of meta searching the player in question doing nothing you ask me his meta and vote me?
That seems opposite land.
Is my case saying all meta.....no. I stated his lack of scum reads and push. You think that comes from town? Why?
I presumed when you had cited that as scummy from him and voted him that you already had an awareness of the meta and knew/suspected this wasn't play that would come from him as town. Was I wrong to presume that?
Maybe it is opposite land, I've had my logic called...(wait for it)....squirrely.
He has certainly expressed scum reads, I can tell that just by going over his iso. I will agree he hasn't pushed scumreads functionally today - but I ask why you presume that to be something he is normally capable of doing and is choosing to not do in this game?
I also note you're trying to frame me into a false debate. I never said his actions justified a town case. I do think they justify a playstyle case,a nd I also could *easily* show you town playing poorly and not scumhunting. Is that really a shocking idea to you, like you've never seen it before? That sounds insane if true.
In post 1670, Squirrel Girl wrote:Actually, I think I sold myself, and we only have two days left and it doesn't look like my cuteness factor has kicked in yet for sheeping;
Unvote: Farside
Vote: IAI
L-1
If this is a scum flip - I would highly suggest a Farside lynch next. Like, highly, highly.
In post 1750, RedCoyote wrote:I voted him, and I'm town. This argument doesn't exactly blow my socks off.
In post 1763, SleepyKrew wrote:In post 1733, RedCoyote wrote:I missed this during my skim of 1226. This is an outstanding catch, Dessew. Everytime I try to go back and read this game, something new comes up that makes me want to dig my heels in. SK, did you see this point?
I might have commented on it when I was defending my hammer, but yeah I definitely noticed and it's part of the reason I suspect him. I did get that he meant "now confirmed", but I still think just phrasing it that way is suspicious.
RedCoyote wrote:Look, I really wanted to talk to SK or Goofy. farside is too far in the tank for IAI and IAI is clearly biased. I had no intention of making a zillion posts here, but IAI's scuminess knows no bounds.
If SK or Goofy comes online and tells me straight up, "RC, in my heart of hearts, I think pops is a better lynch than IAI and you should hammer", I will hammer pops in my next post. Contrasty, if they want to discuss the game with me, I will be willing to do that as well.
In post 0, PokerFace wrote:
The Rules, Stolen from shaft.ed, TSQ, Mr. Stoofer, Flameaxe, Jdodge:
05. You can vote for no lynch to occur during the day. Simply post VOTE: No Lynch. Should this vote reach a majority, it will happen.If no majority is reached during a day then there will be a no lynch when that day ends
In post 1769, singersigner wrote:It's curious that someone got to L-1 and claimed well before someone else did (but hasn't claimed)...wonder what that means,,.
In post 1767, SleepyKrew wrote:You clearly aren't done discussing, and I want to see Squirrel Girl's response to you (I've got some predictions!) so no hammer yet.
In post 1773, farside22 wrote:In post 1767, SleepyKrew wrote:You clearly aren't done discussing, and I want to see Squirrel Girl's response to you (I've got some predictions!) so no hammer yet.
What do you think of squirel girls defense of pops?
