BooKitty wrote:Are you not reading, or are you lying on purpose?
I'm glad to see I finally got some snark out of you.
But seriously, neither of those options is accurate -- one of us has grossly misread the situation. It's possible it's me. Here's where I got that:
ABR wrote:
Translation: Thin reason found for not voting for buddy.
How do you interpret this post? This came right after porochaz moved his vote from Boo to ABR. It sounds to me like ABR is accusing Poro of moving his vote off of you (the "buddy" in question). I'm having a hard time reading this in another way, so I think you might have to spell it out for me.
In post 1803, Save The Dragons wrote:I'm under the impression that one of mathcam or DGB is scum, but unlikely both so for now I'd like to keep my vote there. I would support a mathcam lynch if one became relevant. But I will look at CES and Bookitty a little closer just in case, since I don't think your analysis on the mathcam wagon is wrong.
In post 1813, Save The Dragons wrote:I feel like if DGB is town, the way mathcam handled that was kind of like a cautious scum who knows DGB is town. Actually I could see mathcam's play as trying to distance if they're both scum but it just seems more likely that one is scum and one's not, particularly looking at it from DGB's play with regards to mathcam.
...but at the moment I really want to know if I'm truly alone on my "DGB is scum" island.
I'm going back and forth on mathcam, not sure how I feel about him.
It really does seem like STD went out of his way to un-suspect mathcam. He didn't join the wagon of 5 on cam to start out D3, and developed CES as a backup suspect and slowly unwound his suspicions of cam, who he had done a scum-iso on D2.
It looks like you omitted this argument from your mathcam-STD compilation, MBL.
mathcam wrote:
I'd argue that the real knock any theory that has a STD-mathcam theory scmpair is my argument (which played heavily into my willingness to lynch STD despite my erroneous read on him) is that one of LML's scumlist {mathcam, STD, Sotty} had to be scum. Just think about how silly of a move it would be to postulate that one of three people were scum, when two of those people were on my scum team (and the third on almost no one's top scum list at the time). Even with the inevitable WIFOM argument that a scum could make this move, I think you'd have to agree that there was no reason for me to, and doing so was done at the detriment of the scum.
I maintain this is a pretty strong argument in my favor.
I'm intrigued about your point about me voting before I went V/LA. Where does that train of reasoning lead when applied to VitR's vote on ABR before departing?
VitR's vote, at first glance, seems to be protective of you, cam. Secondly, it's on someone who I believe has a fair number of supporters (ABR) so it's unlikely to lead to a lynch, which means it's a conservative play by VitR. He doesn't seem to want to be on a lynchwagon today--leaving his vote on you or Poro would have sent the opposite message.
Funny, I have the same train of thought with an opposite conclusion -- I view VitR as being possibly protective of BooKitty, but the argument only
really
provides what you point out. He didn't want to get in trouble with his vote during his absence. This may be for town reasons or scum reasons, though I lean the latter. Why do you think that vote is protective of
@Mathcam: Because VitaminR took his vote OFF you to put it on ABR.
In post 4362, Albert B. Rampage wrote:Translation: Thin reason found for not voting for buddy. Vote for main tunnel again.
@ABR: What did you mean by this, please? Mathcam is arguing that you think Porochaz-Bookitty-??? is the scumteam, if I understand correctly.
"Oh, you can't help that," said the Cat: "we're all mad here. I'm mad. You're mad."
"How do you know I'm mad?" said Alice.
"You must be," said the Cat, "or you wouldn't have come here."
"Oh, you can't help that," said the Cat: "we're all mad here. I'm mad. You're mad."
"How do you know I'm mad?" said Alice.
"You must be," said the Cat, "or you wouldn't have come here."
mathcam wrote:We need two of {MBL, chamber, undo} to join us, and barring any major shifts in attitude or compelling new cases, I just don't see any other conclusion to this day.
I can see another conclusion to this day:
In post 4373, Bookitty wrote:
The fact that mathcam wagons just seem to dissolve while other wagons (Yos and Glork are two I definitely remember) gain traction and go the distance easily makes me feel even more sure that mathcam is scum.
In post 4357, Albert B. Rampage wrote:mathcam voted Bookitty too easily. He's scum with VitaminR and Bookitty will be re-evaluated after they are both lynched.
In post 4324, chamber wrote:And I'd lynch you [mathcam] or porochaz over bookitty or vitR, but MBL is where I want my vote.
To be honest, I am willing to join Boo, ABR and chamber here. Guess we just need to translate our intentions into votes. VOTE: mathcam
In post 4380, Bookitty wrote:@Mathcam: Because VitaminR took his vote OFF you to put it on ABR.
But the fact remains that he voted me in the first place. I know that can't stand for much by itself, but how can that be counted as more protective than his actions toward you?
undo: Who do you think my two scumbuddies are? I know we've been at odds all game. You've attacked me every other post for two months, and in terms of actions, I think you're the scummiest player here. I guess I'd just ask you/everyone to keep in mind that there are three scum here working together to accomplish a goal. I, on the other hand, haven't been able to get basically anyone to work with me on anything for even a moderate length of time.
In post 4362, Albert B. Rampage wrote:Translation: Thin reason found for not voting for buddy. Vote for main tunnel again.
@ABR: What did you mean by this, please? Mathcam is arguing that you think Porochaz-Bookitty-??? is the scumteam, if I understand correctly.
I'm still curious -- what did
you
think he meant by this, that you would be so vehemently that I was lying about something? Who did you think was the "buddy" in question? Because I'm starting to suspect that
How has VitaminR been protective of me? It's a serious question; I haven't seen anything like that.
Response to post ninja: I thought ABR was referring to you because of the "not voting for buddy." It can't be me, because Porochaz had JUST been voting for me, so there was no "not voting" there imo. I think ABR would have said "moving vote off buddy" if that's what he had meant.
"Oh, you can't help that," said the Cat: "we're all mad here. I'm mad. You're mad."
"How do you know I'm mad?" said Alice.
"You must be," said the Cat, "or you wouldn't have come here."
Okay. I now believe that we both have plausible interpretations of what ABR meant.
As to VitR's protection: Well, if you just look at all of VitR's posts and search for "BooKitty", there's quite a few positive references, including several times in which he raised an eyebrow at others' attacks on you: Just looking quickly, I see
VitR wrote:chamber, what is your issue with Bookitty?
VitR wrote:I'm still not really getting what's so scummy about Bookitty's recent posts
And this happened most recently in his post 4282 to me, which was probably when I starting really indulging my BooKitty-VitR thought process:
VitR, to BooKitty wrote:
I don't think you're scum. mathcam could very well be, but I wish I could say I'm as convinced as you are. I don't like the hammers, and I'm not particularly charmed by the vote on you, but, like I said, he seems sincerely engaged with the game also.
In post 1614, VitaminR wrote:I've thought mathcam town pretty much since Day 1 and have never understood the wagon on him. And I have said as much. I only made that post because his frustration in Post 1578 clinched that read for me.
Acknowledging and dismissing the case against mathcam:
In post 1670, VitaminR wrote:I get what you're saying, but complaining about no one taking his scumhunting seriously seems like a townie thing to do to me. Why get upset if you're scum? You'd know that your case was wrong (unless you're bussing, I guess).
In post 1980, VitaminR wrote:I've said repeatedly that I don't get why people think mathcam is scum. What do you expect me to do? Not vote anyone?
Agreeing with mathcam that Sotty7 is probable scum:
I've agonized about this a little in my head, but I think it's the best option. I still think her play with regard to LML looked bad and her votes have largely been easy ones.
In post 2315, mathcam wrote:I'm very intrigued by Sotty's last few posts, which have all focused on how there's nothing for her to argue against. There's no "The wagon is wrong because..." or "A better wagon is blah because..." She even goes so far as to call the wagon unfair. Whether or not this is true, this does paint to me a slight picture of scum bemoaning being caught for circumstances out of her control, annoyed that she played the game carefully enough to have nothing to actually be attacked for, and yet got caught away. I'm sure this is partly me trying to retroactively justify the wagon, but it sounds pretty reasonable.
I sort of had the same feeling. I also don't really like how she's using the fact that ABR called my case poor without coming out and calling it that herself. Seems a little disingenuous. If you think it's poor, say so. If you don't, don't use it in your defense.
In post 770, VitaminR wrote:As for mathcam, in Post 719, he says that, after re-reading, he's noticed the case against me (laid out by Yos at some point). This seems like the kind of naturalistic change in how you perceive the game that is hard for scum to fake (this assumes that scum is less likely to re-read just to test their opinions of the game and unlikely to try and find new suspicions at a time when there's no strong incentive to---since there's no wagon on me). It could be a subtle early play to set up a wagon tomorrow, I suppose, but the simplest interpretation is just that he's town.
Criticizing PJ for questioning mathcam:
In post 771, VitaminR wrote:I particularly don't like this question directed at mathcam:
In Post 756, petroleumjelly wrote: Also, can you explain the arguments against VitaminR in your own words?
This question feels so manipulative. mathcam made it decently clear what he had in mind (Yos's earlier case against me). It feels like pj is using the pretense of trying to get insight into mathcam's thought processes to create content that pushes the game in a pro-scum direction.
"Oh, you can't help that," said the Cat: "we're all mad here. I'm mad. You're mad."
"How do you know I'm mad?" said Alice.
"You must be," said the Cat, "or you wouldn't have come here."
Well, but then there's the fact that he's never once voted for you, compared to:
VitR wrote:
Vote: mathcam
I'd be really surprised if he wasn't scum at this point, with those two dodgy hammers.
That wasn't a throw-away vote, or jumping on an inevitable wagon, and it came on a day when it was clear I'd be one of the top (but maybe not
the
top) candidate. Doing that to a scumbuddy is a risky move.
Nevertheless, I see your point as well. In fact, save for a couple of obvious stand-outs (ABR and Yos), VitR has not been at odds with almost anyone this game. I'll concede that I probably saw VitR's voting of ABR as buddying toward you predominantly because I was already on the lookout for evidence of said buddying.
I just checked. VitaminR is out until September 10th. Deadline is September 10th.
I don't like voting for people who aren't going to be around before deadline to defend themselves. However, I've made it clear that I think there's a mathcam-VitaminR-??? scumteam. I'd be willing to make an exception and vote VitaminR if it came down to a compromise.
By contrast, though, you (mathcam) have not given a three-person or two-person scumteam. If I understand you correctly, you're arguing that I'm the best lynch because I could potentially be scum with just about anyone. How does that sync up with your statement that
In post 4388, mathcam wrote:In fact, save for a couple of obvious stand-outs (ABR and Yos), VitR has not been at odds with almost anyone this game.
Wouldn't that argue that VitaminR is equally likely to fit into just as many hypothetical scumteams? How do you reconcile these two assertions?
Do you think VitaminR is scum?
"Oh, you can't help that," said the Cat: "we're all mad here. I'm mad. You're mad."
"How do you know I'm mad?" said Alice.
"You must be," said the Cat, "or you wouldn't have come here."
I have changed my mind many teams in the course over the last few pages over who I think is the most likely scumteam. For example, I have a flaw in my gameplay that makes me find inactive people scummier, so chamber is currently moving up on the list, and you are moving down for engaging in what amounted to a fairly even-headed discussion. This is silly, but I can't help it.
Boo wrote:
Wouldn't that argue that VitaminR is equally likely to fit into just as many hypothetical scumteams?
Yup, just about -- you can see my lists for yourself in post 4248 on page 170. I've been saying all day that I've been going back and forth between you and VitR. I dislike the way ABR is forcing the vote to go down this way, but if only to verify that I wasn't bluffing in that offer, let's go after VitR instead. If he flips scum, I look forward to re-engaging in the "Who was buddiest with VitR?" game with you again tomorrow, Boo. : )
Onto the game, and god that feels like an awful vote by mathcam.
My feelings on VitR are not great but not near a lynching capacity. I really, really hate the way Bookie brought this case up in a burst of activity as well (yet no vote). There is something really weird going on, especially because ABR is already voting him. It feels so opportunistic as well, this case being brought up when vitr is gone.
vote bookie
Mostly retired. Unless you ask or it's something interesting.
You're the one derailed the BooKitty bandwagon (well, tag team with ABR). We literally need almost unanimous support among the active voters for a lynch -- if you weren't on BooKitty, it wasn't going to happen.
In post 1240, Bookitty wrote:That said, I have played with DGB enough to lean town on her. I have never been able to read ABR, especially not in the early part of games.
In post 1724, Bookitty wrote:If I absolutely have to, I will vote DGB to avoid no-lynch. I think she's more likely than Glork to flip scum, and I'm not going to be able to read her any better in this game than I have in the past.
If I were actually scum with ABR, do you really think I would have supported him so strongly throughout the game? Would I have made it so easy to do paint-by-numbers connections between us? I could sort of see it if you were saying I was scum buddying up to ABR, but scum together? Really?
Like I said, I'll vote VitaminR as a compromise. I'm not giving up my first suspicion to move a vote onto someone who isn't here to defend themselves until I think it's the only way to get a lynch.
@MBL:
Without going back and rereading the full context for those, I will say that "lean town" is hardly a declaration that DGB was 100 percent town. I do remember thinking that she was town because she brought out the scumputer, something I haven't seen her do as much as scum, but I'd guess that was later on. I was SURE that Glork was town because of his grumpy, pissed-off reactions to various things, which is usually a towntell for him imo. Notice how I wasn't delighted over voting DGB: "If I absolutely have to" vs. "I found scum! DGB is scum!"
I don't see the contradiction in these two quotes.
"Oh, you can't help that," said the Cat: "we're all mad here. I'm mad. You're mad."
"How do you know I'm mad?" said Alice.
"You must be," said the Cat, "or you wouldn't have come here."
If I were actually scum with ABR, do you really think I would have supported him so strongly throughout the game? Would I have made it so easy to do paint-by-numbers connections between us? I could sort of see it if you were saying I was scum buddying up to ABR, but scum together? Really?
God, thank you I was dying for my daily dose of WIFOM. Either way, both options state your scum.
Like I said, I'll vote VitaminR as a compromise. I'm not giving up my first suspicion to move a vote onto someone who isn't here to defend themselves until I think it's the only way to get a lynch.
Sounds town... but hey you carry on getting others to vote for you.
Mostly retired. Unless you ask or it's something interesting.
