Mini 1634 - English Premier League Mafia (Game over)

[Guyett]

Yeah that claim is bullshit.

So you'd be ok being the hammer then right?

[Ollie]

Annnnnnnnnnd Supersaint Claim.

Interesting. I'm still confident in Ollie being scum, though.

1) Misrepping me twice.
2) Not fighting the case, fighting the player
3) Resigned to his death - If you are town, fight it and make people see why you are town.
4) He said it himself (which I find a little odd) - It's a claim to strike fear into town and one very easy to make as scum.

If people want this lynch, I'll happily hammer because I'm pretty certain I'm not going to die.
Furthermore, if I do die, my role is not at all vital compared to some others that could/might be in this game.

And Ollie, I'm sure you'll get great satisfaction from my death if you happen to be telling the truth.

Me getting satisfaction from your death isn't gonna do us any good you clown. Regardless of your role if you are town then it'd probably be a game losing move & YOU would be to blame for our loss if we didn't get lucky. If a townie hammers me then the game is most likely down to 5-3 at the start of the next day. That's one mislynch away from likely defeat. Let that sink in. So it's imperative that the scum are made to hammer.

Of course I'm resigned to my death. You only have to look at the way my role reveal has been received to know why. An example of how blinkered you are is that you've not even given it any thought. What else would my role be then? Did you even read the rest of it when you saw super saint? I doubt you did given the lack of thought you've put into offering yourself up as a sacrifice.

& you expect me to put up more of a fight do you? What do you think most of my many posts have been doing? Most of my time in the game has been spent on the backfoot defending utter rubbish but no one listens. It doesn't matter what I say, it never sinks in & it's always twisted. I'm best off out of it as I'm a lightening rod for idiotic reads, too much of the game has centred around me. I thought that common sense would prevail but it's a forlorn hope.

I have thought you're likely to be scum & if you're not you're little use to town with your thoughtless reads so you wouldn't be at the bottom of the list of good ideas to lynch by any means. But I'd prefer someone else who hasn't volunteered for lynching me so readily to do it as they'll be more likely to be scum. The scum know I'm town & telling the truth. So we can get better info from seeing who is happy to do it or not.

[Whiskers]

Actually, you're not "backfoot defending utter rubbish"-- or, you ARE defending rubbish, but you're not defending AGAINST it. 4burner was surprisingly accurate when she said, you try to discredit players and laugh off reads. I couldn't put it into words, but he's right.

And it's something that I wonder, if it comes from being from offsite, not from being scum-- by the way, the bit where you copy+pasted from your role PM is illegal. We may not actually lynch you at all, if the mod comes in and decides it's breaking the rules, and modkills you. That'd kind of suck, though.

It's very good that we knew your role, though-- or at least your role claim. Without it, some unsuspecting townie hammers you, how could you not see the information as useful? Instead, why don't we volunteer Yiley, or-- or hell, even Elk, to hammer? Yiley would be ideal, but he refuses to play the game so probably won't be coerced. Elk is in a slot that's been empty all game, and we can not get a read on.

Let's have Elk hammer Ollie.

[Ollie]

Would you do it Whiskers?

btw am I going to congratulate people on reading me as scum for reasons I find unfathomable? Should I throw them an amazing player party? I can't work out how people are reaching most of their conclusions & the terrific points I do make get ignored in the midst of this mass confirmation bias gang bang.

An example being 4burner saying I thought you were scum so I should have voted for you as part of the reason he thought I was scum. I argued against it with two actual quotes, then brought it up again, both times it wasn't even responded to. So when that happens I start attacking the credibility of the player as it's useless to defend flat out wrong reads that won't even get responded to.

[Whiskers]

Would you do it Whiskers?

No, of course not. I'm town, and even if some people think I'm not town, they can make a case and try to lynch me. Elk, on the other hand, has made two posts in the game. There can not possibly be any read on his slot, no case made against him. If a player should be sacrificed, it should be him.

btw am I going to congratulate people on reading me as scum for reasons I find unfathomable? Should I throw them an amazing player party? I can't work out how people are reaching most of their conclusions & the terrific points I do make get ignored in the midst of this mass confirmation bias gang bang.

An example being 4burner saying I thought you were scum so I should have voted for you as part of the reason he thought I was scum. I argued against it with two actual quotes, then brought it up again, both times it wasn't even responded to. So when that happens I start attacking the credibility of the player as it's useless to defend flat out wrong reads that won't even get responded to.

Eh. I'm looking at the whole thing with you and 4burner, and while that wasn't his only reason for voting you, he was taking into account your stuff about Liverpool possibly being scum. You said you didn't make the connection between Liverpool and Whiskers initially, and so were reading them separately, and maybe 4burner missed that.

Maybe 4burner never intended to respond to that, since you really did prove it to be wrong (in Post 338)-- he misremembered something, and that was the basis for that part of the attack. But then you brought it up again in Post 391, and then...

4burner

did

respond to you. In Post 446, he doesn't argue with you that he was right about it, he argues that the way you handle it is bad. He doesn't cling to his initial idea that you should have voted Whiskers, because it was based on an incorrect memory. Instead of clinging, he points out that you

telling

him that it was a major reason he scumread you.

Ugh, I wish I could conclusively tell you that that's wrong, but when you go back 4burner's initial reads post, Post 335, it's true that it's about 2/5th of the paragraph he gives on Ollie. What's up with that, 4burner?

What else is wrong with 4burner's posts, I'll look into it? Reading his posts and yours, I see a lot of scummy stuff from you-- things like in Post 391, where you say his post long, just to make it look better, when actually it was just long to respond to you. Or later in that post, where you go, "You're just throwing shit at the wall to see if it sticks" and "Pick on the new guy day, is it?" in response to an decent point he made-- and I'm sitting here wondering why it's "shit" to you.

And other stuff of yours just makes me want to lynch you, regardless. 391 is a good example of that, too: in your opening paragraph, you make the assertion that 4burner's reads are crap and "full of nonsense" because he reads you as scum, and you are, according to you, not scum. When I read something that, I go, "great, but WE don't know your alignment. WE can't look at his reads and say they're bad because "you're not scum," because WE don't know "you're not scum."" And when that's your best argument against the guy's reads-- when it's even

included

against his reads, it looks like you haven't got a better reason. Like you're flailing for anything to defend yourself. Like you

are

scum. But good scum player knows that already. Why would you include it? Why would

anyone

include it?


Ugh, why am I doing all the legwork here?

Give me something else to look into, I guess, if I'm going to be the one to do it.

[Whiskers]

My point is, even though that appeared to be a big part of 4burner's case, and even though he didn't respond to it immediately, and part of his current case against you is the way you're acting about it,

and part of that's due to the way 4burner behaved

, you still have scummy behaviour, and it still bothers me.

[massive]

I know I'm town. If I see someone who is seeing the game in the same way as I do and acting thusly, it's more than likely they are town. If the logic is self contained and hangs together well, then I'm inclined to see it as town. If however, they were to go along posting as if they saw the game like I do and then acted in a way that I wouldn't expect, then that would send up flags. RA for mine has played in a fashion (at least early on) that correlates in numerous ways with my own, or at least my own train of thought. Combine this with no real pings from the slot and I arrive a townread. Would you disagree?

I don't disagree that this is how most townreads are made. My point is not that you are townreading RA but that you were defending him quite vociferously against a statement that is, ultimately, non-indicative. Do you feel that you have a good enough townread on RA that you should defend him to unknowns? Because this sentence:

And his flip and my flip are not linked in any fashion, and I'm not trying to ride RA townvibes from anyone. If one of us is scum, the other could be, or the other could be town.

makes me feel like that isn't so.

[Ollie]

Whiskers

, read 4burner's posts here as if he's talking about you...

@Ollie

- Comes in swinging, takes a tone I really don't like, and then tries to game a Mod on a site he's only pretty just freshly joined? Unless he knows them from offsite or something similar. Basically I'm thinking scum due to Whiskers/Liverpool/Mod stuff ala Guyett. And never actually voted Whiskers despite agreeing with the anti-whiskers stuff from memory. Votes BRO over very little, comparatively.

Comes in swinging... so what? That's not alignment indicative of anyone. Tone again means nothing, he doesn't know me. Guyett does, he's not seen anything in these things. Trying to outguess the mod isn't alignment indicative either. Last part is flat out wrong as you know. So this is fluff/wrong. From that....

So I've got my scumteam as Guyett/Ollie/Yiley, which I'm scarily confident in for a D2 read. But everyone else is basically town bar a few nulls, so let's see how this shakes out.

He's scarily confident that the 3 of us are a scum team, not just one of us, the 3 of us. Early on day 2.

Plus,

you keep talking to Guyett

. So. I don't know what you want from me.

This is the worst point ever. To not scum read me for conversing with other players would be a start.

Oooh look so not only does 4burner have his scum team locked in but his lynch order is now decided...

Right, that'll do. VOTE: Ollie because you started bad, then just got worse. Guyett can wait til tomorrow. Yiley the day after.

How am I supposed to reason with this guy?

[Ollie]

massive you've hardly contributed anything, who are you reading as scum? Who are you town reading?

[Ollie]

Whiskers

Guyett and Whiskers are making me unhappy with the way they're talking about the confirm-Liverpool incident, but I'm leaning on the side of it being playstyle more than alignment. Because of that, Ollie's discussion of them feels like a scum maybe fishing for a lynch.

Vote: Ollie

This was the entirety of the reasoning I was voted for by elk. By someone who hasn't even asked me a question or anything. Doesn't wanna flesh out his suspicions, clearly not interested in if he's wrong or not. Just a vote on me for apparently trying to get two of my town reads lynched. I mean, come on.

[Ollie]

This guy has largely hidden since his clearly now fake aggression at the start. Did alot of prodding, now just pops up with glib one liners. Seriously?

Also, this is what I think of Elk's vote:

wow great point.

Yeah that claim is bullshit.

No reason why.

4burner wouldn't be my first choice to hammer, but one I'm okay with.

Hang on, I thought my role claim was bull shit? So why isn't he offering to do it? He doesn't mind if 4burner does it though, how nice of him.

[Ollie]

BBT & Guyett

what do you think of all this?

[Guyett]

Bro is scum imo.

people should unvote Ollie now

[Guyett]

If Bro is scum 4burner is town imo

[Ollie]

I think 4burner is town after he offered to hammer me. The scum know my I'm not lying.

[Guyett]

I'd tend to agree but there is an element of WIFOM there.

[Ollie]

big risk for 4burner to take if he knows I'm Super Saint though.

[Red Arrow]

I'd be open to hammering, not caught up (onto page 15 and will catch up after dinner) But Ollie as of page 14 was sticking out as scum to me. I don't believe the claim one bit. Its the perfect scum claim.

'you can't kill me or I will kill you'

[Deux]

I'd be open to hammering

Noted.

It's definitely not the perfect scum claim btw. It generally results in a policy lynch. What other role would I be as Southampon? Have you thought about that? Any thoughts on what I produced from my PM? I take it you think that's a lie too? Would you like to analyze that for us?

Does anyone else have an opinion on my role reveal? A ridiculous lack of actual in depth discussion going on about it.

[BlueBloodedToffee]

I need to catch up thoroughly but I have skimmed.

Can someone clarify who is on Ollie wagon please because Ollie is town as fuck.

[Ollie]

Deux is my hydra account btw^ sorry about that. playing another game atm with it.

[Ollie]

I need to catch up thoroughly but I have skimmed.

Can someone clarify who is on Ollie wagon please because Ollie is town as fuck.

BBT look through my recent posts about people, IMO I hit on some good stuff.

[Guyett]

I need to catch up thoroughly but I have skimmed.

Can someone clarify who is on Ollie wagon please

because Ollie is town as fuck.

This

[Red Arrow]

I'd be open to hammering

Noted.

It's definitely not the perfect scum claim btw. It generally results in a policy lynch. What other role would I be as Southampon? Have you thought about that?

Any thoughts on what I produced from my PM? I take it you think that's a lie too? Would you like to analyze that for us?

Does anyone else have an opinion on my role reveal? A ridiculous lack of actual in depth discussion going on about it.

There is such a thing as fake claims. Mods give them out all the time.

[Guyett]

I think this is accurate

Ollie (4)-

BROseidon, 4burner, theelkspeaks, deathfisaro

Whiskers (1)-

, Yiley

Yiley (2)-

BlueBloodedToffee, Ollie

deathfisaro (1)-

Guyett

Guyett (1)-

massive

Not voting (2)-

Red Arrow, Whiskers