Mini Normal 1719 - Flavorless Fun! [Game Over!]

herrcombs · Post Post #5 (isolation #0) » Tue Sep 22, 2015 6:10 am

Hey guys, this is my first game outside of the Road to Rome. Good luck everyone!

VOTE: pistachi0n

for not giving a reason for his vote on Dierfire.

herrcombs · Post Post #11 (isolation #1) » Tue Sep 22, 2015 8:35 am

In post 9, Haschel Cedricson wrote:
Vote: herrcombs
. He knows why.

Nope. Why's that?

herrcombs · Post Post #18 (isolation #2) » Tue Sep 22, 2015 12:50 pm

lolwut is going on

herrcombs · Post Post #40 (isolation #3) » Wed Sep 23, 2015 4:01 am

In post 39, Dwlee99 wrote:Okay, we're out of RVS. Fine.
But let's look at Garmr's ISO -
21 - RVS
24 - "Honestly don't see anything scummy so far"

In post 37, mykonian wrote:
Garmr already committed a scumtell trying to call someone town.

So saying he doesn't see anything scummy is a scum tell? Okay, totally.

Why did you clip out the rest of what he said, about why it's a scumtell to him?

(Even though frankly, I don't agree with mykonian's premise... I don't think the phrase "to be honest" or its derivatives is alignment indicative, I've seen townies use the phrase and I tend to use it too out of habit.)

herrcombs · Post Post #41 (isolation #4) » Wed Sep 23, 2015 4:05 am

In post 21, Garmr wrote:VOTE: bluewaffle

Because I like you

Wait... Who's bluewaffle? Did you mean BBT? Or are you voting someone who's not in this game?

herrcombs · Post Post #56 (isolation #5) » Wed Sep 23, 2015 8:41 am

In post 44, Dwlee99 wrote:I clipped it out because the rest was gibberish about him saying the word "honestly". He did say some stuff about it being him buddying and "Add to this that he's stepping in to protect someone from an accusation and that little sentence becomes quite damning." but it's a weak case that relies on saying the word "honestly" being a scum tell, which, like you said, isn't one.

Yeah, but your original quote ("So saying he doesn't see anything scummy is a scum tell? Okay, totally") ignored the part of his post where he thought Garmr was scummy for buddying someone (pretty sure that someone was me). Not sure why you felt you had to manipulate mykonian's 37 to get your point across.

pedit: What's with the caustic aggression coming out of mykonian? Calling another player after a very short back-and-forth "either a worthless town or a worthless scum", and then dehumanizing him by calling him "it"... No clue if this is a matter of playstyle or if he's getting super bent out of shape because his 37 was jumped on, or what. But it doesn't seem like myko is working to get past it, either way. Just seems to be instigating a fight with Dwlee. Also, noted that mykonian is ignoring Dwlee's reasoning for voting Soze and trying to insist it's simply OMGUS.

UNVOTE:
VOTE: mykonian

herrcombs · Post Post #67 (isolation #6) » Wed Sep 23, 2015 11:01 am

What is the basis for all these DWL townreads I'm seeing (BBT, implosion, Dierfire)? Could someone fill me in?

herrcombs · Post Post #78 (isolation #7) » Wed Sep 23, 2015 11:46 am

In post 68, Dwlee99 wrote:I don't understand how it's manipulating. I was just quoting the specific part that I wanted to respond to. Like right here I wanted to cut out the last half of your post because it's not what I'm responding to. But I didn't just so I don't bother people when I don't need to.

Ok yeah fair enough, I suppose it's not manipulation to crop out the stuff about the "buddying," since it was a separate thought and not necessarily relevant. But I still think that the first sentence (the one you quoted) was leading into mykonian's argument:

In post 37, mykonian wrote:Garmr already committed a scumtell trying to call someone town. There's no need for the word "honestly" there, it only makes sense from a point where scum is trying to think like town. The word "honestly" implies that he comes from a setting where he was prepared to lie this game, then found a situation where it wasn't necessary.

The manipulation is you implying the scum tell was "saying he doesn't see anything scummy," where myko was arguing it was a scum tell for the way he used the term "honestly" and what it could mean psychologically. You clipped myko's quote in a way that didn't represent what he was trying to say, and then sarcastically dismissed it. That is manipulation.

herrcombs · Post Post #80 (isolation #8) » Wed Sep 23, 2015 12:11 pm

He asked me a question. I was responding to his question.

I don't know what to make of Hieirama's page 4 read list there. Especially since they're blatantly getting things wrong already:

In post 76, Hieirama wrote:Calling Dwlee worthless because he didn't agree with your reads was a terrible move, though.

That is not why myko called Dwlee worthless. Still, the effort to be transparent seems more town oriented than scum, and I like how they're starting to ask a few questions.

One thing real quick though, Hieirama: You should try to avoid putting votes/unvotes in spoiler tags. The mod mentioned at the beginning they won't be counted if you do that.

And a question for you Hieirama, since it looks like your account is fairly new: how much prior mafia experience do you have?

herrcombs · Post Post #84 (isolation #9) » Wed Sep 23, 2015 12:44 pm

Wait HOLD ON. I was just about to reply to Garmr's

In post 72, Garmr wrote:Also what's this bs about calling someone town. I said I don't see anything scummy yet.

because I was pretty sure Garmr's 24 was an indirect reponse to Lalendra's 22, so he was in effect defending me. But "nothing scummy" != "town". Mykonian, why did you claim he was "trying to call someone town" in your 37? I think you should address this.

pedit @ DWL: OK I get it dude, I'm not going to push this any further because I feel like we're going in circles.

pedit2: Yeah, I can see where you're coming from Myko (re: Hieirama), but I'm not done with you. I'd also like to know why you delayed your vote on Garmr until he voted you first. And this coming from someone who called another player worthless in part for their OMGUS vote earlier...

herrcombs · Post Post #169 (isolation #10) » Thu Sep 24, 2015 11:07 am

UNVOTE: myko

I like how mykonian hasn't stepped down from people challenging him, and it seems like he's working to drive the discussion forward with useful content in some areas. I've got a resounding nullread on him at this point, though. His postcount is ballooning a bit and is making the thread a little hard to follow. I also don't like the way in which he avoids answering some questions directly. (e.g. see his back-and-forth with Soze starting with Soze's 99, and the way myko structured his 107 and 110 without simply answering the question. All this does it invite a cyclical discussion that just takes up space instead of generating anything useful.)

I can totally identify with Hieirama's feeling that as someone fresh out of the newbie queue, the pace of this game is noticeably faster. I can see how Hie is having a hard time jumping into discussions. However, I don't like the "Should I go back to lurking or?" bit in hie's 89. This on top of the questions imbedded in hie's readlist in 76, I think it could be a pretty easy way to feign scumhunting without actually trying to figure out the game. I'm fine with progressing that wagon. And a question to Hieirama: what would you consider to be the most interesting development so far in the game? Who is your top scum at this point?

VOTE: Hieirama

Feeling an initial townlean on BBT. He's pushing on multiple people, I like the questions he's asking in 121, for example. Implosion's first point in his 158 is bothering me a bit though. BBT, was your repeating of implosion's points in his 59 in your 120 intentional?

I don't mind pistachi0n's vote on Garmr, but I don't like how pista isn't really commenting on anything else in the game. Pistachi0n, what is your opinion of mykonian? Do you think there's any merit to the wagon on Garmr, which has already attracted several votes?

@ Soze's 142: is it not anti-town to point out things that could be soft-claims? What good can possibly come from discussing such things?

In post 144, Dierfire wrote:I think that the logic is very natural. I will break it down. Town players vote for those they believe to be Mafia. Mafia players vote for those they know to be Town (except when voting players they know to be Mafia, which is presumably less frequent). So, if I believe a player to be Town (such as DWL), others voting for that player are more likely to be Mafia than are others voting for some other player.

This is interesting logic, but something feels off to me about it, too. You say "players voting DWL are more likely to be Mafia." More likely than what? Than random? Using this logic with no supporting scumreads gives a probability marginally better than random to find scum. It's kinda like a really weak process of elimination, and it feels strange seeing it as the sole justification for a vote so early into the game.

In post 147, Dierfire wrote:@Herrcombs
Why did it take you so long to write this one up?

It takes me forever to compose my posts (and I'm still trying to get the hang of following so many different little lines of discussion). I've been writing this one off-and-on for the past hour and a half at least (going on two hours now)

I do like how active Dierfire is being after getting caught up, his interest in talking with mykonian about recent events, and his outreach to numerous other players in the game. Initial townlean for Dierfire.

herrcombs · Post Post #176 (isolation #11) » Thu Sep 24, 2015 2:39 pm

In post 175, pistachi0n wrote:seeing as I'm on it.

xD

it's been a long week

herrcombs · Post Post #188 (isolation #12) » Thu Sep 24, 2015 3:59 pm

I'm inclined to believe the BP claim. I also don't see why as scum, he would feel the need to do it this early. I've never done a mini game before, but wouldn't it be possible for some PR to confirm his role? It's alarming to me how his wagon is picking up steam instead of dying off.

herrcombs · Post Post #194 (isolation #13) » Thu Sep 24, 2015 4:26 pm

In post 180, Hieirama wrote:The popular

In post 24, Garmr wrote:
Honestly don't see anything scummy so far

wins my interest. Not really the quote itself, but on how much attention its given.

OK. So what interests you about it? Do you think the attention it's getting is revealing any information? Are any of your reads from 76 developing as a result?

herrcombs · Post Post #201 (isolation #14) » Thu Sep 24, 2015 5:15 pm

@ DWL: why did you feel the need to make that post? Like... you literally just opened Garmr's ISO, summarized each post, and added barely any analysis to it... And the last paragraph is just fluffy speculation.

herrcombs · Post Post #213 (isolation #15) » Fri Sep 25, 2015 3:07 am

In post 205, Keyser Söze wrote:However, Garmr has now set himself up for both an investigation and policy-lynch (scum would not have strong-motivation to do that).

My point exactly. And what more does pushing his wagon accomplish? He's already claimed his role, and I am baffled by how many people just want to lynch him already a week and a half before the deadline.

herrcombs · Post Post #219 (isolation #16) » Fri Sep 25, 2015 6:21 am

Because if you're wrong, then you end the day early with a mislynch without much contribution from several other players. Because it deprives town of information that we could use to figure out who was actually town on his wagon and who was scum trying to push the mislynch. Because if he's actually BP, then we've quicklynched a PR while learning jack shit and making tomorrow that much more difficult. Because if you're town and are the strongest proponent of his mislynch, then it draws even more suspicion onto yourself and makes you all the more likely to be a mislynch target.

I am a cautious player by nature. If there's a clearly scummy player, then I don't want to delay the wagon for no reason. But the possibility that we mislynch a PR is not something I am that gung-ho about Day 1, especially with so little discussion happening beforehand.

herrcombs · Post Post #221 (isolation #17) » Fri Sep 25, 2015 7:27 am

Figure of speech; comparatively, we're 4 days into a 14 day D1, so what we know now is "jack shit" compared to the discussion that has yet to happen.

I don't want to argue this back and forth with you, because I am still learning how the pace of these games run, and others need to chime in and start contributing. I won't be on much this weekend (family visiting from out of town), but I'll catch up early next week once they're gone.

herrcombs · Post Post #308 (isolation #18) » Sun Sep 27, 2015 4:37 am

Prod dodge. I'll catch up tomorrow once I have time.

herrcombs · Post Post #374 (isolation #19) » Mon Sep 28, 2015 11:36 am

Holy crap, I've got a lot of catching up to do. I'll do it page-by-page and spoiler it, so I don't clutter the thread with a massive wall. I'll pull questions out and post them after the spoilers. UNVOTE:

Spoiler: page 9

Spoiler: page 10

Spoiler: page 11

Spoiler: page 12

Spoiler: page 13

Spoiler: page 14

Spoiler: page 15

Ok, the questions I still have:

@ DWL's 282: Why did you unvote Garmr there? Did you ever consider the Garmr wagon to be in part due to PL, because Garmr was acting against the interests of town? What did you mean by your phrase, "There would be no reason for a policy lynch on Garmr with how they've been playing"?

@ Haschel's 334: Do you think that voting someone and pressuring someone are mutually exclusive? Do you think that Lalendra voting Dier to get more information is scum-indicative?

@ Dier's readlist in 357: What makes you think DWL is town? What's the "English-English translator" think you mentioned in your read of me? Why does your read on Lelandra need to be "referenced against Hieirama's activity?"

and I'm going to VOTE: pistachi0n.

In your past few posts, it looks like you're not really trying to engage in fruitful discussion. I want to see some reads from you or something that looks like you're trying to figure out the game.

herrcombs · Post Post #396 (isolation #20) » Tue Sep 29, 2015 2:56 am

Just want to fact check you quickly, Soze:

In post 393, Keyser Söze wrote:"Null/weak town": pistachi0n's now no longer scum-reads Gamr:

pista was referring to myko here, not Garmr. His null/weak town read was on myko.

herrcombs · Post Post #397 (isolation #21) » Tue Sep 29, 2015 2:58 am

Also, my questions for pista are pretty much the same as those asked by BBT and Soze, lol

herrcombs · Post Post #402 (isolation #22) » Tue Sep 29, 2015 4:16 am

In post 401, mykonian wrote:
In post 399, BlueBloodedToffee wrote:Dwlee, you should absolutely vote for Pistachion. We're approaching the point of the game where we need a flip to progress further.

this is where I want herr to come in to complain about quicklynches and how there's more info to be gained

Nah, that takes a PR hard claim for me to freak out the way I did.

herrcombs · Post Post #404 (isolation #23) » Tue Sep 29, 2015 4:32 am

I'm only half joking. This is my third game on site, and I don't believe I've ever seen a scum fakeclaim a PR before. Thus my trepidation when it comes to lynching people who have already hard-claimed a PR.

herrcombs · Post Post #408 (isolation #24) » Tue Sep 29, 2015 7:17 am

In post 405, Dierfire wrote:

In post 259, Lalendra wrote:Hieirama – 76 seems like feigned scumhunting, as pointed out by herrcombs in 169. Could just be noobtown, someone who is trying to figure things out but not really sure where to go, but reads more like noobscum. Not a fan of how 180 only addresses one point out of the many questions she could have chosen to respond to, and then goes on to bring us back to Garmr’s 24. At the same time, in more recent posts, she has explained her reasoning, explained that she is new and may not be interpreting everything correctly, and has made some interesting points, so I'm starting to lean more noobtown.

What would you make of that quote?

Well, I agree with the first sentence (mainly because I had already made the point earlier, can't even remember if I was the first one to point it out but I doubt it). I think it's a bit sheepy though, especially since I detailed my initial scumread of Hieirama due to a combination of her early posts, and Lalendra just kinda simplified it without adding anything new. I can't precisely follow Lalendra's thought process and read development, especially the phrase "made some interesting points" as a reason for leaning more noobtown. I'm not a big fan of the word "interesting" -- I think it's a buzzword that doesn't really convey an opinion and it's easy to hide behind.

In my reread, I saw some scummy things and some townie things in Lalendra's posts, so this would stick out as an example of the former. I am currently leaning more scum than town on her. I don't like 312, 375, and how they followed the end of her 276. She says she's not a fan of policy lynches, and she unvoted Garmr because it looked like he wasn't going to be anti-town anymore, yet it's her preferred lynch later in 312 and she would "compromise" on Dier as an alternative. If you have an actual scummy read, instead of just a PL target, wouldn't you prefer to lynch scum? Or if you don't have a scumread you feel better about voting, why not scumhunt to find one? I don't understand.

herrcombs · Post Post #467 (isolation #25) » Sat Oct 03, 2015 11:49 am

Reading through Hieirama's ISO, I find it hard to convince myself either way that she's noobscum or noobtown. I need to see some more engagement from her today because yesterday it seemed like she was having serious difficulties breaking in and getting to the core of useful discussions. I unvoted her in preference of a push on pista after I caught up yesterday, but I'm not sure I was ever really satisfied with the unvote.

I'd like to see her answers to the questions posed by Haschel and Dier. And one of my own: what is your opinion of Garmr right now? What do you think of his last few actions yesterday?

VOTE: Hieirama

herrcombs · Post Post #505 (isolation #26) » Sun Oct 04, 2015 7:25 am

I'd like to weigh in on the Garmr thing real quick. My default town-read on him is deteriorating to the point where I can understand the argument that he's scum. His two most significant actions yesterday (his BP hardclaim and his quickhammer) were pretty useless, in my opinion. I say they're useless in that they accomplished nothing, but more importantly, they were both anti-town.

Garmr makes the argument today that D1 was basically over when he hammered, but that's not true. There were several outstanding questions that could have been answered (some of which were on the same page as the hammer). He says that "people were putting intentions to hammer," but the only person to actually do that was DWL and it's been established that he wasn't going to immediately end the day. His arguments that his quickhammer wasn't anti-town (and wasn't even a quickhammer) just don't cut it for me. His change of mind from "I'm in no rush for the day to end" to a quickhammer the very next IRL day also looks really bad to me.

It feels like Garmr is taking a sledgehammer to this game, like he doesn't really give a fuck about the damage he does, and this could be a scum tactic to take out as much as he can before he's finally lynched. Not going to vote him and put him to L-1 right now though. If he's town, I don't want to risk having such a short D2 and have it end by lynching the BP, of all things. I have other people I am still interested in and I want to see if Garmr redeems himself today.

herrcombs · Post Post #507 (isolation #27) » Sun Oct 04, 2015 7:38 am

In post 506, Lalendra wrote:Herrcombs is town and that makes me happy.

Could you elaborate a little bit for me? Why am I town?

herrcombs · Post Post #510 (isolation #28) » Sun Oct 04, 2015 10:39 am

@ Hieirama:

Did you notice that I voted you earlier? Did you see my question for you in 467?

In post 467, herrcombs wrote:what is your opinion of Garmr right now? What do you think of his last few actions yesterday?

Rephrased: do you think his quickhammer was anti-town? Do you find it at all strange that a wagon that flashformed (or in your own words, "formed abnormally quickly") was hammered so quickly by someone who did not declare intent, and who just a few posts before had explicitly said he was in no rush to end the day? Do you retain your townread of him that you held yesterday?

I'm not a fan of how you dodged around Haschel's questioning your opinions of the pistachio wagon (it took him asking what, like three times before you actually talked about someone on the wagon?), and I'm not a fan of how you refuse to address Garmr's quickhammer (aside from your quip in 433) or give a direct opinion of him. I want to hear your opinion.

herrcombs · Post Post #516 (isolation #29) » Sun Oct 04, 2015 11:20 am

@DWL: I think you're mixing up the Hieirama and Herrcombs slots lol. I can understand it can get confusing when people use the shortened forms, though (hier vs heir vs herr or w/e)

herrcombs · Post Post #534 (isolation #30) » Mon Oct 05, 2015 3:23 am

In post 520, Hieirama wrote:@Herrcombs @meanmelter
I did skip by those posts, I was in a rush to reply previously since we were about to go out for lunch.

In post 467, herrcombs wrote:And one of my own: what is your opinion of Garmr right now? What do you think of his last few actions yesterday?

Hmm, went over this a couple times I think....
In post 232, post 227, and post 239.

My main opinion there still stands. The quickhammer was unexpected, but the message that went along with it made sense.

I'm curious as to why you'd ask that question, actually?
It's been repeated a couple times, if my memory serves me right.

Well, I keep asking because you're apparently unable to answer it. I asked what your

current

opinion of Garmr is, and you link three posts from 8 pages before the end of D1, none of which substantiate a town-read on Garmr besides an "assumption" that he's town and the feeling that his outburst was "more Town frustration then scum."

And your answer to the second half of my question -- "unexpected" does not assign alignment, nor does the phrase "it made sense." You are intentionally avoiding my questions, giving answers that absolve you from any responsibility for an accurate read on Garmr, and this looks scummy as hell to me.

Yeah... I'm leaving my vote on you.

herrcombs · Post Post #536 (isolation #31) » Mon Oct 05, 2015 3:36 am

In post 530, Garmr wrote:The people in my scum list are

Lala,the guy I'm voting,myko and
hercombs
. I may be wrong on one but this is where I think scum lays.

Where have I heard this before? Owait...

In post 491, Meanmelter wrote:[@ Garmr:] and literally anyone who voted for your wagon you find as scummy.

And I'm not even voting for you. For shame. I assume you're scumreading me for my 505, because you've literally said nothing else about me all game.

herrcombs · Post Post #539 (isolation #32) » Mon Oct 05, 2015 4:11 am

You're null-lean-scum for me at this point. I need to review some of Lelandra's stuff from D1 (I think I remember reading her scum from some of her posts...) to see if I need to "neck myself" or not.

While I hate using meta as a resource (people who are sufficiently self-aware of their own meta can easily manipulate it), I might take a look at a few of your games to see if your claims regarding your metagame are accurate and likely to hold for this game.

herrcombs · Post Post #540 (isolation #33) » Mon Oct 05, 2015 4:14 am

(I agree with DWL, I don't think a Garmr/Lalendra scumteam is likely.)

herrcombs · Post Post #542 (isolation #34) » Mon Oct 05, 2015 4:18 am

Why are you scumreading me, Garmr?

herrcombs · Post Post #545 (isolation #35) » Mon Oct 05, 2015 4:46 am

Hmm. I don't know what to think of your "offer." For one, I don't like bargaining with people who call me a "mentally handicapped retard." I also think we're playing this game for entirely different reasons. Yours is a very self-centered approach, and everyone else be damned if we win or lose, at least you can claim you had 2/4 of your scumreads correct at some point in the game, right??

I obviously don't understand your methods of PoE, if that's indeed how you're scumreading me (it seems a lot more like OMGUS to me). But a serious question for you -- Do you think all of the scum are stacking on you, trying their damndest to get you lynched? There's not a single person you're scumreading who isn't either on your wagon or entertaining the thought.

herrcombs · Post Post #551 (isolation #36) » Mon Oct 05, 2015 9:13 am

In post 549, Hieirama wrote:Unable to answer? Did you read what I've said?
You should be able to put it together that I have a Town-Lean on Garmr. It's kind of obvious. But if you really need it spelled out for you in a post, there you go.

I have read everything you've said.
The responsibility is on you to substantiate your reads and update them as new information is obtained in the game. This actually reminds me of something you said earlier:

In post 371, Hieirama wrote:I read the game and everything, but usually I have no strong opinions or suspicions on anything. ((Maybe I'll share some opinions later anyway? Just for the record.)) It's much easier to reply if addressed.

This is exactly where scum want to reside. Scum want to sit on the fence, not giving any strong opinions, so when the wind blows just right, they can opportunistically jump on the town-consensus and not look suspicious. By giving actual opinions and suspicions, you put your own thoughts at risk and scrutiny. Scum don't like to be scrutinized. Town don't give a shit because they have nothing to hide.

Read, assumption, what's the difference again?

Assumptions are, by definition, something you take for granted without backing proof or evidence. Reads (I think of them synonymous with arguments) require evidence to build and sustain. Throughout the game, reads develop based on new evidence that is presented. By demonstrating your reads are updating to events of the game, you show that you are thinking about the game and trying to solve who is scum. Scum will try to spin narratives and try to make the evidence fit their reads, rather than the other way around. After all, they're trying to mislynch the town, so they are required to lie to achieve their wincon.

So this is why I keep asking you for specific information. I want to see if your thought process is consistent with your play, and whether you're just trying to look townie or actually trying to figure out the game. I have not been satisfied with your responses to my queries. I asked you earlier (169) for your thoughts including your top scum read.

Your answer?

In 180 you referred me to your super-early readlist which came like 100 posts earlier. This told me that you were not updating your reads (I asked for a top scumread) based on the events of the game.

Similarly, I asked you in 467 to specifically provide a

current

read on Garmr. I was like you D1, where I wanted to believe his BP claim at its face, and I didn't want the wagon to go through in case we lynched a PR D1. However, over time I noticed things from him that began to look scummy, including his change-of-mind at the end of D1 up to and including his hammer, that were making me reconsider my read. I wanted to know if you were taking those actions into consideration.

Your answer?

In 520 you referred me to a set of posts you made 300 posts earlier and then implied that you hadn't really considered anything since then.

It was a way for me to explain why his quickhammer wasn't scummy to me (because it apparently was to others) since you did ask about his last few actions.

But you didn't explain why his quickhammer wasn't scummy. You responded "That quickhammer though" immediately after it happened, which indicated you thought it was strange. And you later told me "the message that went along with it made sense." Which message? Was the message alignment-indicative (anyone in this game, scum or town, can produce posts that "make sense")? Does it excuse Garmr, who had stated "I am in [no] rush to end the day" (412), and then quickhammered without warning 16 hours later?

You asked me my opinions on Garmr and I said I assumed he was Town. That's not question dodging.

You didn't say "I assume he is Town." You linked me a set of old posts and then said "my main opinion there still stands." You never substantiated your opinion in the first place (aside from your 239 "I can't find any other post I don't like other than #117" -- which isn't even one of Garmr's posts!). You have not indicated your opinion is developing. To me, this is absolutely question dodging.

herrcombs · Post Post #553 (isolation #37) » Mon Oct 05, 2015 10:41 am

I asked you the question, bud, because I'd imagine it's quite rare for all of the scum to try to coordinate their efforts and pile on the same wagon. Am I wrong? Does it happen more often than I think? Can anyone else answer this question for me?

It really caught my attention when you scumread me out of the blue, and it feels defensive and convenient to me that all of your scumreads are either voting you or scumreading you. Like I said, I need to take time to review the Lalendra thing, because I think there could be something there (and I've already mentioned as such). Most of my attention has been focused on Hieirama, but once I get more time, I'll go back and try to get a better grip on Lalendra.

herrcombs · Post Post #563 (isolation #38) » Mon Oct 05, 2015 12:35 pm

In post 561, Garmr wrote:Does it matter if my scum reads are on the same wagon if I have good reasons to scum read them?

You have not substantiated your scumread of me in the slightest, so I will continue to dispute this.

herrcombs · Post Post #590 (isolation #39) » Tue Oct 06, 2015 4:09 pm

Sigh... I think we're speaking a different language. This is not the first time this has happened to me. And I'm starting to believe that this might just be another one of my awful TvTs that I should abandon in order to catch someone who is more likely scum.

Gotta review that Lalendra vs Garmr thing that I've been putting off. Seems like that has merit one way or the other.

herrcombs · Post Post #648 (isolation #40) » Thu Oct 08, 2015 7:20 am

Will try to catch up today or tomorrow, this week has been crazy and I'm trying to split my attention with another game.

herrcombs · Post Post #662 (isolation #41) » Fri Oct 09, 2015 10:49 am

First, let me get a readlist out there:

Dierfire: Null-town.

His interactions with BBT back on page 15 still seem really unnatural and appeasy to me. However, I like how he's been pushing on several different people today. Pushing the game forward is townie in my eyes.

Garmr: Scumlean.

On the one hand, his BP claim was so abrupt as was his quickhammer, that it could be reckless-town who simply has little patience for the game. However, I don't like how he's being so blatantly anti-town, trying to spin it as not-scummy, nor do I like how he gives zero attention to people who were/are not on his wagon. His tunnel on Lalendra feels like it's sucking the energy out of the game.

Haschel: Null.

His RVS opening made me really uncomfortable, but a cursory meta inspection reveals that he does that same thing every game. I don't like how he never answered questions about it, but oh well... He's been doing very little, is suspiciously inactive, but I do like his push on Hiei especially in 478 and 483. Not a lot to talk about, but I'd like to see more from him so I can get a better read.

DWL: Town.

Although I've pinged out a lot of stuff he said in pages 9-11, a lot of his posts since them seem town enough. He looks like he's trying to logically figure out the game, even if he's confused at times. I identify with a lot of what he's saying, especially in the Lalendra vs Garmr argument.

Meanmelter: Null-town.

I like the depth with which he caught up. I agree with most of his points against Garmr. And he also seems to be pushing on other people, trying to straighten up their logic and read consistency. Can't see much I don't like from melter. Would like him to post more though.

Hieirama: Scumlean*.

I give it the asterisk because it's exactly the type of noobtown I've lynched in the past for lapses in logic or lack of proactive scumhunting that could just as easily come from noobtown as noobscum. I will be keeping an eye on her though, I feel as the game goes on she will become easier to read.

Mykonian: Town.

I like how he's using his activity to push the game further. Earlier in D1, I felt like he was just posting to post and build up fluff in the thread, but he's redeeming himself in my eyes. i thought he was being overdefensive early on, but I'm led to believe it's just a matter of playstyle and not alignment-indicative.

Lalendra: Scumlean.

I'll talk about this more below, but I didn't like her push against Garmr as a PL yesterday. I discussed this in 374 and 408. I don't like how she keeps blindly tunneling on Garmr paying attention to no one else... Although I'm curious why she thinks Dier is so obvscum? I'm missing something obviously, because I can't see in her ISO where she has a single cohesive reason to think Dier is so blatantly scum.

Keyser Soze: Null-town.

I think I remember reading a few of Soze's older Newbie games, and he always seemed pretty eccentric as town, interacting more directly with people in real-time. I think he's fallen under my radar this game though. Upon inspection of his ISO, he seems readily willing to scour peoples' ISOs to figure out where they're coming from. The walls strike me as different than his playstyle I witnessed previously, but I still see town-value in them. I haven't really found anything that specifically pings me as scummy from Soze's posts.

BBT: Null-town.

I really liked his play D1, but I am a bit baffled by his D2 play for reasons others have already mentioned. Why ignore the work people have already put in D2, declare a lynchpool that consists of the last few people on the pistachio wagon yesterday, and take nothing else into consideration? I don't see scum-motivation in that, but I don't particularly understand why he's taking this approach now.

Ok, it's time for me to weigh in on the Lalendra vs Garmr thing: it's obnoxious, and I don't think it's TvT. I'm almost considering a world in which they're both scum, just because the degree of tunneling on each other is draining this game of life and is making it painful to follow. Thing is, it seems like I have to pick a side, because they're not backing down from each other any time soon.

Gun to my head, I'm going to say Lalendra is scum over Garmr. Starting with her Dierfire case -- What is it? She says he's obvscum, but I've never seen her substantiate that. Post 480 comes off as super strange to me. Then, 497 seems incredibly myopic. Why not use a flip, try to analyze a wagon, and see what you find? Why just shrug it all off, saying "I can't really disagree with anyone on the wagon cause I was all for the lynch?"

I do think that Lalendra was misrepping Garmr in 498. Even though I agree that Garmr responded rather emotionally, sometimes incoherently, to some of meanmelter's points, Lalendra simplified it in a way that brushed away the evidence that didn't fit her read and just made it easier to vote for Garmr. She continues to do this scummy simplification/misrepresentation, I pointed it out once earlier in 408 when she sheeped my read on Hieirama.

Lalendra's 652 seems really weird, especially since she hasn't pushed on Dier at all today. Why is Dier "so obvscum?" I am getting frustrated too, in part because Garmr's ISO is so hard to follow and my mind is swimming from all the defensiveness and the constant tunneling. But I am more bothered by how Lalendra is trying so hard to push the lynch, while not substantiating it well, and ignoring most else in the process.

Garmr's case against Lalendra 630 also seems rather well put together, and I can agree with many of the presented points (I think I've mentioned a few myself earlier).

Ugh, my head hurts. I need to make smaller, more frequent posts, or I'm going to find it increasingly difficult to stay involved in this game.

UNVOTE:
VOTE: Lalendra L-2

herrcombs · Post Post #676 (isolation #42) » Fri Oct 09, 2015 7:23 pm

@ Lala's 671: Why joke as a means of justifying a premature roleclaim? Isn't the proper time to claim when someone declares intent to hammer? Wagons can fall apart on their own at L-1... So wouldn't you want to wait as long as possible before you claimed?

Now, for your "self-evident" Garmr scumcase... Well, I was going to analyze it point by point (I actually had it all typed up), but I'm not going to defend Garmr because honestly I agree with some of your points. What does bother me though, is that it looks like you are not considering evidence that is contrary to this read that you have decided on (like in 498; there are some real points in Garmr's responses to melter's push, but you don't care to consider them.) A few arguments you make are nitpicky, and I think you're showing serious signs of confirmation bias.

Now, your "case" against Dier does still greatly bother me. I already said in my 662, I read through your ISO. I read it a couple of times actually. Your case on Dier is not substantiated to the extent that I would expect from someone who claims he is "so obvscum." Literally all I can see is your 306, which is both super hedgy and super nitpicky, then you said he'd be a good "compromise lynch" to Garmr in 312, then you picked out a single sentence in his back-and-forth with BBT in 377 and decided it was good enough for a vote. Do you honestly think you have been "pretty clear" about your Dier case?

herrcombs · Post Post #678 (isolation #43) » Fri Oct 09, 2015 7:36 pm

In post 677, Garmr wrote:2 There are no crumbs in her iso about her being a dr making the claim less believable.

This is seriously grasping at straws. How are you so sure there aren't any crumbs? And do you think it's necessary for town PRs to crumb their roles? Don't you think it's a terrible idea for a PR to have obvious crumbs, especially for a doc, because they could be easily noticed by scum for an early NK? Do you think it's impossible for scum to fakecrumb PRs?

Like wtf... why even make that argument...

herrcombs · Post Post #679 (isolation #44) » Fri Oct 09, 2015 7:43 pm

@ DWL: Let's talk about something other than the Garmr/Lala thing. What are your thoughts on Dier? I am having a rather difficult time reading him atm.

herrcombs · Post Post #681 (isolation #45) » Fri Oct 09, 2015 8:10 pm

Don't shush me. And I don't know wtf you just said here: "and I would crumb it normally with out making a gambit or at least crumb who she is protecting." Could you rephrase it for me?

Please explain to me why crumbing anything about a doctor role, either the role or your target, benefits town more than it benefits scum? Here's my argument -- if you are the doc, crumbing your role in an obvious manner is bound to get you killed at night, defeating the purpose of your role. Crumbing your protection target will just lead mafia to hit someone else, defeating the purpose of your role. Why am I wrong? (For the record, from what I understand, docs can't protect themselves from the NK.)

herrcombs · Post Post #691 (isolation #46) » Sat Oct 10, 2015 7:50 am

In post 683, Meanmelter wrote:Dude the fact Garmr can quickhammer and no one seems to fucking bat an eye already makes being at L-1 time to claim.

Except I (505, 662) and several other people have batted an eye. And as pointed out by Dier (670), Garmr was already on Lalendra's wagon when she was put to L-1.

In post 685, Garmr wrote:
In post 681, herrcombs wrote:Don't shush me. And I don't know wtf you just said here: "and I would crumb it normally with out making a gambit or at least crumb who she is protecting." Could you rephrase it for me?

Please explain to me why crumbing anything about a doctor role, either the role or your target, benefits town more than it benefits scum? Here's my argument -- if you are the doc, crumbing your role in an obvious manner is bound to get you killed at night, defeating the purpose of your role. Crumbing your protection target will just lead mafia to hit someone else, defeating the purpose of your role. Why am I wrong? (For the record, from what I understand, docs can't protect themselves from the NK.)

You leave a crumb of who you want to protect if there it can confirm people as town if there's no kills.
But be honest do you even believe her claim

Thanks for ignoring half my post. I don't know if I believe EITHER of your claims. This game is such a mess right now that I need to reread yet again to try to make sense of it all.

In post 686, Keyser Söze wrote:Could be a caught-scum-tactic to out the doctor - but as no one has counter-claimed: UNVOTE: Lalendra

By the way, I'm not sure if there's a real doc who isn't Lalendra, that they should cc right now. If Lalendra doesn't die in the night, we pretty much know she's scum, right? Then if there's a real doc, he/she can stay hidden and the role isn't completely worthless.

In post 690, Lalendra wrote:I generally claim at L-1 because frankly, I don't have the time to check in on the game every ten minutes during the week, and it's entirely possible that I could miss ITH and the hammer vote. So, since I was already here and actively posting, and saw that I was at L-1, that seemed to me like the time to claim.

This makes sense. Thank you.

herrcombs · Post Post #720 (isolation #47) » Mon Oct 12, 2015 6:16 am

Hey DWL -- Could you answer my question from 679?

herrcombs · Post Post #745 (isolation #48) » Tue Oct 13, 2015 8:35 am

I didn't realize that we have less than four IRL days left before the deadline. We should probably consolidate, yeah?

From what I understand, several people don't want to take sides in the Garmr vs Lalendra thing. I can understand the desire to let their PR claims sort themselves out. If I had to compromise (someone who's not Garmr/Lalendra/Hieirama), I'd pick Haschel. It seems like he's popping in this game every so often only to take little prods at people without building serious reads or analyzing the game to any degree of depth. He's flown under my radar all game but I could definitely see that as a scum tactic.

UNVOTE:
VOTE: Haschel Cedricson

herrcombs · Post Post #783 (isolation #49) » Thu Oct 15, 2015 4:09 pm

I'm torn. I'd really prefer to let the Lalendra doc-claim resolve itself, but looking through her ISO, I still have to admit she looks really scummy... But I'm honestly worried about the composition of her wagon. I feel way better about sticking to Haschel. He's been a non-factor in this game and I don't see much in the way of town motivation or analysis from him. Plus, he hasn't claimed doc, so yeah. Call me a coward, but I still don't like the idea of lynching potential PRs.

If it means lynching Lalendra or going without a lynch, I'll choose the former, but I still feel really uneasy about her wagon...

herrcombs · Post Post #796 (isolation #50) » Fri Oct 16, 2015 4:24 am

Why do you think haschel is town, garmr?

herrcombs · Post Post #798 (isolation #51) » Fri Oct 16, 2015 4:41 am

In post 788, mykonian wrote:It's a bit annoying that there's a heap of townies who play this game but don't really dare to do anything.

Who are you talking about here?

herrcombs · Post Post #801 (isolation #52) » Fri Oct 16, 2015 5:44 am

Fuck it. You're actually right -- a Lala lynch gives us a hell of a lot more information than a Haschel lynch.

We'd better be right about this, or else I'm flipping my desk.

UNVOTE:
VOTE: Lalendra L-2

herrcombs · Post Post #803 (isolation #53) » Fri Oct 16, 2015 5:49 am

We don't have a weekend. We have 24 hours until the deadine.

herrcombs · Post Post #810 (isolation #54) » Fri Oct 16, 2015 6:24 am

@BBT: If you're asking why I want to lynch Lala -- Her read progression yesterday was terrible, her scumread on Garmr was predicated on quasi-PL desires which morphed inexplicably into a #1 D1 lynch priority based on a scumread that she never substantiated; likewise, her only other scumread in Dierfire up to that point was not substantiated in the slightest and yet she claimed later he was "obvscum" 652 (look through my ISO, I've already made this point quite clear), only to backtrack after being challenged on it, yet still wants to lynch the same person. She has pushed ONE person today (Garmr), and despite other conversations trying to take place, the Garmr/Lalendra game seems to leech all attention from them.

I'll be fine to lynch Lala or Haschel today. I think a Dier lynch would also give us quite a bit of information, but I'm not as comfortable about my read of him. He's making me uncomfortable for the same reasons as Haschel -- despite the fact that he asks a lot of questions, he gives very little of his own analysis, and I see several instances in his ISO that look like he's deliberately trying to project a Town image. If I had given more time to the game today, I would have pushed on him, but I'm rather underwhelmed with others who have had him at the top of their scumlist (BBT, Lala) and haven't really done anything of substance all day to convince us why.

herrcombs · Post Post #813 (isolation #55) » Fri Oct 16, 2015 8:16 am

Would you vote for either Haschel or Dier, meanmelter?

herrcombs · Post Post #819 (isolation #56) » Fri Oct 16, 2015 3:45 pm

Love the town effort here. Thanks guys

herrcombs · Post Post #883 (isolation #57) » Sat Oct 17, 2015 2:53 am

I'm here, just woke up. Give me a sec to catch up.

herrcombs · Post Post #885 (isolation #58) » Sat Oct 17, 2015 3:00 am

In post 863, BlueBloodedToffee wrote:She didn't say who she protected? Has she claimed it afterwards?

In post 864, Garmr wrote:nope not even once.

Why would you lie about that, Garmr? Or did you just not read the thread?

w/e, this isn't even the time to talk about it. The more pressing issue is that

HASCHEL IS STILL AT L-2

. I see on his wagon right now [Keyster, myko, BBT, DWL]. The last vote count was wrong.

UNVOTE:
VOTE: Haschel L-1

Someone get in here and hammer.

pedit: yep we gotta get this done

herrcombs · Post Post #886 (isolation #59) » Sat Oct 17, 2015 3:03 am

In post 868, Dwlee99 wrote:Just checked, they didn't say who they protected.

and this. wtf

herrcombs · Post Post #887 (isolation #60) » Sat Oct 17, 2015 3:09 am

Is anyone else here?

herrcombs · Post Post #889 (isolation #61) » Sat Oct 17, 2015 3:11 am

Looks like 2 hrs 18 min

herrcombs · Post Post #929 (isolation #62) » Wed Oct 21, 2015 3:47 am

Feeling better about Keyser being town. Myko can be town until I reread things to make sure, same with DWL. Not sure if the Dier hammer makes him town or if he's just trying to buy town points.

Uneasy about the NK, either scum is trying to WIFOM us or Lalendra is mafia. Not entirely sure why BBT was killed -- I have suspicions, but I want to reread to make sure first.

Who did you protect last night, Lalendra?

herrcombs · Post Post #984 (isolation #63) » Thu Oct 22, 2015 10:16 am

I'd like to jump in on this back and forth between Dier and Hiei --

these questions are for you, Hieirama:

In post 955, Hieirama wrote:I think they're both Town and I think we've got scum hiding in some common townreads.
The NK makes me more suspicious of this, actually.

In post 983, Hieirama wrote:Common Townreads; Dwlee, Herr, Keyser.
It unsettles me that it seems like scum haven't tried targeting them yet.

Which of those common townreads (between Dwlee, myself, and Keyser) do you think is/are scum? Do you have any reasons aside from the idea that "scum haven't tried targeting them yet?" And by targeting, do you mean targeting for NKs, or putting pressure on them during the day?

In post 983, Hieirama wrote:p.s. not liking how anti-Garmr Meanmelter is being

What makes you believe that it is more likely scum!Meanmelter trying to get town!Garmr lynched, rather than a town!Meanmelter following a strong scumread? Do you think Meanmelter is scumreading Garmr with substance, and if so, do you disagree with his reasoning?

herrcombs · Post Post #987 (isolation #64) » Thu Oct 22, 2015 2:39 pm

Oh, I've read his posts, and I have my own opinions. I need to hear Hieirama's opinions though. This is important to me. I'd appreciate if you didn't interfere.

herrcombs · Post Post #1050 (isolation #65) » Mon Oct 26, 2015 5:43 am

Alrighty, I was gone most of the weekend but I'm catching up now. Wall incoming

In post 928, Keyser Söze wrote:Garmr reads the emerging Haschel Cedricson wagon as a scum-counter wagon. I can see town-Garmr thinking this:

tbf, I think this could also come from scum trying to protect his buddy.

In post 930, Keyser Söze wrote:Garmr REALLY wants the Lalendra lynch: post 829, post 830, post 837, post 842, post 847, post 854.
This does make me feel that Garmr didn't know Haschel Cedricson was scum.

Could you explain this for me Keyser? Are you saying if Garmr and Haschel were scumbuddies, Garmr wouldn't have had an outburst like that trying to get Lala lynched? Not sure I agree.

In post 947, Keyser Söze wrote:I felt like Haschel Cedricson gave out many views/reads on behaviour of many players, but primarily focused only on Lalendra and Hieirama.
Lalendra wins a town point for being the wagon that Haschel Cedricson pushed D1/D2.
Haschel Cedricson did not vote for anyone else he'd given a negative remark on.
Interestingly, I could not find a read/opinion that Haschel Cedricson gave on Meanmelter.

I agree with these statements. I think Haschel's flip looks good for Lala and Hiei, but it makes me nervous about Meanmelter and Garmr.

In post 948, Garmr wrote:I'm trying to set up a situation that will get lale killed if she's town by scum or lynched as scum or forces scum to protect a town power role to keep lale alive if she's scum

Regarding this whole thing, where Garmr tries to out the remaining mason(s), I am going like this O.O We don't know if scum have something like a roleblocker or a strongman, which is likely if Lala is actually the doc and tried to save BBT last night. Garmr gets huge scum points in my book for trying to do this against the remaining mason(s)' will, and for making it easier for scum to hunt them down by pressuring DWL to confirm/deny his role. I'm beginning to feel more strongly that Garmr is scum who's just super ballsy with his anti-town behavior. I just don't see town playing this kind of risk, lemme break it down -- If Garmr's wrong about Lalendra, then his 'plan' directly kills two PRs, one at night, and the other gets lynched the next day. Actually, if Garmr is town and felt so strongly about Lala being scum, he wouldn't bother with this whole runaround. He'd just want to lynch Lala today. That way, we would still have conftown more likely to survive until later.

In post 966, Meanmelter wrote:I do not recall you not feeling townie agbout Keyser? You said he was null-town and that he has been under your radar, but I believe that was the last you mentioned of him. Perhaps you mean you are reassured? Especially with those last two statements who you felt are both town.

Yes, I am reassured that Keyser is likely town.

Garmr's post 973 bothers the crap out of me. It's like Garmr has a finger in each ear going "LALALA I CANT FUKING HEAR YOU" and just trying to drive his narrative home.

At this point, I do not think Meanmelter and Garmr are scum together, but I would wager that there's a scum between them.

A quick diversion -- I'm not a fan of Hieirama's 1002 for the same reason I've not been a fan of most of her play so far. So much vague language, so little desire to reread anything or analyze what has transpired in the game. I wanted real answers to my questions in 984, not just fencesitting without having reread the game and without indicating a desire to figure out the game to any depth. I can't take your reads seriously, Hieirama, if you just make posts like 955 and 983 without substantiation, and continue not to substantiate them after being pressured.

In post 1014, Meanmelter wrote:So what are your opinions on me, then?

I think that you have tunneled Garmr the entire game, and whether you are town or scum, it has left sort of a blind spot for other things that have been going on. That being said, I can see your push against Garmr as a town push. You have made several good points that I agree with, so that prompted my question to Hieirama when she said "not liking how anti-Garmr Meanmelter is being" in 983. I think there are points in your push against Garmr that appear to be misrepresented (e.g. the phrase at the end of 466 "You went from AFK one line posts to softclaiming out of the blue..." it's not clear whether you were trying to say Garmr was afk before he claimed, or rather that the style of his posts were afk-one-liners.) However, I think Garmr is totally overblowing how all of your posts are "shit" and misreps and strawmen and w/e. I think in your interactions with Garmr, Garmr looks way worse. I think Garmr complains about misreps and strawmen, all the while misrepresenting you and making strawman arguments. So I'm not liking Garmr atm.

Note to self: I should come back to myko's 1027 once I have some more time.

In post 1030, mykonian wrote:I think today I'd like to go with the theory that garmr and mean are the two remaining scum. It makes sense on a couple of levels.

Could you explain the levels on which this association makes sense? I'm not seeing this conclusion as readily as you are atm. Ever since meanmelter replaced in, do you think the aggression that he's shown towards Garmr is not unlikely to occur between two scum?

Reading Garmr's 1040, ok he's actually making a few decent points here. Like his point about the line from MM's 466. However (let's look at the FACT THAT WASN"T TRUE line), Garmr, you have it wrong. Your only scumreads D2 were people who were either voting you or considering it. See 530. I even called you out on this, and you sheepishly dropped your contrived scumread on me like a bad habit. Your scumread on feli D1 was AFTER he had first scumread you (see 270). Same with myko. Why does this matter? Because it looks like you're only interested in lynching people who want to kill you. Your scumhunting revolves around yourself. It looks like you're looking inward, not outward, and that is scummy.

In post 1044, Meanmelter wrote:The mafia are NOT killing people who see you as town. I do not recall BBT calling you town,

This is actually not true. BBT was pretty sure Garmr is town. Just look at his interaction with Garmr at the end of D2. And his 636, he outright said that the Garmr wagon was bad.

Holy crap this back-and-forth between Garmr and Mean is painful. It's basically Garmr going, "Mean did this," mean replies "No I didn't," then Garmr goes "Yeah you did." For the record Garmr, if you make claims about someone, the burden is on YOU to prove their validity. If you claim that Mean "says i provided no reads or anything," and he denies saying that, then it's your responsibility to show where he in fact said it. If you claim that Mean "tried to dispel my reads as only people that scum read me," and mean says he did no such thing, it is your responsibility to either show where he in fact said it, or admit that you're lying. Your 1045 just looks like you're trying to back yourself out of responsibility of claims you've made against mean. "really can't be bothered with these anwsers as they do nothing to change my points," well your points don't mean much if they're false to begin with. As scum, this makes complete sense, because you're using hyperbole to fabricate a case to get someone lynched. If you're town, it just means that you are lazy in how you throw shit around, making claims that aren't verifiable, exaggerating because you feel a certain way about a slot. I'm leaning towards the former.

VOTE: Garmr

herrcombs · Mon Oct 26, 2015 11:16 am

No, you've made specific claims that meanmelter did things, that he has explicitly denied doing in his 1044. And then you brushed it all aside. Even though there are points of your argument that I agree with, I can't understand why you would have to blatantly spin the facts and exaggerate to better make your case. That's not a townie thing to do.

I love how you accuse me of wall-derping when you glossed over the bulk of what I wrote in 1050. I guess you still have nothing to say about the scum-read you conveniently gave me D2 (530) right after I made a post condemning your D1 quickhammer (remember deflecting that with a "well what about my other reads"?). How you hadn't said a word about me beforehand, and haven't touched that scumread with a 10-foot pole since? I guess you have nothing to say regarding your THIRD blatantly anti-town action in this game? Your role-fishing that was completely misguided, unsolicited, and has caused someone to prematurely claim not-mason, which ONLY benefits scum?

herrcombs · Mon Oct 26, 2015 11:27 am

o rite, my bad

herrcombs · Mon Oct 26, 2015 11:45 am

@Garmr: So you think Lalendra's town, now?

herrcombs · Mon Oct 26, 2015 12:32 pm

Maybe you could rephrase the first half of your 1060 for me, then? I'm not sure I'm understanding you correctly. It sounded like you were making an argument that looked to me like you were treating Lalendra's claim as legit. What does "she was role blocked/strong manned so that's a miss" mean?

herrcombs · Post Post #1104 (isolation #70) » Tue Oct 27, 2015 6:36 pm

In post 1093, mykonian wrote:This is an interesting situation that I'm perfectly happy watching unfold.

herrcombs · Post Post #1130 (isolation #71) » Thu Oct 29, 2015 1:02 pm

Prodge for a day or two. Had some things come up IRL but I will catch up shortly.

herrcombs · Post Post #1142 (isolation #72) » Sat Oct 31, 2015 5:35 am

In post 1110, Lalendra wrote:So just to be clear, you are saying, since you voted Garmr, that you think Mean is town?

After Haschel's lynch, I was considering that Mean could be scum due to his interactions with him earlier in the game. However, the events of today make me townread Mean for a few reasons. Namely, Garmr's push against Mean seems buried in false accusations and hyperbole that have been challenged, and then ignored by Garmr. I don't understand why as town, Garmr needs to do this. The evidence he and others have presented so far does not compel me to vote for Mean, and furthermore, it makes me believe the Mean wagon is scum driven. I don't feel comfortable joining that wagon with two of my scumreads (Garmr and Hiei) on it. (Although it looks like Hiei is being force-replaced out, which I still have no idea how to feel about.)

This game has stagnated and it seems people are content letting the dichotomy between Garmr and Mean go unchallenged. Then again, we have less than four days left so I'm guessing we'll end up choosing between the two unless someone has strong feelings about someone else.

herrcombs · Post Post #1149 (isolation #73) » Sat Oct 31, 2015 9:25 am

I honestly don't know why I am responding to you right now, but golly I feel compelled to. First you invite me to fellate you (which I've thought long and hard about, but I'll decline, thanks anyway), next you

completely

evade the criticism lodged at your case against meanmelter by demeaning those who bring it up, then you insult my intelligence and imply I haven't done anything this game. And still you're either misreading everything I write, or you're deliberately misrepresenting me.

Actually ya know what, I'm not going to do this with you any more. I've had it with your juvenile personal attacks.

And you can't intimidate me. Nice try lining up your mislynch targets though scum

herrcombs · Mon Nov 02, 2015 10:13 am

I don't really have much else to say at this point. It'd be nice if Hiei's replacement caught up before the day ended, but all signs are pointing to a meanmelter lynch and I really don't feel like joining that wagon.

@ Myko: why have you been so quiet lately? Why did you never answer my question raised in 1050?

In post 1050, herrcombs wrote:Could you explain the levels on which this association makes sense? I'm not seeing this conclusion as readily as you are atm. Ever since meanmelter replaced in, do you think the aggression that he's shown towards Garmr is not unlikely to occur between two scum?

herrcombs · Post Post #1195 (isolation #75) » Tue Nov 03, 2015 8:46 am

You're sold that Garmr is town, eh Dierfire?

herrcombs · Sat Nov 07, 2015 10:16 pm

VOTE: Garmr

herrcombs · Post Post #1233 (isolation #77) » Sun Nov 08, 2015 7:27 am

In post 1227, Dwlee99 wrote:Why, herr?

Really? You need to ask me this? Yesterday, Garmr wrote up a wall about meanmelter that was filled with exaggeration and misrepresentation. When called out on it, he blatantly ignored the criticism and kept blindly pushing the lynch (and somehow convinced others to jump on board, still trying to figure out how that was allowed to happen). Later, he accused me of not being "specific" with my reasoning why his case against meanmelter was bad. He accused me of

painting with a broad brush

, and COMPLETELY ignored the last paragraph of my 1050 where I concisely pointed out a few specific things that Garmr claimed meanmelter did, meanmelter denied doing, and then Garmr refused to address. Then Garmr uses the old "other people are agreeing with me so I must be right" argument to defend himself and falsely augment his case while belittling the cases of others.

I think it's time you crawled out of Garmr's pocket.

In post 1225, Garmr wrote:I just didn't expect mean to be that bad and he can read the dead thread to confirm I'm town and realize by focusing on me all his done all game is been a
thorn in towns side.

This is the pot calling the kettle black. Which you've done repeatedly, might I add. You have been the biggest thorn in town's side this game, Garmr. You've been repeatedly anti-town with an early PR claim, a quickhammer, and rolefishing (yes I'm bringing this up again so FUCK OFF), your pushes have been full of logical holes, and your "scumhunting" amounts to tunneling day-to-day on people who are easy mislynch targets.

In post 1230, Aj The Epic wrote:In honesty, if it's been three days of focusing garmr without any investigative or substantive clears, he SHOULD"VE been lynched. This is a serious misplay by the town that he's still standing

When you replaced in, did you notice where your vote was? Did you care? I've been scumreading your slot off-and-on throughout the game, and while I know you didn't have a lot of time to catch up when you replaced in, you had a hand in meanmelter's lynch and said NOTHING about him prior to it happening.

herrcombs · Post Post #1235 (isolation #78) » Sun Nov 08, 2015 7:43 am

Ok. Let's put Garmr off to the side for a moment. Who do you think was the most suspicious person on mean's wagon? Do you think between myko and me, one of us (or both??) is scum?

herrcombs · Post Post #1239 (isolation #79) » Sun Nov 08, 2015 9:35 am

In post 1237, Garmr wrote:This is what happens when scum kill the smart people aka everyone who ever town read me.

In post 1236, Garmr wrote:you're funny

herrcombs · Post Post #1247 (isolation #80) » Sun Nov 08, 2015 3:24 pm

I'm not. I'm asking for your opinions since you said you weren't comfortable with the game, and I wanted to see if you had opinions or if you consider yourself clueless at the moment.

herrcombs · Post Post #1249 (isolation #81) » Sun Nov 08, 2015 3:52 pm

Aaaand that's four.

Holy shit.

UNVOTE:

You infuriate me, Garmr.

herrcombs · Post Post #1252 (isolation #82) » Sun Nov 08, 2015 4:59 pm

In post 1250, Garmr wrote:Why you want me lynched. Aldo it was vote 3

There are multiple things I want from today. And I wasn't referring to the number of votes on you.

herrcombs · Post Post #1254 (isolation #83) » Sun Nov 08, 2015 5:21 pm

So how does voting yourself achieve that? If you're town, that's working against your win condition.

herrcombs · Post Post #1271 (isolation #84) » Mon Nov 09, 2015 6:18 am

In post 1268, Dierfire wrote:To what were you referring?

Number of textbook antitown things that he's done so far this game.

herrcombs · Post Post #1286 (isolation #85) » Tue Nov 10, 2015 4:45 am

I am waiting with bated breath for AJ to finish his reread and actually answer the question why he kept his vote on meanmelter when he replaced in, despite not having seen anything scummy from him or even knowing who he was.

And before you ask, or tell me all snippy-like to read your iso, no I do not think that 1243 was in any way a sufficient response to my questions.

Happy cakeday, though!

herrcombs · Post Post #1336 (isolation #86) » Thu Nov 12, 2015 5:34 am

Prodge. I really,

really

want to hear from AJ.

herrcombs · Post Post #1350 (isolation #87) » Fri Nov 13, 2015 9:20 am

In post 1348, mykonian wrote:well, what's the excuse for the rest of you? I'm content lynching dier or garmr today.

Wait, I'm actually confused, myko. What is your opinion of the Hieirama/AJ slot? Off the top of my head, I can't recall you giving a strong opinion either way on the slot recently.

Are you opposed to an AJ lynch, and if so, why?

herrcombs · Post Post #1370 (isolation #88) » Sun Nov 15, 2015 7:10 am

In post 1233, herrcombs wrote:When you [AJ] replaced in, did you notice where your vote was? Did you care? I've been scumreading your slot off-and-on throughout the game, and while I know you didn't have a lot of time to catch up when you replaced in, you had a hand in meanmelter's lynch and said NOTHING about him prior to it happening.

In post 1286, herrcombs wrote:I am waiting with bated breath for AJ to finish his reread and actually answer the question why he kept his vote on meanmelter when he replaced in, despite not having seen anything scummy from him or even knowing who he was.

The fact that you're completely ignoring this, AJ, does absolutely nothing to assuage my suspicions of you. Hieirama had been acting like newbscum all game. Her attitude and vote on the meanmelter wagon were awful. There's so much other stuff, if you look through my ISO then you can get a glimpse of it. At this point I would be comfortable lynching you, but I have the feeling you're still catching up so I'll wait for that to happen first.

It's not like you're not keeping up with what we're writing right now. You're selectively responding to things. Take this post:

In post 1294, Aj The Epic wrote:
In post 1288, Dwlee99 wrote:I agree that Ajs mean vote was really odd. I dont see why they would just vote for the popular wagon.

I didn't vote.
I'll finish catching up here by the end of this week, but I don't have time for a lot of reading right now.

But yeah, it pretty obvious that DWL got the series of events wrong when he said "you voted for the popular wagon." Question for you AJ: do you think that's an intentional misrepresentation by DWL, or do you think he was misremembering how your vote ended up on meanmelter?

herrcombs · Post Post #1391 (isolation #89) » Mon Nov 16, 2015 6:24 am

In post 1298, mykonian wrote:there's a way to tell hier's allignment though I've been unable to do so.

In post 1301, mykonian wrote:I don't actually know hiers allignment, I just see avenues of it being figured out.

What exactly do you mean by these, myko?

herrcombs · Post Post #1406 (isolation #90) » Tue Nov 17, 2015 8:27 am

I'm just going to out and tell you -- Myko, I think your attitudes towards AJ are suspiciously passive. I think there's been evidence that you and Hiei have been unwilling to push substantially on each other at all, and your interaction with AJ today continues to concern me. Yesterday, Hiei was incredibly inconsistent in her attitude between two people tunneling on Garmr (you vs. meanmelter). When asked about it, she didn't have a good answer -- Actually, I think she had like one post that said "Myko, you seem so

sure

Garmr is scum. Why is that?" But aside from that, she didn't push you at all. And she plopped her vote down on meanmelter when it was convenient to do so, scumreading him for very similar things that you have been doing.

AJ has done nothing today to make me feel better about Hiei's questionable actions before she replaced out, and you (Myko) are beginning to make me worried about your slot too. You've flown under my radar for much of the game, but looking back specifically at your 1027, I'm actually not a fan of how you PoE'd down to a garmr/mean or lalendra/mean scumteam. Your reasons for removing people early (like Dier and Hiei especially) seem superficial, and then you sort of coasted through the rest of the day while allowing the wagon on meanmelter to build. Independently, I can see both you and AJ being scum. And as a team, I think it's entirely plausible.

I can't believe that my scumread on Garmr is actually weakening. It's beginning to feel like I've taken a tumble down Alice's rabbithole.

But anyway.

In post 1394, Aj The Epic wrote:
In post 1390, Keyser Söze wrote:What about herrcombs, me, Dierfire and Garmr?

This was actually in reference to all of you, not dwlee specifically. I don't understand how Dwlee's had any sort of town read this entire game, but people have been town reading him from essentially page 1. I wouldn't be surprised if he is scum.

As for town myko in that post, town actively encourage other people to post. Myko didn't need to make that post by any stretch and could've just gone scum reading it for low content. Instead, takes the route of encouragement for content instead.

1. You're revising history. In your original post, you accused DWL of relying on you to generate discussion. It was your first sentence directly after voting DWL. This implies that you were using it as a justification for DWL being scum. Otherwise, why would you intentionally put it there? When Keyser pointed out the inconsistency, you backtracked and tried to make it a reference to the rest of the players. Not buying it.
2. You cherry picked Keyser's 1389 and 1390, ignoring his critique of your evidence for Garmr!town, that's my first issue with this. My second issue is specifically how you originally phrased "Just to continue the fact that Myko is town" where you had not mentioned a read on him previously in your posts. It feels awkwardly forced, and your elaboration of it rubs me the wrong way.

In post 1372, Aj The Epic wrote:Herrcombs, I saw the vote count when I replaced in and before I started reading. It held no significance to me because the only person I recognize is Myko. My assumption at that point was that I'd leave it to the better judgement of my own slot until I finished reading. Didn't look at it again.
Lest I need to remind you that a consensus is needed to lynch someone and that consensus was reached by more people than my silent slot on that lynch.
I've yet to see what spurred the wagon so I can't speak for anything involving it.

I agree it takes a majority to lynch, but you're evading any and all responsibility for your spot on the wagon. Your posts today, combined with Hiei's scumminess earlier in the game, make you my strongest lynch candidate.

VOTE: AJ L-1

herrcombs · Post Post #1413 (isolation #91) » Tue Nov 17, 2015 6:31 pm

wait.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think AJ is still at L-2. I missed Dier's unvote after the last votecount.

herrcombs · Post Post #1425 (isolation #92) » Wed Nov 18, 2015 8:48 am

In post 1414, Aj The Epic wrote:I am not revising history. Just because what I said was misinterpreted does not mean I'm changing what I said. I meant the entire group of you were doing shit all and I was right about it.

From Keyser, there is exactly one part of his two quotes I didn't respond to. To say I ignored his critique is giving him too much credit. So my question is why are you going so far out of your way to twist what I'm saying and misinterpret what I've done?

I wouldn't say I'm going far out of my way at all. All I've seen from you toDay (actually, starting yesterDay when you replaced in) is a promise to catch up which has yielded information from only the first 12 pages of the game, and selective responses to things happening currently when your name is invoked. Where have I misinterpreted what you've done, or twisted what you're saying? Literally what I did is notice a post in which you responded to a post by Keyser in which he asked you several questions, two of which you appeared to ignore. And this:

In post 1367, Aj The Epic wrote:You have shitty priorities. I sleep at night, too.

However,

VOTE: Delee99

The fact that you're relying on me to generate any discussion for you just isn't good.
Nor is the idea that you're happy putting someone at L-1 solely off wanting catch-up posts. Your votes are flimsy and there's no town motivation in them.

Are you trying to tell me that I'm twisting what you're saying, or misinterpreting, by deducing that the text in bold is you justifying your vote on DWL? And that, in the bolded text, you were actually referring to me, keyser, dier, and garmr, and not specifically DWL? Because that doesn't make logical sense to me.

I'm sorry if I seem snippy right now, but we have barely more than 3 days left until deadline... My patience is running thin...

Can someone else just tell me if I'm making sense or if I'm off my rocker? I feel like I'm shouting into space at the moment.

herrcombs · Wed Nov 18, 2015 12:09 pm

Well, didn't expect myko to hammer, but w/e.

Were you town, AJ?

herrcombs · Post Post #1444 (isolation #94) » Wed Nov 18, 2015 3:49 pm

Now I wonder whether that VT claim is legit or not.

UNVOTE:

You guys don't read my posts, do you? Should we actually lynch DWL today? (hint: there was no hammer)

I need to reread everything that has to do with DWL tomorrow when I have time. Will make my actual decision tomorrow after a reread.

herrcombs · Post Post #1445 (isolation #95) » Wed Nov 18, 2015 3:50 pm

Have you read the entire thread yet AJ? Is your read on DWL informed by anything past page 12 and before anything that happened today?

herrcombs · Post Post #1446 (isolation #96) » Wed Nov 18, 2015 3:51 pm

DWL's posts in "twilight" from 1434-1442 are shit btw.

herrcombs · Post Post #1447 (isolation #97) » Wed Nov 18, 2015 3:54 pm

And AJ: do you have the time to spend before the deadline to show that you've actually caught up?

herrcombs · Post Post #1451 (isolation #98) » Wed Nov 18, 2015 4:11 pm

In post 1450, Dwlee99 wrote:It was??

What are you referring to DWL?

Walk me through your thought process right now if you'd be so kind.

herrcombs · Post Post #1453 (isolation #99) » Wed Nov 18, 2015 4:18 pm

Oh.

In post 1413, herrcombs wrote:wait.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think AJ is still at L-2. I missed Dier's unvote after the last votecount.

In post 1444, herrcombs wrote:You guys don't read my posts, do you?

herrcombs · Wed Nov 18, 2015 5:57 pm

w/e. My buzz has worn off and I'm decidedly less interested in my original plan than I was a few hours ago.

Let's just do this, get a flip, and deal with the rest tomorrow.

VOTE: AJ

herrcombs · Wed Nov 18, 2015 6:04 pm

ebwop: I'm pretty sure that's actually L-1 this time.

herrcombs · Sun Nov 22, 2015 7:56 am

Well, this is interesting. We can actually learn something concrete from this (and it's a huge error if Garmr is scum).

Could everyone check in here, just make your presence known?

herrcombs · Sun Nov 22, 2015 8:56 am

If it was me and keyser, myko would be dead by now.

We know there must be at least one scum between Garmr and myko.

herrcombs · Sun Nov 22, 2015 9:41 am

Unless our scum team is completely clueless, yes. One between garmr and myko must be scum.

herrcombs · Sun Nov 22, 2015 11:24 am

sigh, wp dwl and keyser. Fooled me to the end.

herrcombs · Sun Nov 22, 2015 1:45 pm

In post 1513, Dwlee99 wrote:Herrcombs, I did not see you being the mason. I really thought it was dier.

Besides the fact that BBT was going HARD on Dier D2, like he was popping in and out of the thread just to ask if we were lynching Dierfire yet. Yeah, I'm pretty sure a mason doesn't bus his buddy like that.

Actually, that was one of my core reasons for townreading you. I think I had a post early game that brought up several posts of yours that bugged me, and I talked to BBT about you in our PT only to have him reassure me that you were town for meta reasons or w/e. I've never been a mason before, but I wanted to trust BBT's strong townread in you and you flew under my radar for the rest of the game as a result.

Bah.

herrcombs · Sun Nov 22, 2015 1:48 pm

In post 1515, Aj The Epic wrote:Also for the love of jesus some help catching up would've been so nice. Jerks.

Sorry AJ. Wish it had ended differently, and wish I had actually gone after DWL in my moment of doubt before we ended up lynching you yesterDay. I need to learn how to better turn off my tunnel vision and try to constantly reevaluate.

herrcombs · Sun Nov 22, 2015 2:57 pm

You totally should have done that

It would have been hilarious

herrcombs · Tue Nov 24, 2015 6:31 am

I'm fine with releasing the mason thread.

herrcombs · Tue Nov 24, 2015 6:39 am

Thanks for modding, A Simple Plan!