In post 2735, Infinity 324 wrote:Why can't town be suspicious of masons if they were very much so before the claim?
This is the more important question here.
I understand why shade casting on the Mason's could be an ok scum strategy even though I personally wouldn't do that as scum but I don't understand why it can't come from town.
Because Town wants masons and Town thinks through the entire process of how stupid it is to fake claim masons.
They have to 1) Have NEVER scumread each other 2) Been in clear cahoots on rereading enough to be believed but not enough to be killed and 3) optionally crumb.
And if you think I am not trusting but verifying you are sorely mistaken. Because if there is ever a HINT of them suggesting the other could be scum that is where scum lies but no townie in their right mind doubts it because A) it goes no where and B) without proof it is spam that drags the game on.
In post 114, Prism wrote:I'll be honest in saying that I have no idea how to read drealm. I've gotten townreads on him before only to walk them back later but I have yet to see his scumgame. There are no glaringly obvious differences thus far between this game and camn's revenge where we were both town.
Example Prism sets up Drealmerz as town D1.
Like fucking obvious. People aren't trying to fucking research or question the possibility they want others to do so. They would bring evidence to the table if it was a genuine doubt.
something like "surprised they weren't NKed they could be scum", but that was just to continue to not telegraph our masonry too hard and to put a little distance because I'd been "buddying" them really hard and wanted to see if I could get some momentum in my/their direction (figured scum would pick up on it more than town) and push 1 of us and I could ID potential scum that way
the hard blatant buddying/hard TRing is the "crumbing" of our masonitetitis that has been existent all game, obviously
In post 2751, Commander Shepard wrote:Because Town wants masons and Town thinks through the entire process of how stupid it is to fake claim masons.
They have to 1) Have NEVER scumread each other 2) Been in clear cahoots on rereading enough to be believed but not enough to be killed and 3) optionally crumb.
I agree, but once again, people who disagree with you aren't necessarily scum.
At some point you have to go Town just doesn't do things like attack masons without proof or not think about how stupid fake claiming mason is. I just can't see that being town.
I have to go take the Tempest to the Citadel for repairs. Considering last time we had to dock my clone took it over who knows how long I will be AFK for.
At some point you have to go Town just doesn't do things like attack masons without proof or not think about how stupid fake claiming mason is. I just can't see that being town.
And I can't see Town defending that either.
Titus / T&B / infinity
No no no
People get confbiased. People get paranoid. Just because someone is illogical doesn't mean they're scum.
You're scumreading someone for disagreeing with you AND you're scumreading someone for saying disagreement =/= scum (which is true in 90% of cases).
Step back and look at yourself. Not everyone sees the game the same way you do.
In post 2735, Infinity 324 wrote:Why can't town be suspicious of masons if they were very much so before the claim?
This is the more important question here.
I understand why shade casting on the Mason's could be an ok scum strategy even though I personally wouldn't do that as scum but I don't understand why it can't come from town.
Both their play from early game was so obvious I had to ask explicitly if they were Masons. Prism did confirm that early too, but I missed it because I was talking to dreal at the time, so IIRC I feel stupid, but that is that and they are Masons. The flavour fits perfectly and no mod will provide MASONS as a fake claim. The dreal flavour claim made it specific as to what flavour Prism would have, so it makes it even more risky for scum to fake that because there was no guarantee William wasn't already in play elsewhere.
All in all, this simply can't be a fake claim. It's as legit as can be (and this coming from someone who had consistently scum read dreal earlier).
I don't know about anyone else but y'all have managed to thoroughly dispel any doubts that might have remained in me that this is a scum fakeclaim. And I think we've established that town players may not vote for drealmerz or Prism.
Is there anything else that really needs discussion? Can we finish this up already?
I don't think anything needs discussed at this point
we just need someone to commit to the titus lynch
those not lynching titus at this point are supersuspect except for the 3 on t&b
I think we can determine that T&B is scum by the location of their vote and the lack of a vote on titus (a little too scared to be drawn in to suspicion by hammering for 'towncred', but, in doing so, has just made themselves more confscum, imo)
so, I'm trying to discern who the final scum could be based on who hammers and in what regard
it is odd that titus didn't self-hammer at this point too, but hey, what's the rush? read a book and wait for things to unfold
In post 2690, Empking wrote:Both Titus and Shep seemed to realise that Prism was the partner. There's no reason for scum-Titus to get it out explicitly, whereas town-Titus could have been thinking Prism or no one.
Because most of us are? Because you and Almost both went together from forcing Drealmerz to claim to campaigning for Titus to be lynched, never once considering that Dreamerlz could have been lying about being a Mason. Wheras town would generally put somebody at L- days-in Day Two with at least some thinking that their taret might be scum.
I'd look here. These are terrible excuses to avoid voting titus.
those not lynching titus at this point are supersuspect except for the 3 on t&b
I think we can determine that T&B is scum by the location of their vote and the lack of a vote on titus (a little too scared to be drawn in to suspicion by hammering for 'towncred', but, in doing so, has just made themselves more confscum, imo)
so, I'm trying to discern who the final scum could be based on who hammers and in what regard
it is odd that titus didn't self-hammer at this point too, but hey, what's the rush? read a book and wait for things to unfold
and I had actually mistaken who was where when I typed that
I thought AC was on T&B and empking was not-voting along with titus
so, yep, will just await prism's go-ahead (they'll likely just hammer after they check in)
you do realize that being antsy for the lynch is major-suspect, wraith? like...it's likely prism or I or you (if you're townBG) are the kill tonight (you said so yourself), so allowing prism to get in final thoughts and reads about everything is pretty crucial in case they're killed tonight, ya?
and I had actually mistaken who was where when I typed that
I thought AC was on T&B and empking was not-voting along with titus
so, yep, will just await prism's go-ahead (they'll likely just hammer after they check in)
you do realize that being antsy for the lynch is major-suspect, wraith? like...it's likely prism or I or you (if you're townBG) are the kill tonight (you said so yourself), so allowing prism to get in final thoughts and reads about everything is pretty crucial in case they're killed tonight, ya?
Oh Jesus Christ he still hasn't said his peace? Didn't he ask for extra time like two days ago?
IDC if it looks scummy, when a game idles on a certain lynch for days just to argue in circles about nothing of particular importance, it can destroy my interest in that game.
I'm King John - One-Shot Cop - following TWC's suspicions I investigated her slot last night. She's aligned with the monarchy.
THAT -in itself- is a scum claim. King John was a traitor to his own brother King Richard and tried to topple him off the throne during the Crusades. Furthermore, he upset most nobles and he finally dies during a civil war that had started because of his policies.
The bolded below is from wikipedia. King John is a villain.
Ralph Turner describes as "distasteful, even dangerous personality traits", such as pettiness, spitefulness and cruelty. These negative qualities provided extensive material for fiction writers in the Victorian era, and John remains a recurring character within Western popular culture, primarily as a villain in films and stories depicting the Robin Hood legends.