VOTE: flubbernuggetFlubbernugget wrote:Not me
Seems like a pretty open and shut case to me.
I don't see it. Flubber is a better wagon.In post 20, Sergtacos wrote:Vote HEM pleaseIn post 19, Sephiroth wrote:VOTE: flubbernuggetFlubbernugget wrote:Not me
Seems like a pretty open and shut case to me.
Are you serious about this?[/quote]In post 25, Sephiroth wrote:I don't see it. Flubber is a better wagon.
That I would rather wagon flubber? Yes. Not sure why we're wagoning HEM tbh.In post 27, skitter30 wrote:Are you serious about this?In post 25, Sephiroth wrote:I don't see it. Flubber is a better wagon.
He said he wasn't town.In post 32, skitter30 wrote:I guess what I'm getting at is why do you want to wagon Flubber?In post 29, Sephiroth wrote:Sorry, meant this:
That I would rather wagon flubber? Yes. Not sure why we're wagoning HEM tbh.In post 27, skitter30 wrote:Are you serious about this?In post 25, Sephiroth wrote:I don't see it. Flubber is a better wagon.
(I'm also not finding the HEM wagon particularly interesting or relevant atm).
I mean, was it clearly a joke? Maybe. But we're less than 24 hours into Day 1 and if you've noticed Flub hasn't shown up to say anything since. I'm taking it seriously in that its a good enough reason to start a D1 wagon that actually generates discussion. Whether I'm taking it seriously enough to say that I think Flub is scum, obviously not yet. That may change depending on the their next post though. That's kind of the point of an early D1 wagon...see something worth attacking, wagon, see what happens. I think claiming non-town is worth probing, don't you?In post 38, skitter30 wrote:In post 34, Wossi wrote:Maybe because there's not really any town reason to claim scum?
There isn't really any scum reason to claim scum?
Why are you and Sephiroth taking that post seriously when it was clearly a joke?
Just to clarify...are you actually claiming miller?In post 54, Sergtacos wrote:hard claim miller
Why are you so keen on shutting down a wagon on the only relatively substantial thing to have happened this game? Sure, maybe claiming scum isn't a good scum move. Its sure as hell not a good town move. I don't see how its beneficial to write it off and ignore it with zero further input from Flub. I mean the dude didn't even vote, just claim non-town and disappear. If that doesn't satisfy the requirement for you to wagon D1, what will? I mean do you want someone to just admit to being scum before we wagon anybody? Oh, wait...In post 62, TwoInAMillion wrote: There's no serious reason to claim scum. This is a normal game and I don't see Jester being a role.
Lets be clear here. A wagon is not the same as a lynch. I am not in a rush to lynch. I AM in a rush to start a substantial wagon because it takes us out of the random stage and into the actual game. The longer we're in RVS the longer people can lurk and make excuses like "I have nothing to work with!" to be completely non-committal.In post 64, TwoInAMillion wrote:Because I don't want to see town lynched?
We are a day into the game, there's a lot more left to happen day 1. Why the rush?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E-sDM8ZUgVAIn post 75, Sergtacos wrote:Whats it to you?In post 61, Sephiroth wrote:Just to clarify...are you actually claiming miller?In post 54, Sergtacos wrote:hard claim miller
K. I don't really like that you waited and built the suspense. Adding unnecessary confusion and uncertainty to the dialog is not pro-town. It also feasibly gives you time to see how the town is taking the claim before choosing whether you want to follow through or pull back. VOTE: sergtacosSergtacos wrote: Joking
Are we serious right now? Where was this yesterday? What changed for you two?Sergtacos wrote: but hey lets sheep. VOTE: Flubbernugget
Are you asking whether giving bullshit reasons is a town or scum tell? Seems kind of like a false dichotomy to me. A bullshit vote is a bullshit vote, but you have to look past the given reasoning to see if its a scummy vote or not. Not to mention my idea of 'bullshit' reasons is very dependent on the player and game situation. How would you answer this question?humaneatingmonkey wrote:Guys, how do you classify bullshit vote reasons? Scum or town?
You can't imagine how happy I was to learn that the username was not taken haha. Sephiroth has got to be one of the best videogame villains ever.Lalendra wrote:I really hope Sephiroth isn't scum because I love the synchronicity of the avatar, location and signature. And because I just generally love Sephiroth. I want to FoS you for unnecessary AtE.
If it was an obvious joke then you probably wouldn't have had 2 people directly ask for clarification, and several other people independently discuss whether it was a fake claim or not. I think it was pretty objectively NOT an obvious joke. And even if it were, you avoided a direct question when you had the chance to set the record straight. Why the hell did you think I was asking? Just for fun? You made the game state confusing then you refused to clarify the situation as the town questioned/speculated about what you meant. That to me is anti-town and worthy of a vote. Your little extra paragraph at the end is pretty suspect. You basically are speculating that because 2 (among a couple others) who were not clear about the sincerity of the claim are scum because...they weren't clear about your claim? Is it possible that just maybe, it was genuinely plausible that your actions were confusing and merited clarification? You're OMGUSing pretty hard over 1 vote...In post 126, Sergtacos wrote: First off I don't like Seph's tone's tone about building the suspsence? idk sounds scum like if you ask me because like i thought it was an obvious joke or fake claim in my opinion and Seph is sounding like she's trying to make it sound bad by force, thats what i mean by sounding scum.
Then skitter posted asking why i did that, same thing. Scum buddy post or innocent post? Not sure, but to me seem like 75% scum buddy and 25% innocent but then I had been in a scum game with skitter when we were scum buddies she was a hard lurker so this is very different. Meh, the other way i guess.
This seems like some wildly unfounded conjecture to me. You've heard the term WIFOM, right?In post 134, wavemode wrote:Also, as I said, 1st and 2nd to claim town are probably town
I disagree on the first quote but I agree that the second is reachy. As has been discussed, you could argue that 68 from tiam was also not scumhunting, but looking for an excuse to park a vote, with reachy reasoning. I think its even worse since tiam first discouraged the wagon and then hopped on for a manufactured and thin reason. What are your thoughts on tiam?In post 138, wavemode wrote: First is incredibly reachy and the quote is taken out of context
Second is similarly reading too deep and drawing a conclusion from nothing
Let me break it down. You made a claim, I didn't understand whether it was serious or not and I asked you if it was serious. You chose not to answer my question. I think this is suspicious for these two reasons, let me know if this is still unclear:In post 160, Sergtacos wrote:In post 105, Sephiroth wrote:K. I don't really like that you waited and built the suspense. Adding unnecessary confusion and uncertainty to the dialog is not pro-town. It also feasibly gives you time to see how the town is taking the claim before choosing whether you want to follow through or pull back. VOTE: sergtacosSergtacos wrote: Joking
The direct question was me asking you whether you were joking. I wouldn't say I'm butt hurt so much as curious why you were choosing to be non-cooperative.In post 126, Sergtacos wrote: In my perspective it was an obvious joke. So you can't really put that on me because its what I see. What direct question? Yeah I asked what is it to you? That I believed was an obvious joke but lmfao u got butt hurt over that? Not sure if you're town because of that or you're scum trying to get a wagon on me all because I made a joke lmao. And the rest i dont understand.
I'm actually not doing that either. I was pushing that it was anti-town to not answer a direct question about his miller claim.In post 161, TwoInAMillion wrote:I'm not liking Sergtacos pushing the claiming scum thing...
VOTE: SergtacosVOTE:
I don't think it was a bad push considering how early in the game that was. I dropped it when the game moved past the early stage as it only really held significance in the early game.TwoInAMillion wrote:I thought the bad push on flub was more anti-town than then flub's idiot posting.
Honestly I feel like this hits the nail on the head for me and its what's bothering me about this game. A lot of my reads basically look like "acting rationally" or "not acting rationally".In post 210, skitter30 wrote: This is how I feel about them too, and to a certain, but lesser extent, you and Seph as well. You're all pushing the right things imo, and taking reasonable positions. I'm just slightly concerned that I'm biased towards townreading all four of you because you're pushibg things that I agree with.
I haven't found serg's play to be especially rational throughout. I think this line of argument winds up being fairly wifom but for the record I don't think serg-scum was too worried about the consequences. They seem to have disappeared so perhaps they didn't expect this sort of reaction at all. Dude literally hasn't said a thing. Scum or town, that doesn't sound like heady play to me.In post 205, implosion wrote:I mean, the reasoning here is obvious but. Do you think serg-scum is likely to put himself out there with the naked L-1 vote? I don't think serg-scum would see the mixed reaction he got to the miller fiasco and decide "hm, what I need now is to enshrine myself as the center of attention."Sephiroth wrote:Meanwhile Serg got jealous of lalendra and wanted my vote back. Surprised only Dany and Skitter have mentioned that raw L-1 vote. I dunno to me it seems like a much better wagon might be Mr. Tacos over here.
How is this at all different than your defense of serg above? Bonus points: You use a similar line of reasoning in defense of serg way back in 83 as well. Its funny how this argument seems to consistently apply to taco but but if wavemode uses it to defend wossi its a 'basic too scummy to be scum' argument.In post 169, implosion wrote: Second is this:which is just like the most basic kind of too scummy to be scum argument.All the nonsense Wossi is accused of, scum tend to specifically try to avoid doing, especially in the very early game... to avoid this exact situation he is in now
I think its pretty clear if you read my posts that I'm talking about his miller claim and subsequent failure to clarify if it was real or a joke.In post 211, Flubbernugget wrote: Sephiroph, what post are you arguing with tacos about? It's probably one of the early ones.
In post 297, Sephiroth wrote:In post 210, skitter30 wrote: With Wossi to me it seems the wagon is built on him holding a position that happens to be unpopular (lynch all liars) with this group of players more than anything particularly scummy that they've done. I dont think there was a significant shift in rhetoric between 34 and 37, since it all falls under the umbrella of lynch all liars which is not a novel belief.Its an older playstyle sir, but it checks out.41 just seems like he's making a joke about his random vote and its been read into like crazy. This isn't page 2 anymore. I mean I could respond to each specific post thats called out if people want but suffice it to say I just don't see what others seem to see in Wossi.
I'll give that game a once over and see if I agree with your take. I'm content to leave my vote on lalendra and wait on serg for the timebeing.In post 305, skitter30 wrote:I was scum with Serg in 1946. He's a lot more self-aware than he might appear to be, and was actually pretty cognizant about the reactions his actions might instigate; he'd talk to his partners a lot and run things by us to make sure he didn't look scummy. (ie 'should I lolhammer?'). If anything, I think that town!taco is less worried about how he looks to others. He also, like, tried to look more invested, even as he played up the stoner dude persona. Like he tried to look like he was contributing and scumhunting, but played up being high so that people wouldn't take what he was saying *that* seriously.In post 297, Sephiroth wrote:I think this line of argument winds up being fairly wifom but for the record I don't think serg-scum was too worried about the consequences.
I mean I'm not trying to be obstinate here but I just don't see why any player would be that caught up in whether something seemed scummy to push near the top of page 2. Like I completely understand what you're saying and it would be a bigger deal to me if Wossi pulled that move in relation to a serious, potentially lynching wagon. But how is this move not explained by them just wanting to push someone in the early game, and joining in on a potential wagon? Early wagons are good. Joining one is a null tell in my book. I mean hell even if this happened page 4 or 5 I might see your point but hell man no scum is sitting there thinking they will get a mislynch from putting the second vote on someone on page 2.In post 305, skitter30 wrote:I think he's done several sketchy things, including his push on Flubber which imo was kinda delayed until after you pushed it since it looks like he specifically waited to see how people would react if it got pushed. His response to me pointing this was was to attribute the delay to being excited for finding scum so early, but I don't think I'd said anything AI by that point. He's also admitted to making 'meaningless accusations', and I don't understand the town motivation in that.In post 299, Sephiroth wrote:With Wossi to me it seems the wagon is built on him holding a position that happens to be unpopular (lynch all liars) with this group of players more than anything particularly scummy that they've done. I dont think there was a significant shift in rhetoric between 34 and 37, since it all falls under the umbrella of lynch all liars which is not a novel belief. Its an older playstyle sir, but it checks out. 41 just seems like he's making a joke about his random vote and its been read into like crazy. This isn't page 2 anymore. I mean I could respond to each specific post thats called out if people want but suffice it to say I just don't see what others seem to see in Wossi.
I really don't see any of the points as legitimate. I see them as pointing at normal page 2 posts and painting an elaborate backstory that suggests their scum. It doesn't make sense to me. The argument is that he hesitated than followed someone else onto a wagon on PAGE 2. Then that he referred to accusations he madeIn post 305, skitter30 wrote: I'm not sure why you keep on dismissing the wossi wagon when there have been several legitimate points raised against him that he's failed to respond to. I don't think we should move past it just because it's 10 pages later when he's been absent from the thread and hasn't really reacted to it yet.
You forgot me, apparently can't be bothered to read my posts still. Honestly they're really not that bad in length. If you think THOSE were wall of text hooo boy.In post 441, Mulch wrote:Mulch tiam wossi Skitter flubber wicked
Don't really want to lynch Dany today, neither Implosion, and I sorta believe you now that serge is town Skitter
Whose left
Chip lalendra? Who else?
This is anti town as fuck. I dunno how you can justify trying to tell a player not to trust themselves and just listen to what you say when you literally can't be bothered to read the game.
The more Serg posts the more he seems like he's on pure random mode at this point. Still lean scummy but its not a strong read. I still find Lalendra very sketch for the general lack of effort in her scumhunting and premature call for a claim on Wossi. She also continues to lurk in plain sight and has managed to avoid commenting on much of the goings ons of the game which is extremely suspicious to me. So I prefer Lalendra of those two.In post 506, Wickedestjr wrote:Do you have a preference between Lalendra and Sergtacos? Do you think they could both be scum?In post 297, Sephiroth wrote:Lalendra's vote might be the scummiest thing to happen so far. I dont think anyone thought that wagon was leading to an imminent lynch, so dropping the L-1 after it had just been criticized from Serg and asking for a claim no less looks really scummy to me. Lalendra basically just decided for all of us that it was time to end the day with a wossi lynch.Either her or Serg should be the ones being wagoned. I'm honestly going to be throwing my vote to whichever one of those two others are willing to vote.Let's make it happen.
unvote: serg, vote: lalendra
Come on guys let's have a real wagon!
ReAd ThE tHrEaDIn post 535, Sergtacos wrote:why are people voting for mulch?
Do you not see how low effort he is playing? Did you not see him say that he was going to be low effort? He is playing exactly like low effort scum...Coming in opposing the big stupid wagon and proposing we lynch on policy (even trying to create a town block) without any real effort to read the game, then going on (falsely) about how meta makes all his reads make sense. He is so clearly scum it hurts.In post 542, Sergtacos wrote:why would scum much do that? he would be too careful to NOT do that. i can see it from a town perspective from mulch by doing that.In post 539, Wossi wrote:Umm, he has imaginary meta on me from a game that doesnt exist? That's not a good reason to vote?In post 521, TwoInAMillion wrote:unvote
I think both Wossi and Mulch are scummy, but I definately don't want day to end early and Wossi's vote on Mulch makes me unsure on which is scummier.
Wossi wagon at the time:In post 373, Mulch wrote:From briefly reading the game I'm pretty sure idany is town but wrong, and that wossi is town. My first look is going to be at the people scumreading wossi for a long time, specifically those that have vote parked them
Way to clear or exempt from todays lynch pretty much every one of those players...the only one on that wagon you suspect is Lalendra who did NOT park their vote at all, and you don't give any reason why Lalendra is scum.In post 441, Mulch wrote:Yeah I'm confident adding wicked based on meta
Mulch tiam wossi Skitter flubber wicked
Don't really want to lynch Dany today, neither Implosion, and I sorta believe you now that serge is town Skitter
Say it louder for the people in the back!In post 575, Flubbernugget wrote:It's not about page numbers. It's that scum does more than one scummy thing, and giving early game reasoning the benefit of the doubt is usually a good thing to do.In post 511, Wickedestjr wrote:I'm not going to give him a free pass for something just because it happened early on. His explanation doesn't make sense. After what page number can I look for reasons to vote someone?In post 504, Flubbernugget wrote:Wicked, I don't like that the best you can come up with to vote wossi is looking all the way back to the beginning of the thread.
Its not just that. Its that he tried to make several policy lynches instead of actually reading players and trying to find scum tells. He's taking the path of least resistance in search of lynching pretty much whoever. Then when Skitter calls him on that and the see-through nature of his reads, he completely backtracks, lies that PoE is not a form of policy lynching, and basically just adopts whatever Skitter's opinion is on any reads that he disagreed with. Hes literally just trying to find any lynch that people will buy into and lied/backtracked when he got caught. I really don't see how ability to go after difficult targets enters into it. Going for easy lynches is the oldest scum tell in the book, why would he want to go for 'more difficult targets' and why would his unwillingness to do so be anything other than a scum tell?Wickedestjr wrote:@skitter:One of your reasons for voting Mulch was because he seemed to be looking for mis-lynches that don't have much pushback. Did he do this when you were partners with him? Do you think he, as scum, is incapable of going after more difficult targets?
There's a difference between giving him a free pass and tunneling on them and refusing to look at other things going on. If you think that something he did on page two is a scum tell, good for you but I don't see how its possibly a big enough tell to be your primary focus. It just seems lazy given how far into the game we are, especially since its at best a very small tell more realistically (imo) completely null.In post 581, Wickedestjr wrote:I disagree. Scum can certainly make mistakes in the early game, so to ignore it just because it happened early on is not reasonable. How can I give him the benefit of the doubt when he literally admitted to 'contradicting himself and making errors of judgment' ? I can't give that a free pass and am trying to figure out why he started off the game that way.
OMG I hate playing with you.
You mean the post where he sets himself up to get away with not engaging with the game in any sort of meaningful way? Is it really that easy to get away with completely anti-town play for you? Also I meant mysterious mostly in the sense that he claims to have a strong meta read on Serg and then completely drops it for a single post. If I'm scum!serg here its like I hit the jackpot. Just do something incredibly obviously scummy and suddenly I'm town. Is today opposite day or something?Lalendra wrote:He did say right off the bat that it was going to be low-effort from him, so I would think that going after "easy pushes" could potentially correlate with that. But without using meta (I try not to because it can be so easily manipulated, especially when people start pointing out someone's meta, and also because my posting/playing style pretty much always has me pegged as scum when I never am), the way he was trying to parse the game at first, the honesty about not having fully caught up, the indecision about his reads, etc. really does give me a very town vibe.In post 588, skitter30 wrote:I think as scum he is *very* capable of going after harder targets. He's capable of doing that as town too. I don't know why he's going after the easy pushes here. This doesn't exactly match his scum game, but this is sooooo far off from how he plays town that I'm having a really hard time seeing town!Mulch here.
P-edit: It didn't seem mysterious to me, he did explain why his read changed.
What part of starting out scumreading then flipping to townreading with no resistance comes across as hardbussing? Seems like he came in 'bussing' and then took the first out.In post 600, skitter30 wrote: Preflips are bad yada yada yada, but I doubt Mulch and serg are scum together. (scum!mulch decides to enter the game and hardbus his partner?)
So do you have a reason or did I miss Skitter post something to this effect?In post 610, Mulch wrote:Seph is town BTW
Thats pretty funny considering how poorly you've played your intro to this game. From either alignment, you've completely screwed yourself over aside from gaining a following of loyal town idiots (chip and serg). You may be convincing to those who aren't paying attention but to anyone who is you've completely destroyed any semblance of credibility. Which makes the sense of superiority all the more amusing to me.
Color me impressed.
Incorrect. Its more likely we are both voting scum and you are desperately attempting to distance by planting your vote on your partner.In post 621, Mulch wrote:Your voting town and I'm voting scumIn post 620, Sephiroth wrote:Plus I scum read Lalendra also so maybe you should try reading...
Lmao
You are worse
The kind that made me read 611 as you. I apologize. This just makes the whole Serg + Mulch thing even weirder to me.In post 623, Chip Butty wrote: What the fuck drugs are you on, moron?
You may be right, and as I mentioned earlier I don't feel strongly that they are partners. What I am saying is that I don't think a mulch scum flip makes serg more likely to be town.In post 626, skitter30 wrote: Because for scum!mulch to have come into the game deciding to 'bus' tacos and take the first out, he'd have to have known that someone would have provided that out. We all know he hasn't read the game, so he wouldn't have known there was some resistance to a tacos lynch already. He certainly would not have expected it from me. If anything, his entrance on tacos reads to me like he came in blind and thought that was the path to least resistance for a lynch.
Thats one interpretation but I also see how Serg can be pro Chip wagon/more chip pressure while still questioning those that jump on board.In post 637, wavemode wrote: Because to me it looks a lot like scum who knows that Chip is town and is trying to show reluctance to the wagon. Why would town serg consider me pressuring chip at that point to be a bad thing?
My scum reads are Mulch and you, followed by serg. Still can't decide what to make of Sergs seemingly random play. I get bad vibes from wavemode and wicked. I need to reread Chip's post explosion tonight to get a better sense but I'm happy to see them post more. Implosion needs to post more. They've done a better job engaging with the game than you have, but are still doing some lurking in plain sight. Who the hell knows with tiam. The meta suggests to me that theyre scum but I'd rather lynch one of my stronger reads since most people seem to read that meta the opposite way. I read Dany Skitter and Flub as town and I don't think you being town has significant impact on how I read those players.In post 648, Lalendra wrote:@Seph/Mulch - If you get me lynched, when I flip town, who are you going to look at next, and why?
Care to explain? Surely you don't read Mulch town based on your logic in 580 alone....Lalendra wrote:I do still believe that Mulch/Serg are town though. So is flub. Scum is in chip/dany/tiam/wossi. The rest are null for me at the moment.
I have no idea in what universe the stuff you cite here could give a town vibe. Like if someone does a bunch of scummy shit and then is like 'hey guys I'm gonna do all this scummy shit' suddenly you think they're town because they're being honest about how they're going to do scummy shit?In post 602, Lalendra wrote:He did say right off the bat that it was going to be low-effort from him, so I would think that going after "easy pushes" could potentially correlate with that. But without using meta (I try not to because it can be so easily manipulated, especially when people start pointing out someone's meta, and also because my posting/playing style pretty much always has me pegged as scum when I never am), the way he was trying to parse the game at first, the honesty about not having fully caught up, the indecision about his reads, etc. really does give me a very town vibe.In post 588, skitter30 wrote:I think as scum he is *very* capable of going after harder targets. He's capable of doing that as town too. I don't know why he's going after the easy pushes here. This doesn't exactly match his scum game, but this is sooooo far off from how he plays town that I'm having a really hard time seeing town!Mulch here.
P-edit: It didn't seem mysterious to me, he did explain why his read changed.
Why does me scumreading the three of you necessitate that all three of you are scum together? I'm not going to delude myself into thinking everyone I have a scum read on D1 = the scum team. That would be silly. It just means I independently find each of you to be the scummiest in the game. I stated as much in my previous post to you:Lalendra wrote: If the three of us are scum then I am doing the absolute most obvious buddying and shit-tastic scum play ever.
Why are you dedicating so much time to contradicting the possibility of yall being scum together, when that is not only NOT a point I'm making but a point that I've explicitly said that I'm not making, directly to you?In post 658, Sephiroth wrote:I don't have strong feelings on associations between players atm as I usually start to look at that more closely at the start of D2.
Are you purposefully misunderstanding me here? I'm not doubting that 580 is you voicing your town read nor did I ever imply that you weren't doing that in 580. The point of that post is pretty clearly to ask for ADDITIONAL reasons that you are ready to town-lock Mulch, because I don't think the logic in 580 is anywhere near sufficient for a town read and especially not a town lock. Thats why it says 'based on 580 alone'. Its a quesiton, which you answered. And now I have responded with why I don't like the additional reasons from your answer. This is how mafia works, back and forth discussion. How is asking you for a better explanation of your reads in any way shape or form manufacturing tells, or a misrep? For christ's sake it was aIn post 669, Lalendra wrote: I don't believe that he is town based on the logic put forth in a post where I literally declared him locktown? Your meter is slipping from green to red for me...
This is about 10000 times more of a misrep of my stance than anything I said about you lmao. This is literally only an argument against my reads all being scumIn post 671, Lalendra wrote:Not to mention that it would be fairly obvious bussing if BOTH of my scumbuddies were on my wagon. That, combined with the fact that I am so confident that they are town DESPITE the fact that they are voting me, should be all the evidence you need.
It is just false that wasn't his primary reason to vote chip. He explicitly states in 386 that he can't read chip but feels hes a negative value. He also wanted to lynch a lurker immediately after he spontaneously changed off of his first 'read', and later singled out flubber as the person we should lynch for lurking. So let's call that what, 2.5 maybe?In post 689, Wickedestjr wrote: *IIRC he didn't try makingseveralpolicy lynches. His vote for Chip came along with the 'I think he's useless as town too', but that wasn't his primary reason for voting Chip.
I'll give you that point but given how flippantly he was voting and then changing reds initially I don't really see that as particularly vindicating. Not to mention, despite giving a town read to both of the leading wagons, he very quickly reverses his take on Lalendra and votes her. I think it was pretty obvious that the Wossi wagon was losing steam at that point and that Lalendra was the hot new shit. To me he sure seemed easily convinced to vote Lalendra after initially saying he didn't see the scum read.In post 689, Wickedestjr wrote: *After rereading, I don't really even see how he's pushing easy targets or taking the path of least resistance. The first two votes that he cast were for people that didn't have any other votes at the time.
But he did join the Lalendra wagon. He just made a big show of first reading her town, then being convinced that he was 'giving her a pass too easy' then she was 'lock scum' then all the sudden to not scum reading anyone now that lalendra is losing steam. Definition of going with the flow.In post 689, Wickedestjr wrote: *If he was just trying to find any easy vote, then why wouldn't he have just joined the Wossi or Lalendra bandwagons?
Okay so I'm sorry but I just flat out agree with you. Maybe this is more of a semantics argument but to me PoE is most definitely a form of policy lynching. I also 1000% disagree that its a valid method (and maybe this is my time away from the site showing). Its basically an excuse to say I don't have reasons to lynch these people but we're gonna lynch them anyways because I have less of a read. To me thats lynching anyone you can't get a read on, which is certainly a policy in my book. But I'm willing to concede this point, I don't think that this changes the fact that he went for two policy lynches right off the bat and then later lied and claimed they were PoE inspired lynches.In post 689, Wickedestjr wrote: *Policy lynching and PoE are two very different things, so that point is a big stretch. Fwiw, I think PoE is a perfectly valid method for scum hunting even though it's hard using that to sway people.
Its called sheeping the most obvious town and its not a new thing. I don't think you can rightly say someones mind was changed when they literally didnt make up their mind in the first place...they didn't read the game thread. ALL the posts were ones they hadn't seen.In post 689, Wickedestjr wrote: *I don't see the benefit for him, as scum, to just repeatedly change his mind and follow skitter's opinions. I feel like this behavior can be attributed to the low effort that he put into his initial reads. skitter changed his mind by showing posts that he hadn't seen.
I think that going for easy targets can apply to both inexperienced scum andIn post 689, Wickedestjr wrote: I feel like the 'going after easy targets' scum tell applies more to inexperienced scum. If it's the oldest scum tell in the book, then I would think scum would stop doing it. If Mulch had a history of playing this way as scum, then this would interest me much more - that's why I asked the question. However, if this isn't even how he plays as scum, then I'm not really convinced. --> I think that, regardless of his alignment, he is putting very little effort into this game. I just don't see how people are so sure that he is lazy scum vs. lazy town.
By my count about 12 (give or take) of your posts either directly address Wossi, defend your read on Wossi, or attack someone elses reasons for disagreeing with your Wossi read. You have posted 36 times and at the time I made that post you had made closer to 30, meaning almost half or your posts were focused around Wossi. I take it back that you were tunneling since you do poke and prod at other people but I stand by my belief that its lazy and somewhat hard to believe that you found nothing better to focus your scumhunting on than some RVS weirdness.In post 688, Wickedestjr wrote: If I am 'tunneling on Wossi and refusing to look at other things going on', thenpleasetell me what I'm refusing to look at that I should be looking at because I think I've only devoted a handful of my 30+ posts to him.
To elaborate on this it seems like he was testing the waters to find the easiest way to flow.In post 694, Sephiroth wrote:I'll give you that point but given how flippantly he was voting and then changing reds initially I don't really see that as particularly vindicating. Not to mention, despite giving a town read to both of the leading wagons, he very quickly reverses his take on Lalendra and votes her. I think it was pretty obvious that the Wossi wagon was losing steam at that point and that Lalendra was the hot new shit. To me he sure seemed easily convinced to vote Lalendra after initially saying he didn't see the scum read.In post 689, Wickedestjr wrote: *After rereading, I don't really even see how he's pushing easy targets or taking the path of least resistance. The first two votes that he cast were for people that didn't have any other votes at the time.
In the world where there is a difference between saying "These are my three scum reads" and saying "These three people are 100% locked to be scum"? I don't really know how else to answer this. I think Mulch and you are the scummiest players in the game, and I lean slightly scum on Serg. You are my number one, number two and number three scum reads, respectively. I have varying levels of confidence in each of those reads. I could easily be wrong about 1, or 2, or all of you (all is very unlikely). I'm pretty confident that Mulch is scum, which is why I'm voting for him. I'm not going to completely disregard all the suspect stuff you've done based on interactions with someone of unknown alignment. The only world in which having 3 scum reads is the the same as thinking 3 people are scum together is the world in which we have 100% complete confidence in every single one of our reads all the time. Maybe I could see that argument if we were very close to LYLO but its day 1, and we have no alignment info at all. What you're saying simply makes no sense to me.In post 704, Lalendra wrote: In what world does you thinking that the three of us are scum not equate to the three of us being scum together?? If there are three scum in a game, and you have three scumreads, how does that NOT necessitate that those three individuals are scum together??
What exactly is your reason for wanting to lynch Serg? Your ISO is pretty devoid of arguments for sergscum. There's 637, which I honestly don't find too convincing, and not too much else. If you want to get me off the lynch Mulch or Lalendra train you'll have to be more convincing than that. Right now I would only vote him if Mulch or Lalendra couldn't get the necessary votes.In post 701, wavemode wrote:Can we lynch sergtacos
Except I never said 'these three players are scum'. I never even came close. I said I think these three players are my top scum reads, in varying forms and variations. The only player that I come close to any certainty on is Mulch who is my number one read and about whom I am very confident. I encourage you to go back and read and if you can find anywhere where I say anything close to either you or Serg are scum I will eat my hat. I've described you both as 'scum lean', 'sketch', 'coasting', 'irrational'. The stance that I'm supposedly backtracking from NEVER HAPPENED. Stop putting words in my mouth.In post 712, Lalendra wrote: It doesn't make any sense to me because if you say "I think these three players are scum," you can't also turn around and say "I never said that you were scum TOGETHER." It seemed really really off to me that you would say that all three of us are scum, and then act flabbergasted by the idea that we are scum together. One sort of necessitates the other. NOW you are admitting that maybe not all three of us are scum, but that is a very different tone than the one I read in your original posts, and smacks to me of backtracking.
Uh...In post 718, Lalendra wrote: This is the post I was referring to. "My scum reads are Mulch and you, followed by serg."
So are the four players you describe as your scumreads (chip dany tiam and wossi) a scum team of 4 or do you admit that your line of reasoning is horseshit?In post 711, Lalendra wrote:My scumreads on chip/dany/tiam/wossi are largely related to the way they've interacted with Mulch, who I still think is town, aside from the points that I made earlier about my Wossi scumread.
Okay but I literally never said that I thought I was 100% right about all three of you. These are my scum reads, i.e. the people I think are suspicious. I don't add someone to my list of scum reads because they are definitively 100% scum, and I don't preclude someone from suspicion because of associations when ALL ALIGNMENTS ARE UNKNOWN.In post 718, Lalendra wrote: The fact that you later said that you "don't have strong feelings on associations between players atm" doesn't negate the fact that if you are right about all three of us (which you're not, and I am doubtful you're right about even one of us), we are all scum together.
That's a straight up lie you just told. I've been backing off my serg read for ages based on his play seeming more random than anything else. That's the basis of my current conversation with wavemode...And I'm sorry but when someone lists a bunch of reads its batshit crazy to default to 'this person is 100% confident in all their reads'. As I said, look at 711. Are you saying that you are 100% confident all those players are scum or are you saying those are the various people you suspect? Really think about this...why is me listing me scum reads (especially in a post where I go over how I feel about every player) possibly saying "THESE THREE ARE DEFINITELY SCUM".In post 711, Lalendra wrote: So I was pointing out how silly that would be based on the way I have played. You talking about your level of confidence in those reads, how one or more could be wrong, etc. doesn't come in until later.
But thats just the thing. Currently we are in a vacuum. Its quite frankly a waste of time to worry about associations until we have a flip because there countless explanations for two players interacting with eachother a certain way and its pure conjecture until we have a flip. Have I thought about the associations? Sure a little bit. Do I consider it a factor that makes any significant difference in how I read people day 1? No. Will I consider it a much more significant factor once we have a couple known alignments? Yes. But right now its purely guesswork. You even make note of this yourself right here:In post 711, Lalendra wrote: And frankly, it's kind of silly to analyze people's scumminess in a vacuum, and not take associatives into consideration at least somewhat; I would not scumread three people without at least considering the interactions I had seen between those three, or at least saying "hmm, if the three of them are scum then that means that they are a team together, and I will disregard what would be extremely obvious bussing on Lalendra's part if that is the case." I don't know, the entire argument just doesn't hold water, as far as I am concerned.
Hmm its almost like you should WAIT for a FLIP before you try to PARSE AsSoCiAtIvEs. Regardless I really don't see how you can think that my stance here is AI. I don't think associatives are useful until after a flip and I never have. I like to base my reads on the concrete actions and things that have happened. Thats why associatives are CRAZY USEFUL AND IMPORTANT in forming reads...starting when we have flips and the associatives start to live in the realm of concrete and not unknown. Like if you think its okay to scunmhunt based on pure conjecture and unknowns, thats fine but you can't claim its scummy that I prefer facts.Lalendra wrote: I'm like 99% convinced Seph is scum and would love to get a flip so I can parse associatives, but that isn't going to happen so I'll have to either wait for Mulch's flip or I'll be dead and it won't matter.
Why is the sky blue? Why do mommy and daddy wrestle at night?In post 754, Mulch wrote:Any questions
I mean I'm just saying you promised to be low effort and delivered. You basically ignored anything I said that was directed at you. Why would I think you have any intention of answering a question that matters?In post 760, Mulch wrote:In post 757, Sephiroth wrote:Why is the sky blue? Why do mommy and daddy wrestle at night?In post 754, Mulch wrote:Any questions
Can you remind me again what those are at this exact moment? I'm not trying to be pedantic but they have legitimately changed quite a bit and I'm not certain who your top reads are anymore. It seems like right now you're saying everyone is equally town. T/F?In post 764, Mulch wrote:1) my townreads
You literally just said you don't care if you're lynched though. And saying you think everyone is town and not digging a little deeper sure seems like you gave up.In post 764, Mulch wrote: 2) no, and I’m not giving up. Nobody has asked me anything so
I'm just saying as town you're supposed to care if you're lynched at least a little bit. Not caring about being lynched isn't a reason to townread you, it just makes me think you're not really trying at your win condition regardless of your alignment. Which is just a bummer for the game as a whole.In post 764, Mulch wrote: 3) false question
I disagree that you're being scumread for your style, its been noted that your lack of effort is out of character for you. Do you blame your lack of effort on other people too?In post 766, Mulch wrote:1) 1,3,8,9,10,12,13
3) I don’t really blame myself for people scumreading me for my style ^^