Scum operating under your assumption above would likely want two scum in the coalition if they thought town would be voting outside of the coalition. In the case at hand, you advocated to remove LUV from the coalition once you learned about the timing. It was probably nothing, but it's why I think an NC-LUV pairing is possible while all the other in-coalition pairings seem unlikely. ~Espresso
In post 682, EspressoPatronum wrote:Per my reasoning above, LUV is a good lynch if the coalition fails because:
1. He's within the coalition (see my earlier reasoning)
2. If he's town, I feel even better about town!NC
3. If he's scum, I feel very strongly about scum!NC (see reasoning above)
The NC connection wasn't my only reason at the time. Although I didn't cite it (and I kind of wish I did now), my scumread on LUV also informed my vote. ~Espresso
In post 1419, EspressoPatronum wrote:I'm getting a sneaking suspicion that it's NC/Hectic, but I don't know why I think that and I don't have time to go into it tonight.
Care to explain this?
***
We just need to tread carefully because if you slip up around her as scum she notices and will tear your spine out and slap you to death with it. (I'm slightly scared of Nancy)
~the worst
*******
Nancy is pretty heavenly ngl
~CheekyTeeky
*******
Nancy-scum feels like a hot knife slicing through butter. Nancy-town feels like a magnifying glass in the sun glaring down at an insect.
In post 1417, Spangled wrote:That... was an interesting NK choice. I wasn’t quite sold on town!Gob, myself — so scum was either convinced we’d see him as town the next day, or was scared of him, or wants to use his conf!town status for something.
That’s all the thoughts I have right now; I’ll revisit this game later and more after my V/LA ends.
Based on RCMA NK, I was thinking it would be you. Maybe scum decided to play it safe, because by the EoD, he was pretty much tr everyone but LUV.
***
We just need to tread carefully because if you slip up around her as scum she notices and will tear your spine out and slap you to death with it. (I'm slightly scared of Nancy)
~the worst
*******
Nancy is pretty heavenly ngl
~CheekyTeeky
*******
Nancy-scum feels like a hot knife slicing through butter. Nancy-town feels like a magnifying glass in the sun glaring down at an insect.
Scum operating under your assumption above would likely want two scum in the coalition if they thought town would be voting outside of the coalition. In the case at hand, you advocated to remove LUV from the coalition once you learned about the timing. It was probably nothing, but it's why I think an NC-LUV pairing is possible while all the other in-coalition pairings seem unlikely. ~Espresso
In post 682, EspressoPatronum wrote:Per my reasoning above, LUV is a good lynch if the coalition fails because:
1. He's within the coalition (see my earlier reasoning)
2. If he's town, I feel even better about town!NC
3. If he's scum, I feel very strongly about scum!NC (see reasoning above)
The NC connection wasn't my only reason at the time. Although I didn't cite it (and I kind of wish I did now), my scumread on LUV also informed my vote. ~Espresso
In post 1419, EspressoPatronum wrote:I'm getting a sneaking suspicion that it's NC/Hectic, but I don't know why I think that and I don't have time to go into it tonight.
In post 1417, Spangled wrote:That... was an interesting NK choice. I wasn’t quite sold on town!Gob, myself — so scum was either convinced we’d see him as town the next day, or was scared of him, or wants to use his conf!town status for something.
That’s all the thoughts I have right now; I’ll revisit this game later and more after my V/LA ends.
Based on RCMA NK, I was thinking it would be you. Maybe scum decided to play it safe, because by the EoD, he was pretty much tr everyone but LUV.
I’m too tired to do this now but I just did an ISO check on both my slot and Hectic’s and that just confirms my suspicions that Espresso has no justifiable reason to link me with him. I still want to believe he is pushing this in good faith but at what point, do you start to be legit suspicious of absurdity?
You're using one of my pairings ideas (which again was a WIP from D1) as a reason you can't be paired with Hectic. If you care that strongly, I'll concede that you could be linked with someone else. At the end of the day, you're getting super defensive about a gut read.
We clearly have no idea on who is scum + I'm sure there's a 'perfectly rational explanation' they can point to for their actions. That's why it's going to be hard to 1v2 here.
Scum operating under your assumption above would likely want two scum in the coalition if they thought town would be voting outside of the coalition. In the case at hand, you advocated to remove LUV from the coalition once you learned about the timing. It was probably nothing, but it's why I think an NC-LUV pairing is possible while all the other in-coalition pairings seem unlikely. ~Espresso
In post 682, EspressoPatronum wrote:Per my reasoning above, LUV is a good lynch if the coalition fails because:
1. He's within the coalition (see my earlier reasoning)
2. If he's town, I feel even better about town!NC
3. If he's scum, I feel very strongly about scum!NC (see reasoning above)
The NC connection wasn't my only reason at the time. Although I didn't cite it (and I kind of wish I did now), my scumread on LUV also informed my vote. ~Espresso
In post 1419, EspressoPatronum wrote:I'm getting a sneaking suspicion that it's NC/Hectic, but I don't know why I think that and I don't have time to go into it tonight.
Care to explain this?
My explanation is that I was clearly wrong about LUV.
In post 1429, EspressoPatronum wrote:You're using one of my pairings ideas (which again was a WIP from D1) as a reason you can't be paired with Hectic. If you care that strongly, I'll concede that you could be linked with someone else. At the end of the day, you're getting super defensive about a gut read.
We clearly have no idea on who is scum + I'm sure there's a 'perfectly rational explanation' they can point to for their actions. That's why it's going to be hard to 1v2 here.
You’ve been pushing me as buddies with LUV since D1 and now that he’s flipped town, you’re still doing it. Tell me, you’d not be remotely suspicious of that because I don’t believe you.
Correction - people keep asking me about my reasoning from my D1 pairings post (specifically you and LUV) and I keep explaining it for them. That's not the same as pushing.
If it’s 1 + 1, I lean Hectic over Spangled. I’m not sure what to think anymore about that. I initially assumed it was 1v1, then prior to LUV flip, I thought 2 scum in coalition and now, no clue.
Scum operating under your assumption above would likely want two scum in the coalition if they thought town would be voting outside of the coalition. In the case at hand, you advocated to remove LUV from the coalition once you learned about the timing. It was probably nothing, but it's why I think an NC-LUV pairing is possible while all the other in-coalition pairings seem unlikely. ~Espresso
In post 682, EspressoPatronum wrote:Per my reasoning above, LUV is a good lynch if the coalition fails because:
1. He's within the coalition (see my earlier reasoning)
2. If he's town, I feel even better about town!NC
3. If he's scum, I feel very strongly about scum!NC (see reasoning above)
The NC connection wasn't my only reason at the time. Although I didn't cite it (and I kind of wish I did now), my scumread on LUV also informed my vote. ~Espresso
In post 1419, EspressoPatronum wrote:I'm getting a sneaking suspicion that it's NC/Hectic, but I don't know why I think that and I don't have time to go into it tonight.
Care to explain this?
My explanation is that I was clearly wrong about LUV.
In post 1433, EspressoPatronum wrote:Correction - people keep asking me about my reasoning from my D1 pairings post (specifically you and LUV) and I keep explaining it for them. That's not the same as pushing.
I was slightly paranoid that you were possibly setting me up for an eventual mislynch but I kept believing this but it’s looking now that my paranoia may possibly have been justified since you - pretty much out of left field are pushing me and Hectic as buddies.
Both of us didn’t want LUV in coalition but you still linked me and LUV as buddies. You made it very clear you wanted LUV lynched. I will find that post. Why did I vote LUV when Gg - someone outside coalition was getting wagoned? What do you see as the scum motivation for that?
I just don’t buy your sudden push on me because it contradicts everything you’ve been saying. You want to mischaracterize that as “overreacting”, I otoh, view it as me being pinged.
Although, I fully expect you to try to twist that too.
In post 455, Spangled wrote:@EP
What’s your take on LUV, post-NC 39’s observation about how consensus seems to be that LUV is scum?
NC raises an interesting point, but I'm not comfortable enough with it to put LUV in my coalition.
First, I want active people in my coalition so I have a better chance at correctly sorting them. Putting LUV in because of inactivity and everyone else's behaviour seems backwards.
Second, all of my previous thoughts on LUV still apply. If we consider LUV's universal scum read ("USR") as a town factor in reading him, I'm still left with:
four reasons:
1. The lurking
2. I didn't like his early posts
3. I don't like his recent posts
4. I don't like the OMGUS vote
To expand:
1. My experience thus far has scum lurks surprisingly often. I even advocate for lurker policy lynches in most of my games bcz of how often I've seen scum skate by under the radar by lurking.
2. He wasn't helpful early. Telling us to ignore the mechanics of the game was anti-town. His early RC tr looks like he was trying to avoid attention. Alchemist gave a meta reason for his read, but I recall LUV leaving the TR without any reasons.
3. I disagreed with most of his catch-up posts. I also think that anyone touting a 'low activity' meta for town is doing a disservice to everyone else playing.
4. He again provided no reasons for what he was doing. I'm not even sure if OMGUS is scum indicative, but it's not a good look either way.
Per my reasoning above, LUV is a good lynch if the coalition fails because:
1. He's within the coalition (see my earlier reasoning)
2. If he's town, I feel even better about town!NC
3. If he's scum, I feel very strongly about scum!NC (see reasoning above)
The NC connection wasn't my only reason at the time. Although I didn't cite it (and I kind of wish I did now), my scumread on LUV also informed my vote.
You still haven’t explained this “gutread”. If you weren’t actually pushing me before like you claim, then why now and why do you think this shouldn’t be pinging me - since based on everything you’ve posted until now, it’s really making 0 sense.
In post 1429, EspressoPatronum wrote:You're using one of my pairings ideas (which again was a WIP from D1) as a reason you can't be paired with Hectic. If you care that strongly, I'll concede that you could be linked with someone else. At the end of the day, you're getting super defensive about a gut read.
We clearly have no idea on who is scum + I'm sure there's a 'perfectly rational explanation' they can point to for their actions. That's why it's going to be hard to 1v2 here.
Well one thing is for sure, it’s 100% LYLO not MYLO because the only way we don’t lose is to correctly lynch one of the scum. So, I obviously know it’s not me and I don’t think it’s Spangled. If you’re actually town here than this is counterproductive. It’s instinctive for me to sr anyone who fmpov is making a bad push on me and if you’re town, this is not helping get the clarity I need to try to figure this out.
So if 1 + 1, I lean Gamma/Espresso with Hectic more likely than Spangled.
If 2, then obviously Espresso/Gamma but am not sure on which.
Gamma seemed pretty townie at EoD and my suspicion on Hectic has lessened since Alchemist mislynch. I feel the best about Spangled and Espresso’s unexplained 180 on me is majorly paranoia pinging me.
I think it would greatly help if I could figure out which is which: 2 scum in coalition or 1 +1.
Because once we have a clearer idea on that, I think the game is definitely solvable.
I think I feel best about Spangled because he seems to be very natural, kind of the opposite of Espresso but that could also be a playstyle thing.
Scum operating under your assumption above would likely want two scum in the coalition if they thought town would be voting outside of the coalition. In the case at hand, you advocated to remove LUV from the coalition once you learned about the timing. It was probably nothing, but it's why I think an NC-LUV pairing is possible while all the other in-coalition pairings seem unlikely. ~Espresso
In post 682, EspressoPatronum wrote:Per my reasoning above, LUV is a good lynch if the coalition fails because:
1. He's within the coalition (see my earlier reasoning)
2. If he's town, I feel even better about town!NC
3. If he's scum, I feel very strongly about scum!NC (see reasoning above)
The NC connection wasn't my only reason at the time. Although I didn't cite it (and I kind of wish I did now), my scumread on LUV also informed my vote. ~Espresso
In post 1419, EspressoPatronum wrote:I'm getting a sneaking suspicion that it's NC/Hectic, but I don't know why I think that and I don't have time to go into it tonight.
Care to explain this?
My explanation is that I was clearly wrong about LUV.
Why are you still sr me then?
I can sr you without the need of LUV. Your defensiveness is a big one right now.
In post 1433, EspressoPatronum wrote:Correction - people keep asking me about my reasoning from my D1 pairings post (specifically you and LUV) and I keep explaining it for them. That's not the same as pushing.
I was slightly paranoid that you were possibly setting me up for an eventual mislynch but I kept believing this but it’s looking now that my paranoia may possibly have been justified since you - pretty much out of left field are pushing me and Hectic as buddies.
Both of us didn’t want LUV in coalition but you still linked me and LUV as buddies. You made it very clear you wanted LUV lynched. I will find that post. Why did I vote LUV when Gg - someone outside coalition was getting wagoned? What do you see as the scum motivation for that?
I just don’t buy your sudden push on me because it contradicts everything you’ve been saying. You want to mischaracterize that as “overreacting”, I otoh, view it as me being pinged.
Although, I fully expect you to try to twist that too.
Convince me I’m wrong.
I don't need to convince you of anything if you're actually scum.
And you've been positioning on me for a while now, so it's funny to see you accuse me of positioning on you.
You're using the LUV connection (from D1!!) as a reason to try
clearing yourself. I've already explained this ad nauseum, so drumming it up more just looks like you're trying to cling o something that doesn't and shouldn't matter anymore.
In post 1429, EspressoPatronum wrote:You're using one of my pairings ideas (which again was a WIP from D1) as a reason you can't be paired with Hectic. If you care that strongly, I'll concede that you could be linked with someone else. At the end of the day, you're getting super defensive about a gut read.
We clearly have no idea on who is scum + I'm sure there's a 'perfectly rational explanation' they can point to for their actions. That's why it's going to be hard to 1v2 here.
Well one thing is for sure, it’s 100% LYLO not MYLO because the only way we don’t lose is to correctly lynch one of the scum. So, I obviously know it’s not me and I don’t think it’s Spangled. If you’re actually town here than this is counterproductive. It’s instinctive for me to sr anyone who fmpov is making a bad push on me and if you’re town, this is not helping get the clarity I need to try to figure this out.
I'm at a 50/50 between you and Gamma. Pushing either of you is not counterproductive. Saying otherwise is just an attempt at gaslighting me and taking the focus off of yourself.
In post 1439, NC 39 wrote:So if 1 + 1, I lean Gamma/Espresso with Hectic more likely than Spangled.
If 2, then obviously Espresso/Gamma but am not sure on which.
Gamma seemed pretty townie at EoD and my suspicion on Hectic has lessened since Alchemist mislynch. I feel the best about Spangled and Espresso’s unexplained 180 on me is majorly paranoia pinging me.
I think it would greatly help if I could figure out which is which: 2 scum in coalition or 1 +1.
Because once we have a clearer idea on that, I think the game is definitely solvable.
I think I feel best about Spangled because he seems to be very natural, kind of the opposite of Espresso but that could also be a playstyle thing.
Fmpv, I don't have to worry about 2 in bcz lynching you or Gamma will result in a scum death. You shouldn't be worried about 2 in either, as from a town!NC perspective, 2 scum in the coalition results in a scum death either way.
Scum operating under your assumption above would likely want two scum in the coalition if they thought town would be voting outside of the coalition. In the case at hand, you advocated to remove LUV from the coalition once you learned about the timing. It was probably nothing, but it's why I think an NC-LUV pairing is possible while all the other in-coalition pairings seem unlikely. ~Espresso
In post 682, EspressoPatronum wrote:Per my reasoning above, LUV is a good lynch if the coalition fails because:
1. He's within the coalition (see my earlier reasoning)
2. If he's town, I feel even better about town!NC
3. If he's scum, I feel very strongly about scum!NC (see reasoning above)
The NC connection wasn't my only reason at the time. Although I didn't cite it (and I kind of wish I did now), my scumread on LUV also informed my vote. ~Espresso
In post 1419, EspressoPatronum wrote:I'm getting a sneaking suspicion that it's NC/Hectic, but I don't know why I think that and I don't have time to go into it tonight.
Care to explain this?
My explanation is that I was clearly wrong about LUV.
Why are you still sr me then?
I can sr you without the need of LUV. Your defensiveness is a big one right now.
In post 1433, EspressoPatronum wrote:Correction - people keep asking me about my reasoning from my D1 pairings post (specifically you and LUV) and I keep explaining it for them. That's not the same as pushing.
I was slightly paranoid that you were possibly setting me up for an eventual mislynch but I kept believing this but it’s looking now that my paranoia may possibly have been justified since you - pretty much out of left field are pushing me and Hectic as buddies.
Both of us didn’t want LUV in coalition but you still linked me and LUV as buddies. You made it very clear you wanted LUV lynched. I will find that post. Why did I vote LUV when Gg - someone outside coalition was getting wagoned? What do you see as the scum motivation for that?
I just don’t buy your sudden push on me because it contradicts everything you’ve been saying. You want to mischaracterize that as “overreacting”, I otoh, view it as me being pinged.
Although, I fully expect you to try to twist that too.
Convince me I’m wrong.
I don't need to convince you of anything if you're actually scum.
And you've been positioning on me for a while now, so it's funny to see you accuse me of positioning on you.
You're using the LUV connection (from D1!!) as a reason to try
clearing yourself. I've already explained this ad nauseum, so drumming it up more just looks like you're trying to cling o something that doesn't and shouldn't matter anymore.
I would really love to solve this game and it’s clear to me whatever your alignment is, you’re not interested in helping me do it.
In post 1429, EspressoPatronum wrote:You're using one of my pairings ideas (which again was a WIP from D1) as a reason you can't be paired with Hectic. If you care that strongly, I'll concede that you could be linked with someone else. At the end of the day, you're getting super defensive about a gut read.
We clearly have no idea on who is scum + I'm sure there's a 'perfectly rational explanation' they can point to for their actions. That's why it's going to be hard to 1v2 here.
Well one thing is for sure, it’s 100% LYLO not MYLO because the only way we don’t lose is to correctly lynch one of the scum. So, I obviously know it’s not me and I don’t think it’s Spangled. If you’re actually town here than this is counterproductive. It’s instinctive for me to sr anyone who fmpov is making a bad push on me and if you’re town, this is not helping get the clarity I need to try to figure this out.
I'm at a 50/50 between you and Gamma. Pushing either of you is not counterproductive. Saying otherwise is just an attempt at gaslighting me and taking the focus off of yourself.
Fmpov, it’s obviously the same. Fine, push me then. I’m not the reason coalition failed.
But if you’re going to be useless, I will wait for others who are actually interested in helping figure it out. If you’re town here . . . you know what nevermind. It’s blatantly obvious I’m talking to a brick wall. If you were actually interested in solving this game, you’d try to engage me but I’m not going to waste my time if you persist on refusing.
In post 1439, NC 39 wrote:So if 1 + 1, I lean Gamma/Espresso with Hectic more likely than Spangled.
If 2, then obviously Espresso/Gamma but am not sure on which.
Gamma seemed pretty townie at EoD and my suspicion on Hectic has lessened since Alchemist mislynch. I feel the best about Spangled and Espresso’s unexplained 180 on me is majorly paranoia pinging me.
I think it would greatly help if I could figure out which is which: 2 scum in coalition or 1 +1.
Because once we have a clearer idea on that, I think the game is definitely solvable.
I think I feel best about Spangled because he seems to be very natural, kind of the opposite of Espresso but that could also be a playstyle thing.
Fmpv, I don't have to worry about 2 in bcz lynching you or Gamma will result in a scum death. You shouldn't be worried about 2 in either, as from a town!NC perspective, 2 scum in the coalition results in a scum death either way.
How do you propose we solve the 1+1?
Why shouldn’t I be worried about 2 scum in coalition? There are two other players: you and Gamma and two non-coalition players. Of course I’m worried because it could also be 1 + 1. The point is I don’t want another mislynch or we lose and fmpov, I have no idea if both you and Gamma are scum or just one of you, so I don’t understand where you’re coming from with this.
The point is, I don’t have a clue if it’s 2 in coalition or 1 + 1. I don’t know if you’re the reason coalition failed or you are woefully incapable of correctly understanding my posts. It’s almost like we’re speaking different languages. What I do know is that I am apparently not understanding you any better than you’re understanding me and this is why continuing to engage with you is so damned frustrating because I don’t think anything I’ve said is at all getting through and it’s been like this from day fucking one.
At least if I honestly thought you were making a good faith effort, I might still try but you’re clearly not for whatever reason. You still have yet to explain how and why you suddenly apparently did this 180 on me. It’s really hard not to feel like you’re just confibiasing me.
If it is then I’ve already answered that. You have clearly misunderstood me. I didn’t say it has to be you and Gamma, it could just be one and one outside coalition. I am trying my damndest to figure out which.
So, if we lynch outside, I already told you I lean Hectic over Spangled in that case but that is dependent on it being a 1 + 1.
If it isn’t and Hectic or less likely Spangled, is a mislynch, then we lose. How is this not townie fyp? Isn’t it townie to consider all possibilities?
