In post 1910, rb wrote:however, assuming the minimum ascension points (5) as opposed to the other 4 possibilities (6,7,8,9) is going with the 20% odds rather than the 80%
if the town had any number of ascension points (6-9) then we could realistically have another PR counter-claim lamees, but we also have room for another PR in the points range too. i think we shelve it for today, but tomorrow we should massclaim
Key note: because scum know how many points they have, they know how many points town have. If they started with 2, then they'd know town has 5.
This, incidentally, contributes to why Lamees is scum: Lamees advocated for the presence of an Immortal, costing 2 points. This lines up with the amount we know they have; 5 (our total flipped) - 3 = 2, the cost of the Immortal.
For Lamees to be town, there must then be a
second
scum role also equaling 2 points. Yet I saw no indication Lamees thinks there's a second scum role.
Also of note: it is borderline gamethrowing not to vote Lamees. Why? If Lamees is scum fakeclaiming, Lamees is scum and needed to be lynched.
If Lamees is town, then Lamees is the only way to get the game off evens back onto odds. Lynching Lamees today is safer than tomorrow, as tomorrow in a worst-case scenario is mylo.
My point holds:
In post 1906, Succinct wrote:Later posts do precisely that, but
it's the
first
reaction that counts; a town player is more prone to an "a-HA!" caught-ya response
, whereas Lamees's response was delayed over the course of multiple posts.
If you were town, you wouldn't be asking if he was claiming cop at all. You'd already know he wasn't one, and would jump on the assumption he was scum fakeclaiming.
Though later posts go through this process, the first post was the important one.
In post 1912, Lamees wrote:And there's always going to be posts that look like active lurking in a very lurky player base when I myself am a pretty active player. Case is garbage and clearly scum driven.
So you think active lurking wasn't valid. What's garbage about these, then?
In post 1906, Succinct wrote:1672 stances were pure scum.
1717, willingness to lynch anyone indicative of scum.
Your
1726 was accurate.
1727 was a poor defense of it.
1779's push of not responding when the obvious answer was you logged off was bad.
1845+
1852+
1878/
1881 = Lamees is willing to lynch almost everyone. (At least 5/9 slots as named lynch targets.)
In post 1907, Succinct wrote:Forgot: Lamees posited the Creature kill = Molla scum.
It's the opposite; Creature's posts implied Molla town.
Appeal to Majority is a fallacy. I ask again:
I've shown why Lamees is scum; your turn.