So you're saying if 4 out of 13 players replace out of a game chances are one of them is scum. Brilliant.
VOTE: Io
So you're saying if 4 out of 13 players replace out of a game chances are one of them is scum. Brilliant.
1. We're you just thinking aloud and not looking for anyone else's opinion?In post 284, TwoFace wrote:1. I didn't ask youIn post 283, MisaTange wrote:her replacing out is NAI imo regardless of reasons
2. I don't agree with you
What are MQs?In post 293, Creeps20 wrote:And I refuse to preform MQs
1. I didn't ask youIn post 347, TwoFace wrote:this is dumb, i expected more from youIn post 346, havingfitz wrote:Eric....pretend you are scum. Would you expect that saying you are town is all it took to remove suspicions towards you?
I know I voted you...mine was the first you received iirc and your omgus reaction comes across very poorly. As do your wagon mates I cast suspicions towards.In post 359, TwoFace wrote:First you voted me or did you forget?
That doesn't matter though. Your attempt at a case on me is the kind of garbage I don't see town making. Some of your other posts I don't see town making, especially you who I know is a decent player.
To somehow imply my vote on you was bad just shows you can't be town
But you implying my vote/case on you is bad doesn't "just show you can't be town?"In post 359, TwoFace wrote:That doesn't matter though. Your attempt at a case on me is the kind of garbage I don't see town making. Some of your other posts I don't see town making, especially you who I know is a decent player.
To somehow imply my vote on you was bad just shows you can't be town
If there was a mislynch today would it be acceptable to cast suspicions D2 on the people voting the mislynch (i.e. VCA?). Two millers claiming D1 essentially provides that same VCA opportunity before D1 ends. Trying to vote town IS AI.In post 360, Gamma Emerald wrote:Havingfitz: pushing the masons before they claim is NAI. If you wanted to attack someone for doubting the claim then that would make more sense.
I'm sure town voting the masons thinks their votes are justified. I don't think everyone voting the masons is suspect. But I had stated before the claims that I two of the players were town reads who at some point suspected/voted the masons. That made it more likely IMO that the others had a greater chance of being suspect. And now that misa and LUV have claimed your opinion has changed hasn't it? You won't be voting them because of their claim...correct?In post 361, TwoFace wrote:I already said I can't remember the term, maybe chainsaw defense? Idk it looks like you're buddying them by calling the people voting them scummy.The votes could be justified but you don't seem to consider that.My vote on misa was completely justified.I don't give a shit if he's a mason, that doesn't change my opinions and I certainly am not going to change that now. I was wrong cause he is town, but that doesn't mean I'm scum or even scummy.
I do not lie as town unless it's to save myself from a mislynch. Though I can't remember any examples of when I have. If I think someone is lying that's a scum indictment in my books. Where do you think Eric is lying?In post 362, Hiraki wrote:moreso just trying to stir discussion, i won't vote eric this game
your analysis is almost spot on except that I also think that eric is lying from a town position - it's a radical theory but it's a theory. how do you feel about that aspect?
What I said still applies...Ted didn't say ALL Eric's reads were without reason which was what you were inferring and what got you both in a spat.In post 365, TwoFace wrote:Ted said Eric didn't explain his reads. I called him on it because he did explain one of them. Was it a mistake by ted? Probably but again I pointed out the facts. I didn't misrep anyone.
The quotes below point out what I am saying. After your naked vote on Misa you gave a few reasons and then afgterwards only referred to your vote as gut...not very strong gut at that. I do not equate reasons with gut so your comments below look like backtracking to me.In post 365, TwoFace wrote:Explaining why I have a gut read on them and keeping my vote on them is giving myself deniability of softening my stance? You can't be serious. By adding to my vote I'm commuting myself more to that read making it harder to get away from it.
In post 210, TwoFace wrote:I voted you cause I think your vote on Eric is garbage. Your reason for voting him is garbage and I disagree that him wanting to rush the day is a scumtell. Looks like going after an easy target which I feel is more likely to come from town. Some of Eric's posts aren't great but nothing looks like they have scummy intentions. Yours on the other hand do to me.
In post 262, TwoFace wrote:my vote is more of a gut thing atm
In post 299, TwoFace wrote:It's really just a gut read ATM. Not sure it's strong enough to sell anyone on
I can use it against you. And how do I know you didn't know she was town???In post 365, TwoFace wrote:Is voting misa before I knew she was amasin bad? 100% no way
Is voting town bad? Sure but I didn't know she's town so you can't use that against me.
Of course town can be wrong. I've acknowledged it in this case by admitting my own suspicions and saying I thought Hiraki and TVD were town. Your point???In post 365, TwoFace wrote:I guess I do need to find games where you voted a town PR. The fact you act like town can't be wrong and it automatically makes anyone who voted a mason scummy means you're hypocrite or scum.
Technically? How do I know you are town who voted town? I mean technically you could be scum voting town.In post 365, TwoFace wrote:I mean technically you're voting town right now havingfitz, so you're bad or scum your self.
So? There are always more town on a successful mislynch wagon than there are scum. How does that relate to this game? Are you saying there were no scum (with the knowledge they were voting for town) voting for the masons before they claimed?In post 366, TwoFace wrote:That didn't take long. You pushed a lynch d1 on a town pr and you weren't scum - viewtopic.php?p=6973570#p6973570
I wall post responded to your post 420 consolidation of several questions to me. If I can't get you to answer a simple question in return as to why you suspect/are voting me then no further responses to you are warranted after this post. And there is no reason to explain in detail why on page 8 or 9 I have players who I lean town on. Especially to appease you who on more than one occasion in this game have dismissed providing reasons:In post 562, TwoFace wrote:I am still waiting on you to explain in detail why you are town reading hiraki and tvd
You used gut earlier but gave no actual reasons.
See detail comments above.In post 562, TwoFace wrote:Let's lock down some reasons so you can't backtrack later.
you know since that is what you thought I was going to do with my Misa read so it's only fair that you outline your reads with actual reasons so you can't do the same thing.
Pay attention...I provided comment on Creeps already. Hit the #number link next in the isolation parentheses and do a search on Creeps.In post 564, TwoFace wrote:@fitz - after you do than can we get some thoughts on Creeps. Obviously you aren't going to be voting hiraki which means creeps is most likely where your vote is going to go. I just want to see if you think he is scum and if so, why do you think he is.
I asked you to provide your case on me using points that haven't been shown to be false. You have not done so...before or after my question.In post 585, TwoFace wrote:You asked me to answer a question I already answered way before you asked me. So how can you sit there and say I didn't answer you is mind boggling to me.
Why should I answer your questions when you refuse to answer mine? And as far as me justifying my town reads....stop being such a hypocrite. These are quotes from you:In post 585, TwoFace wrote:Refuse to answer. Got it.
Let's lynch this guy now. I'm certainly not reading anything else he says anymore if he can't justify his town reads when asked.
So NO non-truths. And as far as AI...whether you the accused agree or not...in my opinion there are things AI. Ex. what I deem a misrep on Ted, backing off your Misa vote reasoning, and voting town.In post 352, TwoFace wrote: Early stat theory stuff is null since that was the conversation going on - to say otherwise is scum motivated imo unless you can explain how staying active in the conversation is bad which nobody can cause it's not.- I didn't say staying active was bad. IMO talking about the statistical odds of hitting scum in a group of four players on P1 of D1 is completely worthless. And going on and on about it serves absolutely no value and just gives the impression of trying. If it's not doing that then it has no place in the game...therefore is not progressing the game at all...and I find that counterproductive...aka suspect.
Shade mason? Where? - pretty sure I didn't so possible misrep here- I viewed your Post 33 comments towards LUV as trying to plant seeds of suspicion (shade) on him.
I certainly didn't misrep ted. Misrep in your part- you claimed Ted inferred Eric had to ~always justify his reads and that Eric "gave no reasons" for his votes. And didn't give reasons for "all of his scum reads." All Ted said when he voted Eric in Post 142 was that Eric was "throwing out reads with zero backing." "Reads" implies more than one read....not ALL reads. Throughout your debate with Ted he states he was referring to two scumreads in particular. Not ALL of Eric's reads as you attack him for. IMO this was misrepping Ted to garner unwarranted suspicions on him.
Naked votes aren't bad - you should know better than that- I never said naked votes were bad. My comment was to indicate voting a mason was bad.
Defending a town read one who's most likely lynch bait - protown.- I didn't say this was bad. I simply placed it there to look back on later if and when yours or Eric's alignments were known.
Vote on gut but gave reasons is somehow bad? No because gut is usually able to be explained by pointing to things. If you were a newb I could see you making this mistake but you aren't a newb- you didn't vote on gut. You gave several reasons for your vote. It was backing off your reasons and saying your vote was gut afterwards that I find suspect..
My vote on misa was good imo, reiterating it isn't bad- Voting town is never good. With the current knowledge that exists...that you were voting town...I can say in hindsight that vote was bad. Essentially VCA. You want to dismiss it because I'm using it against you in combination with other suspicions. Not on it's own...in combination with other suspicions.
Snarkiness - this is non ai, especially since it's my personality
So fitz is probably scum. Too many non ai or non truths being twisted into appearing bad. No way an experienced town player comes to this conclusion.
VOTE: fitz
At one point LUV's wagon was at 5 votes. You think there was no scum in those 5 votes?In post 357, TwoFace wrote:the biggest problem I see with fitz post is he is discrediting people who voted for the masons, when nobody voted a known mason. Just because somebody voted somebody who later claimed mason doesn't mean their vote was bad.
This is a blatant lie. You are misrepping me to Deers and anyone else paying attention. In hindsight all of the votes on masons were bad because voting town is bad. I do not however ever say anyone who voted the masons is scum and I do not suspect anyone of being scum solely on the basis of the fact they voted a mason. It's just one factor to consider.In post 377, TwoFace wrote: Go read the part wherehe's basically calling anyone who voted the masons bad,but he was scum reading one of the masons which means his basis for that assumption is bad. Also look at the example where he as town previously led a lynch on a town PR which also means HISTORICALLY his thought process is flawed.
This is a blatant lie. You are misrepping me to Deers and anyone else paying attention. You even point out that I'm not treating everyone as guilty on more than one post.In post 377, TwoFace wrote: A person votes a scummy person who later claims a pr, doesn't make everyone guilty.That's how he's treating everyone though.
Please explain how asking Eric a hypothetical question implies I know he is town? Because I asked him to "pretend to be scum?" Absurd.In post 377, TwoFace wrote:It also implies fitz knows Eric is town.
Misa...are you saying I am misrepping TF by pointing out statements he made showing his opinion that reasons weren't always needed for a read?In post 596, MisaTange wrote:But anyway I think that comment on 143/149 is a misrep because he was talking about page 6. Very early day 1, which is imo okay to judge reads based on gut/tone and nothing more. If it was said right now (late day one, on the edge of night one), it would've been okay, but that was page friqqin six.
I never gave my reason for voting Io and no one asked. You're making an assumption. Since you didn't ask I'll clarify why I voted for Io:
What "150+ posts go by" are you talking about? As you mention below my vote was on Io for 300+ posts. And what is your point? I placed a vote on someone that gave me a hint of suspicion and in the absence of any response or further posting to change my mind it stayed there. Deer changed my mind on the slot and you were the scummiest thing to come along hence my vote on you.In post 603, TwoFace wrote:150+ posts go by and he leaves his vote on Io which imo is bad cause that couldn't be the scummiest thing to happen.
And what is your point? Are you just saying things for the sake of saying them? What does my leaving a vote on Io for 300+ posts matter? We're 600+ posts into the game and haven't even got a vote from Frank yet. Eric's vote was planted on Ted/Vedith for over 270 posts. You didn't place a vote until 200+ post into the game (on town btw) and you had no real suspicions that you were committed to until I voted you.In post 603, TwoFace wrote:Leaves his vote on IO until 342. 300+ posts before an unvote happened
Well...I do believe what I am saying. It's an easy thing to do when you are 1) town telling 2) the truth. See my comments above to Misa regarding early in the game. My reads on Hiraki and TVDIn post 605, Lil Uzi Vert wrote:Fitz reads like he truly believes what he's saying but I don't like that he won't point to what is giving him these gut reads on Hiraki and TVD. He's using TF's comments soft defending Eric to justify not having to answer questions butfails to realize those same comments were about explaining reads early on in the day phase.It's late into Day 1, no excuse.
You are. But that seems to be the norm this game.In post 615, TwoFace wrote:My apologies fitz, didn't mean to make an incorrect assumption about your reason for voting IO. Looking over this quote again it seemed transparent to me why you were voting
him, but if you are saying i am incorrect, I guess I am...
?????????????In post 619, Lil Uzi Vert wrote:the reason you gave for choosing not to didn't make sense considering what part of Day 1 it is
In post 614, havingfitz wrote:I stated my town reads on Hiraki and TVD at the top of page 8 in only my 2nd post of the game and less than 24 hours from the start of the game.
In post 619, Lil Uzi Vert wrote:You have two basically confirmed masons, wanting to know how you came to your gut reads to determine if they're genuine and not fake
buuuuut ffs and whatever. I will look over HIraki and TVD and point out what led to my page 8 town reads on them. Should be able to later today.In post 614, havingfitz wrote:to go back over the first 7 pages of this game to reassess why at that point in the game Hiraki and TVD came across as town to me (above and beyond or in justification of gut) seems like a pointless exercise.
Thanks for the effort. No surprise really. Iirc correctly your suspicions were sheeping TF's crap case. Iirc.In post 622, Aristophanes wrote:Fitz I know I scumread and I can't remember why, nor can I be bothered to check atm. I'll vote there if I have to.
TF has yet to make a good argument. But I'm sure you would townread him for defending Eric. Kind of like OMGYA.In post 630, Joshz wrote:twoface makes good arguments against fitz + i like him defending eric whos town
What Ari said (amazingly).In post 635, Creeps20 wrote:At this point I would be happy to be scum but at this stage it can get you living till the end. Pretty good as either alignment.
Not as genuine? If I recall Hiraki was the first person to go out on a limb proclaiming Eric was a VI (and ergo not voteworthy). Not something I would have done in the presence of suspect posting by Eric. And certainly no reason for scum to. How was Hiraki's attitude about Eric off?In post 645, Joshz wrote:the reason he(TF)gets more cred for it is that hiraki's didn't feel as genuine, whereas i liked tf's attitude about it.
1) Since you keep referencing your experience with me who are you?In post 703, TwoFace wrote:Fitz from what I remember does that kind of thing as both alignments though.
List reads are easy to do as scum. Easier when you have a claimed pr.
So you can continually make references to your experience with me to support your comments (albeit poorly) but I shouldn't have the same luxury?In post 710, TwoFace wrote:Who I am doesn't matter.
I typically don't either. I was just curious because TF has made several points based on his experience with me. Even if he was a known alt for someone I knew/recalled it probably wouldn't effect my view of him in this game.In post 713, MathBlade wrote:Far as I am concerned I don't give two shits about prior experience
TwoFace wasn't gaining any momentum and you had no votes...how is that playing to anything other than switching to a different scumread?In post 837, Gamma Emerald wrote:This feels like playing into popular opinion but at least you have the balls to vote me.
1)...the list I referred to was my Post 349 players assessment. I had Eric as a scum lean. I started backing off that shortly after josh replaced in.In post 838, Gamma Emerald wrote:Eric's conftown buddy.
Are you even trying? The only person I list as a suspect that had even looked cross-eyed in my direction was Ari.. So not sure wtf you are talking about with the " 'Only scum vote me' attitude" accusation. Unless you are talking about my most recent list. Which as you can see from my first list...half of whom I suspected prior to them casting votes on me.In post 847, Vedith wrote:Look at his list of 4 scum... "Only scum vote me" attitude.
Errrr.....the "some reason" has been stated several times. I didn't do reads on LUV and Misa either...did you have a problem with that? And I never called Hiraki or TVD "strong town reads". I said "Leaning town" and "~ Town"...which is the same as leaning. And their slots are still town reads for me and subject to change based on game events. As is my read on everyone.In post 849, TwoFace wrote:I also pointed out that he leaves out hiraki/tvd for some reason. He held those 2 as strong town reads based off "gut" and he refused to explain his reads on them until later when masons asked him.
You are referring to my scum reads with hindsight of voting for masons. Applying the suspicion equally to everyone would cancel it out. As explained several times but outside of your comprehension level or best interests...the voting on masons was only a factor I considered amongst several for each of my scum reads. Everyone that suspected or voted the masons is not scum...but that doesn't mean it was a pro-town thing to do. If I took out any mention of voting or suspecting masons from my scum reads in Post 349 I'd still come out suspecting the same people for the other reasons stated.In post 849, TwoFace wrote:His logic was flawed to begin with. The fact he didn't use it equally is actually what makes him suspicious
In post 312, Gamma Emerald wrote:PARTNER NOW!
In post 720, Gamma Emerald wrote:Creeps I'd prefer if you claimed now since we're having trouble assembling votes rn.
I hate pushing claims before they are necessary. Why potentially out a PR if not necessary?In post 897, Gamma Emerald wrote:Creeps needs to claim NOW
More Gamma votes please.
This is a good point. I was more focused on the fact Gamma has been doing this throughout the day when we were "nowhere close to deadline then."In post 902, Nachomamma8 wrote:Fitz, don't you think that claiming with ~1 day left until deadline is pretty reasonable when you're the top wagon?
Pushing claims.In post 915, Gamma Emerald wrote:Doing what through the day?
The first example I gave was from 2 weeks ago. It's appeared to be a recurring theme. Those three examples are it. Along with his advice to not claim unless at L-1.In post 918, Nachomamma8 wrote:By "throughout the day", do you mean "that one time when there were three days of deadline left"? Or do you have examples that you didn't quote?
5am wake up. ZzzzzzzIn post 932, Nachomamma8 wrote:Fitz, where did you go?
My case was before his pushes on Creeps to claim so no. Convincing/forcing LUV to out you was however a factor in suspecting him.In post 928, Nachomamma8 wrote:And is that the crux of your case against him?
I wasn't of the impression you'd read through yet. If you have read up and still suspect me I can only hope to dissuade you and that enough town disagrees.In post 934, Nachomamma8 wrote:Why didn't you comment on the possibility of me pushing a lynch through on you?