Open 713: Jungle Republic [Game Over]

[skitter30]

@mod:

I'm always v/la on Fridays and Saturdays.

Also next week I'm v/la Sunday - Wednesday cuz I'm traveling to a wedding. I should be able to post somewhat, but probably not regularly.

- Noted.

--------

VOTE: Beefster

It's a good policy lynch, and, hey, maybe a wolf or scum to boot.

VOTE: Thor665
No protown player does this in RVS. Semi-serious vote.

I mean, if you're going to policy someone it's probably better to do it early on rather than later on in the game. Like are you objecting to the fact that he wants to do this in RVS, or the fact that he wants to do this at all?

I haven't really played with Beef so idk if he's pl-worthy (although he seems to think that this description coming from Thor is semi-justified), but if we're going to pl anyone I nominate NM.

From my experience, a policy vote on someone, plus saying that they could be scum on top of that, inferring that you meant that there was a 5/12 chance of them being scum so the policy wagon is somewhat justified, seems scummy to me. It seems like an outright scumtell.

Can you run this by me again? I don't really understand the connection you're drawing between the 5/12 chance of being scum and a policy wagon. Like are you saying that in general policy wagons are bad, and the fact that he's trying to make a pl look protown by justifying it with the notion of high-chances-of-rolling-scum-in-this-game is scummy?

It's the opposite of everything I know and have ever seen on this site, so

either I'm really wrong, or you're full of hoo-hah

.

Bolded: Or he's really new. Like his reasoning doesn't make much sense to me but it appears to make sense to *him*. By presenting

only

those two options, you kinda transformed this discussion into a you-vs-him type of situation.

[skitter30]

How do you think my setup unfairly cast the situation into a false setup (since I would suggest my setup was 'either Thor is wrong or Paradox is wrong')
Because the only other options are 'we're both right (difficult) or we're both wrong (also difficult).
So...?

I don't know if 'unfair' is the right word. Like it isn't that I think it was *unfair* of you to frame it like that, so much as I think it was unnecessary. Like if the two of you are having this discussion, it'll play out and people will think whatever. It might become a thing, or it might blow over.

But since you framed it as a you-vs-him, you've made this into an *issue* and a *conflict* between the two of you and are implicitly encouraging people to take sides by presenting the two options. Like you're forcing people to pay attention and pick a side.

And that worked so far - we're having this conversation, and bujaber is siding with you.

And from what I know of you and what I'm seeing of Paradox, I think you win most arguments with him. And I think you see that too.

It's not that I think it's an inaccurate or unfair portrayal of the situation, or that I think that both of you are right or wrong, so much as I think that you're deliberately forcing/highlighting this conflict and encouraging people to pick sides in an environment likely advantageous to you.

tldr: I think you're cultivating low hanging fruit.

VOTE: Thor

-------

I'll also add;

Soft town read on BuJaber
Soft scum on Montash

I have the *tiniest* townlean on Montosh - I just played a game with scum!montosh and he was very reserved; his first post was a lot more casual than I'd expect from scum!montosh given that game.

-------

Also, random thought - Wilky is buddying me.

Buddying you because I said your first post wasn't scummy... Uhm, Ok I guess.

I didn't really see it as buddying but this reaction is kinda :/ and like defensive/dismissive.

[skitter30]

Ew, metareading. I don't like metareading tbh, because, I can manipulate my meta quite easily.

*tiniest*

Also in general I think that metareading is a useful tool; while I agree that sometimes it can give false positives or that the person in question can manipualte their meta, many people often can't/don't do this.

--------

1. I voted someone to get somebody to attack me.
2. I intentionally set up the attack on me to obligate people to react to it.
3. I knew they'd be more likely to agree with me than whoever I argued with.

1/2- no, I don't think you deliberately set up on attack on yourself so much as you capitalized on the oppurtunity that paradox gave you

3 - yes, I basically think you decided to force the conflict and present it as binary and as being an *issue* (as opposed to letting it become a thing to not become a thing naturally) with Paradox because I think you know that you can probably get more people to agree with you than Paradox can

--------

Also, if you think I'm doing that - why are youthen leaping in to agree with my attack on Wilky?
Isn't that then me still doing the same thing?

It's multiball. You can be scum and still scumhunt and make legitimate points against someone else.

--------

Oh man, Skitter set me up in an argument where people would have to choose sides!

As for "being forced to choose": whenever two people go at it in a mafia game and accuse each other it naturally puts the other players in a situation where they have to decide whether it is SvT or TvS or TvT or SvS. I decided it was T (you) v S (paradox). Players can't really ignore a fight because a fight is an elephant in the room. It needs to be resolved in some way. Either the two sides reach some sort of conclusion and it stops or one of them gets lynched or attention turns away to somebody else and the fight is suspended to deal with the new issue.

I'm not saying that anytime a conflict happens it should be ignored or that people shouldn't try to analyze it or that conflict is bad or that people shouldn't have to pick sides. I'm saying that I think Thor deliberately instigated/highlighted/framed/created a conflict that he could probably win that might not have existed otherwise by presenting it as binary.

-------

I took 'hoo-ha' to mean 'full of hot air'.

But the actual diction/semantics/word choice is not the point. Like you already agreed with me that you set it up as binary:

How do you think my setup unfairly cast the situation into a false setup (since I would suggest my setup was 'either Thor is wrong or Paradox is wrong')
Because the only other options are 'we're both right (difficult) or we're both wrong (also difficult).
So...?

[skitter30]

Does that describe your case?

tldr: I think by casting it as binary, you framed/created a conflict that was likely favorable to you, when the argument/conflict didn't need to become a thing in the first place.

In doing so I set up a situation where other people could assess the issue and offer their thoughts.

ie this isn't doesn't accurately represent what I'm arguing. My problem isn't that you highlighted some issue and brought it to everyone's attention so that people can discuss it (ie scumhunting). My problem is that I think you artificially framed the issue as a you v him conflict (ie you highlighted the conflict aspect) which encourages people to pick sides (which is what happened shortly thereafter, people were saying they agreed with you or paradox), and I think that it was an opportunistic/manipulative way of getting people to side with you because you can most likely out-argue paradox.

Everything else is burden of proficiency, yeah?
Just because I'm more capable of winning a debate with someone does not mean that, by definition, I am scum and they are town. It is quite possible I am town and am just capable of winning debates...yeah? I'm pretty sure I'm allowed to scumhunt people I can debate better than and still be protown.

No, it doesn't inhrently mean that you're scum. But it does mean that I think you opportunistically took advantage of the situation to get people to listen to you.

I agree I set it up as binary.
I disagree that I set it up as scum/town, which you appear to be implying for your case to make sense. I look forward to being proven wrong about that.

You set it up as a conflict between you and him. I don't think you were necessarily setting it up as scum/town, but my point is that you set it up so that there would be *sides* where they didn't necessarily naturally exist.

2. I'll agree that other players are noticing that I am using logic and appear to be scumhunting. I'll also agree that a roughly equal number of players are calling my aggressiveness/being town read scummy. So...?

Yes, and that happened *after* I started going on about this. Before that, you were being largely townread, which is kinda my point. (ie specifically: Bujaber in 33, Paradox himself in 36, Beef in 34, although admittedly for unrelated reasons, and you accused wilky of buddying you)

Also, I'm going to do this;

VOTE: skitter

Until he can describe how he isn't calling me scum for scumhunting.

a) she

b) this is kinda a bad/awkward/weird vote, and no, not because it's on me.

I don't think you're actually calling me scum anywhere; if you are, I missed it and I'd appreciate a tldr. If you're not calling me scum, why are you voting me exactly? If I don't give you an answer you like, you just gave yourself an excuse to votepark me forever. And if I do give you an answer you like, like what was the point?

--------

I'm not surprised that people are engaging in it. I am suspicious of people who see an argument and immediately infer that one of the participants must be scum. This feels opportunistic to me.

Getting townpings from this.

---------

.

I think I'm townreading you here so far, as your thoughts seem more *real* and *nuanced* than like anything you posted in math's game.

-------

I'm a little bit confused why you went back to RVS when the game had kinda already left it.

Tbh you aren't making much sense to me, but I can't tell rn if that's a scummy thing or a playstyle thing.

--------

VOTE: wilky Serious vote, Montosh is scum too. Wolves NK Thor pls

This is opportunistic af.

OK, why is this opportunistic?

[skitter30]

NM so you scumread Thor?
Why? Why not?

Upon rereading I have comvinced myself that skitter v Thor is definitely TvS.

Or in this game possibly SvW

. So I'll be voting there and only there. Whether you like it or not Thor you made it binary.

VOTE: Skitter

a) Not sure why you've arbitrarily reduced your lynchpool to two people

b) I flip town - how does that affect your Thor read?

Yup 5 scum. Definitely some among the lurkers. But how do you pick one lurker over the other?

OK, who exactly are 'the lurkers'?

Skitter Thor is 50-50.

Why do you think that though?

Also by saying I am only voting for 2 people I give others a false sense of security. But yeah I'm pretty sure I am only voting one of those 2.

'Saying I'm only going to vote for two people isn't as bad as it sounds! I'm going to give others a false sense of security - who knows what scummy things they might do with it! But btw, if you do something scummy, don't worry; I won't actually vote you cuz I'm probably going to only vote for those two people!'

Also what does 'false sense of security' even mean here?

I tunnel when I think I'm right. And I think I'm right.

OK, so what exactly are you tunneling here? Me? The idea that there's definitely scum in me/Thor?

Like why do you think I'm scum exactly? Cuz when you actually voted me, you basically said '50/50 in Thor/Skitter. vote skitter'. To go from there to tunneling is kinda weird tbh.

-----

I would be interested to know if he will respond to pressure but would have to be actual lynch pressure not just a half arsed wagon.

I'd be down for this but according to him he won't respond to it so idk if it'll accomplish much

-----

All of these things are true in any setup. The fact that this is multiball increases the odds of us hitting scum compared to a single team, in fact, and if the odds were really that much worse than chance, then we'd be better off letting random.org do the lynch, because then the odds would be exactly chance. But that isn't really the point. The point is that your perspective on how the lynch is going to go is not that of Town. Your post hoc rationalization doesn't change the initial error.

Honestly, I think that people might sometimes forget that they're playing multiball, and just play like it's singleball.

Like you also sound like you forgot we were playing multiball here in the bolded below; you're ignoring the possibility that thor/paradox might be s v w.

Unfortunately, yes, Town do this as well. I don't think all of the participants are necessarily scum, but I think it's more likely that we'll find scum in {BuJabar, Korina, skitter} than in {Thor, Paradox}.

Unless, I suppose, both you and Paradox are scumbuddies and this is all theatre, which is certainly possible for D1,

but I don't think that's what happening here.

I think you're reading too much into that statement by montosh tbh.

[skitter30]

My case on me boils down to three things:

1) I misread a quote.

Human error.

2) I said I would only vote for one of two people.

True, but it takes 7 to lynch and I would be more open minded if I saw that I won't get my way. This isn't my first game, I understand how lynches work. Taking that statement literally is a bit naive or insulting to me. Also I change my mind. A lot. It is part of my process. It isn't AI. There are multiple games in my history to show you this.

3) I wanted to lynch a lurker then switched my vote really quickly

See above. Also I reread the skitter/thor conversation between those two votes.

If you got other reasons let's hear em. We have two weeks.

1. I don't think you'd get lynched over misreading a post, but the way you're being so defensive about it is weird / over-reaction-y.

People would lynch me for misreading the quote because nobody has any reason to believe that I did. I made a mistake and therefore it makes for me to get lynched. It's a game of mafia. People shouldn't take my word for it just in case. It also sets a bad precedent if I am forgiven for that.

Like it really isn't as big a deal as you're making it out to be so you're being weirdly defensive.

2. I mean, you repeatedly claimed that you thought there has to be scum in {me/Thor}, so calling us naive for believing you is like a weird thing to do? Like changing your mind isn't necessarily a problem, but taking a hard position ('I will only lynch in that pair') and backtracking under pressure by blaming us for believing you is kinda scummy.

3. I don't really think switching your vote is fundementally a problem, but I still think that your proposition of 'lynching a lurker' is nebulous (ie who exactly are the lurkers, and which one do you pick?) and the fact that you couldn't/wouldn't answer these questions before is kinda :/

------

No, I was specifically referring to Thor and Paradox being aligned scum here. But your defense of Montosh is noted.

Tbh I think your both town and that you're tunneling on something NAI.

------

Are you a wolf beef? You're too interested in ending the day early.

what on earth is this?

a) why wolf (ie and not generic 'scum')?

b) Where do you see him being interested in ending the day early?

This is such a bizarre accuasation???

------

Try 72/24 and 48/24 hour games, plus this game, which is 168/48.

This is the only site where I could fesibly get away with doing 3+ games at once.

I mean, I get it, life gets busy and you might not have time to post as much as you like - but like the fact that you're repeatedly popping in to tell us you're busy and that you can't really post content looks excuse-y.

[skitter30]

Spoiler: @Thor

How could I have "scumhunted" him without setting up the false situation you're claiming I set up exactly?

I also note that you did not take up my offer to explain how I could have framed the questioning *without* the so-called false dichotomy - should I take that as tacit admission that you're admitting I couldn't have? Which would then make me wonder about you calling it a scumtell.

'Hey, can you explain what why you think it's scummy to vote a person you want to PL in RVS'?

'Hey, I disagree that using RVS to vote a PL is scummy. Why do you think it is?'

vs

No protown player does what?
Because I'd love to see you support this logic. It's the opposite of everything I know and have ever seen on this site, so either I'm really wrong, or you're full of hoo-hah.

Yes, the versions that I wrote inherently imply that there's disagreement and conflict too. Your version highlights and frames that conflict and casts it explicitly as 'I am right and you are wrong'

I'm not arguing that there *can't* be sides or that there *shouldn't* be sides or that there *aren't* sides in a conflict. I'm arguing that you highlighted the sides/conflict when you didn't have to.

So yes, I think it's entirely possible to ask questions and scumhunt without explicitly framing it as 'Either I must be right or you are'.

How do 'sides' exist beyond humans having differing opinions?
I agree I set up sides - do you think my side looks artificially created and that his side is the more objectively correct stance? Because if so I would ask you the same thing I asked him - how do you come to that conclusion?
If you think my side *IS* the more correct one (and I am 99.9% sure it is) then how the hell are you getting off suggesting I artifically created it for game advancement?

I'm saying that you set it up as sides when it didn't need to be.

I don't think that your goal is to understand the other person's POV or to understand where they're coming from, but rather that you're trying to win arguments.

The paradox thing was set up as 'I believe I'm right and I fundementally believe that you're wrong' in a derisive fashion that indicated that you didn't actually believe he could ever explain himself satisfactorily.

With me, my argument isn't like that complex or anything, and I've restated it many different times, and I'm kinda having a hard time believing you fundementally don't understand what I'm trying to say.

In each iteration of this back-and-forth, you've been reframing what I'm saying and trying to transform the discussion into being about something else, into something more general/innocuous (how is this not scumhunting!) or loaded questions ('How do sides exist beyond humans having differing opinions?').

You're asking me a lot of questions but you're not actually listening to what I'm saying. You're just using each round of this back-and-forth to slightly change the discussion into one that's rhetorically more favorable to you.

Like that's exactly what you did when you voted me:

b) How is it awkward?

I'll agree I haven't called you scum before this - but now that you dodged the answer I'll go ahead and shift to 'yes, I am calling you scummy now'.

Of course, for that to be awkward I'd kind of have to have called anyone scum - and I really haven't yet this game (until just now) so I fail to see the awkwardness you're claiming - explain it?

If you don't give an answer I like, yeah, I'll probably vote you - in a theoretical world where I votepark and you otherwise behave townish I'll agree that would look suspect for me, I don't see how that's an issue right now though - explain?

If you give an answer I like I'll *gasp* probably move my vote, and that would be the point, because I scumhunted you - can you explain why that's such a strange and unusual idea for you? Do you *NOT* ask questions that people can give answers you like to? Like, if every question is supposed to make people go deeper and deeper on their vote then that's pretty weird.

Also, I'm going to do this;

VOTE: skitter

Until he can describe how he isn't calling me scum for scumhunting.

My problem isn't that you highlighted some issue and brought it to everyone's attention so that people can discuss it (ie scumhunting). My problem is that I think you artificially framed the issue as a you v him conflict (ie you highlighted the conflict aspect) which encourages people to pick sides (which is what happened shortly thereafter, people were saying they agreed with you or paradox), and I think that it was an opportunistic/manipulative way of getting people to side with you because you can most likely out-argue paradox.

Like if I'm scummy for dodging a question *when I answered it*, I don't really think you're trying to engage me in good faith or that you actually care what my answer is.

And that's why I think the vote is bad/awkward/whatever the right word is, because you can always declare I didn't answer it satisfactorily. Like you've kinda proven me right, again. My response doesn't actually matter; you're just using what I'm saying to transform the discussion into something else - 'now I can call you scummy for dodging my question!'

Like you're being manipulative because you're setting up an ultimatum you've demonstrated I can't actually satisfy.

I don't understand the bolded.

Italics - like I said above - I don't think my answer actually matters and that you're going to use whatever I say as a reason to continue the argument and/or scumread me; ie that you can always declare me to be wrong and find me scummy for it.

Underlined: More loaded questions and I don't even get what you're trying to ask me with them.

I'm also kinda done with this back-and-forth because I don't think anyone else is actually reading it and I feel like you've been misrepping me so I don't really see the point in continuing this, so yeah.

(I also notice that you dodged my observation that in creating the 'sides' thing you got your townreads, which is the fundemental point of my argument).

[skitter30]

Tomorrow cuz I'm going to a wedding tonight.

[skitter30]

So now the issue isn't that I created a conflict

, it's that I made it somehow bigger than I needed to, when I could have created a smaller conflict?
Do I have that right?

Yes, that's basically what I've been trying to say this entire time

But since you framed it as a you-vs-him,

you've made this into an *issue* and a *conflict* between the two of you and are implicitly encouraging people to take sides by presenting the two options. Like you're forcing people to pay attention and pick a side.

Bolded: Because you framed it as you vs him, you made it a bigger conflict than it needed to be.

Italics: I don't like this because doing so had the ultimate effect of creating sides -> people were starting to choose between you and him, and multiple people townread you because of it (I've already shown this elsewhere) -> they chose you over him.

I think that by framing it as a direct conflict (ie in the quote from you that I copied above, you exactly paraphrased what I mean by 'framing it as a conflict' or 'highlighting the conflict') you set up an environment where people would ultimately pick to agree with you *or* him (again, because it was set up as a direct conflict between the two of you), and when faced with the option, people were giving you townreads and calling paradox scummy.

So, I think that this was manipulative/oppurtunistic because you took the oppurtunity to get townreads/to make paradox look scummy by forcing a choice (ie by higlighting a direct conflict)

And that is why I think this differs from 'basic scumhunting'.

Like I've been trying to get this idea across every way I know how and I don't know how else to say it at this point.

Misrepping. In your quote at the start of this post, I bolded a phrase. You're misrepping me there because that was *never* my argument, but you're framing it like I've suddenly changed positions when that never happened. I've been arguing the same thing this entire time.

And I think you're doing it on purpose because way back when, you said:

1. I voted someone to get somebody to attack me.
2. I intentionally set up the attack on me to obligate people to react to it.
3. I knew they'd be more likely to agree with me than whoever I argued with.

This is basically my argument (as I said before, it differs from what I'm saying slightly in that I don't think you *set up* the attack but that when it happened you highlighted the conflict to obligate people to react to it and that you know they'd be more likely to agree with you than whoever you argued with. )

Which means you understood then what I was trying to say so where on earth are you getting the idea that I've changed positions?

I actually think i do understand what you're trying to say - and I'm saying it's scummy and am trying to paint you into a corner where everyone else understands it's scummy also.

-> Given the first quote in this post, either you don't understand what I'm saying (and that's why you're arguing I've changed positions), or you do understand me and you're misrepping me (because I haven't).

If you understand me but are misrepping me, this is scummy for obvious reasons, and this is what I think you're doing.

If you don't understand me, then I don't think you're actually using this argument to *try* to understand me because when you hit upon the main crux of my argument you're using that to argue that I changed positions. Like if you were trying to understand me and you think I suddenly change positions wouldn't that be a hint that maybe you finally figured out what I've been trying to say this whole time?

I don't even get what I'm supposed to have changed positions *from*.

Please show me how I'm re-framing your stance exactly rather than just generically claiming I am.

^^^^^^^

You've done it in this very post, as shown above.

You've been doing it elsewhere and if you need me to I can make a seperate post about it.

Look at your current answer - "

Thor asked the question in a way that was more setting up a conflict than a less setting up conflict answer could have been

"

is a pretty long stride from your initial call against me

, and also pretty much is now implying awareness that what I did is called 'basic scumhunting'.

Bolded: That's been a fundamental part of my argument this entire time so I have no idea where you're getting the italics from.

And again, I think this is scummy (ie and differs from 'basic scumhunting') for reasons outlined in 46 and again elsewhere in this post

I've been very clear about why I find it unsatisfactory, yeah? if not, ask for clarification.

I don't understand why you find it unsatsfactory.

You're complaining that I gave you no "out" before even trying to fulfill the "out" making your prediction self fulfilling (though I feel you went that way because you recognized that you couldn't back up your made-up scum case hoo-hah.

Q: how is what thor did different from basic scumhunting?

A: he highlighted a conflict

when he didn't have to

and in doing so he created an environment where people were likely to choose sides, and in doing so, he got people to townread him and scumread paradox. He took advantage of a non-issue to get himself townreads and to make paradox look scummy. It's manipulative (highlighting conflict when it didn't need to be framed that way) and oppurtunistic to get townreads and make someone look scummy.

I've already said this like four different times, and why on earth are you not considering this an answer?

I feel like you're setting up an impossible bar for me to reach (and like you've already admitted that you're trying to paint me into a corner) because I've answered the question already multiple times and you're telling me I didn't, and you're using my 'lack of answer' as a reason to votepark me and to call me scummy.

I'm ignoring it because it's requiring me to be either
a) a mindreader
or
b) as scum to think that what I'm doing is pro town and seen as pro town and therfore something I'd do as town making it not a valid tell.

a) You can gauge gamestates and anticipate how certain arguments will likely play out and what the reception to your posts will be without being a mindreader. In fact, I'd posit that this is an incredibly important skill to have in this game. You're like taking a fundamental part of the game (gauging how your posts will be perceived) and stretching that to an extreme that clearly isn't possible (mindreading) to discredit my position of 'thor anticipated that people would likely agree with him over paradox'.

b) I don't understand what you're trying to say.

For the tl:dr of why Skitter is scum.

Initial claim is the first quote.
Clarified claim is the second quote.

It's the same arugment. I even used the same wording/phrasing because I don't know how else to express what I'm trying to say. You're saying I changed my position when I didn't.

She has not actually shown me encouraging people to pick a side in any way.

You've already objectively won the argument, remember? You didn't have to actively encourage people.

She has not questioned anyone else for setting up any sort of disagreement.

My point is that you highlighted the conflict when

you didn't have to

, not that any sort of disagreement is bad or scummy,

She agrees I wasn't unfair in my question.

Where on earth are you getting this from? I've been saying that your vote/question are setting an ultimatum that I don't think is possible for me to satisfy. Or to translate, I think your question is unfair.

She has now agreed that there was already inherently conflict (indeed, it was created by the person she is claiming is town in this exchange)

I never said there wasn't ffs. I said you exacerbated/highlighted it.

She agrees that her best examples of how I could have questioned the player *also* caused conflict.
So her basic claim is, I asked a question that was a little more standoffish than it should have had to have been.

I didn't say that my examples didn't; my entire point with those examples was showing that it was possible to have a discussion (ie conflict) without making it into an explicit you v him type of situation. . Ie you framed it as a direct conflict ('I am right and you are wrong') when it didn't have to be a direct you/him thing (ie like the examples I gave). Yes, it was a lot more standoffish than it needed to be, and yes, I think the way you did it was scummy.

And she's doubling down on it as a valid issue to call me scum over this.
(and has now expanded to me misrepping her)

This entire post misreps everything I've been saying this entire time.

I would suggest that if she can't show me misrepping her that people should vote her more.

This post, repeatedly.

[skitter30]

Skitter - what I don't understand is that you're immediately attacking Thor for making something binary and being able to win an argument. Can you please explain your thought process behind that?
Aside from that, I don't think I have much to contribute. Life is hitting me hard.

tldr: he got himself townreads and scumreads for you out of it.

BuJaber's reactions to minimal pressure are damning. Lynch nao.

And this what gave me the impression he wants the day over quick.

I think that phrasing isn't really AI; it's just saying he he wants your lynch imo. IE I think it's indicative of the fact that he finds you scummy and wants to lynch you, and not indicative of 'wanting night'.

I also think that coming to the conclusion that he might be a wolf because he's eager for the night to start based off of that post is kinda reachy.

Because even if 'wanting night' is a valid interpretation of that post, the connection between that and being a wolf specifically is kinda sparse. People could want night for other reasons than being a wolf: being busy irl, being mafia who wants to talk to his buddies. To reach that conclusion based on that post is kinda weird.

What this post does tell me is that you probably aren't scum with him because that's honestly a bizarre thing to say to a partner.

'd suggest you both back down from your tunnels for awhile and see what else is going on that you find interesting... you can always come back to this later if you feel the need.

Um, yeah I think that might be a good idea tbh.

BUT could this be a scum player not wanting to be D1 lynch? At the moment they have a minority and if they lose one to lynch and possibly lose another one to NK, that could definitely give town a distinct advantage for the game's continuance. I don't want to give him an easy pass because he's doing something any (sane) player would.

I agree; I don't really know if that frustration was AI. If anything it felt kinda *desperate* to me? And I don't know if a townie is that ... survivalistic? Like I associate survivalism with scum because losing one member puts them in a significantly worse position. Like town's goal is to find scum, but scum's goal is to not get lynched.

I also don't like how Bujaber backed off after you said this, as this is a bad argument because you aren't correctly accounting for the number of scum in the game. Those three person groups could easily be S vs W under Bujaber's argument rather than T vs S. It feels like he was using any excuse to get off a wagon he didn't feel was working.

I am now very, very, very confident that you are town.

I said I had a theory that there is definitely scum lurking in the game.

I still don't understand what you're basing this theory off of.

So I wanted to vote there. NM hadn't posted at all at the time so it was the most obvious choice. So I voted NM for lurking.

This is low-hanging-fruit-y.

You're really holding on to the very first interaction I had with Paradox to try to sell that I was overly aggressive, but...man, gotta tell you, the second interaction seems to be very reasoned, responsible, and interested in him explaining himself more than setting up some sort of strange scum gambit of choices to be townread over.

You were continuing an argument

you already created

. I don't get your point here.

I find this Townie.
Apart from that, short ISO, not a lot to read.
(Ever so) slight Town read.

Why is this townie? I think it could easily be scum looking for something to do to look helpful/busy, and so I think it's ultimately NAI.

I would under other circumstances say I’m a bit scummy, but I know what my rolecard is already.

Like you're saying you're going to stop with the excuses, but this feels :/ like in an excuse-y/defensive way.

{Self} - Lock Town
{None} - Gut Town
{Fanta} - Slight Town
{Buj, Beefster, Not_Mafia, Paradox, Esp, Montosh, Skitter, Laser} - Null
{Thor, Wilky} - Slight Scum
{None} - Gut Scum
{None} - Lock Scum

This feels overall kinda lackluster and almost like that readslist was an excuse to defend yourself given that you don't have opinons on like half the player list?

[skitter30]

Okay has to be town That is just too much. If you do do this as scum then good fucking job. That is far beyond any effort scum should even put in so early in the game because getting townread now doesn't guarantee you are townread the whole game. So if all of this to be just an act to gain town cred then it would honestly be a waste of time. You didn't even just respond to all of thor's points. You specifically isolated each and every one.

Mind you, I can't fucking do this as scum

I can't sustain an argument like this when I know I'm bullshitting; literally the last time I tried, it was against Thor, and I gave up after like two half-hearted rounds because I can't make up stuff to holistically satisfy that kind of sustained questioning. I can be stubborn as fuck when I actually believe what I'm saying, and I'll dig in my heels if I think I'm right. But I'm incredibly non-confrontational as scum and I tend to panic-lurk whenever I'm under any sort of pressure. And like making up cases that are sustained in the face of pressure over a lengthy period of time is completely beyond me.

And he like correctly scumread me from like page 4 or whatever it was, and proceeded to shout for my lynch until he actually got it to happen day 2; I basically did my best to ignore his posts that whole time because I knew I didn't have the answers necessary to end the argument and that whatever I posted would make me look much worse.

Subject: Mini Normal 1946 | Classic Hits | Town Victory!

Skitter ignored me again - rather unimpressed by that, especially after my last post about her was specifically about said ignoring.
I'm literally still her biggest pusher and she's pretending like I'm not here and has no read on me.
That's weird any way you cut it, and makes me want to flip her just on general principal that she is proving that she is hard skimming the game but isn't being honest about it.

For me to be scum here, he's positing that scum!me decided it would be a good idea to pick a fight with him after that because .... ? And given that game, the fact that he actually believes scum!me would do that and that scum!me can/would keep the argument up like this is kinda implausible imo?

I'd rather you both just drop the whole thing now.

I mean, I'd like to and I tried to because multiple people asked us to just drop it and I feel like this argument is going nowhere and that I'm shouting at a wall, but if he's making cases against me that are grossly misrepping me, I kinda feel like I have to respond to them.

[skitter30]

Don't facepalm me - there is *ZERO* in your first post that makes that clear.
Feel free to show how it's clear there and I'll immediately apologize - but you ARE changing your words.
There's a reason you had to admit that

conflict was inherent

.

You opened with I forced a conflict.
You've changed that to I turned a conflict into a (by some degree) bigger conflict.

No,the crux of my argument is the latter statement, and has been since the beginning of this.

/'hīˌlīt/ - verb - 'pick out and emphasize'.

You can't 'pick and out emphasize' something that isn't there, yeah? When I said 'highlight' I meant 'magnify and emphasize something that already exists'. 'Highlighting conflict' -> 'magnify and emphisize conflict that already exists'. So the notion that you were making an existing conflict bigger has been a fundamental part of my argument this entire time.

So now the issue isn't that I created a conflict,

it's that I made it somehow bigger than I needed to

, when I could have created a smaller conflict?
Do I have that right?

Yes, the versions that I wrote inherently imply that there's disagreement and conflict too. Your version

highlights

and frames that conflict

I think that you're deliberately forcing/

highlighting

this conflict

Like the fact that the conflict already existed has been an implicit part of my argument since the very beginning. My argument is that you higlighted it in that you made it bigger than it needed to be.

----------
bigger than it needed to be -> he didn't have to -> unnecessary

For starters, what you italicized and I bolded is *already a change from your last answer*.

A: he highlighted a conflict

when he didn't have to

I'm arguing that you highlighted the sides/conflict

when you didn't have to

.

I don't know if 'unfair' is the right word. Like it isn't that I think it was *unfair* of you to frame it like that, so much as I think it was

unnecessary

. Like if the two of you are having this discussion, it'll play out and people will think whatever. It might become a thing, or it might blow over.

The 'unecessary' idea has also been there in each iteration of this argument, so again, how did I change my answer?

--------

I've been saying the same thing this entire time.

At this point I don't know if I'm not articulating myself well or if you're purposefully not understanding me. You're like splitting hairs on my diction and that's the entire basis of 'I changed position'. Yeah I may have slightly reworded my point if I thought doing so would clarify what I was trying to say. That's a completley different animal than changing my position, which I haven't done.

Like if you're arguing that the notion of 'making the existing conflict bigger' hasn't been in my argument this entire time you're basically telling me that you don't think that the phrases 'highlight conflict' and 'making an existing conflict bigger' encapsulate the same idea. Or if you think I suddenly introduced the idea that 'he didn't have to,' you're telling me that you think 'unnecessary' and 'didn't have to' don't encapsulate the same idea. Like is that really what you're going with?

You either don't understand what I'm saying or you're purposefully not understanding me.

----------

And again, you're saying I changed my position from 'instigating a conflict' to 'making an existing conflict bigger'. And I'm saying this is a misrep because the notion of 'making an existing conflict bigger' has always been an implicit assumption of my argument. I can't mid-argument have changed my position from X to Y if Y has been a fundemental part of my argument since the very beginning.

I want that apology now, thank you very much.

--------

Please do.

I think this is going to be another *really* long post that's going to involve like going through our dual ISOs post by post which are kinda dense and like rereading the entire game, so I'm going to hold off sinking the time into writing this until after my midterm tomorrow, cool?

(Which because of weekend v/la might not be until Saturday night. I'm saying that me not posting it immediately doesn't mean I'm ignoring you, just that I'm giving a realistic timeframe on when I'll actually have the time to sit down and write it).

-------

I can't sustain an argument like this when I know I'm bullshitting; literally the last time I tried, it was against Thor, and I gave up after like two half-hearted rounds because I can't make up stuff to holistically satisfy that kind of sustained questioning.

For me to be scum here, he's positing that scum!me decided it would be a good idea to pick a fight with him after that because .... ? And given that game, the fact that he actually believes scum!me would do that and that scum!me can/would keep the argument up like this is kinda implausible imo?

Are you like ignoring this or ...?

--------

There is a claim I'm misrepping - by quoting a post of hers where she's explaining the case and bolding the opening line to the explanation.
Yet Skitter also claims she's never changed her story about what her case is.

I can't even parse what you're trying to say here. I *think* you're saying that you quoted me and I bolded my own words to indicate that you misrepped me?

So now the issue isn't that I created a conflict

, it's that I made it somehow bigger than I needed to, when I could have created a smaller conflict?
Do I have that right?

I quoted this, in which you claim to paraphrase the latest iteration of my argument after quoting it; I agree that you accurately paraphrased that. In this quote, ie with the bolded words, you also claim that it differs from what I said originially. I'm saying that the bolded words here are a misrep because you aren't accurately representing my original argument - the original argument is the same as the version in 182 because I haven't changed my position.

she's straight up lying in a wall and hoping people will buy it (which I believe she's doing).

Also I resent this on like a personal level because I'm not fucking lying.

[skitter30]

@skitter, @thor

I think you are both Town, but I am seriously contemplating pushing for a policy lynch on one of you at this point in time just so we won't have to put up with you bickering for the rest of the game. You are aren't getting anywhere and are making the thread more difficult to read and keep up with. Please move on.

I feel like we ought to be leaving the thor vs skitter clusterfuck behind imo.

This is not just directed at you, skitter ought to have probably let this cool down for a bit by now and get on to other things.

K, I'm done. I think we've been going around in circles for days now and I don't think this is going to end by either of us agreeing with the other so I'm just going to stop responding. And like this is warping my perception of the game because I've been tunneled so hard that I've been having trouble like focusing on anyone/anything else.

@everyone: sorry for making the game super long/argumentative/difficult-to-read.

@Thor: I think I'm just going to ignore you for a bit, no offense.

[skitter30]

One - that you know is town level, and this one, that you believe is scum level.

I think that there's a difference between agressively asking questions and framing conflicts as a direct 1v1. Like look at the two posts you linked me. You didn't do the latter there.

I think you're doing the same thing with me as you did with paradox. You're perpetuating the conflict and and people are taking sides ('I think the argument is tvt', or tvs or whatever people are saying), and when you don't like their stance, you're grilling them on it in an attempt to get them to change their minds. You do it with Montosh on the previous page or whatever.

The former is an attempt to understand others' POV. THe latter is an attempt to perpetuate an argument in order to encourage other people to pick sides in an argument you think that you've won.

Do that and we can drop everything else, even though I will consider it a strategic drop on your part.

Are you like trying to antagonize me on purpose? This isn't like a strategic withdrawal. I'm not conceding anything. I still strongly believe you're scum and that you've misrepped me.

At the same time, I think that going through the motions of continuing this argument is a fruitless endeavor because I don't think either of us are going to back down at this point.

Like who's the audience for this argument even? I don't think either of us are going to change our respective opinions of the other and many of the other players have admitted to not reading our posts. On a very basic level, it's anti-town and making the thread difficult for people to read, and my two biggest townreads are asking me to stop.

I feel like you're deliberately trying to draw me and other people back into this.

I think that this argument should be dropped now tbh. I don't think it's accomplishing anything.

[skitter30]

If it's a soul read why is it only a lean?

Because I -obviously- can't provide you with hard evidence! And -as I said- I was WRONG about him in a recent game where THREE TOWNIES (including myself) defended him and he flipped Scum so it's not 100%

Imo I think he's exhibiting incredibly similar behavior to that game and so I don't really get why you think his tunnel on wilky here differs from his tunnel on yankee/sky there.

I would be very willing to pl him.

[skitter30]

Imo I think he's exhibiting incredibly similar behavior to that game and so I don't really get why you think his tunnel on wilky here differs from his tunnel on yankee/sky there.

Check again, and you might see a slight difference. Also check the other game I played with him between that game and this one (He was the Town Doctor, and I mislynched him bc .. oh, well.. go read D2 yourself. It's a very short read.)

OK, what's that slight difference?

I read through that day2 and I don't really see how it's relevant to this discussion? Yes you mislynched him, but it looks like you did that there because you thought he was fake-claiming. I'm saying I think popping in occasoinally to ask people to vote wilky is similar to how he behaved day 1 in math's game where he popped in occasionally to tell people to vote sky.

[skitter30]

I note a strong lack of examples here.

I would note that what you're describing as my scum play here is exactly how I would describe my play against you in that game.
How do you not?

Yeah, no. I've described my position as best as I can and I don't really know how else to say it at this point. I don't think that continuing this is useful.

[skitter30]

You literally haven't described the position.
And you literally have an entire game where you know I'm town to use as an example to illustrate differences with.

Remember when you told me your scum game involved you running away from explanation because you didn't have an answer?

There's a difference between avoiding you because I don't know how to answer you and refusing to continue dancing through hoops for you when you've repeatedly moved the goalposts.

-> You say you're voteparking me until I can explain how what you did differs from scumhunting. I did and you tell me that isn't an answer.

-> You then say I changed my position. I accuse you of misrepping me because I didn't, and then you called me a liar (Mind you, I don't fucking lie to win arguments or to back up my position. That's why I hate playing scum because I don't like bullshitting or fabricating things and I can't argue things I don't believe)

Then you said:

Don't facepalm me - there is *ZERO* in your first post that makes that clear.
Feel free to show how it's clear there and I'll immediately apologize - but you ARE changing your words.
There's a reason you had to admit that conflict was inherent.

I demonstrated that I said that in the very beginning and that I was consistent about it throughout the entire argument. You said you'd apologize if I could do that and when I asked you to do so you acted like you had no idea what I was talking about.

What do you think I did that was rude and needing an apology for?

-> Then you link two of your posts and say

- like those are my first two posts in a game where you know I was town.
Please describe how those are not like the "highlighting" I did here and if your answer makes even 50% sense I'll drop the case on you till at least tomorrow.

I did that. I said why I thought those two posts were different from how you treated paradox and me this game. You ask for examples but I can't give you examples of things that aren't there ffs.

I've repeatedly fulfilled all of your requests and demands and at each instance you've asked me to do something else instead of fulfilling your part of the bargain you set out.

I'm not evading you or saying that I can't answer. I'm telling you that I think that continuing this argument is pointless given:

a) it's making the thread difficult for other people to read. Just on this level contining the argument is anti-town.

b) you keep on moving the goalposts as to what you actually from me. It took like three rounds of this for me to realize that this is what you're doing and I think it's incredibly manipulative. I also think that you're deliberately antagonizing me in an attempt to get me to continue this.

c) I don't think I'm convincing you that I'm not scum at this point. Like you're being manipulative and perpetuating this on purpose imo. I don't really see any town motivation for this and I don't really see 'antagonizing/manipulating me into continuing an argument that no one wants' as an attempt to understand my POV. I think that you're just trying to win an argument. I don't really see the point in continuing this if you aren't listening to me and you're just using whatever I say as ammunition in the next round of this.

d) multiple other people asked us to stop and I don't think that there's an audience for this argument. If I think you're scum deliberately provoking me into an argument that nobody else is reading, like why should I participate exactly?

[skitter30]

He ONLY popped out to say "yankee is scum" over and over again when he was scum. when he is town he still tunnels but adds "other reads". For example; here he has Montosh as a 2nd SR, and in that game he was tunneling Dino but also had Jay in his view, and later had Vax too. (He was correct about both Dino and Jay not being Town).

OK, so you're basically saying that you think if he names one person only it's scum-indicative but naming more than one person is town-indicative?

I don't really know if that's a meaningful difference tbh, especially since you appear to be applying it to a relatively small sample size (and like, if he's scum, all he has to do now is name more than one person as being in his lynchpool to get you to townread him forever, you know, like he did in his very next post )

Like I don't really think this is AI.

[skitter30]

Day 1 ends in 4 days, 9 hours, 33 minutes

Um, I didn't realize that deadline was so close.

K, here's where I'm at:

{Montosh}
{Laserguy}
{}
{beef, wilky}
{NM} ------ null
{Korina, paradox}
{dr fanta, A50-slot, esp}
{}
{Thor}

I very much want to lynch Thor, but if that's not happening, I could move to Dr Fanta or A50 or esp at deadline.

[skitter30]

This post feels wishy-washy and contradictory and posture-y and super fake tbh.

You were on the biggest wagon, on someone you emphatically claim you think is scum, so switching to wilky ensures no mislynch how exactly? I dont even get why you think he's scum tbh? Nor do I agree with the claim that laserguy is active lurking. (In fact, I'd argue that your slot is active-lurking significantly more than he is). Nor do I get why you think my readslist is bad enough to compose an entire scumteam around it?

@skitter: Get off Thor. I know Thor's a very good scumster, but I also have played scum!Thor as both his partner and as a member of the counter scum team, and I'm not feeling scum!Thor here at all.

Also you say you'd be willing to lynch "my slot", and I would appreciate it if you explained if you SR >MYI< scummy to you still?

He's misrepped me (which I demonstrated) and is manipulatively perpetuating a useless argument imo. You think town!Thor is doing this because ....? Like I don't really see the town motivation for this and no, I'm not getting off of him unless like my vote is needed at deadline elsewhere to ensure a lynch happens.

Your predecessor was scummy and I don't really think you've done much to change that. IE I don't think you've done much that's AI so by default your slot is scummy because of your predecessor, and it'll stay that way until/unless you give me a reason to change that assessment.

(and like, if he's scum, all he has to do now is name more than one person as being in his lynchpool to get you to townread him forever, you know, like he did in his very next post )

And like what do you think about this?

Aw, blatant misrep.. How cute!

-Pepper

OK, why is this a misrep?

[skitter30]

He's misrepped me (which I demonstrated) and is manipulatively perpetuating a useless argument imo. You think town!Thor is doing this because ....? Like I don't really see the town motivation for this and no, I'm not getting off of him unless like my vote is needed at deadline elsewhere to ensure a lynch happens.

That is certainly one version of reality that is not well backed up if people actually read your posts wherein you answer questions with 'I can't give examples' and then claim you've already explained something.
But I'm misrepping because you disagree with me?
Suuuuure.

People who've actually read through the argument have been agreeing with me that you've misrepped me (montosh and dr fanta) so I think you're just making stuff up at this point and I don't know why I'm continuing to respond to you.

You're misrepping me because you said I changed my position mid-argument, and I didn't, and demonstrated that I didn't, and you still haven't back down from this claim but are actually doubling-down on it.

And like the examples thing is you asking me to demonstrate you didn't do something. I explained why it's different and I can't give an example showing that something isn't there better than saying 'look it isn't there!'. Like you're saying I'm scummy and evading the argument because I can't prove a negative ffs.

[skitter30]

@Thor: I think I'm just going to ignore you for a bit, no offense.

--------

Montosh, maybe towns bc they haven't pinged, but I kinda glaze over Montosh, however was scum last time I didn't really read their post properly, I think that says more about me though

His posts actually feel real to me this time; they like express nuanced thoughts that just didn't exist in his scumgame. There his entire game was IIOA. Here he's actually providing new/unique insights.

174 looks like a slip. skitter is right in regards to that in 181.

Yeah the fact that he got that beef was specifically a *wolf* (and not just generic scum) was really weird.

Ok Thor and skitter need to shut up, it's getting anti town. skitter had the right idea to put it in a spoiler.

Sigh, I'm trying .....

-------

I'm town in this one

Is there like a way for you to demonstrate that or ...? Cuz as far as I can tell, you're playing the *exact* same way.

-------

Ok, what changed from your outside scumreading on your slot to move all your leans to nulls?

I discovered my slot was town. Duh!

It doesn't make anyone SCUMMY for having voted BuJaber, but it makes it likely that there was scum on my wagon and I can't decide which one yet.

Tbh this feels more like something you feel like you have to say rather than something you actually believe. Like the bolded feels posture-y and fake.

------

Blatant misrep? You were townreading skitter but due to a readslist that you didn't agree with created a whole pre-flip scum team. Show me where the misrep is.

Guys.. is wilky actually this daft or is does he just play dumb when he's scum?

-Pepper

I mean, his point made a lot of sense to me so like maybe you could clarify what exactly you think he's not getting?

[skitter30]

Tbh this feels more like something you feel like you have to say rather than something you actually believe. Like the bolded feels posture-y and fake.

Right! So how would you go about it given the hypothetical situation you subbed into a game where your slot was heavily SR'd only to discover it's actually a town slot? More to it, how would YOU respond to that question if you were in my feet?? Teach me, please.

Idk. I don't really like replacing into games for like that exact reason tbh. I do know that it sounds fake to me though.

Tbh it might just be your posting style - like the random capital words and the exclamation posts make your posts sound really artificial to me in gneeral, but this one seems worse than normal. But like the fact that you aren't exactly/entirely disagreeing with me is also doesn't feel quite right? Like your answer isn't 'no I didn't do that' so much as 'but how else can you answer that question?' and like I don't know if a response to that question inherently always feels faked.

Like the fact that you're making such a big show about how your reads changed upon replacing in and discovering your slot is town feels just like ... not real? Like a show I guess is a good way of describing it? More like something you knew you'd have to do if you replaced into a widely scumread slot so you're going through the motions? Idk if I explained that well.

[skitter30]

tbh I'd ignore it and not be honest about my reads from before replacing in.

So, you're saying being honest makes me look scummy? If that's what you're saying then I really have nothing more to say.

@Skitter: So, you don't know how to do any other way, but it's still fake to you! And what capitalization? You bolded a certain/specific phrase that had no capitalization. Now you're going to tell me that's not what you were taking about??

What if I told you you response in 413 actually feels excessively fake to me? Because it does.

You prematurely launched an attack that you didn't actually plan carefully, and received an unexpected response that put you is a disadvantage so you're fumbling for what to say and grasping at straws.

I hope you enjoy my fake and artificial vote:

VOTE: Skitter

I was ACTUALLY going to write my post LIKE THIS to demonstrate what I was talking about wrt to the RANDOM CAPITAL WORDS and the EXCLAMATION POINTS but I decided I didn't need to go that far, but APPARENTLY I do!!!!!

YOUR posts are often written LIKE THIS and since I equate CAPITAL LETTERS with SHOUTING it makes all of your posts seem AWKWARD to me and stilted just like in general.

Your vote is OMGUS-y and bad and you just feel like way over-defensive and are making a big show about how surprised you are at actually being town and it all just feels fake and not real. Idk how to say that better.

bolded: Like why is what I said 'premature'? Why do you think that this is something that is 'planned' at all? I'm just like telling you why I don't like your posts. Why was your response 'unexpected'? Why was I 'disadvantaged?' Like all of these words just feel like inane buzzwords to brush away my point?

I'll concede that it might look like I'm 'fumbling' a bit because it's gut and I try to articulate my gut instead of just proclaiming 'this is bad' without any further explanation, and sometimes it takes a bit to find the words I want. I disagree that I'm grasping at straws that your posts feel fake.

[skitter30]

@Skitter: Well, you never objected to THAT in Stack The Deck, and I'll give you ONE EXAMPLE of you interacting with me DIRECTLY in response to a POST where I used THIS SAME POSTING STYLE.

Spoiler:

Yes, he was active and logged in and posted elsewhere between the time he was prodded and the time he was replaced. Like feel free to check this for yourself if you don't believe me.

GDI. How many times do I have to point out THIS IS TOTALLY NAI for Creature. I already explained (perhaps I didn't here???) that Creature was in a game I modded. He was a N1 Cop. He didn't submit an action. I prodded him a good 2 hours before deadline. HE PICKED THE PM AND STILL DIDN'T SUBMIT AN ACTION. I opened the thread, and there he was POSTING IN THREAD.

Tl;dr: TPR .. ONE SHOT .. SPECIFIC NIGHT .. ONLINE .. TOTALLY AWARE .. NO ACTION.

Now this certainly NOT a defense of Creature/Jay. This is telling you FACTS. If Jay doesn't Town it up, we lynch him or Vig him. But the fact Creature is ignoring this game is totally NAI (like you could ask him post-game and he will just say "I forgot about this game" or something along these lines).

GDI. How many times do I have to point out THIS IS TOTALLY NAI for Creature

My point in posting that is that multiple people were asserting he was sitewide inactive between the time he got prodded and the time he got replaced, which isn't true.

I don't really have much else to say right now other than that I don't like the screen wagon and I don't get why he's being policied instead of basing a lynch on alignment.

And even if you don't like his posting style, it's not like he's being toxic or anything like that so I don't really get why he's being policied at all tbh.

Like why are we spending a lynch on this instead of telling a potential vig to shoot him if you're that concerned about him getting to LYLO?

It always bothered me and it makes it slightly more difficult for me to read your posts. I didn't bother getting into it last game cuz I was operating on the assumption you were town from like the third page, remember? Now I like actually have to figure out if your posts are AI and I have to figure out if they feel awkward because I feel like you're RANDOMLY SHOUTING in middle of like every other sentence or if they're awkward because you're being awkward. Although there's always this general awkward-ness because of the RANDOM SHOUTING, you also feel fake and over-defensive-y right now in a way that has nothing to do with that. Like the *content* of your posts feel off, not just how you're going about communicating it. You feel overly concerned about getting across the idea that you discovered your slot was *actually* town after replacing in.

And like why are you focusing on the RANDOM SHOUTING thing instead of the fact that I just called your vote bad?

[skitter30]

My main request is that you all go ISO Skitter and compare his arguments to those he is using here and see if there's a significant difference. I won't even say "reads" because we don't have any flips here yet.

@Skitter: Same to you, my friend. Fake/awkward/void/defensive (did I miss anything?). Oh, yes I did.. and your vote is not only bad .. it SUCKS << serves to use the "shouting" once more.

Let's try something new. How about you call me.. erm.. an old fart? Would that make you feel better? How about MEAN. Yeah.. mean old fart. And I smell too. There you go.

Can you use she/her please?

Also, the bolded: a) why would I do that? b) how is that like relevant to anything?

I'm not like trying to personally insult you, I'm just saying that the way you type your posts are hard for me to read naturally. I don't really get why you're like trying to turn this into like a personal-insult thing?

Can you explain your townread on Montosh?

His posts actually feel real to me this time; they like express nuanced thoughts that just didn't exist in his scumgame. There his entire game was IIOA. Here he's actually providing new/unique insights.

This basically. His posts here have a nuance/depth that he didn't exihibit in his scumgame (a game that just ended like two weeks ago). I don't think his game changed that drastically in that short of a timeframe.

Like this is what I said about his posts there:

viewtopic.php?p=9909958#p9909958

Specifically:

and a lot of your posts are IIOA and seem largely bereft of scumhunting (specifically posts like 570 or post 576). I say the latter because you kinda just summarize people's opinions without much commentary.

The empty 'summary'-ness is kinda absent, and instead he's providing new/unique/thoughtful insights.

[skitter30]

a) why would I do that? b) how is that like relevant to anything?

Because THEN I'd understand and can relate. And it's not an insult at all. I

am

almost 50 y.o., so I actually am an old fart (and a bald one too). I am occasionally mean in the sense that I lose my temper and become overly sarcastic at times. I probably smell too cuz I'm a heavy smoker.

I think your vote is bad. I don't really feel like that gives me leeway to call you rude things.

but I can neither understand nor respond to "feels fake and void"

I'm calling your entire manner 'fake' because it feels like you're overly concerned with getting across the idea about how *surprised* you were that you rolled town. Like you're going through the motions because you think it's something you have to say as opposed to something you believe. IE I'm basically saying you don't believe it cuz you know you're not in fact town.

[skitter30]

and they definitely still need to avoid death

Yeah this basically. He felt kinda survivalistic, and I was getting those vibes specifically from this:

People need to post now. I refuse to be lynched just because half the players waited until the last day and there wasn't any time to change the wagon.

--------

Spoiler: @Thor

I kinda fundamentally disagree with the premise that I fabricated anything. I might be *wrong*, but I don't think that I made anything up.

Because the read is literally bonkers with the info she has about me, and she can't describe it and is coming really close to objective lies in trying to claim she has, so...?

I stopped responding to you because you were kinda frustrating me (I still think on purpose) and I felt if I continued I'd probably say something I'd regret, so I decided to take a break.

I think this game differs from that one in a broader sense (ie as opposed to comparing your entrance here and your entrance there - I didn't answer the former because I decided to stop responding to you, but I do believe I answered the latter).

There, you correctly caught me, and were persistent about getting votes on me and trying to get me lynched, but even as you did that, you were consistently sorting other people and expressing a broader view of the gamestate.

Like day1 you were saying me or MariaR could be scum. Day2 it was me or misere. The whole time you were trying to figure out Mulch, and you were also looking for who might be defending me and like trying to find partners.

Like your game pivoted on me but it wasn't *only* about me. Like you used scum!me as a foundation to sort other people and to look at the gamestate in an exhaustive sense. If I responded to you, you responded to me, and when I didn't respond to you, you just like proclaimed me scummy and moved on to something or someone else. Like the best way I can describe it is that although you strongly believed in scum!me, that wasn't the *only* thing you focused on. You didn't like need to prolong and perpetuate an argument with me.

Here, like you're focusing on me, and like ... that's all you've done. Offhand I can't think of any other significant positions you've taken beyond 'bujaber's replace-out was town' (I strongly disagree with this btw). You've asked a lot of questions and gotten into a lot of conflicts, but very little of it has led to any hard conclusions beyond the obvious. Like I feel like your whole game is about me and it's just so ... narrow? And like when I stop responding to you, you don't just move on, but are dragging other people into the argument. I feel like you're focusing on me and picking arguments to the point that I don't know what else you're thinking.

There is also a large pool of 'happy to lynch' that would include the people not actually participating, like Fanta, N_M, and Espe, but that both begins and ends my ability to describe why they're scum.

After that it's going to be more about flips, because there are too many soft town reads that are clearly wrong.

Like these are your other scumreads and it's just so ... shallow?

Like from this it seems like an accurate representation of your reads are:

-> scum - me because {long argument}

-> happy to lynch because not participating - {nm/fanta/esp} - (imo this is also low-hanging-fruit-y)

-> soft townreads that will need to be evaluated because of flips- everyone else

(Aside - if you flip someone in the middle category, how would their flip help you sort the last category even? If they're not participating you're not getting much info out of their flip anyways. And if you flip me .... like what does that imply for anyone else from your POV? Like the bolded sounds nice but I don't really see you developing the idea much.)

Like there's just very little nuance or trajectory or like clear, definitive stances on like anyone besides for me (and inexplicably town!bujaber). Like you have a lot of posts and a lot of words but very few useful conclusions.

I'm also finding it kinda mind-boggling that you think this game remotely parallels my scumgame. I'm like leagues out of scumrange here, and I feel like you ought to know that.

-------

VOTE: Dr Fanta

Two days left. We need to start consolidating our votes.

I'm going to be switching to A50 before deadline.

Actually since it's less than two days till deadline:

VOTE: A50

Strongly believe Thor is scum but I don't think it's happening today at this point.

-------

Am I looking into this too much or is the bolded part a slip? Seems to me like Almost already knows for sure that skitter doesn't have the same alignment as him.

I was thinking the same thing but there's an obvious rebuttal to that so I didn't see much utility in pointing it out.

[skitter30]

Spoiler: Thor

and also something that is utterly a new stance from you on the differences, since up till now the claim was I am overly aggressive and overly forcing choices.

Like you asked me how I thought this game differed from that one so I answered in a holistic sense? Not really sure what you're objecting to tbh. Also don't really think 'overly aggressive' accurately represents my position.

Like I'm not sure why you're reframing this as 'changing my stance' as opposed to 'being able to elaborate on a general meta read in a broader sense now that a whole day phase has played out'.

Like you're basically faulting me for incorporating new information (ie a holistic overview of the argument/day phase and how that compares to your behavior in a different game that shares the feature of you thinking you caught scum!me) into my read instead of just allowing it to stagnate on your first post?

Yeah, as long as you ignore my clear opinions on Laser and BuJaber. Ignore the pretty heavily implied position on Espeo (and at least that there's aggressive scumhunting there) and ignore the pretty clear statement on Fanta.

This doesn't really rebut the argument that your other significant scumreads are 'happy to lynch' players. (Also I disagree with the notion that your read on Laser has been clear; if I have to ctrl-F your ISO to pick it out via implication, it isn't.)

You then note my "low hanging fruit/handwave lurker value call" without actually addressing that it's objectively true. Anyone claiming really clear or strong reads in that batch, is stretching. I'm calling Fanta and I feel like I'm stretching for that one because he's clearly ducking engagement and issuing threats - but at least that's *something* to call him on. Look at my last exchange with N_M and tell me my read should be anything other than 'willing to lynch' with a straight face.

You're kinda ignoring my point. Yes, I'm *very* happy to lynch all of those players cuz I think they're being useless, and I don't think that the assessment 'happy to lynch' is unfair or inaccurate (ie this is what you appear to be objecting to)

My point is that in the context of the fact that your only significant scumread is me, the fact that your other scumreads are 'happy to lynch' players is kinda shallow. IE town!Thor needs to find five scum out of 11 players, and after a dayphase the best you have is {me and 'happy to lynch' players}. Like it's just .... lackluster and I kinda expect more from town!you after all of this.

I'm not claiming you have an unchangable meta

nor that I understand it

- that's your stance on me.

You've been referencing how I played that game and comparing that to my behavior in this one, so your read is at least partially meta-based, and I'm saying that I think it's a ridiculous read given the context you're referencing.

-------

Anyways, catching up now.

Is this happening or ...?

---------

Just as a heads up. I will not be around at 4am for deadline. So I'd like things settled before then especially if A50 is not the choice for the day.

Also, show of hands on people down to lynch NM as a policy compromise?

Since Thor isn't happening I want A50 but if that also isn't happening I'd be OK with NM but it's like a tertiary lynch option for me for today.

Also probably won't be around at deadline.

[skitter30]

I think that {Korina/Dr Fanta} make a lot of sense.

I'm getting this from the inexplicable townread Korina had on Dr Fanta a while back, coupled with the fact that Korina is now doing whatever Dr Fanta asks him to.

Spoiler: townread

Fanta:

bujaber: espeon, beefster, dr fanta, wilky
wilky: paradox, notmafia
korina: bujaber, laserguy
thor: skitter
skitter: thor
beefster: montosh

nv: korina

I got impatient -Pepper

I find this Townie.
Apart from that, short ISO, not a lot to read.
(Ever so) slight Town read.

{Self} - Lock Town
{None} - Gut Town
{Fanta} - Slight Town
{Buj, Beefster, Not_Mafia, Paradox, Esp, Montosh, Skitter, Laser} - Null
{Thor, Wilky} - Slight Scum
{None} - Gut Scum
{None} - Lock Scum

I find this Townie.
Apart from that, short ISO, not a lot to read.
(Ever so) slight Town read.

Why is this townie? I think it could easily be scum looking for something to do to look helpful/busy, and so I think it's ultimately NAI.

It's something that it's dependent on when it's posted ultimately, and this is one of the times I see it as a townie thing.

Like this isn't a good reason to townread someone imo, and certainly not strong enough to sheep them without like taking any strong stances of your own. Like he's paying enough attention to switch his vote shortly after Fanta asked him to,

twice

this morning, but hasn't caught up or done much else consequential since his role freakout thing.

[skitter30]

This is 100% skitter's town meta. Like, to a T. Anyone on skitter right now is either obvscum or just.. really, really Smurfing dumb. Or both, in the case of Thor.

Speaking of which, can we lynch scum now? wilky or Thor are my acceptable lynches.

-Pepper

Please describe Skitter's town meta for the really, really dumb amongst us.

I'd be interested in hearing this too.

I prefer not to pick up slack for scum.

OK, if I'm as town as you say you think I am, can you do it for me?

Oh, I forgot the part where I mention I'm not going to answer your stupid questions because I don't feel like contributing to more pages of you distracting and arguing with someone with no end in sight, full of misrepresentations and absolute bologna.

It might've helped prove skitter is town

, but I still think there are more productive ways for us to spend our time rather than listening to you throw a hissy fit because I called your questions dumb.

I thought my 'bad' readslist negated this?

By that I mean, which one do you think is a wolf?

Why do you think he's a wolf (ie and not generic scum)?

I think wilky and Fanta are probably both scum but Fanta's wagon composition is horrible

I actually like fanta's except for the fact that Thor is on it.

-------

I want to vote Thor but the fact that Dr Fanta and Korina are the reason it's a thing again is kinda weird because I like neither of them independantly and I get partner-y vibes from the two of them together.

But I don't want to vote Dr Fanta cuz Thor's on it.

I don't think {Thor/Dr Fanta/Korina} is a thing.

I scumread Thor the most of the three (although Dr Fanta is running a close second) so

VOTE: Thor

[skitter30]

Hard to go through those gymnastics to back your buddy's play while still distancing from it, huh?

No, trying to figure out how to apply the things that work for me in singleball to this gamestate.

Right now the best model I have to explain what's going on is {Thor/A50/???} as scum and {korina/Dr fanta} as wolves.

But relying too much on associatives tends to majorly mess me up, so I think that I ought to just go with who I find scummiest, especially since it's day 1.

However, Thor immediately switching his vote to Fanta in 507 support my read that Thor is TOWN and Fanta is trying to save Skitter.

How the heck is this an accurate description of the situation? I'm not remotely close to getting lynched right now, so how is Fanta 'saving' me?

OK.. Mafia team is likely Fanta/Skitter/Korina. WWs are probably wilky/Laser. Game solved.

Mafia!me decides to write up a case implicating both of my partners as partners because .... ?

[skitter30]

Naturally - which brings me back to my original comment about your gymnastics.
Maybe you should try talking holistically about your associatives? Then you can avoid these sort of problems by ducking specifics

I already explained Korina/Fanta. On the Korina side, in his last readslist, his *only* townread was Fanta for providing a vote count, which I pointed out is NAI at best; I would actually call it scummy becomes it makes Fanta look busy without actually doing anything. Now, he's popping in to vote whatever Fanta tells him to and hasn't done really much of anything else of note since the meltdown over being a vt. He doesn't really have a similar relationship with anyone else, so I'm having trouble fitting a third person into the Korina/Fanta dynamic.

For you/A50:

- after I call his vote bad, A50 calls my vote bad. My vote, of course, was on you.

Spoiler:

@skitter: Get off Thor. I know Thor's a very good scumster, but I also have played scum!Thor as both his partner and as a member of the counter scum team, and I'm not feeling scum!Thor here at all.

I ask

He's misrepped me (which I demonstrated) and is manipulatively perpetuating a useless argument imo. You think town!Thor is doing this because ....? Like I don't really see the town motivation for this and no, I'm not getting off of him unless like my vote is needed at deadline elsewhere to ensure a lynch happens

And crickets. No response

- I indicate that I'd like you to elaborate on your Bujaber townread and you ignored that. (Would you consider this ducking?)

Spoiler:

Offhand I can't think of any other significant positions you've taken beyond 'bujaber's replace-out was town' (I strongly disagree with this btw).

Like there's just very little nuance or trajectory or like clear, definitive stances on like anyone besides for me (and inexplicably town!bujaber).

iirc other people asked you too and you didn't explain it to them either.

-A50 is attacking me on the basis that I'm voting you but hasn't been able to tell me why I'm in the wrong beyond a vague 'I think this is town!Thor'. (He also was objecting to other people voting you, like NM in 400, but again, no good explanation for a townread for you)

tldr: Both of you have mutual townreads on each other and I can't get either of you to explain them. A50 is also campaigning to get votes off of you and is calling my push on you bad, and since he can't/won't explain the townread, I don't really get why he's doing this. Both of you appear to be defending the other slot for no reason that I can discern.

(The A50 slot is scummy independently for numerous other reasons as well, but I'm focusing on the bits that relate to you)

(and before you go at me for 'ducking' you again, I don't expect that I will have much time/computer access to write lengthy posts between a few hours from now and deadline; it's the Jewish holiday of purim tonight/tomorrow)

[skitter30]

Suffice it to say of I'm to move my vote off Skitter it would probably be to lynch you. If you -by some odd chance- flip Town I promise to forfeit my own read and sheep your on Skitter. I may even reconsider my read on Thor in that case.

Much townreads, much reevaluation of Thor, much thanks.

I'm pretty sure that both Thor and A50 were trying to tie me to a scum!Fanta flip yesterday. (scum in a generic sense, not in a specifically mafia sense)

VOTE: A50

Cuz he already has a vote on him.

Paradox is a weird one there's not really anyone it implicates or points in a direction too.

It tells me that the wolves were trying to stay out of the main argument of the day and want it to continue tbh.

LaserGuy and Beefster's votes were less reasonable. LaserGuy mostly voted to pressure people into consolidating votes onto wagons near deadlines, which rarely ends well for town. Beefster was just blatantly sheeping. I'd put money on scum there.

VOTE: Dr Fanta

Two days left. We need to start consolidating our votes.

Why'd you pick Dr Fanta here to consolidate votes on?

[skitter30]

Damned if I understood what you want to say!

I said if they flipped Town I'd sheep their read on you, and that's what I did. Now what's your problem again?

-> I wanted you to say you townread me. I don't really think that your read on me is sincere in any case, nor do I think that Fanta is qualified to meta me, but if it means you'll stop making bad pushes/votes on me, I"ll take it.

-> I want you to reevaluate Thor as well

-> I'm pretty sure that you and Thor were trying to tie to me to a scum!Fanta flip. IE if Fanta flipped scum, you were both setting the stage to go after me next as a partner.

-> I think your slot is scummy, both with Thor and also independently, and I want both of you lynched. Right now there's a vote on you so I voted you over him.

[skitter30]

I'll send you my regards from behind the grave when you finally manage to lynch me. I won't be nearly as nice though. I already have to deal with one moron who is SRing me from the previous game still, and I really am close to exploding in a real rampage. Don't let the act fool you. I'm not as calm as I'm trying to sound here.

In sum: If you're Town.. buzz off. If you're Scum.. still BUZZ OFF!

a) I'm not scumreading you from the previous game? That has nothing to do with it, and you're the one who keeps on bringing it up. (I referenced it wrt to my Montosh read but that game has literally nothing to do with how I'm reading you here)

b) I read this bit after I wrote the rest of this post about your other points. I don't want to provoke you or anything, but I think you're scum. This quote sounds to me like you're likely to rage at me for scumreading you and I don't really know how to respond to that given that I'm just trying to play the game. I don't *think* I've done anything out of line? And if I have, I apologize.

I guess if reading the rest of this post, wherein I respond to your last post, is going to bother you that much, then skip it? Idk. Like I can stop talking to you about it if doing so is going to annoy you, but that isn't going to change my opinion or stop me from trying to lynch you.

--------

Now that you're telling me they're not qualified to meta you I take it back.

Yeah I realized after I wrote that that I shouldn't have included that lol, cuz I just handed you an out. My thoughts on the subject should have been clear from my posts yesterday, but meh.

I'll do that once everybody has weighed in for D2

Not really sure why you need to wait for that, but fine, I'll ask again then.

First: This assumes I'm scum with Thor.

Yes, that's what I'm assuming.

Second: Even if we were, we would have had a 7 in 10 or 7 in 9 chance Fanta was flipping TOWN (depending on whether you think we're WWs or Mafia), so "tying you to Fanta" seems ridiculous for Scum to do.

Yeah, but you were trying to lynch them so you thought you were flipping scum. The fact that they in fact flipped town doesn't change the fact that you thought they were flipping scum before the flip happened.

Unless you're saying you thought they were going to flip town yesterday?

Like this point basically states that scum knew that Fanta had a high chance of flipping town (and thus they wouldn't have tried to make partner-cases), but it's multiball and from the way you were pushing for their lynch yesterday it's apparent you thought they were flipping scum.

[skitter30]

1) WW aren't worried about reducing the pool of people on the Fanta wagon. This suggests that they weren't on that wagon, and that it was consequently more mafia-backed.

I think that nka is a very useful tool and I think that this is a point worth considering; there probably was at most ww on the fanta wagon then (as you're saying, if they were both on the wagon, killing on the wagon would be an odd move).

Skitter is, once again, creating a case based around calling scumhunting scummy. Even in the theory world where A50 and I are scum - she's accusing us of thinking;

That Fanta was scum.

VOTE: Skitter

No, I'm accusing you of chaining lynches based on that assumption. I don't really have a problem with you thinking that Fanta was scum; I thought the same thing. I have a problem with you setting me up as a partner pre-flip (and then not even reconsidering given the townflip)

Also is tunneling me all you're going to do or .... ?

Where you got it messed up is assuming Scum!me (who is assumed to be scum with Thor) were pushing on a SCUM lynch.

Yes, I'm assuming that scum!you was pushing on what you believed to be an opposing-scum-lynch. Scum!you also has to find scum so idk why you're acting like scum!you would assume that Fanta was town and not consider scum!fanta as a serious possibility.

but since I'm Town I was only going to lynch you if Fanta did flip Scum because I figured you would be their p,

Your scumread on me predated the fanta thing and was initially largely independent of Fanta (it only became about Fanta when I voted thor instead of Fanta yesterday) so saying you only wanted to lynch me if Fanta flipped scum is kinda disingenuous.

Also quotes like these make me feel like you're talking to me as if you think I'm town (since you're saying you now don't want to lynch me since they flipped town), which is weird because you're making a whole thing about how you don't.

But then that would mean I already knew (or very much expected) Fanta to flip TOWN, and linking you to them the way I did would have extremely dumb, because it would make you a MUCH HARDER lynch today, whereas as Scum my goal would be to make it EASIER to get you lynched.

Right, and that's why I think you were expecting a scumflip because linking me to someone you think is flipping town is a really idiotic thing to do.

We're both saying you expected a scumflip. You're saying you're town who expected a scumflip, which is why it's OK that you were linking me as a partner, as that's what town do when they find scum. I'm saying I think you're scum who expected an opposing-team-scumflip, and that you were going to build on your existing scumread of me and the scumflip to push for my lynch today. And when Fanta flipped town it kinda threw a wrench in this plan and made me a lot harder for you to push. Basically I fundementally disagree with the premise that scum!you was expecting a town!fanta flip.

Also, I apologize myself on the mini-outburst directed your way.

All's good!

How does Skitter know that they're not qualified to do a meta read though? There is such a thing as reading game you're not involved in...

Idk, someone saying they think I match my town-meta to a T when I've never played with them is a little weird.

The point of the posts are so that I can sort you better... So will you provide reasons on why I am specifically a werewolf??

Until then
VOTE: A50

I don't really like this vote. It's like ultimatum-y and I feel like you're using it as a reason to vote-park on an already existing wagon.

[skitter30]

I also find amazing that we keep on taking bouts at each other and nobody ever cares to intervene. The most that people have done is pop on, place a vote and take a nose dive into oblivion. It looks like both Scum factions are happy with the status quo and want it to go on and on and on. Did you ever consider that possibility??

Tbh this is actually a good point. I think I'm going to let the argument rest for now.

but the tldr to your questions are: I think you're mafia since wolves shooting outside me/you/thor signifies to me that they are content with the argument continuing, and I've never rolled scum in multiball (onsite; I have offsite but games on my homesite are kinda different and I don't think that game is immediately relevant to this one for a multitude of reasons)

@Skitter - how is conceptualizing a scum team scummy? Because that's assuredly as close as I came to "chaining lynches".

I don't think that conceptualizing a scumteam is inherently scummy.

It's more like I feel like you're calling me scummy no matter what - if Fanta had flipped scum you were obviously going to argue that I was partners with them, but they flipped town and you're still saying I'm scummy without like re-evaluating anything.

So I basically feel like you were going to use a Fanta scum!flip to push for scum!me if the flip had happened, but it isn't really something you believe given that the townflip doesn't actually change anything for you. Like a lot of your Fanta thing was actually about me and associatives with me and how they couldn't/wouldn't describe their townread on me, so it kinda feels like you went there because you couldn't get a wagon on me to stick, and at eod you were focusing on how Fanta made *me* scummy. Like your Fanta thing was about me to a certain extent.

VOTE: LaserGuy

This is now the most suspicious slot from being too quiet and floating under everyone's radar.

I don't think he's suspicious, quiet, or floating under the radar and I don't get why you think any of those things.

I would, however, like to also bring you back to something you said in Day 1, that if Fanta flipped town you'd reconsider your reads on skitter

and thor

. I know skitter also asked you this, but I haven't seem you really reconsider anything much so far. You mostly seem to be fighting with skitter.

I really want this to happen; A50 said he would once everyone has posted, and everyone has.

There were five wagons at the time: You, Thor, wilky, Dr. Fanta, and A50. I had Town on you and Thor, so I wasn't going to vote there. I was suspicious of everyone on the wilky wagon and didn't want to sheep them. It was a toss-up for me between A50 and Dr. Fanta, and my scumread on Fanta was stronger.

OK fair enough. What's your present read on me/thor/A50?

I'd like Dr. Fanta and Korina's opinions on who I should think is the most probable scum and why though.

lolololol

Honestly? Post count. I just looked at it and picked two people.

Initially I was kinda 'meh' on Laser's question because the obvious answer was 'proven town via flip' and 'proven town via role PM'.

But your answer is *ewwww*.

He just replaced in and I don't think the fact that he randomly chose two players to start with without reading the OP means much tbh.

I don't see why a town on thor when he spent all of yesterday deliberately misrepping arguments.

In case it wasn't obvious, I would start a Thor wagon if I thought it would become a thing this time around.

[skitter30]

viewtopic.php?f=2&t=74154

I'm going to have to look through this before I weigh in on the policy thing.

I agree my Fanta thing was about you - how is that scummy?
I'll wait.

Right, and my point is that since it was about me you were just using it to expand your scumread on me. Like it wasn't really about them, but rather about setting up the next round of this argument - that's why I'm saying it felt like you were chaining lynches; if they flipped scum you were obviously going to use that to go after me next. Like it felt you only cared about them wrt to how they could be used against me, and not for sorting

them

as a slot independant of me.

I think I asked this before, but why do I feel like your whole game is about me?

this is the sort of stuff you were howling misrep over with me yesterday - except yesterday I'd ask it as a question, and here you're just empty immediate attacking while showing no understanding of my issue/what actually happened.

OK, then I don't understand what your issue is or what you think actually happened wrt Tchill.

Yes, I still think you misrepped me.

[skitter30]

so just to be straight fanta got lymched OVER bujabar and NM? when it's quite obvious and agreed upon NM will be in anyone's lynch pool until he decides to participate which is highly unlikely. Anyone that points to NM and says "yeah he's suspicious but..." will stick out like a sore thumb to me. NM is exactly the type of player scum keep around until it's time to win the game. Keep your lynch pool short and get rid of the players you know will be in it.

OK if you're scum you're probably not scum with NM.

haven't seen much from almost50 and it doesn't "mesh" with my reads as of late.

It looks like you figured out later that A50 replaced bujaber. Would you be interested in voting there once you've finished your catchup?

------
Thor, before I get entrenched in another argument with you, I want you to answer this:

I think I asked this before, but why do I feel like your whole game is about me?

And I want to know why you're ignoring me when I ask you about that, and why you're ignoring me when I ask you to talk about other people - most recently the tchill thing. I don't think his opener is significant, but you apparently feel his opener is worth probing, and disagreed with my opinion that it wasn't AI. Why'd you drop it once I asked you about it, only to instead continue an argument about how you think I'm scummy?

It kinda looks to me like you're trying to narrow our conversation to the topic of why I find you scummy and vice versa.

-------

I like this a lot. I've never heard of it. Makes sense.

that being said im wondering why fanta was lynched over Bujabar, korina and NM now.

I kinda want to apply that tell to you wondering why your own slot didn't get lynched.

If you'll look I haven't defended her at all.

Right, but 402 coming on the heels of you reading about the Amished tell makes it look like you were trying to defend korina's behavior without explicitly calling the slot scummy.

[skitter30]

+1

I will add that I can't get either of them to explain townreads on the other - Thor's been ignoring my requests and A50 has been saying he'd do it later, but hasn't.

[skitter30]

Where'd you even try to get me to discuss the read?
In my ISO I appear to be discussing it with other people exclusively.

viewtopic.php?p=9993797#p9993797

You said that replacing out under pressure *strengthened* (268) your townread of him, and I want to know where that came from initially, and honestly yeah, it looks like he replaced out cuz he couldn't handle being scumread and didn't know how to respond to wilky. I usually read 'avoiding pressure' as a scumtell.

Because the best you could claim is this "Thor is highly focused on his primary scumread and makes a lot of posts about them" which is absolutely true.

Right, and my point is that I don't get why you're doing that:

I haven't ignored you about other players - or, more importantly *I* haven't ignored other players but

will agree I haven't spent a lot of time debating scum about my reads

.

You *have* spent a lot of time debating your primary scumread about your read on her.

And that's why I think you're super-focused on me, given that you think I'm scum but you keep trying to continue an argument with me about your read on me

Like from the bolded you agree that debating your reads with scum is a silly thing to spend time on, so .... why are you doing that?

Like just looking about your posts this day-phase - I'm the primary subject (you talk about Tchill too). You're not even trying to talk to other people about why I'm scummy, but you're instead just telling me why you think I'm scummy. Just like .... why? Why do you keep on trying to continue this argument with me when you think I'm scum?

And just like - I'm your primary scumread. I don't think I'm getting wagoned right now. Instead of telling me why you think I'm scum for the umpteenth time, wouldn't your efforts be better spent developing other scumreads instead of tunneling me?

You dropped the Tchill conversation, not me. Your last point in the conversation was that you agreed that you didn't understand my stance - which is what I claimed as reality. That ends the conversation for me - because all the conversation was was you attacking me for bupkiss - I don't need to keep following it up after you admit to the bupkiss.

No, that was me asking you to explain it cuz I didn't get it. That doesn't mean I think I'm wrong or that I'm dropping it, but rather means I don't understand your side and I'm trying to get you to explain it.

(At this point I think at least some of this argument is that we're *really* not communicating with each other well tbh)

[skitter30]

And I would note that I'm not debating you to convince you.

I'm debating you to show holes to convince others.

-> Given that people aren't really reading posts from either of us, this is obviously working super well

-> If you're not trying to talk to me then I don't really see the utility of continuing the argument tbh

If other people want me to clarify anything lmk

--------------

NM, A50, thor would be the ones i want lynched from the lynching wagon in that order.

+1 (although I'd go Thor > A50 > NM > wilky = beef > laserguy)

[skitter30]

Hint: you don't do that if you're winning the points. Just saying.

I kinda won already though tbh given that people are largely finding you scummier than me.

I don't really see the point in debating with *you* if I'm not changing your mind. Like, if other people aren't reading my posts and you aren't changing your mind, there isn't really an audience. I don't really see the point of spending time or effort shouting into the void.

If other people are concerned about the points you raise I'll talk to them about it.

--------

Actually, I'm going to amend this. I'm getting a lot of buddy vibes between the two of them today that I find very suspicious. I don't think that it's possible all three of you can be Town at once.

VOTE: Almost50

+1

I will add that I can't get either of them to explain townreads on the other - Thor's been ignoring my requests and A50 has been saying he'd do it later, but hasn't.

And now A50 is out-of-nowhere starting a wagon on someone who started a wagon on Thor.

Ctrl-f his ISO for beef. The only two posts in his ISO with 'beef' in them before that case are the following:

Spoiler:

Hi!
I was following the game since it started with the intention to sub-in whenever possible, but only to carry on with my "you were killed on N1" series.

Btw, I only unsubscribed the thread yesterday after I got bored with how slow this was going. I believe I was at page 9.

From what I can remember I had Beef as my top TR. I also had Town leans on Thor, N_M & TGP.

I only had two Scum leans, and -funnily enough- my own slot was one of them. The other one is Korina.

Because of my Scum lean on BuJaber I have had Town leans on Espeo. Fanta, wilky & Montosh, but now they're all back to null.

Any questions? None? Good!

Also, I hardclaim Citizen rn. I'm a fucking citizen once again, and literally out of half the rolelist being non-citizen roles, I get citizen again. I really don't care if I'm ML'd d1, happens all the time, and idgaf tbh.

If you're this salty about being a VT, why not play role madness?

If she hates it so bad; she'd probably roll the ONLY pure VT in the setup.

Conclusion: Beefster is SCUM. His partner(s) is/are in Montosh/skitter30/LaserGuy

I disagree with your conclusion because of {redacted}. Also I think that Montosh and laserguy are the two towniest people in the thread so this scumteam theory is like ????? to me.

Since no one is particularly scumreading Beefster...okay?

I don't get it. I'm making a case on him and declaring a Scum read there myself.

Right, and I find the timing to be *incredibly* suspect.

I'll vote for whichever of Thor/A50 has a bigger wagon.

p-edit: holy shit more of the chain-lynching.

[skitter30]

So, I really, really want to lynch Thor, but I'm pretty sure we ought to look for wolves today.

VOTE: Wilky

This is the person I find scummiest who I don't think is partnered with Thor/A50, so let's start here.

My search for breadcrumbs has been inconclusive.

Yeah, I didn't find anything that conclusive either. I don't think he checked korina and found him to be a wolf given how laser's first post of the day yesterday.

I suspect LaserGuy investigated skitter on N1, though that would only catch wolves anyway, so it would seem a bit odd to classify that as a strong townread...

Yeah idk if that implies that he checked me. It's should be self-evident at this point that I'm not mafia at this point though.

No, I just hammered because another lynch wasn't happening

I mean, it was only like five irl days into the phase, so I kinda felt you hammered too early.

3/3 on reads during my catch up.

I said laser was town. You and bujabar was scum.

I was right about laser and bujabar but I doubt I got all 3 reads right which would mean I know believe you're town.

Yes it is multi ball and I don't have any experience differentiating fictional motivation and how to hunt with that in mind.

This isn't a very good reason to clear him imo. It's cool to re-evaluate and all, but idk if being right on two reads means that you should assume you're wrong on the third one.

[skitter30]

I'd give fairly decent odds on NM being mafia.

I am very, very, very confidant that Thor is mafia.

Btw wilky is at l-1.

[skitter30]

Am I the only one that feels this consensus has a fake, scummy vibe to it?

Yes, cuz mafia wants it. And we need to lynch a wolf today so I'm not much bothered by that.

Wilky isn't partnered with A50 here like ever (he made bujaber replace out, remember?). He's the least townie of the people who don't make sense as A50/Thor partners.

Only thing he said today was to cast some shade on some of his wagon (he didn't even mention my vote when he did so).

He spent much of day1 tunneling on Bujaber or going after low-habging fruit in Fanta or korina.

Oddly focused on the night-kill day 2. His vote A50 vote was gross in the same way Thor's vote on me was. (And the same way your vote on Beef was just now). Ultimatums give an excuse to vote-park.

[skitter30]

Oh ffs you just hammered

NM, Tchill, me, esp, you.

I thought announcing it was L-1 would be enough to forestall a lolhammer.

[skitter30]

If wilky flips wolf there's a fairly decent chance you're the partner imo.

[skitter30]

You know that hammer was awful, right?

You were just saying you thought that the wilky wagon was scum-motivated and you didn't understand it and then you lolhammer him like forty minutes later, without wilky even posting in between.

[skitter30]

I think you're trying very hard to make a big deal about it. It's telling.

Yeah, cuz the hammer was objectively awful
---------

In case I die tonight, lynch Thor after a wolf flip.

The associatives between Thor and A50 are flat-out awful; it's like all over my ISO; see my last post day 1 and again my last post of day 2.

the tldr is that Thor hard-defended the A50 townread, and A50 wouldn't explain his townread on Thor, and called out votes on Thor despite that.

Their convo after A50 voted beef at the end of day2 is incredibly fake and feels like theatre. Their convo when A50 replaced in feels fake too.

The third partner is I think NM, with Tchill being my second pick, and montosh a very distant third.

Beef/Esp/wilky never make sense as partners for Thor/A50. Like I would be shocked if anyone from this group flipped mafia. They might be wolves, but they're like never mafia here.

[skitter30]

Wow, wasn't really expecting mafia!montosh or mafia!espeonage. You both played super well

Thanks mutant!

[skitter30]

Nope

The whole game, in the back of my mind, I was slightly paranoid that the things I was townreading you for you'd be able to fake in multiball ... which apparently you were, quite well too imo. I really do think you played super differently here than in math's game though; the stuff you posted at the end of the last day looked super town to me.