'That mistake' being what? Are we still talking about the Galron kill here, and you consider it a mistake?In post 569, DArby wrote:Thynhith was on thin ice as a placeholder of who could also make that mistake as scum!FB's partner.
Which people? Blinded in what sense?In post 569, DArby wrote:I was blinded by hearing multiple people say [Galron was NK'd for crumbing] that it didn't cross my mind how they were saying it.
I hate typing on my phone. Just lost another post ffs.In post 572, Val89 wrote:557. I mistyped, which may have confused, but I corrected at 559.
Galron’s death was an objective mistake and scum gained nothing from it. Genuinely a bad play all around.In post 576, Val89 wrote:No, I'm sorry, I'm still not following what you were trying to say in 569.
'That mistake' being what? Are we still talking about the Galron kill here, and you consider it a mistake?In post 569, DArby wrote:Thynhith was on thin ice as a placeholder of who could also make that mistake as scum!FB's partner.
Which people? Blinded in what sense?In post 569, DArby wrote:I was blinded by hearing multiple people say [Galron was NK'd for crumbing] that it didn't cross my mind how they were saying it.
If they’re scumbuddies the strong read makes sense. This is the only other strong play I can think of Spangled this game. Correct me if I’m wrong, but if they were both scum both of these plays [saying Galron died from crumbing and his FB read] make a lot more sense.In post 558, Val89 wrote:The other issue I have, and this is something I need to get my head around before I can consider joining the Facebones voters, is the unresolved problems I have with Spangleds FB read.
Spangled did a good job by the end of yesterday of almost apologising his way out of his scumread with me (what shall we call that? The Canadian defense?). We have spent some time discussing what his reaction to that part of my read does or does not say about his alignment, but nobody, apart from the possible exception of Facebones himself at 255, has had anything to say on the actual issue I have with it.
I say that Spangled could not have reasonably given the read he does at 142, based on everything that FB had said until then, which was 103,109, and 111. Spangles response to that (and putting aside the way he put it for the moment), was that he says actually that he does consider it sufficient to make a strong read on, and I'm simply taking issue with the fact we have different reads.
I'm so far in the camp that it isn't enough to justify that read that I consider that response suspicious in itself, but I acknowledge that other people do look for different things, and have different thresholds, when making their reads. As such, I would feel happier if other players could at least give some indication as to where they fall on that scale.
It is important because I think that a scum!Spangled was TMIing Facebones as town there, rather than TRing his buddy, so I wouldn't support a Facebones wagon unless and until I saw a Spangled flip - I don't think I get any information from the other way around. If, one the other hand, I can be convinced that I might be wrong on this issue, and that TR was in the reasonable range of responses to that ISO, then the possibility of a town!Spangled changes that calculus.
I agree that the FB read makes more sense from a scum!Spangled, but I don't think it makes it more likely they are scumbuddies. On the contrary, I don't think a scum!Spangled reads a scum!Facebones in such terms. We don't know for sure how a scum!Spangled plays around his scumbuddy, but I think even the most green of mafia players is going to realise saying "Yep, this guy is top tier town" about his scum partner on the basis of 3 posts, while also holding a null read on another slot while saying "what can you expect for 6 posts" is going to attract attention come post-flip when we all start scouring over the ISO for associatives.In post 580, DArby wrote:If they’re scumbuddies the strong read makes sense. This is the only other strong play I can think of Spangled this game. Correct me if I’m wrong, but if they were both scum both of these plays [saying Galron died from crumbing and his FB read] make a lot more sense.
That's more what I was looking for. You didn't agree with the read (you said "Eh idk why it's that important but alright. Feels fairly natural to me, though FB has been lurking a bit yesterday and today. Can't read anything with only three posts") but you do think it was open to him to make that conclusion, and it's a play style thing. Noted.In post 565, Thynhith wrote:I can see where spangled is coming from, in that he had a strong first impression of FB, within the bounds of reasonable play style
In post 135, Thynhith wrote:galron I'm not sure how you came to that read after only 5 posts, can you explain your thinking? you mentioned you were a "town hunter" before
72 hours is only just under half of an average day phase. Why would it be weird for me to want to litigate the point if I didn't truly think Cook was scum?In post 557, Val89 wrote:Amen. Galrons last words were, refering to me, were "Maybe you'll be protected tonight, if that's where you're going."In post 544, Spangled wrote:Val’s still alive because scum killed Galron for crumbing.
I am inclinded to treat with suspicion anyone who is advancing theories as to why Galron was selected as the NK without acknoledging that, given what was said in twilight, scum would be forced to consider the possibility they wouldn't be able to take a shot a me without going through Galron first. It looks he basically threw himself in the path of the bullet like a secret service agent, and I am asking myself why some slots are speculating on Galrons reads, etc, and are pretending they didn't see that he was crumbing pretty hard.
It goes further than that - not only did he call us both townleans, but he explicitly called us TvT just prior to hammer (425). At the time, it pissed me off a bit because I was expecting a red flip and I thought she was mixing the wines right in front of us. Having seen I was wrong, I don't have much choice but to reconsider Margot. The fact of the matter is that I have more than one game where other multiple other slots have been telling me the tunnel I am in is TvT, and they have been right, even ones where I would have bet my kids I was dealing with scum.In post 554, Roden wrote:Not entirely true, Cook was calling them both town leans, and I don't remember anyone disagreeing with either of us.In post 536, DArby wrote:Also I think it'd be weird to hide behind a kill from an argument off of one slot with one post saying it's TvT.
As such, I think I ought put some stock in what a now-proven town SE, even one who ran a game like this one did, has to say on a spat I am having with another slot, if they declare it to be TvT. That said, I still have my suspicions about how the wagon turned yesterday - yes, it ulitmately proved to be a mislim wagon; yes, Margot was proved 'right' in that sense - but reading it back, I can't help but feel it was odd.
It was a 10 day phase. We had spent over 7 of them getting Cook into hammer-range; while there were still such a lack of content from some slots as to have multiple null reads in the lists that had been posted, Margot had apparently herself only managed to read in detail the first 5 pages in those days, and she thought this: "UNVOTE: , as we've actually got 3 days, and not the almost EoD I was led to believe it was". She thought, after we had only managed to get where we had after 7 days, that the less than 72-hours remaining was sufficent to litigate the Cook issue further without a claim and rally around another lim when (and this is the kicker to my eyes) she was openly standing in the way of the only other really viable wagon as well. I can't help that think, even though we did evenutally mislim a townie, that a scum!Margot would have beenoverjoyedto see that one turned around, have us then rush into a quick, low info mislim elsewhere, and for us to be spending today still discussing what the hell we do with Cook.
In short, I'm not quite ready to take my turn under that palanquin just yet.
Everyone is going on about whether or not Galron crumbed. It's been pointed out to me, and honestly, I still don't think it's a crumb. It was a terrible elimination by Mafia on every single possible level, unless we all end up talking circles around whether or not Scum killed Galron bc they wanted to throw Town into confusion, they are bad at the game, or they were responding to a crumb (that was not a crumb, it honestly wasn't even a fake crumb, I still just take from that post that Galron is saying in 493 that, given that Val has worried that they often get NKed by Mafia n1 in a post earlier in the chain, and Galron seems to TR him, he may be angling to be protected if we have a protection role. I'm trying to see it as a crumb and it's still hard.)In post 517, MargotRosa wrote:I agree, this is weird as hell. I can't think about it too much, or else my brain will snap and the game will never end
I'm just not a big fan of D1's, there's no information to go off. Apologies for my lurky play, but for me it's easier to class people as either town or scum from their interactions with other players and seeing which ones I think are legitimate. It might be stupid or whatever, but I feel if I interrupt these people's interactions it'll interfere with the flow and I won't be able to get a clear a read on them as what I could.
Would he have been?In post 516, Thynhith wrote:If they'd left him alone, he'd be drawing all the heat on D2
Galron stopped scumreading/pressuring Spangled on page 8, didn't he? He then moved onto Cook (voting for her twice and declaring intent) and myself.In post 532, Thynhith wrote:Spangled was the only one Galron was really scumreading/pressuring.
Just to touch on this a bit, why would scum Val or scum Margot NK you if you incorrectly labeled them as town? Wouldn't that be more of an incentive to keep you around?In post 554, Roden wrote:My perspective on the TvT scenario is that if Margot or Val have one scum between them, killing the other or me makes more sense than killing Galron.
What conclusions have you come to, having watched from a distance?In post 587, Facebones wrote:I'm just not a big fan of D1's, there's no information to go off. Apologies for my lurky play, but for me it's easier to class people as either town or scum from their interactions with other players and seeing which ones I think are legitimate.
In post 588, Val89 wrote:What conclusions have you come to, having watched from a distance?In post 587, Facebones wrote:I'm just not a big fan of D1's, there's no information to go off. Apologies for my lurky play, but for me it's easier to class people as either town or scum from their interactions with other players and seeing which ones I think are legitimate.
The opposite. If Roden is dead after saying we are TvT, then they are confirmed Town and the last thing they said on us, now as a conf Town, is that we are also Town.In post 587, Facebones wrote: Just to touch on this a bit, why would scum Val or scum Margot NK you if you incorrectly labeled them as town? Wouldn't that be more of an incentive to keep you around?
that’s fair, I guessIn post 587, Facebones wrote:I'm just not a big fan of D1's, there's no information to go off. Apologies for my lurky play, but for me it's easier to class people as either town or scum from their interactions with other players and seeing which ones I think are legitimate. It might be stupid or whatever, but I feel if I interrupt these people's interactions it'll interfere with the flow and I won't be able to get a clear a read on them as what I could.
I think that actually makes senseIn post 585, MargotRosa wrote: What I want to do, is work out Facebones' deal.
If it needs a Galron explanation, then it makes perfect sense to me that someone who is checked out of the game would come back into the game and NK someone after reading a handful of posts and, basically guessing at random, picks someone ridiculous to NK.
It's a good lead, and everyone should take it seriously
In post 577, DArby wrote:I hate typing on my phone. Just lost another post ffs.In post 572, Val89 wrote:557. I mistyped, which may have confused, but I corrected at 559.
Thank you for bringing that to my attention. Even with Cooks endorsement that’s still not a town consensus. Especially if Roden is saying that he doesn’t suspect you because he labeled you TvT in 533 when it didn’t even happen. If a third party is already bringing up a possibility of a scenario that didn’t happen, I’m sure more would if it did. I’d imagine someone such as yourself or Margot would have seen that would be easily called out if the other died. What would be your defense even? “Lol wasn’t me Roden and Cook said so.”? I don’t think that 2 people saying your argument is TvT and neither of you dying proves that it was TvT. I do think you’re both town yea, but not for Roden’s reasoning.
I was assertive ‘cause I held/hold the opinion strongly ¯\_(ツ)_/¯In post 579, DArby wrote:Galron’s death was an objective mistake and scum gained nothing from it. Genuinely a bad play all around.In post 576, Val89 wrote:No, I'm sorry, I'm still not following what you were trying to say in 569.
'That mistake' being what? Are we still talking about the Galron kill here, and you consider it a mistake?In post 569, DArby wrote:Thynhith was on thin ice as a placeholder of who could also make that mistake as scum!FB's partner.
Which people? Blinded in what sense?In post 569, DArby wrote:I was blinded by hearing multiple people say [Galron was NK'd for crumbing] that it didn't cross my mind how they were saying it.
Roden first and then Spangled saying that Galrons death was the cause of him crumbing. When Spangled said it a second time I went “Shit I think they’re onto something” and didn’t stop to think why did both [Roden and Spangled] give that reasoning. Given Spangled play style I find this change of pase weird because it comes off more assured than his other posts. I’m on mobile right now so I’m spitballing here but 544 comes off way more assertive than I’m used to. It was so matter-of-fact it changed my opinion completely. I never paused to think that it was odd how he came out so strong d2 with that read that I do believe he came up with that independently of Roden.
FB and Thyn seem most scummy.In post 597, Spangled wrote:who do you think is scum atm, Margot?
andIn post 280, DArby wrote:This is why I’d rather move Spangled to d2.
came across as a little bit trying to line up townie after townie, and even more so now Cook flipped green.In post 467, DArby wrote:Regardless of how Cook flips I'm pushing the fuck out of Facebones d2. Then Spangled.
I'm confused, do you mean the town assessment on Roden cannot change?In post 590, MargotRosa wrote:It confirms alignment and means the Town assessment cannot change