Animal Rescue: petsPick (Game Over!)

[Amrun]

@Amrun - Bah. I feel dumb. Give me the CliffNotes version of the Llamarble case since you seemed to be changing your mind on him.

Yesterday it was gut, vibe, stalling, and not taking firm stances, especially on lewarcher.

Today, though, I'm feeling town on him.

Also with the info of there being an SK, that means one of my town reads is scum. Great.

Uh, where is the info on there being an SK? We know there's a third party. It's not at all the same thing. (Vi also made this mistake, but it was after yours so I think she subconsciously picked your mistake up, and also this was addressed in her and she used it as a towntell for Quilford, which isn't at all scummy.)

You, on the other hand... That was a weird post already, as Vi noted. You have townreads on EVERYONE? I don't even know who your scumreads are, but you have "plenty," though apparently less than five.

Your response to Llamarble's vote was really scummy. You didn't address the point at all. You implied that you had a viable reason to believe lewarcher was scum based on your role, but lewarcher wasn't scum. That doesn't make you insta-scum, but you avoiding the issue doesn't look so great.

VOTE: Kublai Khan

Can’t remember a single stance he’s taken all game; not good.

Really? Not one single stance? All game? That's really odd because I haven't been a wallflower.

@Ghostlin - You jumped on the lewarcher82 wagon for the "glowball is fishing" argument, then coasted the rest of the day by justifying it with setup arguments.

Your reasoning to jump on the Llamarble wagon is weak and looked like you were trying to groundfloor on the new big wagon. You're not coming up with original arguments against people, just picking up on other people's suspicions and echoing them more loudly as your own.

I agree with the entirety of this post. That vote by DDD was really weak and threw me off of an otherwise-town read. ...What?

Ghostlin is looking scummier by the post, and KK townier.


WAGONS I SUPPORT:
VP - Reasons noted above
Jason - Reasons noted yesterday, plus his very strange glowball/lewarcher push today. It doesn't read as genuine.
Ghostlin - Reasons noted yesterday, plus inconsistencies between his pushes yesterday and today. In general does not read as genuine.


glowball has a point that the VP wagon did spring up a little quickly. That doesn't necessarily mean something, but I'd still like to see more counterwagoning today than happened yesterday.

VOTE: Jason

[VP Baltar]

Also, Llamarble is so fucking scum it's not even funny. Most of his D1 iso is a hard fence sit on the lew wagon while employing "cheese stands alone" voting tactics. Then when lew's lynch is inevitable he suddenly finds him so town and complains of the hammer, as if it's the rest of the town's fault he didn't start participating until the 11th hour. Then he starts today with the 'poor me' act. Give me a break.

His reads aren't even consistent. For example, Vi goes from "towntown" in post 214 because he shares her reads throughout the early game, to not even making his deep reads before the end of the day. Today, Vi is "shades of grey," which I find funny and inexplicable given his other stances.

Then he proceeds to use 'grammar tells' to suss out my alignment while simultaneously using my reasons for calling lew scum yesterday as both a town and a scum tell.

Does not compute.

p.edit ---

Uh, where is the info on there being an SK? We know there's a third party. It's not at all the same thing. (Vi also made this mistake, but it was after yours so I think she subconsciously picked your mistake up, and also this was addressed in her and she used it as a towntell for Quilford, which isn't at all scummy.)

Get out of here with this bullshit. It's a natural assumption to think SK when you hear 3rd party. It could be incorrect, but how exactly does that make me scum? You're suggesting the scum would know a 3rd party is an SK from the start? Use some common sense. Also, nice excuse making when it comes to Vi. VP is the big bad wolf influencing people's thought processes.

You, on the other hand... That was a weird post already, as Vi noted. You have townreads on EVERYONE? I don't even know who your scumreads are, but you have "plenty," though apparently less than five.

How many scum do you think are in this game? Seems to me like I have much better chances hitting scum with a narrow field of strong reads than a broad spectrum of murky reads. Less than five suspects is more than enough. How many do you have, let me check...1...2...3 in your post. M'kay.

Your response to Llamarble's vote was really scummy. You didn't address the point at all. You implied that you had a viable reason to believe lewarcher was scum based on your role, but lewarcher wasn't scum. That doesn't make you insta-scum, but you avoiding the issue doesn't look so great.

What issue am I avoiding again? My response to his vote couldn't have been more town. He called bullshit 'grammar tells' which are not legitimate, and is essentially Mastin-level of scum hunting. Then he contradicts himself on his own point about my so called role info, which I readily point out. Seems like I addressed it pretty clear, so you better explain to me what I'm missing.

[Amrun]

1. No, I don't think scum would know that, but it's quite possible that an SK would know that. It's not a huge thing, but I wanted to mention it. If we had flips to indicate sk, there wouldn't be even this note.

2. The issue is not a narrow field of strong reads. Clearly I am going this route as well. The issue is that you addressed the rest of your reads as town reads, as opposed to null. It's strange.

3. Did you or did you note have a role contradiction that indicated lewarcher was scum?

[VP Baltar]

1. No, I don't think scum would know that, but it's quite possible that an SK would know that. It's not a huge thing, but I wanted to mention it. If we had flips to indicate sk, there wouldn't be even this note.

I would think you'd be checking out the people calling lewarcher SK yesterday before the census info first. But you do as you please.

2 - what's strange? I'm not afraid to take stances. If someone does something scummy, they can go from town to scum. I'm not worried about someone going 'zomg, what about that town read' because I can always explain when and where my reads change. It's called legit scumhunting. Also, I know lots of people here and I believe I can read their town/scum personas reasonably well.

3 - not really an area of discussion I'm getting into, but thanks for fishing. I had reasons for being on the lewarcher wagon that were legitimate. Stay tuned!

[Amrun]

1. I plan on it, but I haven't had time yet. The only one I recall off of the top of my head are xvart and Reck, out of which I don't think Reck would go there as an SK.

2. It's just strange to refer to people you haven't mentioned at all yet as townreads in that unspecific way. It stuck out to me.

3. I'm not asking for your role. I'm asking about what you did yesterday, which is already done. Had you simply said this to llamarble, I wouldn't have raised an eyebrow. Instead, you flailed and didn't mention it, just that his reasons were "crap." I haven't seen you flail before so it seemed weird.

[VP Baltar]

I didn't flail, and I explained clearly why his reasons are crap. I suggest you reread that section for greater clarity. I'll paraphrase what I said yesterday though: 'from what i know, lewarcher's role doesn't seem to jibe'

You can read into that however much or little you want. I dont' intend to expand upon it.

[Amrun]

Post 41 is where you address his reasons, and it doesn't actually do what you profess and reads as flailing to me.

In looking, I noticed something else interesting: you never give ANY REASON AT ALL for voting Quilford.

You give plenty of reasons for voting Jason, and yet never express a scumread on him.

[Debonair Danny DiPietro]

Starting from the top of the day, of the two names Sotty mentioned I think UT is the scummier of them because his play has been more “normal”. Normal/boring is scummier in my book than bad/weird.

What do you mean by "normal"? It seems to me that UT (at least yesterday) was giving people shit in a legitimate way. Where is your negativity toward him coming from?

Exactly, there was nothing technically wrong with UT's play but I will almost always find "nothing technically wrong with their play but can't remember anything they actually did" -> UT, KK, Ghostlin, Xvart more bothersome than odd or strange play.

unvote, vote:DDD

Your vote switch really just seems to come at Vi's behest. Since when are you so easily flapped?

You seem to be of the opinion that I really and truly thought KK was 100% scum and thus my vote switch was somehow a big revelation, what in my posts gave you that impression?

[Kublai Khan]

Why do I need to explain my fake governing? It's in essence just a reverse fake daykill. It probably would've worked better if lew had been active, but on the whole I think it was useful.

Useful for what? What info did you gleam from it?

[Sotty7]

To be fair, when I hear 3rd party I assume SK until proven otherwise. I wouldn't consider that any kind of point.

[Amrun]

I'm still waiting for an explanation of your Quilford and Jason reads, VP.

[VP Baltar]

You seem to be of the opinion that I really and truly thought KK was 100% scum and thus my vote switch was somehow a big revelation, what in my posts gave you that impression?

Well, it's not really that, I just expect you to be serious about your votes and it seemed to me like you moved rather easily for no reason other than a poke in the ribs. Listen, I'm going to be straight with you, I really want you to prove your towniness to me so we can just wreck some fools like in WWF. Unlike Vi or Sotty, I feel like you and I are able to lock in on each other's townieness without a doubt. That's something I want to be able to do and let the scum kill us off if they like. I can't have this middling read of you for the rest of the game.

Post 41 is where you address his reasons, and it doesn't actually do what you profess and reads as flailing to me.

did you even read those quotes from llama I posted? They are completely contradictory. Do I really need to explain them word for word so it is clearer? To me, it couldn't be any more contradictory.

I also explained why 'grammar tells' are bullshit. A simple glance at any town game from me will show my verbosity. I'm sure you can find the word honestly in a town game as well. It's a completely ridiculous argument from him. I don't see what was unclear, unexplained or flailing about anything I said actually.

In terms of Quilford, you're right I didn't open the day with a big case. I wanted to see his reaction, but I never really got around to it because llama out scummed him first. My reasons for voting quilford were as follows: 1) his bullshit read on Sotty remains bullshit! 2) He was completely listless yesterday. He joined the lewarcher lynch, talked about it for awhile, then inexplicably decides he's uneasy with it. 3) he never voted again for the rest of the day 4) He's been on the sidelines all game and continues to do so.

I'm still waiting for an explanation of your Quilford and Jason reads, VP.

Yeah, I'm typing them. I'll try to be quicker next time your highness.

[VP Baltar]

Amrun, chainsawing for llamarble since 2011. Trademark.

[Amrun]

You said one thing about grammar tells, but MOST OF what llamarble has to say has NOTHING to do with that. I don't give a shit about that argument either way, really. It's a dumb tell, and it's fine to call him out on it, but you equating his entire case with one bad tell and using it to discredit everything without addressing everything makes me really uncomfortable.

And I wasn't trying to imply you'd waited too long, since you hadn't, but I realized that I didn't phrase my previous post as a question so I wanted to clarify.

You still managed to dodge the Jason question, though.

Do you seriously think Quilford is scum, still?

p-edit: Mudslinging. Nice.

[Amrun]

You do realize you spent most of the day pushing town while I was trying to lynch llamarble instead?

I've never seen you play throwing around incorrect accusations so cavalierly. It still gives me a feeling of flail.

[VP Baltar]

You said one thing about grammar tells, but MOST OF what llamarble has to say has NOTHING to do with that. I don't give a shit about that argument either way, really. It's a dumb tell, and it's fine to call him out on it, but you equating his entire case with one bad tell and using it to discredit everything without addressing everything makes me really uncomfortable.

Do I need to act like Fate so you actually read stuff. Llama made two points. 1) grammar tells 2) my reason for doubting lewarcher's claim. I've thoroughly discussed both of those, both in my direct address to him and to you. What exactly are you missing? EVERYTHING HAS BEEN ADDRESSED MULTIPLE TIMES.

You still managed to dodge the Jason question, though.

Again, coming to it, but etc. I never stated 'plenty of reasons for voting Jason', as you put it. I stated things throughout the game that bugged me about what he said, but he's never been that strong of a scum read for me. You're suggesting I should be voting a mediocre read over a strong scum read because that would be more in accordance with Amrun's worldview? No thanks.

Do you seriously think Quilford is scum, still?

Where did I say that? I think he has scummy actions in spades. That is tempered by the census taker info. I'm still digesting that. He's not my top lynch choice for today by any means though.

p-edit: Mudslinging. Nice.

It's not mudslinging if it's true. Keep white knighting for llama without substance and I'll keep calling you on it. AtE. nice.

p. edit - ok. You see it as flailing, as you've repeated ad nauseum. I think we all get that. Of course, you can't actually explain that given that I just shot your point full of holes and pointed out how I explained everything and why his points are bunk, but please continue.

Let me ask you this, if llamarble was so much scum yesterday, why are you defending his shit posting so fiercely right now? Don't say you're not, because you've railed for almost a page now about how good his scum hunting of me was. Why defend someone you think has a good chance of being scum?

[Amrun]

I'm not defending him

at all

. I think his case on you was pretty poorly presented, except for one point, which is the manner in which you pushed lewarcher yesterday. That doesn't change the fact that I think you have a good chance of being scum, despite the fact that one person's case may not be great. Mostly due to general vibe and eventual providing of content (and also his turnaround on DDD, which seemed genuine), my scumread on him has turned to a minor townread. Nothing worth defending, though I have and will always defend townreads to the death if they are strong enough. Even if I was defending Llamarble, this wouldn't be chainsaw by any stretch of the imagination.

You can say you addressed the points all you want, and you have, EVENTUALLY, but you didn't address the point I cared about initially and the way you addressed everything just comes off so strangely to me, as opposed to how I normally see you, which is very well reasoned and calm.

And my point was you stated lots of reasons that Jason is scummy, but zero reasons that Quilford was scummy, and yet you voted for Quilford. More importantly, you never said "Jason is a minor scumread." You never gave any read on him

at all

until now.

The main thing that's bothering me about you this game is that I don't get the same sense that you're looking for intent that I usually do when you're town. For example, you've grossly misinterpreted my posts recently. Is that just because you're wrong and being less careful than usual, or because you're scum? The simpler explanation for the aberration is that you're scum.

[VP Baltar]

My points to llama could not have been more clear in my iso 41. I'm sorry you were unable to interpret them until I wrote it out in big letters for you.

I haven't misinterpreted a single one of your posts. You are defending llama's case, and quite poorly I must say. You pretending like you're not doing that doesn't make it so. Whether you want to admit it or not, you've taken up his cause. Don't blame me if I make that link. If Llama flips scum, don't be pissed at me you chainsawed for him. At least have the moxy to admit when you're defending him.

In terms of Quilford v. Jason, I reveal my feelings and votes as I see fit and necessary. That's not really your call to make.

[zoraster]

Spoiler: Watch Out!

Day 2

Amrun ( 0 )

[/color]

(L - 8 )

Cogito Ergo Sum ( 0 )

[/color]

(L - 8 )

Debonair Danny DiPietro ( 1 )

VP Baltar,

[/color]

(L - 7 )

Ghostlin ( 2 )

Quilford,

Kublai Khan,

[/color]

(L - 6 )

glowball ( 0 )

[/color]

(L - 8 )

JasonT1981 ( 3 )

glowball,

Debonair Danny DiPietro,

Amrun,

[/color]

(L - 5 )

Kublai Khan ( 0 )

[/color]

(L - 8 )

Llamarble ( 2 )

JasonT1981,

Ghostlin,

[/color]

(L - 6 )

Quilford ( 0 )

[/color]

(L - 8 )

Sotty7 ( 0 )

[/color]

(L - 8 )

Untrod Tripod ( 0 )

[/color]

(L - 8 )

Vi ( 0 )

[/color]

(L - 8 )

VP Baltar ( 4 )

Llamarble,

Vi,

Cogito Ergo Sum,

Sotty7,

[/color]

(L - 4 )

xvart ( 0 )

[/color]

(L - 8 )

No Lynch ( 0 )

Not Voting ( 3 )

Untrod Tripod, Roxi, xvart,

Total Votes ( 15 )

Needed to Lynch [ 8 ]

Deadline: Nov. 28th at 20:00 EST

[Amrun]

But I'm not defending him, or his case. I'm examining your reaction to it. They're entirely different things, and you not bothering to care puts me off.

Of course it's not my call what you do, but it's certainly my duty to question you on it. You know what scumhunting is.

Why so confrontational?

[VP Baltar]

That's how I roll. I'm not in a particularly good mood already today, and you repeating the same lame duck arguments back at me after I've said how the points were explained in the original post to llama is quite grating. I don't have a high tolerance for people who clearly ignore evidence in thread to make their point. It's not scumhunting, it's an empty routine that looks like busy work to me. You don't like me so much, you should probably move your vote to me and stop making a song and dance about the lead up to it.

[glowball]

glowball has a point that the VP wagon did spring up a little quickly. That doesn't necessarily mean something, but I'd still like to see more counterwagoning today than happened yesterday.

VOTE: Jason

Glow's point had nothing to do with the VP wagon, I was talking about the Llamarble wagon.

[Vi]

Starting from the top of the day, of the two names Sotty mentioned I think UT is the scummier of them because his play has been more “normal”. Normal/boring is scummier in my book than bad/weird.

I've seen UT's scumplay. What he has done ITT doesn't look like it.

I didn't realize I was your waiter just here to take your orders. Will there be anything else, ma'am? (Show me why that's the case, don't just tell me that it is)

Reference
Summary: UT basically hung out and said "I'm really not sure what to do or why I'm here, so give me a while and I might figure it out sometime".

Also, what VP Baltar said.

Also, if this place sells peach shakes, I'll have a medium.

Jason trying to make connections without flips is horrible play; even worse it seems like those are the reasons he’s voting for llamamarble.

But is he scum?

Bad votes himself onto the biggest, easiest wagon, seems likely.

UNVOTE:
VOTE: JasonT1981

Quilford stuff.

Look I agree it would be unorthodox play and if you're asking me if Quilford would be clever enough to set it up as a fake claim then I'd say no but that doesn't mean there's not someone on his team who didn't see the possibility and handed it off to him. In fact, four of the players in this game just played in a game where there was a modifided census taker (and I designed and ran the game) so despite VPB saying he hadn't seen a census taker before he just saw the results of one last game even as it got lost in your post restriction.

Nyew. I completely forgot about it, and was flashing back to Mind Screw V instead, where the Census Taker basically kept tabs on the size of the Cult. (The Census Taker was Town in that game.)

Amrun, could you shift your attention toward DDD for me? He owes me some Town reads besides.

---

Unlike Vi or Sotty, I feel like you and I are able to lock in on each other's townieness without a doubt.

Now I feel bad for that one time in that one game. F&E.

[Amrun]

That's not your call.

p-edit: Oh well. The point is, I'd still rather have dueling wagons on people whom I suspect. That's the optimal situation for any day.

p-edit 2: Can't you shift your attention to DDD yourself? I've said all I feel like saying about DDD at the moment. He's playing a bit milquetoast.

[VP Baltar]

Now I feel bad for that one time in that one game. F&E.

I wouldn't really say it's your or Sotty's fault alone. I just feel like there is this skeptical measure that always hangs in the air when I play with you guys. I don't get that with DDD. I wish it wasn't the case, trust me.

Also, I know it's a lot to ask, but sift through that Amrun stuff and read what I said about Llama and his inconsistent reads and victim playing today. I really do think he's scum here. Don't let the wordiness of that argument distract from truth about llama embedded in there.