Open 420: Medical Mafia - That's all, folks!

[Venmar]

@FuDuzn - Do you think Time Traveller is scum because of possible tunneling on Zach? Tunneling isn't a scum tell on its own in my opinion. That said, any other reason he could be scum?

[FuDuzn]

I don't really know, like you said tunneling in itself isn't really a scum tell. This is why I am trying to gather what his real intent is in tunneling Zach.

I am afraid it is an interesting dynamic that we will probably just have to come back to at some point once we have some more info.

[Jackal711]

I'm here, just nothing to say..

[RachMarie]

V/LA (More LA than V) til July 21 but I will post as much as I can. I should have done this sooner with all that is going on.

[Time Traveling Scumhunter]

To: Weekend Warriors of the Future
From: TTHS

Re: Robo skims and spouts off

Starting here, I don't scumhunt this way, so your entire analysis in this regard is faulty. I indiscriminately hunt for scummy play, I don't take into account whether the person committing the actions is an "easy target."

Also going to note that attacking someone for going after an "easy target" is lazy play. It's a very easy thing to attack. (For example, I could villify everyone on the Rach wagon as going after an easy target since her wagon has formed while she's apparently had real life issues if I completely ignore that her play has actually been scummy and that the wagon is warranted.

I don't see how your scumhunting differently in any way changes the fact that your attempt to equate my saying "scummy vote" to jackal and your vote on him earlier in the game are the same thing. Your attempt to cast it as something else is pretty damning.

Oh, and very "clever" to try the old "I am rubber you are glue" attack: You're scummy because you made an easy attack on me for making an easy attack on Jackal.

To give you a visual representation:



More seriously, if I wanted to go after someone easy, you aren't likely the one I would have targeted. I'm an unknown here. People aren't just going to take it off faith I know what I'm talking about, so going after you was always going to be an uphill battle. But given the fact I'm reasonably sure you're scum, it's the good fight.

Are you assuming Jackal is a bad lynch? How would you know that exactly? Also how can you possibly know I'll avoid responsibility for a lynch I am on? This is magical knowledge of the future you are ninjaing into the discussion where you hope to lynch me on hypothetical arguments regardless of whether they actually prove true.

I am not assuming anything. But I AM saying that in the case where you want to pursue an easy lynch to get through the day without taking any responsibility for the lynch if it goes bad IS scummy. Which is what you do when you say that your vote is simply something to "advance the game."

@ TTSH: You are just twisting Zach's words to make it seem like he has done something scummy. He is right, you have clearly tunneled only Zach this whole game and have not provided any useful information whatsoever.

Am I? Or is this an instance where you gave a very cursory skim to the exchange we've had and have concluded it?

And what "useful" information should I have been providing that I have not? I have a blinking red light of a scum read on Zach, and until someone comes up with something better, I will continue to try and show everyone else just why Zach has been scummy. His initial passive-but-I-look-like-I'm-aggressive play followed by his enraged response to me is what I'm talking about.

Hugs and Kisses,
Time Traveling Scumhunter

[Jackal711]

^ Ok that's enough for me.

VOTE: Time Traveling Scumhunter

[Robocopter87]

To: Weekend Warriors of the Future
From: TTHS

Re: Robo skims and spouts off

Starting here, I don't scumhunt this way, so your entire analysis in this regard is faulty. I indiscriminately hunt for scummy play, I don't take into account whether the person committing the actions is an "easy target."

Also going to note that attacking someone for going after an "easy target" is lazy play. It's a very easy thing to attack. (For example, I could villify everyone on the Rach wagon as going after an easy target since her wagon has formed while she's apparently had real life issues if I completely ignore that her play has actually been scummy and that the wagon is warranted.

I don't see how your scumhunting differently in any way changes the fact that your attempt to equate my saying "scummy vote" to jackal and your vote on him earlier in the game are the same thing. Your attempt to cast it as something else is pretty damning.

Oh, and very "clever" to try the old "I am rubber you are glue" attack: You're scummy because you made an easy attack on me for making an easy attack on Jackal.

To give you a visual representation:



More seriously, if I wanted to go after someone easy, you aren't likely the one I would have targeted. I'm an unknown here. People aren't just going to take it off faith I know what I'm talking about, so going after you was always going to be an uphill battle. But given the fact I'm reasonably sure you're scum, it's the good fight.

Are you assuming Jackal is a bad lynch? How would you know that exactly? Also how can you possibly know I'll avoid responsibility for a lynch I am on? This is magical knowledge of the future you are ninjaing into the discussion where you hope to lynch me on hypothetical arguments regardless of whether they actually prove true.

I am not assuming anything. But I AM saying that in the case where you want to pursue an easy lynch to get through the day without taking any responsibility for the lynch if it goes bad IS scummy. Which is what you do when you say that your vote is simply something to "advance the game."

@ TTSH: You are just twisting Zach's words to make it seem like he has done something scummy. He is right, you have clearly tunneled only Zach this whole game and have not provided any useful information whatsoever.

Am I? Or is this an instance where you gave a very cursory skim to the exchange we've had and have concluded it?

And what "useful" information should I have been providing that I have not? I have a blinking red light of a scum read on Zach, and until someone comes up with something better, I will continue to try and show everyone else just why Zach has been scummy. His initial passive-but-I-look-like-I'm-aggressive play followed by his enraged response to me is what I'm talking about.

Hugs and Kisses,
Time Traveling Scumhunter

You saying things like, "Robo skims and spouts off". Doesn't provide anything to your case. I have read the thread and find your argument to be fail, saying I spouted off doesn't make me wrong, it just makes you look ignorant.

Where is this list of easy lynches coming from? Who made the list of "easy to get a lynch"? You saying that nobody understands you is creating a scenario where you are a victim.

You are twisting his words. I read the thread. Stop saying I haven't. I read your argument and it sucks. I explained why, you saying that I didn't read is not a valid response.

What useful information? You haven't said a word about anybody besides Zach. You haven't given reads, possible partners, insight upon other people's cases. You aren't contributing besides these cases on Zach being scum.

[Mortontfrh]

Can we get a replacement for FightingShadow please?

@Jackal - Can you explain why you tried to self-meta yourself at a point in the game where you were under no pressure at all? And what was scummy enough about that post that warranted voting?

V/LA (More LA than V) til July 21 but I will post as much as I can. I should have done this sooner with all that is going on.

2 week V/LA.../sigh

[izakthegoomba]

Now seeking a replacement for FightingShadow.

Votecount 1.06

Time Traveling Scumhunter (3) - FightingShadow, Zachrulez, Jackal711
RachMarie (2) - Mortontfrh, Venmar
Robocopter87 (1) - RachMarie
Zachrulez (1) - Time Traveling Scumhunter
Jackal711 (1) - FuDuzn
FuDuzn (0) -

none

Mortontfrh (0) -

none

FightingShadow (0) -

none

Venmar (0) -

none

No Lynch (0) -

none

Not voting (1) - Robocopter87

With 9 alive, it takes 5 to lynch.

RachMarie is V/LA until 21st July

The deadline is in (expired on 2012-07-19 04:21:01).

[Venmar]

I find Timetravellers tunneling of Zach very weird. I usually don't find tunneling a scum tell, most of the time just a null tell because both town and scum can use it effectively, but TimeTraveller is hardcore tunneling that it is becoming concerning. He has only really been addressing one person the whole game without really pointing out anything else, like Robocopter nicely explained in his last post. Another to note that TTS's tunneling isn't filled with sound evidence, and rather someone who wants to look extra townie by going against the grain and attacking one of the less scummier players in the game, Zach. Twisting people's words does not equal a case.

I still need to reread the thread a bit before i change my vote or anything. Probably going to vote TTS though.

[RachMarie]

correct the V/LA I meant to July 14th because I wont be home 2 nights next week.

[izakthegoomba]

yellowbounder replaces FightingShadow

[yellowbounder]

Can we get a replacement for FightingShadow please?

Hi.

Okay, before I say anything, just to check, tunneling is like "tunnel vision" and only focusing your attention on a specific player, right?

[Venmar]

Can we get a replacement for FightingShadow please?

Hi.

Okay, before I say anything, just to check, tunneling is like "tunnel vision" and only focusing your attention on a specific player, right?

- Tunneling and Tunnel Vision are the same thing i believe, so yes.

[Zachrulez]

I bought a new computer this weekend and have been sidetracked with setting it up. With that in mind I'm going to

V/LA until Monday Morning.

[yellowbounder]

I think I feel comfortable with my vote staying on Time Travelling Scumhunter for now.

@TTS, if you couldn't lynch Zachrulez today, who would you lynch?

[Mortontfrh]

Outside of tunneling, can someone explain to me what's scummy about any of TTS' posts? Because i'm not seeing a damn thing wrong with any of them.

[RachMarie]

Says a major tunneler

Tunneling by itself is not always a scum tell, however several people have asked TTS for reads on OTHER players besides just Zach. So far he has not complied, not even shown interest in anyone other than Zach. This could be a scum ploy to appear to be scum hunting when not.

To make it clearer:

@TTS What is your reads and thoughts on the players who are NOT Zach ?

To help get a response....

VOTE: TTS

[Mortontfrh]

I'll take an explanation from anyone but Rach until she actually starts answering my posts. Thanks.

First things first, let's talk about this whole tunneling situation. Obviously I disagree that i'm tunneling, but the more important question is - Why the fuck does it even matter? Is tunneling scummy? Does it invalidate anything that i've said? If not, why did you even bring it up Rach? Why do you insist on attempting to debunk my character rather than my case. You say i'm tunneling, and maybe I am - But you're refusing to actually address issues that i've brought up in your play. You still haven't addressed the later part of Post #117 as well as Venmar's objection in the subsequent post as well.

[Mortontfrh]

ITT:

Rach selectively scum hunts.

Rach gives awful justification for selectively scum hunting but never actually follows through on that justification.

Rach commments on people sheeping onto wagons and later sheeps a L-1 vote onto TTS.

Rach provides misinformation and refuses to explain why, even if that information was true, is even relevant to the game.

Rach says that Venmar and Jackal are the scummiest and then sheeps a vote onto TTS

Rach puts someone at L-1 without commenting on it being an L-1.

Can someone explain to me for the love of fucking god how TTS is at L-1 for "tunneling" when Rach has literally dropped MULTIPLE scum tells and is only sitting on two votes?

[yellowbounder]

Huh, TTS is at L-1. That slipped by me. Of course, we'll have to wait 24 hours before we get any reactions.

ITT:

Rach selectively scum hunts.

Rach gives awful justification for selectively scum hunting but never actually follows through on that justification.

Rach commments on people sheeping onto wagons and later sheeps a L-1 vote onto TTS.

Rach provides misinformation and refuses to explain why, even if that information was true, is even relevant to the game.

Rach says that Venmar and Jackal are the scummiest and then sheeps a vote onto TTS

Rach puts someone at L-1 without commenting on it being an L-1.

Can someone explain to me for the love of fucking god how TTS is at L-1 for "tunneling" when Rach has literally dropped MULTIPLE scum tells and is only sitting on two votes?

I'll certainly say that putting someone on L-1 without much fanfare is not very pro-town. At all.

@Rach, you think TTS should be today's lynch? That's what you're implying.

[RachMarie]

Wait I am confused I thought Jackal was voting for me?

@ mod could you double check the vote count?

[Mortontfrh]

First things first, let's talk about this whole tunneling situation. Obviously I disagree that i'm tunneling, but the more important question is - Why the fuck does it even matter? Is tunneling scummy? Does it invalidate anything that i've said? If not, why did you even bring it up Rach? Why do you insist on attempting to debunk my character rather than my case. You say i'm tunneling, and maybe I am - But you're refusing to actually address issues that i've brought up in your play. You still haven't addressed the later part of Post #117 as well as Venmar's objection in the subsequent post as well.

[izakthegoomba]

Jackal711 voted for Time Traveling Scumhunter in this post.

Votecount 1.06

Time Traveling Scumhunter (4) - yellowbounder, Zachrulez, Jackal711, RachMarie
RachMarie (2) - Mortontfrh, Venmar
Zachrulez (1) - Time Traveling Scumhunter
Jackal711 (1) - FuDuzn
Robocopter87 (0) -

none

FuDuzn (0) -

none

Mortontfrh (0) -

none

yellowbounder (0) -

none

Venmar (0) -

none

No Lynch (0) -

none

Not voting (1) - Robocopter87

With 9 alive, it takes 5 to lynch.

RachMarie is V/LA until 21st July

The deadline is in (expired on 2012-07-19 04:21:01).

[RachMarie]

@ Mort I am leaving in less than 4 hrs to take 2 buses and go to the first of two nights (the other one is Thursday night) for a sleep study to see if I have sleep apnea. I will not have any computer access while I am gone save for messages on FB because my cell phone is not a smart phone and has very limited access to the internet.

I will address your questions tomorrow.

Pedit thanks mod