Mini 1572 - The Network [Game Over]

[Porkens]

StrangerCoug, I need someone to talk to in this game, about this game. Where are you on the player list?

1. RedCoyote - A little too actiondan and sure of sns being town (I believe sns is town, but Red seems a little to sure of it). THAT BEING SAID; the most protown in the game.
3. idk - Don't like it; posting to post no content.
4. Paschendale - Sounds fake, attacking me on silly grounds, no spearheading or theories
5. Aegor - town I think,
6. SiX - terrible, replacing out but still a terrible slot. Wishywashy until called on it, then one halfway decent post then poof.
7. cxinlee - ignores the game, I've seen this before as town, doesn't buy him any credit, must go soon.
9. snscompt1 - town I say
11. StrangerCoug - I want to connect, Iget cautiously fuzzy feelings, may just be avatar based
12. Saki

tman2nd

- sniping, not moving the gamestate, could see scum
13. Snarky - I lean town

Players Removed (2/13):

2. Nobody Special,

Vanilla Town

, lynched Day 1.
10. beastcharizard,

Vanilla Town

, corrupted Day 2.

~Fixing tags.

[StrangerCoug]

What specifically do you want to talk about?

[Paschendale]

So Porkens, your only scumread is the guy attacking you? Yeah, that'll really help you find scum.

[Aegor]

EXPLAIN PASCH SCUM TO ME USING ACTUAL QUOTES/REFERENCES TO POSTS PLEASE.

Please.

[kunkstar7]

:: VoteCount 2x1 ::

Paschendale (2)

-

Porkens, snscompt1

StrangerCoug (1)

-

Snarky

cxinlee (1)

-

StrangerCoug

Not Voting (7)

-

cxinlee, SiX, Saki, RedCoyote, Paschendale, Aegor, idk

With 11 alive, it takes 6 to lynch.

Deadline for Day Two is in (expired on 2014-05-31 02:36:19).

[Porkens]

Aegor: If you ain't feeling it you ain't feeling it.

Pasch: the fuck are you talking about?

Coug: what are your reads what do you think of mine I'm starting to think this was a mistake.

Red: help? I'm about to lose interest in this game completely.

[Snarky]

I think Pasch is scum because of the mutual defensive interaction between him and Coug. yet all this depends on Coug being scum, that's why I want Coug dead first.

Also, he's the only one that I think could have killed beast if the beast kill was a mafia kill. Red and CX are most probably town because of the townslip thing.

Aegor: Here's the posts that make me feel that way:

I could support an NS vote. Their analysis and scumhunting have been sparse, and I don't like the Coug vote with no explanation at all.

VOTE: Nobody Special

As I said earlier, this is an inconsistency, since the NS wagon was not better explained than the Coug one, and if he had original reasons to vote NS,he should have mentionned them before being asked to mention them. Town motivation: Can't see. Scum motivation: If Coug is scum, to support a townie wagon while destroying the wagon on his buddy.

You know what, I'll make that goddamn case.

I'm glad you did. It's not bad. I don't agree with very much of it, but it's well thought out and it's good content.

That's just a bizarre thing to say. He thinks my case is well thought-out and good content but he doesn't agree with it... It would have been town-motivated if he mentionned what he didn't agree with, why the things I mentionned in my case are not scummy. If you don't believe in a case, it's because you see holes in the logic, or you see overexageration, or other sophisms. You cannot say it's well thought out and good content at the same time. Feels like he's buddying with me without supporting the wagon on his buddy.

And Coug in 411 that removes Pasch from his suspects without reasoning.

Also, Coug's 404 is so screaming scum it hurts. I could make an entire case on this post alone. Why is the Coug wagon dead again?

Pasch: What makes you think Coug is town?

[Snarky]

StangerCoug: In this post:

RedCoyote, Paschendale, and cxinlee were connected to beastcharizard. I'm currently thinking RedCoyote, but I do not consider cxinlee out of the running, so let me look at both of them. I don't think Paschendale killed beast, nor can I come up with a reason why I'd want to.

Does the "nor can I come up with a reason why I'd want to" means "I can't come with a reason why I'd want to think Pasch killed Beast", or does it mean "I can't come with a reason why I'd want to kill Beast"?

[Paschendale]

As I said earlier, this is an inconsistency, since the NS wagon was not better explained than the Coug one, and if he had original reasons to vote NS,he should have mentionned them before being asked to mention them. Town motivation: Can't see. Scum motivation: If Coug is scum, to support a townie wagon while destroying the wagon on his buddy.

That's not inconsistency. That's just your wrong opinion. The Coug wagon is crap. Your reasons for liking it are crap. It's not compelling. I'm not convinced. Do you usually just scumread everyone who doesn't agree with you? I bet you don't win very often.

That's just a bizarre thing to say. He thinks my case is well thought-out and good content but he doesn't agree with it... It would have been town-motivated if he mentionned what he didn't agree with, why the things I mentionned in my case are not scummy. If you don't believe in a case, it's because you see holes in the logic, or you see overexageration, or other sophisms. You cannot say it's well thought out and good content at the same time. Feels like he's buddying with me without supporting the wagon on his buddy.

I'm not buddying you. Your play so far in this game is completely useless. But your case looks genuine at least. It doesn't read like scum trying to push a mislynch. It doesn't look like a lie. So it's good at you at least look like town. So does Coug. He's not lying either.

StangerCoug: In this post:
Does the "nor can I come up with a reason why I'd want to" means "I can't come with a reason why I'd want to think Pasch killed Beast", or does it mean "I can't come with a reason why I'd want to kill Beast"?

Here's an example of your play just being bad. Not scummy, just bad. Read the next post.

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

Let's talk about Porkens for a moment. Look at his reads list. He makes excuses for everyone he doesn't call town except me. He "could" see Saki as scum, he makes allowences for the Six slot until the replacement makes a splash. Maybe IDK doesn't get the backdoor excuse, but "I don't like it" isn't a particularly strong condemnation anyway.

These are not the reads of someone trying to find scum. These are the reads of something trying to look town by supporting the more agreed-upon town players, giving himself wiggle room on his scumreads, and choosing targets based on how to defend himself. He even gives wiggle room on Coug in case the wagon takes off, so he can join it or oppose it without being called out for inconsistency later.

And then he won't even defend his scumread on me.

And what did he even do on day 1? He wagon-hopped without anything more than token support for them, repeating the sentiments of others. Most of his votes are over setup speculation, mainly complaining about it. Six is one of the sole exceptions, and that was a pretty safe wagon to join.

Porkens is scum looking for an opportunity. He's not scumhunting, he's not taking any risks.

[Porkens]

unvote

Pasch, besides me, who are your scum reads?

[Paschendale]

Six and CX, at the moment. I don't like sns' vote on me, but that's a black mark against a mainly townread. Your unvote doesn't change my read on you.

[StrangerCoug]

Coug: what are your reads what do you think of mine I'm starting to think this was a mistake.

Switch Paschendale and Snarky and you'll get my reads. Yours are mostly good.

And Coug in 411 that removes Pasch from his suspects without reasoning.

I never found Paschendale suspicious, and I ruled him out of who I think could have killed beastcharizard on those grounds. It'd help your image in my eyes if you get my reads right.

Also, Coug's 404 is so screaming scum it hurts. I could make an entire case on this post alone.

Bring it.

StangerCoug: In this post:

RedCoyote, Paschendale, and cxinlee were connected to beastcharizard. I'm currently thinking RedCoyote, but I do not consider cxinlee out of the running, so let me look at both of them. I don't think Paschendale killed beast, nor can I come up with a reason why I'd want to.

Does the "nor can I come up with a reason why I'd want to" means "I can't come with a reason why I'd want to think Pasch killed Beast", or does it mean "I can't come with a reason why I'd want to kill Beast"?

Are you illiterate? I corrected myself in the next post.

[Porkens]

Six and CX, at the moment. I don't like sns' vote on me, but that's a black mark against a mainly townread. Your unvote doesn't change my read on you.

I don't expect it to.

So between Six and CX, I know we have seen less from CXinlee, but I still think Six was full of crap early day 1. Would you be willing to lynch Six before his replacement or are you in love with waiting?

[Porkens]

And also Pasch how do you feel about Snarky?

[Snarky]

Pasch: You have not answered my question. If you feel my case on Coug is so bad you feel the need to insult my play for it, then you must have good reasons why you think so. So, what in my case on Coug is bad, and why do you think it's unconvincing. Or why do you think Coug is town, you seem pretty sure he is. I'm open minded to people with arguments.

And you got the inconsistency wrong. No matter who I was voting, Coug or not, you attacked me for not explaining my vote while at the same time jumping on a wagon without explaining it yourself. It is inconsistent.

Oh and your use of sophisms to discredit my case on you and Coug is noted. The fact that I made a mistake in my last post is in no way relevant to the validity of my cases.

[Snarky]

StrangerCoug: Hey, how can I know what are your reads if you never mention them. You NEVER suspected RedCoyote yesterday, and you NEVER even mentionned Cxinlee.

[StrangerCoug]

StrangerCoug: Hey, how can I know what are your reads if you never mention them. You NEVER suspected RedCoyote yesterday, and you NEVER even mentionned Cxinlee.

How are either of those relevant to today? RedCoyote's down a couple slots in my town list from yesterday, but the evidence against him is just too damn circumstantial to push a case. cxinlee's a POE based on my thinking that Pasch is town.

[Snarky]

^^Fine. Now you asked for my case on your 404, here it is.

In post 399, RedCoyote wrote:
SC, are you going to address Snarky's case? I'm anxious to see your response.

What, exactly, is he accusing me of that's really that scummy? Except for the real lack of faith in the beastcharizard vote, which I concede, it's largely a load of crap. In more detail:

So you concede you had no faith in your vote on Beast. So what was the town motivation behind pushing him for so long? To avoid scumhuntng by theory discussion?

Inability to get reads? Understandable, but not damning. If I am scum, I know who's on my side and who isn't. Coming up with somebody good to lynch shouldn't be that hard, and there were several good candidates out there.

When you are scum, knowing who is scum makes it pretty hard to get scummy vibes from players you know are town. Now you can say every scumtell is not damning by itself. That's not a defense, that's fluff.

My Nobody Special vote? For it to be logically scummy, he has to argue that beastcharizard's case is scummy since I was sheeping him, and his case on me is the ONLY time he makes a negative remark about beast's play. So no.

Oh really? Beast unvoted right after, you stayed on NS for the rest of the day only because of that misrep.

Saying "I don't do meta"? Fat chance in hell that's scummy. Meta is easy to manipulate over time. Therefore, Snarky was effectively demanding that I help him waste his time.

VOTE: Snarky

Wow, meta is easy to manipulate. EVERYTHING everyone says is easy to manipulate, so if I don't want to be manipulated, I should just stop playing this game.

So, while reading this, I have the impression that you vote me only because you don't agree with my case on you (duh! I didn't expect you would), and because I asked for meta. So, what is scummy in these two actions? How is such a weak case supposed to be compelling enough for you to vote me? Speak the truth now. You don't believe in that vote more than you believed in your vote on Beast, do you? If you do believe in that vote more, then you better give better reasons.

[Paschendale]

Six and CX, at the moment. I don't like sns' vote on me, but that's a black mark against a mainly townread. Your unvote doesn't change my read on you.

I don't expect it to.

So between Six and CX, I know we have seen less from CXinlee, but I still think Six was full of crap early day 1. Would you be willing to lynch Six before his replacement or are you in love with waiting?

I wanted to lynch Six yesterday. I'd happily still lynch that slot. I don't think that Six didn't participate enough for us to get reads. But right now I want to lynch you.

And also Pasch how do you feel about Snarky?

I think he's town, but he's trying to hard to proclaim that his original case was good (please note that there are no other votes on Coug so I am clearly not alone thinking that his case is not compelling) that he's not bothering to examine other avenues or actually convince anyone of his position. It's a pretty detrimental thing to do and success sometimes means swallowing one's ego. He's trying too hard to be smart and not playing to his audience.

[Snarky]

At the beginning of Day 2, there has been 5 votes in a row piling up on StrangerCoug. The daykill disturbed everything, and I don't why everyone changed their opinion so radically. but yeah, it has been convincing enough for this to happen. You still have not answered my question.

[Paschendale]

Your "question" is for me to make your case for you. The assertions you're making don't square with the facts. This isn't a matter of technical flaws, the things you're seeing simply aren't there when other people look at the facts. It's like asking me what's wrong with your tuna casserole when you've put a hamburger in front of me.

[Snarky]

Any example of these assertions not squaring with the facts? That's exactly my question, that you still have not answered. I want examples, not generalities.

[Aegor]

As I said earlier, this is an inconsistency, since the NS wagon was not better explained than the Coug one, and if he had original reasons to vote NS,he should have mentionned them before being asked to mention them. Town motivation: Can't see. Scum motivation: If Coug is scum, to support a townie wagon while destroying the wagon on his buddy.

There is no inconsistency. Pasch did not vote NS because the SC wagon was well-explained or better-explained; he voted NS for lack of scumhunting and for an unexplained vote on SC. It is right there in the post. Those are his reasons.

And then he won't even defend his scumread on me.

unvote

The following is my current lynchpool:

{Porkens, cxinlee, SC}

[Aegor]

VOTE: cxinlee

[StrangerCoug]

In post 399, RedCoyote wrote:
SC, are you going to address Snarky's case? I'm anxious to see your response.

What, exactly, is he accusing me of that's really that scummy? Except for the real lack of faith in the beastcharizard vote, which I concede, it's largely a load of crap. In more detail:

So you concede you had no faith in your vote on Beast. So what was the town motivation behind pushing him for so long? To avoid scumhuntng by theory discussion?

I thought that was exactly what he was doing.

Inability to get reads? Understandable, but not damning. If I am scum, I know who's on my side and who isn't. Coming up with somebody good to lynch shouldn't be that hard, and there were several good candidates out there.

When you are scum, knowing who is scum makes it pretty hard to get scummy vibes from players you know are town. Now you can say every scumtell is not damning by itself.

How the hell does it follow that I can call every scumtell "not damning by itself"? The only other thing that can be argued as something I ever said was "not damning by itself" is RedCoyote's interactions with Nobody Special and beastcharizard, and you have not questioned my not pushing RedCoyote for that reason.

My Nobody Special vote? For it to be logically scummy, he has to argue that beastcharizard's case is scummy since I was sheeping him, and his case on me is the ONLY time he makes a negative remark about beast's play. So no.

Oh really? Beast unvoted right after, you stayed on NS for the rest of the day only because of that misrep.

You never accused beast of misrep until you started arguing this case. beast's later unvote does not invalidate my counterattack. You can't pull a sudden 180 on me like that.

Saying "I don't do meta"? Fat chance in hell that's scummy. Meta is easy to manipulate over time. Therefore, Snarky was effectively demanding that I help him waste his time.

VOTE: Snarky

Wow, meta is easy to manipulate. EVERYTHING everyone says is easy to manipulate, so if I don't want to be manipulated, I should just stop playing this game.

You are taking this to an unnecessary extreme. The point that I was trying to make is that, as scum, two things serve my interest: not doing anything that people find a scumtell of mine (so I live longer) and work what people find a towntell of mine into my scum play (to throw people off). As scum, I should be indistinguishable from town, and that's how I do that. Therefore, using my or anyone else's meta to determine alignment is an exercise in futility, and I'm surprised this isn't getting into your head.