Newbie 1717: Newbies Through the Looking Glass (Game Over)

[Simoyd]

IV

You've been tunneling on Lycan. Based on both your wordings it really feels like a misunderstanding. I think the whole topic of meta between you two is NAI. I think any time the meta topic is used in one of either of your arguments as a motivator is NAI. The tunnelling bugs me a bit (which you admit in 262)... Spending so much effort arguing it and missing the meat of 92 bugs me a bit... Not a huge indicator for me though. For reference: 104, 248, 261, 267

Pretty early in the game 52 you're talking about manipulating the pace of the game. Not a big fan of this.

In 104 you say "Accountant is playing the classic null IC", but in 33 you said the game start doesn't usually look like this. If accountant is playing in a "classic" way, then how is the game unusual? Can you elaborate on this?

You seem to be undecided on pants and RC votes. Not liking RC for the unvote in 229 then recanting in 239. Same with pants, hating the L-1 in 146, then moving away in 291. Now for pants, there's a good reason I think. But I'm curious what caused you to be okay with your previous RC hate, as no real explaination was provided? Or do you still lean scum on RC? This waffling around gives me a slight scum read too. Wondering if you're just feeling the crowd to see what's safe.

The first paragraph of 321 feels very town motivated to me. And the recent snoe pressure feels like scum hunting.

[Simoyd]

Lycan

I don't see how IV could possibly be manipulating the game by post 46. Trying to pick someone on vacation as an easy target?

I feel like your communication is often convoluted (post 75, 92 and 306). Also in 226 and 269 you killed the votes on pants, but these feel really forced and convoluted as well. You could have conveyed the idea with much fewer words. You basically just repeated yourself over and over... Additionally in 269 you say "I questioned why you were voting me at all if you were going to defend rather than attack all game". I've read it a dozen times, what does that mean? I wonder if the wording choices are complicated because you're hiding that you're scum.

I don't like the logic for your initial read on IV (92, 106, 118 and 260). I don't think scum would post less under pressure, and as the game went on he has posted plenty even without pressure despite disagreeing with you on this anyways.

In 130 you parroted part of my wall regarding Accountant defending IV, without adding anything. And in 156 you claim this to be your reason ("my own misgivings"), but it was already said... Trying to slide onto the wagon without a post-flip association happening on you later? Later In 260 you said you'd let accountant slide, but that's not what happened in 130 and 156. You did pressure him. This back and forth bugs me. What is your read on accountant now?

Also in 156 you mention that noone pressuring accountant, then say "Reeks of scum". Are you saying accountant reeks of scum? Or the situation reeks of scum?

Through 255 and 259 you claim to be able to call his alignment 100%! I would love to hear the explanation behind that! How was Accountant's answer not definitive?

[Simoyd]

Well those were a lot shorter than I expected. The meta topic being NAI to me cleaned them up a lot. Here's my shit:

Town: { Postie }
Town Lean: { Harkonnen97 }
Mid: { Innocentvillager, Grace, RadiantCowbells }
Scum Lean: { Lycanfire }
Scum: { Snoe, Accountant }

VOTE: Accountant L-2

Spoiler: Unofficial Vote Count

postie (1): snoe
snoe (1): Accountant
Accountant (3): Postie, RadiantCowbells, Simoyd
innocentvillager (1): Lycanfire
Lycanfire (1): innocentvillager

Not Voting: Grace, Harkonnen97

[Accountant]

Ugh...... I messed up. I'll try to be more active. Reads soon.

<IC hat on>Hey Pants, I really shouldn't have to tell you this, but this is very very illegal. The mod can blacklist or ban you for this, especially since this is a newbie. You're an SE, don't set a bad example for our newbs!</IC hat on>

Hey Simoyd, I think you're sheeping RC and hiding behind your newbness to justify it. Your readslist is very similar to his and you're voting the same person as him without strong reasoning. I'd like to hear your defense against this.

[RadiantCowbells]

Why do you need to put an IC hat on to tell someone that they shouldn't break rules?

[Accountant]

Because it's more official, of course.

[Harkonnen97]

She said it in a joking matter.

I am slightly scumreading snoe. Waiting for his reply.

[innocentvillager]

Additionally in 269 you say "I questioned why you were voting me at all if you were going to defend rather than attack all game". I've read it a dozen times, what does that mean?

I LMFAO'D I FELT THE SAME WAY

IV

The tunnelling bugs me a bit (which you admit in 262)... Spending so much effort arguing it and missing the meat of 92 bugs me a bit... Not a huge indicator for me though. For reference: 104, 248, 261, 267

Okay, what does THIS mean? Missing the meat of 92? I'm not sure what this is referring to, or why this is relevant. Why are you quoting those posts?

In 104 you say "Accountant is playing the classic null IC", but in 33 you said the game start doesn't usually look like this. If accountant is playing in a "classic" way, then how is the game unusual? Can you elaborate on this?

I'm not sure how those are mutually exclusive. Accountant was feeling rather nullish at the beginning, despite being a bit defensive. That has nothing to do with the game state. In less than 2-3 hours or so, the game already moved onto arguments on page 2. That's unusual, and there was a lot of noise, which made it annoying. I explained this in one of my posts, but that was a while ago so whatever. I'm just confused on why you're bringing this up NOW, instead of a long time ago—this wasn't even that relevant of a discussion to be brought up again.

You seem to be undecided on pants and RC votes. Not liking RC for the unvote in 229 then recanting in 239. Same with pants, hating the L-1 in 146, then moving away in 291. Now for pants, there's a good reason I think. But I'm curious what caused you to be okay with your previous RC hate, as no real explaination was provided? Or do you still lean scum on RC? This waffling around gives me a slight scum read too. Wondering if you're just feeling the crowd to see what's safe.

So Pants I voted to get him to produce content and for his scummy unannounced L-1 vote. When it became clear that he was not going to post, I redirected my attention towards other people. My scumread on him was always there, and now that snoe's replaced in and made that slot even scummier, it's definitely still there.

As for RC, I scumread his post initially since I didn't see any town motivation that he would release his tunnel/pressure vote. RC later explained he unvoted b/c Postie replaced in so he wanted to really make sure he was playing his best, which I buy because that sounds reasonable. That made it NAI for me, so I stopped scumreading RC for that. Make sure to read the surrounding posts before you accuse, I'm basically just regurgitating the next few posts after my unvote in 229.

IV

Pretty early in the game 52 you're talking about manipulating the pace of the game. Not a big fan of this.

Wait what? I never said that phrase, Lycan did, and that was before I posted. I was talking about how the noise of the game was affecting my ability to read people and was also breeding apathy.

More coming a bit later.

[snoe]

Snoe, you said that Pants98 wasn't really active and didn't give us much to read him. Did you share those notes of yours and summarize what has been happening this game so we can read your slot better?

Yeah, that's pretty much exactly it. Believe I was explicit about that in post 310.

[Harkonnen97]

I don't like this at all, snoe.

Pants was unreadable. His was genuinely inactive, not just lurking. (this can be further supported by the fact that he posted without knowing he was replaced)

Why are you feeling the need to make us townread you when your spot wasn't being really scumread in the first place? It looks to me like you worry too much about how we perceive you.

VOTE: snoe

[innocentvillager]

Spoiler: wall

Oh, I get it now. Okay. If you want to be reductive, I have contradicted myself. However, I would suggest that it’s totally possible that these things are simultaneously true:
1) Scum have incentive to lie low when under pressure (paraphrasing Lycan)
2) Scum have strong incentive not to get lynched in this setup (paraphrasing Sim)
3) Town have strong incentive not to get lynched in this setup (paraphrasing IV and Sim saying I contradict myself)

In all these cases, I was agreeing with (and, I think, putting up counterarguments to) people making cases based on responses to challenges/questions.

If you want my overall take on this issue, it’s that defending yourself (or others) is NAI in and of itself. There are good reasons for scum to defend and not defend, and for town to defend and not defend, in the kinds of cases I think we are referring to. When someone puts you at L-4, and you're busy, there's no big pressure to defend yourself, in other words.

This is a clever attempt to save yourself, but it won't work. You have contradicted yourself period—not "if you want to be reductive", and you are trying way too hard to save yourself from it. You clearly said verbatim "scum have more to lose and hence a greater incentive to defend themselves in this setup", which direct contradicts your agreement with Lycan's statement.

Something that I was thinking is that both Pants and Accountant would be sorta scared at me after our last game.

I wouldn't be surprised if Scum!Accountant said that they should bus the other if pressure ever went down.

@RC I'm very curious about this, can you elaborate for those of us who don't know what you're talking about?

I mentioned it here:

In post 310, snoe wrote:
51:

Mizz pushes IV on not scum hunting yet

; IV complains about the “noise” level in the game; IV’s response bugs me as fake:

The bolded part is the only place where you talk about it. I will apologize, since what I said was a bit misleading. I claimed that you wrote nothing about 51 in your notes: What I meant was, you wrote nothing alignment indicative about 51. Therefore, you couldn't possibly have gotten a scumread just from looking at your notes, which means you went back and did some analysis. This is one of the scummy scenarios highlighted by me, since this essentially makes taking "comprehensive" notes pointless, if you're just going to go back and skim through the thread again anyway.

Look, I'm calling it like I see it w/r/t my vote for Mizzy/Postie. The scumreads I'm throwing everywhere are the kind of scumhunting signals I would have commented on (or thought about commenting on) if I had been in the game from the beginning.

Well, of course you would say that as either alignment. It is one of the more intangible aspects of my case on you, but it doesn't change that fact that scum have more incentive to read the game the way you did than town. Your entire catch-up post, as Postie nicely captured it, was just "safe". And being too safe is a scumtell, even if by some chance you are town and your genuine reads just happen to be passive. Especially when you're under lots of pressure to produce content or get lynched.

Consider - for a moment - the scenario where I am not sure who's scum. I know it's shocking to have doubts about your own judgment in this game (/s), but what would you do in my shoes? Flip a coin? Pretend you know who's what? Maybe you would. I wouldn't.

That's not what I mean by you being conflicted. You put under "Conflicted", which refers to your read being conflicted on these 4 people, the ONLY two large CONFLICTS in this game (RC vs Accountant, and me vs Lycan). There are 2 large conflicts involving 4 people, and you try to stay completely impartial for both of them. THAT is definitely scummy.

I agreed with your argument in #27; I thought you over-sold it in #52. Make sense?

27 wasn't an argument. I don't understand how you can think 52 is fake, but okay whatever to each their own.

This is my 4th game on MafiaScum or anywhere - so I am still kind of a beginner. But I didn't use it as a scumtell - I noted it as I read the thread and looked at your interactions.

You didn't use it as a scumtell? Wha????

Some of IV’s responses these challenges seem weak: post 52 (responding to Mizz), 262 (OMGUS read on Lycan).

While you don't explicitly contradict yourself this time, since this is in the reads section it is certainly implied that you scumread me for this. If that part was just there for funsies and not actually alignment-indicative, that's scummy too since you're adding more filler to a reads section when you literally spoilered an entire 300 post PbPA full of filler (why not just keep it there?). So you're scum either way.

IMHO, it is much less time-consuming to type out a comment than to read through a game - or two games. I shouldn't have taken the "retail worker" dig - I was one too, for many years, and though I'm out of retail I still have to deal with shitty hours etc. So fist-bump on that, all 3 of us. But the LARGER POINT is that calling someone out for not going outside the game to get a meta-read on someone is BS. That is a good thing to do if you have time. However, it can also be a waste of time - I've done it before, and you and others just did it on me, and it sounds like we all got zilch out of the exercise.

Skim. He STILL has not even skimmed a scumgame of mine to get an impression. When I meta'd you, I didn't read all 100+ posts or whatever that you wrote in detail. I picked some of the juicier ones, and skimmed through the rest to get an impression. That's all I need to do.

You aren't understanding the meta-debate between me and Lycan at all, are you? I don't have a problem with him not using meta—that's ridiculous. What I do have a problem with (and here I'll explain it for like the fourth time) is that he meta'd one or two of my towngames, and make a conclusion solely based off of that. I have lots of scumgames! How does he know that my scumgame isn't jsut like my towngame? That's just insincere scumhunting. He's avoiding my scumgames at this point literally just to prove a point. If he had just been like "Okay, fine I'll briefly look at a scumgame." and 10 min later, been like "Your scumgame is completely different, and exactly the same as your play in this game because of X, Y, and Z." THAT'S TOWN BEHAVIOR. But instead, he's just complaining about how he has no time (meanwhile posting a lot, mind you), and using up more time to just complain about me. Defending your scumbuddy isn't going to work, sorry.

IV is pissing me off

Lmao. Here's a box of tissues

[snoe]

I don't like this at all, snoe.

Pants was unreadable. His was genuinely inactive, not just lurking. (this can be further supported by the fact that he posted without knowing he was replaced)

Why are you feeling the need to make us townread you when your spot wasn't being really scumread in the first place? It looks to me like you worry too much about how we perceive you.

VOTE: snoe

I didn't read Pants the same way you did, and he was getting votes before replacement. I felt the slot needed defending.

[Harkonnen97]

Finally, here are my notes on reading through the game. They are long - sorry. But I think it’s worth posting them because …
1) One of the few benefits of getting a replacement player is getting a new set of eyes looking at the game. Might help?
2) I need to give you all SOMETHING with which to read my slot. Pants, bless him … didn’t.
3) I usually phone post (meaning I don’t do giant formatted posts like this often) - would like to have this available when I’m on my phone.

1)This reason is good in general, but not in the case of your notes. It's helpful to get a new set of eyes giving us reads, not repeating what has already happened in the game.
2)You want us to townread you
3)Extracurricular reasoning, NAI

So, snoe, do you think Pants was scummy?

[snoe]

I'll respond to IV's wall tomorrow. Looks like a wall o' bullshit to me, but I'll try. Thanks for the tissues, by the way.

[snoe]

Finally, here are my notes on reading through the game. They are long - sorry. But I think it’s worth posting them because …
1) One of the few benefits of getting a replacement player is getting a new set of eyes looking at the game. Might help?
2) I need to give you all SOMETHING with which to read my slot. Pants, bless him … didn’t.
3) I usually phone post (meaning I don’t do giant formatted posts like this often) - would like to have this available when I’m on my phone.

1)This reason is good in general, but not in the case of your notes. It's helpful to get a new set of eyes giving us reads, not repeating what has already happened in the game.
2)You want us to townread you
3)Extracurricular reasoning, NAI

So, snoe, do you think Pants was scummy?

Pants did 5 posts and they were lazy and prod-dodging. Scummy in a larger sense - they contributed nothing.

[innocentvillager]

I'll respond to IV's wall tomorrow. Looks like a wall o' bullshit to me, but I'll try. Thanks for the tissues, by the way.

You're welcome. You can flail all you want.

Also, I'm not posting in this thread until tomorrow night late maybe. Hopefully when I come back a substantial wagon will have formed on Lycan or snoe.

[Harkonnen97]

2) I need to give you all SOMETHING with which to read my slot.

Pants, bless him … didn’t

.

Pants did 5 posts and they were lazy and prod-dodging.

Scummy in a larger sense - they contributed nothing

.

First you say that Pants was a null read. Now you are saying a different thing.

[Lycanfire]

Ok so I wrote a giant post and intended on splitting it up for the morning, but then I realized that when I cut out my responses to IV my responses to Simoyd started to lack context. I don't blame anyone for not reading it I don't know why I'm still awake any more.

Snoe

310

-I think Mizzy's vote onto Meepo was strange especially with how she went inactive after people kept saying yeah Meepo seems town and so on. t didn't feel like she wanted to pursue Meepo, and when it became pointless, stopped posting altogether. I asked her if it affected her play any but then she replaced out.

-Mizzy being so on board with pressuring IV with me was ++++ in my book but the moment she flopped on a point she reinforced earlier she slipped right into null for me. Her jabbing at me about her scum persona was strange, because IV was bringing up the same thing, but I didn't mind this part much because she already made it obvious that it was a pointless question to begin with. She wanted the right answer, so I gave it to her.

-I wasn't sheeping Grace's read on RC. I was getting frustrated with someone that said they weren't going to reply to someone else (with a list of their reads) while ignoring a simple question I gave him. Meanwhile he finished off his post saying he would be back on the 20th when the deadline was 18 at the time. I told him to enjoy his week and that his playstyle does him no favors. Accountant questioned this and I told him that if RC doesn't want to work with me, the chances that we aren't on the same team is high. I think this is all entirely fair, though I lost my cool with RC esp. in implying that he can feel free to leave for the rest of the week. That was pretty bad.

-Last section became less personal and more of a tl;dr. Would have liked it if you said you didn't get much out of it.

-++++massive points for understanding my plight

------meh i want to see other posts before i explain

[Lycanfire]

IV

Bold aside.. Ok you apologized for it. Thanks for doing that. I get apprehensive too. It's a playstyle thing where I think I'm putting up more pressure if I'm blunt, and short. Sort of like RC's posts, but instead of always being in that mode I use it for shock value. I've definitely been less than eloquent with you too (blunt scum accusations, "obvscum [you] have no incentive to post while under pressure").

this is all going to be referencing IV/314

Don't believe me? Let's look at his notes. Most of the notes are just summaries of random posts that are COMPLETELY NAI. Why write so much summary text, if most of it is just going to be NAI?

Half of it was probably NAI. The other half was him picking out a few people that appeared town while going after Mizzy's slot.

He does explain 30, 81, and 82 in the notes, but where is 51?? He makes no real mention of 51 in his notes. So where did that scumread come from? These clearly aren't comprehensive notes, which alone proves that he didn't just take extensive notes, and then draw reads from that.

Seems just as likely that he missed the part the first time than having added it later which is my problem with this.

Finally, the last possibility is that he wrote the reads first. This is the scummiest of all

But, yes. This would reek.

I initially thought I saw snoe subtly buddying Lycan

Well, you aren't wrong. I don't care about what kind of tone I have, but apparently Snoe thinks it's great! :rolleyes: Didn't need to see that three times.

IV/317

ARE YOU SERIOUS? WHY DON'T YOU READ WHAT I WRITE?? Did 267 just not exist?? Do you only choose to read/respond to the things that benefit you?

Let me preface this by saying that

everyone

got the same tell on Pants when he made a promise-twice-and never showed up. My problem was you thinking he was scummy enough to be anything beyond Null when you had Accountant and myself as Scum. Ordinarily, this wouldn't be too strange. Except Pants nearly got Accountant lynched and did not seem to care enough to post (or realize he was replaced). My connection with him, which isn't as concrete, and IMO is probably only obvious to me because I know I'm town and you don't, is that I also called him out that night out of frustration. I could have made all kinds of posts without anyone batting an eye but I was so done with my night that I couldn't care enough beyond imply he should post ASAP.

So, with this in mind I said neither Accountant/Pants or Myself/Pants would make sense. Meaning Pants has no point on your scumlist at all if the only viable pair is Accountant/Myself. You made no remarks to this.. Instead you told me I wasn't reading your posts and that you had tells on Pants, which was missing the point, honestly.

UNVOTE: Innocentvillager

He caught the missing post in Snoe/310 that I missed. That's proof to me that he's trying to figure out the game. Not to say this is necessarily town due to how easy of a target Pants/Snoe is, but I think it's more townie than scum.

[Lycanfire]

Simoyd

342

Can you elaborate on that incentive? I don't understand why scum would be motivated to do that.

Myself/106

Scum aren't in a hurry to contribute here if accused as each new post they aren't involved in offers opportunities. So, what about town? It would be in a townie's interest to make a meaningful post ASAP if they were the one being accused.

Scum can get an improved position by waiting. Townies have nothing to gain by playing a game.

I don't see how IV could possibly be manipulating the game by post 46. Trying to pick someone on vacation as an easy target?

He wasn't tagged as V/LA, and when he replied talking about supposed LA and mafia burnout he didn't say anything that changed my mind about post 46, either.

376

Also in 226 and 269 you killed the votes on pants, but these feel really forced and convoluted as well. You could have conveyed the idea with much fewer words. You basically just repeated yourself over and over...

This answer doesn't make as much sense w/o a reply I have saved for IV, but my point was that I was trying to establish Pants/Myself and Pants/Accountant as unviable or weak partners, so having all three of us on his scumlist was suspicious to me.

So, to answer. It reads that way because I wrote it that way. I started off questioning IV about why Pants was on his list at all, then offered him the same question I asked Accountant. Of course, I didn't want an answer any more, because asking two different people and already admitting to being disappointed with the first answer already tells how I feel about it. I started with the conclusion and why I was disappointed in Accountant's answer when I felt like the answer should have been especially clear for him. In the second-last paragraph I described a Pants lynch as a low information one, and finished the post by telling IV to argue his case with me if he wanted to vote me. The implication was that since I thought Pants was on his list for no reason, I felt he didn't have the heart to truly pursue me, even though he should have been pursuing anyone besides Pants for reasons already stated, because failing to do so would have been in my opinion the same as riding out the deadline.

Additionally in 269 you say "I questioned why you were voting me at all if you were going to defend rather than attack all game". I've read it a dozen times, what does that mean?

The only attacks IV was doing was with the meta argument, which I was dismissing as complaining. There wasn't anything proactive in his case.

In 130 you parroted part of my wall regarding Accountant defending IV, without adding anything. And in 156 you claim this to be your reason ("my own misgivings"), but it was already said...

I had plenty of misgivings about Accountant, but dropping pressure on IV for Accountant was going to be pointless.

Later In 260 you said you'd let accountant slide, but that's not what happened in 130 and 156. You did pressure him. This back and forth bugs me. What is your read on accountant now?

Also in 156 you mention that noone pressuring accountant, then say "Reeks of scum". Are you saying accountant reeks of scum? Or the situation reeks of scum?

#130 I wanted a reaction from him-anything to draw him to IV-who I was focusing on would have been nice. #156 is actually a defense of Accountant. At this point he is L-1 or L-2-I forget, but he got to L-1 with some of the primary drivers on the wagon not saying anything at all, so it would be the latter.

My reads are honestly awful right now. I don't think Accountant/IV / Accountant/Snoe / IV/Snoe are partners. In fact, I don't think IV is leaning much to scum right now. So, I have my own dilemma of choosing between Accountant/Snoe, and I think I'll have a better idea of it tomorrow.

Through 255 and 259 you claim to be able to call his alignment 100%! I would love to hear the explanation behind that! How was Accountant's answer not definitive?

I later explained this in post 266.

Myself/266

I'll flat out say right now: Pants is not the best choice. That's why I was disappointed with Accountant's answer: he could have said RC was just as likely, or that they were the scumteam, that one was more likely than the other sure, but what I asked was if Pants was the best lynch candidate. This means yes or no, not "yes if not him then other person". I don't know if that's 50/50 or 80/20 or in favor or who.

Simply, Pants is not the best lynch because it doesn't give us clues as to who his partner is. For Accountant moreso-that's why I said it was important and asked him, rather than anyone else. In my opinion, if Pants flips scum Accountant is town. I think this is a safe assumption. For the rest of us, we won't have much clue as to who their partner is based on their posts, but we will know two things-we are town, and Accountant is very likely town as well. Accountant does not get this luxury-if town, they would only know one person is town and has less scumhunting to work with tomorrow. Therefore, there is no scumhunting Accountant can do tomorrow that he cannot do today..

tl;dr I didn't feel like his post was definitive, and since he didn't seem sure enough to express a preference between Pants/Snoe and RC, I felt like he gave me a bad answer when he had an easy good answer he could have given me instead.

[Lycanfire]

RC

350

Why would an accountant townflip make you scumread me?

Isn't the only real answer is that you've used this as a scumtactic before? Are you trying to be called on this?

[Accountant]

Isn't the only real answer is that you've used this as a scumtactic before? Are you trying to be called on this?

Explain?

[Xalxe]

Vote Count 1.9

I haven’t the slightest idea.

Accountant

(3): Postie, RadiantCowbells, Simoyd

snoe

(2): Accountant, Harkonnen97

Postie

(1): snoe

Lycanfire

(1): innocentvillager

Not Voting

: Grace, Lycanfire

Deadline

: (expired on 2016-06-24 07:25:57)

Grace

has 24 hours to make a game-advancing post.

[Simoyd]

Hey Simoyd, I think you're sheeping RC and hiding behind your newbness to justify it. Your readslist is very similar to his and you're voting the same person as him without strong reasoning. I'd like to hear your defense against this.

If anything I'm sheeping postie, not RC. I have RC as null, and postie as town. I value postie's opinion more at this point, but I think my read list is consistent with my past posting and justified as best as I know how to.

I don't really follow/understand this "hiding behind my newbness" thing you guys are talking about... I assume you're just parroting this post:

How else would I get RC to vote with me?

I'm not sure one exists, but did you really expect to yield any fruit for this effort?

Titus has nothing to do with this game. RC's signature says he's a alt of Titus (another member on this forum). Some people read into that meta, but it's a lie so there's no meta to read into.

NAI is "not alignment indicative".

I feel like RC must know that if accountant flips town then RC would be next for lynch (assuming RC isn't NK'd). He even said that he'd be okay with both of them dying after day two. This gives me a town lean on RC (at least until accountant flips).

Getting prodded once then replaced is a town tell right?

*dramatic pause*

Stuff like this. I don't like the approach to the game.

I can write it off as a playstyle dislike thing for now though.

For your benefit, accountant:
173: I think this is a valid question searching for motivation.
186: This is a direct reply to someone's question. I think everything in there is precise and accurate.
209: I think this is a rational tell based on behavior. Someone please enlighten me if it's not...
234: I was thinking people like to play power roles and become disinterested if they are VT, but I haven't read that anywhere so I worded it as a question to see what people think.
243: This was emotion. I was really sick of pants not playing... I think everyone gets emotional now and then in threads regardless of experience. I don't think it has been excessive for me.

You guys are saying this is influencing your decision towards me because of it's newbness? Yes I lack experience but if you're letting that influence you that's your problem, not mine... Feel free to ask me any questions about any post that seems newby and I'll gladly explain my rational thought process.

---

Going back to the quote at the top, I think I've provided my reasoning for voting you already pretty clearly. I think "strong reasoning" is relative. My reasoning for you is the strongest reasoning I have, but I am also willing to lynch snoe at this point.

[Simoyd]

The tunnelling bugs me a bit (which you admit in 262)... Spending so much effort arguing it and missing the meat of 92 bugs me a bit... Not a huge indicator for me though. For reference: 104, 248, 261, 267

Okay, what does THIS mean? Missing the meat of 92? I'm not sure what this is referring to, or why this is relevant. Why are you quoting those posts?

"Missing the meat of 92" is referring to my explanation in 372. 104, 248, 261 and 267 are posts where you brought up the meta argument again after lycan had already explained it in 92.