In post 1269, Vanderscamp wrote:that was the point when he became more scummy to me than marci and so I voted him.
As soon as he became my top scum read I voted him.
This is the lie! This is what I've been saying all game. Saying Marci was a bigger scumread than Bingle makes no sense, looking at everything you posted. You said Marci was awkward. Awkward is awkward, it isn't necessarily scum, and everyone knows that.
At the same time, you gave a bunch of solid reasons to suspect Bingle. Good reasons! Much better than "he's awkward". Yet you voted Marcistar instead.
On top of this, in the same series of posts you said you had nEE down as a solid townread. So from your point of view, Bingle should be roughly a 50% proposition already, on top of all the points you had against him.
It's a lie to say you had a stronger scumread on Marci. Nothing in your posts demonstrated that, and from a pure probability standpoint it doesn't make sense either.
Posted: Sat Jun 19, 2021 8:35 pm
by GuiltyLion
In post 1270, Vanderscamp wrote:I don't think you ever voted him at any point, despite apparently (having said this the next day) that my case on bingle early D1 was so convincing that it's extremely strange that I did not immediately vote him over Marci,
This is a misrep. Just because I thought they were good reasons to suspect Bingle, does not mean I was convinced by them. I wasn't even convinced limming in the 3p was the right move.
What I thought was that
you
should be voting Bingle given the points you were making against him in the thread. Your thought process did not match your vote.
Posted: Sat Jun 19, 2021 9:44 pm
by GuiltyLion
Here's the whole sequence of posts for reference. Look at how much more Vander had to say about Bingle, who he was not voting, compared to Marci, who he was voting.
In post 198, NorwegianboyEE wrote:Oh and "not really townie" is a fancy shorthand way of saying that literally nothing you’ve said is something i think you couldn’t say as scum.
oh smhsmh u shouldve just said that.
lmk if u want me to vote myself
In post 207, NorwegianboyEE wrote:I’m extremely bad at reading Dunnstral. If you can explain how he thinks and plays as scum, and why he wouldn’t be bold like that, feel free to enlighten me.
Dunn likes to low effort as both alignments ime. Calling out a partner as sus while voting one of the other people in the pool is something that is going to inevitably look bad and without the context of the last game it isn't a safe assumption we'll solve in the 6p first.
Is Dunn capable of being bold like that? Sure. Would Dunn actually draw late game attention to himself for a throwaway RVS vote? I don't think so, when he very much prefers to take the back seat and passively manipulate the thread.
I don't like or understand this.
Why do you think Dunn is being bold?
Because I don't think a throwaway RVS vote is being bold in any way, and I haven't seen anything from him that contradicts him taking the back seat and passively manipulating.
Additionally, he wasn't directly calling n_m sus, he was just speculating on why he was in the pool. It might have been indirect but even if it was, it's not like a super bold statement to make.
In post 190, NorwegianboyEE wrote:Vanderscamp's ISO doesn't lend itself well to being allied with N_M imo. Ping me if you disagree.
I disagree with this, I called out in 160 some weird reasoning he's using to scumread both Lukewarm and N_M, and I suspect it may be that scum!Vanderscamp with scum!N_M trying to paint a false associative between town!Lukewarm and his buddy.
p-edit: @nEE I don't really see why he couldn't post that as scum, even if he knew it was true already. It could be a question to make him look uninformed, and it's also entirely possible N_M didn't mention you at all in pregame scum chat.
In post 219, Bingle wrote:In general, it means "This post is something I find noteworthy in a way I'm not entirely sure I want to share yet but would like other people to pay attention to." but thinking about this further I don't actually see a drawback to bringing this up.
Your argument for N_M not being partnered with Scamp applies equally well to yourself, but you phrased it in a way to avoid that entirely which leaves me inclined to think you might yourself be aligned with scamp and looking to passively clear him.
I don't like this either since it's pretty easily explained by nor being town and not thinking about the perspective about me being scum with him.
In post 235, Vanderscamp wrote:I think bingle is now more scummy than n_m for the stuff I quoted.
I like a lot what Norwegian is saying.
I also think nor_GL is a scum team that absolutely does not exist because of what nor is saying about GL, I don't think nor would be calling GL confirmed town from what GL said if they were scum together.
Also Hop please read my 1177 again too, since Vanders replies to one of those Bingle posts I want to highlight how weird Bingles reasoning about Norway and Vander was and how it doesn't benefit him at all to make those arguments about two townies, whereas there is a benefit to try to associate them if Vander is scum
In post 1269, Vanderscamp wrote:that was the point when he became more scummy to me than marci and so I voted him.
As soon as he became my top scum read I voted him.
This is the lie! This is what I've been saying all game. Saying Marci was a bigger scumread than Bingle makes no sense, looking at everything you posted. You said Marci was awkward. Awkward is awkward, it isn't necessarily scum, and everyone knows that.
At the same time, you gave a bunch of solid reasons to suspect Bingle. Good reasons! Much better than "he's awkward". Yet you voted Marcistar instead.
On top of this, in the same series of posts you said you had nEE down as a solid townread. So from your point of view, Bingle should be roughly a 50% proposition already, on top of all the points you had against him.
It's a lie to say you had a stronger scumread on Marci. Nothing in your posts demonstrated that, and from a pure probability standpoint it doesn't make sense either.
I didn't "vote Marcistar instead," I voted Marci for the reasons I scumread her, then I started to scumread bingle, and I asked him about it, and when he responded poorly I instantly voted him.
I've maintained many times that we should just be voting the person we think is scummiest, and at the time that was Marci. You asked me at the time which of them I thought was scummier before bingle responded and I said it was close but probably Marci.
and you liking my reasons for scumreading Marci less than my reasons for scumreading bingle doesn't mean that I agree with you which case was better. I was not calling Marci awkward in a NAI sense, I was calling her awkward in a scummy sense. It's super hypocritical of you to have started talking about this stuff only starting on D2 after bingle died, instead of D1 when it was actually happening (and you even asked me about it) because for you to say the stuff you're saying now about it on d1, it means you have to commit to thinking my case on bingle was great, which you pretty obviously didn't want to do.
In post 1270, Vanderscamp wrote:I don't think you ever voted him at any point, despite apparently (having said this the next day) that my case on bingle early D1 was so convincing that it's extremely strange that I did not immediately vote him over Marci,
This is a misrep. Just because I thought they were good reasons to suspect Bingle, does not mean I was convinced by them. I wasn't even convinced limming in the 3p was the right move.
What I thought was that
you
should be voting Bingle given the points you were making against him in the thread. Your thought process did not match your vote.
I wasn't convinced by them either, that's why I asked bingle for clarification and when he responded poorly I voted him.
How is it supposed to be a thing that I should have been convinced by the reasoning but you didn't need to be?
Nothing I was saying was dependent on my alignment.
Posted: Sun Jun 20, 2021 5:57 am
by GuiltyLion
I was talking about it on D1 - I literally asked you a question about it in 236 and then referred to it again later in 472 when I said I didn't think your Marci vote had any conviction or intent to solve.
Further, you are misrepresenting things when you try to frame this a matter of it being about either of us being "convinced" by the points about Bingle. What I'm calling out is an inconsistency in your attitude and your vote. Townes generally vote who they feel is most likely to be scum, unless they're doing wagonomic compromising with other players to get an elimination through. That's not what happens early D1 though. I pay attention to why people vote who they are voting and it usually stands out to me when they give more reasons for voting somewhere else, yet they don't.
And of course naturally that's only going to stand out more strongly to me after the player you were shading but not voting later flips scum! It started off as a ping/light suspicion amidst a bunch of inherent noise. On D2 after we had Bingle's flip, obviously it's going to stand out more clearly. This is basic mafia play, and there's no "hyppcrisy" there
Posted: Sun Jun 20, 2021 6:02 am
by GuiltyLion
In post 472, GuiltyLion wrote:The strongest/most meaningful content he's posted has been about Bingle, his questionable reasoning about both the Dunn & Norway slots, but it's rather easy for me to imagine that content being either a) scum!Vanders jumping on a townie making illogical/reachy assertions without justifying why those assertions indicate scum alignment or b) scum!Vanders distancing/bussing a buddy!Bingle.
GL you never brought this up on D1 such hypocrisy much wow
Frankly you should have tried to suggest it was a set up by me, that argument would have been more plausible/reasonable than the one you just went with
Posted: Sun Jun 20, 2021 6:02 am
by Hopkirk
Limited access today, will hammer tomorrow at some point
@vanders - when you say the 'scummiest slot' how much are you factoring in prior probability of a slot being scum (1/3 or 1/2 for small pool with 0/1 strong townreads Vs 1/5 for the bigger pool).
Posted: Sun Jun 20, 2021 6:09 am
by GuiltyLion
Hop please pay more attention to D1 and D2 than let yourself get sucked into paranoia about me based on my hope for easy answers with Dunn/Marci elims. I became apathetic and intellectually lazy after a slog of a D2 and that was a mistake. But I was sharp and on the ball on D1 and the start of D2. Vanders has been scummy and awkward in all his behavior outside of the Bingle bus, and the evidence that I was picking up on this was present in my ISO the whole way through. My mistake was not holding onto it with as much conviction as it deserved, but it was hard to see that at the time with people disagreeing with me
Posted: Sun Jun 20, 2021 11:43 am
by Vanderscamp
In post 1284, Hopkirk wrote:Limited access today, will hammer tomorrow at some point
@vanders - when you say the 'scummiest slot' how much are you factoring in prior probability of a slot being scum (1/3 or 1/2 for small pool with 0/1 strong townreads Vs 1/5 for the bigger pool).
trying to factor that in but more to try and calculate the deviation from the base % (which is what I mean by scummiest) than overall scum %.
If I only cared about overall scum % then I wouldn't be as indifferent to which pool to kill into.
Posted: Sun Jun 20, 2021 12:09 pm
by Vanderscamp
In post 1282, GuiltyLion wrote:I was talking about it on D1 - I literally asked you a question about it in 236 and then referred to it again later in 472 when I said I didn't think your Marci vote had any conviction or intent to solve.
Further, you are misrepresenting things when you try to frame this a matter of it being about either of us being "convinced" by the points about Bingle. What I'm calling out is an inconsistency in your attitude and your vote. Townes generally vote who they feel is most likely to be scum, unless they're doing wagonomic compromising with other players to get an elimination through. That's not what happens early D1 though. I pay attention to why people vote who they are voting and it usually stands out to me when they give more reasons for voting somewhere else, yet they don't.
And of course naturally that's only going to stand out more strongly to me after the player you were shading but not voting later flips scum! It started off as a ping/light suspicion amidst a bunch of inherent noise. On D2 after we had Bingle's flip, obviously it's going to stand out more clearly. This is basic mafia play, and there's no "hyppcrisy" there
In post 1282, GuiltyLion wrote:I was talking about it on D1 - I literally asked you a question about it in 236 and then referred to it again later in 472 when I said I didn't think your Marci vote had any conviction or intent to solve.
Further, you are misrepresenting things when you try to frame this a matter of it being about either of us being "convinced" by the points about Bingle. What I'm calling out is an inconsistency in your attitude and your vote. Townes generally vote who they feel is most likely to be scum, unless they're doing wagonomic compromising with other players to get an elimination through. That's not what happens early D1 though. I pay attention to why people vote who they are voting and it usually stands out to me when they give more reasons for voting somewhere else, yet they don't.
And of course naturally that's only going to stand out more strongly to me after the player you were shading but not voting later flips scum! It started off as a ping/light suspicion amidst a bunch of inherent noise. On D2 after we had Bingle's flip, obviously it's going to stand out more clearly. This is basic mafia play, and there's no "hyppcrisy" there
What you're saying would be fair if it were true that I was shading but not voting bingle.
You are making a massive deal over the half a day or whatever it was where I didn't vote bingle because I had a stronger scumread on someone else, like it's supposed to be evidence of me being afraid to vote bingle.
You can't simultaneously argue that I came into the game deciding to bus my partner hard for basically no reason (I was pushing and voting on him before either me or bingle was under any real suspicion) and also argue that I was afraid to vote him.
additionally, I don't give a shit what you think I should have thought based on my own cases against people, especially when you never at any point followed through with a vote on bingle. Obviously in hindsight my case on bingle was right and the one on Marci wasn't, if I had that knowledge at the time then I would not have been voting Marci. But you're just trying to downplay my Marci read as if it was supposed to be some kind of policy accusation or something when I have consistently throughout pretty much the entire game said that I think marci has been playing in a very scummy way. When you were "setting a trap" for me by asking me why I'm not happy to just never vote Marci for the rest of the game or whatever I shat on that notion as well, I reiterated that despite me believing the pool analysis from what bingle do made Marci likely town, I still thought she was scummy and that was basically the only reason I actually had to townread her.
Posted: Sun Jun 20, 2021 8:37 pm
by GuiltyLion
In post 1250, Hopkirk wrote:'To me, this feels like scum making things up to simulate a fictional thought process. I don't buy it as an authentic one. I find it remarkably hard to imagine that town!Vanderscamp was reading conversation between two players in the same pool and not already aware that it cannot be a S-S interaction. '
would scum think 'forgetting the pools' sounds like a townslip? given your assumption that it was fake immediately does scum!vanders/scum!bingle discuss this and decide it makes vanders sound townie? i feel like your read of this comment was somewhat intense
Sorry I think I forgot to reply to this
The thing is I don't think Vanders was trying to do anything especially manipulative or crafty with that post, I just couldn't grok a world where town posts it. Again, ask yourself did you ever forget who was in which pool? Were you always informing your reads by the information available to us through the 1 scum in each pool nature of the setup?
It was just really really really difficult for me to imagine town just straight up forgetting that Marci/Luke was never SvS. It's "forgetting" foundational information that should have been driving his analysis of every interaction between slots in this game.
I think you're right that the scum in the 6p hood getting caught is worst case scenario for scum whereas scum in 3p is most likely going to be sacrificed at some point or another, and that the scumteam are going to be playing around getting rid of the 3p scum to set up the 6p scum as best as possible
I'm not sure yet if I'm convinced that means we should eliminate in the 6p hood first tho since I do think mathematically I'd rather take the safe bet, feels like a world where we mis-elim twice in 6p and wind up with 5p evenly distributed across the pools is the worst possible gamestate.
Ask yourself if scum!GL posts this and then behaves the way I did around Bingle EOD1
Either I'm lying about what I think is good scum play, or I simply fail to execute what I think is the best way to play the game
I also want to highlight this post again. I think it's actually really good evidence for me being town here and me not lying about why scum!GL would have done a lot more to distance with Bingle
In post 1250, Hopkirk wrote:'To me, this feels like scum making things up to simulate a fictional thought process. I don't buy it as an authentic one. I find it remarkably hard to imagine that town!Vanderscamp was reading conversation between two players in the same pool and not already aware that it cannot be a S-S interaction. '
would scum think 'forgetting the pools' sounds like a townslip? given your assumption that it was fake immediately does scum!vanders/scum!bingle discuss this and decide it makes vanders sound townie? i feel like your read of this comment was somewhat intense
Sorry I think I forgot to reply to this
The thing is I don't think Vanders was trying to do anything especially manipulative or crafty with that post, I just couldn't grok a world where town posts it. Again, ask yourself did you ever forget who was in which pool? Were you always informing your reads by the information available to us through the 1 scum in each pool nature of the setup?
It was just really really really difficult for me to imagine town just straight up forgetting that Marci/Luke was never SvS. It's "forgetting" foundational information that should have been driving his analysis of every interaction between slots in this game.
I didn't forget, I feel like the only issue with my post was the phrasing of it which was bad.
I clarified the phrasing to a point where it's pretty clear I did not forget, but you have basically not responded to my actual explanation of it, just trying to paint the meaning of the phrasing of what I said as scummy.
Posted: Mon Jun 21, 2021 11:28 am
by Hopkirk
VOTE: GuiltyLion
Posted: Mon Jun 21, 2021 11:50 am
by GuiltyLion
:/ I was town
Posted: Mon Jun 21, 2021 11:51 am
by GuiltyLion
been a long time since I've had to fight for my life in LYLO I learned a fair amount from this game, well played to Vander
Posted: Mon Jun 21, 2021 11:58 am
by Hopkirk
dang
Posted: Mon Jun 21, 2021 12:06 pm
by Vanderscamp
Can confirm I'm scum, GG all
WP GL especially for being on my case for pretty much the entire game
Posted: Mon Jun 21, 2021 12:10 pm
by Vanderscamp
FWIW bussing bingle like this really was as big a meta deviation for me as I was saying it was, it was partly wanting to try different stuff on a different site (and for the most part disliking the result I got), but most of the reason being that I really didn't think bingle would actually die, I thought the overwhelming sentiment to kill into the big pool first would make him safe for D1.
