In post 183, 72offsuit wrote:Why are you asking me for a read on lucky in the middle of your reads list?
I like to ask questions on players I'm unsure of. Sometimes I stick it in my readslist. My readslists are mostly just reference for myself. Could you answer please?
Isn't it Scummy for 72 to ask that?
How so?
Why aks that? Never heard or seen that it is or should be Scummy to ask a question in the middle of a readslist. Like, it's totally something I can see Scum asking to try and look like they are Scum hunting, but not something I can really see Town asking that thinking, "Hmm, seems pretty out of the ordinary you ask a question mid RL. I bet if I ask them why they did that they couldn't come up with an answer if they are Scum." Yeah, not really seeing that coming from Town. Unless 72 has a gob of experience, but even then there are way better things to talk about than something that doesn't really seem Scummy inherently. 72's follow up doesn't really look good either.
Then vote for me. Put your money where your mouth is.
In post 67, Raya36 wrote:UNVOTE:
I don't want a quick hammer. L-2 is plenty for pressure. Scumlean on Lucky for not removing his vote. Could be hoping for that quickhammer
Is he your only scumlean or do you have more?
It's page 3. What are you expecting?
Valid point but obviously he had multiple leans. Do you feel they were forced 72? Like he felt pressured to answer so he did?
Yes. Names 2 and a half scumleans in 69 feels like a blurted out response.
By 181 Raya has 4 townleans/reads, which feels like way too many from a town PoV at this stage of the game.
The Homura townread is the sort of read I make as scum on my scumbuddy. "Similar thoughts to myself" --> its the sort of statement, which you cant really test the veracity of.
Dumps me in as a null, still doesnt explain how my actions further scum agenda, or why someone of a scum mindset makes aforementioned plays.
If genuinely believes that my RQS is active lurking filler, then why am I not a scumread?
If I was to take a stab at the game solve, I would say Raya + Homura purely off that reads list.
Wow same scum team that was forming on my readlist in my notes
Nothing really, its simply putting it out there. If you were going to scum read Raya in the future for her interaction with Homura, the same can somewhat be said for you, not as efficient a point as a it would be when used on you compared to Raya, but it is still important to keep in the back of our minds should that scenario occur. While I do appreciate that you added a tiny bit more explanation to your Blopp case, 163 I dislike.
In post 193, Raya36 wrote:You can take a look at my meta if you want 72. 4 townleans/reads early game is not unusual for me. multiple scumleans isn't either. And I'm sure you can find reads similar to my read on Homura too.
You're not scumread because my RQS statement is very weak and can only be used as a statement to back up a stronger case.
1. I rarely meta dive, and when I do it's not very effective.
2. I don;t doubt that you have similar reads as town to your read on homura. That's exactly how I play as scum, imitate my town game as much as I can.
Regardless, the Homura association is just a slight ping.
Nothing really, its simply putting it out there. If you were going to scum read Raya in the future for her interaction with Homura, the same can somewhat be said for you, not as efficient a point as a it would be when used on you compared to Raya, but it is still important to keep in the back of our minds should that scenario occur. While I do appreciate that you added a tiny bit more explanation to your Blopp case, 163 I dislike.
You aren;t comparing apples to apples here. You are comparing apples to planes.
I scumread Raya, and working off that assumption, think Homura seems the most likely partner at this stage based off that readslist
I believe Raya's rationale for townreading Homura (mind-melding) is a scum tendency
I have a similar read on blopa's entrance into the game as LL. I haven;t posted a reads list.
I still don;t get what point you are trying to make here in your comparison.
Posted: Sat Jul 04, 2020 5:07 am
by JamSV
In post 153, LuckyLuciano wrote:What's everyone's thoughts on how Homura positioned herself while JamSV and I were arguing last night?
Honestly I'm not sure how to answer this. I don't feel like she did position herself.
Post 127 is linked to Raya's read on me ( I assume ) but I have no idea the point / idea behind it.
Posted: Sat Jul 04, 2020 5:08 am
by TheThirteenthJT
TheThirteenthJT - Slight townlean. 58 are you suggesting Jam and Clark are partners? What is your read on Clark? I believe your vote is still there.
Yes partially. I was also suggesting that scum are the only ones that truly know everyone's alignment. So Clark is an interesting read for me and would like to expand on this later. He actually failed a test earlier and it looks bad for him but his play has indicated town for me. I will be keeping a good look at him throughout the game but it's currently Not enough for me to keep my vote on him currently.
So after my reread my vote will most comfortably be here
UNVOTE: clark VOTE: raya36
Posted: Sat Jul 04, 2020 5:09 am
by LicketyQuickety
There's a LOT more that goes into playing as Scum than simply copying your Town game. Just saying.
Nothing really, its simply putting it out there. If you were going to scum read Raya in the future for her interaction with Homura, the same can somewhat be said for you, not as efficient a point as a it would be when used on you compared to Raya, but it is still important to keep in the back of our minds should that scenario occur. While I do appreciate that you added a tiny bit more explanation to your Blopp case, 163 I dislike.
You aren;t comparing apples to apples here. You are comparing apples to planes.
I scumread Raya, and working off that assumption, think Homura seems the most likely partner at this stage based off that readslist
I believe Raya's rationale for townreading Homura (mind-melding) is a scum tendency
I have a similar read on blopa's entrance into the game as LL. I haven;t posted a reads list.
I still don;t get what point you are trying to make here in your comparison.
It's simply something I wanted to point out so its in the back of people's minds for some scenarios which may occur. I admitted they'd have different levels of efficiency. I also agree it isn't comparing apples to apples, its comparing an apple to a grape. It doesn't affect my reading of you don't worry.
In post 183, 72offsuit wrote:Why are you asking me for a read on lucky in the middle of your reads list?
I like to ask questions on players I'm unsure of. Sometimes I stick it in my readslist. My readslists are mostly just reference for myself. Could you answer please?
Isn't it Scummy for 72 to ask that?
How so?
Why aks that? Never heard or seen that it is or should be Scummy to ask a question in the middle of a readslist. Like, it's totally something I can see Scum asking to try and look like they are Scum hunting, but not something I can really see Town asking that thinking, "Hmm, seems pretty out of the ordinary you ask a question mid RL. I bet if I ask them why they did that they couldn't come up with an answer if they are Scum." Yeah, not really seeing that coming from Town. Unless 72 has a gob of experience, but even then there are way better things to talk about than something that doesn't really seem Scummy inherently. 72's follow up doesn't really look good either.
72 has seemed evasive. But I'm not sure what to make of that
In post 183, 72offsuit wrote:Why are you asking me for a read on lucky in the middle of your reads list?
I like to ask questions on players I'm unsure of. Sometimes I stick it in my readslist. My readslists are mostly just reference for myself. Could you answer please?
Isn't it Scummy for 72 to ask that?
How so?
Why aks that? Never heard or seen that it is or should be Scummy to ask a question in the middle of a readslist. Like, it's totally something I can see Scum asking to try and look like they are Scum hunting, but not something I can really see Town asking that thinking, "Hmm, seems pretty out of the ordinary you ask a question mid RL. I bet if I ask them why they did that they couldn't come up with an answer if they are Scum." Yeah, not really seeing that coming from Town. Unless 72 has a gob of experience, but even then there are way better things to talk about than something that doesn't really seem Scummy inherently. 72's follow up doesn't really look good either.
72 has seemed evasive. But I'm not sure what to make of that
Unfortunately there's very little you can do if someone is being evasive. If being evasive continues for an extended period that's when you can start saying with some confidence that its scummy.
In post 69, Raya36 wrote:Lucky and blopp. Maybe Clark but I'm unsure
Where's your vote then?
My vote is "on" Blopp I just don't want him at L-1
In post 63, LuckyLuciano wrote:Perhaps it is a coincidence, but since being wagoned, Blopp has removed their profile pic. That means they have been onsite and decided not to post. So now we have her ignoring the initial wagon that I started with 72o, despite posting after it began and ignoring my case. In addition, we have her logging on to remove her profile pic and still not posting. Feels a lot like giving up to me.
This is a bad case and very reachy.
In post 71, TheThirteenthJT wrote:Also can you all look back at my two questions (rqs) I asked. I really want to know the answer for the first one.
In post 67, Raya36 wrote:UNVOTE:
I don't want a quick hammer. L-2 is plenty for pressure. Scumlean on Lucky for not removing his vote. Could be hoping for that quickhammer
Is he your only scumlean or do you have more?
In post 69, Raya36 wrote:Lucky and blopp. Maybe Clark but I'm unsure
"I scumlean Lucky for possibly wanting a quick hammer on my other scumlean."
For the record, I'm expecting Blopp not to post again until the slot is replaced, and if the slot claims VT I will be pushing for the slot to be eliminated.
Just because I scumlean him doesnt mean I'm right (I never take associations into account D1. I often have multiple scumread that don't work together). And its perfectly viable to be concerned about someone not removing their vote at L-1 when Blopp hasn't even talked yet.
Actually since I can't vote Blopp right now VOTE: Lucky. I think this is more likely anyway. Your stats case also was reachy and the whole basis of your scumread isn't concrete. I would accept your case if and only if it was supporting evidence of a much stronger and more viable case.
Isn't most Day 1 early cases reachy? I really hate this argument
Also I see you join The Luciano wagon after I printed you to vote and someone else joined before you. I don't like this. I could argue myself that your case on him is reachy but again my case is reachy here no? Finally your case is more repreat what was already aid to give you a reason to join the wagon. While not Al we always scum indicative it's a good start.
Once I catch up my read here I will chiose where my vote goes but you are definitely setting off alarms.
Most cases D1 are reachy but Lucky's case on Blopp is beyond reachy. I mean look at the case I just posted and tell me how that's a good case. And another concern is usually reachy D1 cases are used to create more discussion (mainly from the player being cased) so we can later get better reads and make better cases. But in this case Blopp isn't here to talk and Lucky keeps pushing her. Lucky isn't playing to get more info. Lucky is playing to get a lynch.
I will respond to your readlist post next. I NEED to respond to this first. Is case on Blopp was from what 2 pages worth of posts? Wouldn't that have to be reachy? Do I agree it's a good case? Weird yes but not really screaming confirmed scum for me and thus my vote is not on Blopp. For an elimation to be made 5 players have to agree it's a good enough case to do so. If an elimation were to occur based on that it would be so telling for the rest of the game. Making a case on a player might not get info on the player ryou are pushing but can give Intel on other players in the wagon. Why did they join the wagon? Did they explain themselves well. If it was bad reasoning, what purpose did they have joining that wagon? Miselimnatiin or bad play? So much can be told by these situations.
Overall it has provided discussion to a slow early game and thus has actually been a very beneficial wagon.
I agree with this but it would be much more beneficial to push a player that's active. You would get much more info from that. And also I don't like how Lucky seems to have 0 interest in Blopp being replaced. He just wants Blopp lynched and doesn't appear to care about whether or not Blopp actually is scum or care about getting more info that could help make that decision.
Posted: Sat Jul 04, 2020 5:22 am
by Raya36
In post 209, TheThirteenthJT wrote:TheThirteenthJT - Slight townlean. 58 are you suggesting Jam and Clark are partners? What is your read on Clark? I believe your vote is still there.
Yes partially. I was also suggesting that scum are the only ones that truly know everyone's alignment. So Clark is an interesting read for me and would like to expand on this later. He actually failed a test earlier and it looks bad for him but his play has indicated town for me. I will be keeping a good look at him throughout the game but it's currently Not enough for me to keep my vote on him currently.
So after my reread my vote will most comfortably be here
In post 69, Raya36 wrote:Lucky and blopp. Maybe Clark but I'm unsure
Where's your vote then?
My vote is "on" Blopp I just don't want him at L-1
In post 63, LuckyLuciano wrote:Perhaps it is a coincidence, but since being wagoned, Blopp has removed their profile pic. That means they have been onsite and decided not to post. So now we have her ignoring the initial wagon that I started with 72o, despite posting after it began and ignoring my case. In addition, we have her logging on to remove her profile pic and still not posting. Feels a lot like giving up to me.
This is a bad case and very reachy.
In post 71, TheThirteenthJT wrote:Also can you all look back at my two questions (rqs) I asked. I really want to know the answer for the first one.
In post 67, Raya36 wrote:UNVOTE:
I don't want a quick hammer. L-2 is plenty for pressure. Scumlean on Lucky for not removing his vote. Could be hoping for that quickhammer
Is he your only scumlean or do you have more?
In post 69, Raya36 wrote:Lucky and blopp. Maybe Clark but I'm unsure
"I scumlean Lucky for possibly wanting a quick hammer on my other scumlean."
For the record, I'm expecting Blopp not to post again until the slot is replaced, and if the slot claims VT I will be pushing for the slot to be eliminated.
Just because I scumlean him doesnt mean I'm right (I never take associations into account D1. I often have multiple scumread that don't work together). And its perfectly viable to be concerned about someone not removing their vote at L-1 when Blopp hasn't even talked yet.
Actually since I can't vote Blopp right now VOTE: Lucky. I think this is more likely anyway. Your stats case also was reachy and the whole basis of your scumread isn't concrete. I would accept your case if and only if it was supporting evidence of a much stronger and more viable case.
Isn't most Day 1 early cases reachy? I really hate this argument
Also I see you join The Luciano wagon after I printed you to vote and someone else joined before you. I don't like this. I could argue myself that your case on him is reachy but again my case is reachy here no? Finally your case is more repreat what was already aid to give you a reason to join the wagon. While not Al we always scum indicative it's a good start.
Once I catch up my read here I will chiose where my vote goes but you are definitely setting off alarms.
Most cases D1 are reachy but Lucky's case on Blopp is beyond reachy. I mean look at the case I just posted and tell me how that's a good case. And another concern is usually reachy D1 cases are used to create more discussion (mainly from the player being cased) so we can later get better reads and make better cases. But in this case Blopp isn't here to talk and Lucky keeps pushing her. Lucky isn't playing to get more info. Lucky is playing to get a lynch.
I will respond to your readlist post next. I NEED to respond to this first. Is case on Blopp was from what 2 pages worth of posts? Wouldn't that have to be reachy? Do I agree it's a good case? Weird yes but not really screaming confirmed scum for me and thus my vote is not on Blopp. For an elimation to be made 5 players have to agree it's a good enough case to do so. If an elimation were to occur based on that it would be so telling for the rest of the game. Making a case on a player might not get info on the player ryou are pushing but can give Intel on other players in the wagon. Why did they join the wagon? Did they explain themselves well. If it was bad reasoning, what purpose did they have joining that wagon? Miselimnatiin or bad play? So much can be told by these situations.
Overall it has provided discussion to a slow early game and thus has actually been a very beneficial wagon.
I agree with this but it would be much more beneficial to push a player that's active. You would get much more info from that. And also I don't like how Lucky seems to have 0 interest in Blopp being replaced. He just wants Blopp lynched and doesn't appear to care about whether or not Blopp actually is scum or care about getting more info that could help make that decision.
Raya I'm pretty sure Lucky follows a trail of thought like this: Day 1 is useless, its okay to lose 2 town, as N1 can give us a lot of information to make the loss worth it.
I don't think its pro-town in anyway, but it does seem like he likes that idea.
In post 183, 72offsuit wrote:Why are you asking me for a read on lucky in the middle of your reads list?
I like to ask questions on players I'm unsure of. Sometimes I stick it in my readslist. My readslists are mostly just reference for myself. Could you answer please?
Isn't it Scummy for 72 to ask that?
How so?
Why aks that? Never heard or seen that it is or should be Scummy to ask a question in the middle of a readslist. Like, it's totally something I can see Scum asking to try and look like they are Scum hunting, but not something I can really see Town asking that thinking, "Hmm, seems pretty out of the ordinary you ask a question mid RL. I bet if I ask them why they did that they couldn't come up with an answer if they are Scum." Yeah, not really seeing that coming from Town. Unless 72 has a gob of experience, but even then there are way better things to talk about than something that doesn't really seem Scummy inherently. 72's follow up doesn't really look good either.
72 has seemed evasive. But I'm not sure what to make of that
Unfortunately there's very little you can do if someone is being evasive. If being evasive continues for an extended period that's when you can start saying with some confidence that its scummy.
Yeah, that's why I don't find it necessarily scummy yet
In post 69, Raya36 wrote:Lucky and blopp. Maybe Clark but I'm unsure
Where's your vote then?
My vote is "on" Blopp I just don't want him at L-1
In post 63, LuckyLuciano wrote:Perhaps it is a coincidence, but since being wagoned, Blopp has removed their profile pic. That means they have been onsite and decided not to post. So now we have her ignoring the initial wagon that I started with 72o, despite posting after it began and ignoring my case. In addition, we have her logging on to remove her profile pic and still not posting. Feels a lot like giving up to me.
This is a bad case and very reachy.
In post 71, TheThirteenthJT wrote:Also can you all look back at my two questions (rqs) I asked. I really want to know the answer for the first one.
In post 67, Raya36 wrote:UNVOTE:
I don't want a quick hammer. L-2 is plenty for pressure. Scumlean on Lucky for not removing his vote. Could be hoping for that quickhammer
Is he your only scumlean or do you have more?
In post 69, Raya36 wrote:Lucky and blopp. Maybe Clark but I'm unsure
"I scumlean Lucky for possibly wanting a quick hammer on my other scumlean."
For the record, I'm expecting Blopp not to post again until the slot is replaced, and if the slot claims VT I will be pushing for the slot to be eliminated.
Just because I scumlean him doesnt mean I'm right (I never take associations into account D1. I often have multiple scumread that don't work together). And its perfectly viable to be concerned about someone not removing their vote at L-1 when Blopp hasn't even talked yet.
Actually since I can't vote Blopp right now VOTE: Lucky. I think this is more likely anyway. Your stats case also was reachy and the whole basis of your scumread isn't concrete. I would accept your case if and only if it was supporting evidence of a much stronger and more viable case.
Isn't most Day 1 early cases reachy? I really hate this argument
Also I see you join The Luciano wagon after I printed you to vote and someone else joined before you. I don't like this. I could argue myself that your case on him is reachy but again my case is reachy here no? Finally your case is more repreat what was already aid to give you a reason to join the wagon. While not Al we always scum indicative it's a good start.
Once I catch up my read here I will chiose where my vote goes but you are definitely setting off alarms.
Most cases D1 are reachy but Lucky's case on Blopp is beyond reachy. I mean look at the case I just posted and tell me how that's a good case. And another concern is usually reachy D1 cases are used to create more discussion (mainly from the player being cased) so we can later get better reads and make better cases. But in this case Blopp isn't here to talk and Lucky keeps pushing her. Lucky isn't playing to get more info. Lucky is playing to get a lynch.
I will respond to your readlist post next. I NEED to respond to this first. Is case on Blopp was from what 2 pages worth of posts? Wouldn't that have to be reachy? Do I agree it's a good case? Weird yes but not really screaming confirmed scum for me and thus my vote is not on Blopp. For an elimation to be made 5 players have to agree it's a good enough case to do so. If an elimation were to occur based on that it would be so telling for the rest of the game. Making a case on a player might not get info on the player ryou are pushing but can give Intel on other players in the wagon. Why did they join the wagon? Did they explain themselves well. If it was bad reasoning, what purpose did they have joining that wagon? Miselimnatiin or bad play? So much can be told by these situations.
Overall it has provided discussion to a slow early game and thus has actually been a very beneficial wagon.
I agree with this but it would be much more beneficial to push a player that's active. You would get much more info from that. And also I don't like how Lucky seems to have 0 interest in Blopp being replaced. He just wants Blopp lynched and doesn't appear to care about whether or not Blopp actually is scum or care about getting more info that could help make that decision.
Raya I'm pretty sure Lucky follows a trail of thought like this: Day 1 is useless, its okay to lose 2 town, as N1 can give us a lot of information to make the loss worth it.
I don't think its pro-town in anyway, but it does seem like he likes that idea.
I'm still convinced he's pushing for a mislynch
Posted: Sat Jul 04, 2020 5:54 am
by 72offsuit
In post 210, LicketyQuickety wrote:There's a LOT more that goes into playing as Scum than simply copying your Town game. Just saying.
There is only one way of playing scum?
Oh, please tell me more.
In post 183, 72offsuit wrote:Why are you asking me for a read on lucky in the middle of your reads list?
I like to ask questions on players I'm unsure of. Sometimes I stick it in my readslist. My readslists are mostly just reference for myself. Could you answer please?
Isn't it Scummy for 72 to ask that?
How so?
Why aks that? Never heard or seen that it is or should be Scummy to ask a question in the middle of a readslist. Like, it's totally something I can see Scum asking to try and look like they are Scum hunting, but not something I can really see Town asking that thinking, "Hmm, seems pretty out of the ordinary you ask a question mid RL. I bet if I ask them why they did that they couldn't come up with an answer if they are Scum." Yeah, not really seeing that coming from Town. Unless 72 has a gob of experience, but even then there are way better things to talk about than something that doesn't really seem Scummy inherently. 72's follow up doesn't really look good either.
72 has seemed evasive. But I'm not sure what to make of that
Can you post specifically in which posts I was evasive?
In post 69, Raya36 wrote:Lucky and blopp. Maybe Clark but I'm unsure
Where's your vote then?
My vote is "on" Blopp I just don't want him at L-1
In post 63, LuckyLuciano wrote:Perhaps it is a coincidence, but since being wagoned, Blopp has removed their profile pic. That means they have been onsite and decided not to post. So now we have her ignoring the initial wagon that I started with 72o, despite posting after it began and ignoring my case. In addition, we have her logging on to remove her profile pic and still not posting. Feels a lot like giving up to me.
This is a bad case and very reachy.
In post 71, TheThirteenthJT wrote:Also can you all look back at my two questions (rqs) I asked. I really want to know the answer for the first one.
In post 67, Raya36 wrote:UNVOTE:
I don't want a quick hammer. L-2 is plenty for pressure. Scumlean on Lucky for not removing his vote. Could be hoping for that quickhammer
Is he your only scumlean or do you have more?
In post 69, Raya36 wrote:Lucky and blopp. Maybe Clark but I'm unsure
"I scumlean Lucky for possibly wanting a quick hammer on my other scumlean."
For the record, I'm expecting Blopp not to post again until the slot is replaced, and if the slot claims VT I will be pushing for the slot to be eliminated.
Just because I scumlean him doesnt mean I'm right (I never take associations into account D1. I often have multiple scumread that don't work together). And its perfectly viable to be concerned about someone not removing their vote at L-1 when Blopp hasn't even talked yet.
Actually since I can't vote Blopp right now VOTE: Lucky. I think this is more likely anyway. Your stats case also was reachy and the whole basis of your scumread isn't concrete. I would accept your case if and only if it was supporting evidence of a much stronger and more viable case.
Isn't most Day 1 early cases reachy? I really hate this argument
Also I see you join The Luciano wagon after I printed you to vote and someone else joined before you. I don't like this. I could argue myself that your case on him is reachy but again my case is reachy here no? Finally your case is more repreat what was already aid to give you a reason to join the wagon. While not Al we always scum indicative it's a good start.
Once I catch up my read here I will chiose where my vote goes but you are definitely setting off alarms.
Most cases D1 are reachy but Lucky's case on Blopp is beyond reachy. I mean look at the case I just posted and tell me how that's a good case. And another concern is usually reachy D1 cases are used to create more discussion (mainly from the player being cased) so we can later get better reads and make better cases. But in this case Blopp isn't here to talk and Lucky keeps pushing her. Lucky isn't playing to get more info. Lucky is playing to get a lynch.
I will respond to your readlist post next. I NEED to respond to this first. Is case on Blopp was from what 2 pages worth of posts? Wouldn't that have to be reachy? Do I agree it's a good case? Weird yes but not really screaming confirmed scum for me and thus my vote is not on Blopp. For an elimation to be made 5 players have to agree it's a good enough case to do so. If an elimation were to occur based on that it would be so telling for the rest of the game. Making a case on a player might not get info on the player ryou are pushing but can give Intel on other players in the wagon. Why did they join the wagon? Did they explain themselves well. If it was bad reasoning, what purpose did they have joining that wagon? Miselimnatiin or bad play? So much can be told by these situations.
Overall it has provided discussion to a slow early game and thus has actually been a very beneficial wagon.
I agree with this but it would be much more beneficial to push a player that's active. You would get much more info from that. And also I don't like how Lucky seems to have 0 interest in Blopp being replaced. He just wants Blopp lynched and doesn't appear to care about whether or not Blopp actually is scum or care about getting more info that could help make that decision.
What gives you the impression LL "just wants Blopa lynched"?
In post 183, 72offsuit wrote:Why are you asking me for a read on lucky in the middle of your reads list?
I like to ask questions on players I'm unsure of. Sometimes I stick it in my readslist. My readslists are mostly just reference for myself. Could you answer please?
Isn't it Scummy for 72 to ask that?
How so?
Why aks that? Never heard or seen that it is or should be Scummy to ask a question in the middle of a readslist. Like, it's totally something I can see Scum asking to try and look like they are Scum hunting, but not something I can really see Town asking that thinking, "Hmm, seems pretty out of the ordinary you ask a question mid RL. I bet if I ask them why they did that they couldn't come up with an answer if they are Scum." Yeah, not really seeing that coming from Town. Unless 72 has a gob of experience, but even then there are way better things to talk about than something that doesn't really seem Scummy inherently. 72's follow up doesn't really look good either.
72 has seemed evasive. But I'm not sure what to make of that
Unfortunately there's very little you can do if someone is being evasive. If being evasive continues for an extended period that's when you can start saying with some confidence that its scummy.
You seem to be agreeing with Raya here. Is that correct?
In post 69, Raya36 wrote:Lucky and blopp. Maybe Clark but I'm unsure
Where's your vote then?
My vote is "on" Blopp I just don't want him at L-1
In post 63, LuckyLuciano wrote:Perhaps it is a coincidence, but since being wagoned, Blopp has removed their profile pic. That means they have been onsite and decided not to post. So now we have her ignoring the initial wagon that I started with 72o, despite posting after it began and ignoring my case. In addition, we have her logging on to remove her profile pic and still not posting. Feels a lot like giving up to me.
This is a bad case and very reachy.
In post 71, TheThirteenthJT wrote:Also can you all look back at my two questions (rqs) I asked. I really want to know the answer for the first one.
In post 67, Raya36 wrote:UNVOTE:
I don't want a quick hammer. L-2 is plenty for pressure. Scumlean on Lucky for not removing his vote. Could be hoping for that quickhammer
Is he your only scumlean or do you have more?
In post 69, Raya36 wrote:Lucky and blopp. Maybe Clark but I'm unsure
"I scumlean Lucky for possibly wanting a quick hammer on my other scumlean."
For the record, I'm expecting Blopp not to post again until the slot is replaced, and if the slot claims VT I will be pushing for the slot to be eliminated.
Just because I scumlean him doesnt mean I'm right (I never take associations into account D1. I often have multiple scumread that don't work together). And its perfectly viable to be concerned about someone not removing their vote at L-1 when Blopp hasn't even talked yet.
Actually since I can't vote Blopp right now VOTE: Lucky. I think this is more likely anyway. Your stats case also was reachy and the whole basis of your scumread isn't concrete. I would accept your case if and only if it was supporting evidence of a much stronger and more viable case.
Isn't most Day 1 early cases reachy? I really hate this argument
Also I see you join The Luciano wagon after I printed you to vote and someone else joined before you. I don't like this. I could argue myself that your case on him is reachy but again my case is reachy here no? Finally your case is more repreat what was already aid to give you a reason to join the wagon. While not Al we always scum indicative it's a good start.
Once I catch up my read here I will chiose where my vote goes but you are definitely setting off alarms.
Most cases D1 are reachy but Lucky's case on Blopp is beyond reachy. I mean look at the case I just posted and tell me how that's a good case. And another concern is usually reachy D1 cases are used to create more discussion (mainly from the player being cased) so we can later get better reads and make better cases. But in this case Blopp isn't here to talk and Lucky keeps pushing her. Lucky isn't playing to get more info. Lucky is playing to get a lynch.
I will respond to your readlist post next. I NEED to respond to this first. Is case on Blopp was from what 2 pages worth of posts? Wouldn't that have to be reachy? Do I agree it's a good case? Weird yes but not really screaming confirmed scum for me and thus my vote is not on Blopp. For an elimation to be made 5 players have to agree it's a good enough case to do so. If an elimation were to occur based on that it would be so telling for the rest of the game. Making a case on a player might not get info on the player ryou are pushing but can give Intel on other players in the wagon. Why did they join the wagon? Did they explain themselves well. If it was bad reasoning, what purpose did they have joining that wagon? Miselimnatiin or bad play? So much can be told by these situations.
Overall it has provided discussion to a slow early game and thus has actually been a very beneficial wagon.
I agree with this but it would be much more beneficial to push a player that's active. You would get much more info from that. And also I don't like how Lucky seems to have 0 interest in Blopp being replaced. He just wants Blopp lynched and doesn't appear to care about whether or not Blopp actually is scum or care about getting more info that could help make that decision.
Raya I'm pretty sure Lucky follows a trail of thought like this: Day 1 is useless, its okay to lose 2 town, as N1 can give us a lot of information to make the loss worth it.
I don't think its pro-town in anyway, but it does seem like he likes that idea.
I'm still convinced he's pushing for a mislynch
What makes you think he is scum pushing for a town mislynch, over town pushing a wagon he thinks is productive?
Posted: Sat Jul 04, 2020 6:03 am
by JamSV
In post 222, 72offsuit wrote:You seem to be agreeing with Raya here. Is that correct?
Slightly, I just don't think going based off of something aloof like evasiveness is good for the game state currently, so I was telling her to let it be for the moment.