Mafiascum.net

In post 299, Lynx_Shine wrote:Town cores scare me quite a bit, mostly from a bad experience. I've seen them in two games so far, one of them the game was canceled early Day 2 from player action. The other, the town block was actually four or so Wolves who recruited a Townie or two and took a near-flawless win. Considering how paranoid everyone can be, it seems risky and takes a lot of widely-accepted pro-Town/Town-hunters. It sounds like a good idea if it's pulled off though.

Yeah, bad town cores are bad news. Even a good town core is not easy to put together, and when I am playing with people I know I can read and we want to make it happen sometimes it's still not possible because consensus just won't emerge.

In post 299, Lynx_Shine wrote:

In post 276, TheTrollie wrote:let's vote kues now

VC brought my attention to this. "Lynx is the only vote on Kue, make it a wagon." Trollie's reasonless posts are tearing me apart, you guys positive this is normal Town behavior? I mean, having the extra Town vote is nice and he's not exactly harmful, but damn

I don't believe it's just town trollie behaves like this.
definitely feels like normal trollie, but I have no grasp on his actual alignment.

In post 298, fferyllt wrote:

In post 286, JasonWazza wrote:Not for long that i can remember.

What are your thoughts on my sikon vote?

P-Edit: Why is it newb town over newb scum?

Hey, where'd you go?

Ummmmm sleep?

In post 295, likeabauss wrote: What do you make of my questions for him in post 32, his responses and what ensued there? It turned my read to town... just wondering if my compass is off kilter.

39 i can see scum doing.

In post 39, sikon327 wrote:

In post 32, likeabauss wrote:sikon327 - I'm interested in why your first substantial post of the thread has you leaning town on 2 folks, and then "opening a door" on your RVS fferyllt but subsequently clarifying that you are non-committal. I often find that scum opens the door without committing, and lets townies walk through. I also find quite often that scum likes to lean town or confirm town to build allegiance early in the game. Nobody walked through your open door, and you then retracted your vote. I find this intriguing.

Ah, didn't occur to me it could be viewed that way. My vote on fferyllt was just me trying to go for an RVS vote. After that, I asked her a question about her refusal to take part in the RVS, because I'm new and don't fully understand how some things work. Her answer to my question satisfied me, and

I figured I ought to take my vote off of her, if only to be, I dunno, civil(?)

, since I didn't have a real reason to suspect her just yet, and the RVS stage seemed to have petered out somewhat, so why hold onto an RVS vote? I never said she was town, necessarily. I just don't actually think she's the most likely to be scum right now. Although concerns about her behaviour being "buddying" are intriguing.

As for your mention of only having townreads...

wouldn't a scum player be LESS likely to have townreads?

It seems to me that by declaring a player to be town as a scum player, I'd be closing off potential avenues of people to lynch.

But I guess unvoting this early in the game is also a bit stifling, considering my own belief that seeing who everyone votes for is important. With that in mind...

Since most of the discussion right now seems to be around how the early game should function rather than scumhunting, and, well, these are questions whose answers don't depend on whether one is scum or not. If I wanted to, I could say, ohhhh, he's twisting my actions or whatever, but I can't honestly say you're suspicious, likeabauss, because you're scumhunting, scumhunting IS generally pro-town, and I guess my opening moves were a bit scummy, which helps no one, really. so... hm....

VOTE: cAPSLOCK

You said if people weren't RVSing, you'd "probably try to start something." I think RVS is over at this point, and your posts still don't seem to have a whole lot of content with regards to the current game.

I'd also like to hear from Lynx_Shine and Morthas, who haven't posted since confirmation.

The first bolded is bad reasoning/wording that i don't think a townie would use, there is no need to be civil in finding scum.

The second bolded she is trying to call herself town for having town reads.

That forth paragraph that i italicized is rather scummy.

The rest of the post seems to be fake scumhunting to me

And then in 41 she flip flops and votes you.

So yeah pretty darn scummy in my eyes.

In post 288, fferyllt wrote:

In post 286, JasonWazza wrote:Not for long that i can remember.

What are your thoughts on my sikon vote?

P-Edit: Why is it newb town over newb scum?

newbscum don't get butthurt over their cases being ignored.

I'm pretty sure i as newb scum got very butthurt over being ignored, i also don't believe that is a reason to town read a newb.

That's not the only reason I am townreading sikon.

But, lol I was delighted for my day 1 countervote to get more or less ignored in my first newbie game.

Okay, Jason, so lessee here...

JasonWazza wrote:

In post 295, likeabauss wrote: What do you make of my questions for him in post 32, his responses and what ensued there? It turned my read to town... just wondering if my compass is off kilter.

39 i can see scum doing.

In post 39, sikon327 wrote:

In post 32, likeabauss wrote:sikon327 - I'm interested in why your first substantial post of the thread has you leaning town on 2 folks, and then "opening a door" on your RVS fferyllt but subsequently clarifying that you are non-committal. I often find that scum opens the door without committing, and lets townies walk through. I also find quite often that scum likes to lean town or confirm town to build allegiance early in the game. Nobody walked through your open door, and you then retracted your vote. I find this intriguing.

Ah, didn't occur to me it could be viewed that way. My vote on fferyllt was just me trying to go for an RVS vote. After that, I asked her a question about her refusal to take part in the RVS, because I'm new and don't fully understand how some things work. Her answer to my question satisfied me, and

I figured I ought to take my vote off of her, if only to be, I dunno, civil(?)

, since I didn't have a real reason to suspect her just yet, and the RVS stage seemed to have petered out somewhat, so why hold onto an RVS vote? I never said she was town, necessarily. I just don't actually think she's the most likely to be scum right now. Although concerns about her behaviour being "buddying" are intriguing.

As for your mention of only having townreads...

wouldn't a scum player be LESS likely to have townreads?

It seems to me that by declaring a player to be town as a scum player, I'd be closing off potential avenues of people to lynch.

But I guess unvoting this early in the game is also a bit stifling, considering my own belief that seeing who everyone votes for is important. With that in mind...

Since most of the discussion right now seems to be around how the early game should function rather than scumhunting, and, well, these are questions whose answers don't depend on whether one is scum or not. If I wanted to, I could say, ohhhh, he's twisting my actions or whatever, but I can't honestly say you're suspicious, likeabauss, because you're scumhunting, scumhunting IS generally pro-town, and I guess my opening moves were a bit scummy, which helps no one, really. so... hm....

VOTE: cAPSLOCK

You said if people weren't RVSing, you'd "probably try to start something." I think RVS is over at this point, and your posts still don't seem to have a whole lot of content with regards to the current game.

I'd also like to hear from Lynx_Shine and Morthas, who haven't posted since confirmation.

The first bolded is bad reasoning/wording that i don't think a townie would use, there is no need to be civil in finding scum.

The second bolded she is trying to call herself town for having town reads.

That forth paragraph that i italicized is rather scummy.

The rest of the post seems to be fake scumhunting to me

And then in 41 she flip flops and votes you.

So yeah pretty darn scummy in my eyes.

In post 288, fferyllt wrote:

In post 286, JasonWazza wrote:Not for long that i can remember.

What are your thoughts on my sikon vote?

P-Edit: Why is it newb town over newb scum?

newbscum don't get butthurt over their cases being ignored.

I'm pretty sure i as newb scum got very butthurt over being ignored, i also don't believe that is a reason to town read a newb.

Firstly: Not a she. Not sure where that came from.

The first point you bolded, you highlight the point about "being civil" while ignoring the place where I said that I did not think fferyllt was scum. I had no reason to believe she was scum at this point, my vote on her was an RVS vote. And as with my apologetic-ness in the early game, this was born of still settling into the game. You'll notice the "apologeticness" and "civility" wears off once I start rolling with my case on likeabauss.

The second point: I legitimately did not understand what was scummy about having townreads at this specific point in time. I explained why I believed it was not scummy. He explained why it was scummy. Now I know.

The fourth paragraph was me thinking out loud. I believed that clearly expressing my thought process was the best thing to do, and my thought process went in a little circle there.

The flip-flop after the initial vote on cAPS (why was that fake scumhunting, by the way?) was simply the fact that I hadn't noticed until after I posted my first post that he hadn't actually voted for me. I'd intended for that to be a double post, but posts came in-between the two. I did not actually read these posts, as for some reason the forum failed to tell me that posts had been made since I started the post. I believed that he was actually trying to accuse me of being scum, due to the scum narrative he appeared to be building, and I believed that to be incongruous.

And just in general, my play in the beginning was, I will freely admit, a little bit unsteady. I was trying to settle into the swing of things at this point. You can call that "playing the newbie card" if you want, but... well, what else am I supposed to tell you? That's just what happened.

I like to think my play after this point showed a more pro-town attitude, even if it was a bit reckless.

In post 280, JasonWazza wrote:

In post 203, Cheery Dog wrote:

In post 202, JasonWazza wrote:The fact is this, you having to wait for someone else to vote, to vote me, is scummy and opportunistic as fuck.

No one else has voted you?

*suspecting me, same fucking difference.

No it's not. When other than me questioning, I still had you as a town read at the time.

In post 280, JasonWazza wrote:

UNVOTE: cAPSLOCK

So I assume cAPS isn't as good a vote now? What changed since then?

In post 282, JasonWazza wrote:

VOTE: sikon327

Things of interest;

Way to fucking apologetic.
Plays the newb card a fair amount.
too much AtE
A lot of sitting the vote in the unvote area.
267 seems like some crap.

Please explain why all these are apparently made my scum with the scum motivation behind them.
Because while 267 probably won't help the game progress much, just calling it crap means crap.

In post 292, Lynx_Shine wrote: This question still relevant? I generally like reading them, and they're some of my favorite things late game after players are dead and some scum is confirmed through role flips, huge advantage on that since they're harder to leave out scum partners. Disadvantage PR Townies can be just as likely to lie about their reads as scum are, don't want to point out the whole scum team before Night. I don't think refusing to post a full reads list is scummy on its own.

PR townies should never lie in that regard either - we can follow through thoughts from them just as much as non-powered townies should they be nightkilled.
But I also happen to think they're pointless and will actually help less in a NKA than just generally playing and showing reads (with reasons) as you go.
Post game doesn't matter, and you can easily tell from normal play anyway. (because if it's just there for bragging, you may as well just call out two names randomly and call them the scumteam as it's as much use to the game while it's going.)

In post 304, sikon327 wrote: Firstly: Not a she. Not sure where that came from.

The first point you bolded, you highlight the point about "being civil" while ignoring the place where I said that I did not think fferyllt was scum. I had no reason to believe she was scum at this point, my vote on her was an RVS vote. And as with my apologetic-ness in the early game, this was born of still settling into the game. You'll notice the "apologeticness" and "civility" wears off once I start rolling with my case on likeabauss.

Someone's a liar, 268 is extremely apologetic.

The second point: I legitimately did not understand what was scummy about having townreads at this specific point in time. I explained why I believed it was not scummy. He explained why it was scummy. Now I know.

That's not the point, it's the point you are screaming "i'm town because i did this"

The fourth paragraph was me thinking out loud. I believed that clearly expressing my thought process was the best thing to do, and my thought process went in a little circle there.

It's still scummy

The flip-flop after the initial vote on cAPS (why was that fake scumhunting, by the way?) was simply the fact that I hadn't noticed until after I posted my first post that he hadn't actually voted for me. I'd intended for that to be a double post, but posts came in-between the two. I did not actually read these posts, as for some reason the forum failed to tell me that posts had been made since I started the post. I believed that he was actually trying to accuse me of being scum, due to the scum narrative he appeared to be building, and I believed that to be incongruous.

Yeah the above is crap, you flip-floped, plain and simple, one second cAPS was scum, the next Bauss was, and this was during a conversation with him, the fact that it happened to be during a single posting time doesn't make it any more town.

And just in general, my play in the beginning was, I will freely admit, a little bit unsteady. I was trying to settle into the swing of things at this point. You can call that "playing the newbie card" if you want, but... well, what else am I supposed to tell you? That's just what happened.

I like to think my play after this point showed a more pro-town attitude, even if it was a bit reckless.

"I know i seemed scummy to start off, but i'm pro-town now right? RIGHT?"

Yeah no.

In post 305, Cheery Dog wrote:

In post 280, JasonWazza wrote:

In post 203, Cheery Dog wrote:

In post 202, JasonWazza wrote:The fact is this, you having to wait for someone else to vote, to vote me, is scummy and opportunistic as fuck.

No one else has voted you?

*suspecting me, same fucking difference.

No it's not. When other than me questioning, I still had you as a town read at the time.

It's basically the same thing, you may have had me down as town but the suspicion is what sparked cAPS, that's not a town thing for cAPS to do.

In post 280, JasonWazza wrote:

UNVOTE: cAPSLOCK

So I assume cAPS isn't as good a vote now? What changed since then?

I wasn't paying attention here, shit happened, i ISO'd Sik.

In post 282, JasonWazza wrote:

VOTE: sikon327

Things of interest;

Way to fucking apologetic.
Plays the newb card a fair amount.
too much AtE
A lot of sitting the vote in the unvote area.
267 seems like some crap.

Please explain why all these are apparently made my scum with the scum motivation behind them.
Because while 267 probably won't help the game progress much, just calling it crap means crap.

Easy;
Way to fucking apologetic; Scum want to appear sympathetic because it can lead to town town reading them wrongly
Plays the newb card a fair amount; Simple, scum don't want their mistakes to be looked at as scum mistakes, easier to write it off as newb.
too much AtE; Explains itself really
A lot of sitting the vote in the unvote area; This is bad for obvious reasons
267 seems like some crap; to me, i read a fake blow up, the wording just reads as fake, it looks like scum being backed into a corner (thanks to Trollie) and flailing around trying to act town, i don't read anything as genuine in this post.

I'm gonna give a few actual player reads now.

Cheery Dog and Lynx_Shine have been town throughout, IMO. They've provided content and scumhunted and all of that.

Morthas, on rereading... still seems to be buddying me. He not only mirrors my scumread on bauss at the time, but my townread on Kue, again with little independent reasoning. Having said that, his replacement, the Trollie, now seems town to me, simply because I don't feel like a scum player would try half the shit he's pulled. This is a light town read. He's probably aware his meta supports his current behaviour.

JasonWazza's earlier play / tunnelling on cAPS is still extremely suspect (cAPS seems to have been scumhunting to me), but his current play is better. I'm not happy that he's targeting me, but... eh. I feel like anything I DO get off him right now would be OMGUS.

But most of all, I'd like to talk about Kueshina.

In the early game, I declared Kue to be town, based on the fact that they were not aware that scum can use their QT during the confirmation phase.
They responded that they hadn't gotten her role PM until the game had already started. I failed to realize that this made my initial argument for them as town null. I spent the rest of the game just kind of assuming Kue was town and that their actions were excusable because they were new. A reread of their ISO without those goggles on has made me a bit less trusting of them. They've behaved extremely touchy and defensively throughout the entire game. Their prolific mention of "ways to start the game" consists entirely of things that are thoroughly and admittedly unrelated to the game at hand (they bring up dethy, that's not even kind of related to this) which seems very much like a distraction. Their cases have been consistently flawed in glaringly obvious ways (saying I jumped on two wagons when I'd actually started one of them, saying ff had not suspected likeabauss when she had...) and then, most damningly if they don't end up just replacing out, kueshina has not posted in two goddamned weeks. I'm done giving them the benefit of the doubt.

VOTE: Kueshina

---cut---

Well, Jason, there's not much that I can respond, seeing as how it's my word against yours, except to say that:
Your point of "way to apologetic" consists entirely of early game posts (where I was settling in) and exactly one recent post (where I feel I actually had something to apologize for).
Too much AtE is entirely that one panic/rage post that you don't like.
Sitting in the unvote area for an extended period of time: I was out of the GAME for an extended period of time. I needed some time to catch up.

I also still don't understand what you believe is the scum motivation for voting for one person and then suddenly changing that vote for no goddamned reason. Maybe it's not a pro-town move, but what motivation would I have to do it that requires me to be scum? It seems like a very bad scum move.

Apologies for my absence.

I don't think it was scummy of me to point out that most strategies for starting d1 don't work in this setup, leaving us with nothing better than RVS. I don't think it was scummy of me to include a list of d1 strategies that don't work here. I'm somewhat annoyed by the way everyone keeps misinterpreting that post.

I'm still happy with my vote on fferyllt. It seems like they were trying to help town as little as they could get away with before being called out. I'm also somewhat suspicious of TheTrollie, as they are also being unhelpful, although that might just be the way they play. Sikon327 seems probably town to me; It's hard to imagine newbscum posting 267, but easy to imagine newbtown posting it. I'm mostly neutral on likeabauss; they've been scummy in some ways but have also probably done the most scumhunting/ made the most useful contributions. Lynx_Shine, on the other hand, I'm neutral on because they don't seem to have done anything particularly scummy or particularly townish.

kuishina (3) - lynx, trollie, sikon
fferyllt (2) - kueshina, bauss
bauss (1) - cheerydog
sikon (1) - jason

We have a little under 2 days before nightfall

I decided to go back and reread the first 5 or so pages of the game this morning to remind myself why I had the reads I started with and think about whether they are justified. This is from my handwritten notes, and I'm not going to bother with post links. For the most part I'm not talking about later developments here - just the first 5 or so pages unless there wasn't enough content early on.

Sikon - post 22 struck me as town mindset. post 29 she seemed gratified at getting a tentative town read from me. She had good trajectory on her first non-RVS vote, and again on bauss for FoSing with no vote early on.

capslock - post 25 seems empty of real content. post 27 seems hedgy about rvs of all things. 43, 44 make excuses. 56 puts down a vote for lynx not posting (makes it clear that's why - oh the futility of pressure votes that are basically labeled as such). 78 more excuses. I liked that he questioned my IC post comment that I'm as likely to be scum as any other player, thought it was interesting that people read that as emphasizing I'm as likely to be town as any other player. Agree with trollie about the football metaphor, but on reread his contribution is comparatively weak.

kueshina - right off the top, a "townslip", not realizing scum can communicate via QT prior to the game starting with 7 confirmations. The only way this would happen if scum, I think, would be if kues was coached to make a townslip. 31 is a lot of theory. I feel like kues' general theory stuff kept getting read as suggestions about this game. Overly defensive about kingdavid's rvs vote, and in general pretty prickly and defensive. I keep reading this as paranoid town, but could be confirmation bias. kues looks worse as the game day progresses and doesn't seem to be advancing their reads.

morthas/trollie - morthas looked town as fuck to me. To the extent he gave reads, I agreed with them based on what was in the thread up to that point. His vote on bauss made sense to me. If I had wanted to put a vote down in the thread that early, I would have put it on bauss. He liked kues for town. Trollie's posts, aside from not including a lot of support, also look good to me. When I ask for support what he says makes sense. I can see his reasons for voting (and unvoting) sikon and then kues.

bauss - initially posts questions, including leading questions and foses without votes. In 51, reacts to morthas. oblique, indirect series of posts about buddying. Sometime after 70 he starts tunneling me, and since then his posts have been worthless for discerning alignment. I guess I can't tell town tunneling from scum tunneling when I'm the object, not without priors and some idea of whether my play style is by default scummy looking to him.

king david/cheery - KD's posts were substance free with one exception when I first ISO'd him. Lots of excuses for why he wasn't posting substance. Cheery's better, but he's not taking strong stances about other players. Vote is currently on capslock.

Lynx - votes kues in 64. posts have good content.

jason - I've posted about him several times, mostly with concern about his tunneling capslock. But, my capslock read has suffered a bit since going back over the first 5 or so pages. I like his content since returning. feel kinda unsure about his sikon vote.

Kue, I'm not accusing you of saying those things are valid ways to start the game. It just doesn't make sense to bring them up at all, most of them were for setups that were so vastly different that no one else would have thought of them if you hadn't mentioned them. And anyway, that's really just a minor thing.

My greatest issue with your play, Kueshina, is that your arguments for people being scum have consistently required blatant logical errors.
Your case on Kingdavid required you to assume that Vanilla Townies are more likely to confirm last. This one be excusable on its own.
Your case against me was based on the fact that I was on two different "wagons," ignoring the fact that not only was each wagon only two votes, but I actually started the one I was currently on.
Your case against fferyllt seems to have required you to have read a post where ff references an earlier post where she said bauss' play was suspicious, read that earlier post, see that she's saying bauss' behaviour is suspicious, and then willfully misinterpret it.

Every single one of your scum cases has depended on or prominently featured a blatant logical error somewhere in it. It's the consistency with which you have been doing this that bugs me here.

After my review this morning, I'm willing to lynch within (bauss, capslock, cheery). Would vote kues to avoid no lynch but am not enthused about their wagon.

Sikon, roll with me on Fferyllt. I'm pretty sure Kue is town. Lynx, you too.

For a comparison analysis, hanging Fferyllt over Kue is advantageous because:
Fferyllt is a more experienced player. Better/more experienced players hide their scum game well. An experienced player as scum, in a game of this size with waning involvement, can easily control the flow of info and conversation. Basically an experienced scum player is more dangerous to noob town than an experienced townie is helpful to a noob town. I'm thinking we have a mostly noob town here, and the mafia will be killing off any experienced town players in short order.

Plus I'm pretty sure Fferyllt is mafia and Kue is town.

Also, her short list for hanging includes the most vocal (active) scum hunters in this game. Me, caps, and Cheery. Doesn't that bother anybody else?

We need to hang somebody, and I'll derail the Kue wagon until I'm blue in the face because Fferyllt is a better tactical lynch even if you aren't sure what to do, or who is town/scum. BTW, I think Kue is town and Fferyllt is mafia. Did I say that yet? Should I say it again?

Cheery/IamKingDavid have been anything but vocal scumhunters, bauss. It's why they are currently in my list. Cheery can change that by getting into this game and doing shit.

That post, though, it does nothing to settle my worries about you. You're either oblivious to the game state due to your blind tunneling, or you're scum.

In post 313, likeabauss wrote: For a comparison analysis, hanging Fferyllt over Kue is advantageous because:
Fferyllt is a more experienced player. Better/more experienced players hide their scum game well. An experienced player as scum, in a game of this size with waning involvement, can easily control the flow of info and conversation. Basically an experienced scum player is more dangerous to noob town than an experienced townie is helpful to a noob town. I'm thinking we have a mostly noob town here, and the mafia will be killing off any experienced town players in short order.

*bzzt*

YOU NEVER EVER HANG BASED ON EXPERIENCE



If you hang someone based on "experience level" instead of based on "scumminess" then your basically gambling on RNG.

Experienced players are better to have alive, even when they are scum.

This is basically a "lynch the IC because they are better scum" argument, and that argument is based on odds, not on personal scumminess.

Also, Jason... There isn't enough support to push and hang Sikon today. At this point, we need to put our votes where they count, hang somebody, and get some info. We're going to end up in a no lynch otherwise.

Cheery, same thing... Doesn't look like enough support to hang me today. I appreciate you making a case and sticking to your guns, though.

Preview edit Jason... In case you havent been reading, I've laid out several examples of Fferyllts scuminess. Reread my ISO please. The experience piece is just an add on, and you and I will have to agree to disagree on the validity/usefulness of the tactic.

In post 314, fferyllt wrote:Cheery/IamKingDavid have been anything but vocal scumhunters, bauss. It's why they are currently in my list. Cheery can change that by getting into this game and doing shit.

Strongly disagree. Cheery replaced in and started slinging shit right away. He's got more genuine insights in 14 posts than half of the players in the game.

In post 318, likeabauss wrote:

In post 314, fferyllt wrote:Cheery/IamKingDavid have been anything but vocal scumhunters, bauss. It's why they are currently in my list. Cheery can change that by getting into this game and doing shit.

Strongly disagree. Cheery replaced in and started slinging shit right away. He's got more genuine insights in 14 posts than half of the players in the game.

Yes, good insights, though maybe a little shallow.

The one thing he did that impressed me, though, was townreading sikon for the post she made out of frustration.

But no effort to move things along, refine his reads, etc.

Like I said, he can change my impression by getting into the game.

^^ he, not she.

In post 313, likeabauss wrote:Sikon, roll with me on Fferyllt. I'm pretty sure Kue is town. Lynx, you too.

For a comparison analysis, hanging Fferyllt over Kue is advantageous because:
Fferyllt is a more experienced player. Better/more experienced players hide their scum game well. An experienced player as scum, in a game of this size with waning involvement, can easily control the flow of info and conversation. Basically an experienced scum player is more dangerous to noob town than an experienced townie is helpful to a noob town. I'm thinking we have a mostly noob town here, and the mafia will be killing off any experienced town players in short order.

Experience is nothing with anything - If the experience are on the completely wrong trail - then they're just as likely to live as anyone else.

Unless scum have the noobs already on their tails, predicting the kills to be the most experienced is just an IC N1 syndom of scum not knowing what else to do. (or the threat that they be good scumhunters). They (in this case, likely you) get rid off towniest - and experience doesn't have any say in that, except less mistakes may have been made.

In post 317, likeabauss wrote: Cheery, same thing... Doesn't look like enough support to hang me today. I appreciate you making a case and sticking to your guns, though.

I've made a case? (with apparent genuine insights?)

Why isn't a wagon on you able to take off then?

In post 319, fferyllt wrote:The one thing he did that impressed me, though, was townreading sikon for the post she made out of frustration.

Hasn't everyone bar Jason done that?

In post 322, Cheery Dog wrote:

In post 319, fferyllt wrote:The one thing he did that impressed me, though, was townreading sikon for the post she made out of frustration.

Hasn't everyone bar Jason done that?

You and trollie.

In post 311, sikon327 wrote:Kue, I'm not accusing you of saying those things are valid ways to start the game. It just doesn't make sense to bring them up at all, most of them were for setups that were so vastly different that no one else would have thought of them if you hadn't mentioned them. And anyway, that's really just a minor thing.

My greatest issue with your play, Kueshina, is that your arguments for people being scum have consistently required blatant logical errors.
Your case on Kingdavid required you to assume that Vanilla Townies are more likely to confirm last. This one

would

be excusable on its own.
Your case against me was based on the fact that I was on two different "wagons," ignoring the fact that not only was each wagon only two votes, but I actually started the one I was currently on.
Your case against fferyllt seems to have required you to have read a post where ff references an earlier post where she said bauss' play was suspicious, read that earlier post, see that she's saying bauss' behaviour is suspicious, and then willfully misinterpret it.

Every single one of your scum cases has depended on or prominently featured a blatant logical error somewhere in it. It's the consistency with which you have been doing this that bugs me here.

Sikon, bad logic is just that - bad logic. It doesn't necessarily indicate scum-motivation. Bad logic can be part of a case, there's usually more to it than that. I don't have Kues in my townpile. I think part of their problem is that they write in a roundabout fashion.

The one thing that Kues has not done that I would have liked to have seen was retract that accusation about me not saying that a post had pinged. That one was weird, but it could be just extreme literal-mindedness.