Micro 768: Geriatric Grey Flag Nightless - Game Over

[Korts]

VOTE: Aristophanes

Kill all List Mods : )

[Korts]

VOTE: Korts

Chainsaw defense.

Hmmm can you elaborate? Am I the perpetrator of this chainsaw defense, or are you justifying your vote with it? And do you mean the PolarBoy or the Tarhalindur version of the chainsaw defense?

[Korts]

VOTE: Jingle

Much obliged.

[Korts]

Sigh. Jingle, if you're going to play the look-at-me-I'm-scum-but-scum-wouldn't-say-that reaction test game, let people weigh in and allow the situation to develop before you jump in with your grand analysis.

"Superficial" questioning, really? What exactly were you expecting in response? I asked you to confirm that yes, you are claiming a scumtell on yourself, which you did, and now you're shocked that your wagon took off. Pull your head out of yourself, dude.

By the way - if Reck's "probably town," why mention his lack of RVS vote? What does that indicate, exactly?

[Korts]

1) Putting a serious spin on a jovial RVS vote

2) Obviously he wasn't accusing you of being the perpetrator. How would that even have been possible in this scenario?

3) It's obvious which version he meant. Did this really need to be asked?

1) I don't see why people are hearing a serious tone. Deadpan, maybe. I deliberately took the scumtell claim at face value to increase its potential to generate useful discussion.

2) There was no subject included in his two-word justification for the vote. Justifications for votes are usually meant to implicate the target of the vote, and me being the perpetrator would have made as much sense (i.e. zero) as him.

3) Sure, yeah, but I wanted to give him an opportunity to subvert expectations. That whole line of questioning was to get him to explicitly commit to the scum claim.

By the way - if Reck's "probably town," why mention his lack of RVS vote? What does that indicate, exactly?

Underlined

- The fact I could answer this myself means this is probably another pointless question.

Go ahead and answer it, then.

[Korts]

Because, it's an easy push. You look like you're doing something. You saw the reck vote and took that as confirmation that the game was going to be swinging in that direction and let yourself be pulled along. As someone who is aware of the gambit and town, you would be far more likely to sit back and wait for the situation to develop. You would know, as town, that reactions were going to be more natural without someone who had clearly figured out what was going on muddying the waters. Your mouth is saying one thing, and your intentions are clearly elsewhere. Hence, scum.

Yeah nah you're kinda overthinking it. You think I'm being calculated and actually scumhunting at this point. No, I'm just stirring shit up, and you gave the apropos.

Props on the NK-immune miller vig reference, though.

The associative is that Korts appears to be piling on in direct response to reck voting for me.

Haha no I was piling on in response to your confirmation, Reck just happened to post before me.

I do agree with your Luca suspicion.

[Korts]

Why? What's the end goal of that?

I dunno, to see if a wagon develops, I guess?

Now that I think of it, I wonder if Reck would have jumped on if I didn't deadpan the initial joke to force a commitment from Jingle.

[Korts]

Just popping in right now, but I thought I'd respond to anything aimed at me while I'm here.

Not sure if Jingle wants any answers, I don't feel a need to continue that thread myself right now. Ping me if I missed something!

3) Sure, yeah, but I wanted to give him an opportunity to subvert expectations. That whole line of questioning was to get him to explicitly commit to the scum claim.

Why? What's the end goal of that?

I dunno, just, an easy first wagon to get the town going, I guess. And then of course the competing wagon of those who think the first is bullshit. Huh, looks like it all worked out.

I do agree with your Luca suspicion.

Why are sheeping this opinion rather than raising it yourself earlier?

I mean, I haven't really dug into your post yet, and I didn't want to just OMGUS without a coherent reason, but since Jingle had indicated his suspicion too, I wanted to vocalize something as well so that I don't forget to look into it.

Nice of you to immediately twist this into another reason I must be scum, though. Good hustle.

[Korts]

You're the one twisting what I said into a reason why you must be scum.

Doesn't sheeping have negative implications?

I still don't see why Jingle voicing his opinion should influence whether you share your own. You didn't want to OMGUS me, but then it's suddenly Ok to once someone else has voiced their own suspicion (even though that player happens to be the one you're voting)?

There wasn't much consideration in it, to be honest. But you're right, I should be more strategic about my scumhunting.

Consider this an invitation to pool our resources, Jingle. I'll be making a proper analysis later, but I'd like to hear your thoughts on Luca.

Also, you no longer want to

'continue the thread'

regarding Jingle, yet you're still sitting on your Jingle vote. What exactly is your read on him right now?

Oh yeah, I wanted to unvote.

Thanks for the reminder.

VOTE: unvote

I'll be back in a couple hours, expect deeper thought then.

[Korts]

Man, this is the first time in a long while that I'm not actually dreading a reread.

Here are my notes as I go through:

Spoiler: Page 1

Jingle, post 5, sets the chainsaw defense bait and jokes about getting a Vanilla Town role PM. Simultaneously claims scum and town, which is a game relevant joke - this is a good catalyst, and a proactive move.

People who do not respond to the bait:

• insanity - makes a default opening post.
  
• RayFrost - jokingly OMGUSes CoA, who had jokingly voted him. Also an opening post.
  
• Aristophanes - makes a default opening post.
  
• Luca Blight - Also opening post. Puts a seasonal vote on Jingle, but not in response to Jingle's post.
  
• xRECKONERx - opening post, just banter.

I am the first to bite in post 11. Jingle immediately responds, confirming the scum claim, while separately pointing to Reck's banter as a scum tell. Reck immediately votes Jingle, and spells out the exact logic of the scum claim, somewhat excessively. (I now find this kind of overzealous and a bit scummy from Reck.)

In the post immediately after Reck's, I jump on the wagon too, and Jingle immediately serious votes me in 15. I'm not addressing the points against me at this point, but interestingly, he calls Reck probably town just three posts after calling him probably scum, even though Reck's overzealous wagon starter is more problematic to me. He does mention the lack of an RVS vote as a negative, even though RVS voting is just a custom and not generally accepted as an alignment indicative issue. (Though I suspect we can disagree endlessly about the importance of RVS.)

In the subsequent chatter, I note the following things:

• Keychain's opening post (16) is kind of playing both sides of the argument. Could be a deliberate bid to stay out of it, but also, again, an opening post.
  
• Aristo's 19 somehow takes issue with Jingle's VT claim instead of reflecting on the scum claim conversation, and then praises all three main proponents of that conversation - followed by an immediate denial of the "forward movement?" This is all kinds of tonally wrong to me.
  
• Reck's 20 and 21 make good points, but it also makes me uneasy, because while his analysis of both Keychain and CoA is sound, it seems to be concerned mostly with finding fault rather than listening and responding. Of course, this is still all page 1, so some game starting hyperbole is warranted.
  
• I like insanity's 22-24.

Spoiler: Luca's post 25

And then, ah yes - Luca chimes in, right on top of page 2.

I'm not gonna do direct quotes, because this will be a long post as it is. Let's just break it down into sections based on what he quotes and responds to. You can follow along in a second browser window if you like.

In the first section, he is responding to my original questions regarding Jingle's scum claim. He furthers the "superficial" narrative, which feels much less genuine from him than it did from Jingle, and then goes ahead and answers the questions themselves, even though they have already been addressed by Jingle (who was the one I asked). This seems like it's just meant to undermine me.

In the second section, he analyses my vote. The narrative is serious questions vs. joke vote, and that is either tone-deaf or a dishonest conclusion.

In the third section, he expresses his support of Jingle's analysis, but wants to cast a Reck-Korts scum pair as well. In the fourth section, he concedes a strategic point to me, but reiterates the superficial narrative and undermines another question of mine that is not directed at him. In the fifth, he provides a fair response to Aristo. He ends the post by voting me.

Spoiler: Rest of page 2

Luca's 26 again reiterates the superficial narrative and the serious question vs. joke vote argument, this time in response to insanity (and immediately after his original post). Then asks for more information regarding insanity's Aristo townlean.

Luca in 33 responds to my prompt to answer the question that he undermined before Jingle could answer (What does Reck's lack of RVS vote indicate). Luca's answer sidesteps the actual meat of the question (RVS vote) to say that Jingle can express negative opinions about Reck's behavior while still townreading him. Then, Luca 34 pushes back against suspicion of him, asking Jingle to make a case, and dismissing me as sheeping and questioning my timing.

I don't really get insanity's CoA case. I relate to CoA's 37 response more, and insanity calling it defensive is unfair considering she just made a case to be defended against. Then again, Ray's support of the case in 41 indicates either that there's something to it, or a potential Ray-insanity connection.

I'm starting to zone out, so page 3 is yet to come.

For now, I'm more than comfortable voting Luca.

VOTE: Luca

[Korts]

I don't really understand your Luca Blight case. Your 59 summarises all of his posts. But, what exactly are you finding scummy about them?

Undermining my questions to Jingle, co-opting the "superficial" narrative, and dishonest tonal analysis. The case he made was designed not to scumhunt, but discredit my position. I do not see how that is town behavior.

[Korts]

I don't really get insanity's CoA case. I relate to CoA's 37 response more, and insanity calling it defensive is unfair considering she just made a case to be defended against. Then again,

Ray's support of the case in 41 indicates either that there's something to it

,

or a potential Ray-insanity connection

That's two polar opposites

I dunno, I'm leaving room for the possibility that I didn't read your case well enough, or that our scumdars operate on different wavelengths. Ray's agreement can be any number of things depending on any number of others. I'm just saying it's a noteworthy agreement, and might be more meaningful for analysis down the line.

[Korts]

You have conveniently failed to address the biggest indicator: undermining my questions. My reading of everything else comes from that.

[Korts]

Page 3 analysis incoming. I will respond to you as well in the next post, CoA.

Spoiler: Page 3 notes

Jingle's 50 is general responses to his ongoing threads. Some of it is documenting his meta-reads, which I don't find interesting whatsoever. He promises in the @Korts section to provide his perspective on Luca after I do, of which I will remind him in my next post. And he reeeally doesn't like Keychain's reluctance to vote him, which must be an argument I missed (and I don't understand why this would be answering for other people).

CoA's 51 highlights a really interesting Ray quote. The LAMIST accusation is later cleared, as Ray was responding to Jingle with the highlighted sentences, but the "I waited" line is still an interesting choice of words. In the rest of CoA's post, she asks me some questions (responses in the next post), and responds to Keychain. Makes an interesting point about Keychain not putting Jingle to L-1 to avoid the appearance of doing so, but I don't find this a strong indicator, as it can also still be just caution driving that decision. The Jingle wagon did move very fast.

Nice catch of CoA's miss by insanity in 52 (cleared by CoA in 54). Insanity's 53 calls out my non-committal posts, which they were, but, like, I'm not going to commit to panning out my thoughts every time I sit down to post.

I like Reck's 55. Ray's 56 just responds to people, much like I did - but he also needs to commit himself to meaningful analysis at some point. I hope he doesn't stall for long.

Reck's 61 is fair. insanity's 62 is good.

Luca 66-67 calls my case baseless, and tries to poke a hole in it, but fails to address my main point.

Jingle's 69 is playing coy with reads, but in a very weird and unsettling way to me. If this is indeed theater, I can't figure out what the intent is. It's signaling that he has a full and nuanced read on the game, but because it's anonymous, nobody can decide whether to agree or not. It's kinda like baiting, though I don't know what.

So, with all that behind me, here is where I stand with each of you:

Spoiler: Reads

town

insanity

- Insightful questions, meaningful responses, no cause for suspicion.

Reckoner

- 20, 21, and 55 were good posts. No cause for suspicion.

Jingle

- I don't like his meta-reading technique very much, and everything he does is overdone, but I read genuine intent in most of what he posts.

Aristophanes

- Pretty uninvolved so far. Hoping that changes.

CultofAthena

- I don't have a reliable read. Hoping that changes.

RayFrost

- Doesn't seem immersed in the game, 3 posts total. I have mixed feelings about the direction of some of his responses, and he is yet to provide much analysis. Hoping that changes.

Keychain

- Her ISO is also surprisingly sparse with 3 posts. I am not quite convinced by the case against her, but I see the points, and her lack of activity is hindering the progression of the discussion around it, so I'm putting her below Ray.

Luca Blight

- so far my only definite scumread. I have already laid out my case in 64.

scum

[Korts]

Prompts and responses post.

Spoiler: @CultOfAthena

You already answered this question in 32. Did you feel there was something more to be said, or had you just forgotten?

You're right, I did. It slipped my mind at the time.

This is bad. Do you have nowhere else to place your vote? There's no reason to not have a vote in play at this stage in the game, or in any stage of the game really, barring LyLo.

Oh, please. I took my vote off someone I didn't want it on. When I figure out who I want it on, I place it there, like I have. There is no deadline, there is no rush. Settle down.

As for your "this is bad" spin, are you suggesting that me not voting is scummy, or just bad play? Either way, we need to have a conversation.

Spoiler: @Jingle

I will give you my primary thought on Luca. He thinks I'm town. I'll probably explain further after your analysis.

I'm looking forward to it.

Spoiler: @Jingle, @Keychain

At the risk of being accused of answering for other people again, I reeeally don't like Key's reluctance to vote me. Nor do I like the fact that it comes up in every part of 49.

I'm drawing a blank on why Key should be voting you. That said, I'm also drawing a blank on who Key is voting, and why. Can you guys both explain?

[Korts]

The confusion around my Jingle townread is completely fair - I had written out my reads after coming back to the post a couple hours later, and I didn't really go through my notes again, I just went off the top of my head. I had a lot of good will left over from Jingle's game starting behavior, but I realize that I conflated pro-game behavior with pro-town behavior - and his play has been increasingly off-kilter since then.

I also think that once I explain said plan, much of your gut scumread will make a lot more sense to you.

I really don't know how to read this. Is the plan itself scummy, or does it just result in scummy-looking behavior as you are setting it up? When are you explaining this plan that justifies scumreading you?

As for your challenge to find something that comes across from you as genuine, I'm happy to oblige you over the weekend. I'm guessing it's related to the same pro-game behavior as I said before. You challenged players at the appropriate times to move things forward.

My biggest concern with Luca is that he clearly thinks I'm town. He's been answering for me in a way that subtly suggests he's defending me without outright saying it, 25, which sets off all of my buddying alarms. He's been assuming he knows why I'm posting what I'm posting without considering alternatives, 26, which is a major red flag that he's not actually trying to work out my alignment. Generally, he thinks I'm town, and I think he should think I'm null. Especially at the top of page 2. I'd love an explanation as to what made you so sure I was town, Luca.

That's fair. What do you think of him answering my questions to you (once when you already had, and a second time before you did)?

(and frankly, I'd like to see [Keychain] get her sea legs under her and wow me.)

I appreciate shows of respect and camaraderie as much as the next person, but this parenthetical is kind of weird to finish a scumread on.

[Korts]

@insanity:

Yes, the Luca post you quoted in 80 is one of the two cases where Luca has undermined my questioning. That is the second occurrence,

In the first, he re-answers questions that I directed at Jingle in post 11, which were already addressed and furthered at the point of Luca's response:

Spoiler:

VOTE: Korts

Chainsaw defense.

Hmmm can you elaborate? Am I the perpetrator of this chainsaw defense, or are you justifying your vote with it? And do you mean the PolarBoy or the Tarhalindur version of the chainsaw defense?

I agree that this questioning feels superficial.

1) Putting a serious spin on a jovial RVS vote

2) Obviously he wasn't accusing you of being the perpetrator. How would that even have been possible in this scenario?

3) It's obvious which version he meant. Did this really need to be asked?

What particularly bothers me is the rhetorical questions he uses. The only purpose they serve is to make my questions look illogical and unnecessary. Which they weren't, because they were successful in getting an explicit scumclaim.

On this reading, I also realized that he also accuses me of being too serious about a joke in his first point, but then immediately turns around and demands that seriousness of me in the second point. "How would that even be possible" is essentially the same thing I was asking of Jingle, but I was doing it with tongue in cheek.

[Korts]

Mostly what I find kind of funny is that you're so upset about me "dancing around" a scumread on you without sealing it with a vote but you're equally dancing around one on me.

I see later on that insanity has also noticed this comment from Keychain. It is indeed a good point.

Jingle, why haven't you voted Keychain?

Ari is caught scum. I'm going to be the vengekill, because bussing in this setup is insane and thus I'm obviously town. I do NOT want a hammer on him until I've had time to pursue and expound upon my other reads, because I believe I have solved this game. If I have, I feel I must admit I'm very disappointed, given how much I've been looking forward to playing with some of you. Still, needs must and winning a game is enough of a consolation prize that I will have to content myself with it.

What?

Why are you under the impression that anyone would hammer Ari here? Nobody is voting him. Not even you are. I don't even understand how you think he's caught.

I am tired of your reaction baiting bullshit. Make your case if you have one. Is it just that Aristo's meta is not consistent over time and place? I mean, Jesus. There comes a point where you have to stop reading other games and play the one in front of you.

[Korts]

Thanks for the responses. I will parse your post later. Can you also address my questions in 98?

[Korts]

I was thinking about what my genuine intent read on Jingle meant. It wasn't intent, it was purpose that I saw. The seams between the paragraphs are quite visible, and there is a man with a needle on the other side. I will have to re-examine the tapestry that he has woven to see who's behind it.

The Aristo case is interesting, but essentially all of it hinges on the questionable idea that not putting Jingle at L-1 is scummy. Same as with keychain, I think that's just weak. And the I still don't see the slip-up in the meta vs. self-meta argument you pressured him on. Can you condense and simplify?

No offense was meant with the reaction baiting bullshit. What I meant was you seem to be laying traps and leaving prompts and breadcrumbing all over the place, which I don't find as constructive as being transparent.

For example, this plan you have alluded to, and claim to have explained. I have seen no explanation, and the post you linked is not one of yours.

[Korts]

Lamist is an acronym for look at me I'm so town.

[Korts]

so please no L-1 votes on Ari until we're ready for the hammer. I find him selfhammering at this point to be very likely.

Aw man, I was on board until your last sentence. Why do you keep getting ahead of yourself?

[Korts]

Do you disagree that Ari is scum, that I should be confident in this read, that Ari as scum would selfhammer at this point, or that Ari as scum would use the vengekill on me at this point?

I have no issue with your case or the strength of your read. I don't really see the argument for a self-hammer, and have no opinion on the vengekill.

My problem is with you acting like it is a given that the town will follow your Ari case, and are already giving warnings about L-1 before a wagon of any kind has developed. I can't decide if that is just hubris, some sort of LAMIST play, or something else.

[Korts]

I don't see what the point in including the summary is if it's not backing up the reads.

The point is for me to take notes while I'm rereading. Not everything I note is immediately alignment relevant.

[Korts]

Yeah, pretty much. I wasn't particularly concerned about being (or even looking) useful, I was just logging my thoughts as they came up.

[Korts]

@Korts

, in 76, you mention, among other things, that you felt Jingle is playing 'in a very weird and unsettling way to me'. So, why do you later conclude in your reads summary that Jingle's intent seems genuine (or his purpose seemed genuine in 115)?

Like I said before, I didn't reread my notes when I compiled my reads, and Jingle had a lot of good will left over in my mind from helping the game get going. When I clarified the "genuineness" in 115, I did not call his purpose genuine again. At that point, I realized that his visible purposefulness did not translate to any indication of alignment.

[Korts]

I have been mulling over the Ari case, and I'm on board. I'm not completely comfortable with Jingle's... attitude, I guess? But the case is compelling, and Ari's response has not been satisfactory.

VOTE: Aristophanes

[Korts]

Oh yeah, that's L-1.

Let's see if the self-hammer scare is justified.

[Korts]

Oh hey, looks like I haven't posted in a few days. I didn't really have much to say that I haven't already said, but I'll figure something out tomorrow.

[Korts]

Sorry, I've been a bit busier than I expected the last couple days. I will try to get something constructive in today.

[Korts]

f you could go into some kind of depth on your Ari read, I would find that really helpful. Like for/against him being scum.

1. His response (in 48) to Jingle's RVS VT claim was hella manipulative. "Feeling uneasy" and "it just feels wrong" were put forth as the reasons why the obvious joke is a point against Jingle. This was after Jingle's other RVS joke, a scumclaim, had already been taken up as a conversation-starting vehicle - and would have been a stronger argument to push. It's just disingenuous, especially with his refusal to vote along with it and put Jingle to L-1.
2. His stance regarding L-1 caution, by the way, is not consistent with his actions in his latest finished games, and his response to Jingle's observation of this has been lackluster - and can be summed up with his last word in 90: "meh."
3. In fact, in 95, he tries to turn it around on Jingle to say that the metadive is fake scumhunting.
4. In 60, he engages in the old "I would totally do that if I was scum" argument to discredit Jingle's expectation of town behavior.

All of this I find scummier the more I look at it.

I'm reluctant to take his level of activity and contribution as an indicator of alignment, but what little game-relevant material he has posted recently is just about defending himself, which doesn't help at all.

[Korts]

Hmmm. I will reevaluate things maybe tonight.

[Korts]

TGP, what was the basis for your Hopkirk suspicion yesterday? Where do you stand on him today? Has Ari's townflip changed your mind about Hopkirk?

Hi. I'll be catching up over the next few days. As a heads up, I'm usually online in the mornings and after midnight.

How is your catchup going, BlackVoid? I am interested to see this slot get back in the game.

[Korts]

I think TheGoldenParadox's response to Ari's wagon reeks the most. The way he unvoted despite thinking that there is a 'very reasonable chance he's scum' feels like someone who wanted to get off a town off mislynch wagon, while leaving his options open. The fact that he doesn't give any reasons for why Hopkirk was apparently scummier excerpt for 'meta' is also not good.

I like this read.

VOTE: TheGoldenParadox

[Korts]

I need to reread TGP/Ray's slot and the game as a whole at some point.

@Reckoner: What do you think about my thoughts on you from yesterday?

Still waiting on TGP to go over which games he's talking about. If he just meant the one we were in together, that's finished now.

Gest Idea
Dragon Hunters
Marked for Death #1

Yes, what about them?

[Korts]

Your sudden cavalier attitude is highly unsettling, Jingle.

I understand the rest of your townreads, but what justifies Hopkirk's position there?

[Korts]

TGP, none of that explains your meta angle. You brought up three specific games where Hopkirk's play... was different as town, I guess? You didn't say what about those games was interesting. Please clarify.

Or have you ditched the meta argument in favor of this process of elimination thing? How does a null read eliminate someone from suspicion?

[Korts]

Not hammering since I'm having a hard time seeing scum being so stupid when he's on L1 and his 'top scumread' isn't voting him yet.

Does this mean that you are reading TGP as incompetent town?

[Korts]

The games he mentioned were actually groupscum, town, and (third party that changes alignment) in a upick that I broke.

Soooo just random noise then, not actually relevant analysis.

I don't read this as incompetence. It looks much more like taking the piss.

[Korts]

Hmmm.

Interesting.

Here are some links:

Dragon Hunters endgame reveal - Town wins, Hopkirk is town.

Marked for Death endgame reveal - Town wins, Hopkirk is town.

Greatest Idea OP with dead flips - Hopkirk is town.

VOTE: unvote

VOTE: Hopkirk

Why did you lie about your alignment in these games? Did it not occur to you that someone would check?

[Korts]

Hmmm, fair enough.

VOTE: unvote

VOTE: TheGoldenParadox

... Is taking the piss scum indicative? If so, I'd be interested in hearing what you think suggests Paradox is deliberately making such bizarre arguments and isn't just a bit clueless.

This is a reasonable question, but I believe it can be a deliberate strategy of obfuscation. I don't think cluelessness is a good explanation when he's outright avoiding questions and refusing to explain himself. If he at least tried to support his meta argument, I would be willing to entertain the notion, but that is not the case at all.

[Korts]

Eh, it was an impulsive reaction to being lied to, which I retracted after an explanation. I don't really like your analysis of this situation, and I don't like how you talk about me in third person.

[Korts]

mod:

can we get a votecount and a pulse check on Blackvoid?

Now that I read Reck's post again, I also don't like that he reiterates how he's "blinded" by me. Like, it's flattering, but repeating it as justification for increasing his suspicion on me makes it sound like the first mention was intended to prepare the scene for just such a turn.

[Korts]

I'm here. Sorry for lack of posting. I don't know why I wasn't prodded before replacement. The mod seems aware of how prods work given he posted it in the OP. Will be catching up today since I have free time.

Not sure what to think about your immediate appearance after a replacement notice was posted. It suggests that you hadn't just forgotten about the existence of this game, but were deliberately flying under the radar, waiting for a prod to just barely fulfill the minimum activity requirement.

Looking forward to your contributions.

[Korts]

Like, I've done the same thing where I just sit on my ass and don't post in the thread bc lazy or not motivated and then when I'm about to be replaced I finally do something

For 8 days? I realize how Gurgi not enforcing the 48 hour prods would give a false sense of complacency, but that doesn't exonerate BlackVoid the least bit from posting at least something to the effect of "hi, sorry, I didn't catch up yet" around the first time he was called out on his inactivity, which I did four days ago.

[Korts]

Hey Hopkirk, you still willing to hammer TGP?

[Korts]

Ugh. At this point, it's pretty clear that TGP is not going to explain himself, or post anything useful. Can we get this lynch over with? We'll deal with BlackVoid afterwards.

[Korts]

Fuck, okay.

I think I'm going to be the scum push for today for hammering both wagons.

If anyone uses this argument, they would be only incriminating themselves. Both wagons were completely justified and uncontested, and both were basically in service of moving the game forward. We have not had enough activity for competing wagons, unfortunately, and that has stunted our progress.

I will try to make a similar analysis to yours tomorrow, depending on how much work I have during the day. If not, it will happen over the weekend.

[Korts]

Sorry guys, I had a more eventful weekend than I anticipated. I also have more urgent responsibilities tonight, but I will get around to this tomorrow.

[Korts]

Oh shit, I knew I forgot something. I don't have time for a proper post, but I want to share some thoughts while I'm here.

I think I'm forming an OMGUS read on Hopkirk as I read his analysis - the connections he's involving me in are all rubbing me the wrong way, and I'm having some trouble viewing it objectively. I will try to lose the ego when I do a proper reread, and see if my suspicion holds up. It's certainly worth noting that even though I seem to be his top scum pick, he doesn't have much of a case against me.

Jingle and insanity seem pro-town. I will have to look into Keychain. Reck is null. I believe Luca/BV/<insertplayerhere> is probably scum, but I basically only have Luca's early game behavior and BV's prod dodging to go on, which is not very substantial.

Since everyone seems to be picking entire scumteams, my guess right now would be Luca/Hopkirk/[Keychain/Reck].

[Korts]

Hmmm.

The back and forth on this page does not seem very much like scumpartner theater. Not sure if scum-town or town-town though. Hopkirk is making some sound points, and Reck is getting riled up.

I'm not sure where to put Hopkirk backing down from me as confscum so easily. It initially pinged my radar, but giving up on bad logic as soon as it is called out

can

be a reasonable pro-town move. It seems, however, that rather than just demoting my guaranteed position in all his scumteam calls, he's now transitioned his main focus to a scumteam without me? Not sure how that works.

Gotta go now. Will do more tomorrow.

[Korts]

Sorry guys. I'm having a rough couple of weeks. I don't want to replace out, because that would be a death sentence for the game, but I won't be able to contribute until the weekend. I am setting a bunch of reminders for myself so I don't flake on that promise.

[Korts]

Shit. Sorry, guys. I got backlogged.

Good game, scum.

No way town can ever win in a geriatric game

lol

Reported.