In post 7, notscience wrote:Vote for mala, vote for not_mafia. I can't decide which wagon I want to join! Guess Im gonna sheep farside, plain and simple.
VOTE: mala
VOTE: Notscience
In post 7, notscience wrote:Vote for mala, vote for not_mafia. I can't decide which wagon I want to join! Guess Im gonna sheep farside, plain and simple.
VOTE: mala
In post 12, notscience wrote:Oh if you dont like buddying youre gonna hate me
In post 42, farside22 wrote:I thought you were saying you were trying to use your mmmmmm.......... performance to do a reaction test, so I was apologizing if I ruined your fun.In post 39, HK 50 wrote:[Statement:]Master Farside! I would advise you not to argue my existence is "made up". It accidently trips my Mark II Philosophy unit, making me ponder my programming. After all, I'm currently in a state of ethical bliss where I massacre all organics in the same, wanton style. Tempering which such a perfect wiring will only lead to decrease efficiency.
UNVOTE: notscience
VOTE: Farside
[Observation:]However master, I am rather perplexed by the tonal discharge displayed by you in post 29. Despite my strewed desires, you seem deadly serious in your apology when the thread's tone was akin to cheerful banter. Why did you felt the need to Apolgize for the lack of murdering?
[Addendum:]Assuming your dialogue with Dunnstral has reached its concordance with its primary directive, what did you hope to gain from asking him such a question? It seems you believe that Dunnstral demonstrated a logical gap in that another game he was pushed for being passive as town, yet pushes Notscience here for it. Is this correct? If so, what makes you believe the phrasing by Dunnstral in said evidence is not influenced by random voting stage behavior? As that would be the consequence of such a read.
As for Dunn I was curious about his vote and reasoning on NS. I don't think passive is a scum tell if someone was passive themselves. So my question was to see his response to that that. So far I would say his response is noncommittal. Also I'm not a big RVS wagon ho type. So I question players on wagons typically.
In post 44, Malakittens wrote:Now taking a deeper look into HT50.If one of Vot or HT50 flips scum I’m ok with them being partnered. This is HT50’s first game. I obv get it that’s it’s an alt account. But the whole knowledge felt off to me
In post 49, Ghost Ganster wrote:Sorry to say, but I'm not a big fan of the gimmick. It makes it a bit of a chore to read the thread. It feels bad to vote them because of it and it feels bad to parse the posts.
Also, all the talk about past games is confusing. Could I convince you all to either stop/limit it or explain it to those of us who lack the context to interpret it?
In post 56, Malakittens wrote:Your total topic. I don’t know who your main is and honestly I’m not going to waste the little time I have to try to sort it out. You’re playing an old gimmick and that’s fine with me. As long as it doesn’t interfere with trying to sort you I’m ok with that.In post 52, HK 50 wrote:In post 44, Malakittens wrote:Now taking a deeper look into HT50.If one of Vot or HT50 flips scum I’m ok with them being partnered. This is HT50’s first game. I obv get it that’s it’s an alt account. But the whole knowledge felt off to me[Query:]Addtionally, what was the extent of this "deeper look"? What methodology was used?
In post 95, Dunnstral wrote:I'm pointing to what I didn't like.In post 86, Green Crayons wrote:Is this a chronological description of Mala's play?In post 81, Dunnstral wrote:I don't like the way you went about the early game, votato + hk50, and then the notscience vote
In post 130, bob3141 wrote:Either mala is scum and unafraid of the spotlight or as i feel at the moment a fellow townie that simply does not have anything to fear in the first place.
In post 139, bob3141 wrote:In post 137, HK 50 wrote:In post 130, bob3141 wrote:Either mala is scum and unafraid of the spotlight or as i feel at the moment a fellow townie that simply does not have anything to fear in the first place.[Recitation:]Master bob3141, may I need to remind you I unvoted when the Notscience wagon reached four?
[Query:]If your experience states that scum tends to hop off a band wagon during random voting, which for the record master I find to be a highly ridiculous notion, then what is your current position on my true alignment considering the after mention switch off?
I dont quite get why your jumping on me pointing out that scum are far more likley to jump off a rvs wagon when it reaches 4 then to be the actual one to push it to 4.
In post 130, bob3141 wrote:I ask as at the moment i'm in a slight town reading mala. In my experience scum tends to avoid jumping on rvs wagons when they have already stacked up 3 votes. Either mala is scum and unafraid of the spotlight or as i feel at the moment a fellow townie that simply does not have anything to fear in the first place.
Only seen twice scum on 4thed place on rvs wagon. One was when scum was being rvs wagoned and the other was a scum player that spent much of the rest of the game jumping on wagons.
And mala comments on hk feel that it matches that pattern as well. Of a anotehr townie that inst afraid to get their neck stuck in and let thier views be known.
In post 131, bob3141 wrote:In my experience scum dont like being caught on large wagon in vs.
Take my last completed mini. Although i was on losing side if you looked back at day one. scum rvs voted me and as soon as i picked up my 4th vote. That Scum player was teh first to jump off. And infact tried to distance them selves from that wagon.
In post 138, Malakittens wrote:Hm. I really did just like HK 137. But I want to see how that progresses
In post 144, Malakittens wrote:That post has a bad gut feeling, but will wait for redemption
In post 143, Battle Mage wrote:I'll catch up later, but for now:
VOTE: HK 50 - biggest wagon and he appears to have a horrible post restriction and needs to be put out of his misery.
In post 161, Malakittens wrote:What the fuck is my reaction to the current battle Mages posts.
@Notty:
Right now scum wise I’m kinda getting some pings, but nothing solid as of yet. {Vot, Dunn, BM}
I have more town pings than scum pings. {HK, bob}
In post 171, notscience wrote:I’m giving mala space bc I’m nice and also a wee bit drunk
There’s more than one way to skin a huma- a ca- an animal
In post 172, Malakittens wrote:Right now I’m liking bob’s posts. The way he’s going about is very similar to the last game we played together. I’m starting to see you scum hunting while you’re using your gimmick. A lot of players that use gimmicks hide behind it and don’t actually scum hunt. So that give me town pings.In post 165, HK 50 wrote:In post 138, Malakittens wrote:Hm. I really did just like HK 137. But I want to see how that progressesIn post 144, Malakittens wrote:That post has a bad gut feeling, but will wait for redemption[Interrogation:Master Malakitten, you have made several posts showing a stance without explaining it nor fully committing to it. Please explain your pings. Has the interaction with master bob3141 reached a finite conclusion read wise considering you town ping both of us?
Where as Battle Mange is the post I was referring to that felt a scum ping IMO. That’s way before he even thought I was OMGUSing him.
In post 177, Green Crayons wrote:bob's posts look like scum trying to effort. (shrug)
In post 184, Battle Mage wrote:Green Crayons Notes
He has played extremely safe and cautious, not really going out on a limb on anything, and only really focussing on either highlighting people's towniness, or criticising other's arguments for people's scumminess (which is generally easy for scum to do because they know who is actually scum). In his first 18 posts (all of them prior to my vote) he hadn't indicated suspicion of ANYONE. His only vote was a random vote on Farside - I know it was random because he made it very clear by saying "eenie meanie minie mo". The only other thing of note is that his 4th post was an apology (which incidentally was the thing which pinged me into doing an ISO) for being rude...only he hadn't really been that rude? by the standards of this site, it was about as courteous as a criticism gets. So the apology just seemed a bit OTT and like he was walking on eggshells. No meta yet, but an absence of town enthusiasm or active engagement - more of the commentating from the sidelines style.
In post 191, stungun0404 wrote:I am currently a few pages into reading, but would like to make a request. @HK50, I love your posting style -- so nothing against it -- but could you possibly use less sophisticated words to get your points across? I can understand what you are saying if I really spend time looking into your every post, but it is very hard to read some of your posts on the surface.
Another reason I ask this is because using a ton of more complicated words makes it more difficult than normal to read your intentions. This posting style could be extremely effective for scum to hide behind, because it is an easy way for them to blanket their intentions, because a lot more effort is needed than typical to truly assess their motives.
And if you are town, then it should make sense why this could become an issue. Because if people are having to spend too much time looking at a townplayer's posts to unpack their motives, it takes away from their focus of scumhunting, which absolutely could lead us down the wrong path in the long run.
In post 206, notscience wrote:It’s the people in this game I’m used to ask any of them
In post 233, stungun0404 wrote:This is a little bit of an odd focus, to my view, if you are town. Why do you want someone focusing on something you did rather than something someone else produced so you can have a better awareness of the gamestate if you are town? What benefit do you gain from this unless you are scum trying to get someone to read you a certain way?In post 137, HK 50 wrote:In post 130, bob3141 wrote:Either mala is scum and unafraid of the spotlight or as i feel at the moment a fellow townie that simply does not have anything to fear in the first place.[Query:]If your experience states that scum tends to hop off a band wagon during random voting, which for the record master I find to be a highly ridiculous notion, then what is your current position on my true alignment considering the after mention switch off?
I have also done something similar to this as scum, so that's a second red flag, and I am noting this.
In post 242, stungun0404 wrote:@DoctorPepper, @Dunnstral, @Geraintm, @ Votato do you guys have any early townleans/town indications?
@NotScience, could you please lay a vote down somewhere? Doesn't matter if you pick the wrong person, a vote is better than no vote.
In post 250, Malakittens wrote:I have not personally seen scum bob, have you?
In post 256, DoctorPepper wrote:I agree with your vote but your line of questioning was not leading to this, what do you really feel about Dunn?In post 168, HK 50 wrote:[Statement:]The lack of actual discussion is making my circuits moderately irritated. There cannot be ruthless slaughter like this.
VOTE: Dunnstral
Master Battle Mage feel free to explain the basis of your read.
In post 261, DoctorPepper wrote:In post 191, stungun0404 wrote:I am currently a few pages into reading, but would like to make a request. @HK50, I love your posting style -- so nothing against it -- but could you possibly use less sophisticated words to get your points across? I can understand what you are saying if I really spend time looking into your every post, but it is very hard to read some of your posts on the surface.
Another reason I ask this is because using a ton of more complicated words makes it more difficult than normal to read your intentions. This posting style could be extremely effective for scum to hide behind, because it is an easy way for them to blanket their intentions, because a lot more effort is needed than typical to truly assess their motives.
This. This is a good town post. Encapsulates my feelings. Great entrance and I think you're town
In fact, I think HK not breaking his posting pattern might actually make me question him
In post 262, DoctorPepper wrote:Anyone got a meta read on BM? Is he more jokey and not serious as town or scum?In post 200, Battle Mage wrote:don't get medical with me!In post 199, notscience wrote:So we moved from video game debate to vernacular debate
In post 288, stungun0404 wrote:Not a bad point. Would like to see HK produce an analysis when they get the chance.In post 284, votato wrote:probably town? Dunno, there are mostly just questions coming from hk and not much analysis
First off I have scum/town hunted. Example A: my handling of non science and malakitten. Example B (strong example): my progression on bob and the logic behind it. Example C: the doctor pepper pressure over my posting style.In post 695, stungun0404 wrote:Next, a very short case on association from HK50's posts. HK has really not talked at all about either of Votato or BM in a scummy sense, but also doesn't really appear to be truly scumhunting in general. So that is something to keep an eye on.
Further, HK is on the counterwagon of Dunnstral, which could be seen as protecting a potential partner in Clidd/BM.
HK is only voting Dunnstral, per his 307 because "he agrees with what has been said about him." This is a lazy sheep vote. Does that seem like genuine scumhunting to you? Especially since he's voteparked there?
Spoiler: Scumteam Case from HK's posts
Moreover,In post 702, stungun0404 wrote:OK. No discussion since earlier? How about a simpler version of my cases.Lie. No follow through (which in this case is anti-town).
Lie. No follow through. Took over a day only to state another reason, which might be genuine, but also notably allows him not to post any content to avoid a prod.
In post 663, HK 50 wrote:I'm sorry, but I'm not really motivated rn with this game (and I'm not white sure why).I'll try to self-motivated myself tonight.Might havelied again, as he did not post at all after that during that night.
In post 391, votato wrote:i have a little but i cant talk about it. by day 2 or 3 ill probably give some more details. as for the association you're drawing between me and dunn, stun, you're right that we aren't scumbuddies, but i dont think your reasons why are all that strong.plus the only reason you know that is cuz you and i are scumbuddies.Lies. Tries to implicate me in case he flips, since he was the leading wagon.
In post 708, notscience wrote:Why aren’t you funny anymore
Ask yourself this though about that vote count. Let's operate in the framework that votato and BM are scum together and Dunnstral is town. Plus note I just woke up, and did not review the context of that vote count in it's entirely although I do remember some of it.In post 715, stungun0404 wrote:Will address everything else later, but this particular take can be seen, not necessarily in bussing fashion, but in early voteparking fashion from the two I suspect to be partners: BM/Clidd and Votato. Because it is easier to put this in bold, I have chosen to quote farside's unofficial vote count and not one the mod made here.In post 713, HK 50 wrote:
Scum is fine with the status quo and is not eager to move away and slash or are fine to bus a partner (dunn/clidd) potentially. Which I buy more for occ. Razor.
In post 429, farside22 wrote:unofficial vote count:
votato(3): Malakittens, bob3141,Battle Mage
Dunnstral (5): DoctorPepper, farside22, HK 50, notscience, stungun0404
Battle Mage(3): Not_Mafia,votato, Green Crayons
notscience (1): geraintm
Malakittens (1): Dunnstral
Not voting (0):
But let's further this notion that Votato and BM are scum together and Dunnstral is town. I just controlled F and BM first posts was analyzing Green Crayon (if I remember one of dunnstrals aggressors at the time) and then in this post supposedly votes his teammate and townleans the leading mislynch.In post 343, Battle Mage wrote:Challenge accepted!In post 315, Green Crayons wrote:Votato votes are lazy. I bet one of y'all are scum.
VOTE: Votato
I like the meta analysis by stungun, clearly nobody is getting behind Green Crayons, and I think I'm townleaning Dunnstral. And seriously, voting BM on Day 1? This dude has run out of ideas...
Uh Votato was at L-2 at the time he was still voting @bold.In post 727, bob3141 wrote:I can sort of see what you mean. BM vote on vota does look overly scummy to be made by scum unless scum wanted us to find it suspect.In post 696, stungun0404 wrote:Finally, from the BM/Clidd angle, which is long like the Votato one, but all but seals the deal on this scumteam for me.
Spoiler: Scumteam Case from BM's posts
I am convinced this is the scum team. I think we should lynch them consecutively.
Also note all three of Votato, BM and GC have weakly sheep-voted people, using players as shields.Votato sheeping me immediately onto GC, BM very weakly sheeping me onto Votato, and HK weakly sheeping Farside and others onto Dunnstral without bringing any new evidence to the table regarding Dunnstral!scum.
Thus, it seems voting Clidd is the right move here.
It would explain why no one really tried to push vota after that.The wagon quickly broke up with new pushes on dun following its break up.If BM was scum and vota town i would have expected him to double down and continue pushing Vota but after his vote he doesn't do much in that regards. Instead he pushes a counter push on green. And he doesn't even push dun himself, in fact pushing a town read there.
It does feel sort of suspect looking back. Bm makes a scummy vote on vota. The vota wagon gets quickly abandoned and when he is benign suspect he makes a weak push on dun being town. All the while never really trying to explain how he managed to come to the opposite conclusion using one of your points. Until just before he repped out.
While making himself unable to support the counter wagon of dunnstral by pushing crayon and throwing out a townlean on him? I can see people saying the townlean had an out, but the push on crayon weakens what's suppose to be the goal of mafia in that position.In post 732, stungun0404 wrote:BM had no choice but to join the Votato wagon in case he was lynched. Votato became a majority wagon at one point this day phase, so it makes complete sense that he joined under that light.In post 728, HK 50 wrote:Ask yourself this though about that vote count. Let's operate in the framework that votato and BM are scum together and Dunnstral is town. Plus note I just woke up, and did not review the context of that vote count in it's entirely although I do remember some of it.In post 715, stungun0404 wrote:Will address everything else later, but this particular take can be seen, not necessarily in bussing fashion, but in early voteparking fashion from the two I suspect to be partners: BM/Clidd and Votato. Because it is easier to put this in bold, I have chosen to quote farside's unofficial vote count and not one the mod made here.In post 713, HK 50 wrote:
Scum is fine with the status quo and is not eager to move away and slash or are fine to bus a partner (dunn/clidd) potentially. Which I buy more for occ. Razor.
In post 429, farside22 wrote:unofficial vote count:
votato(3): Malakittens, bob3141,Battle Mage
Dunnstral (5): DoctorPepper, farside22, HK 50, notscience, stungun0404
Battle Mage(3): Not_Mafia,votato, Green Crayons
notscience (1): geraintm
Malakittens (1): Dunnstral
Not voting (0):
You got a clear wagon in the form of Dunnstral for mafia to push. There's five people already on it, and the person being pushed isn't doing much on his own to get out of the lynch. Now then,why would votato and BM enable themselves to be a counterwagon to Dunnstral by voting eachother?Their votes pushes them into prime bandwagon spotlight without actually helping secure the easy mislynch supposedly in front of them.
That's the point with status quo I'm referring to for example. If Dunnstral is town, mafia status quo was already achieved there and they wouldnt open up that many more wagons, let alone on themselves. However, if Dunnstral is mafia, then scumneeds to redirect the wagons or bus him. This is basic wagon dynamics.
(Note that I'm not saying Dunnstral has to be scum here based off that one VC, but rather if we applying what I meant to that particular VC then that would be the answer.)
Votato just voteparked on BM from RVS until 25 posts later in his ISO.
Therefore, both of these make sense as scum votes on a fellow scummate.
Point one: less resistance on Dunnstral? You mean the wagon that's been here since page 5 that keeps having other bandwagon raise up to try and meet it? That's the textbook example of resistance lol.In post 734, stungun0404 wrote:There has been less resistance to a Dunnstral wagon than a BM wagon, which still has never reached a majority this day phase, unlike Dunn which has been the primary majority.In post 731, HK 50 wrote:If anyone can link the post link to the main BM case that would be swell because I'm sure as hell too lazy to dig for it.
I can be convinced of scum BM despite disagreeing with the votato pairing. I want Dunnstral though preferably because it gives more information. Just off the top of my head:
If scum:
-Depending on the formation of the BM wagon, this could point to town BM if it was heavily pushed for without much countermeasure (aka mafia allowed it to happen).
-Stunguns stance on Dunnstral throughout day 1
-Farside, GC, and bob are pretty surely town
-votato is town due to the opening post by Dunnstral
-malakitten is prob town too although I need to revisit that.
If town:
-Farside/bob scum equity goes up (this is my bargaining chip. You want to see my little secret? Gotta keep my robot ass alive and flip Dunnstral).
-im wrong about stungun most likely and they are town
-BM/Clidd equity for scum goes up.
-Im sure there are points that help sort conscience, malakitten, and GC.
I confess it doesnt help solve the militank nor Germy germ, but I also confess I stop paying attention to such weaklings
Obviously, since the majority has been 4 votes lately, scum isn't really helping us too much with these votes, or I'm sure we would be closer to a lynch.
What on earth makes Votato town based on a post by Dunnstral? What kind of crazy logic? He should be town based off his own posts from your angle, but not someone else's. That is really weird.
Look, you're also willing to flip on my townreads provided that Dunn flips town. I do not like that, as I am townreading both Bob and farside. I see you and think you are lining up lynches here, since you think they are both town currently.
You want an extra day with BM/Clidd & Votato, don't you?
Just my gut read right now.
@Farside: I have to say no to moving to Dunnstral, unless he's a majority and we are threatened with a no lynch situation or Dunnstral.
I hope you will do the same thing provided it's Clidd or no lynch, because a lynch obviously favors us more than a no lynch.
Not really because its WIFOM bullshit surrounding the clidd point.In post 735, stungun0404 wrote:Is it not scummy to add an extra day to the clock only to use more than double that amount of time up without even saying so much as a word like "I am having trouble catching up" or something? I can understand busyness, but at the same time it only takes about 15-30 seconds to come in and say something like that, and it also helps us.In post 631, Jake The Wolfie wrote:clidd has requested an additional day to be added onto the clock. The new end of day is in (expired on 2020-06-24 07:23:04).
Do you think for a second that might be scum that has no defense for what I called them out about on Friday?
Votato has also not answered. It has been >36 hours since I asked those questions, and HK only responded after I asked him a second time. Do you think there is a reason these players are dodging those questions?
Now then, the taser has agreed to vote Dunnstral out of needing a lynch. I'm willing to do the same with BM. Anybody who is not on one of these two wagons will get severely pushed by me tomorrow for being a dingus.@Farside: I have to say no to moving to Dunnstral, unless he's a majority and we are threatened with a no lynch situation or Dunnstral.