PTP3 - Pikachu's Revenge - Page 3

On August 23 2012 13:34 Drazerk wrote:
Personally I'd rather kill Wiggles / Mattchew over Dirk but thats because I honestly get no vibes from the case and I hate voting on things I don't care about.

On August 23 2012 14:41 Mr. Wiggles wrote:

So, this post stuck out to me, because of the misdirection it's pushing. It's funny, because he says I claim people are red, when all I said is I think that at least one of BC and WBG are red. There wasn't a declaration about which I thought was red, just that I thought there was red between them. However, BC reacts very defensively here. His reasoning for me being a scum candidate is that I'm criticizing people and claiming "they must" be red without a case. But the fun part is I didn't call either him or WBG red directly, I just said one of them were red. So, why the defensiveness and near-OMGUS? If for example, I had said that there was at least one red among all the players still alive, no one would care. It would be fallacious to say that I was saying all of them must be red without a case. So then why the difference when I limit it to a small pool of players?

Now the next fun part is that besides saying I'm claiming some people must be red when all I did was say that I thought at least one bandwagon was started by scum (which is a reason, by the way), BC criticizes me for doing so without making a case on either one. He also uses this to support the conclusion that I'm scum. This would be fine coming from another player, but not from BC, or at least not if you've read his filter. Let's take a look, shall we?

+ Show Spoiler [The Terrible Terrible Contradiction Re…] +

Ding! Ding! Ding! We have a winner!!! So all in all, according to BC , we have a 9-person scum team of:

Kurumi
Drazerk
Dirkzor
Chezinu
Mementoss
Bumatlarge
Hopeless1der
Misder
Mattchew

Only one of these accusations had any sort of case or reasoning to go along with it when he posted it. Two of them had cases posted many hours after the actual accusation. So, that's either 8 or 6 people he has called scum without any kind of case or reasoning to back it up. But in the post I have quoted up at the top, BC says that one of the reasons I'm looking bad is that I called out "people" without a case. That's hypocrisy and contradiction at it's finest.

In addition, the very fact that BC has called out so many people without any reasoning is alarming as well. He likes to call people out as not being useful to town or helping the town at all, which is funny when you look at his own posts. Basically, they consist of three things:

-Making accusations with no case/reasoning
-Role/setup speculation and general advice
-Backing up his accusations only when asked

Besides the couple cases he has actually bothered to explain, I wouldn't call his posts very "helpful". If you look through his posts without treating his posting as a whole, you might be tricked into thinking he's helping the town or actively scumhunting, but all he's doing is posting accusations that accomplish nothing and do nothing to help us kill scum.

Now, the last thing to note is the general attitude with which BC has been treating his cases, particularly the one on Dirkzor today. He doesn't sound like he cares that much about lynching his target. This is a jarring distinction from the way he addresses the players he's accusing. In several posts, BC has claimed that Dirk has claimed scum, says that he's "clearly" acting anti-town, and makes another post where he just calls him mafia plainly. Basically, he says with complete confidence that Dirkzor is 100% scum. However, there aren't really any posts in his filter where he asks for other people to vote for Dirkzor, or challenges their choice of lynch target. So, he's not actively pushing people to lynch Dirk, which is weird considering his posts say that he knows he's scum. Next, is his change in tone after the Day 1 Dirkzor lynch failed:


Now Dirkzor has gone from being 100% scum to being "likely scum". Also, his two posts addressing him today are saying that he's "fine" with a dirk lynch, or that he's a better lynch than mattchew. This is different from saying that he thinks Dirkzor is the best lynch, or the person we should for sure kill today. Notice the tentativeness compared to how he acted on Day 1. It's a complete departure from how he was treating him before, and he doesn't give a reason for such a change in his posts. Indeed, he even continues to press Dirkzor into Night 1.

So, why the caution and tentativeness from him now? It's because he's sounding out the lynch. He can't just abandon Dirkzor, because of how hard he pressed him on Day 1. As well, there was an anti-Wiggles sentiment that began during Night 1, and now he's saying he'd like to lynch me possibly. However, he doesn't make a strong push one way or the other. His posts are saying that he could go either way, and that he's OK with either one of us being lynched. It's because he's trying to sound out the way town sentiment is running, and wants to leave himself outs in case he comes under opposition. He's setting himself up to keep tunneling Dirkzor without doing anything to really get him killed, while also keeping open the possibility of switching to me if it turns out that's how people want to run Day 2.

Therefore:

##Vote: BloodyC0bbler

I've outlined what I think of him and his play above. The guy is scum, and he's who we should be lynching today. He's trying to get by with superficial "contributions", and has been playing in a self-contradictory and hypocritical manner since he's first started posting. We need to kill him today, or else he's going to just float by as people give him a pass for doing a minimal amount of anything.

+ Show Spoiler [Free Bonus Content] +

On August 23 2012 06:02 wherebugsgo wrote:


I agree with most of this. Based on how the wagons went I don't think Dirkzor is scum. I unfortunately was not available to reverse-snowball the allinson lynch. From the looks of it I should've known he was town when so many people jumped on at once.

I do disagree, however, with your assumption that one of the wagons was started by scum. #1, I'm town and that leaves BC (and I don't think he is scum ATM either). The fact that you casually push this is really disconcerting, though. You did nothing to stop either wagon and now you're seemingly trying to push blame and culpability based on weak and faulty assumptions onto myself + BC. If you legitimately thought one of us was scum then I'd expect you to actually come forth with reasons but you have simply seeded doubt.

___________________________________


I'm okay with Mattchew dying as he seems particularly lazy this game. From what I recall he doesn't like playing scum (and this was something he stressed in my games) so I think the case on him does have merit from a meta standpoint. I'm unsure what to think of Wiggles based on his last post since he seems to be making summaries that make sense, but making accusations that don't. If I die he should be watched carefully. Also if I die, newer players take note:

Toad, BC, VE, bum, Kita, and Zephirdd are all also good targets to watch for in coming days as they are all capable as scum and are all harder to pin early. I would argue that if any of them seem "off their game" then they're probably scum. In particular I would rate Kita as the best scumhunter in this game, so if he's alive and somehow not dangerous to scum then he should be lynched immediately. So far he's done very little so it is certainly possible we may be going in thatdirection.

On August 21 2012 16:47 Mr. Wiggles wrote:


The problem with this is that it isn't about finding scum. As a townie, you're supposed to look at all available information and decide who is most likely to be scum. You don't say, "I don't like this guy, so I'm voting him and it's up to you to convince me to kill scum instead of him". You're taking any responsibility for having to do anything on Day 1 away from yourself and putting it onto other players. I'm surprised all the people voting for All-In Tim for deferring his opinion to the judgement of others aren't on you for the same thing.

##Vote: VE