Hero Mini Mafia - Page 7

Post a Reply

Prev 1 5 6 7 8 9 15 Next All

thrawn2112

United States6918 Posts

December 12 2012 21:53 GMT

#1165

On December 13 2012 06:48 wherebugsgo wrote:

Show nested quote +

He was fairly inactive and didn't say anything of substance. You're the polar opposite of that.

That'd be hapa of either alignment

thrawn2112

United States6918 Posts

December 12 2012 22:29 GMT

#1184

jay, i know what he asked you and i dont even care about this conversation

thrawn2112

United States6918 Posts

December 12 2012 22:35 GMT

#1186

at least one of you needs to stop being a jackass and just back down. the way both of you are arguing isn't doing anyone any good

thrawn2112

United States6918 Posts

December 12 2012 23:19 GMT

#1216

On December 13 2012 08:07 Palmar wrote:
Bugs is scum.

Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum.

Bugs is scum.

Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum.
Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum.
Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum.
Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum.

Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum.

ok with everything so far except the bolded part. how did you reach this conslusion?

On December 13 2012 08:07 Palmar wrote:
Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum.

Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum.

a bit hypocritical, don't you think?

On December 13 2012 08:07 Palmar wrote:
Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum. Bugs is scum.

Bugs is scum.

I'd like to see bugs give an answer to this part.

thrawn2112

United States6918 Posts

December 13 2012 00:06 GMT

#1245

ok palmer, was that wbg stuff for real?

thrawn2112

United States6918 Posts

December 13 2012 01:40 GMT

#1318

On December 13 2012 10:37 Palmar wrote:
Seeing as I was wrong on Bugs I might just let someone else take the reins for now. I'm gonna check out this bluelightz case.

I recall writing something about him earlier, that he was getting away with something.

I'm more interested in what you have to say about VE

thrawn2112

United States6918 Posts

December 13 2012 01:50 GMT

#1331

On December 13 2012 10:49 Palmar wrote:
It's worth noting that of the people that eventually did not join the Adam wagon, thrawn looks kinda towny and I'm not sure about Z-boson, however djodref looks bad.

On December 12 2012 10:51 thrawn2112 wrote:

so now it seems natural that among thrawn, boson, and djodref, each of them should be expecting to find at least 1 scum between the other two..... unless any of them think that all the scum were bussing adam, which thrawn doesn't

thrawn2112

United States6918 Posts

December 13 2012 02:03 GMT

#1334

On December 13 2012 10:51 Hapahauli wrote:
I have Z-Bo as leaning-scum through process of elimination atm.

Djo... I still think his D1 lynch actions are townie. There was that series of "COUNTERWAGON GO" posts that seem suicidal from a scum perspective. One could certainly interpret it as him not giving a shit about who gets lynched other than adam, but I just can't connect a mentality of Djo knowing Adam was scum, knowing that Adam was the clear leader to get hanged, and then going off and pulling the stunts that he did.

btw hapa, I just remembered was I was getting at when I brought up djo's hardcore bussing in looney. the point is that he's not afraid to make ballsy plays when people are ignoring him. you were saying something like djo's play looks ballsy to be scum, and that's how the looney game is relevant to this one

thrawn2112

United States6918 Posts

December 13 2012 03:25 GMT

#1347

On December 13 2012 12:21 Z-BosoN wrote:

Show nested quote +

Reading his filter, he seemed 100% confident that bugs was scum, asking to put vig shots on him, etc. Do you make this to be a scum excuse to not post any real content (which he hasn't done so far) or a town who really actually thinks bugs was scum?

Idk, I don't expect smart town to try and direct night actions like that

thrawn2112

United States6918 Posts

December 13 2012 03:34 GMT

#1351

one problem I have with all these jay, bl, and tunkeg suspicions is that those were the only other lynch candidates that ever had real chances of getting lynched

thrawn2112

United States6918 Posts

December 13 2012 06:14 GMT

#1372

On December 13 2012 14:00 jaybrundage wrote:

Show nested quote +

If clarity didn't suck at scum hunting, maybe I wouldn't consider voting him. As it is, he tried to lynch me, and wasn't going for the adam lynch at all.

He has yet to help us lynch a scum yet. If he succeeded at derailing the adam lynch to me we would have two dead townies

How is that a town win condition oriented thinking process? Lynch the people who suck at scumhunting?

thrawn2112

United States6918 Posts

December 13 2012 06:35 GMT

#1373

On December 13 2012 14:44 Djodref wrote:

Show nested quote +

@ thrawn

I have mentioned it to the thread because I thought that it was a pretty big towntell and that it would maybe have convinced other townies that you were more likely to be town than mafia pulling off a "big play". Also it was to show that I had definitively assessed my town read on you.

I didn't care to out your plan because I thought that it was bad (too obvious) and that you wouldn't catch mafia players with it.

Eh.... I feel okay about this response. Atm I'm wanting to believe it.

CLarity shouldn't be lynched tomorrow... idk wtf people are thinking.

Currently going through boson's stuff, sneak peak is I think he's scum

thrawn2112

United States6918 Posts

December 14 2012 00:36 GMT

#1537

I still want to lynch into boson/djo. I'm leaning leaning boson overall and I keep changing my mind about djo.

I'm surprised about how long people have kept talking about clarity being scum. I just don't see it. His reactions to certain things in the game have been the same as mine + Show Spoiler [example] +

On December 13 2012 09:03 Clarity_nl wrote:
Debears you are a logical mess and I hate that you were right about Adam.

and he's been one of the few people putting serious effort into this game. The timing and context of his claim makes me think he's town claiming because there's no reason not to rather than scum trying to get confirmed town status.

thrawn2112

United States6918 Posts

December 14 2012 00:48 GMT

#1538

eh, i might go for tunkeg as well

I'm gonna do a re-read through of d1 then post thoughts on boson/djo/tunk unless I find something that convinces me not to. I don't have interest in any of the lynches outside of those people.

thrawn2112

United States6918 Posts

December 14 2012 01:00 GMT

#1541

On December 14 2012 09:55 Djodref wrote:

Show nested quote +

@ thrawn

Like, not even BL ?
This guy doesn't even have a scumread at the moment...

idk I haven't done the meta research needed to figure out what to think of his lurking. but I still don't think he bussed adam. if i had to guess whats going on with him.... I think that for whatever reason he's not putting effort into the game and is just sheeping palmer

thrawn2112

United States6918 Posts

December 14 2012 02:21 GMT

#1550

On December 14 2012 11:19 jaybrundage wrote:
Annnnyway, Now that I expressed my random thoughts on Clarity and Palmar.

Anyone still down for a Djodref lynch?

##Unvote
##Vote Djodref

definitely but i'm undecided between him and boson

thrawn2112

United States6918 Posts

December 14 2012 03:55 GMT

#1582

lets lynch boson

Boson's D1 play can be described as two things... distanced from the game, and working towards scum objectives. His first post lightly hits on thrawn's "plan," and how he's suspicious of thrawn for not having scumreads. He says this even though thrawn has a vote for wbg. It's not too big of a crime to be inaccurate but it's his first statement of the thread and he's not even correct about what's going on. The next half of that post is criticisim's of bugs' 80% number. Arbitrary percentages attached to reads are some of the most useless things to argue over... it's hard for me to imagine a town player who looks at the "palmer is 80% scum" statement and thinks.. "that number isn't mathematically perfect. lets lynch this guy!" He also questions bugs for assuming that we have 4 scum.... this is another really pointless thing to have an issue with. It's not limited to 1 post, they have an extended conversation about it and boson eventually ends up dropping the issue. He doesn't continue on with his suspicion of thrawn either.

Somewhere during all of this he drops some suspicion on vivax but nothing worth bringing up. He lightly jumps into the debears/adam debate but only to comment that debears is probably taking things out of proportion.

After all of the above, we get this post:

On December 11 2012 04:41 Z-BosoN wrote:

Show nested quote +

I was trying to figure out where you were coming from with all of that, because I honestly can't follow that thought process.
Anyways, I don't have any solid scum reads. As I've stated earlier, I find vivax a bit suspicious, but beyond that nothing really. What about you?

So far... boson has done basically nothing. He's done as much nothing as the people who were lurking, because all of his "scumhunting" was him finding a problem with ridiculous things. He has stuff to say to people, and argues with them, but I don't get the feeling that he is suspicious of anything at all.

On December 11 2012 04:50 Z-BosoN wrote:

Show nested quote +

On December 11 2012 04:43 jaybrundage wrote:

On December 11 2012 01:35 Clarity_nl wrote:

On December 11 2012 01:32 jaybrundage wrote:

On December 10 2012 23:52 Clarity_nl wrote:
Hey marv, you've explain why we shouldn't vote a bunch of people (thrawn, jay, palmar) but do you have any reasons we should vote a someone?

On December 10 2012 22:04 marvellosity wrote:
On jay, I'm ok on how he explained his 'slips'. My only worry with jay is that he comes across as overly... compliant?:

"Glad someone is reading my posts. I felt like i wasnt get any feedback from them."
"I do appreciate you giving your reasoning behind your claim. It helps me understand you a bit."

I don't particularly think much of it atm, was just weird when I was reading them. I would say it was indicative of the fact he didn't want to ruffle feathers, but he's not been afraid to put himself out there, so it isn't that.

His response reminds me of my own scum game. I showed no emotion that game, I just tried to remain logical and not to ruffle anyone's feathers, thinking that if I kept that up eventually people would stay away from me because I answered every question and reasoned away any doubt.

@ Jay

I read some of the stuff in your linked games, and yes you lyched town D1 but I never saw you say anything remotely close to "well I guess I should be more careful of early bandwagons". Not during any of the games and not in the pre-games or post-games either.

The thing is, you say you don't want to jump on an "easy bandwagon" this game, but you do. All you don't do is you haven't voted for thrawn, but he's the only person you've put pressure on. So why mention it? It's an easy way out.

It seems like common sense. If I get on easy bandwagons as town. Shouldn't i avoid em?

Im not you I don't find it necessary or needed to call people dumb or idiots like some players here do. It is it that unexpected to show some respect to people : /

I call people dumb or idiots?

So other than Thrawn, who is an easy bandwagon to you so should be avoided, who stands out as scummy?

I didnt mean you specifically but some people in TL mafia do. I actually am starting to lean more neutral on Thrawn. In my early mind set I just couldnt see someone misclaiming as a joke, or risk getting them selves lynched. Im a little worried about our lurkers.

And i would prefer to see more posts out of ZBoston. Specifically ZBoston what do you think about Claritys case on me and some people soft defending me.

Also MunkE has had like 3 posts since his /in and every single one of them is mostly about WBG statistic. Do we really have to nitpick over something like that. WBG was mostly trying to bait Palmar out. Lets hear your thoughts on some cases

On Vivax its odd. He seems really interested in going after Thrawns claim and saying that Ve defended it as a joke. When its not a joke. Even when thrawn said his self it was just a joke. That he stubbornly. Refused to explain to generate discussion. I think he is concentrating on thrawns little joke to much to the exclusion of everything else. I can see him being scum.

##Vote Vivax
(Because some people get SOOOOO antsy if you dont follow your argument with your vote.)

It's Z-Boson. It's funny you should mention Munk-E, because he has a town read on WBG, even though he disagrees with WBG's logic. Does anyone find this post right here:

Show nested quote +

Any close to being normal?

The above post is another example of boson having issues with dumb stuff. Boson criticizes Munk-E for having a town read on wbg, even though Munk-E disagrees with wbg's logic. I don't think that has anything to do with who is scum and who isn't.

There's a part of the thread where suspicion of Adam starts rising beyond "maybe this guy is scum" to "maybe we should lynch this guy." Boson's interactions during this time tunneling djo while defending Adam from as far away as possible. Example:

On December 11 2012 06:07 Z-BosoN wrote:

Show nested quote +

Dude, wait to take the arrogant stance once you yourself have properly read what people have said.

You said Adam implied thrawn was scum. Presumably when he said thrawn was "different" from his town meta.
I said this isn't the case, because saying someone is playing different from their town meta doesn't necessarily mean they think they are scum. I used your meta as an example to this.

Then you said he said thrawn wasn't scum. This is not true, he never said thrawn wasn't scum.

Are you deliberately twisting words here?

This isn't the first time boson has attacked debears for going after adam. He did it in the very beginning of the game too. He attacks debears in a way that makes debears look bad but he doesnt call debears scum or probe anything else about debears' play.

Then there's a huge chunk of boson's filter where he tunnels djo, for pretty much the remainder of D1. He goes into extreme tunnel mode. That doesnt have to be bad in of itself but the way he came out of the tunnel was strange. Boson is questioning djo about an interaction between djo/thrawn, and when djo explains how boson is misunderstanding the issue, boson's next post is:

On December 12 2012 01:43 Z-BosoN wrote:

Show nested quote +

They are because they can't be legit in their scumhunting. This is fairly obvious.

Show nested quote +

On December 12 2012 01:21 Djodref wrote:

On December 12 2012 01:02 Z-BosoN wrote:

On December 12 2012 00:51 Djodref wrote:
@ Z-Boson

+ Show Spoiler [for reference] +

On December 12 2012 00:28 Z-BosoN wrote:

Show nested quote +

1) Yes I have. I mentioned "scum getting lost in the sidetracks", because that's what's going on. You are trying to make it seem like you are contributing, when in fact, you are not. More on that later.

2) I don't buy this. You assumed that it was a vote intended to spark discussion, because it was in early game and had a "carefree" atmosphere, made by debears.

You then pressure FOS debears to make sure he sparks discussion as his townie self.
Then, he goes after adam, and you keep the FOS because you disagree with his case?? You can disagree with his case, just like you did somewhere, but that is only warranted of your suspicions is if you think it's fake comes from scum.

Yet what do you do?

You go on to drop debears entirely and go around asking questions about other aspects of the game without taking a proper stance yourself.

3) This still doesn't make sense. Why in gods name are you so interested in thrawn explaining himself, if you think he's town??. Why did you pressure vote him, whom you had a town read on, instead of going after debears, someone you've made quite clear you don't like the play this game?

Also, to those who aren't feeling Djo, notice his complete lack of scumhunting in this game. Here's a summary of his entire play this game:

The whole debars/thrawn extravaganza I've already gone over which makes no sense.
Probing WBG's weird logic on palmar.
Giving munk-E a questionable town read
Flock of non-conclusive questioning and a ton of fluff.

And that's IT. Zero stances, zero cases. It's scum feigning contribution.

1)So, basically, you are saying that I couldn't keep my story straight. And that shows that I'm scum. I would say that I've been inconsistent as townies can be inconsistent. Basically, my FoS on debears was not a very serious one (like all early FoS are) and I didn't feel like I had to follow it up when thrawn put himself at the center of the attention.

2)I was disagreeing with debears view on Adam and I still disagree with it because I think he is exaggerating some points. But debears has done nothing to deserve a vote. So I don't see why I should have not the right to use my vote on thrawn to pressure him. And yeah, I was leaning town on thrawn when I voted him but I needed his explanations for his miller claim to assess my read on him.

3)Putting pressure on thrawn was fulfilling two goals. The first one was to help me to assess my town read on him when he was going to reveal us his "plan". It was kind of obvious he was going to say something like this but I was interested to know how he was going to present things, and he did say almost exactly what I expected.
The second goal was to show him that he was putting himself in a bad situation and that he should better explain himself asap so that the thread could move on to another subject because all this situation was a bit stupid and not helping us to have constructive discussions.

1) Scummies are more likely to be inconsistent than townies, so it's a small tell, but still a tell. What bugs me is the logic you had regarding debars/thrawn I've already went over.

2) Wait a minute. Bolded part. Whatever happened to:

On December 11 2012 13:01 Djodref wrote:
I've watched Palmar's video and I've changed my mind a little bit about your interactions with Adam. As a result, I would lean town on you and slightly scum on Adam but I'm not yet sold on him being scum.
The latest "scumslip" is not a scumslip in my opinion because it would have been one if he was totally sure that you were scum, which doesn't look to be the case.
The fact that he dropped you is reasonable but it's not very indicative of his alignment because it was the best thing to do as scum and as town. I'm waiting to see where he is going to go with Vivax but I think that jay is more likely to be scum than him at this point.

Still not keeping your story straight. You say you lean him being town, now you lean him being scum. Worst of all, where is the reasoning, where is the justification for this??

3) It's counter-productive. You are wasting time reassessing a "town-read" you had, and you STILL are flimsy and not moving on:

On December 11 2012 13:12 Djodref wrote:

On December 11 2012 12:54 thrawn2112 wrote:
debears could you respond to the question I asked you at the bottom of page 22? It's in the last post on the page sorta near the bottom of my post.

Djo: bleh I've probably waited too long to ask this, but I'd like you to go back to this post. When did you write it in relation to the post you made right before it? Was it one right after the other, did you make them simultaneously, did you write the 2nd one first but post the 1st one 1st, etc. please be as specific as possible

@ thrawn

The two posts you are talking about were independent if you are talking about these.

On December 10 2012 15:31 Djodref wrote:

On December 10 2012 14:52 debears wrote:

On December 10 2012 14:46 Djodref wrote:
@ debears

So, between Adam and Jay, which one of them should deserve your vote right now ?
Because it looks like to me that the main reason for you to vote Adam is that he asked for your vote and voted against you.

I think Clarity made good points against Jay and I'm also leaning town on thrawn right now. I think I know the reason why he doesn't want to explain himself right now and I don't think that my pressure vote is going to work out.

@ jay

It looks like you are leaning scum on thrawn. Would you care to convince us that he is indeed scum and that we should vote him ?
As you can see, the risk to start an early bandwagon on him is not so big.

##Vote jay

I like Clarity's points on jay, and clarity seems to satisfactorily have jay covered. I'm gonna work on Adam/whoever I feel like

So, I guess you are satisfied with your vote on Adam right now. According to me, Adam has been pretty clear on his stance on thrawn and I disagree with you about him: I don't see anything to blame him for right now. I'll let you do what you feel like but I'll voice my concerns if you seem mistaken.
For example, right now, I feel like you should better vote for jay instead of Adam.

On December 10 2012 15:34 Djodref wrote:

On December 10 2012 14:53 thrawn2112 wrote:

On December 10 2012 14:34 jaybrundage wrote:

On December 10 2012 14:21 Clarity_nl wrote:
So someone makes a big case on you and you react by saying "glad someone is reading my posts"?

It's not that you don't put your vote where your mouth is, it's the REASON you don't vote. You shouldn't care what's easy and what's not, all you need to care about is who is scum, and try to get your strongest scumread lynched.

I would love it if you linked some games in where you claimed this has happened to you. I would also love it if you walked us through a scum thrawn's reasoning for doing what he did.

Lol is my reaction not what you expected

Wait a second, the reason i didn't vote is because i don't feel i have too. A vote doesn't mean anything till the end of the cycle. I have been going after thrawn and trying to get him to respond to me. And get some kind of explanation from him. However he has yet to respond to me. THRAWN STOP GAWD DAMN IGNORING ME.

And yes i do care if the lynch seems to easy. Because then from my experience, its likely a bus or a townie were killing.

I'll try to find the games if i can. Its been almost a year tho.

And i already gave you a scum reasoning to do what he did.

On December 10 2012 10:23 jaybrundage wrote:
Hey guys just finished work ten hour shift zzzz.

Reading up so far. It appears. That thrawn either made a pretty big scum slip. Or maybe he just made a big mistake as town.

There wasn't any point to claiming miller. As if anyone read the OP (as they should it) they would know millers arent self aware.
So first your lying. I only seeing this make sense as scum. If you didnt know that miller was self aware. Then your thought process is that you self claim miller. A you can waste a DT check. Or make DT's ineffective against you.

As town i see no reason to lie about your role. Please give your reasoning. Because as far it doesn't make any sense.

Also I thought the point about debears. Posting a video to not enage in conversation was interesting. Not a scum tell or anything. But a video wont help us find scum some good solid conversation will.

alright well I'm tired of the miller claim discussion so here's how it went down from my perspective.

At first it was mainly a joke, but it was also intended to jump start discussion. + Show Spoiler +

wow big surprise there right?

Then people started taking it more seriously than I thought they would so I decided to be dickish about it in order to ignite further discussion. I actually don't mind being a potential mislynch, I think I'm better at discerning scum when they are trying to lynch me. I don't mind a bit of pressure during early D1 if it allows me to make better reads. Also.... anything is better than talking about lurker policy ffs

@ thrawn

In fact, this is exactly the explanation I was waiting for you. I remembered this post from our previous Looney game when you were going to be mislynched at MYLO.

On October 20 2012 09:13 thrawn2112 wrote:
Cuz I'm not scum u silly. Don't worry I love being mislynched. It's the part of the game where in the past ive figured out who is scum.

So, did you manage to get any clue of who could be scum after analysing the way they treated your fakeclaim ?

Regarding the post you linked, it was the conclusion I came to when I was asking myself why you were being stubborn and not wanting to explain your motivations for your fakeclaim. After my pressure vote on you, I was wondering why a town thrawn would put himself in such a situation and I remembered this post you made about how you liked to be pushed as a mislynched.
So, I was ready to post it before your explanation because it was what I was expecting from you. But it was not prepared, just I knew where to find this stuff.

It is a strange question. Could I ask you what you are going to do with this info ?

What do you expect to hear? Are you still trying to confirm thrawn as town? Thrawn has been questioned twice already regarding this and the most he said was "bugs came out looking worse".

This is another example of you fooling around trying to look like you are contributing, imo.

1)Okay, I'm just saying that it was the early game and that I didn't follow up my FoS on debears so much because it was not a very serious one.

2)I have Adam as slightly scum. Debears is convinced that Adam is scum. I would lynch Tunkeg and jay before Adam today, I would say that grush might even be a better lynch choice than Adam. This is where I disagree with debears. Basically, I'm not sure that Adam is scum because some points brought against him seem to be exaggerated in my opinion. I would prefer to let him live today so I can have a better read on him when the game goes on.

3)The conversation that you quoted has been initiated by thrawn and I was answering him. His first question was weird and I wanted to know why he asked me it in the first place, it turned out that he was still unsure of my thought process. I hope that things are clear between him and me now. This conversation was productive in my opinion.
I'm not 100% sure that thrawn is town at the moment and it helped me to confirm my view on him. What would be the benefit of a scum Djodref to ask this ?

Hm, I didn't see you were answering thrawn.

Well, I'm pummeling you for being inconsistent and not keeping your story straight. I view this as a small tell, which was augmented by the rest of your posting (not scumhunting). Until your case on Tunkeg you had zero scum hunting and some fluff, which is why I really thought you to be scum.
I certainly see you as scum being capable of writing such a case, but I'll have to reassess and see what other people make of your posts and our exchange.

You're not getting lynched today and we need to consolidate... so
##Unvote

Boson doesn't have a real scumread for the whole game, and then drops his main scumread after it's shown that 1 very small part out of all his arguments is factually incorrect. I don't see this as the natural response of a suspicious townie, and is yet another time when boson is making incorrect accusations. He shows disinterest in the game and a lack of suspicion.

Then comes the part of D1 where arguments about adam are heating up. Boson is asked for his opinion on adam because he hasn't given it voluntarily. Here's boson's summary of adam:

On December 12 2012 02:09 Z-BosoN wrote:
Well, like I said, debears seems to be doing some massive twisting of words to me.
What I found suspicious on Adam's filter is this contradiction in his idea of a case -> vote relationship, which I'd like him to explain.

He first criticizes debears for not voting him after making a case and votes him:

Show nested quote +

This is funny to say the least, because later on, though, when he's made a case on vivax, here's his stance when questioned on why he wasn't voting vivax:

Show nested quote +

I mean, it's ok that he makes a huge case and doesn't vote, but when debears did that it made him scum? Weird.

Since we need to consolidate though, I am more confident in a Tunkeg lynch at the moment.

His read feels so... unemotional and distanced. The whole post feels off. He gives an example of something scummy about adam... but it's not anything major and the line: "I mean, it's ok that he makes a huge case and doesn't vote, but when debears did that it made him scum? Weird." makes me think he's lying off his ass.

Here's another instance of boson's reality being different than the thread's reality:

On December 12 2012 08:40 Z-BosoN wrote:
I won't be around for the deadline, gonna be pulling some massive weights, but I insist we go for tunkeg.
I really don't like how little resistance there is to adam's lynch, look how easily it took off. Compare this to tunkeg, for example.
Adam is a lurky player by nature, so that makes me even more not confident.

+ Show Spoiler +

Also, there's no way I'm sheeping debears

bleh.... I know he cites irl issues and those are supposed to give null reads but the fact remains that he wasn't around for the time that the lynch was decided... he disappears before the deadline and leaves another very soft defense of adam. A very, very soft defense. And he was completely incorrect... I felt tons of resistance to the Adam lynch. That statement about adam's lynch being too easy... I sorta wanted to lynch him for it right when I read it.

tldr:

-he's wrong a lot about what's happening in the thread
-he soft defends adam and attacks debears for going after adam
-tunnels on djo while there is tons of other stuff going on
-generally more passive than what I remember of his town play
-he's a lurker
-one of the 3 who didn't vote for adam
-he's not around for the lynch
-is willing to argue about people over insignificant stuff and doesn't appear to actually be suspicious about any of it
-etc

there is more but for now I have to go watch the Hobbit

thrawn2112

United States6918 Posts

December 14 2012 03:55 GMT

#1583

sorry marv u shouldnt have asked

thrawn2112

United States6918 Posts

December 14 2012 05:33 GMT

#1589

On December 14 2012 14:15 Djodref wrote:
@ thrawn

I like your case but I still feel better about a Tunkeg lynch because Z-Bo has at least shown some effort in scumhunting.
Also I don't see it as necessarily scummy that he thought that debears was exaggerating.
Do you think that Tunkeg and Z-Bo could be in a scumteam together ?
How do you feel about a Tunkeg lynch ?

I'm waiting for Z-Bo defense with great interest !

Why would I think boson and mr t are scum together? ... I don't see what that has to do with anything. CPUs you expand on ur boson read?