EPT1st Conclusion. Davison is likely town.
Smurf Mini Mafia - Page 43
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
Let's play a game... | ||
|
Baker1986
217 Posts
1st Conclusion. Davison is likely town. | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
But go ahead and make the case on td2. Btw. Im still waiting for comment on my eccleston case. Im not letting you ignore it. And this is now second time I ask. | ||
|
Baker1986
217 Posts
| ||
|
SMcCoy
228 Posts
On June 08 2013 20:48 TheDavison wrote: Mccoy. If you dont like what td1 did. Fine But go ahead and make the case on td2. Btw. Im still waiting for comment on my eccleston case. Im not letting you ignore it. And this is now second time I ask. The only wagon that scum could have tried to push during D1 was on Hurndall, we know it by having flipped JP and Tom, and the indications that H3 is town. The wagon on H3 was the only possible way for scum to derail the lynch, and it died extremely quickly. Nonetheless, the only guys pushing it were you and Troughton, and that makes you scum since we can exclude the Troughton wagon to be scum's counterwagon. If the case is on TD1 or TD2 is irrelevant if you can prove TD1 to have been scummy enough to warrant his lynch. His fake scumread on JP has shown that he was aware that he would look bad after DrT's flip. On June 07 2013 02:30 A McGann wrote: Yes. Backflip. Case on H3 Back out of H3 start of case on PT more on PT Back out of case on PT, onto Tom Tell me again how tom was your focus? You have none, you just fling shit in every direction to see what sticks. As a little bonus, one of the NK's scumread was Davis. | ||
|
Baker1986
217 Posts
| ||
|
SMcCoy
228 Posts
Points for Davison being town please. | ||
|
Baker1986
217 Posts
Also, H3 is town if I had to guess, but he's playing like an ass. | ||
|
SMcCoy
228 Posts
| ||
|
Baker1986
217 Posts
| ||
|
Baker1986
217 Posts
my current feeling is that we need to lynch into eccleston, PT and HW. | ||
|
SMcCoy
228 Posts
| ||
|
SMcCoy
228 Posts
| ||
|
Hurndall3
237 Posts
| ||
|
SMcCoy
228 Posts
On June 08 2013 23:50 Hurndall3 wrote: @SMCC do you see a reason why PT, HW can't be scumteam? Would that be your guess? I recall that you called HW "confirmed town" at some point lol. HW said during D1: "It wouldn't surprise me if both DrT and PT were scum", and voted DrT (with bad reasoning, it had absolutely nothing to do with the points brought against him) Other than skimming the thread, Tennant's filter is surprisingly empty of anything that would contribute to town. Mostly asking others to do work for him while he sits and waits and gets his postcount up. DrT was the goon, he was expendable, so it's a logical choice to make for HW, he says Trout could easily be scum too. But HW never pursues PT after this, he goes after Tom, Davison and Eccleston. And his Eccleston "case" contains that ridiculous point mentioned earlier. Guess I'm fine with this guy's lynch. At least I won't regret anything if I'm wrong and this game is too hard with such low activity, so let's kill the least active guy. ##Vote HartnellWill | ||
|
SMcCoy
228 Posts
Maybe it's really the best play to lynch the most uninvolved guys and HW and Baker is where it's at. | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
On June 08 2013 21:28 SMcCoy wrote: If scum bussed early and it's Baker + HW shit will get serious though. Seriously McCoy. You need to stop with the conspiracy theories and taking wild guesses at the scum team. Lets go back to basics, and figure out scum #2, lynch him; and then deal with finding scum #3. As it stands, since around late Day2, you seem to latch onto anything that is remotely scummy. For example, the above: Baker is not scum. He had very serious 'back n forth' posts with Dr.T, that were completely over the top for a bus scenario; and in addition, difficult to fake. I am not scum either; and if the best you can produce is a weak summary post that had already been explained in-game from A.McGann, then you have absolutely nothing on me either. The *only* reason i still think you are confirmed // probably town, is due to the interactions shared with MSmith1. I don't say this to offend you; rather, I say this in hopes you realise how "wishy-washy" you have been recently. Because frankly, your play has got progressively worse each day, in that you satisfy the "demotivated/disinterested" scum tactic down to a 'T'. Because of MSMith1, I choose to attribute this to the lurker frustrations in this game - which I fully share as well, so can understand. As I said in Day2, and Day3; we need to work together. Figure this game out together. I have trust in your alignment; and if you read my filter, you should be able to have trust in mine. I really don't understand how you can have a firm town read on H3, but not me or Baker. Consider this: You, Me, Baker are probable town. That leaves two scum in this group (Eccleston, HartnellWill, PTroughton, Hurndall3). Since Day4 started, HW + PT voted Eccleston. I will state outright: it is outlandish to consider scum bussed in those early Day4 votes. There is just no benefit to it. This means, scum is either HW + PT; or H3 + Eccleston. Im betting my left nut: it is H3 + Eccleston. But it doesnt matter, we can only lynch one person a cycle; and I would prefer to start with Eccleston. I have produced a damn solid case based on scum motivation. I don't believe H3 rebutted the core of the case at all. Further, Dr.T has a two page filter full of gold. We need to mine this to its full depth. Here is a quick example of 3 points. Exhibit A (Talking to Baker) + Show Spoiler + On May 30 2013 22:15 DrTennant wrote: i didnt see that you had suspicions of me. Just that you disagreed with my point. town members cant disagree on a post? Or are you the one that is full of shit? Just like when addressing you, he is overtly aggressive; and the full of shit comment is highly defensive. Exhibit B (Talking to Eccleston) + Show Spoiler + On May 30 2013 22:13 DrTennant wrote: ive made reads you must not be reading my posts. He is much more reserved here when addressing Eccleston, compared to Baker in Exhibit A. Exhibit C (Explaining to SMcCoy why he did not attack Eccleston for wishy-washy posts) + Show Spoiler + On May 29 2013 23:48 SMcCoy wrote: You didn't bring up Ecclestone after he told Smith that he doesn't know if he's angry villager or alien though. I'm curious why you didn't find his post to be filler content as opposed to mine. The bolded is essentially a statement about scumhunting method. Do you want me to make quick judgments? You seem like you're justifying quick judgments, then asking me why I'm worried about making them. If I'm worried about making them it's cause Ecclestone's posts didn't allow for a quick judgment, as already laid out. Now, why do you bring that up. Your posting went from telling me my post is wishy washy to justifying your own judgmental posting, is it to tell me that I should make quick judgments? I don't recall ever asking you to justify yourself for quick judgment, but you brought up a justification for it nonetheless. How is it relevant to you claiming that I am scum? I already laid out that he could be both. Until he posts more I'll refrain from judging. Purpose of the post: Trigger an answer and change the posting style of a possible bad townie to a more constructive version. Communicate that I'm suspicious of him. + Show Spoiler + I think DrTennant is scum On May 29 2013 23:58 DrTennant wrote: At the time that post was your only post in the thread. It looked like to me as just a big post to say nothing to me that's why it stood out to me over everything else. Yes eccelstone did have what could be interpreted as a wishy washy post but right before that he essential through out a town read for no reason. To me your post was devoid of actual content. Obviously you think it conveyed more than that but i didn't see it that way. However looking at your recent posting it seems you have had an easy time explaining yourself which i think would be much harder for you if you were scum. Firstly, I did not find SMcCoy post regarding Eccleton wishy-washy. I have explained this already; SMcCoy found Eccleston scummy, but in his experience rarely comes across scum this "quickly/easily" so in true towniness is putting this guy on watch, instead of jumping to conclusions. He voiced the concern to see if others had picked up on the same "bad vibes". Dr.T tried to slam this as wishy-washy; whereas, it was actually Eccleston who was wishy washy and did not address MSmith1 question regarding alignment. All he did was call A.McGann friendly.. which Dr.T interpretted as giving out alignment (when it fact it does not) - Not that it matters anymore, but that was a genuine scum slip for Dr.T. The point is: motive (1) Why does Dr.T post "guns blazing" to SMcCoy in the first place (2) Why does he ignore the 'wishy-washy' posts from Eccleston (3) Why does he talk to Eccleston meekly compared to people like Baker/SMcCoy. For me, it makes sense if Dr.T is a scum team with Eccleston. So far, sound reason has not disputed this. Lets work as a team, lynch scum #2 (Eccleston); and only then consider scum #3 | ||
|
SMcCoy
228 Posts
You should be glad there's someone putting conspiracy theories out there, cause the alternative to it is be someone who doesn't do jack shit, like the majority of this game. I'm heavily pissed off, and that for a good reason. You will lose your left nut cause H3 would have had to bus Eccleston since D1, and then switch to defend him only recently, which is one of the reasons for why I think that H3 is posting without a scum agenda. There's no way Eccleston and H3 are scum together. Remove HW from this game. Only stupid towns leave lurkers alive for this long. | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
On June 09 2013 01:19 SMcCoy wrote: Yet, you call me scum for identical behaviour, when you cited A.McGann post.As "wishy-washy" I might have been, I should not even have been in need of posting if I was scum, so take your conspiracy theories elsewhere. If I'm posting so much, and with so many suspects, it's surely not something I would have to do as scum since this town is perfectly capable of destroying itself without me. You should be glad there's someone putting conspiracy theories out there, cause the alternative to it is be someone who doesn't do jack shit, like the majority of this game. I'm heavily pissed off, and that for a good reason. Are you really that jaded? Of course I am glad for the above, it is why I ensured I wrote I still think you are town. I am actually trying to communicate to you that you have itchy trigger fingers, and it is going to alienate you from the remaining town. (Alienate is not a word for scum, treat it literally please). We need to stick together McCoy. It is that simple.You will lose your left nut cause H3 would have had to bus Eccleston since D1, and then switch to defend him only recently, which is one of the reasons for why I think that H3 is posting without a scum agenda. There's no way Eccleston and H3 are scum together. Dude, I wrote at the top of my post & the bottom. Concentrate on scum #2 first, and lynch him.I dont care if we agree or disagree on H3. What I care about is whether we agree on Eccleston Its simple, can you dispute the logic I have put forth for Eccleston being scum? If you can great, we move onto the next guy. But thus far, I think my approach at looking for scum motivation is *very* solid. Remove HW from this game. Only stupid towns leave lurkers alive for this long. Yes, lurkers are an issue. But I would prefer to lynch a scum with excellent case behind, then a lucky dip lurker lynch. The score is 5-2. If we eliminate a town lurker, + NK; it become 3-2, and the game will essentially be over; the lurkers have proven they dont want to contribute, nor do they want to listen to the actives. It is too late for a "policy lynch". We need to be cold, calculated and decisive. It starts with Eccleston. Either you can rebut the case or you can not. | ||
|
Hurndall3
237 Posts
The logic is not conclusive. Let's look at exhibit B: On June 09 2013 00:44 TheDavison wrote: Exhibit B (Talking to Eccleston) + Show Spoiler + On May 30 2013 22:13 DrTennant wrote: ive made reads you must not be reading my posts. He is much more reserved here when addressing Eccleston, compared to Baker in Exhibit A. I would characterize his response as quite aggressive actually. it doesn't look like how scum would talk to each other. @td you are suffering from confirmation bias pure and simple. You are looking at all these little things that don't cohere into a bigger picture. You are seeing signs where there aren't any. | ||
|
Hurndall3
237 Posts
| ||
| ||
