EPTSmurf Mini Mafia
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
Let's play a game... | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
| ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
He blatantly sheeped an early case without adding anything to it and unvoted as soon as the casee responded. Since that moment he has been complaining about the difficulty of reading an all smurf game, which is the reason I've read the thread more than once, and hasn't added anything to the progression of day one discussion. For now I find H3 the scummiest player in the thread and shall, therefore, vote for him. I ask each of you to either vote with me and tell me why yo agree with me or, if you are not voting with me, tell me why you disagree. Vote:Hurndall | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
| ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
On May 30 2013 19:05 Baker1986 wrote: Here's a list. Town heroes: McCoy Baker Townies: Msmith McGann Useless: TheDavison JPertwee Modkill-land: TomB4 HartnellWill Someone who thinks he's funny but he isn't, also his RP is awful PTroughton2 Scummy fuckers: Eccleston Hurndall3 Scum: DrTennant Wait, so I'm useless but my thread contribution has been to make a case on the kill it with fire/stab it in the face scum player. How do you reconcile those two opinions? DrT, you seem a little defensive, you've said you thrive in the spotlight and that helps you form reads but you don't actually have reads. You are calling PT shit and saying Mccoy's case is trash but you are not calling either scum. If you are indeed town and you 'thrive in the spotlight' I'd rather like to hear about the reads you've gotten by being the centre of attention. | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
This is a game where none of us, even you, can make people listen to them based on their names so each of us should be evaluating individual cases on a merit basis and I should not have to be in thread actively pushing for it to be considered. Because I could be anyone from Grush to Syllo I expect you to look into my cases as if they come form someone worth listening to. If it wasn't my case that convinced you that H3 was scum what was it? | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
Baker, you are right. DocT is one scummy mother fucker. | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
I'm the one with a minor case on H3 who didn't comment on DrT at that time. | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
| ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
On May 31 2013 21:56 Baker1986 wrote: JP is the hardest call in the game at the moment, probably along with eccleston. There's probably 2, if not 3 scum in this list DrT JP Eccleston PT Tom Hurn I just need to weed out the townies. of those I'd be way more interested in DrT, JP and Tom flipping than the other three. On my reread I think its unlikely Hurn is scum. His vote has been all over, his posting is bad, his play seems insane as scum since being so free to admit to not reading the posts of the player he called scummy is going to draw attention to him. I'd label him dumb, not scum. Look at this vote count from the illustrious Oatsmaster: On May 31 2013 12:20 Oatsmaster wrote: WHOS THERE? SMcCoy (0): TheDavison (0): DrTennant (7): SMcCoy, Baker1986, MSmith1, HartnellWil, A McGann, Eccleston, Hurndall3 Hurndall3 (2): PTroughton2, TheDavison PTroughton2 (3): TomB4, JPertwee, DrTennant, DrTennant is set to be lynched. Votes without ## will not be counted H3 is putting his vote in a lot of places, I do not believe a scum player would be so free with their vote and pressure so many people since they would be afraid to anger one or more of their targets who could turn the tables on them. On May 31 2013 12:47 TomB4 wrote: I can name at least two people who would make better lynches (whom I haven't already), but it's pretty pointless given that it looks to be a fruitless endeavour right now. It's better for me to sit on those reads and see how they develop without interference. Troughton is still a better lynch than DrT and he still has enough votes to be a viable candidate. He's not responded at all to any of the votes he's received. In fact, he's still done nothing at all since his first two posts. This post is incredible. Not in a good way. If you as town genuinely think this we'll have words post game. I find it much more likely however that the first sentence of this post is a lie, either a stupid gambit or a scum trying to look like they have more to contribute than they do. I don't like how TB4 is trying to defend DrT from this lynch either, his arguments for DrT being town are non-existent while his attacks on Trout seem like he fell for a modified Kenpachi trap. The role playing did not disguise Trout's motives or reads it was simply flavour. But it was odd. And scum love to attack odd things since they cannot genuinely hunt scum. For the moment ##Unvote ##Vote: TomB4 I'm curious to see what he has to say and the rest of you are getting DrT lynched already. Time for another wagon so that the day gets interesting. | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
I think we should look into H3 and TB4 most, those are the guys (TB4 more so) who were trying to puh counter wagons but ended up on the DrT wagon. That seems like the most likely place for scum to be in my mind, they would want to create a counter wagon on town and yet get the credit from a scum lynch. TB4 still looks like scum to me, I don't like that no one tried to swing the lynch at all, I'd much prefer that we had a real possibility of a counter wagon to see where the votes ended up. With a tight race we'd have learned a lot more from a scum lynch. Ah well, it is what it is. McGann, I disagree, it was clear to me at least that DrT was going to be the lynch no matter what. Barely over the line is totally false. I'll write up a full case on TB4 within this night phase. In all seriousness though that shouldn't be needed, he is scum. | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
On June 01 2013 19:23 SMcCoy wrote: @ Tom I need your exact reasoning for giving JP a townread. He's the next guy I would lynch. All the noise he has been making was always an attempt to shift the lynch away from DrT, I will show it in more detail. @ TheDavison I want to know why you're not considering JP, and I would like you to comment on the points written in favor of H3 so far. Multiple players have given him townreads, myself included. ______________________________________________________________________________________________________ Then, I don't like how this guy joined the wagon, he has basically no other posts of value, and keeps himself the option open to switch to trout should the counterwagon gain steam: Vigi should probably shoot Trout for uselessness, although I would speculate that he's town based on current information. Nonetheless it's better if we take him out of the equation. Hartnelwill might be another viable option cause he's a lurker. I'm not not considering JP, I need to reread to see what I think of him though. Update on that in a few minutes after I see whats what. My post ten hours ago was unclear on that point because I am bad at writing things. What it was supposed to suggest was that we should look into the players actively pushing other wagons who ended up on the DrT wagon, those players were H3 and TB4 between those two I wanted to look into TB4 and not H3. As for H3, I already commented that I think he is town in an earlier post and would be unhappy with lynching him. You may remember that as the post where I tried to start a counter wagon on TB4. And yes, what I did was 100% an attempt to create a counter wagon, I wanted DrT to have reason to post and his probable scum buddies a belief that they could defend him. I don't like easy day one wagons not, like most players, because I think that means the wagon is on scum but because I think we are more likely to learn more by having a contested lynch and an easy one, even on scum, doesn't help as much as a tight run lynch. I'm reading filters now and will update with reads and reasons when I have them. | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
| ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
Next up: Hwill | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
Feeling better about Hwill after that read. I'd suggest everyone go look at page 7 and 8 actually. | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
For reference: + Show Spoiler [Post 1] + On June 03 2013 09:04 TheRealMcCoy wrote: Guys, GM confirmed me on my non-smurf account, but HAS NOT confirmed me on this smurf yet. I'm blurring the lines of what is acceptable as Davison appears to be the prime candidate for this lynch and almost 24hrs has expired - so there so is much work to be done to prove innocence. Apologies GM for jumping the gun. Feel free to reprimand me if you want. All: Below are the actions I plan to take over the next 24hrs. Feel free to direct questions my way between now and then. (1) Dissect the cases against Davison with my fresh perspective. Note: I can not explain the "why" of Davison. However, as I know his alignment, I can try to understand the motive and give my take on what occurred. (2) Determine a valid counter candidate to lynch Note: I know I am town - yet I also understand that heeds no meaning until I establish my innocence. Please be patient, I know everyone enjoys a passionate and robust defense. However, I do like the post count of the game currently, therefore, do not wish to break away from that. In short: I am going to start working on the two points above, and will make every effort to answer questions headed my way post-replacing. + Show Spoiler [Post 2] + On June 03 2013 10:03 TheRealMcCoy wrote: Vote 1 + Show Spoiler [A.McGann] + + Show Spoiler [Vote] + On June 02 2013 13:35 A McGann wrote: In addition to your JPertwee read that never materialised, you never came through on this full case on TB4, either. What you have written about him so far is unconvincing to say the least. He was never trying to gain credit for the Dr Tennant lynch. The first part of your original case against him boils down to "I think this sentence is untruthful, I have no way to prove it". The next part is criticizing his defence of DrTennant. If you think Tom and Dr.Tennant are both scum together, why would you not join the majority of people already lynching DrTennant. If they were both your scum reads, you should have been happy to see either one die to confirm your suspicions. Furthermore, if they're both scum as you put forward, what would splitting this lynch between two scum prove? All this does is run the risk of a no-lynch as townies tussle with two competing wagons, both of which are accurate. You are not thinking like a townie and your original case is hollow. When pressed you deliver (questionable) town reads on people not in question and avoid commenting on the contentious ones. ##Vote: TheDavison The gist of your vote to me is: "You do not like TheDavison opinion of TomB4." Rebuttle (1) Since when is activity indicative of alignment? Perhaps those "promised' cases never materialised due to the inactivity which led to him being replaced. What does this do for your vote? Have you considered TheDavison entry into the thread? + Show Spoiler + On May 30 2013 03:11 TheDavison wrote: I'd like to bring attention to H3's posting, in reading and rereading the thread I found him less than useless. He has a fair number of posts and has been involved in discussion without adding anything to said discussion. He blatantly sheeped an early case without adding anything to it and unvoted as soon as the casee responded. Since that moment he has been complaining about the difficulty of reading an all smurf game, which is the reason I've read the thread more than once, and hasn't added anything to the progression of day one discussion. For now I find H3 the scummiest player in the thread and shall, therefore, vote for him. I ask each of you to either vote with me and tell me why yo agree with me or, if you are not voting with me, tell me why you disagree. Vote:Hurndall That first post was bold, blunt and brash. A combination stereotypical of town confidence. Yet, you are willing to throw away that explicit read simply because TheDavison had differing thoughts on a player you MUST CERTAINLY think is town (i.e. TomB4). - Otherwise the chainsaw defense makes no sense to me. (2) This is most abundant when you attempt to tie scum motive to TD analysis of TB4 & Dr.T defense. Here, you present tunneled conclusions and juxtapose this mentality with the actions of TheDavison. Thus, by design, TheDavison would always become scum for you. I offer the following: Start reading TheDavison/me by face value. The Davison has been nothing but blunt, candid and open in his posts. There is no need to try and force that honesty into something else. Vote 2 TomB4. Run out of time. Will address when I get back in a couple hours. Vote 3 + Show Spoiler [HartnellWill] + + Show Spoiler [Vote] + On June 02 2013 23:54 HartnellWill wrote: I like how instead of a TomB4 case we get three posts saying "this player could have been scum but nah, I think they're townie". Otherwise McCoy said pretty much everything there is to say. ##Vote: TheDavison McCoy? So I presume we are talking about the following: + Show Spoiler [McCoy1] + On June 02 2013 19:13 SMcCoy wrote: Tom raises some good points actually, here's a tl; dr for why Davison might be a good lynch, too. Tell me what you observe. & + Show Spoiler [McCoy2] + On June 02 2013 19:51 SMcCoy wrote: I have some doubts about today's lynch though  I know this much, it's not going to be Tom, but one of JP or Davis. Here's a summary of stuff Davis did:
I suggest that among the two we lynch the dude first who posts less compared to the first cycle. Other than that JP and Davis are both the best choices, with no particular order of preference, barring any new contributions that give me a better impression on one of the two. Interestingly enough, McCoy didnt lead with a vote. He asked others for observations. Please explain why you chose me over JP. Vote 4 + Show Spoiler [JPertwee] + + Show Spoiler [Vote] + On June 03 2013 05:04 JPertwee wrote: I still don't know how you guys aren't understanding this. I will make it as clear as I possibly can, and this will be the last I speak of it. DrT was a scum read of mine on day 1, that should be clear to everyone that's read the thread. However, Troughton has claimed scum in the thread, I would rather kill the 100% scum, and then go after the 70%. Especially with the linking circumstances in the thread. I am not saying Dr. Tennant took his time before going after Troughton. I am saying he hesitated. We know now that Tennant is scum. He was offered a lynch on Troughton, and it took him two posts before he was willing to go after him, even though he had put a bit of suspicion on him earlier. The whole scenario reeked of distancing from Tennant, and then the realization that there was no possible lynch that wasn't him or Troughton. If Troughton were town, there wouldn't have been that "Oh, yeah, he's scummy, but I won't vote" -> "Aw, fuck it, I'll vote him". It would've been "Oh, wow, look at this case guys. This is the real scum right here." and he would've slapped his vote down right away. The hesitancy is his desire to stay alive finally winning out and showing him that either he dies, or his scum buddy who has done nothing but claimed scum dies. It's an easy choice from that point. I see Davison being the one most likely to round out this list of scum. While it's possible there were scum on the wagon, I think at this point it's more likely that both the scum were not on the wagon. Davison fits the bill for the last member of the scum team, especially once you factor in that the scum team seemed to have had very little pull on the lynch. I'm still 100% sure that Troughton needs to be lynched for us to win, and if I had my way we'd lynch him today. From the way everyone's acting I just don't see that as a possibility today. With Troughton off the table I think Davison is without a doubt the best lynch today, and is only second to Troughton in the likelihood of being scum. ##Vote: TheDavison Technically you have recanted this vote. What is interesting with this vote is, you say TheDavison is the most likely to round out the list of scum, but you do no provide any rationale, other than "he fits the bill" and your top read Troughton is unlikely to be voted. Please explain why TD is a scum read, as for me, your insinuations are not explicit, and I would contest not even implicit. In short: The reasoning of HartnellWill and JPertwee need more explanation. They are weak votes, and explicitly demonstrate one of two mindsets. (1) Town: Lazy sheep riding the town leader bandwagon OR (2) Scum: Using the town leader vote to bandwagon a town lynch. The question is, which mindset both those players fit into. Based on the way the votes are structured, I would argue JP is scum (as he felt a need to over compensate his vote, even though it said nothing). At least HartnellWill had the confidence to bluntly say, I am sheeping SMcCoy. Over and out. MSmith1: I will address your queries when I get back. Today is busy day unfortunately. JPeterwee: Originally, you were pushing Troughton AND voted TheDavison. Now, you are pushing Troughton AND voting Ecleston. I have two questions then. (1) If Troughton is your consistent scum read. Please share again in laymans terms why you are not campaigning for his vote? (2) Please share your thoughts on Baker1986. and his love for Ace // SMcCoy. | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
On June 03 2013 14:08 A McGann wrote: Why is Baker in question? Mr McGann, I shall explain in three parts. (1) Why did I bother to consider Baker Because I don't like sycophants. As scum they easily blend in with town status quo and thus, are never held accountable. There is no shame to agree with someone else. However, Baker has taken this into the realms of hyperbole. His posting of late is nothing more than to create a SMcCoy fan club. (2) Why did I ask JP to give me an opinion on Baker Because I wanted to see how he reacted when asked to discuss something that has not received much attention. (3) But seriously, why Baker1986.. who has he pissed off? That is precisely the point. Baker1986 is a person who has bugged since since before I replaced in. Now I am in the game, I felt this was a way to inject some original thought into the thread for discussion. Perhaps he is simply a townie that loves his leader. There is no shame in that either. However I still think it is critical for him to put his cock on the block and share his *own* thoughts before being prompted to go "+1". In my opinion, this stream of thoughts can only improve towns position, not hinder. Anyways, here are some exerts of Baker1986 fanaticism. + Show Spoiler + If it is unclear. All the references to "sheep" refer to "SMcCoy". This has gone on for multiple days now. On June 01 2013 22:37 Baker1986 wrote: My man McCoy On June 02 2013 05:39 Baker1986 wrote: Also, I'm starting a McCoy fanclub. Anyone wishing to join can type in the thread: ##McCoy for President On June 02 2013 19:24 Baker1986 wrote: Do I have to, can't I just sheep you? On June 02 2013 22:02 Baker1986 wrote: I'd probably just sheep this Davison lynch too, tbh On June 03 2013 08:12 Baker1986 wrote: but why not just sheep mccoy? He's the president after all... | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
On June 02 2013 21:16 A McGann wrote: I will admit I have not read the whole thread since replacing in. Tom, in regards to how many scum were on the Dr.Tennant wagon, I'd say a maximum of 1. The idea of both remaining scum being on Dr.Tennant (and therefore everyone not on that lynch is town) is outlandish enough that I'm willing to discount it. (i.e. my knowledge of the thread is based on my readings pre-replacement) The OP says the # of roles is not given; can you please clarify how the thread/yourself came to the discovery of 3 scum? I have played in 13 player games with 4 scum, 3 scum, 3 scum + 1 3P. I am still puzzled with what logic/knowledge such a bold statement derived from? | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
On June 03 2013 09:32 MSmith1 wrote: @TheRealMcCoy aka TD2 I just have three questions [1]How much of the thread have you read already? I read the whole thread as an observer, kept updated and developed opinions on several characters.Not that it means anything, but I did support the Dr.T lynch. [2]Before you replaced in, were you in the Obs QT, casually obsing on your own, or not following at all? I was not in the ObsQT. As an aside, if I was, I believe that would make me ineligible to replace in. [3]If you're the real mccoy, who the fuck did Baker just appoint president? TheRealMcCoy was my way of signalling to everyone I was up to date with the thread before replacing in. | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
On June 03 2013 15:47 TheDavison wrote: I will admit I have not read the whole thread since replacing in. (i.e. my knowledge of the thread is based on my readings pre-replacement) The OP says the # of roles is not given; can you please clarify how the thread/yourself came to the discovery of 3 scum? I have played in 13 player games with 4 scum, 3 scum, 3 scum + 1 3P. I am still puzzled with what logic/knowledge such a bold statement derived from? EBWOP Please ignore that moment of stupidity. After another review of the OP, it shoes 3/3 Derridians. | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
On June 03 2013 16:02 A McGann wrote: Mhmm. Since you've quoted that, do you agree with the statement? + Show Spoiler [Statement] + On June 02 2013 21:16 A McGann wrote: Tom, in regards to how many scum were on the Dr.Tennant wagon, I'd say a maximum of 1. The idea of both remaining scum being on Dr.Tennant (and therefore everyone not on that lynch is town) is outlandish enough that I'm willing to discount it. On June 01 2013 11:30 Oatsmaster wrote: DrTennant (8): SMcCoy, Baker1986, MSmith1, HartnellWil, A McGann, Eccleston, Hurndall3, TomB4 Yes I can agree it is indeed outlandish to entertain that notion - with one caveat. Just as reads must evolve based on thread direction; so must this heuristic. Mafia game after mafia game has proven to me that what *I* consider to be good, solid play; is not necessarily what is in the mind of other players. Regardless, I think the best course of action is to evaluate what JPertwee brings to the table with his rebuttle(s). I hope for his sake, he does not thrive in the spotlight the same way Dr.Tennant did. | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
If I may direct some of your energy towards the below. On June 03 2013 16:45 PTroughton2 wrote: + Show Spoiler [*Snip*] + MEMO From: New Management To: Smurf Mafia I have assumed control of PT2 (now known as PT2000). I read through the thread quickly while sleepy so I can't give much good analysis at the moment, but I wrote down a couple of thoughts that I can share that stem from my initial impressions of the game. As far as what PT2 was doing in his first and apparently only post, you're going to have to ask him if you find out after the game is over. Made a few notes early in the reading process (I hadn't read the game at all before subbing in, sorry this is pretty weak right now). Eccleston posting for the sake of posting. Struck me as scummy as all get-out. I'll be reviewing him in detail later in the day. Lots of good arguments for Eccleston probably being scum that I saw being posted by other players. + Show Spoiler [*snip*] + On May 29 2013 17:33 Eccleston wrote: Reporting in. Why do you prefer guessing at the scum team instead of trying to generate constructive discussion? On May 29 2013 17:45 Eccleston wrote: Setup speculation, lynching policies ... something that you can reply to. PT2000. A.McGann provided an excellent take on Eccleston here. (1) Once you have had a chance to assimilate, let us know if your opinion has changed. + Show Spoiler [*Snip*] + MSmith had a really nice conversation starter and also pointed out what struck me immediately about Ecc as I began to read the thread, started with a green read on MSmith and I don't really recall much else sticking out during the rest of the day. maybe I'm just too sleepy to remember or maybe there's something there to look at. Here's where my original read stemmed from: McCoy has been town cheiftan so far and Baker seems to be hinting he's rather comfortable with sheeping McCoy. Looking into Baker as well, not sure how comfortable I am with him being a sheep but at least it's McCoy who is the shepherd. I'd be careful. Baker1986 might be jealous of the great polishing job you just gave to SMcCoy.(2) What I would like to know is your motivation for raising Baker as an item of discussion instead of a hot potato like JPertwee? This is exacerbated by the below. + Show Spoiler [snip] + (3) Yes, please share the JP read.So you have my thoughts based on my first quick 90-minute read through the game so far. If you want impressions on players who I haven't mentioned that I will be looking at when I return that would be swell. Looks like we're talking about JP most recently so I'll add him to my to-do list. Goodnight. | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
On June 03 2013 23:25 JPertwee wrote: It's nice to see that you can be given all of that info, and still find nothing to say. I'm not hanging today, because I'm not guilty. This is a fallacy. I am confident you will hang today. Your stance on "Guilt" has no bearing. + Show Spoiler + ##Vote:JPertwee This should solve the majority issue. Quick question for you JP. On May 30 2013 00:03 JPertwee wrote: + Show Spoiler [*snip*] + 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 You have to understand on this one, McCoy, that I can see both sides of your and Dr. Tennant's dispute. I can understand exactly where his suspicion of you came from in your entrance, + Show Spoiler [*snip*] + but since then you've alleviated my fears. I might be biased on this because it seems I've followed a similar thought train to him. Is there anything specific in Dr. Tennant's play that you think make him an alien, or is it just this push? Dr. Tennant, can you clarify what you mean about Eccleston? I can only think of one particular point in his favour for his wishy washy post, and no one has touched on it. I want to know exactly why Eccleston wasn't on your radar. Now that Dr.T has flipped scum. Do you still think you "can understand exactly where his suspicion" came from? For Oatsmaster/GM: ##Vote: JPertwee | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
Neither msmith or JP received a saved notification. So either scum withheld. Or JP is lying. Whilst I would hate to lynch an uncontested medic claim... I find it really unlikely scum withheld night1. That makes the game so much more difficult to win, especially when they already dropped a goon. I'm sticking with JP, unless someone is able to share more information to aid the equation. | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
Hmmm. For me, that changes things. Msmith1 was a valid target. McCoy was too obvious. I'm at work and don't have time to re read JP though... I still hate his wishy washiness in promoting one. Ore lynch target, but pushing the status quo. Hence, currently I'm still sticking to my guns. I.e. this is a ploy. If someone is willing to do the leg work. I will check in 30min to lynch and reassess. Sorry guys. Work is work after all. | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
| ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
##vote: tomb4 I'm off gents. Best of luck | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
##vote:JP | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
On June 04 2013 11:08 SMcCoy wrote: What do you guys think of Davison's vote switch? Would he believe that we could manage to switch in this short time as town, or did he gamble on the lynch going through anyway and looking good post-flip? Excuse me. U r the one who issued the rallying call. I respond, and u try to hold me accountable. I think baker is getting to your head. U have showed great insight multiple times in this game. However the mere notion of what you suggested is completely outlandish. I'm disappointed we lynched a medic as well. Personally I'm going to review how the JP lynch built up steam, and look for specifically over compensated +1s. In my experience, that presents scums easiest way to join a town bandwagon. | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
I agree Get rid of h3 | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
On June 04 2013 11:34 Hurndall3 wrote: I was working all day for several days in a row now. But I'm not going to blame that. Truthfully I didn't think I needed to try that hard because town was just owning it up I really didn't have anything to add with my limited time. Also everyone thought I was town so yeah.. my job was done kind of. Mcgann. This response is precisely why I called into question baker yesterday. Unfortunately, whether town or scum. I cannot have a go at H3 for this attitude. It is indeed a completely valid point of view to hold. I.e. Follow the leader. What many forget is. Scum are as strong as their best player. Town are as strong as their worst. Ppl like McCoy and msmith1, whilst certainly capable of making validated and correct decisions. still require individuals to go back and forth with them and Challenge them. This process improves critical thinking on all levels. I hope town decides to move forward from day2 and instead of pointing accusatory fingers. Rather, work together and critically challenge each others points of view. Day1 proved this game is solvable. We just need to do it together. Personally I think the challenge in this game is separating the sycophant towns asking for McCoy guidance from the blending scum. Its the typical lurking scum vs bad town scenario with a twist. So what am I going to do? As I said prior. My plan of attack when I get home is to review the over compensated +1s to bandwagon JP. I expect to provide some decent leads. | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
I know your focus appears entrenched between eccle and tomb4. May I ask for a stance on PT2000. I.e. on the radar? And How much lenience to give to begin contributing meaningfully. Why? His spiel on baker day2 rubbed me the wrong way. Whilst we both raised baker as an item of discussion, I felt the motivations were completely different. | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
Rereading JP medic reveal. I'm kicking myself. It is so damn blunt and authentic. That's the love/hate relationship of hindsight I guess. Bakers response essentially was to belittle his scum target, however the current evidence stacked against him points to immature town. Tomb4 response was interesting.. But I think it is best he focuses on replying to McCoy observations. Of suspicion to me is mcgann. Now for context. I replaced in and didn't read op. Thus, when I was talking about it doesn't make sense to withhold shots, I was referencing standard Mafia dynamics. If I understood the kp rules of withholding, I would most certainly advocate that path as scum. I.e. a 180 flip in thought. Now mcgann says he agrees that It makes no sense to withhold. So let's continue to push JP the "fake" medic. What is interesting is later he discusses the kp benefits of withholding, hence he was always aware. I want an explanation why mcgann thought it was outlandish for scum to withhold kp.. Effectively pushing the JP medic lynch Gents. Note this is exacerbated by subsequent posts where he creates logic scenarios and then admits they are wrong. U need to decide whether genuine or part of the acting routine. I hope this becomes an item we can all discuss. | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
On June 04 2013 13:10 Hurndall3 wrote: TD, you think i'm a sycophant? if you think that, I think you need to l2dictionary Do u think I am town? If so, why do u care what I think. I suggest instead of throwing around cheap insults, that you seek avenues that indeed lead to the discovery of scum. Surely you must realise there is a high propensity for msmith1 and smccoy to be shot tonight. We need as much POSITIVE discussion to place town in good stead come day3. I think this game is solvable H3. We just need to work together. | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
I saw that response and agreed with it when I thought we were playing normal Mafia kp withhold. I know now, we are not playing standard rules. So yes, I still take issue. Take it as a sign of respect - as hard as it is to swallow. Throughout this game you have displayed snippets of wisdom. Hence I can only feel grave disappointment reading comments such as the one we are discussing. I shall raise two more points. 1, I'm trying to put you in the limelight. I imagine you as town, would be someone who thrived and utilised the moment to prove without doubt your innocence. I'm not getting that from you... 2. Aren't u the one advocating eccleston innocence? What is your plan of "attack" with eccleston 2.0 | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
It started off as a retort, and developed into a case. Thats what happens when site maintenance kicks in for 1 hour.  + Show Spoiler [To A.McGann] + On June 04 2013 13:56 A McGann wrote: McGann, I think you have done a superb job separating yourself from the chaff in this limited person game.+ Show Spoiler + On June 04 2013 13:45 TheDavison wrote: Mr Mcgann. I saw that response and agreed with it when I thought we were playing normal Mafia kp withhold. I know now, we are not playing standard rules. So yes, I still take issue. Take it as a sign of respect - as hard as it is to swallow. Throughout this game you have displayed snippets of wisdom. Hence I can only feel grave disappointment reading comments such as the one we are discussing. I shall raise two more points. 1, I'm trying to put you in the limelight. I imagine you as town, would be someone who thrived and utilised the moment to prove without doubt your innocence. I'm not getting that from you... 2. Aren't u the one advocating eccleston innocence? What is your plan of "attack" with eccleston 2.0 1) If you cannot get a grasp on my innocence from the last 25 pages, then just give up and quit. The fact that this game has been made infinitely harder by half a dozen townies doing jack-squat all is god damn INFURIATING, especially when they come in after the lynch saying "At least I didn't lynch the medic HURRRRRRR". 2) What kind of a question is this? If I was advocating his innocence before the replacement, why would that change as soon as he replaces out? It wont and hasn't. I think he's more than likely town and until he gives me a reason to think otherwise, he can stay that way. However, I do not think for one second that you have established innocence to the degree you expressed when suggesting I quit. Considering the below - even you appear to acknowledge this thread sentiment. On June 04 2013 01:46 A McGann wrote: Confirmed isn't a sliding scale, its binary. Yes or no. We're all no, as far as I know. But people like yourself, McCoy and Smith get to go in the "Super, duper unlikely scum, most probably town, ill take everything they say at face value" bracket. Now. I hope we can put our differences aside and work together constructively. I think you have great ideas, so, if you think the below is worthwhile I look forward to your constructive opinion. + Show Spoiler [True Agenda] + When discussing the witholding kp "dilemma" I was actually staging the conversation to be a mechanism to discuss the "withheld kp" with the masses. I was hoping you would play along - but hey, sometimes we have to roll with the punches. To me, the benefit of witholding KP is (with no godfather/strongarm): (1) Fake claim medic or vet or JK (2) Fake target a person (assuming medic /JK is in the game) to setup a kill next cycle. (3) Target someone likely to be protected by double stacking (4) Blitzkrieg -> Rapidly take out town leaders/threats to destablise town. (5) Improve odds of a fatality -> i.e. hope town medic + JK target the same person. 1 of your KP hits the unprotected. (6) Promote "waste of time" discussions like this =) Perhaps there are other scenarios, it is up to you to decide whether they are important to include; and make my conclusion obsolete. If the godfather/strongarm is in the game Points (1) and (2) and (4) and (5) and (6) apply. (3) Is covered by the strongarm, who can only shoot once, but is worth 2kp. If we evaluate those scenarios (1) *HAD* slim potential. Now that a medic has been killed, it is unlikely for a fake JK/vet claim to occur. It is too easy to counter. (2) I dont think the return is worth the investment. This is generally frowned upon by good players anyways. (3) Again, i dont think the return is worth the investment. Also generally frowned upon. (4) This is certainly worth while *IF* town is on the wrong path. (5) Also worthwhile. Its a a safe way to mitigate protective roles and 1KP. (6) Its possible. But requires in my opinion a myopic scum. Considering GM entry requirements, I would like to assume this is unlikely. Henceforth, the evaluations above indicate that the scum objectives are best satisfied by enabling the double KP to execute either (4) or (5); with one caveat. That is, the benefit is best gained when the blue roles are unknown as it is there to mitigate that uncertainty. Now of course, we are already thinking the town leaders are likely to be shot. This is merely reinventing the wheel, right? + Show Spoiler [The Point] + So Why is this important? Because scum were down 1 person after Day 1. Playing the game to execute scenario (4) and (5) indicate a confidence to finish off the game in a strategical manner. Or more specifically, they are not playing in survival mode: i.e. trying to do anything it takes to take off pressure. This is important to realise...During Night 1, Scum were very likely: not threatened This establishes the following dichotomy: (a) Scum have absolute balls of steel - a possibility that I expect a handful of TL players to be capable of. or; (b) Scum did not feel pressured, as they have either camouflaged as town; OR, are not viewed as a major threat. Keep in mind, the decision to boycott KP was made Night 1, so you have to look back into the game with the thread sentiment of Night 1. + Show Spoiler [In Action] + If we examine the final votes for both Days. On June 01 2013 11:30 Oatsmaster wrote: Day 1 SMcCoy (0): TheDavison (0): DrTennant (8): SMcCoy, Baker1986, MSmith1, HartnellWil, A McGann, Eccleston, Hurndall3, TomB4 Hurndall3 (1): PTroughton2, PTroughton2 (2): TomB4 (1): TheDavison On June 04 2013 10:52 Oatsmaster wrote: Day2 jpertwee (7): baker1986, smccoy, msmith1, tomb4, a mcgann, thedavison (1): eccleston (2): hartnellwill, jpertwee hartnellwill (0): tomb4 (1): Someone who stands out to me as a contender to satisfy that dichotomy is: Hurndall3. On Day1, VCA indicates he has thrown his vote around randomly seeing where it sticks. In fact the vote justifications below are sycophantic at best and outright scummy at worst. Pay particular attention to the over compensation with his Dr.T sheep vote//bus. + Show Spoiler [H3 justifications] + On May 29 2013 23:01 Hurndall3 wrote: yup mccoys post is scummy as fuck. until he makes himself seem more town: ##vote smccoy On May 30 2013 03:17 Hurndall3 wrote: ok ##vote thedavison pretty self explanatory imo. This is his first post! On May 31 2013 00:06 Hurndall3 wrote: the bandwagon of justice rolling through.. it is so beautiful ##vote ptroughton On May 31 2013 11:20 Hurndall3 wrote: ##unvote ##vote DrT k I think I can sheep this DrT shit now that I read the case thoroughly. these are the points that convinced me to sheep. 1 DrT's overdefense 2 unnatural calmness 3 repeated appeal that scum is among the inactives 4 one dimensional scumreads On June 03 2013 05:09 Hurndall3 wrote: ##vote td jp is looking town from that last post. going with the alternate wagon. Besides I thought td looked scummy from his first post. On June 04 2013 11:10 Hurndall3 wrote: fuck I guess my vote is really outdated. ##unvote ##vote JP NOT THAT IT MATTERS Compare this to "TomB4" who was in the final two to seal Dr.T fate. On June 01 2013 07:36 TomB4 wrote: I'd rather feel dumb than correct, since I am the minority in this case. It's better for us if I'm wrong. ##unvote ##vote DrTennant There is a stark contrast in confidence in the sheep vote. H3; who never explained any of his D1 votes in gross detail, suddenly feels the need to provide a summary account when it comes to Dr.T. His Day1 performance sequence is repeated in full force on Day2, when he votes for Davison citing "JP looks town", before seizing an opportunity and rescinding back to JP - with no explanation. If i haphazard a guess, I would say with confidence: His actions with JP are a scum slip. (i.e. jumped into the thread without reading, and realised the error in judgement and recanted) Let me repeat it for you: On June 03 2013 05:09 Hurndall3 wrote: ##vote td jp is looking town from that last post. going with the alternate wagon. Besides I thought td looked scummy from his first post. On June 04 2013 11:10 Hurndall3 wrote: fuck I guess my vote is really outdated. ##unvote ##vote JP NOT THAT IT MATTERS Please remember thread sentiment: barely anyone thought JP was town; or even if they had a "gut feeling". JP filter did NOT do not much to help them present a counter case. However, H3 suddenly knows it all. It doesnt matter that 1 day elapsed between the H3 backpedal. He backed the horse (JP) when no one else did (I would bet due to knowledge we dont have)... and when the opportunity came he took it and provided ZERO justification. Just like all his other votes except Dr.T. SMcCoy has already touched on some odd interactions with H3 and other(s) in the thread. + Show Spoiler [The Outcome] + Guys, I am suggesting that regardless of who dies this cycle: please push forward and secure the lynch of H3. (1) His voting of Dr.T is suspect (2) His voting of JP is suspect (3) His behaviour fits the pattern of scum who has blended into the "not a current thread" zone, thus satisfies the requirements of enabling the "withhold KP" ability. (4) Has suspect behaviour with other participants. Please discuss this. I think this person I speak of in "The Outcome" satisifies all the criteria I have been looking for. i.e. Over Compensated votes on scum. Low details when voting town. & satisfies my "withhold kp" musings in the spoilers above. Let me know your thoughts. If you think I am wrong. Point it out! Construction discussion can only help lead us in the right direction! | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
Excellent observations. I agree in full that we can move beyond NK speculation as it will all become evident in 20hrs or so, which decision(s) scum made. I think your additions to the H3 case are excellent, and are highly indicative of a scum mindset. I am eagerly awaiting the feedback of H3. As an aside A.McGann, my musings on your feedback regarding NK speculation. Spoilered as its not that relevant anymore. + Show Spoiler + You are completely correct; the original analysis hinged upon enabling "withhold KP" ability. So it is completely feasible that MSmith1 was the Night1 and thus, was saved. I think we can all agree that he was a logical kill choice. Extending this theory: I firmly believe there is no strongarm in play. If there was, it would have been logical to use native scum KP on MSmith1, and strongarm on SMcCoy. Thus mitigating scums danger personnel in one fell swoop. Hence, my explanation for why I think they didnt shoot MSmith is below. If I direct us back to the "withhold KP" theory. It is completely centralized around scum thinking strategically - which again, I believe is realistic given the entry requirements for this game. Therefore, even if the quadrumvirate is a serious threat to scum, I believe they would have come to the same conclusion as me. There was simply too much risk to shoot a key target Day1 (without a strongarm) due to risking a block The safer choice would have been to "withold KP" and attempt to eliminate two targets Night 2; ensuring the death of one prominent person. | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
On June 04 2013 18:07 Baker1986 wrote: How could you do this to me McCoy, how could you not be 100% right all the time? WHYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY Matey, Can you please provide a stance on H3. | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
On June 04 2013 18:24 A McGann wrote: + Show Spoiler + Luckily for us, you cannot separate the strongarm ability in that manner, otherwise I believe they would have done so. All the Strongarm ability does is supercharge the native factional KP into a 2KP on the same target, to avoid medic/veteran protection. This can only be done once, and at a cost of losing the 'godfather' status of being immune to checks. I question that maybe they shot at MSmith to preserve their Strongarm/Godfather, instead of opting to kill McCoy with it. + Show Spoiler + Yes, you are right. With that in mind, I think it is then most likely a shot was attempted at MSmith1. Somehow, JP was the only guy in the thread suspicious enough of SMcCoy to not save him. LOL. Anyway, the irony of this is. Scum might now realise it most likely is best to delay KP tonight, as they still don't know what is "out there". | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
Well just remember. Before I rose from the ashes to become "TheDavison2", I was formerly known as "TheRealMcCoy" Please keep in mind, TD2 is not asking you to look into Hurndall3. It is in fact, "McCoy". I look forward to your contribution Baker. | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
On June 04 2013 13:30 SMcCoy wrote: Took a look at H3 and HW. They never mention each other. Except for this occasion where H3 is reminded that HW exists. I read HW filter. I think he is town. Even though I found his comments post-JP lynch offensive at the time of release; they have a brutal honesty which I am of the belief is hard to "fake" as scum. In fairness, he is a lurker, so no interactions from HW -> H3 is not indicative. As for why H3, does not post about HW; I do not have an answer. As you may have surmised though, I think your gut on H3 is looking schmick though. | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
It all depends on who is "we" of course. I think scum are in a very good position to close this game out. Lastly, I am tired of your excuse: "I dont have time right now" a recurring theme since I replaced in. Thus far, there have been 3 replacements. Davison, PT2000, Eccleston. If you magically are town; and sincerely are time restricted to play the game properly. Do us and GM a courtesy and seek a replacement. Otherwise; your current modus operandi suits the scum agenda perfectly. | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
I think your interactions with Dr.T are in the same vein as with JPertwee. So when you say "shit tier town", I think I am inclined to agree. This leaves on the chopping block, PTroughton, TomB4 & Eccleston If you are planning to filter dive. Can you please give a spiel on which of those three we should focus on. | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
On June 05 2013 06:50 Hurndall3 wrote: but being mad at me for playing bad and thinking im scum are two totally different things, and it looks like you are trying to combine them H3 this is spot on. Reading the diarrhea diatribe from PT2000 made me think of the following: Fake Spiteful in tone Pushing bad town points Not accusing you outright of being scum In short. Passive aggressive and Lacking any conviction. In fact. The way PT2000 manouvered the conversation reminds me of Dr.t in day1 looking to overcompensate what he deemed as "bad play". Perhaps we should honour the wishes of our marine guard, JP. And seek vengeance on troughton. PT, do you disagree with the above? | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
Your rebuttle is still heavily loaded with a spiteful passive aggressive undertones. Henceforth, you fill the non-genuine category. Thank you for taking the time to respond regardless. P.S. You didn't actually address my points. You avoided them the same way Dr.t avoided smccoy case. P.p.s. The way PT2 entered the thread came at a pivotal time. Dr.t had just been hooked and was trying to wrangle off. Who comes to the rescue? PT2 with his roleplay post. "I must save the town".. Just so we are clear. When the night is over. If I am around. You have my vote instantly. | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
The diatribe laced with passive aggressive innuendo. If only I wasn't phone posting, then I could serve true justice to this discussion. Mr trough ton, I have indeed considered both sides of the slots. In fact, OK find your behaviour in general indicative of scum.. And it was that behaviour that inspired me reread the original pt2 actions. Thank you for agreeing they contain sinister vibes. Best of luck day3. | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
U played great ##vote:ptroughton | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
So I'm comfdoetable with that Hartnell. I don't like how dr,.t handled the eccleston situation day1 | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
| ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
I just finished re reading the game in full. And its changed my perspective greatly. I was filter diving before, but the post gaps for some players meant that filter dives gave zero context, and hence inaccurate pictures. This is now resolved. I believe I am mistaken with ptroughton and his entry into the game. I think it was merely poor timing. Especially after Dr.t tried to throw mud his way. The discovery I found was that another player took the distraction role I thought pt did. And that player was in fact you. I found your continual defences of Dr.t to be stereotypical Mafia jargon players of any alignment can spew. Kudos for you for manipulating discussion to suit your strengths. I encourage everyone to re read the start of day2. Tom gives his reads, which he actually promised during night1. In it, he outlines specifically why eccleston is probably town. Tomb4 gives a breakdsown of eccleston actions and states specifically this can only be from a town mindset. He then buddies to McCoy by pushing both of his suspects JP and TD. Whereas day1, Dr.t he continually fought McCoy. Compare this with his post above, where he finds cheap reasoning to +1 eccleston. A full 180 and in the process throwing away his probable town read with very little reasoning. Why is he not adamantly defending eccleston like he did Dr.t? He never said he thought Dr.t was probable town, merely the reasoning was weak. What has changed tom? Tomb4 is a damn good player. You can tell by how he approaches discussion. Why is it that I always feel with him he is demonstrating restraint? I hope people are willing to discuss this further. I will build a case if necessary, but first I encourage you all to re read day1. ##unvote ##vote: tomb4 | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
My posts have flip flopped between targets as I have updated my thread understanding. I should have shown more restraint, but the lack of posting from McCoy and smith motivated me to try to contribute more than I should have. Regardless as stated before, I have caught up and just now have finished another reread. I am firm on tomb4. By process of elimination and odd references between each other. I have a high degree of certainty, a.mcgann is the remaining scum. Naturally I suggest to lynch tom first. Over and out. I will stop posting for 24hrs and see where the thread develops before deciding what course of persuasive action to take. The vote is not changing though. | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
I believe we can both agree that the HW "Eccleston" case contains several flaws;some more glaring than others. Where we differ however, is the conclusion. In short: I do not understand how the point(s) delivered above, justify a vote - in particular given your standing within this town. This is where I become confused. On one hand I would like Hartnel Will to step outside the den, and reply directly. This will help town in general paint a better picture of his alignment. On the other hand, I am keen to better understand why you think this mindset is indicate solely of scum, and hence, a vote. I will leave the decision on whether to respond in your hands. | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
On June 06 2013 01:17 SMcCoy wrote: SMcCoyI would like you to mention the flaws you're referring to by yourself. I would prefer not to defend people before they have a chance to respond. Activity is low enough as it stands; requesting I respond on the behalf of others will only provide more excuses to lurk. (i.e. the confusion I expressed earlier) Before you yell "hypocrite". Consider: I am not arguing with you on whether Hartnell is town or scum (directly at least, though I do understand it is implicit). I am actually passing comment towards the validity of your logic. (I am not simply not seeing how A => B) I believe this is a large distinction, and I expect you of all people to be able to appreciate that. If you truly think my response is worth the ramification outlined above; then sure, let me know and I shall oblige accordingly. Note: I would have thought my stance on the HW "Eccleston" case is clear-cut anyways: given my position outlined prior with TomB4 and A.McGann. Your question regarding my conclusion out of the flaws I mention has already been answered. I do not believe my question to you has been answered.In my opinion (and perhaps the crux of this discussion): The points you raise are indicative of a myopic mindset. As far as I am concerned, myopia applies to both town and scum. The logical jump to categorise this as one or the other is missing for me. Perhaps you are using other/older heuristics in conjunction with these points to label Hartnell, scum. However, that was never expressed explicitly. Thus represents the essence of my query. | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
We are having a clear misunderstanding. I said: I agree there are flaws in HW case on Eccleston (primarily, that it is myopic = tunneled). When I said "conclusion" I was referring to your decision to lay down a vote seemingly based on a poor case. My following comment was in short: I am not here to defend Eccleston (by breaking down Hartnell case). Eccleston said he was going to do it, I need to let him do it. I am not also here to defend Hartnell (by initiating this convo). It is up to Hartnell to take issue with your vote. Read it again SMcCoy: I have been transparent. I merely am questioning the validity of your logic conclusion. Secondly, I am quite disappointed you have thrown the comment "scumslip" around. I surmise this to mean I have not sufficiently established my innocence. This is a problem. If you have qualms with my play, now would be the time to voice them. Thirdly, I have to tread lightly regarding your extension on Hartnell; as I do not want to give him ideas for a defense/retort. I will leave it for now as "I agree to disagree". i.e. I don't believe those two tells can only originate from the mindset of a scum player. | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
On June 06 2013 02:06 TomB4 wrote: No one died n1, right? Our flipped medic claimed to have protected him-we obviously don't know if he got shot n1 but it's very likely given there were no kills. Our medic dies d2 and then MSmith dies n2. Almost certainly he got shot twice. I read it originally as double stacked. Yes it is likely MSMith1 was shot over two consecutive nights. However it is not almost certain. Considering there are other roles capable of preventing a NK than medic in this game. | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
On June 06 2013 02:10 TomB4 wrote: 1. He got replaced. 2. JP died. 3. MSmith died. It's really quite simple, reevaluating in light of deaths is very important. Eccleston's replacement really hasn't done much in the time since and the deaths have made him look quite bad. Perhaps, or perhaps not. On June 05 2013 12:59 TomB4 wrote: .. Seeing as MSmith's secondary read was Eccleston and McCoy's secondary read was JP, Eccleston looks very bad in light of the kill. .. ##vote Eccleston OK. JP died, by lynch. Eccleston didnt even vote. 7 voters out of 10, nominated JP. Why does the JP lynch paint Eccleston in a bad light again? OK. MSmith died. If Eccleston was the secondary read; why is the primary read not being painted in bad light for you / discussed publically? Perhaps you will now throw in, his primary wass Dr.T. If that is the case, considering you threw out this before: On June 01 2013 09:47 TomB4 wrote: Like most players on TL you have no idea how to play scum. I am sure you will agree, it is very weak scum play to NK people "onto" you. Typically strong analysts are taken out first. MSmith1 satisfied that role: and hence became a suitable candidate regardless of who his target was. Now, if you want to consider we have "terribad" scum playing, then I'm surprised you didn't catch onto Dr.T earlier =P So I ask again, what does the death of MSmith have to do with Eccleston bleeding red? | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
it is clear you are agitated today. I still think you are the key to rallying this town together, but i suggest you take a breather and clear your mind. I am about to unleash a case on TomB4 based on his latest response. I truly feel this holds more certainty than your Day1 case on Dr.T. I would appreciate if you (and all other town) can review this case and if it holds, join my vote. | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
On June 06 2013 03:06 TomB4 wrote: If only that was the answer to the question.+ Show Spoiler + On June 06 2013 02:47 TheDavison wrote: Perhaps, or perhaps not. OK. JP died, by lynch. Eccleston didnt even vote. 7 voters out of 10, nominated JP. Why does the JP lynch paint Eccleston in a bad light again? Process of elimination. Like I said earlier in the game and even earlier today, Based on who I think is likely to be town, scum must be within a small group of 3-4 players. JP's flip makes that group smaller and by extension makes everyone in the group look worse. First the easy part: You have subtracted "assume town" players from the remaining pool of players. Where you proceed to lose me is when you tie the following two statements. (1) JPs flip makes that group smaller & (2) The JP lynch paints Eccleston in a bad light. As I mentioned, Eccleston did not vote. With your logic: whilst Eccleston may hang with the low fruit; he must certainly not be the lowest hanging fruit. Unfortunately, your actions suggest otherwise. On June 06 2013 03:06 TomB4 wrote:+ Show Spoiler + I spoilered what you wrote because it is all pertains to discussion over theory. Hence, each of our opinions are valid in their own context.On June 06 2013 02:47 TheDavison wrote: OK. MSmith died. If Eccleston was the secondary read; why is the primary read not being painted in bad light for you / discussed publically? Perhaps you will now throw in, his primary wass Dr.T. If that is the case, considering you threw out this before: I am sure you will agree, it is very weak scum play to NK people "onto" you. Typically strong analysts are taken out first. MSmith1 satisfied that role: and hence became a suitable candidate regardless of who his target was. Now, if you want to consider we have "terribad" scum playing, then I'm surprised you didn't catch onto Dr.T earlier =P So I ask again, what does the death of MSmith have to do with Eccleston bleeding red? Really, you're grasping at straws so hard here. Yes, obviously their primary reads on DAY 1 were DrT. Almost everyone had that read aside from, primarily, JP and myself. Also, no, it is NOT a weak scum play to kill someone who is "onto" you, particularly if it avoids other issues. Townies don't always go back and reread. I was the only person who reported on what I found in MSmith's filter after he died. How many times in endgame have you seen good townies come back and say "you should have looked in my filter after I died"? It happens all the time. So if they were shooting purely based on analysis why did McCoy not get shot? There are three reasons that could possibly be, and I'm betting on a combination of them. We can agree that good analysts are scary to scum, but we need to differentiate the shot here. McCoy maybe would have been perceived more likely as being a protect target than MSmith. There's one reason. The second reason (and just as plausible) is that McCoy's secondary reads were not as scary as MSmith's. Scum often shoot those who are on the correct track if they are the only ones they think have the potential of catching them. As I am sure you are aware. I am a practical man. Theory only extends so far, and thus, your point holds very little credence. It certainly is not a precursor for a vote when isolated. If i choose to indulge this "theory". MSmith1 was chasing Eccleston & MSmith1 dies. This outcome does not make Eccleston scum. You know this TomB4. Cause and causality are very hard to "reverse engineer", yet you claim to have done so? I smell fallacious posting. Even if you want to treat this "theory" as 'icing on the cake", the rest of your reasoning does not even equate to the eggs in the cake mix. The point is moot. Herein lies my quandry. If we rewind to Day1/2: You identified Eccleston as a probable town in this post On June 02 2013 16:10 TomB4 wrote: + Show Spoiler + Eccleston Based on what I've read of Eccleston's posts I think he's probably the most likely to be town out of the entire lot. In fact, I think he's quite likely to be town. He's made very specific observations that are quite hard for scum to make. I do not, for example, think that the average TL scum player would say anything like these: On May 31 2013 19:25 Eccleston wrote: Can you explain to me why you think that these points are exclusive to a scum mindset? For example, point three could be explained from a town perspective too; if DrT is a townie being tunneled, trying to shift the attention toward the lurkers is a perfectly valid thing to do if he thinks that the mafia are lurking. Before, you dismissed his "overdefense", as brought up by MSmith1 here (it's point two in his post), saying that "2 people are searching for something to talk about early game. This is true of both town and scum." What made you change your mind? How often do scum reference posts and actually question the logic of someone else on such a specific level? Generally scum find it hard to fake the "figuring out" process because they've already been given the alignments of everyone in the game. It's almost impossible to fake this kind of specific questioning process-if questioning is faked by scum, it's usually more general or nebulous. On May 31 2013 03:05 Eccleston wrote: I think lynching PT2 at this time would be unwise. He's made one post and thrown a vote on Hurndall3 for being "brief and blunt", and suddenly, ten hours later, he's a prime suspect? I think you're stretching it when you say that At the time of his post the thread was about three and a half pages long. It doesn't really take much effort to read that and then write a five paragraph RP post and throw a vote on someone. He could just as well be disinterested townie. I could understand it if you were pushing him as a policy lynch because you're not certain about DrT, but how he is "far from null" is beyond me. He has made one (half serious) post in the entire game. Has he been useless? Yes. Does that make him scum? No. This post reflects Eccleston's initial thought process regarding my opinion of PT yesterday. What's interesting is not necessarily this post itself, because I think the average scum could probably reasonably fake something like this. What's most interesting are his followup posts that demonstrate that he was thinking about this. IMO most scum would not put in the effort to think about what another player has written and said about someone else because they don't have to-they don't know how to fake the process, and so they only show the results of that process. This is partly also, IMO, why scum are so reluctant to swap votes. It's hard for scum to realistically be able to fake a decision-making process when their ulterior goal is to blend in. Eccleston doesn't display any of those tendencies. He's almost certainly town IMO. If anyone can find instances where I am wrong about what I've said above, I'd love to hear it. The only thing that could possibly be held against Eccleston, IMO, is his relatively low recent activity, but given the context of the game I do not think it is a point worthy of consideration unless his inactivity persists. Let me summarise the key quotes: Eccleston
A very strong analysis, backed with a VERY strong opinion. (Eccleston *is* certainly town) You go on to add the caveat: this opinion even holds credence with low activity. If we fast forward to now: You have 180'd on Eccleson with weak logic (already broken down above), and to boot, you have cited his low activity as an issue! Surely I dont have to remind you it is normally scum that are able to backpedal reads so flippantly. If you dont want to respond to that one, its OK. Lets try the next point. HartnellWilliam. Below are opinions you have chosen to share publicly of HW throughout Day1 to now. On June 02 2013 02:30 TomB4 wrote: I'll let JP speak for himself, but I find it more likely that... HW or PT are scum than him. ... On June 03 2013 04:13 TomB4 wrote: IF there is some scum on the DrT votelist it's probably HW. He's pretty much just coasting along. On June 04 2013 07:07 TomB4 wrote: JPertwee claiming medic..... There's still so few posts...I'd be down to kill JP or HW but with no one posting there's almost no way to tell who's scum and who's just afking as town. In short: Since Day1 HW has hovered as a low hanging fruit according to your filter. So what happens Day3. Your low hanging fruit writes a "big" case on Eccleston. The man you adamantly proclaimed as almost confirmed town. What do you do? You decide to side with your low hanging fruit (HW); throw around cheap reasoning (already dispelled), and discard that *certain* town read. Not only calling Eccleston scum, but proceed to use a townies strong weapon against scum on him. Your vote. That is a sequence of logic that is incomprehensible for a townie. In this sequence of actions, you exhibit no desire to follow up with Eccleston to ascertain his alignment. This is the absolute least a man of your intellect can do for a former "confirmed' townie. Your behaviour satisfies all the criteria for trademark scum motive. You saw an opportunity to pounce on lynch bait (Eccleston), and took it. In process you not only threw away a hard town read. But you also decided to vote *with* a scum reads target. This all occur without you trying to prod for more information. This is all scummy behaviour from simply Day2 and Day3. SMcCoy has already summarised a bunch of points to why your Day1 antics were scummy. Ironically as a corollary. Your post identifying JP as medic: is so blase regarding JP being lynched, that surely even you qualify for your own criteria for low hanging fruit on the JP wagon.=P Town: Join me in eradicating scum. Vote for TomB4 | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
FYI, Your style becomes very cramped when you are under perceived pressure. It is the first I have noticed you throw ad hominem after ad hominem. its nice to see scum sweat I will reply to your questions when I have computer access. In short. I'm finding your responses beginning to be selectively myopic. And you are stretching quotes between concepts in the same vein you did with McCoy and the trout policy issue. You are definitely one slippery scum player. That being said. I only have two things to continue discourse over. Firstly. Eccleston may have been replaced but the alignment stays the same. The point? You have identified points you love about ecc 1.0 And points you despise about ecc 2.0. I know it was clear before, however the point is important enough to warrant a repeat. You have made no attempt to dialogue constructively with ecc 2.0 If you were truly looking for scum, as a townie does. Your sequence of actions would be very different. Your addendum reasoning still does not cut the mustard or provide a satisfactory motive. This is exacerbated by your willingness to drop eccleston for he. Point 2 You had a list of four people. Myself included. Where are you trying to decipher which of the four are the apparently remaining two scum? Where is your curiosity to decipher my alignment disappeared? That you can jump from ecc to hw in a heartbeat without sound reasonings depicts the real truth on your care factor for this lynch. I.e. you don't actually care. For anyone who was still unsure about you; this should be the nail in the coffin. In short. A Scummy response from a scum player. | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
I am more than happy for you to challenged my logic with tomb4. It can only lead to finding scum. As for mcgann, I would prefer to work on one target at a time. I hope you can respect that. I am merely one person and already entrenched with tom. Going back to tom. You identify you think his response is genuine and my reasoning is perhaps, misinterpretation. Can you please detail where you think I have gone astray. Lastly. If McCoy had a super town read on PT2, and then you replace on as PT2000. Do you not think it is odd if mccoy calls u scum without exchanging any conversation with you? | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
Thank you for replying clearly and transparently. I think I have sourced the crux of our difference in opinion. When I have comp access I will reply in full. Here are Two points for consideration betwwen now and then One. There is nothing wrong with evolving reads. Its good play. The key is to transparently evolve reads. I dont see how you can argue tomb4 organically evolved his read on Eccleston. And I dont see how you can argue it is natural to jump from certain town to so scummy I will vote with no interaction or inclination to find out more. Tom didnt just call eccleston town. He built a case to prove beyond doubt he was town. Yes A slot replaces in and doesnt post. Yes i want him to post more as well. However Since when is activity an indicator of alignment. If you still disagrwe. And Activity is indeed scummy. Half of the remaining players would be scum categorically.. TWo I Am still awaiting a response from you regarding a hypotehtical situation with mccoy. | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
The mccoy hypothetical is then first post on this page (30). And is the very last question. It was basically a rehash of the tom/ecl scenario and is most likely redundant now. As mentioned prior. When I have comp access. Say 12hrs. I will reply in full to tom. Reply in full to you. I will not be making a defense for eccle though. And I find it odd you think it is normal that tom did that. Not scummy odd. Just we differ in opinion. For me. The best way to stop a lynch on someone you think is town, is to provide an alternative wagon with sound logic. Building a case to prove town in my personal opinion is a last resort. People still need to be allowed to defend themselves. As toadesstern used to say. It is easy for scum to give out town reads, as they don't have to lie. Making up reasons for scum is much more difficult and this is another area where tom falls short. He is obviously well spoken and capable of deep thought. That is proven by his analysis of a town ecclw. When it comes to why Hartnell or eccle are scum however. The analysis is blunt, fallacious and lacking conviction. Over and out | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
So far I'm finding this very productive though. For example, you thought tom was town and decided to interject. BUT, you did not state why you thought tom was town. Instead You chose to share why you thought the case was bogus. I think this is a default town way to defend someone you think is town. You then did what I suggested before and provided a counter wagon. Again. Townie in motive. When rereading, pls think why tom would write such a detailed analysis on eccle in the first place. Yes, eccle was under scrutiny, so why not just address those "bogus" points? I find the detailed analysis out of place and is almost an excuse for a meaningless contribution. Dr.t was were important analysis was required, and with that tom tried to divert with a policy lunch on you (trout1). Over and out | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
I won't dispute that the activity of certain individuals is beginning to perturb me. Especially when it is clear they are lurking, and only contribute if called out. So yes,whilst activity alone is not an indicator of alignment; especially now that town needs to begin consolidating, activity is required. To answer your question.yes, eccleston does need to weigh in ASAP. However, so do hw, a.mcgann, baker, mccoy, and H3. Now. We are both in agreement with PT2000. Not that he gets you, but rather, he is trying to critically evaluate what is being put forth. Further he is prompting others to help discern their alignment. Town needs more of this before the lynch. Any who. I disagree with your rationale for the behaviour association that "poking sticks" makes hartnell scum. In a classical game of Mafia, I would be inclined to agree with you. However, this game is well within day3. And heuristics need to suit the current state of play. Unfortunately town had a leader that was too strong, and to boot a relatively uncontested lynch. This allowed town to be lazy, and once it starts. Its hard to reverse. The lessons I learnt from day1 were repeated in day2 and are being repeated again in day3. I.e. The majority of the playing group prefer to avoid live discussion and instead throw Tidbits when it suits them. Further, their vote is not predictable. Somehow they are independent, but don't want to maintain any these presence. Considering this pattern, the way day3 has transpired is actually normal for this playing group. I.e. is similar to day1 and day2 play. As we both know. 2 scum remain and about 6 in total lurk. I.e. in the lurking group must be a majority of town. If anything, this tendency to avoid discussion is a town tell for this group, and scum have chosen to adapt and be comfortable. Considering heuristics need to tailored for each game microcosm, I just don't see how you can say hw behaviour to selectively delurk makes him scum on its own. Nor anyone else. I.e. I'm saying, if u want to call some one scum based on motive. You need more than a cheap traditional scum tell. What you need is proof of a scum mindset indicative over a filter. I.e explicit behaviour over multiple events in the game. You have not produced that with eccleston, and are still not producing this with Hartnell. Over and out | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
I can agree the task is difficult. I can also agree mentalities like that are detrimental to end game town. However, I'm not going to forgo what I deem to be a valid scum lynch, to chase a 50/50 read. This is a rhetorical statement, as you surely can not disagree with this in principle. The best I can offer is two parts. 1. I will continue to re read your defense with an open mind 2. I will listen very carefully to anyone who constructively opposes your lynch. I'm done till I get a comp. I just can't express without quotes what I want to say. Over and out. | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
I can vouch the servers went down multiple times. I even commented on it when I made me post regarding withholding kp. Personally I didn't think you were scum before that, and now I certainly do not think you are scum. So at least take solace in that. Have you caught up with the thread? Regarding tom, the next question is weird i admit. But please be honest. Did u sheep vote because you believe in the case, or because it allowed u to OMGUS? I ask because if it was based on omgus/easy sheep.. Now that you are back I would appreciate some fresh critical eyes run over it. I look forward to hearing more from you. Please don't despair. | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
I should have said. Since my detailed rereads, i did not think you were scum. | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
Please keep in mind, that just as you have been demotivated. So has McCoy. Do u think his vent 12hes ago to HW/H3 was forced? Either way its good to have another poster. I look forward to your future contributions. Are u planning to rebutt the day3 cases against you | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
Eccleston commenting on McCoy has agitated me. But to make that play, makes no sense to me as scum (or town). I listened to what you said before: and read the filter of MSmith1 in detail. He did outline some convincing points against Eccleston. I am still weighing up the scum points (MSmith1) vs the town points (Tom/McGann) vs the weird points (him wanting to lynch McCoy). One thing I have to keep in mind is that when MSmith1 wrote his analysis on Eccleston; he also accused JP of being scum. We all know now that was not the case at all. | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
On June 06 2013 23:41 TheDavison wrote: I am still weighing up the scum points (MSmith1) vs the town points (Tom/McGann) vs the weird points (him wanting to lynch McCoy). One thing I have to keep in mind is that when MSmith1 wrote his analysis on Eccleston; he also accused JP of being scum. We all know now that was not the case at all. On June 06 2013 23:52 TomB4 wrote: Luckily I am back to a keyboard.Are you going to disregard everyone else's opinion because they were all wrong about JP too? Your logic makes so little sense. People being right on day 1 does not validate their opinions anymore than people being wrong on day 2 invalidates them. You can't have such a glaring double standard, because each player is an individual case. Firstly, This is very aggressive for a post where I am indicating openness to what you suggested prior? Secondly, I have a very valid point: You/McGann commented on Eccleston 1.0 as town. MSmith1 analysed the same comments on Eccleston 1.0 and declared scum. I am trying to decide whose analysis is less tunneled and well-reasoned before coming to my own conclusion. So yes, MSmith1 getting JP wrong is critical because the core of this read was tied to interactions with Dr.T and VCA. This is similar to the core of his read with Eccleston. Thus there is a high likelihood he simply got it wrong twice. If we look at your original reasons for voting Eccleston: On June 06 2013 07:32 TomB4 wrote: I think Eccleston is scummy primarily because of two reasons: 1.) He's within the only group of players that could possibly be scum at the moment. and more importantly, 2.) He was suspected quite consistently by MSmith, who most likely got shot twice. You think this is a coincidence? I don't. Point 1 I agree with. Point 2 I think is a stretch. Your gist: MSmith1 identified Eccleston as scum; MSmith1 was potentially shot twice; Eccleston *must* be scum. i.e. MSmith1 was only a NK target *BECAUSE* he was after Eccleston. (a) That is information I don't have access to (i.e. scum QT) & (b) Is quite disrespectful towards MSmith1. I would contest that he was the most important townie in this game. Including Day1.
What I am saying is: MSmith1 could have been killed for a variety of completely valid reasons. It was a solid choice, and if I was scum I would shoot MSmith1 first as well. Therefore, there is no corollary between MSmith1 thinking Eccleston is scum; and MSmith1 dying, which is what you are purporting. Simply, he was valid for Night 1, and with a confirmed medic dead, why not finish the job Night 2. | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
The candidates for this lynch are: TomB4, Eccleston and Hurndall3. You need to step up; because that vote on PT earlier was a load of bullocks. Are you going to vote Tom or not. | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
On June 07 2013 00:34 SMcCoy wrote: But in none of this you ever point to H3. Yes, and TomB4 never points out A.McGann either. You do realise, A.McGann was also stalling to join the Dr.T wagon? He merely hid it behind "I''m waiting for him to respond first" even though i agree with your case. | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
On June 06 2013 09:12 PTroughton2 wrote: Firstly, my case never weighed in on this very trivial point.+ Show Spoiler + On June 06 2013 08:45 TheDavison wrote: Trout. I am more than happy for you to challenged my logic with tomb4. It can only lead to finding scum. As for mcgann, I would prefer to work on one target at a time. I hope you can respect that. I am merely one person and already entrenched with tom. Going back to tom. You identify you think his response is genuine and my reasoning is perhaps, misinterpretation. Can you please detail where you think I have gone astray. Lastly. If McCoy had a super town read on PT2, and then you replace on as PT2000. Do you not think it is odd if mccoy calls u scum without exchanging any conversation with you? Pasting out part of your post without direct quotes: Yes it is likely MSMith1 was shot over two consecutive nights. However it is not almost certain. Considering there are other roles capable of preventing a NK than medic in this game.+ Show Spoiler + As with Tom, I am having a hard time believing there would be TWO protective roles in this game. It's a 13-player game, and would be out of this world imbalanced to have more than one protective role, especially without the possibility of a mafia vigilante or other type of KP (from the OP). Imagine two protective roles that would be used defensively night after night in such a small game that mafia KP has virtually no meaning. Yes, it's possible they would double cover, it's also possible they would simply protect two of the strongest town powers for the entire game and keep them alive long enough to solve the game handily. That doesn't jive with how most gave I've played or read are balance, and therefore I disagree with your propostition that there are further protective roles. Tom actually was the one who inserted it in his case rebuttal. Lastly, I never stated the conclusion you interpreted. As I mentioned, Eccleston did not vote. With your logic: whilst Eccleston may hang with the low fruit; he must certainly not be the lowest hanging fruit. + Show Spoiler + and If i choose to indulge this "theory". MSmith1 was chasing Eccleston & MSmith1 dies. This outcome does not make Eccleston scum. You know this TomB4. Cause and causality are very hard to "reverse engineer", yet you claim to have done so? I smell fallacious posting. Even if you want to treat this "theory" as 'icing on the cake", the rest of your reasoning does not even equate to the eggs in the cake mix. The point is moot. Eccleston has been a focus for many players so far this game. The original's posts and interactions were questionable and the current incarnation is barely here. However, to attribute the night shot or shots on MSmith means that, as he has explained and matches up with the gamestate, isn't a stretch at all. It's a point of evidence, not the sole evidence, against Eccleston. I have to disagree that MSmith1 suspecting Eccleston; and MSmith1 subsequently dying is indicative of Eccleston being scum. I have outlined this in more detail here If we rewind to Day1/2: You identified Eccleston as a probable town in this post + Show Spoiler + Are we not allowed to be wrong? His judgement was his own to make, that's why the game allows us to vote. He may not have interacted with Eccleston about it but coming to a possibly incorrect conclusion at the time doesn't make him scummy. Do you think it's fair to assume that he gave Eccleston the opportunity to present himself as town by seeking out potential town motivation for Eccleston's posts? Did he look like he was unable to be swayed about his read on Eccleston? I started with a scum read on Eccleston just from my first read through the game, does that mean I should not also allow Eccleston the opportunity to prove his innocence if he is capable of doing so? As Tom points out, the game is dynamic; and as a famous TL Mafia philosopher once said: "You have to build a case for a day and then, as you approach the lynch, do it all again from scratch to see if it makes sense". We already touched on this point. I complete support reads changing, but the process needs to be organic. My whole issue is that TomB4 had a very strong town read on Eccleston. He 180's on this "very strong read" based on what I deem to be weak long that is easily broken down. Further he made no effort to discuss his issues with his "very strong read", which I think is bizarre. The gist of TomB4 rational to vote Eccleston, is the dearth of MSmith1. This is 100% speculation and can not be proven - only assumed. Thus for a townie looking for scum: this should not be the basis of reverting a firm town read. I will give credit to TomB4 that he has stuck to his guns this whole time; but the counter to that is, he hasnt received votes to pressure him either. A case is only scary if the votes follow. That is a sequence of logic that is incomprehensible for a townie. In this sequence of actions, you exhibit no desire to follow up with Eccleston to ascertain his alignment. This is the absolute least a man of your intellect can do for a former "confirmed' townie. + Show Spoiler + You are incredulous to the fact that anyone could possibly try looking for a town motive from Eccleston and then switch to a scum read once enough time has passed? How easy is it to communicate with someone who is barely even playing the game at that time? We have Eccleston here now, perhaps Tom is here and will be able to, as you request, engage him now that he has arrived. This is not a case of reverting a "leaning town" to "leaning scum" without dialogue. This is about reverting a "probably town" to "probably scum" lets vote, without dialogue. | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
On June 07 2013 01:08 TomB4 wrote: quadpost time: I'm really rapidly losing interest in this game. If there's no pick up in activity soon honestly I don't really have the time nor patience to keep posting and arguing in circles. The number of replacements, the complete lack of activity, and the general apathy have made a game that I thought would be pretty fun and nice really dull and frustrating. Day 1 had some of these elements but to me it was okay because we hit scum. Day 2 was just horrible. I'm sorry to the hosts for what they've had to deal with this game, but really as a player it just drains you when you see that more players in the game are afk than trying. Personally I agree with this in full. I hate using this type of logic, but, the main reason I would consider lynching Eccleston is a taboo point. The fucker didnt vote, and GM still gave him a replacement. (1) If Dr.T was lynched Day1, and MSmith was indeed correct.. I can picture scum being very demoralised... Essentially making one of Davison / PTroughton / Eccleston scum. (2) If scum lost a member to modkill, the game would be effectively over. Look like I said, this is taboo, so i dont know why im posting it. Its prob more of a vent, because Im just as frustrated. I quit mafia a while back, and came back solely for this game. It has been a very disappointing experience. (Nothing to do with GM though). I really cant be fucked posting anymore between now and deadline. Tom, my vote is going to stick on you. I just hope town can secure a majority lynch.It seems impossible currently. | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
I been putting in effort for 24hrs to get a Tom lynch. and its for nothing. Eccleston is majority lynch. | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
On June 07 2013 01:37 Hurndall3 wrote: I dont like any of those lynches though! Haven't looked into Tom real close but his activity looks pretty town just from glancing at it. Why not PT ;_; On June 04 2013 11:29 Hurndall3 wrote: truth is td and ecc were both way scummier than jp ever was .... | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
OK.. I like mccoy reasoning on a.mcgann Im happy with a team of H3 / TomB4 | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
McCoy.. im gonna disappear and come back at lynch deadline. i dont care who is voted between tom or H3. | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
I said from the start, Tom was my focus. and by process of elimination at the time, you were my 2nd choice.. and i havnt pushed you. Thats staying true to my intention. OK, you are not convinced by Tom, yet you haven't challenged a single item I raise. | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
ANd soon | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
Tom is my primary and has 5 votes. Why try to move elsewhere when we can obtain consolidation. FRankly I am not sold on hartnell. I think his case on eccle is easy to write as a tunneled townie. I am choosing to treat him as bad town. And I felt the points u raised against him arentn valid because as a townie I could picture myself making simlar connections he did in a tunneled state. There has already been analysis which showsnhe coild have affected the dr.t lynch. Instead he chose to sreengthen it. I refuse to believe scum bussed so early. So in that regard both tom and H3 fit the bill. Tom is vote leader so stick with him is my suggestion | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
What have you done this cycle to justify your high horse position. All I recall is OMGUS on me with zero analysis. If You are town you should be ensuring a lynch occurs. This game in general has too much driftwood/dead weight and we need to eradicate it. ALl tom does is create barriers to a lynch. But when it comes to pushing one he is very short on substance. Dead weight | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
BUt it is a high horse because you havent contributed anything significant this cycle and now have the power to derail any lynch from occuring. You are potentially the keystone to preventing a no lynch. And whilst i can respect that you tjink tom is town. I cant reconcile the lack of effort to produce a better alternative | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
HOwever if someone gets itchy fingers. The lynch goes to poop. LoOking at H3 here | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
Smccoy made the case day3 And a.mcgann found points against h3 day2. Im on phone but the case I wrote is full of spoilers. And starts off talking about apologising foe long post | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
No vote changes should count | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
| ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
U just participated in a mislynch. And there is no remorse. Straight onto next guy. Where is reviewing where things went wrong. Now two days in a row... DIsgusting. | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
That you throw mud at him so quickly only makes me think between hw and h3 it is you that is scum. Your vote on Dr.t was still over compensated. Especially now to confirmed town tom. All u keep promising is you will prove you are town, and then nothing happens. I like a h3/mcgann team. Both seriously delayed voting Dr.t. Mcgann is seriously uninvolved, and then constantly threatens to boycott the game if challenged. H3 is just broken promises. At least eccleston demotivated post felt genuine at the to,me, I just wish henwqas more present. Same with hw, he has a bluntness u think is hard to fake. And in my opinion has a different motive to h3. Hartnell is blunt in a transparent way. H3 is blunt in a passive aggressive way. I will do a filter dive on everyone after the night kill, but so far I like h3 / mcgann. | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
On June 08 2013 09:44 Hurndall3 wrote: @smcc look at my most recent post on ecc There are things he says that look VERY town, even if his play isn't very pro-town. MSmith's vote analysis makes Ecc look very bad, but there's one problem with MSmith's argument: It assumes that PT is town. If PT is scum along with DrT, then suddenly his entire analysis is irrelevant. Actually. i beg to differ, but will present something different. I am cleaning the house currently, and was thinking about the game and was musing in my head: why would Eccleston try and get a SMcCoy lynch? Anyone who read the game will know SMcCoy is town for two highly specific reasons from Day1. (1) The back and forth with Dr.T is genuine and could not be faked. They were playing cat n mouse, and SMcCoy won. and more importantly (2) MSmith1, (who is confirmed town) kept saying he completely agreed with the points SMcCoy was raising. i.e. MSmcCoy is thinking EXAXTLY like a well-reasoned townie should. Regardless of lowering presence since Night 1, SMcCoy is town. Eccleston 2.0 said he read the game, this should be abundantly clear. Yet when SMcCoy has a badly-timed vent; who tries to pounce on the opportunity? Eccleston 2.0 who has done nothing since coming in. This can only come from scum agenda. I actually believe Eccleston when he said he was demotived.. he came into a game and was a lynch candidate for things he didnt do. However, contrast this with my behaviour. I came into the game as a lynch candidate, and knowing I am town, I had the confidence to immediately rebut the cases put forth against me. Eccleston on the other hand, is demotivated as the points are valid. I start sticking up for him, and suddenly he has the confidence to push scum agenda (i.e. lynch SMcCoy). Yet did not rebut any of the cases against him as promised. This is pretty damn scummy. So in short, I could not reconcile why a townie would try and push for a SMcCoy lynch. Just cos the guy had a badly timed vent, does not make him scum. I think this action was a scum slip from Eccleston. I also coultn reconcile his "demotivated" post. Because it was written in a way that was very hard to weird (i.e. the paragraphs was all in one block). I think this was a specific tactic by Eccleston to hide behind. I dont think he lied about being demotivated (because replacing in, when votes are cast on you is demotivating for both town and scum). Come Day4, I am voting for Eccleston. Will figure out last scum after Eccleston is eliminated. | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
i reckon trying to setup mccoy. GG A.McGann | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
Eccleston is town is dead (i.e Tom + A.McGann) BTW, for all those doubting McCoy because he is still alive & the past 2 days has been a touch wishy-washy between targets. Just think of personality 2 with Marv. He was town, and the leader.. and scum kept him alive to impose doubt (and because he was on the wrong path). I still think smccoy is town for the reasons i listed earlier. peace out. | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
Look I didnt vote with Hartnell because I haven't made up my mind on what to do this day yet. My plan of attack is: I am going to re-read each day, and jot my pro/cons of each player for each day. This will probably be my last post until this action is done. I will give you this H3. I also need to re-read PT very carefully. I have assumed PT2000 is town based on effort alone [since every fucking town read has just decided to disappear] - not because he was right about Tom. I need to check what he has been pushing and if the thoughts are genuine. H3, if Eccelston is town. Try and explain to me why a townie would push SMcCoy out of all people? Even when SMcCoy had a fit and said he just wants you/HW "OUT". You two didnt try to lead a lynch. Where is town motivation for this? And do you think my scum motivation is over the top (i.e. saw an opportunity to stab the town leader in the back in a vulnerable moment?) | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
On June 08 2013 11:52 Hurndall3 wrote: ECC's townstory is consistent and believable. He did not read the game carefully enough to comprehend SmCC's towncred. Can't you see how someone saying "bad town is pissing me off I want them to die" can be construed as scummy? Because it looks like he wants to lynch people for being bad instead of being scum. Here is a question: Why would scum push SMcCoy at that time? Really there is no reason. there were plenty of other scummy townies (myself included) that would be better choices. Well yes, that is perhaps a valid reason. But it all hinges upon assuming Eccleston did not do his due dilligence when reading. Thats not really something we can quantify - at least meaningfully. Regardless, I thought I already gave a reason scum would try to push SMcCoy. He was vulnerable. Perhaps I am grasping at straws thinking scum could be bold enough to make that play. However, I will admit, his "vent" in conjunction with lowering thread presence made me start to question my read on him at the time. As I said before, I am going to do a thorough re-read of each day; and then I am going to do a thorough re-read of each dead players filter. Only then will I know who I want to vote for this cycle. Im sick of lurkers coming in, and laying down votes with weak justifications. I almost want to policy lynch someone this cycle - and hope I hit scum simultaneously. | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
Eccleston 2.0: I genuinely can not tell if English is your first language. My suggestion is this: If you want to maintain McCoy as a lynch candidate, then rebut these two points I made earlier. On June 08 2013 10:18 TheDavison wrote: Anyone who read the game will know SMcCoy is town for two highly specific reasons from Day1. (1) The back and forth with Dr.T is genuine and could not be faked. They were playing cat n mouse, and SMcCoy won. and more importantly (2) MSmith1, (who is confirmed town) kept saying he completely agreed with the points SMcCoy was raising. i.e. MSmcCoy is thinking EXAXTLY like a well-reasoned townie should. Regardless of lowering presence since Night 1, SMcCoy is town. If you can not do that, then I suggest you concentrate on finding out who the second scum is. Otherwise, I would imagine you will be majority voted regardless of whether town/scum. Ver is right as you pointed out, you can not share every thought. | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
From the first page I already know who to vote for. + Show Spoiler + ##Vote: Eccleston Ecclestons scummy openers have been done to death but I will outline my issues anyway. On May 29 2013 17:33 Eccleston wrote: Reporting in. Why do you prefer guessing at the scum team instead of trying to generate constructive discussion? This is just so damn aggressive, especially for a first post. I have been assuming that he acted like this because MSmith1 RNG'd him as scum. But when I think about it, as town you are confident.. you know you can prove yourself town. Therefore when name calling like that happens, you just brush it off. The only reason I think a townie would write that post, is if they are trying to alpha-male the town leadership. However, clearly Eccleston never aspired that far. Outcome: Leaning Scum On May 29 2013 17:41 MSmith1 wrote: ... What would you have preferred me to say three posts into the game? On May 29 2013 17:45 Eccleston wrote: Setup speculation, lynching policies ... something that you can reply to. Another weird response. Since when is discussing lynching policies conducive to scum hunting? Everyone that plays mafia beyond the newbies, understands that policy discussion is what scum *LOVE* to keep town focused on. They are guilt-free lynches, and you dont have to create fake cases. I don't think this post by itself is scummy; but it is very weird. Because he raises issues, but doesn't provide solutions. He could have easily said "lynching policy.. .how about this" (which A.McGann actually asks in the next post) Outcome: Very slightly leaning scum On May 29 2013 18:06 Eccleston wrote: From what I could see the setup is normal except for the KP delay function. It will not affect lynching until end game though, so I guess it doesn't. Mr. McGann seems friendly enough. As for you, I don't know... Are you an angry villager or a murderous italian? Your reactions look valid from both perspectives. Trivial Point, but he was aware of KP delay function instantly. Now, some people read the OP, others dont (including me). So i won't call him scum for knowing the scum specifics of play. But, if he is town and knows this.. why not create discussion around it? Especially because he called out others for not being constructive. Instead, he makes a blunt comment I dont understand.. "it will not affect lynching until end game".. and then tries to segue this into a useless a comment about A.McGann which says nothing AND MSmith1 where he avoids calling him town or scum (uses the words. villager/italian). Note, he was actually asked to share his thoughts on alignment. "Friendly" is not indicative of town or scum... Outcome: Null on its own, Very slightly leaning scum with the other points. Now, heres the pearler. And somehow, I dont understand how we all missed it. (Apologies if someone has raised it, I genuinely dont recall) On May 29 2013 18:40 SMcCoy wrote: Hello. I took note of Eccleston's aggressive entrance. His latest post suggests that he doesn't know what to make of MSmith. I have bad vibes about him. My first guess would have been to assume that scum did not post yet, they have no interest in driving discussion at early stages. That is what I assume. Eccleston's strange paranoid behavior with subtle criticism suggests that he has differing methods of finding scum or that he is trying to look like he's scumhunting by voicing quick, exaggerated suspicions with not much reasoning behind them. At first criticizing very early posts and then proceeding to call someone's actions ambiguous without specifying why. We might just differ in our methods but I will be observing this subject during our stay and beg him to keep posts as informative and objective as possible. On May 29 2013 22:17 DrTennant wrote: This is actually the scummiest post in thread in my opinion super ambiguous and actually says nothing. Says he took note of whatever that means offers some reasion why eccleston's posts might be interpreted as scummy then leaves justification for why it might not be. Why so wishy washy? You scum? Now: We all know Dr.T got lynched for this post. i.e. "Why so wishy washy? You scum?" We also know Dr.T was scum... so the question I asked myself was. Why would scum be motivated to make this post in the first place? Consider: early game, the objectives of scum are the same as town. (1) Establish your innocence (2) Blend in OR Assume town leadership It is ONLY after this phase that you start looking for "bad town" to setup as "scum". In his first post, Dr.T forgoes establishing innocence and throws out the artillery straight away. Not only aggressively attacking SMcCoy, but labelling him the "S" word (uscumbro). This is a big deal; as the post was not conducive to establishing the innocence of Dr.T, nor did it allow him to blend in. Secondly, the post was laced with too much aggression to try and establish a town leadership position. The key to Dr.Ts motives SMcCoy was confessing his confusion with Eccleston. i.e. He doesnt expect scum to be in the limelight early Day1.. yet everything Eccleston is doing doesnt add up as town. Its actually not wishy-washy at all. The reason Dr.T made an aggressive attack on SMcCoy as his first post To fling shit at SMcCoy and lower his credibility because he was suspicious of Eccleston. Its that simple. He was protecting a scum buddy. And decided to forgo establishing his innocence, which led to his demise. ##Vote: Eccleston | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
On June 08 2013 17:56 Hurndall3 wrote: *edwop early game aggression is NOT alignment indicative Disagree. As follows: + Show Spoiler [Motive] + Early game aggression may *NOT* alignment indicative during early game. However, as people are removed from the game, and alignments elucidated; early game aggression *does* become alignment indicative. Because you can start to figure out motive. As I pointed out in my case: scum have a typical modus operandi when the game starts. Blend in via establishing towniness, and then allow the bad townies to get lynched. This is the safe play that almost every game of mafia follows. Occasionally scum will try to assert themselves for town leaderships, which still requires them to establish towniess regardless. + Show Spoiler [Dr.T "Dirty Hands"] + Now Hurndall3, if what you say is true and Dr.T found "town wishy-washiness" with SMcCoy I am confident he would not have tried to ostracize SMcCoy so vehemently. Scum want to suggest "bad points" so others pick up the torch and do the pushing. i.e. Scum don't want to get their hands dirty and become accountable in any game of mafia But this did not happen.What we found this game is that Dr.T not only got his hands dirty, but he also became immediately defensive. We all know how this panned out: he was lynched. Because its so important, I shall repeat it one more time. Dr.T did not need to come out "guns blazing" to try and discredit SMcCoy. He could merely have pointed out an observation - which satisfies scum objectives so much more efficiently. It sows doubt, establishes that he cares -> towniness, and keeps his hands clean. A perfect trifecta. H3, even you noted Eccleston early game play as follows: On June 08 2013 08:29 Hurndall3 wrote: I think Dr.T noticed this as well, and felt the need to provide "cover fire" for Eccleston, hence the breakaway from scum safe play. ...Regarding Eccleston... his early game record looks really scummy . This actually then becomes a very good reason for why he became immediately defensive. (In his mind, its like.. WTF!! i just tried to divert attention from you, and now I am the prime suspect...) Hurndall3, what I want to know are two simple things. (1) Why do you feel compelled to answer on behalf of Eccleston constantly? Your last 2 pages of filter are regurgitating "Eccle is town", and not producing cases for scum. (2) Why is early game aggression indicative of "leaning town". | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
On June 08 2013 19:42 SMcCoy wrote: Now I feel confident in giving H3 a townread. Congratz buddy. I hope this is a fuckn sarcastic post. Cos I have a case on H3 ready to go. All starts with this: On May 29 2013 23:01 Hurndall3 wrote: yup mccoys post is scummy as fuck. until he makes himself seem more town: ##vote smccoy (Ties in precisely when Dr.T came to Eccleston rescue) Lynch Eccleston, then H3. GG, no re. | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
I think H3 is last scum. but just want to focus on one guy I think my Eccleston stuff is conclusive. As for McGann NK.. cos my first thought was.. wtf, why is mccoy still alive. It made sense when H3 tried to use it as a "well it means Eccle is town" | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
Why dont you comment on my eccleston case. And if you think Im scum, then you deserve to be lynched/not killed. | ||
|
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. | ||
|
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 | ||
|
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. | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
On June 08 2013 19:52 TheDavison wrote: Hurndall3, what I want to know are two simple things. (1) Why do you feel compelled to answer on behalf of Eccleston constantly? Your last 2 pages of filter are regurgitating "Eccle is town", and not producing cases for scum. (2) Why is early game aggression indicative of "leaning town". On June 09 2013 01:48 Hurndall3 wrote: TD you are tunneled on Ecc right now. It happens to all of us. You need to step back and realize that your case against Ecc isn't good. The logic is not conclusive. And you are not tunneled? All I have seen from you is Eccleston is town. Where is your "profound logic" for determining scum? At this pivotal point in time, I am not voting for your scum target simply "because you say so". Produce proof and I will consider with open eyes. On June 09 2013 01:48 Hurndall3 wrote: I would characterize his response as quite aggressive actually. it doesn't look like how scum would talk to each other. Right? Is this how you try and dispute the case(s) on Eccleston, by treating each point as stand alone? The entire concept was not whether he spoke to Eccleston aggressively. It was that it was significantly more reserved compared to Baker. It was written very clear cut, and even specified to refer to Exhibit A, yet here, you forget all this. Regardless, your post is irritating and condescending. The whole point of my case with Eccleston is looking at the big picture. I have written several solid points, and you decide to meekly refute it all by saying "the logic is not conclusive". Thats bullshit. If you think the case is wrong and I am tunneled; respect the effort I have put in and break it down point by point; or let Eccle defend himself. | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
I agree, it would have to be a pretty craft scum to conjure that. I truly think scum team is either: PT/HW or Ecc/H3. With 5/2, we can afford to mislynch into one of the teams; and then during LYLO lynch into the other team to win. Based on the Ver guide, I will vote for HW. ##Unvote ##Vote: HartnellWill H3, the other reason Im doing this 180' is because I want to learn from my lesson with Tom. Throughout the cycle he remained present, and everyone else disappeared. PT or HW should have weighed in again since their votes. | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
+ Show Spoiler [1] + On May 30 2013 10:22 Baker1986 wrote: McCoy only has thread control because we allow him to have it. If I didn't think he was doing a good job I wouldn't let him lead. A very important part of mafia is not to figure out who is scum, but to figure out who is town. I agree with Mccoy's suspicions of you, and I specifically explained in detail here why I disagreed with you: (To Dr.T) Your latest post just makes you look even worse. Anyone who is reading the thread with any kind of attention should be able to tell I'm pretty towny, probably second to only McCoy. I don't think you're paying attention, I think your suspicion of me is based on nothing. There is nothing wrong with sheeping in mafia, and you're trying to make it out to be scummy. In fact, if you're not stupid, you should realize that my behavior could both be explained by town-baker and scum-baker. It's not strange for a town-baker to agree with someone I consider town, so why do you only look at one option? Are you lazy? bad? scum? + Show Spoiler [2] + On May 30 2013 10:30 Baker1986 wrote: Actually I want to take this one step further. Explain in detail why this is the only viable conclusion you can reach from my posting up until the point you throw the suspicion on me. Explain the following. 1) Why does scum-baker sheep McCoy but town-baker doesn't. 2) Why does scum-baker call McCoy smart but town-baker doesn't. 3) Why would scum-baker join a wagon but town baker wouldn't. Assuming your "read" isn't utter bullshit, you must have valid explanations to these questions, or you wouldn't have come to the conclusion my behavior was scummy. The other part is this, which actually goes some way towards clearing Eccleston as well. On May 30 2013 10:08 DrTennant wrote: He is trying to get off the hook so throws you some alternatives.Smocoy i don't really care that you think im scum the only part that concerns me is the last part of your post where you say that your unlikely to change. + Show Spoiler + Now i think with your effort and you confidence that your most likely to be town. Misguided town but town nonetheless. And that all the information that i care about from your case. Now it seems like you have gone into tunnel mode with that last part of your post and i think thats insanely stupid one because im not scum and two a ton of people haven't posted. For what its worth yes i do actually think town are more likely to thrown town reads out there. Scum are more worried about keeping a "story" straight so they are more reluctant to give out reads then be called out later if they flip flop. Mafia have an information advantage and usually are reluctant to give it out. You seem to think that your post communicated a lot more than it did. I took as wishy washy and filler post and that is scummy ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ That said i dont really mind the spotlight i i thrive in it. And most importantly it helps to make reads. With a ton of people not posting i think there is a definite possibility of 1 or even 2 scum being completely inactive. Of the "active" posters the ones that concern me the most are eccleston and baker. Eccelston despite being active early seems to have just decided to fuck off while i been in the spotlight despite his hig activity early. He hasn't given an opinion on anything that has happened despite showing he was active early on. Baker it appears from my perspective has just decided to sheep who i think is the towniest guy in mccoy and who might have the largest thread control. Baker never gave reasoning he just called mccoy smart and it looks like he is just trying to latch on to an early wagon. Eccleston + Baker. I haven't seen a situation where a scum tries to save himself by throwing another scum into the mix (voluntarily). We already know Dr.T is a goon; which adds further credence that he suggested two townies. Baker is pissing me off with the low activity, but the thing with this game is. We dont know if anyone is playing in two games at the same time (which could also explain the low activity?) | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
On June 08 2013 10:34 Hurndall3 wrote: HW explain your townread of PT. And vice versa. On June 08 2013 11:16 PTroughton2 wrote: PT2000, still waiting for this one. Remind me about this question if I forget to address it when I return from my familial engagement. | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
the above is not clear. Who is your Are you stating the scum on your lynch is Baker or H3? And why are you twisting my vote by saying "I avenge Tom". The Ver guide point is very relative. Why are you ignoring it? | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
HW stated: "There is definitely a scum sheeping my vote right now" [H3, TD, Baker] are possible candidates. Then he orders them with towniest on the left [Baker, TD, H3]. However, when describing the candidates: the only one he references to sheeping is Baker. So which is, the scum sheeping; or the towniest? | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
I also re-read PT2000 VCA post, and was also left hanging. | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
On June 09 2013 19:57 SMcCoy wrote: Constant effort is probably the hardest thing to fake as scum. Baker was under no pressure until now and he has precisely not shown any effort since the D1 lynch. And neither has Eccleston. SMcCoy, there ar 4 lurkers currently PT2000 / HW / Eccle / Baker. Only a maximum of two can be scum. | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
1. You had massive thread influence. I agree. Since day2 it has been dropping at an exponential rate. I wouldn't be so sure you will be nk`d at all. Especially the trail you still continue to give consideration as follows in point 2. 2. Eccle + pt or TD + baker. Firstly, why is pt your strongest town read out of this five did you actually read his vca post and felt it validated a vote on eccleston?..... If you can answer yes to this, we are going to have problems. That I promise. Secondly, if the precursor for baker being scum is that I am scum. Then rest assured baker is not scum. You already made a very weak attempt to label me scum where you outlined heuristics you layer used to call yourself town. Fact. Since day3 only 1.5 people gave a shit about this game. Me and you as a half cos of vent. Since day4 only 2 people give a shit about this game. Me and H3. You don't count cos you come in and throw some shit out every page that completely 180s with zero justification. The only consistent force driving the the thread is me. Yet you want to call me scum? I might have made a case of town tom, but you agreed with it and put your vote that sealed his fate. Get off the high horse. Your attitude of calling anyone and everyone scum is serving only to stop people from talking. | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
In hindsight when I said Pt is your strongest town read in that group. That was a leading question/statement. I misread | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
You only come out of hiding when someone pulls McCoy into line. Where were you when we needed answers? | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
Think eccle is tunneled and vey bad town. I see no benefit to scum agenda by coming out to throw mud at you the way he did. I think je is so tunneled he considers yoy gejuine scum. As such he is showing town confidence posting jis suspicions. Thats my take anyway | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
We need baker or eccleston. | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
Is eccleston ensuring a no lynch occurs effect your town read? Considering how votes him, and he responds by voting McCoy, I can o my gather he believes hw is town so is not omgus. In his massive paragraphs do you recall he states hw is town? | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
| ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
Make a stand. Hartnell or eccleston. | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
I already explained why its super unlikely McCoy is scum. Msmith1 kept saying he had the exact same thought process as McCoy. That means McCoy is thinking like a townie, because he is a townie. Eccleston, we all make bad calls. You have done it with McCoy. And I did it with tom. If you are town either vote Hartnell or explain why you won't. | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
On June 10 2013 10:45 Baker1986 wrote: This doesn't quite feel right, but honestly whatever. There's a bunch of people in this game I can't read at all. so yeah... Can you please expand? What's tingling the senses for you? Do you think eccleston might be on the money? | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
Regardless of pt afk state. Ifmnhw is scum. Going to have to read carefully before voting off pt | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
| ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
I refuse to accept McCoy is scum. Absolutely refuse it. Which probably makes eccleston town. Scum just can't be that stupid, and his qt partner would be hammering him. So Baker, h3, pt ... 2 are scum. Baker Nostradamus ability pre lynch doesn't look good. Without a re read I'm considering a baker/h3 team now. See ya later. Very important 24hrs. | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
I know I rukled out wccleston before. But just had a brain wave. Hartnell didn't give a shit he was getting lynched. Simply did not care, which goes in hand with quite a few ppl this game who disappear for long periods at a time. The only two people that lifted activity are h3 and eccleston. H3 lifts it up when eccle is under the gun. Just some food for thought. H3 plays the game all random. And then when we in pivotal time, starts to post seriously. His play over day 4 is very different to play days 1 to 3. The difference.. He had an objective to clear eccleston. Hmmm will have to make a call on what this means. | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
I Have reread day1 with the hindsight of all the flips. Before posting my conclusion I would like to know where I stand with you. | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
On June 10 2013 19:43 Baker1986 wrote: actually fuck it. I'm good at about 3 things in this game. Day 1 reads, convincing people, and not getting lynched as town. So let's try to lynch me tomorrow, that will provide us with a useful day. Why are you going so defensive? Instead of trying to defend yaself; how about letting us know who the final two scum are. | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
On June 10 2013 21:01 Baker1986 wrote: Looks like I don't know, right? I know I'm not lynching you or mccoy. Awesome, this ties spectacularly into my conclusion I want to unveil - once McCoy responds. Im so excited now "So why are you going so defensive?" - What are you worried about? | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
On June 10 2013 21:29 SMcCoy wrote: + Show Spoiler + I have some unconcluded stuff written up about d1, but no time to finish it atm. But h3 suspects as alternative to the drt lynch and baker's list are important points of it, that likely point to troughton being scum, and possibly eccleston. You can post your stuff later if you want to hear my version in detail first though, id be glad to provide it once i have more time. OK. If I read between the lines, I surmise that you trust me. Excellent. This means we have ~12hrs to work together constructively. I will say prematurely that I agree with you on PT. As per your request: I will let you know my first choice after you post your stuff. | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
On June 10 2013 21:41 SMcCoy wrote: Could also be troughton and baker need to check their interactions On the money! As in that is my conclusion. Hence, the problem. I believe I will be shot, so Eccleston is left with you and H3. It will be up to H3 to convince Eccleston to *not* vote you; as he will be the swing vote. | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
As for a double push on me. (1) H3 knows I'm town. (2) Baker cant push me - Without giving himself up.On June 10 2013 21:01 Baker1986 wrote: I know I'm not lynching [TheDavison] or mccoy. | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
On June 10 2013 23:25 Baker1986 wrote: + Show Spoiler + On June 10 2013 21:03 TheDavison wrote: Awesome, this ties spectacularly into my conclusion I want to unveil - once McCoy responds. Im so excited now "So why are you going so defensive?" - What are you worried about? I don't see where I'm defensive. Explain where I was defensive? On June 10 2013 19:43 Baker1986 wrote: actually fuck it. I'm good at about 3 things in this game. Day 1 reads, convincing people, and not getting lynched as town. So let's try to lynch me tomorrow, that will provide us with a useful day. No one had directly questioned you - other than me making a rhetorical nostradamus comment. This was both a pre-emptive strike and passive aggressive threat. There was absolutely zero requirement for that post. Broken down the post highlights two points. (1) Pre-Emptive Strike = Reminder of your strengths and reinforces "you are town" (2) Passive Aggressive Threat = The last bit... worded so people do the "exact opposite" as it is sarcastic in nature. This post given the thread sentiment of how the lynch went down is actually indicative of a defensive mindset. And the only reason to be defensive at this stage of the game - when not being challenged - is inherent.. scummy.. guilt. As an aside, you are a smart guy. Its actually hilarious, because all this time I have said if SMcCoy didnt have an awesome Day1, he would pass off as the scum who slowly gets bored and stops contributing. However, all this time, it has been you playing that role. And subtle gems like this: On May 31 2013 19:12 Baker1986 wrote: Most importantly, do you think McCoy and I are town? I respect this for Day1 scum play. On first glance: it looks like a bog-standard alignment question. However, this has many subtle undertones. Essentially you are mentally prepping this person (TomB4) to call you town, by association of a town read on McCoy. For an example of how a suspicious town asks about alignment, we revert to: On May 29 2013 17:51 MSmith1 wrote: Your turn. What alignment is A McGann and what alignment am I? The difference may seem minute, but here, MSmith1 treats the equation of two alignments as independent. You on the other hand, have too much confidence that McCoy is town. Yes, thread sentiment strongly suggested he was town, but without a Dr.T flip; there was no way to know for certain unless you had knowledge of his alignment. And henceforth, the subtlety in the quote is exposed. | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
I was prob a bit aggressive there. Its basically LYLO after this NK, so I need to be open to all possibilities. Let me know who you think is final team. | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
On June 11 2013 00:15 Baker1986 wrote: I'll respond to the rest later, but the reason I brought up the "three things I know I can do" thing was not to say I'm bad at everything else, it was to explain why it might prove productive if people try to lynch me tomorrow, because this forces the people trying to lynch me to come up with reasons for the lynch, and I'm stubborn enough to take the heat. So that might help us weed out who is wrong for the wrong reasons and who is wrong for the right reasons. Yeah.. i dunno... im struggling with you. because, your last post felt really genuine to me. And my gut reads on those types of posts have actually been right. I said for a while hartnell was town based on his bluntness. Its my analysis that has been completely wrong. | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
On June 11 2013 00:14 SMcCoy wrote: Im not against Eccleston being discussed.+ Show Spoiler + I'm finding quite some points that speak for Eccleston being scum, but that means that his teammate must have bussed him at some point, or still is. Happening after this votecount: + Show Spoiler + On May 30 2013 21:31 Oatsmaster wrote: WHOS THERE? SMcCoy (0): TheDavison (0): DrTennant (3): SMcCoy, Baker1986, MSmith1. Hurndall3 (1): PTroughton2. DrTennant is set to be lynched. Votes without ## will not be counted Eccleston's comeback: + Show Spoiler + On May 30 2013 21:38 Eccleston wrote: Sorry for my absence. Have been busy. Baker, I like your post about DrTennants read being shit, however, I am curious as to why you agree with MSmith1's read on me, because I think what he brings up is trash. Is your thought process similar to Smith's or do you agree with his read but not with his reasoning? Regarding DrTennant: McCoy's case on DrTennant isn't conclusive, but I think there's a fair chance of DrTennant being scum. The inconsistent suspicion toward ambiguous opinions and his defensive reactions could be scum indicators. I feel that point one would be a null tell if it wasn't for his strange justification about not being suspicious of me. It would be understandable if he said something like "Eccleston was asked to provide his opinion, but you were not." or that my post seemed less serious, but his "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." sounds more like an after-the-fact justification (and a very bad one at that), especially since he said before that that my aggression was likely more of a town tell than a scum tell. Why didn't he touch on that again if that was what he thought? His recent posts about Baker being scummy and about thriving in the spotlight leave much to be desired. It's mostly rhetoric with little of essence. @DrTennant You said that you thrive in the spotlight and it helped you make reads, but you've yet to share them with us. Do you think that all the mafia players are lurking? What I find curious about Eccleston's post is his question to DrT. He mentions that he had Baker as scumread, but then he asks him if he thinks that all the mafia players are lurking and that he has to share reads. This question might just be show after all. On May 31 2013 03:05 Eccleston wrote: I think lynching PT2 at this time would be unwise. He's made one post and thrown a vote on Hurndall3 for being "brief and blunt", and suddenly, ten hours later, he's a prime suspect? I think you're stretching it when you say that At the time of his post the thread was about three and a half pages long. It doesn't really take much effort to read that and then write a five paragraph RP post and throw a vote on someone. He could just as well be disinterested townie. I could understand it if you were pushing him as a policy lynch because you're not certain about DrT, but how he is "far from null" is beyond me. He has made one (half serious) post in the entire game. Has he been useless? Yes. Does that make him scum? No. On May 31 2013 03:40 Eccleston wrote: On second thought, I do find it quite strange that PT2 even bothered writing his mini case on Hurndall. If he is mafia trying to just skate by without doing anything, why make this stupid post instead of sheeping McCoy? I can think of two reasons: 1. DrT is mafia and PT2 doesn't want to add any more pressure on him. 2. DrT is town and PT2 doesn't want to be held accountable if he is to be lynched. I can't see any pro-town motivation behind his post though... Maybe he doesn't find DrT scummy, but can't be bothered to voice his opinion? Because it's hard to believe that he really is that convinced on Hurndall... The guy had posted about 300 words at that time. For example his backpedaling on the PT defense looks scummy if PT is scum. Eccleston might have been scared of the consequences of his defense for later, and wrote this post to look like he was in doubt about PT. What do you guys think about this This is essentially MSmith1 argument re-raised? This is a tough one as everytime I read Day1, Eccleston sticks out like a sore thumb to me. One thing I noted in my read today was: On May 30 2013 10:08 DrTennant wrote: Of the "active" posters the ones that concern me the most are eccleston and baker. Eccelston despite being active early seems to have just decided to fuck off while i been in the spotlight despite his hig activity early. He hasn't given an opinion on anything that has happened despite showing he was active early on. Baker it appears from my perspective has just decided to sheep who i think is the towniest guy in mccoy and who might have the largest thread control. Baker never gave reasoning he just called mccoy smart and it looks like he is just trying to latch on to an early wagon. What stands out is: With Eccleston, Dr.T just summarises the thread sentiment opinion With Baker, Dr.T creates a new argument to attract attention. Everytime I want to consider Eccleston though, I kept coming back to H3 and the heuristic about the 'Ver Guide". This is then compounded because even though I can not put my finger on it, Im liking the sincerity from Baker. | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
On June 11 2013 00:33 Baker1986 wrote: Yeah, should probably just lynch according to this list. Hillarious actually. I read this today and at the time.. Eccle + H3 was my team, and I was like WTF! The only thing that made me get off that thought process, was again the "Ver" guide. I think MSmith1 analysis of Eccle is pretty fucking good. Eccle waited a long time before deciding between Trout and Dr.T. That we know Dr.T was a goon, it suggests Eccle was hesitant to bus. - Which is normal. H3 was also always in agreement with Dr.T and voted accordingly. I think the only reason H3 could gain thread presence during Day3, was because all of the town fucked off. Either way, I like where this is going. Good work guys. | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
PT2 Role Play voting H3, gave H3 a perfect opportunity to create a counter-wagon for Dr.T. H3 has also consistently maintained Eccle as a town read (except once, where he votes him citing "survival'). H3 was constantly trying to derail the Dr.T lynch by three different methods. (1) Blatantly support Counter-Wagon (Trout) + Show Spoiler + On May 31 2013 00:06 Hurndall3 wrote: the bandwagon of justice rolling through.. it is so beautiful ##vote ptroughton On June 07 2013 00:42 TheDavison wrote: H3 The candidates for this lynch are: TomB4, Eccleston and Hurndall3. You need to step up; because that vote on PT earlier was a load of bullocks. Are you going to vote Tom or not. On June 07 2013 01:37 Hurndall3 wrote: I dont like any of those lynches though! Haven't looked into Tom real close but his activity looks pretty town just from glancing at it. Why not PT ;_; (2) Denigrate the SMcCoy case (Keeps asking for it to be simpler) + Show Spoiler + On May 30 2013 12:58 Hurndall3 wrote: also I still want someone to explain SIMPLY the case on DrTennant that everyone is sheeping. On May 30 2013 06:54 Hurndall3 wrote: um ok SMcCoy I tried to read your last post several times. Maybe my attention span is bad but half way through (between megacases 1 and 2) I kept getting so bored that I lot my concentration and had to start over. I still have no idea what you are trying to say but the gist I got was it was COMPLETELY INCONCLUSIVE lol. It's all analysis and no insight. On May 30 2013 09:42 Hurndall3 wrote: can smcc's analysis be summarized for simpletons such as myself or can the complexity of the argument not be condensed? (3) Rebuts points on behalf of Dr.T + Show Spoiler + On May 30 2013 14:15 Hurndall3 wrote: 1 "uscumbro?" is null possibly leaning town. I know you don't like it because of how it effectively accomplishes nothing, but town does it all the time. 2 people are searching for something to talk about early game. This is true of both town and scum. DrTennant is not a scumread and I think there are already a bunch of better lynch candidates out there: Eccleston PTroughton2 JPertwee Actually rereading all those filters I am gonna unvote TheDavison. His response to my OMGUS looks marginally genuine: ##unvote JPertwee might be a too scummy to be scum scenario. He is overly agreeable, wishy washy, and constantly asking people to expand on things they've said rather than contribute his own original thought. Then there is the over compensated vote on Dr.T where he backpedals on "overdefense" On May 31 2013 11:20 Hurndall3 wrote: ##unvote ##vote DrT k I think I can sheep this DrT shit now that I read the case thoroughly. these are the points that convinced me to sheep. 1 DrT's overdefense 2 unnatural calmness 3 repeated appeal that scum is among the inactives 4 one dimensional scumreads This guy and Eccleston has to go. | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
On June 11 2013 01:05 SMcCoy wrote: But H3 mentioned Eccleston as suspect after defending DrT. How are they compatible. Distancing. I just read Hurndall 7 page filter. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=413713&user=Hurndall3 Early game Eccle is a scummer. Then midgame Eccle instantly becomes a mislynchf or him. Endgame he is constantly hard fending Eccleston as a strong town read. The below is every post in H3 filter that has the word "Ecc" in it. + Show Spoiler [H3 on Ecc] + On May 30 2013 14:15 Hurndall3 wrote: Lists Eccleston as a lynch candidate (a s per thread sentiment).1 "uscumbro?" is null possibly leaning town. I know you don't like it because of how it effectively accomplishes nothing, but town does it all the time. 2 people are searching for something to talk about early game. This is true of both town and scum. DrTennant is not a scumread and I think there are already a bunch of better lynch candidates out there: Eccleston PTroughton2 JPertwee Actually rereading all those filters I am gonna unvote TheDavison. His response to my OMGUS looks marginally genuine: ##unvote JPertwee might be a too scummy to be scum scenario. He is overly agreeable, wishy washy, and constantly asking people to expand on things they've said rather than contribute his own original thought. On June 03 2013 07:53 Hurndall3 wrote: ya ecc or td id lynch either of those On June 04 2013 21:23 A McGann wrote: Who do you want to lynch tomorrow and at least give a paragraph outlining why. On June 04 2013 21:32 Hurndall3 wrote: This is gonna take some time that I don't have right now. I have to read the filters of TD, Ecc, HW, pf?(I may be forgetting someone else I found scummy) first. I will do this for d3 though. On June 07 2013 00:42 TheDavison wrote: H3 The candidates for this lynch are: TomB4, Eccleston and Hurndall3. You need to step up; because that vote on PT earlier was a load of bullocks. Are you going to vote Tom or not. On June 07 2013 01:37 Hurndall3 wrote: Literally he goes from considering him scum, to not being willing to vote him in this post!I dont like any of those lynches though! Haven't looked into Tom real close but his activity looks pretty town just from glancing at it. Why not PT ;_; On June 07 2013 04:30 Hurndall3 wrote: other scumread is HW. there is a very scummy connection between the two. Neither ever tries to figure out if the other is scum. They both push Ecc, TD mislynches. On June 07 2013 05:44 Hurndall3 wrote: k i have to go so this is a survival vote ##vote ecc On June 07 2013 06:08 Hurndall3 wrote: i agree ecc is a mislynch but wtf do you want me to do On June 07 2013 11:27 HartnellWill wrote: Now can we pls pls pls pls pls lynch eccleston day 4? On June 07 2013 12:23 Hurndall3 wrote: no! On June 08 2013 08:29 Hurndall3 wrote: Now he is starting to hard defend Eccleston.k I've been reading and rereading eccs filter and I think he's town. his early game record looks really scummy (shown by msmiths analysis.). In fact it looks so bad that scum would probably be more careful about how they were treating DrT, since all the powertowns were on drts wagon and it was pretty obvious he was going to be lynched. this is a tooscummytobescum argument but that doesn't mean its wrong. secondly there is this quote: I really can't imagine writing this as scum. And I don't mean the thought is particularly pro town. It's just that scum doesn't have thoughts like this. On June 08 2013 09:44 Hurndall3 wrote: @smcc look at my most recent post on ecc There are things he says that look VERY town, even if his play isn't very pro-town. MSmith's vote analysis makes Ecc look very bad, but there's one problem with MSmith's argument: It assumes that PT is town. If PT is scum along with DrT, then suddenly his entire analysis is irrelevant. On June 08 2013 09:56 Hurndall3 wrote: If Ecc is town, and TomB4 is town, then why would mafia give a fuck what wagon they were on yesterday? On June 08 2013 10:22 Hurndall3 wrote: TD I am not done reading filters but I'm really sure Ecc is *EBWOP NOT* scum. Please keep an open mind to my upcoming posts. Also realize this: a town Ecc was demotivated as fuck and very disconnected from the game. So disconnected that he didn't realize Smcc is obv town like we do. I think it was simply a case of activity without intellect behind it. On June 08 2013 11:10 Hurndall3 wrote: yup mcgann died because he thought Ecc is town. Ecc IS TOWN. Do you think it's a coincidence that PT and HW (both scummy fucks) are now pushing him uber hard in tandem? On June 08 2013 11:52 Hurndall3 wrote: ECC's townstory is consistent and believable. He did not read the game carefully enough to comprehend SmCC's towncred. Can't you see how someone saying "bad town is pissing me off I want them to die" can be construed as scummy? Because it looks like he wants to lynch people for being bad instead of being scum. Here is a question: Why would scum push SMcCoy at that time? Really there is no reason. there were plenty of other scummy townies (myself included) that would be better choices. On June 09 2013 01:48 Hurndall3 wrote: Here he defends Eccleston by taking arguments out of context (a constant theme of H3 throughout this game)TD you are tunneled on Ecc right now. It happens to all of us. You need to step back and realize that your case against Ecc isn't good. The logic is not conclusive. Let's look at exhibit B: 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. On June 09 2013 02:08 Hurndall3 wrote: Dude I'm sorry if I'm sounding condescending but it's just I think all your arguments for Ecc are bad. I've been there dude. Dat tunnel. Dat confirmation bias. 1 Why am I defending Ecc so hard.. well because you are going at him so hard. I am quite sure you are town and I want you on my side. Also Ecc seems like a newer player and he isn't trying or maybe isn't capable of defending himself. Also my townread on ECC is extremely strong. 2 Early game aggression is leaning town MAYBE for some people but I would be more comfortable saying it's alignment neutral. It's somewhat harder for scum because they have to find something that they can misconstrue as scummy. On June 09 2013 02:13 Hurndall3 wrote: i do like your point about hw/pt scumteam or ecc/me scumteam though. Ask yourself, do I really seem scummy? Also ask yourself, is it possible ecc is just newish town? On June 09 2013 02:19 Hurndall3 wrote: Sorry for the quadruple post. This is another one in response to TD. i mean Ecc read the Ver guide on how to play town for fuck sakes. I'm really sorry if im being disrespectful to you. it's just that I feel very strongly about the wrongness of your arguments. I have been refuting point by point. I have been saying WHY I think they are not conclusive. Please, I welcome you to present your most damming arguments, and I will say why I disagree one by one. As far as I'm concerned, the Ecc comments are dont have conviction behind them for pushing a lynch. | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
On June 11 2013 01:05 SMcCoy wrote: But H3 mentioned Eccleston as suspect after defending DrT. How are they compatible. To address your actual question. Regarding the post in question ("uscumbro") H3 defends Dr.T and then lists 3 scum reads, including Eccleston with no expansion of thought. This is simply distancing, as H3 did not seriously (or casually) push Eccleston as a lynch candidate at any point in the game. The simplest solution is that Eccleston was listed as the majority of the thread were suspicious of him. This allowed H3 to blend in, and cast suspicion on others. In the end he pushes JP, and leaves the door open for an OMGUS on Trout. There is certainly compatibility available. Just remember, that H3 lifted his activity once I built cases on both H3 + Eccleston. I treated H3 as town for two reasons. (1) He was one of the only people posting, and with so many lurkers, I felt scum had no reason to contribute (2) You kept calling H3 town, which made me doubt my case (as I was outnumbered on feedback 2 to 1) | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
H3 dismissed them all calling them "trash logic".... just like he did with Dr.T. + Show Spoiler [H3] + On June 04 2013 16:35 TheDavison wrote: *snip* + Show Spoiler [In Action] + If we examine the final votes for both Days. On June 01 2013 11:30 Oatsmaster wrote: Day 1 SMcCoy (0): TheDavison (0): DrTennant (8): SMcCoy, Baker1986, MSmith1, HartnellWil, A McGann, Eccleston, Hurndall3, TomB4 Hurndall3 (1): PTroughton2, PTroughton2 (2): TomB4 (1): TheDavison On June 04 2013 10:52 Oatsmaster wrote: Day2 jpertwee (7): baker1986, smccoy, msmith1, tomb4, a mcgann, thedavison (1): eccleston (2): hartnellwill, jpertwee hartnellwill (0): tomb4 (1): Someone who stands out to me as a contender to satisfy that dichotomy is: Hurndall3. On Day1, VCA indicates he has thrown his vote around randomly seeing where it sticks. In fact the vote justifications below are sycophantic at best and outright scummy at worst. Pay particular attention to the over compensation with his Dr.T sheep vote//bus. + Show Spoiler [H3 justifications] + On May 29 2013 23:01 Hurndall3 wrote: yup mccoys post is scummy as fuck. until he makes himself seem more town: ##vote smccoy On May 30 2013 03:17 Hurndall3 wrote: ok ##vote thedavison pretty self explanatory imo. This is his first post! On May 31 2013 00:06 Hurndall3 wrote: the bandwagon of justice rolling through.. it is so beautiful ##vote ptroughton On May 31 2013 11:20 Hurndall3 wrote: ##unvote ##vote DrT k I think I can sheep this DrT shit now that I read the case thoroughly. these are the points that convinced me to sheep. 1 DrT's overdefense 2 unnatural calmness 3 repeated appeal that scum is among the inactives 4 one dimensional scumreads On June 03 2013 05:09 Hurndall3 wrote: ##vote td jp is looking town from that last post. going with the alternate wagon. Besides I thought td looked scummy from his first post. On June 04 2013 11:10 Hurndall3 wrote: fuck I guess my vote is really outdated. ##unvote ##vote JP NOT THAT IT MATTERS Compare this to "TomB4" who was in the final two to seal Dr.T fate. On June 01 2013 07:36 TomB4 wrote: I'd rather feel dumb than correct, since I am the minority in this case. It's better for us if I'm wrong. ##unvote ##vote DrTennant There is a stark contrast in confidence in the sheep vote. H3; who never explained any of his D1 votes in gross detail, suddenly feels the need to provide a summary account when it comes to Dr.T. His Day1 performance sequence is repeated in full force on Day2, when he votes for Davison citing "JP looks town", before seizing an opportunity and rescinding back to JP - with no explanation. If i haphazard a guess, I would say with confidence: His actions with JP are a scum slip. (i.e. jumped into the thread without reading, and realised the error in judgement and recanted) Let me repeat it for you: On June 03 2013 05:09 Hurndall3 wrote: ##vote td jp is looking town from that last post. going with the alternate wagon. Besides I thought td looked scummy from his first post. On June 04 2013 11:10 Hurndall3 wrote: fuck I guess my vote is really outdated. ##unvote ##vote JP NOT THAT IT MATTERS Please remember thread sentiment: barely anyone thought JP was town; or even if they had a "gut feeling". JP filter did NOT do not much to help them present a counter case. However, H3 suddenly knows it all. It doesnt matter that 1 day elapsed between the H3 backpedal. He backed the horse (JP) when no one else did (I would bet due to knowledge we dont have)... and when the opportunity came he took it and provided ZERO justification. Just like all his other votes except Dr.T. SMcCoy has already touched on some odd interactions with H3 and other(s) in the thread. + Show Spoiler [The Outcome] + Guys, I am suggesting that regardless of who dies this cycle: please push forward and secure the lynch of H3. (1) His voting of Dr.T is suspect (2) His voting of JP is suspect (3) His behaviour fits the pattern of scum who has blended into the "not a current thread" zone, thus satisfies the requirements of enabling the "withhold KP" ability. (4) Has suspect behaviour with other participants. Please discuss this. I think this person I speak of in "The Outcome" satisifies all the criteria I have been looking for. i.e. Over Compensated votes on scum. Low details when voting town. & satisfies my "withhold kp" musings in the spoilers above. Let me know your thoughts. If you think I am wrong. Point it out! Construction discussion can only help lead us in the right direction! + Show Spoiler [Ecc1] + On June 08 2013 10:18 TheDavison wrote: Actually. i beg to differ, but will present something different. I am cleaning the house currently, and was thinking about the game and was musing in my head: why would Eccleston try and get a SMcCoy lynch? Anyone who read the game will know SMcCoy is town for two highly specific reasons from Day1. (1) The back and forth with Dr.T is genuine and could not be faked. They were playing cat n mouse, and SMcCoy won. and more importantly (2) MSmith1, (who is confirmed town) kept saying he completely agreed with the points SMcCoy was raising. i.e. MSmcCoy is thinking EXAXTLY like a well-reasoned townie should. Regardless of lowering presence since Night 1, SMcCoy is town. Eccleston 2.0 said he read the game, this should be abundantly clear. Yet when SMcCoy has a badly-timed vent; who tries to pounce on the opportunity? Eccleston 2.0 who has done nothing since coming in. This can only come from scum agenda. I actually believe Eccleston when he said he was demotived.. he came into a game and was a lynch candidate for things he didnt do. However, contrast this with my behaviour. I came into the game as a lynch candidate, and knowing I am town, I had the confidence to immediately rebut the cases put forth against me. Eccleston on the other hand, is demotivated as the points are valid. I start sticking up for him, and suddenly he has the confidence to push scum agenda (i.e. lynch SMcCoy). Yet did not rebut any of the cases against him as promised. This is pretty damn scummy. So in short, I could not reconcile why a townie would try and push for a SMcCoy lynch. Just cos the guy had a badly timed vent, does not make him scum. I think this action was a scum slip from Eccleston. I also coultn reconcile his "demotivated" post. Because it was written in a way that was very hard to weird (i.e. the paragraphs was all in one block). I think this was a specific tactic by Eccleston to hide behind. I dont think he lied about being demotivated (because replacing in, when votes are cast on you is demotivating for both town and scum). Come Day4, I am voting for Eccleston. Will figure out last scum after Eccleston is eliminated. + Show Spoiler [Ecc2] + On June 08 2013 16:52 TheDavison wrote: Started doing my re-read. From the first page I already know who to vote for. + Show Spoiler + ##Vote: Eccleston Ecclestons scummy openers have been done to death but I will outline my issues anyway. This is just so damn aggressive, especially for a first post. I have been assuming that he acted like this because MSmith1 RNG'd him as scum. But when I think about it, as town you are confident.. you know you can prove yourself town. Therefore when name calling like that happens, you just brush it off. The only reason I think a townie would write that post, is if they are trying to alpha-male the town leadership. However, clearly Eccleston never aspired that far. Outcome: Leaning Scum Another weird response. Since when is discussing lynching policies conducive to scum hunting? Everyone that plays mafia beyond the newbies, understands that policy discussion is what scum *LOVE* to keep town focused on. They are guilt-free lynches, and you dont have to create fake cases. I don't think this post by itself is scummy; but it is very weird. Because he raises issues, but doesn't provide solutions. He could have easily said "lynching policy.. .how about this" (which A.McGann actually asks in the next post) Outcome: Very slightly leaning scum Trivial Point, but he was aware of KP delay function instantly. Now, some people read the OP, others dont (including me). So i won't call him scum for knowing the scum specifics of play. But, if he is town and knows this.. why not create discussion around it? Especially because he called out others for not being constructive. Instead, he makes a blunt comment I dont understand.. "it will not affect lynching until end game".. and then tries to segue this into a useless a comment about A.McGann which says nothing AND MSmith1 where he avoids calling him town or scum (uses the words. villager/italian). Note, he was actually asked to share his thoughts on alignment. "Friendly" is not indicative of town or scum... Outcome: Null on its own, Very slightly leaning scum with the other points. Now, heres the pearler. And somehow, I dont understand how we all missed it. (Apologies if someone has raised it, I genuinely dont recall) Now: We all know Dr.T got lynched for this post. i.e. "Why so wishy washy? You scum?" We also know Dr.T was scum... so the question I asked myself was. Consider: early game, the objectives of scum are the same as town. (1) Establish your innocence (2) Blend in OR Assume town leadership It is ONLY after this phase that you start looking for "bad town" to setup as "scum". In his first post, Dr.T forgoes establishing innocence and throws out the artillery straight away. Not only aggressively attacking SMcCoy, but labelling him the "S" word (uscumbro). This is a big deal; as the post was not conducive to establishing the innocence of Dr.T, nor did it allow him to blend in. Secondly, the post was laced with too much aggression to try and establish a town leadership position. The key to Dr.Ts motives SMcCoy was confessing his confusion with Eccleston. i.e. He doesnt expect scum to be in the limelight early Day1.. yet everything Eccleston is doing doesnt add up as town. Its actually not wishy-washy at all. The reason Dr.T made an aggressive attack on SMcCoy as his first post To fling shit at SMcCoy and lower his credibility because he was suspicious of Eccleston. Its that simple. He was protecting a scum buddy. And decided to forgo establishing his innocence, which led to his demise. ##Vote: Eccleston + Show Spoiler [Ecc3] + On June 08 2013 19:52 TheDavison wrote: Disagree. As follows: + Show Spoiler [Motive] + Early game aggression may *NOT* alignment indicative during early game. However, as people are removed from the game, and alignments elucidated; early game aggression *does* become alignment indicative. Because you can start to figure out motive. As I pointed out in my case: scum have a typical modus operandi when the game starts. Blend in via establishing towniness, and then allow the bad townies to get lynched. This is the safe play that almost every game of mafia follows. Occasionally scum will try to assert themselves for town leaderships, which still requires them to establish towniess regardless. + Show Spoiler [Dr.T "Dirty Hands"] + Now Hurndall3, if what you say is true and Dr.T found "town wishy-washiness" with SMcCoy I am confident he would not have tried to ostracize SMcCoy so vehemently. Scum want to suggest "bad points" so others pick up the torch and do the pushing. i.e. Scum don't want to get their hands dirty and become accountable in any game of mafia But this did not happen.What we found this game is that Dr.T not only got his hands dirty, but he also became immediately defensive. We all know how this panned out: he was lynched. Because its so important, I shall repeat it one more time. He could merely have pointed out an observation - which satisfies scum objectives so much more efficiently. It sows doubt, establishes that he cares -> towniness, and keeps his hands clean. A perfect trifecta. H3, even you noted Eccleston early game play as follows: I think Dr.T noticed this as well, and felt the need to provide "cover fire" for Eccleston, hence the breakaway from scum safe play. This actually then becomes a very good reason for why he became immediately defensive. (In his mind, its like.. WTF!! i just tried to divert attention from you, and now I am the prime suspect...) Hurndall3, what I want to know are two simple things. (1) Why do you feel compelled to answer on behalf of Eccleston constantly? Your last 2 pages of filter are regurgitating "Eccle is town", and not producing cases for scum. (2) Why is early game aggression indicative of "leaning town". | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
Explains why Dr.T came in so hard. Explains why H3 was trying to actively derail the Dr.T lynch Explains why H3 came in so hard to derail any Eccleston lynch | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
Well I slept on it. So have a fresh mind. Those two make sure sense for a lot of intervals in the game. Everyone agrees eccleston at numerous points has not been bad town, but extremely scummy. Read over pt2000 and the tom lynch where he tries to constructively argue with me. I don't think scum had reason to oppose this lynch so vehemently. Pt also tried to paraphrase so I understood his point of view. This is unlikely to come from scum who don't care about free lynches on town. If he was scum trying to score town cred then what was the point? He knew about the wedding before replacing and lurked between tom death and wedding anyway. Twas all effort for a guaranteed nothing..and that's something scum never do!! Baker is interesting and satisfies disinterested scum. Some parts of the story don't add up though. For example, he provided REAL support to the Dr.t case BEFORE it became a fully fledged case. And then there is Dr.t throwing out the sheeping argument. I will be honest, when I replaced in and commented on baker being a sycophant. I did not read/remember Dr.t called baker a sheep. This is important as I found it to be a scummy point for baker so raised it. It appears Dr.t did the same thing. To me, for a bus that's a little authentic because if you are scum and truly think something about your Teammate is scummy, its very hard to throw that into the thread because you think they can't talk themselves out of it due to the guilt. That leaves the beloved h3, due solely to the point he has contradictions with eccleston. Did u actually read the post I made regarding that? I think the contradictions are superficial at best and distancing at worst. I had him as scum day3 and The only reason I listened to him day4 was because he was the only one present, and this game is so fucked with lurkers we need a sounding board + you kept saying he was town which made me doubt my conclusion. Aside from derailing Dr.t and eccleston etc, consider this about h3. 1. He comes in to just post..,"lol.. Someone thinks I'm scum". This is how he tried to derail eccleston + Dr.t. he just laughs at you, implying you are bad...but never actually responds to the argument!!! This recycled throughout his filter. 2. Since this night cycle, Pt and baker both tried to offer something, whether big or small. What has h3 done? He's clearly up to date. Eccleston has again fucked off hoping we continue the.. Too scummy to be scum argument, originated by yours truly. Mr h3. Mate. If I die tonight you need to kill eccleston full stop. I think evidence points to h3 as #2. If he is scum it makes sense for all phases of the game. Personally I would kill h3 first as he is slippery and has an higher chance of weaseling his way out. Best of luck!! I have faith in you, pt2000 and baker! Please remember my dying words if it is me this cycle. | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
I already explained why ur favourite lynch target McCoy is town several times. All u have done is ignore it. Anyways the guilt on u and h3 is dripping. You and h3 are the only ones that care about saving themselvesa. Everyone else put in some effort even if they don't expect to be shot. This says a lot about u and h3. Gg no re P.s. msmith1 said it best. When game starts and u get town. Usually you are pretty happy. Not eccleston. Pessimistic and antagonistic from the get go. Classic scum. Sdint be fooled by the too scummy to be scum argument. He is scum left right and center | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
On June 11 2013 09:09 Eccleston wrote: i explained my mindset... Yes, and when presented with valid feedback from a thread considered townie. You act as if nothing was said. You don't get it do you? U think because you put your thoughts out there once, that you have satisfied the requirements for being town. It doesn't cut it. You have demonstrated zero willingness to update your position in light of new activity, and here again demonstrate zero willingness to solve this game as new information is unveiled. You are guaranteed scum. Absolutely guaranteed as in I would wager both my nuts. | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
On June 11 2013 09:37 Hurndall3 wrote: Ecc how experienced are you? if that question is legal Its not. That is clearly an attempt to discern information pertaining to the man behind the smurf. You know, hence the qualifier "if its legal" | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
NIce save h3. AGain. How can everyone doubt the scum team ECcleston and h3 REmember those words | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
Thats why its a slip. H3 is too cautious and trying ti always save you prematurely | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
| ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
 | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
| ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
| ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
On June 16 2013 21:41 Hurndall3 wrote: I an kidding when I say things like learn to play! sorry. people don't get that I am trolling half the time. baker is really palmar lol? second time you mislynched me ebdgame. and don't say I'm unreadable cause so many people would have known I was town there. This is just annoying. After baker supports you as town, you have to be a dumbass all over again and he votes you on principle. I didn't like your bullshit when you joined a newbie and proceeded to bus me without any discussion in the qt.... Leading to a ban. And I don't like your bullshit anymore in this game. Now post game, there is still no remorse. You are the first person on my Mafia ban list. Congratulations. | ||
| ||
