TL Mafia LXIX: Carol Of The Bells - Page 124

On December 14 2014 06:20 GlowingBear wrote:
REALLY RITOKY?

I'VE MADE A STRONG CASE ON THE GUY WHO WAS PUSHING YOU AND TEMPLAR'S CASE IS GOOD? NO WORDS REGARDING MY CASE?

On December 14 2014 06:13 Xatalos wrote:
GB: It's hard to reread stuff on my phone, but I think your case is pretty heavy on meta and assumptions. I don't think its particularly scummy to focus on main scumreads rather than some people you mentioned once in a listpost. How do you know that HF's read on Froggy changed without reason? He might have just not reasoned every change of opinion in his filter. I didn't really get your last point. Overall not great reasons to lynch him.

On December 14 2014 06:09 Fecalfeast wrote:
Yeah keep in mind, if I get lynched, who used night kill analysis to scumread me. Keep in mind who is defending HF by swinging their votes from tubesack to me. I'm a proponent of the church of GlowingBear now. I do not fear dying for my god.

On December 14 2014 06:06 Trfel wrote:
Ok, I'm pretty suspicious of KelsierSC.

The first real thing he does in the game are these posts, which I'm sure everyone is familiar with:




This feels really weak to me, especially now that KelsierSC linked the game that he refers to. I don't understand how he can possibly find Fecalfeast the slightest bit scummy for this. It feels like he is really forcing this read from nothing, while potentially identifying a stupid Scrooge (which happened...) and appearing towny.

Same with his early townread on Holyflare. Even Holyflare says that it is weak, and I agree. We've already established that Holyflare is really good at playing Mafia, and that makes it really hard to identify him. So no, a meta case that early into the game isn't very good. This post again lacks substance, and feels like he is making a read for the purpose of making a read.

This post seems to take even more force out of his meta case on Fecalfeast. Is it really a good argument, if he isn't sure himself what Fecalfeast's day 1 play is like?

KelsierSC and I seem to be the only two people who read batsnacks as town for the post he made on Half the Sky. (Since then, batsnacks' play has made me much more suspicious, but that isn't the point of this post). The weird thing is, KelsierSC read batsnacks as town because he agreed with batsnacks' post. The validity of batsnacks' post has since been shown to be very questionable, but KelsierSC hasn't changed his stance.

KelsierSC then spends several posts focusing on Alakaslam. Here is his explanation.
Later, he goes back on this and says that this didn't end up working out. More words, less analysis.

His scum list seems to be changing without that much explanation. He says that he would happily vote 27nb, but doesn't include her in his lynch list. And his inclusion of Vivax in the lynch list for bad reads seems strange. Bad reads don't necessarily make someone scum, it is the intent behind them. And these reads are seeming forced.

Later, he comes back with a new post, and Vivax isn't mentioned in his scum reads at all.

The point about his changing stance on ritoky is also interesting. He puts ritoky into his town circle, then adds him to his lynch list, saying he has done absolutely nothing. His explanation of this is that he forgot he had him in his town circle. Shouldn't his reads be the same every time, even if he forgot all of his previous reads? If he was trying hard to make real reads, they would. If his read changed due to new information, that would be good, but the only new information he provided is that a few people scumread him. "I forgot" and "others are scumreading him" are not good reasons to change a read like that, he should at least investigate the case himself.

In conclusion, I would be happy to lynch KelsierSC. Moreso than Fecalfeast, anyway. Obviously it's not certain, but it seems better than anything else.

Now I will take a look at GlowingBear's complete case on Holyflare.