|
Let's play a game... |
I really don't understand how you can be this thick.
What you're asking for, particularly this:
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.
is impossible, given that neither of them is posting and nothing seems to motivate them to post.
You don't ignore or let those types of people slide. You KILL them.
|
Keep throwing the ad hominems tom.
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.
|
Its just tough replacing in and a couple people wanting to lynch you i guess... like imagine you havent been reading the thread really and you replace in, its a lot of things to catch up on, and people are writing case about your previous posts you didnt make and saying you are scum, and you dont even have a good enough sense of the thread to understand whats going on and how to formulate a scumread or if this guy accusing you is town or even scum... right? So when im saying im demoralized its because its a tough situation. i mean good news is were winning but maybe this is a better explanation: imagine youre in my shoes, you have a 30 page thread to read and ppl think u r scum for things you didnt do. then when you start reading the thread, TL goes down (mayb you dont believe me but this happened) so you go to bed and wow night is over and some guy died and ppl are like "look this guy died, eccleston is scum" and you dont even know why that is or how that makes sense, because you havent literally been abel to catch up on the thread... and like yeah, thats a bad feeling man. and then you also start thinking 'well we can afford to mislynch once... maybe its better town lynches me now instead of at lylo" and thats the kind of thought spiral you get into and it makes you not want to read the thread... because you feel demotivated.
|
Eccleston
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.
|
Ebwop
I should have said. Since my detailed rereads, i did not think you were scum.
|
And i dont just think tom was faking confusion.. tom was making a "show" of trying so "hard" to hunt scum. I can explain it like this... think about you are townie, you are hunting scum, and you dont know if a guy is scum or not but you think hes scum. But its not just about saying you want to hunt scum beyond the first major candidate... someone who thinks someone is scum has other interest but doesnt make a big "show" of trying to hunt scum like tom did. Let me show an example to explain... maybe one you well relate to: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.
what is tom saying here to you? he says he has better lynches like he is some sort of masterful scumhunter... and even more, 2 more lynches, but he doesnt want to say who his scumreads are (does he afraid of his teammates tells associating him?) and is making a show of how he has better lynches, and how Trouht is better lynch... and is talking about "enough votes" instead of trying to hunt scum. he is putting on the idea of hunting scum as his appearance but he is not hunting scum really, he's making a show of hunting scum... this is not what a town player would do in this situation, think about it why would you make this post? you cant think of it...
|
On June 06 2013 15:24 TheDavison wrote:
Eccleston
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.
yes TheDavison I have caught up with the thread... I voted for tom for two reasons, one which is good and one which is just an okay reason. my first reason for voting him and this is a good reason, i really think he is faking his scumhunting "effort" i outline above... it doesnt make sense to me. from my read through just his posts they seem to pop out as disingeniuous, instead of real, like from a town train of thought i understand. this is why he stood out to me even though i havent done traditional scumhunting method of vote count analysis or filter dive... from this first read through i can see already he stands out. also he is someone who i think i can make a good case on... and who others agree with me on. it is also my goal today (secondary goal but an important one!) that i do not get lynched. if every townie can avoid getting lynched we win, and part of that is making a convincing case that you think other people could agree with... like i dont like mccoy, even though he is putting a lot of big grandstanding effort in, his attitude and his weird question to me i dont think make sense... so he is my #2 scumread but its not worth it for me to try to lynch him instead i should keep on reading on tom filter or do VCA to find out more about tom because mccoy is unlynchable today...
|
Eccleston
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
|
##Unvote
Didn't read all of the last few pages cause to be honest I feel kinda annoyed from all this doubt we're having since the JP lynch. I'll now go methodically through most of the game again and serve you scum, or at least very probable townies, so we can eliminate and obliterate the remaining scum.
The Davis analysis on Tom looked promising, but all the rhetoric annoys me. Low hanging fruit, caveat. Wtf dude more SCIENCE less POLITICS please.
|
On June 06 2013 21:03 SMcCoy wrote:
##Unvote
Didn't read all of the last few pages cause to be honest I feel kinda annoyed from all this doubt we're having since the JP lynch. I'll now go methodically through most of the game again and serve you scum, or at least very probable townies, so we can eliminate and obliterate the remaining scum.
The Davis analysis on Tom looked promising, but all the rhetoric annoys me. Low hanging fruit, caveat. Wtf dude more SCIENCE less POLITICS please.
He doesn't really have a case, that's what makes it even more frustrating to respond.
On June 06 2013 15:36 Eccleston wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2013 15:24 TheDavison wrote:
Eccleston
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.
yes TheDavison I have caught up with the thread... I voted for tom for two reasons, one which is good and one which is just an okay reason. my first reason for voting him and this is a good reason, i really think he is faking his scumhunting "effort" i outline above... it doesnt make sense to me. from my read through just his posts they seem to pop out as disingeniuous, instead of real, like from a town train of thought i understand. this is why he stood out to me even though i havent done traditional scumhunting method of vote count analysis or filter dive... from this first read through i can see already he stands out. also he is someone who i think i can make a good case on... and who others agree with me on. it is also my goal today (secondary goal but an important one!) that i do not get lynched. if every townie can avoid getting lynched we win, and part of that is making a convincing case that you think other people could agree with... like i dont like mccoy, even though he is putting a lot of big grandstanding effort in, his attitude and his weird question to me i dont think make sense... so he is my #2 scumread but its not worth it for me to try to lynch him instead i should keep on reading on tom filter or do VCA to find out more about tom because mccoy is unlynchable today...
look at this guy.
He has McCoy as his #2 scumread. Do you think McCoy superbussed DrT day 1? You think of all people, the one who killed scum on day 1 is 2nd likeliest to be scum?
You're lying, you never attempted to read in the first place.
|
I mean come on, there is literally NO excuse. This game has 30 pages in 3 days, how is it hard to read that? It would take all of about an hour of very thorough reading for the average reader, maybe two if you are slow or extra thorough. This game has by far the least posts of any that I've ever played in.
|
Tom, what do you think of H3
|
On June 06 2013 22:58 SMcCoy wrote:
Tom, what do you think of H3
I don't particularly think he's scum, but he's an asshole for not contributing.
Most of the players in the game currently are assholes for not contributing, actually.
|
On June 06 2013 23:07 TomB4 wrote:I don't particularly think he's scum, but he's an asshole for not contributing. Most of the players in the game currently are assholes for not contributing, actually.
But you wanted to lynch PT for not contributing, why don't you want to lynch H3 then?
|
Tom. I will admit.
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.
|
On May 30 2013 13:24 MSmith1 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 30 2013 12:58 Hurndall3 wrote:
also I still want someone to explain SIMPLY the case on DrTennant that everyone is sheeping. @H3Okay I will summarize the points that smcc made against DrT as I see them. 1) This quote from DrT, addressed towards smcc, doesn't seem genuine. Let's say that as a townie you read someone's post and get the feeling that they might be scum. You would probably ask questions trying to get in your suspect's head and understand why they posted what they posted, right? On the contrary, DrT just pulled out a "uscumbro?" which isn't a real question and shows hostility without doing anything productive. Show nested quote +On May 29 2013 23:31 DrTennant wrote:On May 29 2013 23:21 SMcCoy wrote:On May 29 2013 22:17 DrTennant wrote: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. 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? It's a considerate post. At that point the majority of players didn't post, and I went by the assumption that scum doesn't post early. I voiced my opinion on Eccleston's excessive aggression, but it's not enough for me to make a judgment in light of the fact that scum might not even have posted yet. I think Ecclestone's posts might come from both a bad townie or scum. You call it ambiguous, expecting me to give a definite opinion. I would like you to tell me why you think that me voicing suspicion against a player is considered as saying nothing. Would you rather expect me to make a quick judgment this early in the game? Bolded your loaded question. Looks like faked hostility, doesn't reflect interest into finding out about my thought process. Well i don't know about you but i'm suspicious of everyone. i didnt take it as you saying you were suspicious of Eccleston i took as complete filler post that said absolutely nothing really and i took it as wishy washy and posting for the sake of posting by not taking a stance. I dont understand why making early judgements could be seen as bad i change my mind on things all the time based on new information and flip floping being scummy is a lie pushed by scum. Its only scummy when its convenient. So i dont understand your worry about making snap judgements. 2) In this post, DrT justifyied his own play and explained in some detail why what he posted isn't scummy. But nobody asked him to do this. Nobody was even calling him scum at the time. So in this post DrT betrays a defensive mindset. 3) And finally, smcc had a problem with the way that DrT attacked smcc's first post for being ambivalent and inconclusive, but chose to pass over Eccleston's equally ambivalent and inconclusive post about my alignment. This is slightly inconsistent. I think all of the points are valid. I don't believe any of them are completely damning, but I think that these three points combined with some of the recent points made by Baker/AMG/myself subsequent to DrT's response comprise the strongest case in the thread thus far. So what do you think H3?
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: Show nested quote +On May 30 2013 03:21 TheDavison wrote:+ Show Spoiler +That is indeed my first post, I have been absent from the thread until now. Upon reading the thread I found you scummy. Instead of doing anything to refute that you have instead reinforced my belief that you are an alien monster who must be purged by our security forces. ##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 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 May 31 2013 19:25 Eccleston wrote:Show nested quote +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 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?
What Eccleston was pointing out is a really good point. H3 used the same point first in defense of DrT, and then as a reason to join his lynch as the 7th vote, showing in both cases fake reasons to do what he had to do in that situation.
##Vote Hurndall3
Other than that, he's a guy who plays the dumb card to look like a bad townie, and Tom has been adamantly unaware of his disruptive play despite showing such fervor when it came down to lynching a guy for roleplaying..
I think the remaining scum is H3 + Tom, I have some more points against Tom up my sleeve but I want to lynch H3 first and see what Tom has to say to it. I have been waiting for 30 minutes for an answer to his ignorance regarding H3 and I think I know the reason he's taking so long.
|
GG no re scum, one of you dies today
|
On June 06 2013 23:18 SMcCoy wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2013 23:07 TomB4 wrote:On June 06 2013 22:58 SMcCoy wrote:
Tom, what do you think of H3 I don't particularly think he's scum, but he's an asshole for not contributing. Most of the players in the game currently are assholes for not contributing, actually. But you wanted to lynch PT for not contributing, why don't you want to lynch H3 then?
Oh please. I didn't want to lynch him for solely not contributing. I've gone over this multiple times, the key was that he was clearly present but not contributing. You can expect someone who is literally not contributing to get replaced, but you can't expect that out of someone who shows up and says something irrelevant/trollish, and then disappears for a while, only to do the same thing later.
There's a stark difference between being present and not contributing and not being present at all. In one case you can generally do something, in the other it's really nothing but a coinflip.
Also, the atmosphere has changed since then. At the time, almost everyone else in the game at the very least was present. By the end of day 1 and through night 1 the game went into lurkmode.
Lastly, there actually things in H3's filter that can be used to read him, unlike a 2 post user with one post being a troll post and the other being a one liner not even worthy of remembrance.
On June 06 2013 23:41 TheDavison wrote:
Tom. I will admit.
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.
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.
|
On June 06 2013 23:50 SMcCoy wrote:Show nested quote +On May 30 2013 13:24 MSmith1 wrote:On May 30 2013 12:58 Hurndall3 wrote:
also I still want someone to explain SIMPLY the case on DrTennant that everyone is sheeping. @H3Okay I will summarize the points that smcc made against DrT as I see them. On May 29 2013 22:17 DrTennant wrote:
Why so wishy washy? You scum? 1) This quote from DrT, addressed towards smcc, doesn't seem genuine. Let's say that as a townie you read someone's post and get the feeling that they might be scum. You would probably ask questions trying to get in your suspect's head and understand why they posted what they posted, right? On the contrary, DrT just pulled out a "uscumbro?" which isn't a real question and shows hostility without doing anything productive. On May 29 2013 23:31 DrTennant wrote:On May 29 2013 23:21 SMcCoy wrote:On May 29 2013 22:17 DrTennant wrote: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. 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? It's a considerate post. At that point the majority of players didn't post, and I went by the assumption that scum doesn't post early. I voiced my opinion on Eccleston's excessive aggression, but it's not enough for me to make a judgment in light of the fact that scum might not even have posted yet. I think Ecclestone's posts might come from both a bad townie or scum. You call it ambiguous, expecting me to give a definite opinion. I would like you to tell me why you think that me voicing suspicion against a player is considered as saying nothing. Would you rather expect me to make a quick judgment this early in the game? Bolded your loaded question. Looks like faked hostility, doesn't reflect interest into finding out about my thought process. Well i don't know about you but i'm suspicious of everyone. i didnt take it as you saying you were suspicious of Eccleston i took as complete filler post that said absolutely nothing really and i took it as wishy washy and posting for the sake of posting by not taking a stance. I dont understand why making early judgements could be seen as bad i change my mind on things all the time based on new information and flip floping being scummy is a lie pushed by scum. Its only scummy when its convenient. So i dont understand your worry about making snap judgements. 2) In this post, DrT justifyied his own play and explained in some detail why what he posted isn't scummy. But nobody asked him to do this. Nobody was even calling him scum at the time. So in this post DrT betrays a defensive mindset. 3) And finally, smcc had a problem with the way that DrT attacked smcc's first post for being ambivalent and inconclusive, but chose to pass over Eccleston's equally ambivalent and inconclusive post about my alignment. This is slightly inconsistent. I think all of the points are valid. I don't believe any of them are completely damning, but I think that these three points combined with some of the recent points made by Baker/AMG/myself subsequent to DrT's response comprise the strongest case in the thread thus far. So what do you think H3? Show nested quote +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: On May 30 2013 03:21 TheDavison wrote:+ Show Spoiler +That is indeed my first post, I have been absent from the thread until now. Upon reading the thread I found you scummy. Instead of doing anything to refute that you have instead reinforced my belief that you are an alien monster who must be purged by our security forces. ##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. Show nested quote +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 Show nested quote +On May 31 2013 19:25 Eccleston wrote: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 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? What Eccleston was pointing out is a really good point. H3 used the same point first in defense of DrT, and then as a reason to join his lynch as the 7th vote, showing in both cases fake reasons to do what he had to do in that situation. ##Vote Hurndall3Other than that, he's a guy who plays the dumb card to look like a bad townie, and Tom has been adamantly unaware of his disruptive play despite showing such fervor when it came down to lynching a guy for roleplaying.. I think the remaining scum is H3 + Tom, I have some more points against Tom up my sleeve but I want to lynch H3 first and see what Tom has to say to it. I have been waiting for 30 minutes for an answer to his ignorance regarding H3 and I think I know the reason he's taking so long.
You should consider actually reading the thread.
Have you forgotten about HW? Should I make up some bullshit about how you're purposely ignoring him, therefore you're scum?
Pick 2 of 4. Myself, Eccleston, HW, H3. We can't all be scum, yet you certainly haven't commented on all of us.
Using your logic, that must mean you're scum! LOL I GOT THE GAME FIGURED OUT GUYS
|
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:
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. Luckily I am back to a keyboard.
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.
- Not only did he easily establish his towniness;
- he also acted as a facilitator for the Dr.T lynch,
- and in Night 1 proved he was capable of deep analysis.
- An added bonus was that McCoy was the "auto assume" medic protect, due to being the "leader".
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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
