EPTiGrok's Good Clean Old-fashioned Mafia
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
| ||
|
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
On June 10 2012 08:23 Radfield wrote: Hizzah! No setup to talk about! No roles to direct! Nothing but cold hard calculation...! No medic and no ability to confirm townies means that every player needs to actually play, and establish themselves. No spamming, no coasting, etc. Given that, lets lynch into the players who are most difficult to find and the players with the best scum play. In this case that's ace and.... uhmmm.... well, just Ace I suppose  Seems like a good policy to me! Ohohoohoho, yes! It's funny because Ace was one who make policy lynch thread, ohohohoho! Is funny! + Show Spoiler + | ||
|
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
On June 10 2012 09:10 chaoser wrote: ![[image loading]](http://i49.tinypic.com/14xfjew.png) Let's go yo. ##vote: Ace Haha, was that your first try, or do you just want to kill Ace? I know someone you might like to get to know better, I think you share similar interests. Radfield meet Chaoser. Chaoser meet Radfield. It's a perfect match! | ||
|
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
On June 10 2012 09:36 chaoser wrote: Nah, Radfield doesn't want to RNG; he thinks it has no benefit. So I'm not a perfect match with him. Ace does want to RNG though so I'm possibly a perfect match with him. Or at least a better match than with Radfield. It just so happened that the RNG picked my perfect match. =[. What's done is done yo. No, I meant because you both want to lynch Ace. :p Unless you love Ace as well, and then maybe Rad is just jealous, and is trying to kill Ace to steal you away from him. Isn't the idea behind RNG that we have nothing to talk about, so it provides a talking point, and that it makes mafia sweat, because they have no control over it, so if you decide to lynch a scum they'll freak out and the reaction will be enough to lynch them anyways? | ||
|
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
Now, onto the game. In response to gonzaw, I made that post to take a stab at what I thought the benefits of RNG were. However, I wasn't sure if I was correct in my assumptions, and that's why I phrased it as a question. I didn't want to ascribe the merits of RNG and then argue against them myself, so I was waiting for a reply. Unfortunately, none of the RNG supporters have actually bothered say what they think the merits of it are. Personally, I'm against actually following through with an RNG lynch, except in a few situations. I think RNGing a target and then discussing them could be a decent way to start discussion, and get people to either defend or attack a player and take a stance, but that needs to be done at the beginning of the day, and we didn't do that. However, I don't think we should just lynch that person unless there is an adequate argument as to why we should. So, in that case the RNG serves as a way to start us talking about players instead of policy or game mechanics, and then we find the lynch target from there. The only time I'd actually follow through an RNG lynch is if the entirety of Day 1 was so devoid of discussion analysis was impossible, but I rarely see that happen, and it doesn't seem to be happening in this game. So, I do not support actually lynching an RNG'ed target in this game. I actually want Chaoser to answer my question from earlier, since he sort of side-stepped it: On June 10 2012 09:20 Mr. Wiggles wrote: Haha, was that your first try, or do you just want to kill Ace? I know someone you might like to get to know better, I think you share similar interests. Radfield meet Chaoser. Chaoser meet Radfield. It's a perfect match! There's no assurance you actually RNG'ed that, so I'm wondering why you want to kill Ace. Do you actually support an Ace lynch? Your next post looks weird too, asking if Ace is backing off RNG when he said you're jumping the gun and that your RNG isn't valid. False pressure, and all that. | ||
|
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
##Vote: Mr. Wiggles | ||
|
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
I can't really comment that much on the lynch, because I wasn't around to interact with it, but I get why people wanted to lynch MZ, and he martyred himself, which wouldn't help his case. Looking at how the votes fell, there's a few people who just single voted for someone who wasn't Palmar/MZ. This includes Gonzaw, hesmyrr, and chaoser. Going through filters: chaoser, you said in this post: + Show Spoiler + On June 12 2012 02:16 chaoser wrote: I'm ok with either a MZ lynch or a BB/wiggles lynch. This is an invite only game that was very exclusive from what I can tell from pre-game and so for people to be as inactive as BB or wiggles are is very disappointing. But even then, lynch wise it would be greymist>>>MZ>>>>>>>>>>BB/Wiggles You'd like an MZ lynch in preference after grey. However, you don't comment at all on how you think MZ is scummy. You also don't switch your vote to consolidate at all onto MZ, even when the lynch came down to being in between MZ and palmar, with you writing this: + Show Spoiler + On June 12 2012 05:54 chaoser wrote: I don't think palmar is trolling, if that helps. I think palmar is playing a pretty good game actually (not trying to buddy), I think you're misrepresenting his actions BB. So, if you had a town-read on Palmar (which is what I'm getting from "palmar is playing a pretty good game actually"), why didn't you switch your vote onto MZ, who you said you were ok with lynching, and to prevent the lynch of palmar? What gives? Hesmyrr only mentions the MZ/Palmar lynch here: + Show Spoiler + On June 12 2012 07:07 Hesmyrr wrote: I was actually waiting for you to post the analysis regarding VE, since I couldn't find concrete argument to merit analysis post yet. Currently I find MZ lynch to be better than that of Palmar but I am not going to get stuck on black-white thinking; the fact that GreYMisT+VE have voted him is cause for concern which is why I am reserving my judgment until the last moment. Personally the interactions happened between VisceraEyes and you are making me extremely wary. He says he likes the MZ lynch better than a Palmar one, but that's it, and doesn't commit to it with a vote. This was 53 minutes before the deadline, but the vote counts were all low, so I'm hesitant to call him out on not switching to a target more likely to be lynched. I'm keeping an eye on him. Gonzaw said he doesn't like the MZ lynch, but there's no mention of Palmar one way or the other. So, he didn't say he likes one of the candidates and then didn't vote for them like the other two, he just stuck to his candidate he put forward. He looks the best out of the three after the lynch. By the way, Gonzaw, what do you think of Palmar? Personally, I think Palmar is being Palmar right now (or at least acting like it). He's been changing his scum meta recently from being just useless from Day 1 on to trying to act like himself for a while. I'm leaning slightly towards town now, but if he starts not pushing any cases or doing anything useful, it means he's scum. On June 12 2012 09:10 gonzaw wrote: Another question: Does any of you have an idea who the SK might be? And is there any subtle difference in scum behaviour and SK behaviour? (without taking interactions with scumbuddies into account) I'd say that an SK is going to be active enough to not get lynched, but not so active that he will be shot early on. So, basically someone who's running middle of the road. It depends a bit on the player though. Obviously, someone like Radfield couldn't play the SK the same way as me or you, or someone else who people aren't expecting to be one of the central figures of town in the mid-game. But, for most of the players, it should go how I said. They'll contribute enough to not look scummy, and then they'll keep a low enough profile to not get shot. This will go on until the player numbers go down, and then they'll probably try to become a stronger force in the game. Also, something people seem to be missing, or at least glossing over, is that if scum shoot the SK, they don't need to out themselves to lynch necessarily. They can just make an analysis of that player calling them scum, or wait a day and make one calling them the SK. There's nothing stopping them from just trying to lynch the SK normally, and as soon as a town player does it, calling someone out as an SK isn't suspicious. | ||
|
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
On June 12 2012 10:53 gonzaw wrote: First of all..can someone tell me why the lynch was on "either MZ or Palmar"? Both Palmar and Grey had 2 votes (before I voted BB) if I recall correctly, and MZ only had like 3 votes at a time (which is not a "oh oh he's definitely the lynch today" amount) @Wiggles: I was suspicious of Palmar initially because of him trying to shift attention towards MZ when I presented my Grey case. However after seeing him play I see he's playing with confidence and arrogance. I know he can play pretty good as scum, like in Liar Game, so I'm not crossing him as town yet, but I don't think lynching him right now (or yesterday) is a good idea. Wiggles you have a lot to contribute since you've been missing, specially about the cases on Grey, VE and Radfield that were posted last day I said it was between Palmar and MZ because it looked like it ended up as 4-3, and then everyone else having only 1 vote on them. I read through pretty quickly, so I might not have paid enough attention to how the vote developed. I just saw three people single-voted and went through their filters to see what I thought and look for people avoiding being responsible for the lynch or not. I have a bunch of stuff to catch up on, so would you mind linking me to the specific cases? I know you made the greymist one, and hesmyrr made the VE one, who started the one on VE again? | ||
|
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
On June 12 2012 11:06 gonzaw wrote: You answered your own question. Sorry I'm too lazy right now to reread the thread looking for them. But chaoser and I posted about Greymist Hesmyrr posted about VE VE and MZ posted about Radfield Just check their filters (and of course read the thread in it's completion) I don't really like the Chaoser case against GreY. I also agree with him that your reasoning for voting GreY isn't very strong, even if I disagree with him on his own case. I think it was early to pull out the "Never made any analysis" card. I explain why I don't like Chaoser's case later when I talk about why he's scum. Next, I don't agree completely with Hesmyrr's case on VE. I don't see a logical disconnect between the two posts in the second paragraph. In the first, VE says that he's afraid of trusting how we decide the RNG lynch. This implies he's afraid of someone manipulating the results or something similar. Next, he says he like Palmar's plan. There's no disconnect, because Palmar's plan is essentially random, and isn't decided by one person, as it would be verified by multiple people. So, it's something that's not open to manipulation. Therefore, the change in stance makes sense. The part I do agree on with Hesmyrr is that pushing the RNG talk to continue doesn't look that great. However, I don't think that's enough to call VE scum on. I'll respond to the Rad case later. On June 12 2012 18:43 Radfield wrote: Wiggles, that's all well and good, but those posts are startlingly neutral. Who would you have voted for yesterday. Who do you think is playing scummy. Between MZ and Palmar, I would have truthfully voted for MZ. Out of other people, I would have voted Chaoser. The reasons for this are that he's done about three things that make him look off to me. First, he did that weird thing with the RNG. I have no idea how that was supposed to work though, because RNG doesn't work with just someone posting a number and saying that's who we're lynching. But, after not enough people supported him, and I called him out on it, he says that it was for pressure and to see how Ace reacted. That sounds silly though, because the pressure would always be weak, and Ace didn't back off RNG but Chaoser still pushed him for it. Like I said, false pressure. Second, I don't understand his initial case on Grey at all. I don't know what he means by "you show no suspicion to the usage of terms", but I guess he's saying that he's not suspicious of different names and that makes him scummy? But this is an iGrok game. I lost Sleeper Cell I because I lynched a guy for having a green bolded name when no one else did. I learned my lesson, and I know iGrok has done similar things in lots of his games since then with regards to flavour and role name, because flavour hunting is just stupid. So, it makes sense for GreY not to necessarily question that they have different names, which makes Chaoser's accusation weird and off-base. Then he calls out GreY for wanting to lynch me and not MZ. The thing is though, there's nothing stopping GreY from thinking I made a bad post even if MZ made a worse post, so that's not really a valid for saying he's scum. Just because something is worse than something else doesn't mean that other thing can't still be bad (On a side note, I don't think my post was bad, this is from GreY's PoV :p). So again, I don't like Chaoser's reasoning for voting GreY. Third, Chaoser didn't change his vote from GreY to MZ. There wasn't enough support for the GreY lynch it seemed, and the votes between Palmar and MZ were very close. Chaoser said he'd prefer an MZ lynch after a GreY lynch, and that he thought Palmar was playing well. However, he never ended up changing his vote to ensure someone he thought was scummy would get lynched instead of someone he thought was playing well. That stinks. So, these three things together lead me to think Chaoser is scum. It's a lot of little things that I find off or pushing from an insincere direction that add up to that conclusion. On June 12 2012 19:17 Radfield wrote: He can't shoot you because if he did that would make him scum There's the Ace we know and love. You can't shoot me though, I'm bulletproof. I like how when you are scum you find something someone has done and then just spin it as scummy like crazy. Look for an entire body of evidence.. nahh. I assume what your insinuating is that me and Palmar are scumbuddies, or that I wanted to save him for some sort of underhanded reasoning. I can assure you that if I was scum and Palmar town, I would push any lynch on him I possibly could. Palmar, like no other player on this site, correctly ID's me by Night 1 pretty much every game we have ever played. Certainly he busted me in LOTR and Arkham 2, and was on my case in Closed Casket. No way I would save him, especially when I had already given myself plenty of reason to not vote Meapak.  Then again, if you're bullet-proof that makes you the SK too. Hey, this scum-hunting thing is pretty easy! | ||
|
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
On June 13 2012 02:55 gonzaw wrote: Hmm...I'm leaning on BrownBear-Wiggles-Radfield 2 scum-SK team for now. I don't like that post of yours Wiggles, I dunno...seems your reasons for thinking chaoser is scum are kind of weak. But well, if I'm still alive on D2 I'll reanalyze the thread, hey! Maybe you are right about chaoser who knows? What about them are weak? If you'd like me to explain in more detail or go over something in a different way I can. Just saying they're weak doesn't really help me if you don't think he's scum or the case is bad. | ||
|
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
On June 13 2012 03:40 gonzaw wrote: You didn't actually respond to this point. The point is that he makes a fake RNG on Ace. Ace calls him out for making a fake RNG. Then Chaoser tries to turn it around that Ace is backing off his original plan of having an RNG lynch. It has nothing to do with whether RNG is bad or good, or whatever. It has to do with how Chaoser dealt with it. This is inherently weak because it relates to the RNG bits from earlier on. chaoser could have easily done that as town or scum. It's like if someone said we should lynch lurkers near the beginning of the day. Then person #2 comes in three hours later and says that the person who made that post has only made three posts in total, so we should lynch them for lurking. Then the original person comes back and says that they hadn't even defined what constituted lurking so the vote is silly. Then person #2 responds by claiming that the original poster is backing off of his policy lynch of killing lurkers now that he's been put under pressure, and thus implying he's scummy for it. The reasoning is fallacious, and it parallels what Chaoser did with the RNG lynch. He just made a number. Ace said we hadn't even talked about how we would determine the random number. Chaoser calls him out and implies he's scummy because he's backing off of his policy, when Ace didn't do anything near that. The logic isn't right, and the pressure is non-existent because of that. That's why I don't like Chaoser's response to my question, and think it makes him look scummy. This seems weak as well. You find chaoser suspicious because he found Grey's reaction to my "joke" suspicious, only based on a game you (but not chaoser) played (and he would have no way to know that). GreY mentions this himself while talking to chaoser, but chaoser never concedes the point: + Show Spoiler + On June 11 2012 09:33 GreYMisT wrote: Im not suspicious because me and iGrok have hosted together multiple times. I know not to put stock in Role PMs being different as he changes them on purpose, or gives them different names, he also puts sample Role PMs in the OP. so yea, I don't put stock in Vanilla townie being too different from Vanilla towny He ignores it, even though that was the reason mentioned for why he initially voted for GreY. If he had made some sort of post taking it back, or revoking what he had said, I'd feel better, but he doesn't. He just lets it stand even though it's a silly reason for thinking GreY is scum. Also, to counter what you said, this is becoming a pretty frequent practice in games with lots of flavour to help deter people from trying to confirm with role PMs while not just mass modkilling them. For a counter-example, chaoser played in responsibility mafia that had two vigs outed on Day 1 because one claimed and the other counter-claimed because their role names were different and we ended up losing one to a mislynch on Day 1 and the other that Night. So, he has played in a game like that, and it's still a terrible reason to vote someone. This is the main thrust of Chaoser's case against GreY. The logic is again silly. He's saying that GreY is scum because he called me out for what he saw as a bad post but didn't call out MZ at the same time for what Chaoser believes is a worst post. That's one of the worst reasons for calling someone scum I've seen. It's like calling someone scum if they make a case on someone and ask someone who made another case to explain it again, and you think that second person's scummier. Just because GreY called me out and not MZ isn't a good enough reason to say he's scum, and it's a weird reason at that. It looks like Chaoser's just trying to make stuff up to support his initial accusation. Well..MZ did flip town. chaoser not voting someone that flipped town would be better considering the circumstances. I do find that a little bit odd, but he said he prefered a Grey lynch rather than a MZ one, and I was voting Grey at that time as well (while MZ only had like 3 votes on him), so at that time him keeping his vote on Grey isn't alignment telling. Yes, him not changing his vote to MZ later seems weird, because he said MZ was his 2nd lynch. But all in all your reasons for thinking chaoser is scum seem weak to me. What about his interactions with other players? What about his behaviour and aggressiveness? Do you think he's scum because of them as well? But meh. | ||
|
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
##Vote: Chaoser | ||
|
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
On June 13 2012 12:11 chaoser wrote: How do I generally start off games? I post "Blank is mafia, let's lynch him". This worked well for me for a while after that game I fakeclaimed DT but now it no longer works. When radfield jokingly suggested RNG and then Ace backed it up I figured it was a good way to pressure. I think palmar explained it really well and is kind of what I was going for in my post about why I started off talking about RNG but didn't really get across at all with my "it provides an amazing amount of pressure" Palmar's: Notice the part where he talks about settling it early, which is why I asked palmar to do RNG before the first 24 hours was up. I couldn't explain in thread at all as palmar points out so that's why I told radfield: The VE/gonzaw vanilla towny/vanilla townie was actually just an over reaction on my part and once I realized no one else was bothered by it, I knew it was a false reading on my part. When I first saw VE claim vanilla townie and then gonzaw counterclaim it as vanilla towny, I though I had caught them on something huge since I was taking both their posts seriously. The OP allows for me to post my PM so I'll do it to explain: Vanilla towny/townie/anything like that is never mentioned in the PM and so I was like wtf...did VE mess up and gonzaw caught him on it or did VE bait with it and then gonzaw got caught and was very confused. I don't remember right now but after a few minutes of thinking, I ended up reasoning out that the most suspicious person in that interaction was not VE or gonzaw but greymist because he hadn't responded the way I did, which was to do a double take upon seeing the VE/gonzaw interaction since Vanilla townie is never mentioned in our PMs as townies. I figured any townie would immediately be like wtf... That's why I immediately asked people what they thought of the usage of the words. Once I realized no one else really reacted the same way I did, I knew it probably didn't mean much. However I had already found greymist's posts to be suspicious at that point already because it looked like he was picking and choosing who he wanted to point fingers at while ignoring others who were guilty of the same things he was pointing out in the people he wanted to point out at. And at the same time his case on Ace came up and it was ridiculously scummy, I mean, how can anyone think it's not, especially if he said he was suspicious of wiggles and then all of a sudden moves on to Ace while wiggles was also guilty of not posting much content at all? Then I had to go out for dinner with a friend for his birthday and basically till now hadn't even looked in the thread. That's why I didn't change my vote. I think I've answered all your questions, please point out more if I haven't Ok, so this explains the points I didn't like. To make it clear though, you're saying you were planning on changing your vote to MZ but were out? Next, while this provides explanation that could say why you did what you did, all you've done in this post is defend yourself. Who do you think is scum? Who do you want to lynch? If you want me to move my vote off of you, I want to see what your own opinion on things is. Right now, my only misgiving about Radfield is that he asks a lot of questions but doesn't interact with other people. For example, he asks me: On June 12 2012 18:43 Radfield wrote: And I make a reply, and then he just ignores it. He doesn't engage with me after asking me for my reads, and this is the same for a lot of his questions. Besides that though, I'm not sure if I see the case on him. I went back and read through his filter, and not much stuck out as scummy besides that. Also something funny:Wiggles, that's all well and good, but those posts are startlingly neutral. Who would you have voted for yesterday. Who do you think is playing scummy. + Show Spoiler + On June 07 2012 09:27 Radfield wrote: I sense meta will play a strong role in this game. I vote we lynch the first player to use the term 'scumslip' inappropriately. :p Obviously this is damning evidence and Radfield should lynch himself. If I change my read on chaoser, or need to vote to get him lynched, I'll switch onto Hesmyrr. I like the case on him, and what BB added. His Day 1 vote made me a little suspicious, but I wasn't ready to call him out completely on it, as well, I didn't like his case on VE very much. It had a couple points that were OK, but a big part of it seemed like it was just completely ignoring the content of VE's posts in favour of calling him scum for them. I want to see what he has to say in defense as well. | ||
|
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
On June 14 2012 04:04 VisceraEyes wrote: Wiggles what do you think of gonzaw sir? Palmar is hellbent on his destruction, which concerns me. Clearly you don't agree with his vote, so what do you think of the event if it's not worth commenting on or even mentioning? I think Gonzaw is town. If Palmar wants to lynch him, it doesn't look like he's doing a very good job. He's the only vote on him, and he hasn't produced anything resembling a case. He's made a post defending rad, but hasn't produced anything similar with reasons for why Gonzaw is scum. So, right now it's just baseless and there's nothing to comment about. If Palmar comes in with a case, I'll read that and respond to it. | ||
|
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
On June 14 2012 05:10 VisceraEyes wrote: So you don't have any comment on the action itself? Trying to get someone lynched...by doing nothing? I mean, we can assume it's some sort of ploy or ruse or whatever to gauge his reaction...but we just don't know do we? The only thing I see even close to reasoning in Palmar's filter regarding gonzaw was a slightly leading question asking about Rad and Grey and him being butthurt about being accused of not playing. Why is this not something worth commenting on Wiggles? It wasn't worth commenting on because it wasn't completed. When Palmar does stuff, sometimes it's for different purposes than it just appears to be on the surface. When he makes that post on Gonzaw, I have no clue if he actually thinks Gonzaw is scum, or he just wants to pressure him for a reaction, or he wants to see if someone else reacts, or whatever. Like I said, it didn't give me any reason to vote gonzaw and goes against my own read. Besides that, it's palmar doing palmar stuff. I normally ignore that stuff until I think he's scum for it, or it becomes something actual i.e. people actually voting, an actual analysis, a follow-up post, etc. I'm switching my vote to Hesmyrr. No one is commenting on my chaoser case besides gonzaw, and chaoser himself has disappeared. I don't like that any pressure on him is gone because he just went inactive for a day cycle. We should lynch him Day 3. Hesmyrr is my second candidate after chaoser, so my vote is going there. I don't feel like his defense or follow up post really did anything to sway my mind about my read. Oh how I wish we had vigs... If the SK wants to be nice, he should shoot chaoser tonight. You'll hit scum, which will be good for you. ##Unvote: Chaoser ##Vote: Hesmyrr | ||
|
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
| ||
|
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
On June 15 2012 07:40 gonzaw wrote: chaoser seems to be legitimately inactive I think. I don't think he'd purposefully lurk like this as scum, considering that he hasn't been lurking at all on D1/N1 either. If he doesn't show up he'll get modkilled as well, so he HAS to show up if he was indeed lurking as scum, and he'd get insane pressure on top of him after doing so. It still bothers me that he isn't here, specially when half the players in this game disappear as well. @Wiggles: What in particular makes Hesmyrr your 2nd preferable lynch than, say, Radfield or someone else? You only mentioned him not committing his stance on D1 with a vote and you not liking his case on VE. What else? I mentioned the stance on Day 1, and his case on VE as my own reasons. That he doesn't commit to what he said with a vote shows that he wanted to distance himself somewhat from the lynch, and the VE case doesn't follow logically from what VE posted. It just looks like he decided to make a case on VE and needed reasons to call him scummy; it's grasping. I also agree with what you and BB wrote about the wishy-washiness and wanting to just sort of blend in. I also like when it was pointed out that Hesmyrr just sort of pops up whenever he's being talked about. That's pretty much the definition of active lurking, and is also a strike against him. | ||
|
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
| ||
|
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
On June 15 2012 19:29 Radfield wrote: I also think we need to set aside Chaoser from our lynch options right now. There is simply not enough information to base a case one way or the other. It's very possible he is scum, but if he isn't that leaves mafia a complete freebee, which we cannot afford to do. This is wrong. There's definitely enough information on Chaoser to make a case. I don't understand what you're trying to get across here. He posted actively on Day 1, and that should be enough information to make a judgement call one way or the other. I don't like this cop-out. Unless prplhz comes in tomorrow playing as the towniest town who ever towned, he should hang. | ||
|
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
On June 16 2012 02:21 VisceraEyes wrote: He concurs as far as I can see Wiggles. Care to give your thoughts on everyone but chaoser Wiggles? As far as I can see, if you're town you're a #1 priority night-hit since Rad/Palmar are aligning against each other...I'd really like you to comment on everyone in case you die. I don't really want to post a list of reads, so I'm going to tell you who I think are scum. Right now, I think Chaoser/prplhz is scum based on his play. I don't care if he went inactive, and prplhz's posting hasn't exactly inspired me to think he's town yet. I'm not sure exactly who his team mate is, and would rather just lynch him first than divide my pressure across multiple people. That said, he comes out of the pool of Palmar/Rad/BB, as I feel good about you and Gonzaw right now. After Chaoser flips red, I'd go through those and figure out which one is scum with him. As for GreYMist, he's actually fitting how I think the SK would be acting right now. He's not pushing people enough to really warrant a scum shot, and he's not scummy enough to be the top lynch. Overall, his posting has felt rather forgettable. That's my feeling from a cursory read through, but I'd rather go after mafia than SK hunt right now, because that's going to be somewhat harder to actually make a case about and then convince people. | ||
| ||
