Either way I love how you say that i'm overjustified on everything but you aren't jumping on other people who are actually justfying themselves or their vote or scum read 10x as much as what you perceive.
Anyway I won't be here until about5-6 tonight really busy day today so not sure before that if i can pop in
On November 27 2014 23:26 Damdred wrote: I answered every thing that trefel put forth, my case on DSIM was and is good even if he flipped town so go suck an egg.
Nothing was over justified at all
Its objectively bad. Im not sure how you can even argue that.
You did a post by post recap of what DSIm did. Kush had a much more succient paragraph which outlined the main points.
Clearly you didnt need to make that kinda case if kush could do it in much less.
On November 27 2014 23:32 Damdred wrote: Either way I love how you say that i'm overjustified on everything but you aren't jumping on other people who are actually justfying themselves or their vote or scum read 10x as much as what you perceive.
Anyway I won't be here until about5-6 tonight really busy day today so not sure before that if i can pop in
On November 27 2014 17:43 Trfel wrote: So I still think that batsnacks is mafia for the reasons I (and several others) have mentioned many times.
I'm also pretty suspicious of Damdred being mafia. Not because he led the mislynch on Dicksmash McIroncock, that doesn't say anything in and of itself. It's the way he did it. I also am noticing several contradictions in his statements, and lots of opinion changes for seemingly little reason.
On November 26 2014 11:45 Damdred wrote:
On November 26 2014 08:02 Trfel wrote: I'm becoming highly suspicious of batsnacks.
Looking at batsnacks' posts this game, it does seem like he hasn't contributed many reads or constructive comments at all. He has pressure voted kushm4sta, and tried to convince other people to vote for kushm4sta, as shown:
On November 25 2014 10:27 batsnacks wrote: I think you should all start voting kush since that's the most logical vote right now.
Then Oatsmaster starts hinting that he might be mafia, and he responds as follows:
On November 25 2014 12:25 batsnacks wrote:
On November 25 2014 12:18 Oatsmaster wrote: He has bad posts regarding a read ohf HTS, his policy lynch on kush is really bad and he is using that to avoid playing the game and doing actual useful things.
This isn't a read. None of oats' posts contain reads.
oats is play is like 80% asking questions that have already been answered and 20% badgering the host about issues he could fix himself.
If my plynch on kush is bad give me something better.
I've seen oats play a lot better than he is doing right now.
He just starts attacking Oatsmaster, without actually providing any argument against the accsusations.
It's been nearly 24 hours and I cannot find any critical thinking or logical reads from batsnacks. He has been only minimally probing for information, as well.
Now, examining batsnacks' mafia history, it seems to show similar, non-accusatory play as mafia, but an ability to logically provide arguments against people as town.
In Fantasy Football Mafia Mini 2, his most recent mafia game, batsnacks was a mafia vanilla. His posts generally seem to lack content, for example this:
On October 23 2014 16:57 batsnacks wrote:
On October 23 2014 16:50 Alakaslam wrote:
On October 23 2014 14:24 Alakaslam wrote:
Fite me
You know it is time
Exact same amount of letter swapping sson
I only had to swap 2 letters, the A and the I. You have to swap 3, the N, O, and W. Plus you have an extra letter that doesn't even belong there.
Looks like I'm right about you. You're clearly reaching here.
batsnacks did give some analysis in saying that robik seemed to be town in that game, which ended up being correct. But he failed to provide specifics or any real evidence of this:
On October 24 2014 06:50 batsnacks wrote: I think robik looks pretty solid. I like how he's posting; he's focused, not all caps, consolidated, no personal dramas, that stuff is what reminds me of hard to get along with robik. @DrParnassus what about robik this game seem hard to cooperate with? Could you quote an example? You did say -everything about the way he's playing- reminds you of that.
He also defends Liam from an accusation. Up to now, the only two real things he's said are claiming these two people to be town. At this point he is accused of being mafia, and this is his defense:
On October 24 2014 21:41 batsnacks wrote: I think I'm not a good lynch right now. For obvious reasons.
He continues to not provide any true defense or explanation for his actions, and ends up being lynched on the first day.
On October 06 2014 23:26 batsnacks wrote: Oats if you are in fact "contributing" shouldn't you be thanking me? I did enable these "contributions" of yours. I feel like you're annoyed with me for allowing you to contribute.
Or are you annoyed with being in the spotlight this early?
You dont get to claim credit for something that happened accidentally.
What are your reads, mainly holyflare and me?
I agreed with HF a lot last game and he was town. I'm agreeing with him this game already so, tentatively town.
I'm voting you because I think you're scummy.
Also lol at "accidentally"
You claimed on accident now?
batsnacks accuses Oatsmaster of being mafia in this game (which ends up being incorrect). But when he defends someone as being town, he provides some support for this claim, and also shares his views a bit.
On October 07 2014 08:07 batsnacks wrote: Wait a minute, something isn't right. I quoted all of the following from the same post.
On October 07 2014 02:35 Blazinghand wrote: ...there's roughly speaking 13 players, right? If 3 are scum, then that gives us a solid 22% chance of lynching scum purely based on RNG.
No townie in this game knows the ratio of town to mafia, so it is correct here that BH gives us an example ratio of 10/3 or 22% as an example.
But then later in that post he says this:
On October 07 2014 02:35 Blazinghand wrote: ...the fact of the matter is, I'm offering a straight-up 22% chance to lynch someone.
BH how do you KNOW there are exactly 3 mafia? I bolded fact because that's a serious word to throw around when you're supposedly working with estimates.
Here's a critical analysis of a post in that game. It doesn't result in anything, but this post has more logic and scum-searching than his play to this point in the current game, as well as his play in the first game I mentioned, where he was mafia.
On October 08 2014 02:24 batsnacks wrote:
On October 08 2014 02:22 Hopeless1der wrote: You had one job batsnacks. + Show Spoiler +
and then HF gave you another one.
Does it make you nervous that I've already figured out you're mafia?
Then he claims Hopeless1der to be mafia, which ends up being correct. I don't see any reasoning listed, though. This post also came after the first 24 hours of the game, unlike all of the other posts quoted here.
I did notice this inconsistency between his post in this game:
On November 25 2014 10:58 batsnacks wrote:There is no such thing as scum slips, so no, dude didn't scum slip.
and this:
On October 07 2014 08:29 batsnacks wrote:
On October 07 2014 08:19 Grackaroni wrote: You're implying that at the start of the post BH was careful not to slip that he had knowledge of the setup. (by pointing out that the number of scum is unknown) and then *slipped* that he was 100% sure there were 3 mafia within like 10 seconds of typing which is really unrealistic.
What I see is BH working off the assumption that random lynch provides at least 22% chance of hitting mafia compared to day 1 analysis which varies (and BH thinks is worse for catching mafia)
I think it's feasible that he slipped.
besides
The TL mafia database disagrees that random lynch is better. So by random lynching we 1) have worse odds of lynching mafia and 2) players who agree with the random lynch have zero accountability for their votes.
Why the change? Probably just a change in his playstyle, but another explanation is that he is searching for mafia in that game, and has less incentive to do so in this game.
Looking at batsnacks' play in the game preceding the above game, 2p2 Vanilla Werewolf 13er, batsnacks immediately comes up with a comprehensive look at GlowingBear:
On September 26 2014 08:14 batsnacks wrote: I'm not completely caught up yet but I still think GB is mafiawolf.
On September 25 2014 11:02 GlowingBear wrote: I think Storr is mafia because of this:
This post stinks:
On September 25 2014 09:20 StorrZerg wrote: (1) i'd lynch fecal for the donkey entrance to the game.
the overly troll attitude fecal has with the caps locks, and insta vote on holy is really throwing off scum vibes. Deff would lynch.
On September 25 2014 08:34 Fecalfeast wrote: The fact that nobody was using the voting thread made me think they were joke votes. That's why I didn't use the thread anyway.
Lol I actually like your case holyflare
"yeah right"
Also i don't like the GB entrance to the game
On September 25 2014 08:41 GlowingBear wrote: Oh THANK GOD I'm town again! I hate rolling scum.
Ok, Haru, tell me what you think of holyflower by now
(2)unless im missing a game he just played, last game he was scum. seems odd to lead with a lie.
(1) very has reason to call someone definetely scum. I did that no geript last game. There is nothing alignment indicative in fecal's entrance and that makes storr look bad.
(2) storr was scum with me and I clearly stated on the qt that I wanted to be town. I was mafia for 3 games and I wish I was town on this, which I am. I never lied.
The way he is disliking entrances looks like he is trying to pretend to be an aggressive town.
Also, he gives Haru free town pass for his entrance and also obiwan. None has alignment indicative posts.
On September 25 2014 10:11 StorrZerg wrote: obi probably town too.
I'm on a phone and I'm too lazy to search for the town pass on Haru now.
storr is my strongest scum read the moment
Here's his case on storr. He says storr is pretending to be aggressive town by disliking entrances. That is a weird thing to say. How can GB tell the difference between someone who is pretending to be aggressive town and someone who actually is aggressive town based on so few posts? Imo he can't and is just making stuff up.
He also scum reads storr for saying someone is "definitely" mafia and says he said the exact same thing as scum last game. Well, look at this:
On September 25 2014 11:32 GlowingBear wrote: Naaaah. I'm positive storr is scum. ##Vote: Storr
He did it again this game.
I also think this post is scummy:
On September 25 2014 13:09 GlowingBear wrote:
On September 25 2014 12:51 Hopeless1der wrote:
On September 25 2014 12:42 GlowingBear wrote:
On September 25 2014 12:28 Hopeless1der wrote:
On September 25 2014 12:22 GlowingBear wrote: [quote]
Because that's his scum read and if the case didn't go through he should be asking more questions to Haru to get more information?
Lol...
HF's case on Haru was literally based on one post that was demonstrably false using out-of-thread but public information. Again, why try to stick with such a case? Refusing to "overlook" (which is a strange way to phrase it btw) his case would be way more suspicious than dropping it like he already has. The fact that this seems suspicious to you makes YOU look suspicious to me.
Because it's easy, as scum, to pick on a tiny problem to bus a partner then drop the read.
That is so incredibly shallow. Unless I have found surefire scum tomorrow, I'm voting you just based off this interaction.
btw, fecalfeast is behaving pretty similar to last game imo. No reason to hate on him just yet. Palmar seems to have gotten upset that no one uses the voting thread to follow his policy and has taken up a silent protest. Sky is new to TL but not to mafia. I'd like to hear his (her?) thoughts on why d1 claimers usually got lynched on SK. I'm gone for now, see you all later.
It can be shallow, but at least I'm the only one trying to get people talking. Nothing is in the way of updating my reads the more people starts to talk. If you lynch me, you'll be lynching a townie for stupid reasons and you'll soon lose the game as much as you lost our last one
The "at least" in that sentence is really scummy to me. It's a tone thing. It's like he's really saying "I'm mafia but at least I'm the only one trying to get people talking." It's also scummy how he says he's the -only- person getting people talking. GB made a case against HF earlier for dropping his case against HaruRH. I'm not a mind reader but I think HF made that case to get people talking. So GB is scum reading HF for trying to get people talking -- while saying he, GB, is the only contributor in the thread.
I also think this post is scummy:
On September 25 2014 10:18 GlowingBear wrote: Ok
Glowningbear's first scum team guess: Haru, HF, Storr
Gonna have dinner and give reasons
GB is referring to himself in the third person here in order to distance himself from his reads that he doesn't actually believe in. How can he be confident he's caught the whole scum team and solved the game? Later when he's drunk he posts this:
On September 25 2014 17:48 GlowingBear wrote: My dribk senses says JAT is possibly mafia
So now GB has found 4 mafia... HF is mafia for getting people talking with an early case, Haru is mafia for unflipped assosiations, storr is mafia because GB can tell somehow that storr is just pretending to be aggressive town, and JAT is mafia because ??? Speaking of reads, GB is frantic this game about "getting reads." He is addicted to reads and needs an intervention. He wants to convince us so badly that he is trying to get reads that he can not stop saying it:
On September 25 2014 08:46 GlowingBear wrote: It won't help me getting reads if you use day1 just to charge your solar beam.
On September 25 2014 09:46 GlowingBear wrote: Asking about holyflare's case to everyone is my way to get people talking and getting reads from them.
On September 25 2014 11:11 GlowingBear wrote: Why I think Haru is scum:
He doesn't want to talk much, not letting me getting reads:
On September 25 2014 11:11 GlowingBear wrote: Why not talking? He should be helping us with reads day1.
On September 25 2014 11:15 GlowingBear wrote: I'm done with the reads. I'm going to get ready for a party.
On September 25 2014 11:28 GlowingBear wrote: Because I want people talking about people so I can get reads.
On September 25 2014 13:09 GlowingBear wrote: Nothing is in the way of updating my reads the more people starts to talk.
On September 26 2014 00:33 GlowingBear wrote: Sorry, I'm guilty of getting people to talk to get my reads instead of immediately attacking both HF and hope.
On September 26 2014 00:33 GlowingBear wrote: I think that is good to register and to get reads.
On September 26 2014 00:49 GlowingBear wrote: Gut feelings VS actual reads. Actual reads won.
On September 26 2014 00:49 GlowingBear wrote: It could be totally wrong but at least I would get people talking more so I can have more reads
He's clearly thinking and investigating the posts, and trying to find the scum. Then he starts thinking that SkyDragon is scum:
On September 26 2014 08:18 batsnacks wrote: Also this post is really scummy:
On September 26 2014 01:07 SkyDragon wrote:
On September 25 2014 12:51 Hopeless1der wrote:Sky is new to TL but not to mafia. I'd like to hear his (her?) thoughts on why d1 claimers usually got lynched on SK.
"His" is correct. :p
d1 claimers got lynched depending on what they were saying.
- If they claimed to be Town with nothing to back it up, they were seen as suspicious and people would vote to lynch them if their play-style doesn't match. - Throwing out names on the first day was seen as suspicious. - Feigning ignorance of a particular role was suspicious unless he weren't very bright in the first place (As one guy did when he asked the Mod in the thread whether getting no pm means that you're a Villager - We straight away knew that he was trying it, lynched him and he turned out to be Mafia) - Changing votes repeatedly was seen as suspicious. - Normally active players who become quiet were seen as suspicious.
There's no one answer to fit all situations really. There were also power roles so someone may have been saying something considered "weird" because they were the Seer, Doctor, Vigi or some other good role (And the last thing you want to do is get them lynched). There would be some hesitation to vote to lynch anyone on Day 1 but sometimes something is said that just doesn't feel right to several people.
It's a long post filled with info that makes zero conclusions about anything. Perfect mafia post. If I'm not voting GB today I'm voting skydragon.
He continues to press on GlowingBear and SkyDragon. Both end up being town, but batsnacks is showing that he is capable and willing to attempt to find scum and provide logical accusations that other players are scum.
In conclusion, batsnacks seems very suspcious because he has not yet provided any real content, particularly at least one accusation of someone being mafia with an argument behind it. This resembles his play in his last game, where he was mafia, and contrasts with his play in previous games where he was town. What do you guys think?
First good job, overall this is a really good case and took a lot of effort it looks like to put together.
And for lolz I will say When has bats ever really shown logical critical thinking skills! ( I love you bats)
The big thing about bats is that he has taken great strides to change his play between games. The style and tone of his play and if you can remember him is his biggest mafia give away and lurkiness.
I do not think that you are necessarily wrong in what you are saying, we should be very suspicious of batsnacks and if he really stops doing things and is forgettable we lynch him immediately. But i'm not confident enough as it seems he is trying to push something when talking to people he does ask for reads from people.
You are now town to me.
First, Damdred responds to my case on batsnacks by saying that it is overall a really good case and that we should be very suspicious of batsnacks. Then he says that the way batsnacks went about the policy vote on kushm4sta was really towny. Then a few posts later, he posts this:
On November 27 2014 01:35 Damdred wrote: Oats dicksmash both bother me right now I would vote dick i think
He has never mentioned Dicksmash at all before this point. In fact, at this point, only kushm4sta has presented anything against Dicksmash (and not very much, at that). But then he votes Dicksmash literally one minute after this post, with no reference at all to the "really good case" on batsnacks. I don't see how the fact that batsnacks policy voted kushm4sta could be this convincing.
On November 27 2014 04:48 Damdred wrote: Sure this is why i'm picking Dicksmash over everyone else today
On November 25 2014 07:57 Dicksmash McIroncock wrote:
On November 25 2014 07:55 sicklucker wrote:
On November 25 2014 02:10 sicklucker wrote: Im a horrible day 1 player might just coast.
So I set this up pre game to get info. Breske had a really weird reaction. The breske I know does note vote someone five minutes into the first day.
"they called me out better push the blame on Breske"
Basically he starts out the game instead of inquiring what SL means and what information he has gathered about the Breske, he immediately colors i as scum and infers something that just isn't true at this point. Hes not gathering information and throwing crap on people.
On November 25 2014 09:28 Dicksmash McIroncock wrote:
On November 25 2014 09:26 sicklucker wrote:
On November 25 2014 09:22 Damdred wrote:
On November 25 2014 09:20 sicklucker wrote:
On November 25 2014 09:08 Damdred wrote: SL tell me what you think of Half the Sky.
And since you are so good at reading breske give me a preliminary read (especially since you are fond of fast reads)
Like hes the only person in the game ive given a read on yet. Why do you keep asking
Because your read is half ass'd and at one point you say that he defends you when he never does and in almost his very next post he says "Oh nvm i'll vote him and keep my eye on him" basically.
Thats bullshit Everypost I made in this entire thread was about those two players. Its like your posting to make yourself look good while adding nothing.
i kinda agree with this.
Cool you agree with SL about my line of questioning thats actually OK at this point until,
On November 25 2014 09:33 Dicksmash McIroncock wrote: sicklucker: why are all your posts about your actions revolving around your town meta? it's easy for mafia to act like their town persona and FOS people who aren't mafia.
On November 25 2014 09:34 Dicksmash McIroncock wrote: and damdred dont you think you might just be finding reasons to find sick funny at this point?
He seems to be siding with SL at first against my barrage of questions hat i'm throwing at SL in pressure, but instead of pressuring me and my motives he shifts his pressure back to SL and finally back to me without actually inquiring about my read of SL is. He stays in the middle and never commits to the read and he never follows up his quesion in fact he dodges the questions posed to him at this point
On November 25 2014 09:43 Damdred wrote:
On November 25 2014 09:34 Dicksmash McIroncock wrote: and damdred dont you think you might just be finding reasons to find sick funny at this point?
Not really, i'm trying to figure out exactly why hes doing what hes doing hes answered me to the fullest of his abilities thres nothin else to gain from the conversation.
What are you doing though? You agree with Sick when he says its looking lik ei'm trying to do stuff just to do it but then you try to pressure him then switch to me. Looks like you are trying to do the same thing I was accused of
He never revisits this point and never follows up any of his questions early on just leaves them fluttering in the air, it looks like he is doing things but not really doing things at all.
On November 26 2014 07:05 Dicksmash McIroncock wrote: i'm dropping in to say i won't be able to catch up today i have a shit ton of work to do. i'lll be in tonight hopefullys
Makes excuses and his reads are laregly unsubstantiated
On November 26 2014 12:32 Dicksmash McIroncock wrote: Before I read more does anyone who's played with trfle know if he always posts insanely long posts? So far reading in im looking at him for something he said in page 13 where he directly contradicts himself that I can't quote but I have much to read
Easy to back out of read with oh i jus made a mistake, and he can't quote but he wants to say that he just thinks its bad basically.
On November 26 2014 12:48 Dicksmash McIroncock wrote: My mistake. It was page 10 when you first called HTS town but a couple posts later put him up as your scumread. SL wrant from null to scum as well. Though reading through bats filter I can see that of everyone he's made and effort to not post reads or reasoning for votes so for today my vote stand on him ## vote bats
Doesn't read the thread but has time to directly read bats filter? What is this? He scumreads Sl, he doesn't even call bats scum he just votes him? 10 minutes ago hes barely read any of the thread and hes had time to filter dive someone call someone else scum but doesn't vote the scummy person? Wha?
On November 26 2014 12:51 Dicksmash McIroncock wrote: Concerning the rest, I have confusion on HTS, The whole game agrees he's town but he's had an oddly low post count for that, what gives? I'm still suspicious of trfel for the aforementioned post, I'll look into this but for now I say tentative null. Everyone else I really have no reads on except I can say damdred looks Towny , wish I had a meta to go off of
pretty wishy washy post
On November 26 2014 21:33 Dicksmash McIroncock wrote:
On November 26 2014 21:14 Breshke wrote:
On November 26 2014 20:51 Dicksmash McIroncock wrote:
On November 26 2014 20:19 Breshke wrote: Yeah man deadlines are rough for us. I will probably be around if you find anything you want to talk about.
I think you are being paranoid about damdred but it could be a world just not one i think we should consider today.
What do you think of bats taking his vote off of Oats to vote dicksmash?
He didn't even bother to explain why. HES STILL NOT GIVING READS.
What's your reads other than bats?
Honestly mostly town. Not sure how I feel about SLnhis posts feel slippery but that's not alignment indicative. Kush reads town honestly I don't see why everyone says otherwise. Not sure why everyone's written HTS off he's onlyngot a one page filter so that's still up in the air bag t I read him town
Goes back on his SL is scum read to just say he feels slippery at this point which is odd
On November 27 2014 03:14 Dicksmash McIroncock wrote:
On November 25 2014 13:13 batsnacks wrote: ##unvote ##vote: Oatsmaster
step it up oats
On November 26 2014 12:57 batsnacks wrote: ##unvote ##vote: Dicksmash McIroncock
On November 27 2014 00:34 batsnacks wrote: SL vote isn't happening meat.
##unvote ##vote: Oatsmaster
I don't think oats plays like this as town. That's probably my final vote today.
On November 27 2014 01:39 batsnacks wrote: I'm sheeping kush because he's town and he's right
##unvote ##vote dicksmash
On November 27 2014 01:50 batsnacks wrote: ##unvote ##vote Trfel
Look, I changed my vote again. It's really easy.
here's every vote post he's made, no explanation of thought process in any of them except "oats isnt like this as scum". so tell me bats why vote me if oats is playing scummy?
also, spoiler alert, bats isnt going to switch his vote back to me so when i flip town he can conveniently forget he hopped on the wagon on me and start pointing fingers at my voters.
Then theres this post, not sure what you are doing here but trying to say voting lots is scummy?
Overall I think dicksmash is scum. His reads are pretty flimsy and easy to back out of, he has little to no follow up with the questions he asked and dodged several peoples questions. He has only became active now since he is up for lynch today, he throws dirt on people to see what can stick and his scum read on SL went into the ether and he voted on someone he never called scum till later instead of his scum read at that second.
This guy is pretty scummy
Then Damdred puts together a collection of evidence against Dicksmash. I'm really glad to see this, as it does show effort. But when I examined the quality of this case, I felt that it was a bit lacking, and he should have seen that when he put this together. If you guys can find such holes in either of my cases (against batsnacks and the current one against Damdred), or if you can show why I am wrong about these holes in the Dicksmash case, I will retract this point.
For the first quote, to me that feels like a fine sentence. He never said sicklucker was scum, never colored sicklucker as scum. He's just criticizing sicklucker's behavior. A lot of people have done that this game, and many have said that he is probably town in the very same post. Nothing out of the ordinary here. For the record, batsnacks gave an early townread to Dicksmash for the same post:
On November 26 2014 10:30 batsnacks wrote: I had an early townread on dicksmash because of this post:
On November 25 2014 07:57 Dicksmash McIroncock wrote:
On November 25 2014 07:55 sicklucker wrote:
On November 25 2014 02:10 sicklucker wrote: Im a horrible day 1 player might just coast.
So I set this up pre game to get info. Breske had a really weird reaction. The breske I know does note vote someone five minutes into the first day.
"they called me out better push the blame on Breske"
He was the first to point this out and several other people sheeped it.
Perhaps he doesn't like your questioning and he doesn't like sicklucker's answers? He's already criticized sicklucker's play, there is nothing new about this. I personally don't have a problem with Damdred questioning sicklucker, but it's not unreasonable to think you went a bit too far. Half the Sky stated this earlier.
I don't think it's expected to state what you learned based on the answers to every question asked. Yes, Dicksmash was giving far fewer reads than questions, but batsnacks, Oatsmaster, and even Damdred himself have done this.
Yes, he made a mistake by saying the wrong page number. Look at page 10 though, and he's right, my statements do seem rather contradictory. I already explained that earlier, that's not the point of this. The point is, he's not backing out of his read, he's sticking with it. If Damdred was reading carefully, he should have seen this.
Perhaps his scumread on bats was expedited because some other players had put the evidence together for him? And a filter read doesn't take all that long. There were 16 minutes in between the time where he said he hadn't read the entire thread and the time where he voted on batsnacks. He never said how far he was in the thread, but he had probably have read through at least page 13, since that was where he said I made the contradiction. At worst, he had read through page 10. And he voted for batsnacks on page 20. I think it's reasonable to read 7 pages and a filter in 16 minutes.
Also, Dicksmash never scumreads sicklucker. He criticized sicklucker's play earlier, but that's not a scum read (as I have previously discussed). I'm assuming Damdred says that Dicksmash read sicklucker as scum due to this post:
On November 26 2014 12:48 Dicksmash McIroncock wrote: My mistake. It was page 10 when you first called HTS town but a couple posts later put him up as your scumread. SL wrant from null to scum as well. Though reading through bats filter I can see that of everyone he's made and effort to not post reads or reasoning for votes so for today my vote stand on him ## vote bats
Which actually says that I changed my opinion on sicklucker from null to scum. He doesn't say a thing about his own opinion on sicklucker.
Again, I feel like Damdred would have seen this if he was being careful about what he was doing and if he was focused on providing an accurate read. The case looks pretty good, and I can see why it convinced a lot of people (including myself, for some time). But Damdred was digging up all of the quotes, he should have seen this.
On November 27 2014 05:08 Damdred wrote:
On November 27 2014 05:01 Trfel wrote:
On November 26 2014 11:45 Damdred wrote:
On November 26 2014 08:02 Trfel wrote: I'm becoming highly suspicious of batsnacks.
Looking at batsnacks' posts this game, it does seem like he hasn't contributed many reads or constructive comments at all. He has pressure voted kushm4sta, and tried to convince other people to vote for kushm4sta, as shown:
On November 25 2014 10:27 batsnacks wrote: I think you should all start voting kush since that's the most logical vote right now.
Then Oatsmaster starts hinting that he might be mafia, and he responds as follows:
On November 25 2014 12:25 batsnacks wrote:
On November 25 2014 12:18 Oatsmaster wrote: He has bad posts regarding a read ohf HTS, his policy lynch on kush is really bad and he is using that to avoid playing the game and doing actual useful things.
This isn't a read. None of oats' posts contain reads.
oats is play is like 80% asking questions that have already been answered and 20% badgering the host about issues he could fix himself.
If my plynch on kush is bad give me something better.
I've seen oats play a lot better than he is doing right now.
He just starts attacking Oatsmaster, without actually providing any argument against the accsusations.
It's been nearly 24 hours and I cannot find any critical thinking or logical reads from batsnacks. He has been only minimally probing for information, as well.
Now, examining batsnacks' mafia history, it seems to show similar, non-accusatory play as mafia, but an ability to logically provide arguments against people as town.
In Fantasy Football Mafia Mini 2, his most recent mafia game, batsnacks was a mafia vanilla. His posts generally seem to lack content, for example this:
I only had to swap 2 letters, the A and the I. You have to swap 3, the N, O, and W. Plus you have an extra letter that doesn't even belong there.
Looks like I'm right about you. You're clearly reaching here.
batsnacks did give some analysis in saying that robik seemed to be town in that game, which ended up being correct. But he failed to provide specifics or any real evidence of this:
On October 24 2014 06:50 batsnacks wrote: I think robik looks pretty solid. I like how he's posting; he's focused, not all caps, consolidated, no personal dramas, that stuff is what reminds me of hard to get along with robik. @DrParnassus what about robik this game seem hard to cooperate with? Could you quote an example? You did say -everything about the way he's playing- reminds you of that.
He also defends Liam from an accusation. Up to now, the only two real things he's said are claiming these two people to be town. At this point he is accused of being mafia, and this is his defense:
On October 24 2014 21:41 batsnacks wrote: I think I'm not a good lynch right now. For obvious reasons.
He continues to not provide any true defense or explanation for his actions, and ends up being lynched on the first day.
On October 06 2014 23:26 batsnacks wrote: Oats if you are in fact "contributing" shouldn't you be thanking me? I did enable these "contributions" of yours. I feel like you're annoyed with me for allowing you to contribute.
Or are you annoyed with being in the spotlight this early?
You dont get to claim credit for something that happened accidentally.
What are your reads, mainly holyflare and me?
I agreed with HF a lot last game and he was town. I'm agreeing with him this game already so, tentatively town.
I'm voting you because I think you're scummy.
Also lol at "accidentally"
You claimed on accident now?
batsnacks accuses Oatsmaster of being mafia in this game (which ends up being incorrect). But when he defends someone as being town, he provides some support for this claim, and also shares his views a bit.
On October 07 2014 08:07 batsnacks wrote: Wait a minute, something isn't right. I quoted all of the following from the same post.
On October 07 2014 02:35 Blazinghand wrote: ...there's roughly speaking 13 players, right? If 3 are scum, then that gives us a solid 22% chance of lynching scum purely based on RNG.
No townie in this game knows the ratio of town to mafia, so it is correct here that BH gives us an example ratio of 10/3 or 22% as an example.
But then later in that post he says this:
On October 07 2014 02:35 Blazinghand wrote: ...the fact of the matter is, I'm offering a straight-up 22% chance to lynch someone.
BH how do you KNOW there are exactly 3 mafia? I bolded fact because that's a serious word to throw around when you're supposedly working with estimates.
Here's a critical analysis of a post in that game. It doesn't result in anything, but this post has more logic and scum-searching than his play to this point in the current game, as well as his play in the first game I mentioned, where he was mafia.
On October 08 2014 02:24 batsnacks wrote:
On October 08 2014 02:22 Hopeless1der wrote: You had one job batsnacks. + Show Spoiler +
and then HF gave you another one.
Does it make you nervous that I've already figured out you're mafia?
Then he claims Hopeless1der to be mafia, which ends up being correct. I don't see any reasoning listed, though. This post also came after the first 24 hours of the game, unlike all of the other posts quoted here.
I did notice this inconsistency between his post in this game:
On November 25 2014 10:58 batsnacks wrote:There is no such thing as scum slips, so no, dude didn't scum slip.
and this:
On October 07 2014 08:29 batsnacks wrote:
On October 07 2014 08:19 Grackaroni wrote: You're implying that at the start of the post BH was careful not to slip that he had knowledge of the setup. (by pointing out that the number of scum is unknown) and then *slipped* that he was 100% sure there were 3 mafia within like 10 seconds of typing which is really unrealistic.
What I see is BH working off the assumption that random lynch provides at least 22% chance of hitting mafia compared to day 1 analysis which varies (and BH thinks is worse for catching mafia)
I think it's feasible that he slipped.
besides
The TL mafia database disagrees that random lynch is better. So by random lynching we 1) have worse odds of lynching mafia and 2) players who agree with the random lynch have zero accountability for their votes.
Why the change? Probably just a change in his playstyle, but another explanation is that he is searching for mafia in that game, and has less incentive to do so in this game.
Looking at batsnacks' play in the game preceding the above game, 2p2 Vanilla Werewolf 13er, batsnacks immediately comes up with a comprehensive look at GlowingBear:
On September 26 2014 08:14 batsnacks wrote: I'm not completely caught up yet but I still think GB is mafiawolf.
On September 25 2014 11:02 GlowingBear wrote: I think Storr is mafia because of this:
This post stinks:
On September 25 2014 09:20 StorrZerg wrote: (1) i'd lynch fecal for the donkey entrance to the game.
the overly troll attitude fecal has with the caps locks, and insta vote on holy is really throwing off scum vibes. Deff would lynch.
On September 25 2014 08:34 Fecalfeast wrote: The fact that nobody was using the voting thread made me think they were joke votes. That's why I didn't use the thread anyway.
Lol I actually like your case holyflare
"yeah right"
Also i don't like the GB entrance to the game
On September 25 2014 08:41 GlowingBear wrote: Oh THANK GOD I'm town again! I hate rolling scum.
Ok, Haru, tell me what you think of holyflower by now
(2)unless im missing a game he just played, last game he was scum. seems odd to lead with a lie.
(1) very has reason to call someone definetely scum. I did that no geript last game. There is nothing alignment indicative in fecal's entrance and that makes storr look bad.
(2) storr was scum with me and I clearly stated on the qt that I wanted to be town. I was mafia for 3 games and I wish I was town on this, which I am. I never lied.
The way he is disliking entrances looks like he is trying to pretend to be an aggressive town.
Also, he gives Haru free town pass for his entrance and also obiwan. None has alignment indicative posts.
On September 25 2014 10:11 StorrZerg wrote: obi probably town too.
I'm on a phone and I'm too lazy to search for the town pass on Haru now.
storr is my strongest scum read the moment
Here's his case on storr. He says storr is pretending to be aggressive town by disliking entrances. That is a weird thing to say. How can GB tell the difference between someone who is pretending to be aggressive town and someone who actually is aggressive town based on so few posts? Imo he can't and is just making stuff up.
He also scum reads storr for saying someone is "definitely" mafia and says he said the exact same thing as scum last game. Well, look at this:
On September 25 2014 11:32 GlowingBear wrote: Naaaah. I'm positive storr is scum. ##Vote: Storr
He did it again this game.
I also think this post is scummy:
On September 25 2014 13:09 GlowingBear wrote:
On September 25 2014 12:51 Hopeless1der wrote:
On September 25 2014 12:42 GlowingBear wrote: [quote]
Because it's easy, as scum, to pick on a tiny problem to bus a partner then drop the read.
That is so incredibly shallow. Unless I have found surefire scum tomorrow, I'm voting you just based off this interaction.
btw, fecalfeast is behaving pretty similar to last game imo. No reason to hate on him just yet. Palmar seems to have gotten upset that no one uses the voting thread to follow his policy and has taken up a silent protest. Sky is new to TL but not to mafia. I'd like to hear his (her?) thoughts on why d1 claimers usually got lynched on SK. I'm gone for now, see you all later.
It can be shallow, but at least I'm the only one trying to get people talking. Nothing is in the way of updating my reads the more people starts to talk. If you lynch me, you'll be lynching a townie for stupid reasons and you'll soon lose the game as much as you lost our last one
The "at least" in that sentence is really scummy to me. It's a tone thing. It's like he's really saying "I'm mafia but at least I'm the only one trying to get people talking." It's also scummy how he says he's the -only- person getting people talking. GB made a case against HF earlier for dropping his case against HaruRH. I'm not a mind reader but I think HF made that case to get people talking. So GB is scum reading HF for trying to get people talking -- while saying he, GB, is the only contributor in the thread.
I also think this post is scummy:
On September 25 2014 10:18 GlowingBear wrote: Ok
Glowningbear's first scum team guess: Haru, HF, Storr
Gonna have dinner and give reasons
GB is referring to himself in the third person here in order to distance himself from his reads that he doesn't actually believe in. How can he be confident he's caught the whole scum team and solved the game? Later when he's drunk he posts this:
On September 25 2014 17:48 GlowingBear wrote: My dribk senses says JAT is possibly mafia
So now GB has found 4 mafia... HF is mafia for getting people talking with an early case, Haru is mafia for unflipped assosiations, storr is mafia because GB can tell somehow that storr is just pretending to be aggressive town, and JAT is mafia because ??? Speaking of reads, GB is frantic this game about "getting reads." He is addicted to reads and needs an intervention. He wants to convince us so badly that he is trying to get reads that he can not stop saying it:
On September 25 2014 08:46 GlowingBear wrote: It won't help me getting reads if you use day1 just to charge your solar beam.
On September 25 2014 09:46 GlowingBear wrote: Asking about holyflare's case to everyone is my way to get people talking and getting reads from them.
On September 25 2014 11:11 GlowingBear wrote: Why I think Haru is scum:
He doesn't want to talk much, not letting me getting reads:
On September 25 2014 11:11 GlowingBear wrote: Why not talking? He should be helping us with reads day1.
On September 25 2014 11:15 GlowingBear wrote: I'm done with the reads. I'm going to get ready for a party.
On September 25 2014 11:28 GlowingBear wrote: Because I want people talking about people so I can get reads.
On September 25 2014 13:09 GlowingBear wrote: Nothing is in the way of updating my reads the more people starts to talk.
On September 26 2014 00:33 GlowingBear wrote: Sorry, I'm guilty of getting people to talk to get my reads instead of immediately attacking both HF and hope.
On September 26 2014 00:33 GlowingBear wrote: I think that is good to register and to get reads.
On September 26 2014 00:49 GlowingBear wrote: Gut feelings VS actual reads. Actual reads won.
On September 26 2014 00:49 GlowingBear wrote: It could be totally wrong but at least I would get people talking more so I can have more reads
He's clearly thinking and investigating the posts, and trying to find the scum. Then he starts thinking that SkyDragon is scum:
On September 26 2014 08:18 batsnacks wrote: Also this post is really scummy:
On September 26 2014 01:07 SkyDragon wrote:
On September 25 2014 12:51 Hopeless1der wrote:Sky is new to TL but not to mafia. I'd like to hear his (her?) thoughts on why d1 claimers usually got lynched on SK.
"His" is correct. :p
d1 claimers got lynched depending on what they were saying.
- If they claimed to be Town with nothing to back it up, they were seen as suspicious and people would vote to lynch them if their play-style doesn't match. - Throwing out names on the first day was seen as suspicious. - Feigning ignorance of a particular role was suspicious unless he weren't very bright in the first place (As one guy did when he asked the Mod in the thread whether getting no pm means that you're a Villager - We straight away knew that he was trying it, lynched him and he turned out to be Mafia) - Changing votes repeatedly was seen as suspicious. - Normally active players who become quiet were seen as suspicious.
There's no one answer to fit all situations really. There were also power roles so someone may have been saying something considered "weird" because they were the Seer, Doctor, Vigi or some other good role (And the last thing you want to do is get them lynched). There would be some hesitation to vote to lynch anyone on Day 1 but sometimes something is said that just doesn't feel right to several people.
It's a long post filled with info that makes zero conclusions about anything. Perfect mafia post. If I'm not voting GB today I'm voting skydragon.
He continues to press on GlowingBear and SkyDragon. Both end up being town, but batsnacks is showing that he is capable and willing to attempt to find scum and provide logical accusations that other players are scum.
In conclusion, batsnacks seems very suspcious because he has not yet provided any real content, particularly at least one accusation of someone being mafia with an argument behind it. This resembles his play in his last game, where he was mafia, and contrasts with his play in previous games where he was town. What do you guys think?
First good job, overall this is a really good case and took a lot of effort it looks like to put together.
And for lolz I will say When has bats ever really shown logical critical thinking skills! ( I love you bats)
The big thing about bats is that he has taken great strides to change his play between games. The style and tone of his play and if you can remember him is his biggest mafia give away and lurkiness.
I do not think that you are necessarily wrong in what you are saying, we should be very suspicious of batsnacks and if he really stops doing things and is forgettable we lynch him immediately. But i'm not confident enough as it seems he is trying to push something when talking to people he does ask for reads from people.
You are now town to me.
Damdred first says this is a good case against batsnacks, and then says that he isn't confident enough, but is very suspicious of batsnacks. Then votes for Dicksmash, with the only explanation being Dicksmash bothers him. And I don't think he mentioned Dicksmash at all until literally one minute before this vote. As I type this up, I noticed that Damdred just added a post of reasoning against Dicksmash. Which is great and all, but I would have liked to see this earlier, or at least some hints that you were getting suspicious of Dicksmash. Ironically, this is exactly the same thing you just accused Dicksmash of.
On November 26 2014 10:18 batsnacks wrote: There's people arguing about whether someone's excuses are legit or not...
Meanwhile Trfel has contributed a massive case, he's followed up and voted, and no one has commented on any of it.
If you're town get your priorities straight. If you're mafia keep talking about IRL excuses and timezones.
Even batsnacks is saying that my case has some validity. If it didn't, he would have torn it apart by now. I haven't seen anyone provide strong arguments against the case on batsnacks yet, other than it is suspicious but not quite strong enough to vote (which I disagree with, but is understandable I suppose). Meanwhile, excluding the most recent Damdred post on Dicksmash, the case feels a bit thin to me.
Meta cases are weird in the fact that they look Amazing, and really shows effort put in by the person who did it but doesn't take into account changing game play and the way the person is choosing to play the game you are in currently. If you compare Bats earlier games Mission Mafia, Storm, Neat and Tidy, Cell, Titanic. You will see A HUGE disparity in the way he plays. I am always suspicious of batsnacks though because we have such a good history together and I think his scum game and his town game can be similar depending on the amount of time he puts in. Thats just the thing about Meta cases though they can be wrong and can be right
This second point isn't right at all, I even quoted myself when I questioned Dicksmash and he never answered me at all. I never said who my scum leans were and Bresh was the only person to inquire which I just now got around to answering part of hat question and of course I can't go extremely in depth like I want on my phone thats just silly reasoning there.
I somehow missed this post, for which I'm pretty annoyed about. Anyway, the point of the meta case is that as town, batsnacks attempts to make reads and find scum. Sure, he can change his play as town, but I cannot see how a playstyle that does not do these things is any good. Town always wants to find scum.
On November 27 2014 14:33 Damdred wrote: Well I was trying to let things develop and some of the scum reads made me laugh pretty hard tbh damdred asked 16-17 questions he's so obvious scum. But the thread was kind of stagnant with no cases so I figured I should push the scummiest person.
What do you think of oats bresh
And then he comes up with this explanation for why he pushed on the Dicksmash lynch. There were no cases? He stated that "overall, this is a really good case" in reference to the batsnacks case. Since then, what changed? Yes, the post I presented contained a large amount of reference to batsnacks' previous play. There is also a lot of evidence against batsnacks in this game. And if Damdred is really so skeptical of meta cases that he considers the case on batsnacks to not really count as a case, why didn't he think of this initially when he read my post? Then he wouldn't have said that the case was really good, he would have said it is weak.
Both before and after the Dicksmash lynch, a lot of people have said that batsnacks seems very suspicious, including Damdred himself. Regardless of how he felt about the meta case on batsnacks, he said "we should be very suspicious of batsnacks". Then after the flip, he initially goes after Breshke, and then suggests lynching Half the Sky. No mention of batsnacks whatsoever. This seems to be a very weird change in his suspicions.
Note that this case has little, if any relation to whether or not batsnacks is in fact mafia.
In conclusion, I am suspicious of Damdred because he keeps changing his opinions and seems a somewhat contradictory. I think he is likely to be mafia, but I am not as confident as I am about batsnacks. I suggest voting batsnacks on day 2, as the evidence there seems very strong. Whether or not batsnacks is mafia, Damdred still seems very suspicious. But if batsnacks flips mafia, I feel like the case against Damdred becomes overwhelming.
Overall i'd say i've been pretty straight forward in most of what I have said which is cool I guess.
Yes it was a very good case, you put a lot of obvious effort in and brought a meta case into the world. Does that inherently make it right? The answer to this is no, I made probably the best case on GlowingBear in hearthstone mafia (best case i've made) it was completely made on meta and even GB said "I'm totes scum" thankfully gb died during the night and he was town, so just because a meta case is good does not mean it is right.
You should always be suspicious of batsnacks idk how else to say this. We will have disagreement about policy vs pressure, just the pressure is slightly towny policy is null oats will be yelling at me in a few minutes though about it again.
I've played probably ten games with batsnacks, if I can remember some things hes done at the end of day 1 i'm not going to vote him d1 when their are scummy people who I think are scummy. I did mention dicksmash before hand infact I spoke with him very early in the day and my question was a pressure question because I did not like what he was doing in fact I put that in my case.
First post that is attack is a tone read as shown by my explanation why it is scummy, generally town will try to figure out what someone means by that and not directly attack the person by reworking what they said to make them look like hey are trying to push blame on someone else, and who cares what bats town reads someone for?
This part of your post is completely guess work, he complains on one hand about not having enough time to read and saying He has a lot left to read but then comes in with a vote on bats after filter diving? That makes little to no sense, I stand by this
I'm not really sure what you mean about changing opinion on SL from null to scum? I think the post can be debated whether he is talking about his own opinion or what he gathered from filters, and as Dick didn't try to correct me but obviously read my case as he asked a question about something later in the case afterwards and didn't correct that part.
Not sure why you quoted that next post it still stands and I talked about it earlier, meta cases are good but super flawed.
Just because there was a meta case that honestly i thought was good but disagreed with your conclusion that bats was mafia, hell I have said that a lot over d1 and n1. Even in that very first post I said that no lynch batsnacks today, you should always be suspicious of batsnacks (no offense to bats) hes not going to get killed by mafia very often especially early so we have time to find out his alignment by means other than meta which you should know since you did the meta cases on him.
This next part is just throwing dirt, tunneling on one person is not the way to win a game of mafia its something i'm weak to that i'm correcting but I know you lose if you tunnel. You should always pressure everyone that you do not have a strong read on I think bresh is town now but I wasn't sure before.
And then more associative reads its great.
Overall the post is really wordy and comes to a conclusion if bats flillps scum damdred is scum. To all those concerned this post looks good and is rather lengthy but that does not make it in fact towny in nature, read it very thoroughly and post what you think
The first thing is, Damdred, I'm not going to argue with Damdred. It can't serve a purpose. There is no way I can convince him that he is scum, no matter what his alignment is. So what I say is to everyone else, so they can see my reasons for being suspicious of Damdred.
Of course my case can be a good case and still be wrong. But I would certainly expect Damdred to at least reference it in the future, especially when he said there were zero cases. Damdred has effectively said that a good meta case is no case at all, while simultaneously saying that the best case he has ever made was entirely meta.
I disagree with Damdred about reading batsnacks as more towny because of the kushm4sta pressure/policy vote whatever. No, I won't argue about wording, or whether or not that is towny. The point is that in addition to the meta case, there is good reason to lynch batsnacks for this game only. And Damdred decides that all of that is overwhelmed by one slightly towny action. Seems unlikely to me.
As for Damdred's response to my criticism of his case on Dicksmash:
For Dicksmash filter diving on batsnacks, I'm not doing any guesswork. I think that we all should get the benefit of the doubt, so if Damdred wanted to use this as evidence against Dicksmash, he should have investigated this claim before using phrases like "10 minutes ago he barely read any of the thread" (it was 16 minutes ago, and he read over half of the thread). I timed myself reading a random page (page 20, if it matters), and I got two minutes exactly. If Dicksmash reads a little faster than I do, then his statements make perfect sense.
Dicksmash's post can't be debated. This is his quote: "My mistake. It was page 10 when you first called HTS town but a couple posts later put him up as your scumread. SL wrant from null to scum as well." He first discusses my opinion on HTS and says that it changed. The next sentence discusses a change in opinion on sicklucker. Is there any possible way these do not both refer to reads given by the same person, in this case, me? Because I still can't see how, unless the person reading is being careless. Dicksmash had no defense whatsoever. No, he wouldn't necessarily have tried to correct you.
I don't make any associative reads at all, I only discuss the implications of a batsnacks flip in my last few sentences. I maintain that if batsnacks flips mafia, the case on Damdred is overwhelming. But if he flips town, this is still a stand-alone case with some force behind it. I definitely think we all need to be suspicious of Damdred, and that is why I presented my case on him. Be wary of what he says unless he is somehow able to clear his name. And regardless of the batsnacks flip, in a day or two (real time) please revisit the Damdred case. Read the posts for yourself, make your own conclusion. I think you will also see a lot of evidence against Damdred.
On November 25 2014 10:11 Damdred wrote: @bats I missed you and glad you said that. Would you think I'm insane if I told you I'm scum reading half tight now
Damdred, I was not asking why you were questioning sicklucker. Either you've forgotten you mentioned you thought HTS was scum, or you're dodging the question. Considering I could never find your reasoning for this read, that is concerning.
@all...my main reason for my post on slam was that I don't feel he's the better lynch simply because he wasn't in the game yesterday when he didn't do anything inherently scummy in his posts and we've got so many people question two other players. In fact, you probably have more against me than you do him lol.
Mylo is when there are 2 more town than scum at the start of the day. Since scum wins when numbers are equal or lower, scum will win that night. General strategy would be to no lynch and go into lylo the next day.
Lylo is when there is 1 more town than scum at the start of the day. So town has to lynch someone or lose.
There's some weird stuff regarding 3p but that's not very common.
Both lylo and mylo are acronyms or whatever, can't remember what they stand for though. It's on Google for sure.
On November 25 2014 10:11 Damdred wrote: @bats I missed you and glad you said that. Would you think I'm insane if I told you I'm scum reading half tight now
Damdred, I was not asking why you were questioning sicklucker. Either you've forgotten you mentioned you thought HTS was scum, or you're dodging the question. Considering I could never find your reasoning for this read, that is concerning.
Speaking of dodging, I presented my thoughts against him way back on page 16, and I have yet to see a defence. This isn't the first time. (NB: I will not hold him nor any American player accountable for any gaps in posting through the end of Night #1 given the holiday.)
On November 25 2014 10:11 Damdred wrote: @bats I missed you and glad you said that. Would you think I'm insane if I told you I'm scum reading half tight now
Damdred, I was not asking why you were questioning sicklucker. Either you've forgotten you mentioned you thought HTS was scum, or you're dodging the question. Considering I could never find your reasoning for this read, that is concerning.
Speaking of dodging, I presented my thoughts against him way back on page 16, and I have yet to see a defence. This isn't the first time. (NB: I will not hold him nor any American player accountable for any gaps in posting through the end of Night #1 given the holiday.)
Yes, I am going to be out until several hours into day 2.
I am still very much in favor of a batsnacks lynch. There is plenty of stuff on him even without the meta case that I presented. I don't see any other lynch target anywhere near as good. If I do end up being killed on night 1, if the batsnacks lynch loses traction for no good reason, if someone could make a compilation of the reasons to vote for batsnacks, that would be much appreciated.
I am very suspicious of Damdred, as previously stated, but I think that lynching batsnacks is far better than lynching Damdred.
I am also a bit suspicious of kushm4sta and meatpudding. Just hunches, not much evidence behind them, so don't take that too seriously. I don't care to go into the reasons now, since I think the focus should be on the batsnacks lynch.
EPT
