Mini 1195: The Beehive Mystery (GAME OVER)
-
-
Tommy Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 703
- Joined: March 7, 2008
- Location: Glasgow, Scotland
Blimey - the silly stage was over within six posts. You people don't mess about.
Beck's joke seems harmless enough to me, given its timing. Captain Spoon's attack on it therefore seems a bit over the top, but I guess it helps to get some substance in early and he seems sincere.
I was somewhat suspicious of subgenius after post 13 ('Beck is scum, and Yank is his partner') - too certain and and he didn't explain it. But post 30 went a long way to putting that right.
I find Beck's post 15 a bit weird too: that's the one where he implies that he's familiar with subgenius's play. When subgenius called him on it, I asked myself why Beck would want to give a false impression like that. Can't think of one, so leave that for now.
I'm sympathetic towards Ivan the Pleasant's case against YankCane, though 'I've never seen a scummier post on page 1' sounds like exaggeration. Certainly, YankCane was wrong just to dismiss the charges out of hand (twice) before finally responding to subgenius's explicit challenge on the matter.
Really can't see where Spoon's vote comes from in post 24. Certainly he isn't providing any explanation himself (care to do so, Captain?); but I like that he called Acronach for lurking, and I distrust Ivan's attempt to invoke RVS long after it's gone.
ConfidAnon's debut is bizarre - apparently Acronach's crime is that he didn't start slinging his vote around immediately. Keeping a watch on that one.
rblinker123 seems right-headed but timid. Maybe that's just by comparison with the otherwise somewhat testosterony play so far (incidentally, testosterony is the real San Francisco treat).-
-
Tommy Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 703
- Joined: March 7, 2008
- Location: Glasgow, Scotland
My timezone is BST (which is GMT+1).
My scumread on YankCane isn't as strong as ICEninja's, though it's there. I wouldn't vote for him yet. Like subgenius, I see post 49 as overly defensive stuff that could come from scum or town. 55 is pretty scummy, though: 'So if I'm Beck's scum-buddy, why not vote for him?' Yuck.
Captain Spoon wrote:I like to put... conviction into my RVS votes to add that extra bit of pressure.
This sounds like an admission of dishonesty, but I've had to get used to people playing weirdly in the early game, so on its own this doesn't damn you. Claiming RVS still applied by post 24, though, is a bit much. Criticising Ivan for putting… conviction into early posts is rank hypocrisy. Voting Acro for not posting a random vote is just as wrong of you as it was in ConfidAnon, though maybe less suspicious - you're doing a good job of convincing me that you really do hold the (mistaken) belief that everyone should always have their vote on someone.
Captain Spoon wrote:voting is the town's greatest weapon
Not voting is nearly always anti-town. You should always be applying pressure. How else are you suspposed to make the scum slip?
It's precisely because my vote is the my greatest weapon that I seek to preserve its value. I don't vote for someone unless I want to see them dead. Pressure can be applied through analysis, interrogation, discussion, argument.
ConfidAnon's position on Acronach seems to be subtly shifting (as SleepyKrew has noticed). Compare these two:
ConfidAnon wrote:Vote: Acronach
Why hold your vote because we're out of the RVS? That would seem like more of a reason to vote to me, since there is at least something substantial (albeit not much) to discuss.
ConfidAnon wrote:I doubt anyone would suspect you for not voting (again, not what I've ever suspected you for).
Come on ConfidAnon: what was your case on Acronach? Was it holding his vote, or what he said about it? If it was what he said about it, why didn't you say that in the first place?
I like subgenius's point that Acronach has been posting a lot but not providing much content, though I'm also interested in the speed of the resulting wagon.
SleepyKrew, could you summarise your case against Captain Spoon?-
-
Tommy Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 703
- Joined: March 7, 2008
- Location: Glasgow, Scotland
-
-
Tommy Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 703
- Joined: March 7, 2008
- Location: Glasgow, Scotland
-
-
Tommy Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 703
- Joined: March 7, 2008
- Location: Glasgow, Scotland
-
-
Tommy Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 703
- Joined: March 7, 2008
- Location: Glasgow, Scotland
-
-
Tommy Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 703
- Joined: March 7, 2008
- Location: Glasgow, Scotland
Acronach wrote:i'll also be watching SK.
1: it may be a bus
2: he's the only one i've played a full game with and he's been able to fool me before. if hes maf, it would be a good explaination as to why i'm the ML target.
Whoah whoah whoah. 'It may be a bus'? You can't bus a townie! You're talking about SleepyKrew's case against you, right?-
-
Tommy Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 703
- Joined: March 7, 2008
- Location: Glasgow, Scotland
-
-
Tommy Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 703
- Joined: March 7, 2008
- Location: Glasgow, Scotland
ConfidAnon wrote:I should have figured out a way to make my post clearer. The vote was caused by the overclarification I mentioned in a later post - however, I wanted to ask the question first to see what kind of an answer I would get (I haven't really gotten an answer yet). I'll give more on this after I get an answer, because it is directly related to the overclarification point, but I wasn't voting him for not voting.
Well, the bit of text under your vote looked a lot like a reason. You now claim it wasn't the reason, and that you waited until a later post to explain your vote. That sounds fishy. Here's another possibility: you are trying to sway with the wind. At the time of your vote, you judged that prevailing opinion was with the always-vote lobby. At the time of your 'explanation', you judged that it had swung towards the pressure-doesn't-need-votes lobby.
Acronach, please can you answer the question I asked you in post 193?-
-
Tommy Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 703
- Joined: March 7, 2008
- Location: Glasgow, Scotland
-
-
Tommy Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 703
- Joined: March 7, 2008
- Location: Glasgow, Scotland
Acronach, thanks for the answer. I'm afraid you and SleepyKrew are certainly the most suspicious players at this point - partly because of the protection link that subgenius has been investigating, but mainly because of your slip in post 188. I had to ask you about it three times before you attempted to explain it. Maybe you were hoping I would lose interest and it would be forgotten.
Let's have another look at it:
Acronach wrote:
i'll also be watching SK.
1: it may be a bus
2: he's the only one i've played a full game with and he's been able to fool me before. if hes maf, it would be a good explaination as to why i'm the ML target.
Your explanation has made it quite clear that you really were considering a possible attack by SleepyKrew on you when you said this. I think your use of the word 'bus' is a terrible mistake - at some point after posting you realised that it's only a bus if you're scum, which is why you evaded my question for so long.
I won't vote yet, because I want to hear more from Greymarble before the day ends.-
-
Tommy Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 703
- Joined: March 7, 2008
- Location: Glasgow, Scotland
Beck wrote:The original question from acro was directed at Subs, why did you answer it For him?
Captain Spoon wrote:because that part of the post appealed to me and I felt I could answer it and explain SK's true motives
Beck wrote:Why would you be trying to explain the motives of another player?
This is a damn good question. Points to Beck. A related question is, what makes you think you know what SleepyKrew's 'true motives' are?-
-
Tommy Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 703
- Joined: March 7, 2008
- Location: Glasgow, Scotland
My scum list has four names on it. In order of decreasing scumminess:
- Acronach and SleepyKrew. Joint first place, for the reasons I gave in post 256 - and note also that Acronach hasn't talked about his fatal use of the word 'bus' yet. Care to comment, Acronach?
- ConfidAnon, for his attempt to revise history (see post 145).
- YankCane, for his fishy first post (but I wouldn't lynch him for this on its own).
I haven't included Captain Spoon on this list, despite the fact that he stepped in to answer a question directed at Acronach. Taking the rest of Spoon's play into account, I've decided that the mistake is typical of a hyperactive player who means well (talking about the Twisted Spoon head here). He's been scum-hunting with enthusiastic sincerity, as far as I can see. Also his attack on one of my top suspects helps to clear him in my mind - I don't think he's subtle enough to try an early bus.
Still not voting: still hoping to get some substance out of the Greymarble slot before the end of the day.
By the way, this is unacceptable:
Ivan the Pleasant wrote:Honestly, I haven't read the thread-
-
Tommy Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 703
- Joined: March 7, 2008
- Location: Glasgow, Scotland
Beck wrote:@ Tommy, how in the hell is Ivan not on your scum list?
I don't follow your argument. It looks to me as though one of the heads wants to vote for YankCane and the other one wants to vote for subgenius. Obviously the schizophrenia is somewhat impairing Ivan's ability to play, but it doesn't seem that scummy to me. Could you clarify where you think the lie was and lay out the evidence that it was a lie?-
-
Tommy Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 703
- Joined: March 7, 2008
- Location: Glasgow, Scotland
-
-
Tommy Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 703
- Joined: March 7, 2008
- Location: Glasgow, Scotland
Okay. So as I understand it, Beck, your case against Ivan is based on his post 302, which I reproduce here.
Ivan the Pleasant wrote:unvote
The two of us are in different states right now in terms of how much we've kept up with this game, and need to develop a more coherent understanding of what our respective roles are in this hydra thing. This is our first time trying this, and we apologize if our play has felt disjointed thus far.
I, for one, disagree vehemently with the subgenius vote that was made by the other head. If it were up to me, we would have been on Yank this entire time, which is what I thought we were doing...
vote Yank
Now, the same head had earlier voted for Acronach, as Ivan admits. You think this makes 'this entire time' a lie, but I think it's fairly clear from the context that the post in question is weighing up subgenius and YankCane, with Acronach left behind in the distant past. I'm sorry, but I think your case doesn't hold water.
But maybe that doesn't matter much to you any more, because I see that while I've been writing this, you've suddenly changed horses...-
-
Tommy Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 703
- Joined: March 7, 2008
- Location: Glasgow, Scotland
-
-
Tommy Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 703
- Joined: March 7, 2008
- Location: Glasgow, Scotland
-
-
Tommy Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 703
- Joined: March 7, 2008
- Location: Glasgow, Scotland
Acronach wrote:sorry for anyone who has questions ect. for me. i'll try to get around to them
This is rot. I asked you a question in post 321 and reminded you of it in post 349. Then subgenius reminded you again in 356. Since then you've posted multiple times without addressing it. If we follow the pattern from last time we played this little game, this second reminder from me will do the trick.
Ivan the Pleasant wrote:@ Tommy -
Do you have a town meta on this site? If so, please link it.
Yes I do, though it's pretty old. Please see my wiki entry.
I'm leaning on the side of believing YankCane's claim. If he'd been scum, I think he would have claimed a two-mason set-up. Three is unusual, and his poor play suggests that he wouldn't engage in such creative WIFOM.
ICEninja wrote:Right now I'm inclined to put my vote on Sleepy, but Sleepy took his vote off Yank before the claim which looks really good for him if Yank is indeed town.
But that was a while ago, before momentum built up on the Yankwagon. He only voted for a moment because of a mistake by Beck. His main target was Captain Spoon. I think he and Acronach are still the best lynch candidates today.
Beck wrote:What I'd like is for Tommy to actually attemp to scum hunt
Seems a bit harsh.
Beck wrote:Can somebody explain the case on acro and why he is a better lynch candidate than Ivan or SK
Sure, though I think the case on Acronach depends on SleepyKrew being scum. There are three parts to it. The first part is the fact that Acronach and SleepyKrew have been defending each other, as subgenius summarised in posts 232 and 351. The second part is the moment when Acronach accidentally used the word 'bus' when considering a possible attack on him by SleepyKrew (post 188). The third part is Acronach's consistent avoidance of my questions about post 188.-
-
Tommy Goon
-
-
Tommy Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 703
- Joined: March 7, 2008
- Location: Glasgow, Scotland
Was skimming a bit this morning and missed this:
Da Koolzzy wrote:I was using the vote as a harsh lesson, that I AM willing to lynch someone who so thoroughly and effectively negates the town's primary means of finding scum. Scum or not, they need to go.
Don't like this. There may be circumstances that require a policy lynch, but a single instance of answering someone else's question isn't among them.-
-
Tommy Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 703
- Joined: March 7, 2008
- Location: Glasgow, Scotland
-
-
Tommy Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 703
- Joined: March 7, 2008
- Location: Glasgow, Scotland
-
-
Tommy Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 703
- Joined: March 7, 2008
- Location: Glasgow, Scotland
-
-
Tommy Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 703
- Joined: March 7, 2008
- Location: Glasgow, Scotland
-
-
Tommy Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 703
- Joined: March 7, 2008
- Location: Glasgow, Scotland
I agree with ICEninja, though I confess I don't follow these bits:
ICEninja wrote:If we have masons and they don't die, Yank is very obviously scum who just bought himself some time. If we have masons who don't want to out themselves yet and counter claim, giving up one of their own to prove Yank's guilt, then he's obviously scum who just bought himself time.
Anyway, I'm just twiddling my thumbs until either Greymarble turns up or we get near the deadline.
My scum list now looks like this:
- Joint first: Acronach and SleepyKrew, for mutual defense, the 'bus' slip and question evasion.
- Third: Greymarble, for lurking.
- Fourth: ConfidAnon, for revising history.
- Fifth: Da Koolzzy, for his gung ho attitude to policy lynching (I disagree that his attempt to hammer was scummy).
-
-
Tommy Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 703
- Joined: March 7, 2008
- Location: Glasgow, Scotland
ICEninja wrote:
I'm not really sure how you can declare them equally scummy when Sleepy jumped off the Yank wagon right as it was building steam (perfect time for opportunistic scum to be on a wagon, he was on early enough to evade suspicion) when Acro places an incredibly scummy vote on Yank at a poor time.
You're right that Acro was playing worse than Sleepy, but most of his scumtells implicated them as a pair. Now that Acronach has flipped town, my case against SleepyKrew has pretty much evaporated.
Which brings Greymarble up to first place on the Tommy scum-list. Mr Marble, come on down!
Greymarble wrote:
TOMMY HASN'T VOTED A SINGLE PERSON THIS GAME. WTF.
I was waiting to get some substance out of you first.
Why did you hammer Acronach instead of trying to persuade the town to vote for one of your suspects? Before you hammered Acronach, why didn't you give us reasons for your various reads?
Now, Ivan.
Ivan the Pleasant wrote:
Scum:
Tommy
Greymarble
rblinker
- Ivan the Fool
Why? And why did you explicitly refuse to back up your reads even when rblinker challenged you? Are you slinging mud?-
-
Tommy Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 703
- Joined: March 7, 2008
- Location: Glasgow, Scotland
Beck wrote:
Why does Acro's flip change SK's allignment?
My case against the pair was based partly on the fact that they were defending each other, but mainly on Acronach's scummy use of the word 'bus' when considering a possible attack on him by SleepyKrew (there was also some Acronach-only evidence that relied on his question evasion). So most of it disappeared when Acronach's alignment was revealed. There's still the fact that SleepyKrew was defending Acronach, and now I read back I see that I had it the wrong way around in my head - I thought that it was mainly Acronach defending SleepyKrew. But I don't really see how it would be in scum's interest to buddy up with a scummy-looking town player. I'm not saying it's a town tell (because that would be WIFOM), but I can't see much of a case against him either.
Ivan the Pleasant wrote:
We were pretty much just slinging mud.
Don't like this at all, Ivan. Let's return to this quote here:
To rblinker, Ivan the Pleasant wrote:
You're going down tomorrow though, don't worry. You are so scum it's not even funny.
Do you still think rblinker is scum? Did you ever think it? Please remove your tongue from your cheek before answering.
Beck wrote:
Tommy, why did you question ivan than provide him an answer to the question?
'Are you slinging mud?' isn't a lifeline, it's an accusation. He decided to jokily grab it as if it was a lifeline, which I find suspicious.
Greymarble, please answer the questions I asked you in post 539. Also, what's all this logic problem talk:
Greymarble wrote:
Sub, Ivan, or Sleepy are all in the running for third scumbuddy. Those 3 Tommy and Ice contain AT LEAST 2 scum.
I'm not wrong about more than 1 of Koolzy, CA, Blinker, Beck & Spoon towns.
'AT LEAST 2', 'not wrong about more than 1' - how do you know?
Beck wrote:
And as dumb as this sounds, I doubt grey is scum. Scum hammering like that would definitly draw extra attention on himself.
This is WIFOM. What if that's what he wants you to think?
I find Captain Spoon's defense of Beck persuasive.-
-
Tommy Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 703
- Joined: March 7, 2008
- Location: Glasgow, Scotland
-
-
Tommy Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 703
- Joined: March 7, 2008
- Location: Glasgow, Scotland
Beck wrote:
I don't get why SK defended acro, as town it makes no sense to defend somebody you don't know the alliance to.
I agree that it's poor play, but it's conceivable that a town player would want to steer the town away from what he believes is a red herring.
Beck wrote:
That's why I'm on Kool now, he has yet to make a scum read on anyone and he isn't even attempting to scum hunt.
I have some sympathy for this, though I do think the infamous hammer-attempt post contained genuine scum-hunting. I realise that's controversial. More damning, in my opinion, is this:
Da Koolzzy wrote:
I was using the vote as a harsh lesson, that I AM willing to lynch someone who so thoroughly and effectively negates the town's primary means of finding scum. Scum or not, they need to go.
Yuck. And note that he's backtracked since discovering that was unpopular:
Da Koolzzy wrote:
I am unsure of policy lynches, but I do believe in attacking someone for hindering the town.
Right, next Beck question:
Beck wrote:
Explain why each is suspicious to you
Sure. Da Koolzzy I've covered. I discussed my problem with ConfidAnon (his revisionism) in posts 145 and 218, though this has been tempered with some quite pro-town play. Ivan has started chucking dirt about to see whether it will stick. People who challenge him on it get scorn but not answers.
Speaking of which: Ivan, please answer the question I asked you in post 568. I'm also looking forward to seeing your answer to rblinker's question.
Now, Greymarble.
Greymarble wrote:
My wagon was the only one other than Acro's with a reasonable chance of lynching.
This is simply untrue. You had six days till the deadline. That's plenty of time to launch a case against one of your suspects. I've been wondering why you didn't do that, which is why I asked you about it in post 539 and reminded you of the question in post 568. You've ignored the question three times, along with the question of why you were willing to go into the night phase without giving evidence for any of your reads. You and ICEninja will be thrilled to hear that I'm finally prepared to dust off my vote.
Vote: Greymarble-
-
Tommy Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 703
- Joined: March 7, 2008
- Location: Glasgow, Scotland
-
-
Tommy Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 703
- Joined: March 7, 2008
- Location: Glasgow, Scotland
-
-
Tommy Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 703
- Joined: March 7, 2008
- Location: Glasgow, Scotland
-
-
Tommy Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 703
- Joined: March 7, 2008
- Location: Glasgow, Scotland
Greymarble wrote:
I did not have enough townleaderpoints to make a new wagon happen on somebody I actually wanted to lynch.
I don't accept that. You had six days: that's enough time to turn people around. And did you feel that there wasn't even five minutes left to give the outline of the reasons for your reads before you did it? And did you feel that an Acronach lynch was preferable to no lynch at all?-
-
Tommy Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 703
- Joined: March 7, 2008
- Location: Glasgow, Scotland
Ooh, I just thought of another question (this really is magnificent whisky): how about twilight? You could have taken the time to give some reasons for your reads after the hammer. Why did you let the night come without having your say? I think it's because you knew you'd survive the night. Certainly you were bright-eyed and bushy-tailed with your cases come morning.-
-
Tommy Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 703
- Joined: March 7, 2008
- Location: Glasgow, Scotland
-
-
Tommy Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 703
- Joined: March 7, 2008
- Location: Glasgow, Scotland
I'm back from T in the Park.
Beck, subgenius and ICEninja seem to be agreed that the way forward is to pick a lurker and pressure them with votes until they contribute. I see the attraction, though I'm worried that that kind of vote can turn into a full-blooded killer vote without the voter really stopping to consider whether they're targeting the scummiest player. Bandwagons have their own momentum.
I still think we should lynch Llamarble, because he hammered a player he'd thought was town and showed signs of knowing he'd survive the night. But I seem to be the only one who thinks that.
If we're going to wagon a lurker, let's pick the scummiest one. Like jilynne and Da Koolzzy (and for that matter, ConfidAnon and Captain Spoon), Ivan has failed to contribute any content recently. Unlike those players, though, he's also posting scum lists without backing them up. Hard to know what to make of this, because it's pretty obviously bad play as scum or town. But I think it could be an inept attempt to fish for support - maybe he's hoping people will seize on one of the names in his list and say 'yeah, I think they're scummy too'.
So my (distant) second choice after Llamarble is Ivan the Pleasant. Beck, subgenius and ICEninja, if you guys want to pressure a lurker, let's choose him. Looks like one head's disappeared and taken half the scum-list with him, but maybe we can squeeze something out of him on subgenius and rblinker.
Vote: Ivan the Pleasant-
-
Tommy Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 703
- Joined: March 7, 2008
- Location: Glasgow, Scotland
-
-
Tommy Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 703
- Joined: March 7, 2008
- Location: Glasgow, Scotland
-
-
Tommy Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 703
- Joined: March 7, 2008
- Location: Glasgow, Scotland
Llamarble wrote:Lack of explanations was mostly due to not having enough gametime.
I hammered at 4:15 AM so it's not like I was going to be doing deep casemaking that evening.
Excuse me for a moment. [Retrieves jaw from floor.] Thank you for answering my question. It pains me to say it, but I believe what you say. It also gives you a reasonable alibi for not having returned to back up your reads during the nine hours of twilight. I note that you didn't post on any forum until Tuesday. So my case against you is reduced to the scumminess of the hammer itself (on someone you thought was town) and your slowness in responding to my questions. I still think you're scum, but it doesn't look like I'm going to sell that to anyone else today.
Ivan the Pleasant wrote:Your argument requires achro to be scum therefore you should be voting achro if you actually believe what you're saying.
I never understood this. Subgenius was arguing that Acronach and SleepyKrew were a scum pair. Surely, then, it didn't matter which of them he was voting? Ivan's other points on subgenius look so thin as to suggest he's had to put the case together now, retrospectively.
Welcome, Magic Trainer. I like your case on rblinker. He's certainly cautious and hasn't been contributing much, and those are mild scum-reads. If there weren't better options, I'd be happy with an rblinker lynch. I'll stick within YankCane's non-mason list for now, but let's not discourage scum-hunting outside the list.
Ivan, you claimed to have a case on rblinker too. How about sharing it with us?
jilynne1991 wrote:A Vanilla Townie is super boring.
Very disappointed about this unprovoked claim.-
-
Tommy Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 703
- Joined: March 7, 2008
- Location: Glasgow, Scotland
Magic Trainer wrote:Gut is bothering me, so here's what I propose. We run up Koolzzy and Jil both to L-1.
Then at that point I'd like either BLINKER or Tommy to hammer. This way, we have to legitimate wagons to get SOMETHING out of regardless of what Jil flips.
If we follow your plan, what will we learn if jilynne flips town? And what will we learn if she flips scum?-
-
Tommy Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 703
- Joined: March 7, 2008
- Location: Glasgow, Scotland
Magic Trainer wrote:What I'm thinking is, if we two decent wagons we can compare and contrast them
I dare say that's true, but if we have two artificial wagons orchestrated by you, we can't do a lot with them. I'd prefer a Koolzzy or jilynne lynch to no lynch, but I'd rather see Llamarble or Ivan swing.-
-
Tommy Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 703
- Joined: March 7, 2008
- Location: Glasgow, Scotland
-
-
Tommy Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 703
- Joined: March 7, 2008
- Location: Glasgow, Scotland
How can the first of these statements possibly be taken to mean the second?
rblinker123 wrote:were not really guna get a lynch on someone being replaced anyway.
rblinker123 wrote:Subs, yeah i agree with you lol, thats what i meant, i would want to hear from the replacement before lynching them.
I think rblinker's behaviour is becoming rather fishy.
Beck wrote:I need to make a case on a leaning scum vibe? Not really
It would be helpful if you gave your reasons.
Welcome, Scott Brosius. Yes, you should take a look at YankCane's claim post, which outs a list of players as non-masons.-
-
Tommy Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 703
- Joined: March 7, 2008
- Location: Glasgow, Scotland
I welcome Scott Brosius's vote on Llamarble. That and jilynne pulling out give me new hope for a Llamarble wagon.
Vote: Llamarble
Vote Llamarble, people! He hammered Acronach even though he thought Acronach was town. He claims there wasn't time to hammer anyone else, but there was ages. He's been avoiding questions.
Mod, please replace jilynne.
Enjoy math camp, jilynne.-
-
Tommy Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 703
- Joined: March 7, 2008
- Location: Glasgow, Scotland
I still feel that Beck is town. He's been earnestly scum-hunting and giving a great impression of frustration at not knowing who to vote. I think that his post 756 is a reasonable explanation of the apparent flip-flop on Ivan.
I think Subgenius ably revealed the thinness of Ivan's case on him. It seems like every time Ivan opens his mouth he shows how little he's concentrating on looking for scum. No wonder he's reticent to expand on his other reads. I'm becoming increasingly happy with the idea of lynching him.-
-
Tommy Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 703
- Joined: March 7, 2008
- Location: Glasgow, Scotland
-
-
Tommy
-
-
Tommy Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 703
- Joined: March 7, 2008
- Location: Glasgow, Scotland
Masons aren't usually allowed to communicate during the day. YankCane was just making sure that the people on his scum list couldn't claim mason. I think, all else being equal, we should lynch from the list, but if we can find good reasons to lynch somebody not on it, we shouldn't hesitate to do so.-
-
Tommy Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 703
- Joined: March 7, 2008
- Location: Glasgow, Scotland
-
-
Tommy Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 703
- Joined: March 7, 2008
- Location: Glasgow, Scotland
Ivan the Pleasant wrote:Town doesn't talk in terms of "becoming increasingly happy with the idea" of something. They just do things.
I can only vote for one person at once. I still think Llamarble is the scummiest. How do you reckon town players ought to discuss their changing suspicion levels? Or do you think they shouldn't?-
-
Tommy Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 703
- Joined: March 7, 2008
- Location: Glasgow, Scotland
-
-
Tommy Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 703
- Joined: March 7, 2008
- Location: Glasgow, Scotland
Beck wrote:Tommy, can you explain how I was 3rd on your list to lynch after marble and Ivan, to thinking I am town in just 4 days... so I would like you to point out what I said between ppst 635 when you made that comment in post 770
I've always thought you were town. I can't find anything in post 635 that suggests otherwise. If you'll quote the bit that gave you that idea, maybe I can explain.
Beck wrote:
I would also like a better case on why you want to lynch marble, because basically your reason with your vote was he hammered a townie and he is avoiding questions, while it is frustrating I know, I have learned on this site that avoiding questions isn't always a scum tell
True, avoiding questions on its own wouldn't be enough to convict him. The main plank of my case is that he hammered someone he thought was town with six days to go before the deadline. If you've come across town players doing that before, then don't vote for him. I think it's the biggest scum-tell we've seen this game.
Llamarble wrote:What are these questions I'm supposed to have been avoiding?
There are none outstanding, but it was like getting blood from a stone. Please see posts 539, 568, 576 and 586.
Ivans, please get your shit together. You announced suspicion of rblinker, ICEninja, me and subgenius. So far you've presented a reasonable case against subgenius, and taken apart a recent post of mine. But we need more than that. You must back up your historic suspicion of rblinker, ICEninja and me.-
-
Tommy Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 703
- Joined: March 7, 2008
- Location: Glasgow, Scotland
-
-
Tommy Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 703
- Joined: March 7, 2008
- Location: Glasgow, Scotland
-
-
Tommy Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 703
- Joined: March 7, 2008
- Location: Glasgow, Scotland
-
-
Tommy Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 703
- Joined: March 7, 2008
- Location: Glasgow, Scotland
Beck wrote:the only thing I can say about marble is I don't really know where he stands
Beck wrote:is marble scummy? yes
You're managing to dig yourself a very deep hole in a very short time.
Beck wrote:just cause he hammered an obviously scummy person isn't reason enough to lynch somebody
Are you deliberately watering the case down? He didn't just hammer an obviously scummy person. With no explanation other than self-preservation, he hammered a personwho he'd said he thought was town.-
-
Tommy Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 703
- Joined: March 7, 2008
- Location: Glasgow, Scotland
Llamarble wrote:Tommy is on my wagon pretty much entirely because "LOLOL U HAMMAH"
SB & Ice are "LOLOL U HAMMAH AND NOT MASON"
Sub is "LOLOL I VOTE U BY ASSOCIATOIN TO PROBTOWNBECK"
NONE OF THESE CONCERN MY ACTUAL POSTING ASIDE FROM VOTES.
These are NOT town reading deeply and thinking about things.
ALL ARE PICKING OUT THE EASIEST SHALLOWEST AND LEAST MESSY THINGS TO TALK ABOUT.
This is a straw man. I've been extremely concerned with your posting aside from votes. Every time you avoided a question, I took note and drew the town's attention. And my case is more subtle than you give it credit for. It's actually LOLOL U HAMMAH PLAYER YOU THINK TOWN WITH 6 DAYS LEFT. I can't believe you tried to misrepresent it by simplification so soon after I called Beck out for doing exactly the same thing. You guys are in melt-down.-
-
Tommy Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 703
- Joined: March 7, 2008
- Location: Glasgow, Scotland
Beck wrote:Tommy's reason is solely based off the hammer and because jilly has become disinterested in the game
That's slightly wrong. I mentioned in my vote post that her replacement gave me hope for a Llamarble wagon, because a new player might be willing to vote for it. I think you misinterpreted that as being part of my case.
Mod, please could we have a deadline extension to give jilynne's replacement a chance to read and vote (and claim if necessary)?
While I've got you, Beck, I don't understand why you think that defending a confirmed townie is such a sure-fire scum-tell. Sometimes a town player defends a town player, right?
Now, it looks like I have a juicy case to answer.
Magic Trainer wrote:Without voting, he lets other people take full responsibility for the wagons, meaning people get lynched without him getting his hands dirty. He leads on others suspicions, without putting himself out there. This is ideal scum play. Look like you're doing shit without actually doing it.
I take as much responsibility for the Acronach wagon as the people who voted for it. I made it clear that he was my top suspect, and that I was holding off my vote until I could get some content out of Greymarble. I didn't want day 1 to end until I had at least some material from every player. In the end, Greymarble hammered before I had the chance to place my vote.
So, when I entered this game and stated Tommy one as of my scum reads, he ignored it. Completely.
Yes. To explain your suspicion you pointed to a Greymarble post which I felt I'd addressed already. There didn't seem much to add except for 'Hey! Don't suspect me, I'm a goodie!' Which wouldn't have been much of a contribution.
Hell, in my case against blinker I criticized blinker for voting Llamarble based on his hammer, this is the same reason Tommy was voting Llamarble. Yet he ignores THAT as well.
Hmm. When you say you criticized him, I guess you must mean this paragraph:
Iso #13: Suspicion of Grey. This is just going after an easy target. iirc all his suspects at this point consist of Sleepy/Acron/Llamarble. The former two were prime time suspects and the latter is suspected for his hammer.
You weren't really criticising all hammer-based votes so much as rblinker's sheeping (or that was my understanding). I had no problem with this as part of your larger picture of rblinker coasting. Llamarble was indeed an easy target, partly because I'd been leading the charge against him.
EVEN when he was responding to my idea, he doesn't even bother to ask WHY I would ever suspect little ol him.
Think I've already answered this bit. I knew why you suspected me, and I felt that I'd already addressed it.
even later on when I put him on the spot light, he doesn't bother to ask WHY I suspect him? Why? He was curious to know when Ivan asked, so why not ask me as well? (Because he's scum who doesn't care atm)
Because I knew, because I knew, because I knew.
Hell, take a look at this comment by Grey, who stated he knew 2/3 scum in X list. I said a similar thing, but no reaction to my accusation.
Ah yes. Now, here you have a good point. Frankly, I felt a bit silly when I picked up Greymarble's one. This 'at least two of these five'-type talk is something I've always found weird, but it's so common on this site that it's hardly a scum tell. I did notice when you did it later, but I said to myself, 'Come on, you're not going to criticise that stuff twice in the same game, are you? People will just start thinking you're a dick.' You've correctly identified an inconsistency. I flagged one instance out of two, but I think I should have flagged neither.
Lasly, I have a question for you. On Ivan you say this:
I can easily relate to WHY he suspects certain people and understand his reasoning.
What? Half his reads have no reasoning whatsoever! If you happen to know why they're there, could you enlighten the rest of us?-
-
Tommy Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 703
- Joined: March 7, 2008
- Location: Glasgow, Scotland
-
-
Tommy Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 703
- Joined: March 7, 2008
- Location: Glasgow, Scotland
-
-
Tommy Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 703
- Joined: March 7, 2008
- Location: Glasgow, Scotland
-