Papa Zito wrote:
You mean like I did with AGar? Oh noes, there goes a hunk of your case.
No, not like what you did with AGar at all. The difference is that I explained my thought process and how I came from Old Conclusion to New Conclusion. You did not. The idea that that townies should explain their reasoning and justify their votes is hardly controversial. It's the same with your Sando vote, really -- if the entirety of your reasoning for wanting to vote for a guy is his interaction with the people actively attacking him, then I'd expect you'd at least want to say that.
Is that your official position now, by the way? That you hammered because of what others were saying? Or that you wanted a lynch at deadline?
1. Oh good, you've admitted it in thread now. This supports what I said.
If you've been reading the thread, you will have noticed that I've already said more than once that I had a vague town read on you, but upon reflection could not come up with a good reason why I thought that at all.
2. This was NOT your argument. You said you tracked me to "solidify a murky read". Even though you just admitted to having a townie read on me. And even though, on Day 2, you admitted to having "a hard time getting a handle on Scien."
I guess I'll just quote myself yet again: "However, when I asked myself
why
I thought you were a pro-town role I found that I could not think of good reasons." How does that communicate anything other than "I might have been mistaken in my initial reactions"? You're reaching. Unless I misunderstand your flailing here, it seems like you're suggesting that I should have targeted Scien a second time? But, before, that targeting someone to clear up unclear reads was stupid? Having gotten a no-target result on Scien Day 1 was much more than nothing, in case it hasn't occurred to you: if, at any point in the remainder of the game he fakeclaimed a PR that targeted on N1, I would be able to bust him. This was also part of the reason I was fine with a massclaim in what I believe to be a likely MLYO situation (which, again, I have already said). If I had it to do over again, I would still target someone other than Scien on Day 2.
3. What reason did I have to distance a buddy? Was I in danger of being lynched and needed to protect myself? Was my buddy in danger of being lynched and I needed townie cred? Try to make this make sense from a Zito-scum perspective.
Do you only distance yourself from buddies when you're on the verge of a lynch, or are you a better player than that?
Day 1: Zito's town. Dunno about Scien. Let's track him to figure out his alignment.
Night 1: Scien didn't do anything. Oh. Well that doesn't say anything about his alignment anyway.
Day 2: Zito's town. Dunno about Scien. Let's track Zito to figure out his alignment.
This doesn't make any sense whatsoever.
Of course it does. If you were not busted scum, you wouldn't have to pretend I'm dumber than I am, nor should you have to try and straw-man me.
You're certainly overestimating the strength of my town read on you. I don't know how sure you are of things Day 1, but I would never conclusively have said anyone was town. Scien was not playing the same way I'd seen him play before, and was generally much less involved. So, track Scien and see what happens.
The result did not say anything about his alignment then, but easily could have later. Day 2, my Scien read was not great but with the potential to become very strong later as a result of my no-target result. Not complicated. Do I target Scien again, or move on to another target who I want to know more about, one who is suspect to other players but who I may have potentially been fooled by? If I realize that I think someone's town but cannot tell myself why I think that, 100% of the time I will start over with them. The same applies to scum reads. This is called critical thinking and it is a very useful tool for the game of Mafia.
Rephrase this:
charlatan wrote: The fact that you considered the NK to be about you and him sniping back and forth at the end of Day 1 suggests that you didn't even agree with yourself here.
Unless I am confused, you are saying that the connection between you and SC was more or less negligible and that it would not have been an important factor in upcoming days. Yet, at the beginning of Day 2, you were willing to speculate that SC was killed to incriminate you, which suggests the exact opposite.
No, what it means is that you had to quickly manufacture a case when your alleged track didn't convince the town fast enough, and you couldn't really come up with much because goddamit PZ is actually town and fabricating cases is
hard
.
That's silly. If I wanted to, I could say the same thing about how you have been only partially present in the thread until people started voting for you. Now, suddenly, you can't be dismissive. See how easy that was? Let's not waste our time with this level of play.
If you look, I haven't posted in any of my games for a day or two. I would have voted for PZ, though. Balt, I find your argument sort of flimsy considering I've been probing and suspecting PZ for some time now, when other players haven't.
. I would have held onto it last night anyway due to the confusion of not knowing who was scum that night, or who the likely target would be. Meh I guess I suck at power roles. (Yes I realize that I had the game on me at that point. Just didn't know what to do.)