Mini 1035 - Devil's Town - GAME OVER

[podium123456]

VOTE: Gofarman

[podium123456]

What do you think is the best way for Town to lynch scum day 1?

RVS's and D1's are a real pain in the arse. All you can really do is wait for something little and stupid to blow up and then hope that somebody does something that sticks out.

At the chat site i used to play at, nearly every game started at night... day starts were rare. It's totally the opposite here, and i dont know why. Night starts provide a MUCH better starting environment, IMO.

[podium123456]

You guys are crazy if you think that is a scum tell.

Unvote
VOTE: Dr. Pepper

OMGUS isn't really that big of a deal, people act like it's a major scum tell -- it isn't. The fact that it was during the RVS makes it much much less of a big deal.

Edmunds plan isn't that weird, and it implies nothing about how hard he will scum hunt.

There is nothing 'interesting' (implying scummy) about LMP's question. It is a common RQS question... why in the world would you find that 'interesting'?

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Also, I don't like how Lynchmepls and nexus piled on the Blaze wagon solely off of that RVS vote.

[podium123456]

(found interesting) =/= (found scummy)

Perhaps you should distinguish, as you lumped it in with another activity that you later classified as scummy. Why criticize him for going the RQS route? His question is about as good as you can get for a RQS question. What is a RQS question that you believe would generate 'relevant' discussion?

Edmunds plan does not set up an excuse for lazy scumhunting... that was a misrepresentation.

And yes it is textbook OMGUS. But OMGUS isn't really a scumtell, ESPECIALLY when it occurs during the RVS. IMO, i guess. Apparantly you have assumed that blaze literally thought you were scum because of your random vote... which is a heck of a jump. Common sense tells me he didn't intend it as a 'he's scum and should be lynched' type of vote. I guess blaze will have to specifically state what his intentions were... but regardless... i am suspicious of how quick you seriously voted over that.

[podium123456]

Perhaps you should distinguish, as you lumped it in with another activity that you later classified as scummy.

• Have not classified anything as scummy

This implies that you dont consider textbook OMGUS to be scummy. Is that correct?

What is a RQS question that you believe would generate 'relevant' discussion?

• What is your type of play style?
  
• Are some tells too scummy to be scum?
  
• How many games have you played?
  
• Others that have player specific answers

[/list]

These are no more relevant/difficult than edmunds question.

[*]Voting with a poor reason

RVS

[*]Trying to get me off his case

Misrepresentation... where did he try to get you off his case?

I guess blaze will have to specifically state what his intentions were...

I voted for you because you pretty much voted for me...in your first post. I should have said why but I thought it was obvious. My bad to everyone else.

Really? You think that isn't obvious? ... I was referring to his intentions -- whether or not it was a lighthearted rvs vote, or a serious 'he's scum' vote. Common sense tells me it was a lighthearted RVS vote, and therefore, your reaction to seriously use that as a reason to vote blaze was suspicious. But blaze will have to confirm that.

[podium123456]

Oh jeez... a huge lie i have made... you voted someone and i made the huge and disingenuous leap to assume you thought they were scummy, when you actually only thought they were anti-town. a million apologies!!

Besides that minor infraction, i haven't lied anywhere.

I find it hypocritical that with your vote on me, you essentially do the same thing you accused blaze of... if not worse. I am scumhunting, and you omgus me for it... that's as anti-town as anything he did.

Also, a video that says 'wrong' isn't a valid rebuttal technique.

[podium123456]

If he intended it to be an RVS OMGUS vote, then why not say something to that effect?

Probably because he assumed everyone would realize that.

[podium123456]

Dr. Pepper, I wish you would talk like a normal person... it really isn't that clear exactly what specific things you are talking about at times.

Things podium has lied about

• Blaze's vote being random and light-hearted
  • giving Blaze the benefit of the doubt
    
  • while condemning me with assumptions
• My reasons for voting Blaze
  • His OMGUS vote

How is any of this a lie? What exactly are you talking about? Where did i lie about blaze's vote being light hearted and random?

Where did i lie about your reasons for voting blaze?

[*]hard since he's being defended for no reason[/list]

Don't know what you are trying to say here.

[*]Me calling any player scummy

yes, i admitted that that was a mistake on my part. You voted someone and i thought you thought they were scummy, when you really only thought they were anti-town. Honestly, it's not THAT big of a deal... IMO, of course.

[*]The severity of his slips[/list]

Huh?

[podium123456]

It is not that hard.

I'll ignore that you just insulted me... and say that YOU are the one that formatted it in an incorrect fashion.

You said 'things podium has lied about' with no dot, then listed the reasons and subreasons with dots. Then you use a black dot to say 'my reasons for voting blaze'... which taken as it is written looks like you are saying 'my reasons for voting blaze' is falling under 'things podium has lied about'. When apparently you intended for 'my reasons for voting blaze' to be a new category like the one you started with 'things podium has lied about'.

If you are going to converse in a fashion that is unorthodox, at least do it right.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

[Things podium has lied about] are [Blaze's vote being random and light-hearted] which is [giving Blaze the benefit of the doubt] [while condemning me with assumptions]

You still didnt answer my question... how is any of that a lie?

OK, kiddies. Lets play a game of answer the question

• What do you think of Blaze's vote?
  
• What do you think of LynchMe's LAL question?

Nearly everyone has weighed in on these subjects... are you reading the thread?

[podium123456]

ok well, my back and forth with DP has died down for the moment. i'll try to reread things a little closer in a bit. welcome to albert.

I will say that i really found lynchmepls and nexus's votes to be scummier than Dr. Pepper's actions at the time i voted him. However, i was much more interested in seeing how dr. pepper would react to some pressure/accusations, than i was in voting for either LMP or Nexus. i haven't been impressed with DP's behavior so far... i wanted to probe him a little more before i said this (for fear that he would act differently because of it), but he seems to have disappeared... and things need to move along. cant say right now if his poor handling is scum based or town based.

LMP and nexus, your votes on blaze looked

really

bad... definitely possible that it was scum trying to take advantage of the situation. that's not to say that it was... but it definitely looks like it could be a possibility.

[podium123456]

podium123456 has lied about statements I made.

... this seems to be a pattern of yours. i have

repeatedly

asked you to show me the lies i have made. But you ignore my requests and keep repeating the accusation... and you accuse

me

of creating white noise? get real.

Besides the admitted mistake of assuming you meant scummy, when you meant anti-town... WHERE HAVE I LIED?

He has since recanted claiming it is not that serious

I haven't recanted anything. I said that at the time i first voted you, nexus and lmp's votes were scummier... but i wanted to see how you behaved under pressure. Your behavior has been more scummy than townie.

Instead of letting a wagon get going, podium does his best to break it up, FAST.

Yeah. Because it is pro-town to let someone get to L-1 on page 2 based off of a joke RVS vote.

BTW @ Mod: Please replace me. I will accept the ban/blacklist.

Damn bro, you aint gotta run just cause you're taking some fire...

[podium123456]

OK, i've gotten caught up.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Dr. P - sigh... don't really know what to do here. i have to admit that RQ'ing like that realllllly sounds like he is scum to me... if he was town and got lynched today, it wouldn't mean the game was over with at all... but if he is scum, it severely hampers their chances of winning.

also, his OMGUS was

really

textbook OMGUS... if you have played with me, you know that i dont regard OMGUS as much of a scumtell... but if there ever was a time for OMGUS to look scummy, this would have to be a case.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

To be fair, once I realised it was L-1, I wanted to at least give him a chance to explain himself, so got off it before he got quicklynched. If I was scum, I'd have left it on there, tbh.

That is a wifom argument, and doesnt really hold water.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

A question to Nexus and LMP: why did you vote on the Blaze bandwagon?

Why in the world did you ask this?

They had specifically answered this... i think multiple times. Looks like you just asked a question to give the appearance that you are scumhunting.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

LMP - If one of the votes on blaze was a scum vote, my gut says this is the one. but, it could mean nothing.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Albert - Not looking too good, imo.

Joins the UT 'wagon' without saying why, or ever haven mentioned suspicioun of UT. The ONLY thing that had been said about UT up to that point was LMP briefly mentioning that UT hadn't taken a firm stance yet.

Hammering Dr. P without getting a claim first is not a good move IMO... yet Albert did. A technicality prevents Dr. P from being lynched at the moment, but Albert showed his card already.

His input has been pretty lackluster so far.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Right now i guess i am most susp. of Albert and Dr. P. It's going to be hard for me to get away from the feeling that Dr. P is scum after his RQ... so i guess i will leave my vote in place for now.

TDC needs to claim, though.

[podium123456]

TDC has already claimed vanilla. If you guys put albert at L-1, we risk exposing a PR and/or narrowing mafia's choices for PR hits. Keep that in mind.

It's a toss-up between them to me, but since TDC has already claimed vanilla i am ok with that lynch.

[podium123456]

Still waiting for an answer to my question from UT.

ABR is at L-1 now, correct? I'm willing to hammer after the claim.

You haven't mentioned ABR once all game, and you are prepared to make him claim and hammer? ??

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

It's day 1... we have at least 1 mislynch (assuming), and probably more... why not just axe Dr. P? Claims are like christmas presents to mafia... it tells them who to kill or not to kill... i would prefer not having 2 people claim on D1. If we have an investigative role, then they can investigate ABR.

[podium123456]

I think Podium's point was that you didn't really elucidate/elaborate your suspicion of ABR.

This.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

And LMP i dont care if you vote for TDC or not... but you shouldn't hammer someone just to hammer them. Do you think ABR is scum? You haven't said so all game.

Are you not concerned that maf is going to get two claims on D1?

[podium123456]

2 claims on D1 is very bad for town, imo.

if you assume 2 mafia (but there could be 3 which would be worse), they have a 1/5 (or 1/4 with 3 maf) chance of killing a PR... on N1. you guys need to keep that in mind.

i would rather lynch a VT than risk exposing/killing a PR, when we have a mislynch (or mislynches) to spare.

[podium123456]

Yes and No. I don't want a second claim today, but that doesn't mean you have to vote TDC. I'm saying don't hammer ABR just for the sake of hammering someone.

If the majority still wants to go after ABR, then that will happen. I just want to ensure everyone knows what's at stake here before we get a 2nd claim. If you think ABR is scum, and are aware of the implications of 2 claims (and are ok with it), then do whatever you think you should.

[podium123456]

*sigh*

horrible freakin start

[podium123456]

Seriously, he ragequits the second he get pressure on him. If thats not mega-obv scum right there, then I should stop playing right now, because if it this isn't a perfect(albeit a perfectly poor) example of scummy play, then I know nothing about scumhunting.

What happened to all of this, zodiark? ???

[podium123456]

What's gonna be our subject of discourse now it's daytime?

Hang people that make meaningless posts.


<-- but kinda -->

[podium123456]

24+ hours and only 3 posts. I'm guessing this game is due for some prods.

No player is in prod territory.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Zodiark seems to be the big target today... i'll repeat my earlier comment.

and when the wind turns and ABR is the choice of the moment you suddenly decide I'm oh so town and have made up for Dr P and hammer ABR.

Albert was acting more scummy than you, 'nuff said.

The point is that you said that Dr. P was 'mega-obvious' scum:

Zodiark13 wrote: Seriously, he ragequits the second he get pressure on him. If thats not mega-obv scum right there, then I should stop playing right now, because if it this isn't a perfect(albeit a perfectly poor) example of scummy play, then I know nothing about scumhunting.

and later, you apparently forget about this when the ABR wagon picks up steam. Why do you no longer think that Dr. P was obvious scum? TDC's input has no bearing on the conclusion you reached from Dr. P's behavior.

[podium123456]

Zodiark you have ignored me twice... is it intentional?

[podium123456]

Only if you ignoring my last post was.

your attempt at sarcasm fails... this is what i would like addressed:

http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... 5#p2504125

[podium123456]

I just noticed something while reading something in the wiki:

A Normal game should have at least one Mafia faction, and

no more than two

.

I didn't know about this rule... so that means we have a maximum of 2 mafia, which is good to know.

[podium123456]

never mind, i didnt see the word faction.

[podium123456]

it's been a while, so i'm assuming that zodiark read my last post and chose not to respond... so

VOTE: Zodiark13

For refusing to discuss the problem with me, and to move the game along. If he responds, i can reconsider. That puts him at L-1.

[podium123456]

I felt that my 178 answered other such accusations, and I saw no reason to repeat myself. You did nothing but point to old questions. You want more answers, you ask more questions.

I think that's everything. If not, ask away, and please don't point to old questions. If I haven't already answered, chances are I didn't/don't see the question.

I'll repeat... whether or not TDC acted scummy when he replaced in has NO bearing on the specific conclusion you reached about Dr. P. You said that the only person that would rage-quit like that was a super mega obvious scum (paraphrasing). Why have you changed your mind?

TDC's activity doesn't change the fact that Dr. P rage quit... and you stated that someone rage quitting like that was obviously a scum.

[podium123456]

Personally i still find Dr. P's rage quit scummy, and that's probably always going to be associated with that slot for the rest of the game.

Still think zordiak's behavior was scummy, and lynch worthy, at the moment.

LMP... been getting a slightly scummy scum vibe here... mostly gut. dont like how he says he thought UT was scum, but didn't pursue/vote him today until incognito started making a case.

Haven't been a fan of Taz's input so far.

That's about all i got... can't really get into this game, and haven't seen much that has jumped out and grabbed me.

[podium123456]

D2

[podium123456]

I really don't get this. It is mind-bogglingly frustrating. Simply astonishing. I seriously do not understand the logic here.

The logic is that if UT was such a hot target in your mind, you would pursue him regardless of whether or not anyone else was with you.

Does that mean you are scum? I don't know. But that's the logic.

[podium123456]

For the record, i've played with taz a couple of times, and his behavior can be quite erratic/spazzy.

Here is an example... skim through pages 8-13 where taz replaces in, makes like 4 votes, and ends up accidentally hammering our doctor... after previously stating that he refused to vote for that person... ...

He replaced out right after that...

[podium123456]

what a mess of a game.

[podium123456]

VT

[podium123456]

i'd rather hear your results

[podium123456]

taz, you fail pretty hard man. why did you let us lynch an innocent person? ...or a better question:

WHY WERE

YOU

VOTING FOR AN INNOCENT PERSON?

[podium123456]

Dont both mafia visit the night kill... regardless of who submits it? that's how it works on other sites.

...this reminds me of a game i was in in which we lynched a guy who claimed vanilla townie.... and he was actually the cop. lol. next time give us the information taz.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

that being said, i dont think taz is scum. first of all, it fits his normal play (bizarre)... and secondly, maf would have discussed this and known to give a result that wasn't batshit crazy. also i dont see anything wrong with a setup of watcher/tracker.

i dont have a town read on anyone at this point, pretty much. if i had to pick right now, id probably go with the low hanging fruit... UT.

[podium123456]

i was in a game as scum recently, when on d3 lylo a person placed a vote on a townie at the start of the day. my partner and i had already discussed to be prepared in case that happened... we hammered within 5 minutes and won the game. everyone was very active today when UT voted, and LMP/TDC didnt bite. if i believe that taz is town (which i currently do), then that means either LMP/TDC are numbskulls/gutless for not trying to quickhammer, or that UT is scum.

im probably ready to vote now... but will wait till everyone is ready.

[podium123456]

^^ if mafia was going to fake tracker, dont you think they would have used someone other than zordiak? i cant see mafia saying 'ok taz, u fake tracker and report that you tracked zodiark N1' considering that taz lynched him on D2.

i mean, i understand now that both mafs dont visit, so a non-visit could still be guilty... but if you were going to fake, why not do it on someone you didnt end up lynching?

[podium123456]

at one point in time, there was a vote for UT and a vote for Taz today. We were all active during this. If LMP/TDC were a team, they could have hammered... so i dont think that is a possibility.

im gonna have a hard time accepting that taz/ut are a team, even though LMP raises good points.

so from my pov its ut/lmp or ut/tdc... and right now i feel like it's probably ut/tdc.

[podium123456]

^^ if mafia was going to fake tracker, dont you think they would have used someone other than zordiak? i cant see mafia saying 'ok taz, u fake tracker and report that you tracked zodiark N1' considering that taz lynched him on D2.

i mean, i understand now that both mafs dont visit, so a non-visit could still be guilty... but if you were going to fake, why not do it on someone you didnt end up lynching?

I don't think this is a good argument. Look at Mad World: Time Travel mafia in my wiki to see my scum fake-PR claim. I claimed targets that turned out to be very sub-optimal choices. We can't assume that all scum fake claims will somehow be air tight. Scum make mistakes too.

A little different... it's not a matter of who he investigated, it's a matter of him not acting on his results. Why would maf fake a tracker report on someone that the tracker lynched without ever mentioning his result?

FYI - your wiki link to time travel goes to the wrong game.

I agree that it was a risk, but I don't think it can be ruled out. Notice how he didn't want to claim targets but asked for my claim right away. Only when others said "we want your targets" did he give them up. This links with my above point about how scum can make bad fake-claims too.

This behavior is consistent with taz's previous PR roles... in this game he does the same thing as cop. He reveals that he is cop, and got a guilty... but says he won't say who it was, so that people can discuss the game more. ...naturally we told him to reveal.

And if they are 2 goons, then 1 watcher only isn't that hard to believe. I don't think we should turn the game into trying to outguess the mod on setup. 1 tracker 1 watcher is possible, and just 1 watcher vs goons is also possible.

I dont see anything wrong with speculating about the setup at this point. IMO only 1 pr for town (a watcher) isn't very likely.

Have I missed something in your iso, or is that really the first time you say anything about UT?

This is a good question. ISOs on TDC and podium as soon as I have some time.

Process of elimination.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

UT's scum buddy. Who could it be? If it's not LMP, then that's a really tough dilemma to figure out.

You're the scummiest town player i've ever seen. (assuming you're town, of course.)

[podium123456]

In other news, I just finished a TDC ISO. Its basically 38 posts of town goodness. I started doing post by post analysis like I did with UT and Taz, when I realized that after every quote I was just basically saying "I agree". TDC is almost certainly town.

Do you plan on ISO'ing Dr. Pepper? Wouldn't that be relevant as well?

[podium123456]

This post is one giant wall of saying things that don't really mean anything. I think you manage to imply Me, ABR, Dr.P, Nexus, and UT are scummy in the same post. Looks like a lot of IIOA with 0 scum hunting.

Saying things that dont mean anything? I disagree... i raised several scummy actions and explained them. And IIOA? Did i not analyze multiple events? How is that information instead of analysis?

Also, a summary post is going to be more observation based than scumhunting.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

If anyone was worried, TDC/podium is NOT a scum team in this game, based on these interactions.

TDC/podium is not a scum team because of the events that transpired today. How do those quotes show that TDC/podium wasn't possible?

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

I'm not a fan of how all the interaction of D1 went down between podium and me. I said I was willing to hammer ABR because of his attempt to hammer TDC before he even had a chance to claim. Then podium tells me to not hammer "just for the sake of hammering". I had never said I was gonna hammer for the sake of hammering.

In re-reading this discussion i just realized what some of the confusion was about. When you said:

Still love my vote. I'm sympathetic to an ABR wagon though, for the "hammer".

I thought you meant for

you

to hammer... not for

his

hammer. You pointed it out to me, and i still mis-interpreted it. I was only paying attention to the 'im sympathetic to an abr wagon' part. In 131, taz appears to do the same thing.

My mistake.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

And another defense of Taz.
@podium: Where does your read of Taz come from? meta only? He looks really scummy to me.

1. Claimed tracker (because of my thoughts about the setup)
2. Meta

Also, let's not forget that you made a meta defense of taz in this game as well...

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

it's been a while, so i'm assuming that zodiark read my last post and chose not to respond... so
VOTE: Zodiark13
For refusing to discuss the problem with me, and to move the game along. If he responds, i can reconsider. That puts him at L-1.

This is an example of podium following the crowd. He didn't get on Zodiark wagon early D2, but just followed the crowd with this vote.

I was the first person to call out Zodiark on D2, and posed a question to him about the matter. Myself and 2 others expressed suspicion and then you voted him. Why am i following the crowd, but you aren't?

Did i follow the crowd on D1?

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Personally i still find Dr. P's rage quit scummy, and that's probably always going to be associated with that slot for the rest of the game.
*cut*
That's about all i got... can't really get into this game, and haven't seen much that has jumped out and grabbed me.

This is another post where you point out a number of possibilities, but don't really take a hard stance on any of them.

It's another summary post... why are you cherry picking those and painting me as a 'wishy-washy' player? Have i not taken hard stances in this game?

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

i dont have a town read on anyone at this point, pretty much. if i had to pick right now, id probably go with the low hanging fruit... UT.

The "I don't have a town read on anyone" is also pretty scummy

Why?

as is the follow-up to that being go for the easy lynch that others are pushing.

A little disingenuous... no one was really pushing for his lynch, he was low hanging fruit because of his hammer.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

@Podium: Do you admit that I made a case on UT D1? Do you admit that absolutely NO ONE agreed or really even discussed my case? Do you admit that D2 when I was pushing Zodiark, I was still probbing UT over his fence-sitting? If you don't admit any of these, please explain because I'm pretty sure they are fact. If you do admit them, then please explain what was bad about moving my vote to UT when someone from town finally started paying attention to my case.

Honestly, i found the LMP/UT arguments extremely boring... UT's massive posts didn't help. I don't even remember what your argument was (if i ever did) at this point. However, i did already answer your question in thispost.

[podium123456]

Why is only 1 pr for town unlikely, particularly with a powerful PR like watcher?

Watcher is weaker than a cop... is cop + a protective role a common setup? Yes... so having only a watcher PR isn't likely. If cop + doc and 2 goons is balanced, how would a weaker town PR and 2 goons be balanced?

I understand speculation about a setup can be risky... but do you really think that watcher + 2 goons is balanced?

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Do you plan on ISO'ing Dr. Pepper? Wouldn't that be relevant as well?

IIRC Dr.Pepper was like 8 or so bullet list points that didn't really make a whole lot of sense. I'll look at the ISO, but I don't feel to hopeful about finding anything useful there.

He was on a lot of peoples scum lists based off of that activity... dont understand why you would choose to overlook that portion of the slots game activity.

[podium123456]

*facepalm*

[podium123456]

1) No I don't think you did much analysis. All you did was summarize what was happened.

In the post in question, i took several observations and explained how they could have scummy motives behind them... how is that not analysis? Tell me what definition of 'analysis' you are holding me to?

The few times you did "analyze" things, it was wishy washy. Example:

More cherry picking.

2) Those quotes show TDC/podium isn't possible because I don't think scum on D1 would have been trying to persuade others to hammer there teammate just to keep another townie from claiming. If your mate was put at L-1 and forced to claim, and then people started looking at another wagon, it would take a lot of guts/really strong scum play to actually say "no no, don't lynch that guy, this guy has already claimed, we should lynch him" knowing that you'd lose your partner on D1.

Still dont see why you think that proves that we aren't a team. Bussing... trying to look town... etc.

5) Your D1 play in regards to Dr.P wasn't following along, but pretty much everything after that does look like following along to me.

D1 - Led the charge
D2 - I made the first argument towards Zordiak's hammer. Again, how am i following, but you aren't? You're vote came after 3 people had already expressed suspicion.
D3 - There's no following here... it's common sense/POE.

6) I'm pointing out your summary posts because to me they are multiple examples of you making statements like you're on the sideline just pointing things out, but not taking a stance on them.

What am i supposed to do... vote every time i see someone do something scummy? I took a hard stance on Dr. P, ABR, Zordiak, and now, UT...

7) "I don't have a scum read on anyone" is scummy because it plays into opportunistic scum. You get to sit back and see which way the wind is blowing, and no one can contradict you because you get to say "well, everyone looked scummy to me, I said so right here".

*TOWN read

I fail to see how that statement is scummy, especially at this stage in the game. How could scum benefit from saying that? I named my lynch choice in the same post. How would someone contradict me?

8) NO ONE WAS PUSHING FOR HIS LYNCH? Are you kidding me!? WOW! I'm simply amazed.

Why? His hammer made him the lynch choice by default, who am i following?

As for 371, I disagree completely with your assertion that watcher is weaker than a cop. Watchers are so powerful some have questioned if they should even be in the game.

I've never seen people prefer to have a watcher instead of a cop. Cop gets a result every single time... a watcher first has to get lucky and choose a target that someone else chooses... and then you still don't know the alignment of the person that visited. (disregarding anti watcher/cop PR's)

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Anyway... are we all ready to vote UT?

[podium123456]

^^

Oops, another mistake of mine... i thought i made this post at the start of D2, but i made it at the end of D1:

http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... 5#p2494755

...anyway, it doesnt change my point. I was the first person to bring up zodiarks scummy vote, and you voted for him after 3 people had expressed suspicion. Why am i following the crowd, but you aren't?

[podium123456]

Its just information if you point out that it could be scummy. Its analysis when you come to a conclusion.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analysis

Analysis: Analysis is the process of breaking a complex topic or substance into smaller parts to gain a better understanding of it.

You're wrong... you don't have to reach a conclusion on something to analyze it.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

If I'm unwilling to follow that up with anything then it is worthless and does nothing but make you look like contributing without contributing.

In that post, i listed my top two scumpicks as Dr. P and ABR... my vote was already on Dr. Pepper. To insinuate that i didn't follow up my talks with action, or to contribute, is false.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Still dont see why you think that proves that we aren't a team. Bussing... trying to look town... etc.

Wow... this is fascinating to me. I think this might be the first time someone has argued with me that their behavior could make them part of a scum team.

You were very sure of the conclusion you drew from those quotes... which made little sense to me, and it still doesn't.

Then you not hammering today doesn't show it either. You could have just been unwilling to gamble the game if the town voter unvoted when you went for the quick lynch.

Nah... I just won a game as scum by quick hammering in this same type of situation, no reason why i wouldnt have went for it here. Regardless of that wifom, you didn't protest when TDC and myself discussed why certain teams were most likely not possible earlier, but you are now because it fits your current argument.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Which you are now conveniently pushing despite all attempts previously to deny UT-scum.

This is actually a pretty big misrepresentation/lie. Unless i missed something, i have never tried to deny that UT was scum. To the contrary, the only time i brought UT up was to accuse him of doing something scummy here. Can you provide quotes where i tried to deny that UT was scum?

Again, you only push UT now, but yesterday you argued pretty hard against any suspicions at UT.

Again with the misrepresentation/lie, and now you appear to contradict yourself when compared with this earlier quote:

This post is one giant wall of saying things that don't really mean anything. I think you manage to imply Me, ABR, Dr.P, Nexus,

and UT are scummy

in the same post.

Care to try and explain this?

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

6) I'm pointing out your summary posts because to me they are multiple examples of you making statements like you're on the sideline just pointing things out, but not taking a stance on them.

What am i supposed to do... vote every time i see someone do something scummy? I took a hard stance on Dr. P, ABR, Zordiak, and now, UT...

All easy targets.

You are shifting the argument here. This argument wasn't about whether or not people were 'easy' targets, it was that you said i didn't take stances in the game.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

8) NO ONE WAS PUSHING FOR HIS LYNCH? Are you kidding me!? WOW! I'm simply amazed.

Why? His hammer made him the lynch choice by default, who am i following?

So if not for his hammer yesterday you wouldn't find him scummy? But just the hammer means you want him lynched? If he hadn't hammered, would anyone in the game be scummier than him?

I dont see what those speculative questions have to do with your earlier accusation. I didn't have to follow anyone to determine that UT's hammer was scummy... POE makes the decision even easier.

[podium123456]

I guess i'll go ahead and reveal now that earlier when i dropped that little note that i was leaning UT/TDC, it was a ploy. I was more susp. of LMP and wanted to see what kind of reaction that would illicit. I wasn't expecting all this discussion to follow... actually i thought day would have ended by now... anyway, i figured i might as well put it out here now, since we're having a big discussion.

I've found LMP kinda scummy since the start of the game... i haven't read the UT/LMP argument, but LMP was pretty much on him most of the game... looks like a possible buss to me. But today is where any doubt i had has been removed, with this last few pages of discussion.

He realizes it will be me, him, and TDC in lylo... so he does ISO's on everybody. But... he ends up not even ISO'ing TDC because 'everything is town' from him. Ok... i might could buy that... but the fact that he didn't include Dr. P i found odd. I brought it up, and he still dismissed it. I dont believe that anyone that was REALLY trying to decide against two people would forgo such an important part of that role.

Now, with the line of questions against me, i see a lot of scummy tactics, that i have highlighted with the past few posts. The biggest is his contradiction of acknowledging that i made a post that implied UT was scummy, and later said that i had "argued pretty hard against any susp. of UT". Which is a lie as well, as i haven't said anything in defense of UT all game.

His conclusion that TDC and I aren't partners because of my day 1 insistence of hanging TDC without more claims, seemed very odd. Why would someone discount the possibility of bussing that easily? His conclusion was much more confident than i believe the evidence shows.

I'm sure there is more stuff, but that's off the top of my head, and is enough to satisfy myself as to who i should vote for.

So that's that...

[podium123456]

podium has been happy to chug sweatily along behind the bandwagon for the latter half of the game. He did it with Zodiark, he's been doing it with me today and I imagine that if, god willing, we start discussing lynching someone other than me, he'll wait for someone else to point out LMP before actually jumping on that.

Trying to help out your partners case before you go, eh?

As i stated previously, i made the first criticism of zodiarks vote. Even if i hadn't... big whoopin deal... he hammered someone without getting a claim first, he's obviously gonna be at the top of everyones scumlist.

...the same with you.

And, actually, i think i'm the first person to make a case against LMP today... so you can't say i'm waiting for a bandwagon on him.

Your case against me is really weak (it seems to mainly be UT is scum because he's scum and other people have said so) and hints pretty strongly at trying to bandwagon to sweet, scummy victory.

No, i have explained it pretty thoroughly at this point. Process of elimination by taking into account the votes placed today, and taz's claim.

It's actually quite strong.

[podium123456]

As i stated previously, i made the first criticism of zodiarks vote. Even if i hadn't... big whoopin deal... he hammered someone without getting a claim first, he's obviously gonna be at the top of everyones scumlist.

a bandwagon is made of votes. It's one thing to say someone's scum, it's entirely another to put a vote on them. You weren't the first person to vote on the zodiark wagon.

Yep that's true, my vote came later. Just showing that my opinion of him was given before the rest joined in.

Hey... wait a minute... could i place a vote on you right now and then accuse TDC and LMP of bandwagoning when they vote later? Or is it just me you hold to that standard?

No, i have explained it pretty thoroughly at this point. Process of elimination by taking into account the votes placed today, and taz's claim.

It's actually quite strong.

The vote thing makes it just as likely that Taz is scum as it does me! Your case is weaksauce if it is based on that!

Well, it is. Guess we will find out how good of a theory it is when the rope goes taught, eh?

[podium123456]

I have a hard time buying this considering you've basically had a "still think Dr P was soo scummy"-post every other page. Since when has that not been your real opinion?

Never. But you've played pretty solidly since you replaced in. I've found LMP scummy all game, and i've made note of it throughout. His behavior today sealed the deal.

What's your opinion on the points i raised about his recent discussions with me?

[podium123456]

Can you refresh me on what you noted on him prior to today?

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

I will say that i really found lynchmepls and nexus's votes to be scummier than Dr. Pepper's actions at the time i voted him. However, i was much more interested in seeing how dr. pepper would react to some pressure/accusations, than i was in voting for either LMP or Nexus.

LMP and nexus, your votes on blaze looked

really

bad... definitely possible that it was scum trying to take advantage of the situation. that's not to say that it was... but it definitely looks like it could be a possibility.

^^ note that this was another ploy similar to what i did today.

LMP - If one of the votes on blaze was a scum vote, my gut says this is the one. but, it could mean nothing.

LMP... been getting a slightly scummy scum vibe here... mostly gut. dont like how he says he thought UT was scum, but didn't pursue/vote him today until incognito started making a case.

[podium123456]

As for you being behind the curve a lot. I agree with that.

I dont quite get why people keep throwing in descriptions like 'a lot' and 'all game'. We've had 2 days (3 if u count today i guess) of activity... on one of those days i led the charge, on the other i voted after others had (like LMP did). Why does the second day count more than the first, and why isn't LMP following the crowd as well? I wouldn't say that she is, but i'm using the same standards that people are putting on me.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Yes you did ask Zod what happened to his earlier read before night fell, but when the new day startet you just seemed to have forgotten about it and when you finally remember it's just "he seems to be the big target today".

I didn't forget about it, i wanted him to respond to my question before i voted... is that scummy? I pointed that out several times during D2.

I'd hardly call that conviction. Then you put him on L-1 (for pressure, basically), talk some more about Dr P, throw in the Taz meta and that's that day.

You should take a re-read of my ISO, because you are being a little disengenious with your description. Particularly by saying that there was no conviction, and that it was only a pressure vote.

By observing my D1 arguments about claiming, you should know that i take putting someone at L-1 very seriously. Furthermore, after i said "if he responds i can reconsider"... he did respond and we discussed the issue. Not only did i not reconsider, but i left my vote in place and recommended that he be lynched for his behavior.

Still think zordiak's behavior was scummy, and lynch worthy, at the moment.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

It's not much different with UT whom you've apparently picked because he's "low hanging fruit" (and later because you think Taz is town).

I don't see how this is a criticism. UT was my top scumpick when i said that because of his scummy vote... how is that not valid?

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

That is totally different to LMP repeatedly stating suspicion of UT but only voting him when there's actually wagon support.

Again, i'm not sure what you are criticizing here.

[podium123456]

By the way TDC, you didn't comment on what i asked you to (mostly 382). I don't think you have discussed LMP all day today... if not the whole game. Why? Do you find nothing critical about his play?

[podium123456]

TDC u can end today if you want, we can continue the conversations where we left off tomorrow. I would end it, but i dont know if you are ready.

[podium123456]

OK... looks like LMP has a pretty good audience with TDC...

That is the scummy nature of the "I don't have a town read on anyone" statement. If he'd decided to pick TDC instead of me for his target, he could just as easily say "I've been sure he is scum all game, just look back at what I've said".

That's exactly what I'm thinking. The only difference between us is that you've clearly stated a town read on me while I haven't reciprocated that.

LMP and TDC (Dr. P) were my top scumpicks from D1, and throughout the game. There's no way i could have predicted that i would end up in lylo with you two back then. UT's scummy hammer made him... scummy.

Construct as many 'scummy' motivations as you want... the facts show that there would be no reason for me to have a town read on you three players based on my previous input.

(and NO LMP, i didn't just call everyone scum)

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

on one of those days i led the charge

How did you lead the charge on ABR? You were the one pointing out again and again that we've already had a claim and wouldn't it be smart to not get another one and just lynch me.

Keep in mind the accusation we are discussing here. I wasn't referring to ABR. I was responding to criticism that i followed the crowd 'a lot' or 'all game'. I'll repeat:

We've had 2 days (3 if u count today i guess) of activity... on one of those days i led the charge, on the other i voted after others had (like LMP did). Why does the second day count more than the first, and why isn't LMP following the crowd as well? I wouldn't say that he is, but i'm using the same standards that people are putting on me.


xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

I didn't forget about it, i wanted him to respond to my question before i voted... is that scummy? I pointed that out several times during D2.

Again, in your first post of the day, you don't mention him at all, and in the second you merely notice that he seems to be the big target. If you were that eagerly awaiting an answer, you sure did a brilliant job to hide it.

Your description isn't accurate.

In my first post of the day, zodiark hadn't posted yet... so there was no need for me to repeat my question.

In the second, i didn't 'merely notice that he seems to be the big target'... i repeated my question, and with more detail. Link I continued to press the issue with him throughout the day.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Yeah, that really is what you said.

We're off track of the point i was making here, but i'm going to drop it.


xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

UT was my top scumpick when i said that because of his scummy vote... how is that not valid?

Your only response to UT's hammer was "what a mess of a game". Your very next comment was the low hanging fruit one, without ever actually saying you had a problem with his hammer. From then on it's just "Taz is town, hence UT scum".

I see. So you believe even though UT hammered before the claim, that i said "what a mess of a game" right after he did, and that i had previously criticized 2 different players for doing such... that i didn't have a problem with his hammer.

Really?


xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Again, i'm not sure what you are criticizing here.

Nothing. You are basically saying that LMP is guilty of exactly what you've done. I'm saying that's not the case.

No, you misunderstood my point.

I was referring to D2 and the Zodiark vote. LMP accused me of just 'following the crowd'... yet she voted after 3 people had expressed suspicion. I was the first to raise suspicion about his hammer, but didnt vote until after i had questioned him.

Why am i following the crowd, but LMP isn't?

[podium123456]

By the way TDC, you didn't comment on what i asked you to (mostly 382). I don't think you have discussed LMP all day today... if not the whole game. Why? Do you find nothing critical about his play?

I thought I did respond to that when I explained how I agree with his sentiment regarding your play. He's doing fine - not that that guarantees he's town.

Ermm... you kinda sailed over my bigger points... ill condense:

- he claims to do an ISO to determine which of us is scummy... yet leaves out a very influential portion associated with your role. i question him about it, and he dismisses it as if it was meaningless.

- he has said multiple times that i argued against UT being scum all game. yet, earlier he described a post in which i 'implied UT was scummy'. this is actually a pretty big contradiction.

- besides the fact that he contradicted himself, it's a lie to say that i defended UT. i clearly didn't, at any point in this game.

- why did my insistence of lynching you on D1 without more claims mean that we weren't partners? that isn't a logical conclusion... as we could have easily been bussing.

As I've already mentioned, this type of fucked up game is really easy to win as scum for compentent players because

you can win it by playing pretty much identical to a townie

.

Yes, but he isn't even doing that... he has over-reacted at times, made hypocritical accusations, performed illogical scumhunting, and made a pretty big contradiction.

[podium123456]

- he claims to do an ISO to determine which of us is scummy... yet leaves out a very influential portion associated with your role. i question him about it, and he dismisses it as if it was meaningless.

I never figured out what was so scummy about Dr P posting mostly meaningless garbage in the first place, so that's a non-issue for me.

... well... that's not really the point, since obviously you know Dr. P's role.

the point was that

LMP

didn't bother to ISO his play... doesnt make sense to totally throw out that portion of the role if you are trying to ISO people for guilt.

- he has said multiple times that i argued against UT being scum all game. yet, earlier he described a post in which i 'implied UT was scummy'. this is actually a pretty big contradiction.

But you didn't just imply UT was scummy, you said the same about several other players and without following up on it at all.

...dude... you totally missed the point... i dont even know what you are arguing, there.

1. LMP points out a post in which i specifically called UT scummy.

2. Later, LMP says that i have defended UT all game.

Contradiction.

- besides the fact that he contradicted himself, it's a lie to say that i defended UT. i clearly didn't, at any point in this game.

Yeah it would be more accurate to say that you ignored him for most of the time.

So you agree it's a lie.

- why did my insistence of lynching you on D1 without more claims mean that we weren't partners? that isn't a logical conclusion... as we could have easily been bussing.

Obviously it is the right conclusion anyway. Whether something looks like bussing or like scum wanting to get a mislynch is always going to be a subjective call.

bro... again...

of course it's the right conclusion. the point was that he

definitively

said that that situation showed that we were NOT partners.

Let me try it this way... do you think that my insistence to lynch you on D1 proved that we were not partners?

We've had 2 days (3 if u count today i guess) of activity... on one of those days i led the charge, on the other i voted after others had (like LMP did).

So by "you lead the charge" you mean on Dr P? I'm really not following what you are trying to say you did.

On one of those days I didn't follow anyone, and lead a wagon for Dr.P/TDC.

Why does the second day count more than the first, and why isn't LMP following the crowd as well? I wouldn't say that he is, but i'm using the same standards that people are putting on me.

That's what I tried to say - he had been very clear what he thought of UT. One could say he lead the charge...

...

In comparing myself to LMP, i am only referring to D2... i thought i made it pretty clear.

We each 'lead the charge' on someone... me on Dr.P, and him on UT. On D2 i was the first to raise suspicion of Zod, and i voted after discussions. After 3 people raised suspicion, he voted Zod.

Why am i following the crowd on D2, but LMP isn't? On D2.

I see. So you believe even though UT hammered before the claim, that i said "what a mess of a game" right after he did, and that i had previously criticized 2 different players for doing such... that i didn't have a problem with his hammer.

Really?

I'm just missing this "UT is so scum for that hammer" post. Instead he's the low hanging fruit and, oh well Taz's claim makes him town, so he kinda must be scum, right.

Did you even read what i wrote?

You think that i didn't think his hammer was scummy? After i had previously said doing so was scummy, to other players in the game?

Do hammers before a claim is given generally give a town vibe? Sheesh.

[podium123456]

LMP's play is just way more transparent than yours. I think I always had a good idea what he was thinking about the game (and on top of that, most of that made sense to me as well).

You're failure to get some of the basic points i have been raising, as well as seeming to let LMP mold your opinion of me, has me worried. If LMP is town, then this game has been composed of the scummiest acting town people i have ever EVER played with. Hands down.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

In your own words, what is your case against me? What have i done that has been scummy, to you?

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

If you were scum, and had just been caught contradicting yourself and lying... would you keep talking about it, or stay quiet and hope it goes away? Several times i have specifically brought those issues up to LMP, and he has completely ignored responding to them. ...of course he probably will now, now that i have called him on it...

My point is that an innocent person would try to clear the issues up... not completely ignore them.

[podium123456]

Well, but I agree that it is pretty meaningless. The Dr P wagon was horrible.

Right. Because playing poorly, and ragequitting on D1, are totally town behaviors.

-
...dude... you totally missed the point... i dont even know what you are arguing, there.

1. LMP points out a post in which i specifically called UT scummy.

2. Later, LMP says that i have defended UT all game.

Contradiction.

The point here would be that as far as I can tell you calling UT scummy wasn't more than a throwaway comment.

Well, you missed it again... dont know how else to get it across to you.

LMP said i did A.

Later, LMP said i didn't do A.

Forget that you think it wasn't more than a throwaway comment... LMP stated that he took it as me calling UT scummy. Later, he says i have been defending him all game.

- besides the fact that he contradicted himself, it's a lie to say that i defended UT. i clearly didn't, at any point in this game.

Yeah it would be more accurate to say that you ignored him for most of the time.

So you agree it's a lie.

*shrug* Ignoral isn't particularly "better" than defense.

???

I mentioned UT once, and it was to imply he was acting scummy. How is that defending?

Hell... forget i made that comment at all, and hadn't mentioned him all game. How is it truthful to say i defended him all game?

You seemed reluctant to lynch UT.

Where?

Let me try it this way... do you think that my insistence to lynch you on D1 proved that we were not partners?

No. And? What does scum LMP gain from declaring we couldn't be buddies for the wrong reason?

...

The point was to show that it was illogical to conclude that. Things that don't make sense are indicative of scum.

We've had 2 days (3 if u count today i guess) of activity... on one of those days i led the charge, on the other i voted after others had (like LMP did).

So by "you lead the charge" you mean on Dr P? I'm really not following what you are trying to say you did.

On one of those days I didn't follow anyone, and lead a wagon for Dr.P/TDC.

As far as I remember Zod started off that wagon. (Although it escapes me why you'd think being responsible for that wagon would be a good thing).

That doesn't surprise me.

I am responding to the criticism that i 'followed the crowd' all game, and didn't take hard stances.

Why am i following the crowd on D2, but LMP isn't? On D2.

He voted him in his first post of the day, actually.

Not really the point.

Let me put it this way... do you think i was just following the crowd on D2, or that i was genuinely suspicious of him?

You think that i didn't think his hammer was scummy? After i had previously said doing so was scummy, to other players in the game.

But that is exactly the point. You didn't hound UT for that at all. You spend the first few posts of the day not mentioning it at all and when you do come around to talking about it, you half-assedly conclude he's scum because of the Taz claim and still don't mention it.
I just don't get the impression that it really bothered you all that much.

Asking me whether I think you think it was a scummy action is not a useful question, because my theory is that it was not at the top of your list, because he is your buddy and you hoped the topic might just disappear.

He voted for the person i was voting for. If it didnt bother me, then why did i say 'this game is a mess' after he did? Why would i complain, if he voted for the person i thought was scum?

I didn't keep bringing it up, because it's common sense that a hammer without claim is scummy. I didn't know that if i didn't specifically state it word for word, that people would assume i had no problem with it.

Think about the scenario you are proposing... you're saying that i thought 'uh-oh... he hammered without a claim... i better not say anything... maybe no one will notice, and he wont get lynched.'

If that was the case... THEN WHY DID I SAY WE SHOULD LYNCH HIM? Comon man...

[podium123456]

In your own words, what is your case against me? What have i done that has been scummy, to you?

Look, there have been players in this game that have been scummier than you and they annoyingly enough turned up town.
But at this point it's only Taz, him and you and you just fit best in the way you treated UT (and all this could be very moot if UT actually flips town which I suppose is still possible as well). That the only thing I would want to give you credit for committing to is the Dr P hate is just a bonus.

Let me get this straight... i have shown where LMP contradicted himself, lied, and made statements that are illogical. Yet, you want to lynch me because... because... well... you haven't really said, as far as i can see.

How have i treated UT (that you are referring to here), and how am i scummy... in your own words?

[podium123456]

This is getting really repetitive now.

Part of that is because i have had to explain myself repeatedly on most points just to get you to understand them. My points against LMP are all easy to understand, and valid.

THEN WHY DID I SAY WE SHOULD LYNCH HIM?

i dont have a town read on anyone at this point, pretty much. if i had to pick right now, id probably go with the low hanging fruit... UT.

How many people do you figure will this post convince that they should lynch UT?
You're just going along with it.

Surprise, surprise... you are talking about something different with your answer than the point i was addressing.

I didn't provide that paragraph to show that i was trying to convince people to lynch UT. It was to get you to think about your opinion that his hammer didnt bother me, and that i was ignoring it in hopes the issue went away.

First of all, it's ridiculous to think that i would think no one would talk about his hammer... secondly, i said he was my scumpick -- if i wanted to hush the hammer topic so he wouldnt get lynched... why did i say i wanted to lynch him? And lastly, you have never answered what pretty much proves my story... if i didn't have a problem with his vote, then why did i make a critical comment about it after he made it?

If i had wanted to show how i tried to convince people to vote for UT, it would be later in the thread... when i meticulously broke down the reasons why he was almost 100% guaranteed scum.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

You're acting just as scummy as LMP at this point. I have proven that LMP contradicted himself, lied, and acted illogical... and you barely (if any at all) acknowledge it. When asked what your case is on me, repeatedly, you give no answer... you just talk around the subject.

Besides that, i have to explain stuff 3 or 4 times before you understand what i am talking about... i don't know if that's an act to try and resist acknowledging that LMP has acted scummier, or if it's legit.

[podium123456]

because my theory is that it was not at the top of your list, because he is your buddy and you hoped the topic might just disappear.

By the way, i doubt that's really your theory (ignoring topics so they disappear), as i had just given that theory in the paragraph above yours. What a coincidence that the first time you make mention of it, is right after i give it.

Also, you continue to avoid commenting on the fact that LMP

actually

did this... as opposed to me, who didn't... I did criticize his hammer.

[podium123456]

You keep telling me how the hammer made you so sure UT is scum but it just doesn't show in your contemporary posts.

I never have said his

hammer

made me sure he was scum... but dont let the facts get in your way.

He was my top scumpick, but i was still undecided... hence my comment. We are only discussing it because you think his hammer didn't bother me, even though the evidence shows otherwise.

Your basis for your conclusion (after it becoming very apparent he was going to get lynched anyway) was Taz' claim.

The basis of my conclusion was process of elimination based on the votes that were cast, as well as Taz's claim... what does this have to do with anything?

i said he was my scumpick

Please, please tell me about which of your posts you're actually talking here.

Uhhh... the one where i said i was going to go with UT. ???

When asked what your case is on me, repeatedly, you give no answer... you just talk around the subject.

And I have repeatedly explained that I think you make the most sense as UT's buddy. I'm not sure why we're discussing this anyway as I'm obviously not going to convince you that you're scum.
To put it quite frankly, if LMP was UT's buddy, why bother with the game long bus when it was quite apparent that the town was

full of idiots

?

The trend continues...

Boy, that is rock solid scumhunting... 'LMP and UT aren't partners because LMP has argued against UT all game'.

*facepalm*

And the bus started long before it was apparent what kind of crowd we have here... not that your theory is plausible, anyway.

By the way, i doubt that's really your theory (ignoring topics so they disappear), as i had just given that theory in the paragraph above yours.

What the fuck dude.
1. I initially brought that up here:

His sudden urge to lynch UT could be read either way I suppose. At the time we were both relatively clear we wanted UT dead so he may well have thought it was inevitable and he'd better be on it than not.

Are you even paying attention to what you are writing?

I was referring to your theory that i didnt mention the hammer, because i wanted that issue to go away. You quoted yourself referring to your theory that i saw both of you wanted UT dead, and thought i should be on the wagon.

TWO DIFFERENT THINGS...

lso, you continue to avoid commenting on the fact that LMP actually did this...

You will have to provide evidence that he could've posted but didn't for this to make any sense. All I see is him having a clear stance in his first post after the event.

Wow... what are you even talking about? Clear stance about what? The hammer? That isn't the issue that is being discussed.

I clearly explained numerous times that i am referring to how LMP refused to discuss the contradiction/lie that i caught him in. Someone who is innocent wouldnt let those accusations float on by... someone who was guilty and couldnt explain them easily, would.

[podium123456]

Everything I would say in this back and forth argument has already been said by TDC.

The only thing I'd like to address is this:

Let me get this straight... i have shown where LMP contradicted himself, lied, and made statements that are illogical. Yet, you want to lynch me because... because... well... you haven't really said, as far as i can see.

1. Your claim that I contradicted myself is ridiculous. I argue that you've protected UT (yesterday by deflecting attention away from UT and towards Zodiark).

Town that's dead, i'm sorry but i can't do much when i am being hit with fail logic on one side and the other person is buying it.

Yes, because i wanted to lynch the person that hammered without getting a claim... that obviously means i was defending/protecting UT. Because a townie would obviously not let the scummy hammer bother him, and instead, would focus his attention on someone else's scumpick...

Your play yesterday in regards to the UT wagon is nothing but scum motivations.

Yeah, i know... because i should have not worried about Zodiarks scummy hammer, and instead helped you lynch your scumpick. By the way, the most votes that were on UT yesterday was TWO... but i know that doesn't matter... it's obviously a wagon and i should have been on it.

Oh and, hey... TDC wasn't on it either... not that it really matters.

Your play today in regards to him is as well, as well as your "sudden" revelation that you've been sure I'm scum all game.

Right, because when i argue against UT today, i am bussing him. When you argued against him all game, it obviously wasn't bussing.

Also, i never said that i was 'sure you were scum all game'... but don't let the facts get in your way.

2. This quote oozes squirming scum.

I agree... anyone in 3 way lylo, that is talking to the deciding party, pointing out scummy behavior from his opponent, and also that the deciding party hasn't said what his case is against me, is obviously squirming scum.

[podium123456]

And the bus started long before it was apparent what kind of crowd we have here... not that your theory is plausible, anyway.

I was hammered on page fucking four

And the bus started BEFORE that, which pretty much negates your already weak theory. But... you know... keep sticking to it...

Uhhh... the one where i said i was going to go with UT. ???

What, the low hanging fruit one?

Yes, the one in which i said i was going to go with UT.

I'm sorry, i guess i should explain... i realize you have a problem reaching logical conclusions from text that doesn't specifically state it's intent to the letter... did you think i meant i was going to go with UT to the mall? I meant i was going to go with UT for the lynch.

[podium123456]

And just to be clear here:

what a mess of a game.

Could that imply that you thought UT was being really scummy and that you wanted to lynch him? Sure.
Could that imply that you just thought he was an idiot? Sure.

You're right... even though he just hammered someone without a claim, it's more believable that all i was doing was choosing that time to just throw out a random insult towards him... even though he had voted for the person i was voting for.

If i was his partner, and i didn't want people to discuss his hammer... then why would i choose that moment to make that criticism?

Think about it.

[podium123456]

And the bus started long before it was apparent what kind of crowd we have here... not that your theory is plausible, anyway.

I was hammered on page fucking four

And the bus started BEFORE that, which pretty much negates your already weak theory. But... you know... keep sticking to it...

You mean because once a bus has left the station it must keep on rolling because it will explode otherwise?

The bus started before your lynch. The lynch was the result of the scummy hammer of ABR, that didnt count because of a technicality. After that happened, people backed off of your case and moved on ABR. Also, one of the players on your case was replaced, their replacement joined the game and removed the vote. It wasn't apparent that the town was full of idiots until much later in the game.

Besides that, your theory is just wifom'y weak anyway.

Yes, the one in which i said i was going to go with UT.

I'm sorry, i guess i should explain... i realize you have a problem reaching logical conclusions from text that doesn't specifically state it's intent to the letter... did you think i meant i was going to go with UT to the mall? I meant i was going to go with UT for the lynch.

No shit.

Then why did you question which post i was talking about?

1. It came pretty much out of the blue. (This is where the hammer comes in, because you had until then not even mentioned it other than with this uber-ambigious post-lynch comment - and you don't mention in that post either - see that's where I got the idea that you didn't have much against the hammer, because surely if you had, you'd actually have talked about it. Your answer to this was that you had something against it when Zod did the same thing, which is true, but of course all that does is create a discrepancy between how you reacted to Zod doing it vs UT doing it.)

Again, i thought that a hammer without a claim is generally scummy... you even say you think that i think this. So it was understood by everyone that it was scummy... and there was no need for me to spell it out.

I expressed indecision about lynching him, because the hammer wasn't the 100% proof that he was scum... it was just something generally scummy.

2. You commit at a time where Taz was already voting him (meaning he was basically lynched all but in form, because UT and I were going to vote him).

And? LMP and your comments were the first posts of the day... i'm obviously going to have to follow those. So you're saying i only committed to UT because i saw other people suspecting him?

3. The phrasing ("low hanging fruit") does not sound particularly convinced of it (which is rather odd considering you claim it is a result of process of elimination and seeing how you seemed rather sure that Taz wasn't lying. One of them had to be scum.)

A. I wasn't convinced... which is why i sounded hesitant.

B. POE due to votes didnt come into play until

after

i made that commitment.

[podium123456]

By the way

Dont both mafia visit the night kill... regardless of who submits it? that's how it works on other sites.

How could you not be aware that only one member of the mafia submits the kill if you've actually already been there and done that?

That role PM says nothing about how many mafia visit the target. As a matter of fact, it implies that other mafia members can speak for the rest in the pm... 'each night, a MEMBER of your faction may PM the name of a player YOU wish to kill'. I assumed that regardless of who actually sent the pm, all mafia would show up on tracker/watcher reports.

I've played nearly 500 games of chat mafia, and that has been my only experience with trackers... that multiple mafia visit the target, and if the tracker is on one of those mafia, it shows a guilty.

[podium123456]

It wasn't apparent that the town was full of idiots until much later in the game.

Well, I was aware and unlike hypothetical LMP-scum I didn't even know they were all town..

You also knew the alignment of Dr. P.

And I doubt the majority of people on this site would say that getting mad and ragequitting on D1, because you were under suspicion, is townish behavior.

Besides that, your theory is just wifom'y weak anyway.

I might be predisposed because my last game went exactly like that. I was scum, the town was not even as bad as this one and it would never have occured to me to risk what seemed like a certain win by bussing my buddy. Hell, he was really scummy actually, I just ignored him, and he never got more than a single vote.

You are obviously predisposed...

You are letting this wifom theory overshadow the actual actions that LMP and I took in this game.

Again, i thought that a hammer without a claim is generally scummy... you even say you think that i think this. So it was understood by everyone that it was scummy... and there was no need for me to spell it out.

Is it just a bit scummy? Scummy enough that you'd lynch him over it? Who knows if you don't say a word about it.

Wait... you were arguing that i didnt find his hammer scummy... now you are arguing over how scummy i might have found it.

It wasn't scummy enough for me to lynch him over it, as i was still undecided. I didn't feel the need to state the obvious, that i considered a scummy act scummy... especially since i had already made a comment regarding his hammer.

...i know, i know... you think i was really just insulting him out of the blue... you dont have to repeat it.

So you're saying i only committed to UT because i saw other people suspecting him?

You comitted when he had sealed his own fate by voting Taz. You gave zero indication that you were willing to do that before that.

We had just started the massclaim...

I mean LMP actually asked me why I wanted a mass claim when he thought was clear that we'd lynch UT and I said I thought it wasn't clear because it was only him and me. That would've been where you say "hey, I'm fine lynching him, too!" if that was what you actually thought but didn't bother to spell out because it was so obvious.

I didn't say it, because i wasn't necessarily okay with lynching him at that point...

B. POE due to votes didnt come into play until

after

i made that commitment.

Why did you make the commitment at that point then? If it wasn't based on the Taz-UT conflict, then why not earlier?

You're off track.

This originates from you saying you found it odd that i used a hesitant phrasing, considering that claim POE makes it nearly 100% that he is scum.

I was informing you that the POE came after i made that hesitant phrasing.

[podium123456]

Why bother with a designated sender in the first place if it doesn't matter who it actually is?

It just says 'a member of your faction'... doesn't specify anything. I assumed it was because the mod just needed to know what we decided... not to specifically here from individual mafia.

Actually, if you look in that scum quicktopic i refer to it as 'we' everytime i sent the kills... i didnt know it was only me that was visiting and killing. I also told the mod who to roleblock, which i couldnt do as a goon... since the mod went ahead with it, it furthered my assumption that all the night PM did was notify the mod of our decisions.

How could you not be aware that only one member of the mafia submits the kill if you've actually already been there and done that?

Badly phrased, what I mean is, did you seriously think that the town roleblocker in that game would prevent your kill even if he targeted one of your buddies?

No, because that was an action that only affects an individual (i'm used to it being called a town drunk... the town drunk drunks someone and they cant perform their action). The tracker is an action that only affects an individual as well.

I was under the assumption that the mafia kill was a group activity, however.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

I am preparing for my first mod game... i specifically included this rule in my rule list:

2. The mafia member that submits the night kill will be the only one that visits and kills the target.

(i can link you to the game review quicktopic, where that ruleset is listed, if you want)

I don't believe i have ever seen that rule on this site, and is the reason i am including it... because i had been under the wrong impression for as long as i had played here. The issue had just never come up.

[podium123456]

Okay, well... since we pretty much predicted that, no surprises. And since we had a lot of discussion about the 3 way lylo yesterday, i guess most of it is already out there.

TDC had been pretty town to me, until yesterday when he seemed to turn a blind eye to LMP's scummy behaviors, and condemn me... based on some subjectivity surrounding my feelings towards UT yesterday, as well as a pretty weak reason (in my eyes) to discount a LMP/UT team.

But LMP's actions over the course of the game have been scummier... so that's who im betting on as scum.

@ TDC:

You can still respond to 436 and 437, i guess.

But as far as i can tell, your case for voting me is that i make the most sense as UT's partner. This is based on your subjective interpretation (which is overly critical of certain things*) of my feelings towards UT today, and your theory about LMP not bussing UT (which is wifomy weak, and has holes in it).

*as in, refusing to believe that i was criticizing his vote, even though evidence points otherwise... instead believing i just decided to throw out a random insult at him

As far as our individual actions, i have shown where LMP has actually contradicted himself, lied, and made illogical conclusions. I've seen no similar criticism of my play, from anyone.

Dont know what else to say, that i haven't already said. If you are going to hang the game on this wild theory of yours, then it is yours to lose.

[podium123456]

He said UT/incognito... not me/incognito.

[podium123456]

As for his reaction to me, he pretty much spent the whole game casting sideways suspicions at me without ever backing it up with a serious case/vote, and then late yesterday when he realized that he'd be coming into today without UT, he suddenly launches the "I've always thought LMP is scum". That pretty much sealed it for me. I want to see the self-ISO that TDC asks from podium, but I'm all but certain based on the play that podium is the last scum.

This is the second time you have misrepresented my words on this issue, and i have already corrected you once.

I didn't say 'i've always thought LMP was scum'... i said i found you more suspicious than TDC at this point, and that you have acted kinda scummy throughout the game. You keep trying to twist it into me meaning 'i've always thought LMP was guaranteed scum, i just didnt bring it up'... which isn't at all what i said.

And i have made note of your scummy behavior throughout the game... i didn't just come out of the blue with that opinion now. You, on the other hand, have never made any mention that you thought i was acting scummy... until now, of course.


xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

And as far as the 'when he realized he would be coming into lylo with you and TDC, he realized he had to attack me'... that goes the other way as well... when you realized you would be coming into lylo with TDC and myself, you started attacking me and buddying up to TDC. It's kind of a pointless criticism, because we both acted in the same manner.

[podium123456]

podium:
Interpretations tend to be subjective. If your posts where less open to interpretation there would be less for me to subjectively interpret.

First of all, we are only discussing one or two posts here... it's not like i made a habit of it.

Secondly, it was only in a situation in which i felt deductive reasoning made my intent clear. The problem is that you are refusing to use any deductive reasoning when considering my statements... instead saying 'well... since technically it could mean anything, im going to reject your explanation'... which i dont feel is fair.

It's like when LMP said 'we all know who we are going to lynch today', and you said 'i assume you mean UT'. You used deductive reasoning to assume who she meant, even though she didnt specifically say so. But then - even though i previously expressed my opinion about hammering without a claim, the general consensus that it is scummy, and my critical remark i made right after his hammer - you refuse to believe that i found his hammer scummy.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx


Don't really know why both of you are so interested in me detailing an ISO... i've clearly stated these positions, and the times that i had them, over the last couple of days. Anyway...


#301 - UT's hammer was scummy. Nothing changes until...

#322 - Pick UT for lynch, but not convinced he is scum.

#355 - Due to complete massclaim, and POE because of the voting, feel UT is nearly guaranteed scum.

[podium123456]

But I didn't know I was going into lylo with TDC, he or I could have died. You were the one that flailed about like crazy yesterday once we approached deadline.

But i didnt know i was going into lylo with TDC, he or I could have died. You were the one that flailed about like crazy yesterday once we approached deadline.

See? It's a pointless argument, and means nothing.

The rest of what you are saying is claptrap.

i.e. - he's right, and i can't rebut it... so ill just insult it

[podium123456]

This is hilarious. You trying to paint your behavior yesterday as similar to mine is laughable.

You accused me of only coming after you because i figured us 3 would be in endgame together... i could say the same for you. The difference is that i had been pointing out your scummy behavior all game, and you never mentioned me before today.

So, yeah you're right, it is laughable... your behavior looks more like scum.

The rest of what you are saying is claptrap.

i.e. - he's right, and i can't rebut it... so ill just insult it

Actually I can do more than rebut it. The fact that you were willing to say "LMP is more likely scum" is even worse than if you'd actually picked me as scum and pushed it.

You aren't rebutting that point... you are changing the argument. The point i made was that i didn't say/mean 'i've thought LMP was guaranteed scum all game, i just didnt say so', like you misrepresented. Also, i didn't just come out of the blue with suspicion of you because i realized we would be in endgame together, as you implied.

If you want to discuss other points, then we can... but you misrepresented my play, and that was the point.

[podium123456]

Given that statement, I have a couple of questions: If all doubt has been removed, why are you sitting around today arguing with both of us and jockeying for position, instead of voting me. If you still have doubts (and thus you don't want to vote), then why did you say yesterday that all doubt had been removed?

I have doubts because of the discussions i had with TDC following that post... but that's really neither here nor there because i still think you are scummier. I haven't voted because our votes are mostly symbolic, since we are going to cross... the only vote that matters is TDC's. Also because i want the chance to make my case before a hammer.

You spin a lot of words to try and confuse the issue, but the plain simple truth is no ones play in this game matches up better with UT scum than yours.

Where have i spun words to confuse the issue? I'm pretty direct with my language, and i can point to many instances where the person i was talking to mixed up, or changed, the issue we were discussing.

Your entire game has been "let me cast as many suspicions as I can out there so that when the time comes I'm able to justify hoping on any wagon".

As i already said, that's not accurate. I didn't call everyone scum. Also, while i naturally pointed out scummy behaviors from other players, I was more vocal about LMP and Dr. P being scum than anyone else in the game... since the beginning.

Your D1 play is pushing hard for Dr. P scum, but then suddenly yesterday "all doubt" has been removed that I am scum and TDC isn't. When I push UT D1, you have nothing to offer. When I push him some more D2, you have nothing to offer, when Incog and I push UT D2, you start pushing at the Zodiark wagon more, and call me scummy for "tunneling". However, despite your casting suspicion on pretty much everyone in the game, you never call UT scum until the hammer + mass claim pretty much force you to. Then you act like we're all supposed to see you as townie for it.

I dont see how any of this is relevant.

I've explained why i chose you over TDC, and why POE meant that UT was scum, yesterday.

I also said that i was completely uninterested in your UT case, and hadn't paid any attention to it. From what i remember from D1, your case was that he was 'wishy washy'... which is barely a case. Anything that occurred after that, i barely read because of the walls of text.

Prior to yesterday, i called UT 'scum' just as much as TDC did... which was never. What does that matter?

[podium123456]

Explained in the first paragraph above your post.

[podium123456]

Why did you pick UT in #322? What had happened between #301 and #322 that would make you want to lynch him? You state you don't have a town read on anyone and that you don't think Taz is scum. That leaves many more people than just UT and we've established that you weren't too interested in lynching UT just for the hammer. We've also established that process of elimination came after that post - so what made you pick UT for the lynch at that point?

Dude... have you really forgotten the big discussion we had about why i picked him as my lynch candidate in that post? The reason why i said he was 'low hanging fruit'?

Because of his hammer.

Explained in the first paragraph above your post.

I assume you realize how odd it looks to me that you are not voting the person that, if you are town, is confirmed scum.

Not really... since i just explained my reasons above. LMP and i are just going to cross, so what does it really matter?

Here...

VOTE: lynchmepls

[podium123456]

TDC, for the sake of argument, let's remove the UT connection aspect for a minute.

Who do you think is the scummier player when looking at things from this perspective?

[podium123456]

Dude... the hammer happened before #301. So you're saying that nothing actually changed between #301 and #322, because the reason for #322 is exactly the same as for #301. You just decided you wanted to lynch him? Why? This is exactly what I've been trying to find out all the way through and you're just not answering it.

TDC, i dont know what you want.

I have told you why i wanted to lynch him multiple times, and you continue to ask me. In this post to LMP i state why he was my scumpick, and in this post to you (the first time you raised the question) i repeat it. Since then i have had to repeat it, as well.

UT's hammer is what made me choose him over you or LMP... but it wasn't a case of 'omg he is obv scum because of that hammer' it was 'all 3 are scummy, and after considering everything, i feel UT's hammer was susp. enough to warrant a lynch'.

If you are looking for a different answer, you will have to rephrase the question because i dont know what you want, and i have answered this particular question many times. I hope you would reconsider your accusation that 'im just not answering it'.

Why did you leave out the middle question? If you can't tell, the question aims at the disconnect between the first sentence saying I might well be scum (LMP is just scummier), while the second sentence implies I'm town.

Are you referring to when i said 'i want a chance to make my case before the hammer'? That was said due to my mafia experience being mostly played at a different chat site where everyone must vote before a lynch occurs. I temporarily forgot that that isn't necessary here, and that if you were mafia you could hammer without my vote.

[podium123456]

EBWOP:

I just noticed this:

You state you don't have a town read on anyone and that you don't think Taz is scum. That leaves many more people than just UT and we've established that you weren't too interested in lynching UT just for the hammer.

I dont recall that i've ever said (or that it has been established) that i wasn't interested in lynching UT for his hammer. Perhaps this is where the confusion lies.

[podium123456]

First of all, there doesn't have to be a 'thought process' between 'this hammer is kinda scummy' -> 'lets lynch UT because of his hammer'. That IS the thought process.... "that was a scummy action.... im going to lynch him because of that scummy action".

'Considered everything' refers to me THINKING. Thinking about how his hammer compared to the scummy actions of you and LMP, as well as everything else occurring in the game... isn't this common sense? I have stated that his hammer didn't make me think he was 100% scum, that i didnt have a town read on you 3, and that i hesitantly chose him for the lynch "because of his hammer". Isn't it common sense to understand the thought process was that i THOUGHT about the game? What else do you want me to say?

You seem amazed/dumbfounded because i didnt go "hey everyone... im going to think about everything that just happened in the game" and then later go "ok i made a decision, i think i will lynch UT".

[podium123456]

^^ that's a textbook scum manipulation attempt. half the stuff in it is ridiculous.

Massclaim on lylo was a bad idea? lol wut

You stated that the only thing you are really considering is the UT connection, so he is beating the heck out of that subject.

I feel that your subjective uneasiness about my connection to UT gets canceled out (or nearly) by the game long UT bus by LMP. That's why i want you to set that aside for a moment and consider the rest of our gameplay.

[podium123456]

You seem amazed/dumbfounded because i didnt go "hey everyone... im going to think about everything that just happened in the game" and then later go "ok i made a decision, i think i will lynch UT".

Why did you not think about this when the game was in night phase for three days?
I mean what you are saying is that you thought the hammer was scummy, and then - considerable time later - you thought about "everything that just happened" and only then came to the conclusion that you wanted to lynch him for it.

wow man, you are really fixated on this... it sure would be a shame if you spent 10% as much time relentlessly grilling LMP about the 'proven' lies/misrepresentations/contradictions/illogical play that i have pointed out.

what are you even trying to do here? it looks like you are ready to hang me because my first post of D3 wasn't a vote for UT.

have you forgotten that in between the time of his hammer, and when i picked him for my lynch, all these things took place: a night kill, a mass claim, and a tracker claim/reports? can you not understand why i might want to hear/ponder this information before i made a decision?

hell, even

your

last post of D2 brings up the possibility of the scum team being incognito/LMP... so even YOU weren't convinced that the hammer, and the hammer alone, made UT scum.

[podium123456]

podium: Then bring it: What did the night kill, the mass claim, the tracker claim/reports do to further convince you towards him being scum?
(The last time I asked you what made you go for UT the answer was "UT's hammer is what made me choose him over you or LMP...", so you'll understand how much I'm looking forward to this answer.)

UT's hammer is what made him scummy.

Comparing UT to LMP/TDC, and considering 'everything else', i decided to lynch UT.

So, why did i choose UT for the lynch?

[podium123456]

I mean this is really fucking simple.

you're one to talk...

There is evidence pile A and your reaction is "he's scummy". Then there's evidence pile B which is A+X and your reaction is "I want to lynch him". I've been asking you what "X" is countless times now and your answer has varied from nothing (A=B=hammer) to "everything that happened" but you're not offering a single concrete thing.

That just makes it very hard for me to believe that to be the honest thought progression of a townie.

i dont even know what the hell you are saying here. what the hell is evidence pile B? the only evidence regarding UT was A -- his hammer. "X" is THOUGHT. Apparently you cant understand how someone could use the power of... THINKING... to make a decision.

UT's hammer was scummy

I had to decide between 3 susp. people, and when i thought about all of it, i decided UT's hammer superseded anything else that had happened in the game.

So why did i lynch UT? BECAUSE OF HIS HAMMER

..the f man

[podium123456]

Why did you "have to decide" before LMP had even claimed?

Wow... first i decided too late... now i decided too early. Cant win with someone who already has there mind made up, i guess.

Is this a new argument? Because i dont see how it relates to our previous discussions. It looks like now you are implying that i was lying when i said i thought about the mass claim, when i thought about who i wanted to lynch.

First of all, I didn't 'have to decide'... but I guess i implied i would be OK with a UT lynch before LMP claimed, for the same reason that you implied

you

were OK with a UT lynch before ANYONE claimed. Or am i not allowed to do something like that?

Does not having one persons claim mean that i cant use the rest of the massclaim information in my thought process in determining a tentative lynch candidate?

You are really over thinking this... meanwhile, the big flashing signs go (apparently) sailing right past you.

[podium123456]

Yeah, but I'm not the one claiming that it took me so long to condemn UT purely on D2 evidence, because I was waiting to see what the mass claim would bring, but then when it hadn't brought anything at all other than more or less confirming someone who I didn't suspect anyway, I did not await one of my three suspects claiming because I had already seen enough.

I didn't say i was waiting on a mass claim to reach a decision on UT. I said that that information was taken into account, like everything else that happened in the game. I only brought it up because when i said i thought about everything before i made my decision, you couldn't understand what 'everything' was.

1. You asked me why i suggested UT for a lynch. I told you because of his hammer.

2. You asked me what happened between 301 and 322 that made me suggest him at that time. I told you because after contemplating UT's hammer vs. TDC/LMP/game, i found him to be the most likely scum at that time.

THINK ABOUT THAT. REALLY. It all makes sense. What do you want me to do? Lie to you and tell you i thought he was my guaranteed scumpick at the end of D2? I DIDN'T. Does that mean i didn't end up tentatively nominating him for a lynch because of his hammer? NO.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

You're about to blow this F'NG game because you are overanalyzing this one thing to hell and back. Meanwhile LMP pulled off a gamelong bus, acted scummy consistently, and keeps making these OBV MAF posts like 483 and 484... and you have

yet

to question him over ANYTHING he has done all game.

[podium123456]

Would like to hear whatever comes to either of your minds on this post:

No, i have explained it pretty thoroughly at this point. Process of elimination by taking into account the votes placed today, and taz's claim.

It's actually quite strong.

I don't know how many different ways I can say this: Taz's role is not confirmed! Unless you have a hidden info role you cannot be sure his claim is true! The vote thing makes it just as likely that Taz is scum as it does me! Your case is weaksauce if it is based on that!

Both of you seem to have missed this.

What's the point of asking both of our opinions? Obviously we are both going to say whatever helps our case and hurts the other. LMP said what he did above, and i say:

Looks like UT was trying to make me look like a scum that had an investigative role... so that it would either make me a lynch candidate that day, or look like a bus attempt after UT was lynched as scum.

...comon man.

[podium123456]

While you do nothing but ignore him and chainsaw defend him so clearly you are town.

Besides all of the 'you're a liar! nuh uh!

YOU'RE

a liar!' back and forth about who is/isn't UT's partner... this is an example of the crap i am talking about.

We played with UT for 3 days. D1 i implied he was acting scummy. D2 i criticized his hammer as being bad. D3 i pick him for lynch.

That's the only times i mentioned UT. Yet LMP keeps saying that i defended UT all game.

open. your. eyes.

[podium123456]

What's the point of asking both of our opinions? Obviously we are both going to say whatever helps our case and hurts the other. LMP said what he did above, and i say:

Well scum would say whatever helps their case and hurts the other. Town would just say what they thought about it.

We both said things that help our case, and hurts the other... so... yeah.

Now i'll wait for you to tell me why my statement is the only one that helps my case, and how LMP is just saying what he thought about it.

Scum don't need to have an investigative role to know Taz is telling the truth (well unless you would go as far as thinking Taz would fake claim as town..), and he's not accusing you of anything there.
That aside, who would wagon you other than him for something that ridiculous? We were all committed to lynching him.

Cheezo dude, you are really tunneled on me...

everything

i say you want to argue about. You asked my opinion about a comment a confirmed scum made (that was on death row)... and now you want to argue with me about the plausibility of it.

You want to argue that a scum on death row wouldn't try to deflect attention on anyone he could at anytime? Whatever... i'm not interested in a debate about that. It still could be an attempt at faking a bus. You asked my opinion, and i gave it.

Or wait... was i supposed to say what LMP did? Because apparently you don't see anything wrong with that opinion, and i think it's no more plausible than mine is. People often bring up the 'zomg he's coaching his partner in daytalk' scenario, and i have never seen it happen.

[podium123456]

*snip*

GARBAGE

*snip*

1. My interpretations of how you are playing have absolutely NO connection to what i think about UT -- defending, attacking, or otherwise. I never said ANYTHING about the quality of your case, i criticized your BEHAVIOR.

2. You conveniently ignore that the only times (before D3) that i specifically mentioned UT... i implied he was acting scummy each time. But don't worry, because TDC isn't paying attention to anything you do anyway.

Hey... ya know... maybe you should post a link to your scumchat so we can all have something to read, while we wait for TDC to lynch me. awokka wokka

[podium123456]

Well, can't say I would begrudge edmund victory either.

Scum is playing just as bad as town has in this game.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Do us a favor and give us some idea of what (if any) cases you have against us at this point. Because all you have done for the last half of yesterday and all of today is grill me non-stop, and argue with everything i say. Are you trying to convince ME that i'm scum? Not going to happen. Are you interested in examining both of us, or do you just want to argue with me? So far, this is the only thing you have mentioned that you are really taking into account: UT connections. This is how you have handled it:

UT/podium - Hmmmm... I'm suspicious of how he approached the D3 vote... i'm going to grill him over pages and pages about every single aspect of it... and argue against whatever he responds with.

UT/LMP - Welp, i think town played bad... so obviously there's no way he would bus UT.

[podium123456]

Peep this:

Contradiction/Lie and Major Misrepresentation:

I think you manage to imply Me, ABR, Dr.P, Nexus, and UT are scummy in the same post.

Again, you only push UT now, but yesterday you argued pretty hard against any suspicions at UT.

&

Which you are now conveniently pushing despite all attempts previously to deny UT-scum.

1. contradiction because... it's a contradiction

2. lie/misrep because he says that i 'argued pretty hard against any suspicioun of UT', even though the

only

times i mentioned him in the game were to imply scumminess. (TDC CONFIRMED)

Nonsense/Illogical behavior

:

1. Says that because i criticized LMP's behavior, i was defending UT.

2. in response to my not wanting another claim on D1, and to proceed with a TDC lynch, he says this:

If anyone was worried, TDC/podium is NOT a scum team in this game, based on these interactions.

which makes absolutely no logical sense. (TDC CONFIRMED)

3. when iso'ing, he completely ignores a large portion of the role that he needs to buddy with at endgame.

Buddying/Obv Maf behavior:

1. Says that he is about to perform an ISO on all parties to determine guilt. Takes the one person that is likely going to be the tie breaker and goes 'oh i read some of it and then just thought boy oh boy he is so town, so im not even going to bother'.

2. Here, here, here

Misc:

1. Game-long bus on partner. From TDC's pov, it's unknown... of course.

2. his first vote on blaze looked really scummy: Link. Blaze's vote was his very first of the game, at the beginning of the RVS stage. LMP, quotes Dr. P calling it 'textbook omgus'... and says 'ok im on board'. i read that as scum taking opportunity of the situation, and using dr. p's words as the reason for his vote, so he wouldn't have to actually accuse blaze personally.

3. In an ISO post to determine guilt, he makes a point of pointing out where i defended taz 3 times (implying suspicion)... even though one of those times it was based on meta and UT had made a nearly exact defense about taz, here. The other 2 times referred to the period in which POE nearly confirmed taz as tracker.

4. Makes no mention of my behavior throughout the game. When realizing i will be in endgame with him, all of a sudden he realizes i have also been a 'wishy washy' 'following the crowd' player.

Day 2

Then we have day 2... which is the best for last.

Zodiark hammers without a claim on a townie. Nearly everyone (note, except UT. perhaps b/c LMP was already on board?) was on Zodiarks case pretty hard, starting at end of D1 and carrying over to D2. LMP joins the party, citing TDC's criticism of Zodiarks vote... ALSO he adds 'and after a quick ISO of edmund'. Why is that relevant? Because edmund had expressed suspicoun of Zodiark on D1, and edmund was killed during the night.

OK. Then, UT continues to make a few more 'wishy washy' posts at UT, and makes some banter with me, but NEVER addresses

any

of the responses Zodiark gave, nor presses him for any additional information.

Incognito enters and says 'i dont find LMP that towny, but i do like his UT hate'... immediately LMP drops Zodiark (never to return for questions/responses) and takes up the UT case. Even incognito continued to interrogate Zodiark... LMP just pushed UT and responded to her accusations.

I hope i dont have to explain how scummy all of this D2 activity is. Several people pick up on it, and zodiark sums it up pretty good here and here.

Here, ill do it anyway: LMP votes for someone that hammered a townie without a claim, and who was under suspicion of the person that died at night. She never responds to any of his explanations, presses him for any information, nor makes any comment about the issue. She then leaves that vote, to push for someone whose entire previous case she pushed was that he was 'wishy washy'.

/perry mason

[podium123456]

So basically, there's alllllll of that... vs. LMP's accusation that i am 'wishy washy'/'following the crowd' and TDC's opinion of just exactly when/why i actually found UT scummy enough for a vote. The latter of which i have answered nearly every possible detail imaginable, and have yet to really hear any complaint about my responses.

So... yeah.

[podium123456]

LOL... LMP, i keep referring to you as 'she', even though i know you are a 'he'. It's because of your avatar... it looks like an avatar a girl would use, and i cant disassociate it.... lol.

[podium123456]

You want me to respond to those massive walls that he directed at you? He looks like he is flailing around looking to find anything he can that will sway you to his side, which you could expect from town or scum in this situation.

Massive walls? Yeah, i've made some posts that are several paragraphs long... but you're right there with me.

And what is with the 'flailing around' thing? You've said that several times. My discussion has been pretty well thought out and calm. Dont know what you consider 'flailing around'... except for normal defense... which would mean you are 'flailing around' too.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

What I meant by argued hard against suspicions is, like I've pointed out about a dozen times, is that you pretty much did everything you could to attack Zodiark and leave UT alone.

I know exactly what you meant. The point is that it is a lie/misrepresentation. I don't know what world you live in, but in this one, when you dont mention someone it isn't 'arguing hard against suspicions'. The fact that on the 2 times i did mention UT specifically, i implied he was scummy, makes your statement even more false.

TDC already agreed with me on this. Link

You did make a post that tossed a bit of mud at UT, but how is that behavior a town-tell?

This isn't the point. Yes i know you have your theory that i called everyone scummy (which i didnt) for scummy motives... but it's just a theory. I brought up my discussion about UT to prove that your statement was false.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Its referred to as "chainsaw defense" on this site, where you defend a partner by starting a counter-wagon or attacking those attacking the partners.

From the 'wiki':

The key to identifying this tell is intent - it is possible to confuse Chainsaw Defense with a player who simply finds the attacker scummy and has no intent of defense. In general, you can be reasonably sure that this tell is involved if a) the player supposedly using Chainsaw Defense has not previously been especially critical of the player he is now attacking, and b) the player supposedly using Chainsaw Defense seems to find the player he is supposedly defending at least reasonably pro-town.

I was previously critical of you, and i never implied that i thought UT was town. In other words... i just found you scummy.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

2) It was not illogical, it makes perfect sense. I thought the likelihood that a scum heavily attacking their partner on D1, then when an opening presents itself to get a mislynch instead DEMANDING that the town hammer their partner instead was pretty much 0.

To reach such a definitive conclusion didn't make sense, when there are a number of reasons why we still could have been partners. TDC already agreed with me here.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

3) The Dr. Pepper stuff was not ignored. I read it, but there wasn't much there but you and him arguing back and forth.

You didn't ISO him, until i asked if you were going to. That was my point.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

1) Do you hear how absurd that sounds? I think bussing implies that a buddy is under suspicion and you turn against them.

Mine

is absurd? You are implying that since you started the case on UT, it means you didn't bus him... because bussing can only happen when someone else has already suspected your partner.

That

is absurd.

I also love how you use that as one of your points, when that can't be proved without it being true. "LMP was bussing UT all game. How do I know, cause LMP is scum. Why is LMP scum? Because he was bussing his partner all game". That is absurd.

You use so much weak logic in your defenses. The same could be said about your accusations on me... dont you understand that?

2) This does not mesh with your claim that I bussed my partner all game.

Uhhh... yes it does. Unless you are talking about some semantic thing, where 'all game' means from the time the game opens until the last post.


xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

4) LOL! Let me get this straight, you get to play a scum game that is all about blending into the background, flinging mud at people when the opportunity strikes, but relatively laying low, and then when you successfully slip by for 2 days, and I finally start looking at you, this makes ME scum!? ROFL!

Again with your theory... ok, lets talk about that for a minute. What you are calling 'sitting back, flinging mud at everyone', i call scumhunting. In analyzing the thread, i may point out something that looks suspicious or that i dont understand... but that's SCUMHUNTING. Did i point out a lot of stuff in this game on a good bit of people? Yeah. Why? Because this game was filled with bad/scummy town... people ragequitting for no reason, people hammering without claims, being difficult, etc. Just because i might have pointed out

one

questionable action somebody made, it doesn't mean that i am calling them scummy.

Besides... i would rather see someone suspicious of everyone, rather than only of a few.... scum are the only people that know the truth, and the only people that have a reason not to suspect anyone. This ties into my statement about you vs. me. You never mentioned me all game, and now you can't stop talking about how obv-maf i have been all game. Why didn't you mention any of it before?

Because as scum, you weren't interested in analyzing my gameplay throughout the game to determine my alignment... you already knew.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Also, why does my ISOing edmund and seeing that Zodiark was one of his suspects make me scum? Isn't it natural when someone is NK'ed to look back at what they said to try and find a reason why they were NK'ed?

You missed the point. I know why you ISO'd edmund. This highlights how, even though you were aware and suspicious of things like this, you

never

questioned Zordiak... and dropped him like a hot potato as soon as incognito said what he did.

So if I stay on UT, (according to some in the thread) I'm scummy, if I go to Zodiark I'm scummy, if I go back to UT, I'm scummy. The whole thing is simply absurd and flat out wrong. Town can (and should) have more than 1 suspcion and can focus on more than one idea at a time. I was actively pushing the UT case, why if I felt UT was scum would I focus my attention on Zodiark?

It's been explained several times throughout this thread why it was scummy. It was the

way

in which you left/joined/scumhunted. I'm not going to explain it again... if you don't know by now, you are either feigning ignorance, or really cant comprehend it.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Because I say it didn't go down like that AT ALL, and he is simply retconning D2 to fit his story.

No 'AT ALL', huh? Can you tell me what in my description that i didnt describe accurately? Please answer this.

[podium123456]

TDC you saw how all of this happened at the time, does his description actually fit your read/recollection of the events of D2?

Yes, i am also interested in TDC's thoughts about all of your play. Especially since he hasn't questioned a single thing you have done, yet.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

I would ask you, if you are town, to kindly consider that you have one very big piece of information I don't have and that hence what may seem obvious to you, is not necessarily obvious to me. That applies both to thoughts you may have had at the time but never really voiced and things LMP did that look agreeable on the surface but you would know may well have sinister motives.

I understand where you are in the middle, and am sympathetic to your POV. But i still feel like things have been pretty one-sided (up till now, maybe) today. I feel like i have tried to answer every concern you had with me, and also feel that my stances/responses have been pretty solid. I also feel that when LMP has been under fire (from me, pretty much, only) his explanations/responses have been shaky -- filled with nonsense logic and hypocritical finger pointing.

Anyway (once you take all of this in), i would still like to see summary on where you stand right now with everything.

[podium123456]

The last line in post 501 should read:

Not

'AT ALL', huh?

[podium123456]

sigh... this is getting old. LMP gets under any pressure, and he starts making these huge misrepresentations/lies that i have to correct.

But as long as they just sit around tossing accusations without following up, they get to look town without being town.

And that is exactly what you have been doing all game. I think its hysterical that of the two of us, I'm the only one who pushed a serious case against the scum, and you have the gall to say you've been scum hunting and I haven't.

1. I NEVER said you haven't been scumhunting. Show me where i did, or else it is a lie.

2. You are saying that i never pushed a serious case against scum and/or followed up on my accusations... i guess you forgot about D1 ....and D2. I also guess you are forgetting how

you

never followed up on Zodiark D2, after actually voting him for a lynch.

Do you understand that you just described your D2 play with the bolded? You just described what you did as a scum tell.

You're really good at twisting things to try and fit the scenario you are creating, but it's all a pile of crap.

It's actually the exact opposite. Can you give me an example of where i've twisted things to fit the scenario? Because i have been pointing out many examples where you have.

If scumhunting is sitting around pointing out little things people do, and labeling at some point in time everyone in the game scum, without ever seriously pursuing a case on the person you find most scummy, then you are grade A awesome at it.

1. I NEVER labeled everyone scum. Show me where i did, or it's a lie.

2. And again, i pursued cases on my scumpicks. Can't always say the same for you.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

ALSO, please respond to this:

Because I say it didn't go down like that AT ALL, and he is simply retconning D2 to fit his story.

Not 'AT ALL', huh? Can you tell me what in my description that i didnt describe accurately? Please answer this.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

TDC: Can you please weigh in on things? LMP basically starts saying whatever he wants when he feels pressured, and i am tired of having to correct him.

[podium123456]

TDC you're gonna have to come in and make a decision, cause I can't argue with all this complete nonsense anymore. The idea that I wasn't pursuing UT D2, or that I didn't pursue Zodiark on D2 is simply absurd. Anyone with half a brain can go and read the events.

LMP these are facts:

1. I didn't say anything about you not pursuing UT on D2... obviously i was referring to Zodiark.

2. You did NOT pursue Zodiark on D2, after you tossed an accusation at him. In your first post of D2, you tossed accusations at him. After that, you NEVER pursued him any further. That is a FACT... PROVE ME WRONG.

That is why when you said this:

But as long as they just sit around tossing accusations without following up, they get to look town without being town.

...you implicated yourself as scum.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

The idea that I didn't scum hunt D2 is simply absurd. D2 started, I pushed Zodiark for his hammer, still prodded at UT because he continued his scummy play, and then pushed him as hard as I could when I finally had some help. Do you deny that I pushed UT D1? Do you deny that Incog's case was simply a restating of all the things I'd already pointed out? If not, then how you can possibly call that not scum hunting is behind human comprehension.

Who the hell are you talking to? Because i haven't said that you 'never' scum hunted. This is the second time i have SPECIFICALLY said that... yet you continue to argue this phantom case.

Perhaps you are mixed up with my description of you vs. me? Where i stated: You say that i have been obv maf all game, but you never mentioned any of it until endgame. This was because you didn't have to analyze my posts to determine my alignment... you already knew.

Anyway, stop arguing the phantom argument.

[podium123456]

I don't think I said it made "no logical sense".

No... you didn't specifically say 'no logical sense', if you are talking about semantics. LMP reached a conclusion based on a D1 situation. I asked you if that D1 situation should have yielded that specific conclusion. You said no.

What I did (try to) say is that it is orders of magnitude weaker than the fact that podium and I didn't hammer UT, so I didn't really understand what the point of the argument was, since it was attempting to prove something that was already proven.

The point of the 'argument' was that the conclusion he reached didn't make sense. Things that dont make sense are scum tells. I specifically explained this to you the first time you asked the question.

Podium, why do you suppose would he bother trying to justify why we're not scum together with let's say, not-watertight reasoning, when it's already been proven pretty conclusively anyway?

To give the appearance that he was scumhunting.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Okay, so this is D2:

*summary*

Your D2 summary wasn't really necessary. What would have been useful is if you had said if my description of LMP's D2 activity was accurate... since that is what was in question.

More useful would have been for you to give your comments on it, and/or ask questions...

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

You missed the point. I know why you ISO'd edmund. This highlights how, even though you were aware and suspicious of things like this, you never questioned Zordiak... and dropped him like a hot potato as soon as incognito said what he did.

Well, I can't find anything there either. Then again, the only thing you say about Zod after your vote is that you're still okay lynching him. The only actual interaction with him is from Incognito and me (both of us not on the wagon at the time).

I don't know who you are talking to, and what (if anything) you are agreeing/disagreeing with. Please clarify.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

I was expecting some comment about the case i laid out against LMP from you.

And again, i ask that you give a summary of your thoughts/cases on each of us at this point.

[podium123456]

You're not listening. I was pretty sure TDC said what I claimed he did. You just insist on twisting things to fit your narrative.

Sigh... here we go again. The truth is the complete opposite of what you say...

I said it didn't make sense for you to completely rule us out as partners based on that. I asked TDC if it made sense for that D1 interaction to completely rule us out as partners. He said NO.

Then

you asked TDC "do you agree that that is an unlikely scum play", to which he said yes. But that is a different argument, and that is where you twisted things just now to make it look like

I

was twisting things.

That's proof. I didn't twist anything, YOU DID. Prove me wrong. Don't blabber... PROVE where i twisted this, or else you are lying.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

While you're at it, why dont you post proof of the things you have been accusing me of that i have been asking for all game, and you have ignored.

Where have i twisted things to fit the scenarios i am creating?

What part of my D2 description wasn't accurate.

Where did i say you haven't done any scumhunting?

Where did i label everyone scum?

BUT IT DOES MAKE SENSE. You calling for TDC to be hammered to save the town from making any further claims makes you either the best scum player I've seen yet (which we know from your later play isn't true) or not in a scum team with TDC. Your insistence that my logic was flawed is laughable.

Sigh. It's laughable that you consider a scum bus to be indicative of 'the best scum player ever', and that it's not likely to occur. Anyone with your record would know that scum bussing partners is common... no matter if it's D1 or D10.

This is the kind of stuff i am trying to get TDC to realize. Nobody with your experience would be so quick to discount a scum bus, and to later say it would be indicative of 'the best scum player youve ever seen'. It's illogical.

Feeling nervous podium?

Only person that should be nervous is you, in keeping your 4-0 scum record undefeated.

[podium123456]

"the argument" obviously refers to his argument not to yours...

While it wasn't 'obvious', i understand you now.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

I'm talking to you. I agree that LMP doesn't say anything about Zod post-vote-switch and I point out that neither you (nor anybody else on the wagon) do much about him either, other than sitting on your votes.

A. I dont think it's accurate to say that everyone on his wagon 'didn't do much about him' -- i (and others) pursued a line of questioning similar to what you did towards him.

B. LMP didnt say A SINGLE WORD to him, or about his case, after her first post.

Again, you seem more than willing to give LMP the benefit of the doubt in these observable situations, while not budging an inch when it comes to your theories about me.

You don't find anything suspicious about LMP voting for Zodiark (citing substantial reasons), and then all of a sudden dropping it to move back on UT without

ever

questioning/mentioning anything concerning Zodiark?

That looks like town behavior to you?

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

I agree that LMP isn't properly acknowledging that, but at the same time you're blowing it up into you having significant suspicion of UT which doesn't seem to be the case to me either.

Whoah whoa whoa. I

never

claimed to have a significant suspicion of UT all game. I have been discussing this to highlight LMP's severe misrepresentations of my play.

He has made nearly constant misrepresentations of my play, as i pointed out in 514 above. Do you believe misrepresentations like those, as well as the UT statements, are indicative of town?

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

I was expecting some comment about the case i laid out against LMP from you.

Well I'm not his lawyer, so I don't really see the point in replying point by point. I read everything you write and I consider everything you write.

Yes, i know... but that is why i have been asking for a summary from you. I have pointed out many observable scummy behaviors from LMP, and still haven't seen a case on me more than your earlier gut feeling about my UT interaction (which i assume is still in place?).

Btw, i guess i'll assume that you don't want to give a summary of where you stand? Which is fine... but you haven't said anything when i have asked, so i dont know if you are ignoring me, or if you missed it, or what... and i dont want to keep repeating myself.

[podium123456]

That looks like town behavior to you?

No.

I see no point in asking him the same question again and again.

I wasn't necessarily intending for any questions to be asked again. I was discussing it because i felt it was another example of non-town behavior, and you have confirmed that.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Do you believe misrepresentations like those, as well as the UT statements, are indicative of town?

No, but again, I think it is not that harsh of a misrepresentation in that your UT statements - while existing - didn't seem particularly consequential until D3.

Well, you agree that he has misrepresented my play, and that that is not town behavior... and that is the main point i intended.

However, I do disagree with your assessment of the 'harshness' of his misrepresentations concerning UT. I understand your point about how i didn't pay UT a lot of attention, so it didn't appear that i was overly critical of him (which i wasn't). But i feel statements like "podium argued hard against any suspicion of UT all game" go much further than a 'slight' misrepresentation... implying a

completely

different attitude than the one i presented in the game.

I feel that most third parties reviewing this situation would feel the same way i do.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Sorry I meant to reply to that earlier, but always forgot about it. No I won't post a case on you, because neither is there anyone whom I need to convince about anything nor is there anyone I could convince about anything, so that just seems like it would waste a lot of time.

Well, i mainly ask for it just to get it on record. So that when this is over, town will see that despite a multitude of documented scummy behavior from LMP, you based your decision mainly off a gut feeling about one aspect of this game (if you end up voting me)... despite how i held up under a torrent of questioning related to that aspect.

And in doing so, perhaps you would see that your gut read is over-riding a lot of unambiguously scummy play from LMP.

I wont ask you for a summary any more, but i would like to know the answer to this question: For the sake of discussion... if you discount any UT connections, who is the scummier player?

I ask you to discount UT not because i am worried about how my interactions with him look, but because i feel it should be more of a null-tell wash from your POV than it currently is. I say that because i feel you were way too willing to discount the fact that LMP could have bussed UT, while at the same time being so eager to damn me because i didnt specifically say that his hammer was scummy, and vote him, in my first post of D3.

[podium123456]

Well I don't want to open that can of worms again, but it is not just a gut feeling.

Mmmm, well i still feel it is more of a personal gut thing... which is heavily influenced by your theory that LMP wouldnt bus UT, because the town turned out to have some lousy players in it.

The only thing i can recall reading is that you weren't sure if i thought UT's hammer was scummy, and that you thought i only recommended him for a lynch because you and LMP did so first. When i explained things in detail, you seemed to automatically reject any explanation/clarification and stuck with your initial assumption.

As for discounting UT, what exactly is left of LMP's play then?

Contradiction, multiple misrepresentations/lies, illogical reasoning, D2 treatment of Zodiark, etc.

For instance, he now states that i have been acting extremely scummy all game... but never mentioned

anything

about my play until endgame. That doesn't make sense... especially from someone who was intently monitoring for 'wishy washy' behavior.

...and yes, he has been stretching the facts somewhat.
I want you to understand that you are not a saint in this regard either when you give things the "TDC approved"-seal when I made a much weaker statement about them.

If you look at what was said, i dont believe i have

I said "it's a lie to say i have defended UT"... and you said "yeah, it's more accurate to say you ignored him". I later clarified "so you agree it was a lie"... and you said "*shrug*". I later said that you confirmed this was a lie/misrepresentation... because the way i read it, you did... you certainly didn't say that it wasn't.

I said "do you think our D1 interaction proved we werent partners?"... you said "no". That means it makes no logical sense for her to reach that conclusion, and this is what i said you confirmed.

I may have reworded things, but i didnt change the meaning of anything.

(remember when you said me asking about your interpretations about some of UT's posts didn't make any sense because everybody would just post the answer that would fit their case best rather than what they genuinely thought? How's this different?)

A biased personal opinion is different than completely misrepresenting someones play to benefit your argument.

[podium123456]

Contradiction, multiple misrepresentations/lies, illogical reasoning, D2 treatment of Zodiark, etc.

**SNIP**

A biased personal opinion is different than completely misrepresenting someones play to benefit your argument.

I couldn't agree more.

That's cute, but i have provided

proof

of everything i accused you of there.

We're still waiting for you to back up all these accusations you have been making about me.

[podium123456]

1) Calling it proof doesn't make it proof.

2) I've provided back up for everything I've said. Whenever possible I've quoted the relevant sections.

1. Of course you are going to deny it, no surprise there. But the proof is contained in posts such as this: Link. TDC has agreed with me on several of those points, as well.

Proof of you twisting words/arguments disingenuously: Link


2. You haven't provided a single quote to back up the claims i have asked you to back up here. The only quote you provided was to back up your observation that i was 'wishy washy'.


But... you know... dont let the facts get in your way.

[podium123456]

@podium: I can back and forth with you for weeks, and at the end of the day you're going to claim that you've proved I'm twisting words and I'm going to claim the same about you. So keep posting saying it, it doesn't make it so.

I have provided examples of ALL the things i have accused you of. Whether or not they 'prove' my accusations is debatable... but, obviously, they are meant for TDC to examine/consider... not you.

You have provided NO examples of those things that i asked you to show proof of. None. You have been shooting your mouth off these past few days saying whatever you need to, to try and convince TDC that i have acted scummy... regardless of if there is any truth to it. When i ask you to provide examples, you can't.

The more you talk, the more your true alignment is revealed.

[podium123456]

podium:

Would you mind doing the same and see whether you can find anything that supports the LMP-bus thesis that I haven't so far?

Re-reading D1 and half of D2, and paying close attention to LMP vs. UT, i'm struck by how fake LMP's push on UT looks.

First, we have UT agreeing (with me) that anyone that took blaze's RVS vote as serious was foolish (referring to LMP/nexus)... he also later says that "i agree that we will find scum on the blaze wagon"... knowing that his partner was on it.

But this is the UT post where LMP started his push: Link. UT states that it's really early in the game, that our argument is based off a small RVS post... and that he didn't want to make a call about either of us. He also states that he feels scum is on blaze.

LMP responds with this:

Are you gonna make a judgment about something else then perhaps? This post was incredibly wishy-washy. You wanna take a stand on anything? Post 60 was a big ball of saying nothing in as many words as possible.

Which really looks like an over-reaction to me. I feel LMP's level of UT suspicion stemming from UT's post to be un-naturally high. ...i mean heck, look at what HE said in the SAME post he condemned UT of being wishy washy:

As for my "suspicions" I don't have much new to add. I was suspicious of Blaze because I thought he was admitting to OMGUS, but then he came back and explained that he was randoming. The interaction between Dr. P and podium is interesting, I'm still watching it to see how it shakes out. Right now I'm leaning town on Zodiark.

LMP,

himself

, referred to the Podium/Dr. P discussion as "interesting" ... which is just as ambiguous as UT saying 'i dont want to make a call right now'. Then he continues with a 'wishy washy' attitude stating "i was susp. of blaze, but then he explained why he did it".

So,

A. If LMP was really that susp. of UT's 'wishy washy' language, why would he make comments that were so similar to those that UT did?

B. LMP's reaction seems to be much more than a post like UT's warranted at this point in the game.

ALSO, why would LMP refer to UT's post as "using a lot of words to say nothing" (which wasn't accurate... he did make

some

substantive statments), and completely ignore this post from Blaze... which actually WAS a lot of words that didnt say anything? At this point in the game Blaze's input was far more "not taking a stance on anything" than UT's was.

Doesn't make sense.

*continuing to read

[podium123456]

As the day goes on, UT gives some substantial input here, and later votes ABR for scum, listing several reasons, here.

A short time after, LMP says this:

I think Untrod Tripod is scum, but apparently no one else agrees or even feels the need to comment, and he seems reluctant to answer my questions, so I'm announcing my willingness to hammer ABR.

??

After all that has taken place in the game, she still considers UT her top scumpick? Based on what? Apparently that one 'wishy washy' post UT made at the beginning of the game... even though he had provided substantial input, and taken a hard stance against ABR, since then.

Again... it doesn't make sense.

UT brings up how her behavior doesnt seem to make sense here... but LMP never responds to it.

*continuing

[podium123456]

D2 starts, and UT makes this post. In it, he discusses Dr.P/TDC and states that he doesnt think Zodiarks hammer was scummy.

LMP responds with this:

It's really rough when you have a decent player replace into a slot that was acting like total scum.

On the one hand

, I want to give TDC a chance, because he's not acting anything like Dr Pepper,

but on the other hand

Dr Pepper was acting like scum and I know I should care about the slot more than the player. The best thing to do imo is analyze the surroundings of the Dr Pepper wagon and the ABR lynch.

The bolding is mine. UT is whishy-washy fence sitting again. What a shock.

Look at what he is calling wishy washy... UT's description of a player that is essentially Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde due to the replacement aspect. Isn't that the normal observation to make about that? "Dr Pepper was scummy, but TDC is acting town" -- that's essentially stating a

fact

. Yet LMP tries to pin 'wishy washy fence sitting' on UT, off of that valid observation.

That

is a prime example of LMP twisting things around to make someone look scummy.

Also, LMP ignores the fact that UT also stated he felt Zodiarks hammer wasn't necessarily scummy... which is a pretty bold statement to make, considering nearly everyone else felt the opposite at the time.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

UT makes this post, and LMP responds with:

Wow, I'm just going to have to get used to hating your posting style I guess. More wishy-washy words like "I

think

Taz jumps to the top of my scumlist" and "Taz is twitching my scumdar and I'm still iffy on TDC...". Do you ever commit to anything? And do you have a link to a recent scum game for me?

"Do you ever commit to anything"? Really? In the post LMP was referring to, UT had JUST said:

I really don't get what's so scummy about Zodiark. I didn't find his vote all that suspect and I don't think he's scum.

Does it make sense for LMP to continue to accuse UT of never committing to anything, after UT had JUST stated that he didn't think Zodiark was scum? And after the other stances he had taken?

I dont think so.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

I'm going to stop here, because i think this evidence shows that LMP's push on UT was pretty damn fake. If you want me to do the rest of the game, let me know.

[podium123456]

Isn't that complete distancing? I don't know how much more distance you can put between yourself and someone than to have 0 interactions with them. And all of podium's interactions with UT are the same.

While our interactions were brief, i wouldn't say there were 0 interactions. We each mentioned each other several times... and UT didn't distance himself from me.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

I don't recall ever using the words "solid town read"

I already answered. that. I was ISOing everyone, I already had a

solid town read

on you, but I was ISOing everyone.

Lol! As i said... the more you talk, the more your true alignment comes out.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Also, you continue to ignore this:

You have provided NO examples of those things that i asked you to show proof of. None. You have been shooting your mouth off these past few days saying whatever you need to, to try and convince TDC that i have acted scummy... regardless of if there is any truth to it. When i ask you to provide examples, you can't.

...

[podium123456]

@TDC: Look at today's play. Who is strikes you as more desperate? Please, look at this logically, it's really quite simple.

Why am

I

desperate when i argue a case, but you aren't when you make a case?

And logic is on my side... i guarantee you.

[podium123456]

CONTRADICTION

Earlier today, LMP said this:

I don't give out town reads in mini games, I think it benefits scum more than town. It's like saying "Hey scum, you should kill this guy, he looks pretty town".

Yet, at the beginning of the game, he said this:

Right now I'm leaning town on Zodiark.

This is actually a pretty big contradiction...

[podium123456]

^^Give me specific things you want me to show proof of, and I will. Trying to send me through the convoluted back and forth of today to answer your question is near impossible. Show me statements you claim I haven't backed up and I'll be happy to back them up.

Ugh... this is such

bullshit

, and typical LMP style.

EVERY

time you made one of these accusations, i quoted it and asked for proof. I even made a summary list of the things i had asked for, here... and you still refused.

Now

you say 'oh im not going on a wild goose chase, tell me what you want'? ??? REALLY? Like it's my fault you didn't answer me when i quoted you and asked for proof throughout the thread.

Unbelievable.

Go to the thread i just linked, to find the summary i provided earlier. ...or, you know... come up with another reason to avoid responding.

[podium123456]

A) I don't know how anyone can accuse my play of being wishy-washy. I can stomach a lot of things, but calling me a hypocrite on this is complete crap.

I didn't accuse your entire 'play' of being wishy-washy, but that post certainly is. The proof is in it. That makes your accusal of UT being wishy washy, in the same post, look really fake.

Your language in that post was just as 'wishy-washy' as what you attacked UT over... the only 'stance' you took, was to give a town read on zodiark... but in your own words:

Also, it's really easy for scum to say "I don't think SO AND SO is scum" they know who the scum is. Its much harder for them to take a stance on who IS scum.

So... yeah... that was 'wishy-washy'... based on YOUR own criteria.

[podium123456]

LMP, please answer this... if you can. I think it pretty much proves that your UT case was fake.

Why did you attack UT for 'using a lot of words to say nothing' in that post, yet completely ignore this post from Blaze? At least UT said

something

relavant... Blaze didn't say

anything

. Blaze hadn't given

any

meaningful input at that point... why didn't you treat him the same as you did UT?

[podium123456]

STOP CALLING ME HER! You've even said yourself you know I'm a he. I don't know why you keep doing it, but knock it off.

Lol, yeah i know... i keep having to correct myself, but still dont catch all of them.. sorry, lol. And i told you why... it's because of your avatar... i generally only see girls put cats in their avatars.

[podium123456]

^^

now

who's flailing around?

[podium123456]

Except I took stances on who was scum, UT!

So? UT took stances on who he thought was scum, and you kept accusing him of being wishy washy. Why cant the same be done to you? You used as much 'wishy washy' language as he did.

Also, I'm not being paranoid cautious, BECAUSE I'M NOT SCUM.

???

Why would you

not

be paranoid cautious as town? Is this a (nother) scumslip?

@TDC: podium is throwing as much spaghetti at the wall as possible, just hoping something will stick. Seriously, look at the sheer volume of posts and their size today.

Why do you keep making these AtE posts? It's really scummy. Your posts have been just as lengthy as mine in places. Besides, the only reason i did a detailed breakdown of your UT case was because TDC insisted i did so.

[podium123456]

LMP, please answer this... if you can. I think it pretty much proves that your UT case was fake.

Why did you attack UT for 'using a lot of words to say nothing' in that post, yet completely ignore this post from Blaze? At least UT said

something

relavant... Blaze didn't say

anything

. Blaze hadn't given

any

meaningful input at that point... why didn't you treat him the same as you did UT?

[podium123456]

^^ an example of using a lot of words to say nothing.

Seriously... like you aren't 'bringing other stuff up', and like you aren't making wall posts.

You're the one trying to justify your position by questioning the events of the game, rather than allowing them to speak for themselves

This doesn't even make any damn sense... as if you haven't questioned any events in this game. Why dont you stop with these scummy hypocritical posts... it accomplishes nothing.

[podium123456]

3) He isn't exactly wishy washy, he is saying he doesn't like Dr. Pepper.

What planet are you from? Because he explicitly states that he was joking about the drink when he said that.

Did you even bother to read the post?

That's

twisting facts.

This is another example of you twisting events to fit your narrative. You just looked back to find one post that might be similar to UT's wishy-washy attitude, and then try to assert that because I didn't point that one out too, my case must be fake. But the truth of the situation is far different from that. Blaze only made one post like that, it wasn't anywhere near as bad as some of them from UT, UT did do other things (appeasement) to make matters worse, and BLAZE WASN'T EVEN AROUND ANYMORE.

Wow. You just wasted a ton of reading time, because you, again, didn't comprehend what i wrote. I SPECIFICALLY said "at that point" when i brought this up. My point still stands... Blaze had contributed MUCH less substance than UT had at that point, yet you only seemed to have a problem with UT, and completely ignored Blaze.

I read what you wrote, so you dont have to write it again. I don't buy it, though, for the reason i just gave.

[podium123456]

1.

podium wrote:Where have i twisted things to fit the scenarios i am creating?

Nearly everyone (note, except UT. perhaps b/c LMP was already on board?)

The comment in parentheses is attempting to distort the fact outside of it, to call me scum.

That is not twisting facts... that is stating my theory about UT's intentions... which is normal. Notice when i said 'perhaps'? That implies that i am only saying it's a possibility.

The truth is that you are actually twisting the facts around, to make it seem like i was giving false information. I was giving an OPINION.

Anyway... i still wait for you to provide examples of where i have twisted facts around... because what you just cited was NOT twisting facts.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

2.

What part of my D2 description wasn't accurate.

OK. Then, UT continues to make a few more 'wishy washy' posts at UT, and makes some banter with me, but NEVER addresses

any

of the responses Zodiark gave, nor presses him for any additional information.

LMP-EDITOR'S NOTE:Before Incognito enters, and while I'm pushing at Zodiark, I continued to dig at UT for his return to wishy-washy play, but you conveniently omit this part.

Wow. Lets try this another way: Can you tell me how this ISN'T twisting facts? I JUST stated that you made some 'wishy washy' posts at UT... and then you say that i omitted that part. Seriously?

The parts in bold are the inaccurate descriptions of D2.

The only thing you bolded, was an OPINION i gave, and the lie about me not acknowledging you making posts to UT before incognito came.

Please provide what i described inaccurately... unless you can't... in which case, retract your lie.

You still haven't explained why that is scummy.

I have explained this to you several times. Other players explained it to you that day. I'm not going to keep banging my head against a brick wall with you. If TDC doesn't understand the reason why it looked scummy, he can say so, and i can explain it again. Otherwise, go back and read the multiple explanations i gave you.


xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx


3.

Where did i say you haven't done any scumhunting?

Both of those are implying that I'm not scum hunting. The one with the bold in particular, accuses me of not analyzing because I already know alignments, and thus I'm not scum hunting.

Both of those were implying that you were

faking

scumhunting

for those people

. I am referring to this quote of yours:

you have the gall to say you've been scum hunting and I haven't.

I never said that you hadn't done any scumhuting, unless you can show me.


xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

4.

Where did i label everyone scum?

First off, when I said this I was speaking with hyperbole. Obviously you haven't labeled "everyone" scum

Thank you for admitting you were misrepresenting the truth. And i previously explained why there were a lot of players i suspected, and how pointing out a questionable action doesn't mean that i am accusing them of being scum.

[podium123456]

Here is the essence of my point (

@TDC

If this is tl;dr, at least please read this part):

This post is on D2, when the players in the game are podium, me, TDC, Taz, Incog (this slot hadn't posted anything yet D2 I believe), Zodiark, UT. Of the 6 that aren't podium, 4 of them get some form of suspicion/tarring lobbed at them in this one post. That is really scummy.

Really scummy, eh? With 2 scum left you think me calling 2 people scummy, and 1 slightly scummy, is excessive? Even if you want to classify my comment about Taz as me implying i thought he was scummy (which is a stretch)... big whoop. There were 2 scum left, and unlike you, i had no idea who they were.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

@podium: If you really thought I was playing scummy all game long, why did you not push a case on me until you had no other choice? Sure, you made small comments here and there about what you thought was scummy, but you never seriously pushed a case on me. Why?

Because i was pursuing scummier cases. I

did

express that i considered you scummy several times, however.

I think the more interesting question is the one i asked you earlier, that you didn't answer: You never mentioned me all game, and now you can't stop talking about how obv-maf i have been. Why didn't you mention

anything

about me, before endgame?

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

@TDC: Please don't forget this stuff. I know podium has posted a lot more than me

*snip* garbage *snip*

this game day, but volume doesn't equal substance or truth. Look back at the play please,

You're wasting so much time/space with this stuff. Will you stop with the begging of TDC, and repeating stuff you have said many times before? Maybe you're nervous. Maybe you're aware that the actual MEAT in the case against me is pretty thin, so you feel you have to trump it up with a bunch of pleading and biased retelling of your theories. Whatever... it's scummy and a waste of everyones time.

[podium123456]

I'd also like to address this:

You never mentioned me all game, and now you can't stop talking about how obv-maf i have been all game. Why didn't you mention any of it before?

Oh sorry, I'd already found scum and was trying to get it lynch. So sorry I'd only caught 1 of the scum.

I just noticed this.

Can you please give a real answer, or is that sarcastic response the best you can do?

[podium123456]

Also, even though I did make a contradiction, why is it scummy?

Are you really asking what's scummy about a contradiction? *facepalm*

But i will break it down for you, since you asked:

You stated that in mini games, you feel giving town reads is a bad thing because it tips scum off as to who looks town.

But at the start of the game, you gave a town read.

You see, your reason about not giving town reads is a very common one... i happen to feel the same way. That's a pretty big issue, and not something you just 'forget'... unless you have 'forgotten' that you are supposed to act like a townie.

Both of our arguments against each other involve a lot of dissecting and are open to interpretations... but this is a pretty clear cut example of a scumslip. Your only defense could be "oh i forgot i felt that way, and that's why i gave a town read"... which is preposterous.

[podium123456]

Really scummy, eh? With 2 scum left you think me calling 2 people scummy, and 1 slightly scummy, is excessive? Even if you want to classify my comment about Taz as me implying i thought he was scummy (which is a stretch)... big whoop. There were 2 scum left, and unlike you, i had no idea who they were.

Yes, having that many scum reads and NO town reads is scummy. Period.

A. You just said that not giving town reads is a town action. Herp.

B. I had

1

more scum read than you did at that point...

C. Lol.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Wait a sec, so you're supposed to get credit for "pursuing scummier cases", but then you call me out for not mentioning you before endgame? So this works for you and not me?

You're analogy doesn't work... i didnt push a case on you, but i

did

mention your scumminess. You didn't mention

anything

about me, even though you are now claiming i was acting really scummy all game.

You intentionally left out the fact that i mentioned your scumminess, to make it look like i am being a hypocrite.

Twisting facts.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

I don't even grant that you were "pursuing scummier cases". The only case you took any initiative on was Dr. P, which can easily be put down as someone using an awkward posting style leading to lots of misunderstandings and then a ragequit. Every other case was built by other people. You wouldn't get on board UT scum until the massclaim forced you to and you got on the Zodiark wagon late also.

When i write opinions like this, you call it 'twisting facts' or 'revising history'. But when you do it, i guess it's a narrative?

The same can pretty much be done for you, you know. Here:

The only case you took any initiative on was UT, which can easily be put down as someone making a normal null observation about an argument... you even gave the same observation that UT did about that argument. Every other case was built by other people. You only voted ABR because you saw town was voting for him, and figured you had better do so as well. You did the same thing with Zodiark.

Now go ahead and tell me why i am being disingenuous, and you aren't.

[podium123456]

In addition, would you mind elaborating what you hoped to achieve with this:

Whose reaction where you looking for? What kind of reaction would've meant what?

I would expect scum going into 3 way lylo to hit back pretty hard if someone accused them of being scum... attack my play, argue with me about why i thought you were scum, etc. You shrugged it off, with barely a mention. That furthered my suspicion that LMP was probably scum.

[podium123456]

A) I think listing town reads early in mini games is generally bad for town. I think saying "I have no town reads" in 5-man mylo is scummy.

B) And no town reads.

In true LMP form, you are twisting things around to make an argument. You made an observation about a D2 statement, and i responded to it. When you realized my rebuttal made your initial point moot, you start talking about something i said on D3. Very scummy.

Back to the original argument... you yourself said that not listing town reads is acceptable town behavior, and i only had 1 more scum read than you did at that point. If you want to discuss this, stick to the actual issue we are talking about.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Ya, because I wasn't focused on making sure I'd called everyone in the game scummy. I was more focused on lynching the people I thought were scum. I love how I'm supposed to get negative credit in retrospect because I didn't notice you being scummy earlier in the game, when your whole style was lay low and poke scum accusations at people, and I had a much bigger fish to fry.

I didn't call everyone in the game scummy, and i already pointed out this game has an unusually high amount of town people acting scummy... why is it a surprise that someone would have a lot of scum reads?

The issue we are discussing is how you never mentioned me at all, even though now you say i was acting really scummy. You pointed out other people acting scummy besides UT, but not me. It doesn't make sense. I believe it's because you already knew my alignment, so you didn't need to analyze my play during the game, like a townie would do. Like i did to you.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Because you know that's not true, but you have to push that version of events or you'll get caught. It's not hard.

You know that the version you told about me isn't true, but you have to push it or else you'll get caught. It's not that hard.

[podium123456]

In addition, would you mind elaborating what you hoped to achieve with this:

Whose reaction where you looking for? What kind of reaction would've meant what?

I would expect scum going into 3 way lylo to hit back pretty hard if someone accused them of being scum... attack my play, argue with me about why i thought you were scum, etc. You shrugged it off, with barely a mention. That furthered my suspicion that LMP was probably scum.

Of course you say that now, what else would you say?

@TDC: What is the point of even asking this question? The truth is that he was testing the waters for which way to go (you or me) in 3-way lylo, but of course he isn't going to admit to that.

Why is it you feel the need to jump into conversations TDC and I are having, and give your biased opinion, when no one asked you to? I don't do that with the questions he asks you. Are you really that nervous?

[podium123456]

This is really simple. Town can contradict themselves too. People contradict themselves in every day life all the time, and not because they are doing something wrong.

Lol... i understand that you are naturally going to argue that a contradiction isn't scummy... but it's still funny. We all know that most people consider contradictions to be a major scumtell.

And this isn't some small contradiction, that could be attributed to a townie making a mistake. Like X saying 'i didn't say Y was scummy' and somebody bringing up a quote where X said 'i'm getting a scum vibe from Y'.

No, you gave us your PHILOSOPHY about how/why you play as town... but you did something that completely went against that philosophy earlier in the game. It's a big deal... people don't just 'forget' their philosophies.

[podium123456]

It is a small tell, since I said "I don't normally do X" and it turns out that on D1 many weeks before I had done X. I simply did something I don't normally do. It doesn't change the fact that I don't normally do it.

Lol... you got caught so bad. Notice how he tries to rewrite history here, and adds the word 'normally' in to try and give himself an out.

That's the problem with a text game like this... the truth never goes away:

I don't give out town reads in mini games

, I think it benefits scum more than town. It's like saying "Hey scum, you should kill this guy, he looks pretty town".

/game

[podium123456]

You don't actually want to discuss this game on the merits of the play up until now,

This doesn't make any sense.

you want to hound me over and over and over until I say one small thing you can use, and then call it "/game". Well guess what, it aint game, not even close. Even if I contradicted myself under your nonstop ridiculousness,

This contradiction came from a line of questioning by TDC, not me.

it doesn't change the fact that you're UT's buddy and the record of the game shows it.

@TDC: THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT. YOU HAVE TO MAKE A DECISION. THIS IS NOT HELPING US WIN.

He said he was VLA until sunday... stop shouting...

[podium123456]

Just go for it.

[podium123456]

thank god... thank god in heaven

*exhales*

[podium123456]

great job modding prana

[podium123456]

GJ with the hammer TDC... how close was it, and what made you change your mind?

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

@ prana - yeah i didnt know if you realized or not, but all other days were 2 weeks, and the rules say 2 weeks... i didnt know if you made the last day 3 weeks on purpose, or if it was a mistake.

[podium123456]

tricky call on the ABR thing, technically i think you are in the right not to count it... but if it happens in the future (which would be rare) i would probably count it, as ABR was aware of the circumstances and wanted to do it anyway.