Erg0 wrote:I'm leaning strongly towards a jason/Sando/Jack scum trio at this point. Definitely want to lynch one of the last two today, Sando's not ripe for lynch -1 yet so...
Vote: Jack
You have stated you have a scum read on Sando in 511. At the time you made this vote Sando had 3 votes and Jack only 1. If you think they are both members of the scum team why push on the member with less votes? Why are you afraid to put Sando at L-1?
Erg0 wrote:Given that Sando's scumteam lost that game, do you think he could have learned from it and changed his scum style? Do you recall whether scum interactions were a big part of the reason for Sando and ooba's lynches on the last two days?
Scum interactions had little to do with the scum team being lynched. I was V/LA for basically all three scum lynches. Flavor of claims is what doomed the Mafia there combined with a smidgeon of PoE. Nothing to do with interactions.
So, no, I don’t think Sando decided to change his scum play as his bussing / interactions didn’t result in his team’s loss.
Zajnet wrote:So if I'm scum, Jack probably isn't. Cool, because I'm not scum.
Not my point but possibly true. What makes it so scumtastic is that you haven’t scum-hunted or made any sort of comments about Jack that I can see in your ISO. You swoop in (much like your avatar), make a vote with little reasoning and disappear.
The fact that you chose to ignore the Sando wagon is an interaction I will be keeping my eye on.
Sotty wrote:MOI do you think Sando is likely town then?
Nope that’s a logical leap I’m not willing to make. I’m only stating that I don’t that his ignoring of Jason is a scum-tell. Below is my analysis of Sando’s ISO.
Sando’s ISO -
ISO 0 – Votes Jack for the tell “first to accuse of rolefishing is scum”. Note that this is the ‘boilerplate’ scumtell, which vollkan attacks on Day 2.
ISO 1 is the last significant direct interaction with Jack.
ISO 2 – 7 he goes back and forth with Farside significantly over issues regarding Jack’s meta free pass Day 1 and issues related to Sotty.
ISO 8 – Disagrees with Charlie’s decision to put me at L-1 while he is ‘divided’.
ISO 10 – Comments on IKD’s case on Jack and elaborates further reasons why he feels Jack is scummy and why Jack’s defenses are not credible.
ISO 11 – Move vote to Charlie for Charlie’s “Quickhammer would be under scrutiny” comment. ISO 12 follows up explaining why to Charlie.
ISO 13 - Light attack on Poro for not taking ‘stands’.
ISO 14 ends the day discussing Charlie.
ISO 15 starts Day 2 with a renewed vote for Jack based on role-fishing. States Jack is ‘muchos scummier’ than Zajnet.
ISO 16 – Attacks vollkan for his attack on Sando for using ‘boilerplate’ tells.
ISO 17 – Votes vollkan over the boilerplate issue with a touch of self-meta.
ISO 18 and 19 – Back and forth with vollkan regarding Poro’s inactivity.
ISO 20 – Answers questions about his scum-reads (Jack, Yhtan / Erg0 and vollkan)
ISO 23 – Long defense of his scum meta and a vote for Poro for inconsistency in voting / scum-reads.
ISO 24 – More scum meta defense. Admits to ignoring Jason but states it is not deliberate. Attacks Jack for ‘Saying Y is scummy but voting Z”
ISO 25 – More meta scum discussion and questions to Locke / Poro / Jack regarding his relative scumminess in comparison to Zajnet.
ISO 26 to 29 – More arguments against him being scum based on meta.
ISO 30 – Votes Locke for being opportunistic.
ISO 31 – Responds to questions regarding his and Poro’s scum game together
ISO 32 – Answers question from Sotty regarding his Jason.
Sando ISO 33 wrote:I've voted Jack for most of the game, I've decided that I'm best served highlighting the things that I find wrong with Poro and Locke at the moment.
Sando – if you are sure Jack is scum why are you better served highlighting Poro and Locke at the moment? Isn’t your later Day 2 / Day 3 play to this point the same thing that you have accused others of – ‘Jack is scummy, but I’m voting for Poro / Locke’?
ISO 34 – Questions Erg0 about his scum partnership reads.
ISO 35 – Comments about Zajnet’s vote for Jack.
ISO 36 to 38– Contradictory point that he is not attacking Poro on meta. All statements regarding Poro relate to his play in other games as scum.
ISO 40 – First direct scum-hunting on Jack since early Day 1. Accompanied by a vote.
I’m getting a scum read from Sando at this point. He’s called Jack as scum for the majority of the game but hasn’t actively worked towards proving that via scum-hunting. In fact his focus on Jack really wilts Day 2.
Many of his posts are framed from a defensive position.
The timing of his renewed attention to Jack (aligned with Jack’s sudden attention to Sando) strike me as possible bussing.
Overall most of his ‘scum-hunting’ revolves around meta attacks, which he states in ISO 2 he dislikes (emphasis added)
Sando ISO 2 wrote:Funnily enough, having not played a significant number of games with anyone here,
I can't really contribute to the meta discussion, doesn't really bother me though, I hate meta arguments.
He's been hammering multiple people for 'Call Y Scum, Vote X" when he looks to be doing the same thing with Jack in the last Day.
Finally that last bit of self-contradiction regarding his attacks on Poro triggers one of my top Scum-tells - Cognitive Dissonance.
UNVOTE: Jack.
At this point I really need to assess how strongly I think Sando and Jack are likely scum partners. If I do either is a good lynch. If I don't I really need to weigh the scumminess of the two.
"I am a leaf on the wind ... watch how I soar!"
Pretty much Geriatric game restricted at this point ... unless there are players I REALLY want to play with.