Open 272 - Near-Vanilla (Over!)

[AntB]

Confirm in and VOTE: JesseSheffield for having my hometown in your name

[AntB]

@Jesse
Yup

Brokenscraps has pinged scumdar quite badly...
fail case (2nd confirm is scum) and chainsaw fail

[AntB]

I never said CN confirmed 2nd, just that he is the confirmed 2nd scum, I may have phrased that poorly.

Very poorly... seems like a complete cover-up.

UNVOTE: JesseSheffield
VOTE: brokenscraps

[AntB]

people with some interlect[...]

I think you mean

intellect

.
Nice OMGUS/chainsaw...

[AntB]

@CN
So voting on something which to me reads as a cover-up to a particularly nasty slip is a scum slip in itself? While true it ultimately comes down the interpretation, that's why we have punctuation.

[AntB]

So now covering up a slip isn't serious... sure whatever.

My vote was serious, in "serious times" as I felt (and still do feel) he was(is) trying to cover for a slip.

[AntB]

@DrShotty

AntB- 1. Why the sarcasm? and why the hatred? You mad bro?

1) I'm a sarcatic person. Also, people seem to take notice of sarcastic comments more for some reason...
2) Because people are out to kill me(?) - No hatred though in honesty.
3) Nope. Why would I be?

@Farsight
I can understand others may see it differently. However, we have punctuation to clarify things like this.
"helping uncle jack off his horse" can be read many number of ways. "Helping Uncle Jack, off his horse" leaves only one meaning
The "shifty-eyed" emote doesn't exactly reinforce his case.

@Andrew
No further comment about the OMGUS/Chainsaw vote of yours? The fact you did that and haven't commented further makes me think you know broken has something to hide...

[AntB]

And yet people pick it up easy enough... I'm not one for subtle sarcasm.

[AntB]

I never said CN confirmed 2nd, just that he is the confirmed 2nd scum, I may have phrased that poorly.

To me, it looks like a cover up. reinforced by this:

he said 'confirmed 2nd scum'
people with some interlect like me would understand why he said that
vote antb
3rd scum

to me this reads as "OMG I'm going to vote AntB just because he voted brokenscraps."
OMGUS = Vote for no reason. chainsaw = defending another by attacking the attacker. My logic gives me Chainsaw OMGUS. Why do this unless you know something? My vote is pretty damn weak, but this early D1 IMO it doesn't matter. Its a damn sight stronger than andrew94s.

[AntB]

chaotic neutrality confirmed 2nd scum

There's the original post... now lets fill it out.

chaotic neutrality

,

confirmed 2nd

,

scum

chaotic neutrality

is

confirmed

as the

2nd scum

now taking how I read it into account:

I never said CN confirmed 2nd, just that he is the confirmed 2nd scum, I may have phrased that poorly.

Notice this is more grammatically correct. Despite that, even without adding commas, there wouldn't be an alternate way to read it.

You have still yet to justify your vote.

[AntB]

@brokenscraps
It still looks like your covering a slip. I wasn't the only one to mis-understand what you put and if it wasn't for andrew94's post I would have moved on already.
What's your thought on andrew94s vote?

@drshotty
Madness is a gift few truly possess. With it, they can either rule the world or rot in a corner.

[AntB]

I would rather attempt to rule the world and swing from rope should I fail.

[AntB]

If I am scum then it's your job to ensure that I

reach

the rope.

[AntB]

So either way, if I now back down, I'm scum. If I stand by my position, I'm scum.

Hmmmm.... You may as well QuickLynch me.

---

I highlight again, if it wasn't for andrew94s counter-vote, I would have moved on and accepted the reason. The chainsaw omgus says to me broken has something to hide. Normally I would consider the possibility of neighbours, but as this is an open game, I somehow doubt it.

[AntB]

in fact, seeing as I am scum either way.
UNVOTE: brokenscraps
VOTE: andrew94
Still not justified his vote on me and has missed the question multiple times, as well as chainsawing me and pretty much labelling me as scum no matter what I do.

[AntB]

I feel its a pretty good tell. I could be wrong but I would have to be proven wrong first. At least 2/3rds of my wagon are scum IMO anyway.... its up to the town whose case they buy into.

Andrews no-reasoning-at-all-but-is-defending-someone-else-by-attacking vote or my admittedly pants vote, trying to squeeze something else out of you.

I don't see what the fuss is on D1... half the point is to gather information, right? You really think I would actively push so hard for a lynch, so early?

Nobody else has bothered to push andrew94 for a reason either... except CN who posted "reasons are your friends don't forget your friends"....

[AntB]

I have said again, andrew94s vote made me reconsider the case entirely and I believe they both have something to hide. There's no neighbours... If andrew94 had not voted for me I would have moved on pretty quickly.

But apparently andrew94s vote-with-no-reason its as bad as my vote-with-a-pants-reason-to-get-information...

I ain't claiming. There's nothing to claim.

[AntB]

13 players remain; 7 votes needed for a lynch.

AntB (3) - andrew94, brokenscraps, Chaotic Neutrality

Unvote, Vote: AntB
L-1.

Fail? try L-2.

[AntB]

L-3 even!!

[AntB]

so yea, weak case, weak dude,

Still stronger than yours.

Why did you even consider claiming before checking the votecount that was posted right above my head?

Why claim I'm at L-1 when there's a vote count right above your head... The only time I check vote counts is when I'm voting.

[AntB]

@Nachomamma8

So what made you check the votecount after you made that post?

It caught my eye.

For this. The reaction.

lol? Surely there's enough reaction from me on previous 4 pages to go on without fishing for more?


@Farsight
Punctuation can completely alter the meanings of sentences in written English. Even scum while defending town build a better case than andrews and I was hoping to provoke a further reaction out of both broken and andrew.

[...] just someone I find myself shaking my head at.

You'll get used to doing that... I cause a lot of headaches.

@broken
Agreed.

--

UNVOTE: brokenscraps
VOTE: Nachomamma8

[AntB]

Defiance, yes, over-defensiveness, no. I clarified my vote using terms which had been throw at me and gave my then current and previous opinion.

Add bold to show the over-defence, and italics to show the panicking specifically, please.

[AntB]

So now covering up a slip isn't serious...

sure whatever.

The italics would be the defiant part. Refusal to acknowledge something which has been stated to me.

[AntB]

@Nachomamma8
You played ONE game with me, and if you really want to go build meta on me, instead of looking at posts in general, go through to games I've played (it's all on the wiki). All you'll find afaik is that I have a variable playstyle. The only consistency being, I like OMGUS... What can I say, I like the scum to jump at me, and I like to attack my attackers...

It doesn't set off his scumdar at all

[sarcasm] Because I always announce every suspicion I have... [/sarcasm]

he doesn't believe anything he's saying

Seeing as you like meta, that also seems to be a trait I seem to have...

The 2/3rds comment is an admittedly wildcard accusation, but it's there to provoke a reaction, which it did. Also, it's a lot better than "Vote, L-1, even though its not".

My vote reasons are (incase you missed them):

For this. The reaction.

lol? Surely there's enough reaction from me on previous 4 pages to go on without fishing for more?

-AND-

@broken
Agreed.

referring to:

For this. The reaction.

people say
You said someone was at L-1 to get a reaction... rolefishing much?

Unvote: AntB
Vote: Nacho

The wagon needs to stay here.

Now your case on me seems to be

heavily

based on meta, am I

really

that much of a threat to you?

--

I hope at some point we both get a game as scum... You'll enjoy reading my meta from that...

[AntB]

Only scum would see me as a threat.. while true I'm not completely terrible, I'm not exactly much good either.

Players who shout their suspicions can be good for the town, but as there isn't that much shouting I kept quiet. Shouters get NKd if they get close to the mark and abused if not.

I'll clarify that reason for you:
You've thrown 4 pages of "reactions" to one side and went for broke, going for another reaction by faking putting me a L-1, now if that's a gambit, that's risky as hell, and I don't see any potential benefit from it, apart from forcing a mislynch.

P-EDIT:
lol @ :lies:

[AntB]

@Nacho
I said me as a threat to you. Not me as a threat to town or scum... Don't try to read what isn't there...

@Archer
I will happily die (and even self hammer) if my flip will provide sufficient information, and even as scum if I feel it will throw the trail off my scumbuddies. However, my death now will provide nothing but a lot of "meh!"

[AntB]

I sense archer not reading properly... time to unzip methinks.

There's no self pity intended in my post. Self-preservation, maybe. Possibly even survivalist...
You appear to have missed the part where scum will take shouters for an easy ride when their wrong...

Also your post seems wrong somehow. First, you say you'll self hammer. Next you say that action would help scum. Next you say your death will provide nothing useful (meh). Really really confused

Lets break it down and try and relieve some of that confusion.

First, you say you'll self hammer.

Only if it will:
(as town) provide information leading to the capture of scum
(as scum) throw the town of the trail of my scum buddies.

Next you say that action would help scum.

No I don't.

Next you say your death will provide nothing useful (meh).

Who's alignment can you get a good feel on when I flip town from lynching? Answer: No-ones.
So, lynching me right now will provide no information beyond my alignment and won't give anything else useful. Apart from, possibly a slight shift in peoples read on Nachomamma8.

[AntB]

@Archer
No insult intended. I am sorry if you believe I have insulted you.
You are looking too hard to find evidence of scum that your missing the point where I said it could help town. This answers both the contradiction and my supposed slip.

@Farsight

Broken was the one who brought up the rolefishing first, which AntB then jumps on

I had not actually considered the possibility of role fishing but was more concerned with the lie of me being at L-1 in an attempt to force a slip.

antb just made up a fail reason to vote broken

I trying to gain information, as I have said before had it not been for andrew94s vote without reason on me I would have moved on quickly. That vote made me believe there was something being hidden and I believed it needed to be extracted.

@All
Nobody else bothered andrew94 seems to be a bit too conservative about giving any reasons for anything?

[AntB]

My vote for nacho is stone set now methinks. Far too much wagon jumping, not enough reasoning, seems to either be half arsed about the game in general or scum after an easy ride. The posts he's put about me not believing my vote seem to say to opposite IMO, in addition to lord_hurs' backtracking and contradictory comment, I provide my reasoning and stand by my guns throughout. Surely if I didn't believe my own vote I would backtrack, give no reasoning and back down very quickly under town pressure?

@andrew94

cn was the person being wagoned, antb just made a crap reason to jump on someone else (if he jumped on cn, too obvious?)

Its taken you that long to pull that as your reason for voting? I was expecting something a lot better...

[AntB]

As to why AntB doesn't believe what he says, refer to #175. The first quote is him saying his scumdar was pinged quite badly, and that brokenscraps's case "failed". And yet, no vote. This shows that his scumdar wasn't pinged that badly, since when people find scum, they put a vote along with their suspicions.

I'm not "people". I'm AntB. I play how I play, not how people such as yourself expect me to play. When I believe I've found scum I hunt around looking for potential connections. Using peoples reactions at this point can provide me with reads later on.

The second quote demonstrates AntB dancing around the answer to a question far more than he needed to. Farside said he was voting for a crap reason, and all he needed to do is answer "a scumslip isn't a crap answer". Again, shows he doesn't believe what he says because he's afraid to just come right out and say it.

I am a sarcastic person. There is no dancing around, I provided an answer which boils down to "a scumslip isn't a crap reason to vote".

The third quote just bleeds of crap. It's drawing scumteams this early in the game that seem to stem from being voted, although he tries to hide it in creative ways.

I draw a connection for use later when one of them flips. I wasn't pointing a scumteam, I was pointing a possible connection. Could have been a Night 0 investigation for all I know. We won't find out while later.

Far too much wagon jumping

WAGON JUMPS:
AntB to Archer

How is this "far too much wagon jumping" in the least bit?

Opportunistic jumping. You went with the flavour of the day both times.

not enough reasoning

I have plenty of reasoning, especially considering it's PAGE 8.

Your reasoning for voting me is.... nothing. You provide nothing to go with your vote on me - except an L-1 claim. Then later you just wanted the reaction... You lie, to get a reaction...

Your vote for archer is reasoned with this:

lord_hur, I figured ALL of his posts give that feeling, especially when he's attacking a suspect in them.

Nothing of your own, just a generic general agreement.

seems to either be half arsed about the game in general or scum after an easy ride.

Wonderful fencesitting. What makes you think it's the second as opposed to the first? Why do you think I would be after an easy ride as scum since I was under pressure since we've been out of the starting gate?

Well it is quite comfy up there... Please don't put words in my mouth, I didn't say either option was more viable than the other. But while we're on the matter, opportunistic voting and lying to pull a reaction seem like your attempting to give the illusion of a scum hunt, but are just going with the easy wagons in an attempt to cruise. Even pressured scum can cruise if they're smart enough, as I believe you to be.

The posts he's put about me not believing my vote seem to say to opposite IMO, in addition to lord_hurs' backtracking and contradictory comment,

So you agree that backtracting and contradicting are the only two ways to find out if someone believes what they're doing or not?

If someone doesn't believe the reasoning behind their votes they will either crumble under pressure, contradict themselves, back down quickly, lie and provide minimal reasoning. (Sound familiar?).

Surely if I didn't believe my own vote I would backtrack, give no reasoning and back down very quickly under town pressure?

Beautiful WIFOM. If this were true, then all scum would back down given pressure. All scum don't.

Scum would go for the easiest option, with minimal reasoning; and then with town pressure they would quickly unvote with just as little reason.

----

I do not like how he used my comment without a trace of doubt concerning my alignment, as if he knew I was town. Usually town say "I think he's right" or "that makes sense" in one form or another, and don't use unconfirmed people's words so freely.

I believe it to be a neutral comment, true in many situations regardless of alignment. I would be more concerned with Nachos generic general agreement with your case on archer.

[AntB]

I checked your newbie game, and you voted when you had suspicions then. You also went through with your suspicions in Hair Trigger Mafia... so is there any meta you have where you refused to vote who you found suspicious?

Oh look, meta-case. If you look at my other games, both completed and on-going I think you'll find it hard to establish a solid meta.

What does sarcasm have to do with anything?

Well if your taking my meta into account, a lot... otherwise, part of the bit you initially quoted was sarcasm.

So you're a lynch all liars prescriber then? I never demanded a claim. Hell, I never even MENTIONED the word claim.

You placed L-1 underneath your vote for me, essentially claiming yours was the L-1 vote. I never said you asked for a claim from me. And yes, Lynch All Liars is also a policy of mine.

Don't put words in your mouth?

OH SORRY I FIGURED YOU WERE VOTING WHO YOU SUSPECTED. HOW IDIOTIC OF ME

I didn't explicitly say which option I went for and I provided my reasoning for voting you.

If this was true, then mafia would be a piece of cake, now wouldn't it?
And I didn't believe any of what I was saying here, but I sure as hell didn't back down.

I don't consider meta except in rare circumstances. Yours does not qualify to be a rare circumstance.
I will elaborate later when Archer has answered your question about meta so that I don't taint it. I have already posted my reasoning in another currently active game if you wish to find it seeing as you like to do your homework.

[quote="Nachomamma8"

Scum would go for the easiest option, with minimal reasoning; and then with town pressure they would quickly unvote with just as little reason.

But but

I'm not "people". I'm AntB. I play how I play, not how people such as yourself expect me to play. When I believe I've found scum I hunt around looking for potential connections. Using peoples reactions at this point can provide me with reads later on.

[/quote]
and..? If I have a vote in place, that vote stays where I it. I don't change my vote a lot.

[quoute="Nachomamma8"]At the time of the vote, I thought he was scum. And specifically for what, I don't remember. All I remember is that I thought he was scum.[/quote]
I lol at you.

[AntB]

I'm adressing the posts as I read them:

---

@Nachomamm8

Did you forget this already?

I'm not "people". I'm AntB. I play how I play, not how people such as yourself expect me to play. When I believe I've found scum I hunt around looking for potential connections. Using peoples reactions at this point can provide me with reads later on.

How do you expect me to respond to a meta defense with anything BUT a meta case?

You play on meta, while I disagree with it others swear on it. For those that use it I will provide what they need/

What bit specifically? What would you have said if you weren't being sarcastic?

I stated before which bit was sarcasm. I would have probably dismissed the point either way,

Wonderful.
So are you lynching me due to policy, or do you have actual reasons? When did you plan on bringing your policy up? Why didn't you bring it up before?

If I was lynching on policy I would have said so sooner. I have provided the reasons several times.

Well, let's just say I'm hoping you're not voting me since you believe I'm lazy town.
Do you have any other suspects, then?

andrew94 is my secondary suspect currently.

You should be considering meta if you want to push a "scum do this and you're doing this" case. There's no excuse when there's plenty of meta to be had.

I go for what I consider to be scum like behavior. Meta as I've come to know the description is an overview of a players general playstyle.

Meaning that your belief in what you're writing can't be measured by how stubborn you are. Meaning that other ways need to be found in order to gauge your intentions. Surely you see where I'm going?

My stubbornness can be my downfall. As for other methods to gauge me, well there's plenty of content in this game to go on.

And why do you think something like that is more likely to come from scum than town? Or do you even believe I'm scum in the first place?

Because quite simply town would be able to establish reasoning for their votes. This contradicts your previous claim that you voted for the reaction.

---

@Farside22

@AntB: I looked at your wiki just to see if what Nacho is claiming is true. Do you have a finished game you can link me to where you were scum?

Not currently.

---

@Nachomamma8
This seems contradictory:

[AntB] For the crappy brokenscraps case.

[Archer] Ignoring the brokenscraps tell.

My case was based on the tell... which you say is crappy.
I will admit for the

n

th time my case was flawed, however I extracted some information from it.

[AntB]

As to why AntB doesn't believe what he says, refer to #175. The first quote is him saying his scumdar was pinged quite badly, and that brokenscraps's case "failed". And yet, no vote. This shows that his scumdar wasn't pinged that badly, since when people find scum, they put a vote along with their suspicions.

Note the lack of meta here.

You infer a general meta which applies to all players, expecting me to fit in with it and begin pushing a case based on non-conformity to said meta meta.

---

You also still haven't answered my question.

I would have probably dismissed the point either way,

---

So now covering up a slip isn't serious... sure whatever.

My vote was serious, in "serious times" as I felt (and still do feel) he was(is) trying to cover for a slip

Once again for further clarification, "sure whatever" is a sarcastic dismissal of the point. I have stated this once already.

---

Answer ALL of my questions.

I am doing...

---

My suspicions on andrew94 are raised from his vote on me and the painstaking process of getting a reason out of him for it.

---

You state you can't remember why you voted me, yet earlier you state you were reaction fishing.

---

The possible contradiction is in listing me as scum for pressing a brokenscraps case, then listing archer as scum for ignoring it.

[AntB]

i find antb scummy

Because of a "crap vote to jump on a wagon"... Yours isn't exactly good, and your maintaining it.

Who else is scummy and why?

[AntB]

I am intrigued by this because I find the opposite to be true. As scum, your information level is much greater - you know who is or isn't scum and thus you never have to consider the possibility that you are wrong. As town, this is clearly not true - someone who is genuinely scum-hunting will always have a voice in the back of their head that they may be picking up on the wrong trail or misinterpreting someone's behaviour. This fact leads to greater equivocation, especially when it comes to making a suspect list at an early stage of the game.

But then we have obviscum. So, scum obviously aren't going to go firing both barrels, are they?

@Andrew
Strike 1.

[...] Who else is scummy and why?

[AntB]

I'm happy for a Nacho, andrew or Bella lynch today.

Reasons on Nacho and Andrew should be clear, reason for bella is the fluffy catchup, provides nothing. Only 1 solid read, interestingly there's a potential scum-case but its too soon...
@Bella
Why is it too soon to build a scum case? When

isn't

it to soon to build a scum case?

@Mod: Whats your deadline lynch policy? Majority of votes or none?

[AntB]

Due to deadline I will be happy to vote either Nacho or Andrew for reasons outlined, not sure what the policy is on Bella, but I will also be happy to bump her, egg or smash for lack of content.

My preferred option remains Nacho.

[AntB]

@Bella
Scum motivation to not vote would be for a no-lynch providing them with a free kill.
You missed this:

Why is it too soon to build a scum case? When

isn't

it to soon to build a scum case?

@Looker
My reasons for nacho are in the wall-of-words debate we had. Starting with his claim at me at L-1.
As for andrew I have already stated is dodging questions and not really doing much for town. If i remember correctly it also took about 3 or 4 pages at least to get a reason for his vote on me out of him.

[AntB]

I didn't miss it, I ignored it because [1]it was entirely irrelevent to what was being discussed. [2]Scum list =/= scum case. But if you want pith answers, then it's too soon to buuild a scum case if there is no justification for a scum case and it's not too early to build a scum case when there's justification for said scum case. [3]But that's not what was being said at all.

[1] I made it relevant
[2] Never said it was.
[3] You said the seeds were planted, seeds need nurturing to grow, you could just leave them to it and hope they grow... putting this into Laymans terms:
You find him scummy and see the potential for a case, why not push him and see what you can get? Why just leave it?

[AntB]

@Bella
So you'd rather just sit back and let the scum slap you in the face instead of rooting them out. Fair enough...

@Nachomamma8

Ant is scum for nothing mentioned previously except meta

I'm not going to engage another wall of words war with you this close to the deadline, so I'll be brief.
In "jumping wagons" I stated clearly that either way I would be considered scum, no matter what action I took.

I've discussed meta enough to go further into it... But I am curious how a reference to a general meta is a scum tell?

@Battousai
I learned my lesson from that game, and I said they were covering something between them...

[AntB]

@farside22
Literally around 24 hours until deadline afaik, and you jump on to voting me, why? What changed between your last two posts?

[AntB]

In all honestly I was too focused on my targets to consider anyone else... no doubt it will now be my undoing.

I still want to know the reason you voted me D1 farside...

@Bella
People can be wrong, its seems I was barking up the wrong tree in the wrong forest... unfortunate but I'm not going to deny it.

Will be re-reading D1 at some point over the weekend.

[AntB]

at the bottom of pg8 currently I have other games I need to catch up on so this will be brief:

@andrew
WHY do you need to be asked 9 times to justify your D1 vote on me? you made 13 posts between voting me and justifying it.

I have more but I need to build.

[AntB]

Haven't read any more of D1 just yet, ended upgrading my netbook. Caught up from my last post and VOTE: andrew94. "I don't care" is not a valid response.

@Looker
I have other suspicions I'm checking currently in addition to andrew.

[AntB]

Caught up as much as I'm going to.

Andrew is scum, if not then kill me.

The latest vote on me from him makes me chuckle.

@andrew
WHY do you need to be asked 9 times to justify your D1 vote on me? you made 13 posts between voting me and justifying it.

behold the epic-ness:

antb, i dont care.

vote antb

why has nobody pulled him on this? Other than "tagging for later"? DavidParker gains a +1 at this point.

@andrew94: How long before you justify this vote Andrew? 15 pages?

When asked about suspects D1:

antb- for reasons stated
lord_hur comes in , seconds the policy lynch, BUT doesnt vote. comments on bella is not a 'newb' then says ' i was just pointing it out, adding to the case' then 'fos david for interprating it otherwise???'
and batt

What happened to change it to:

suspects apart from antb, [farside22]

and looker? "due to sence of not good ness when i read his iso.

What specifically? indulge me.

Also, you posted your suspects when I asked, I had to ask twice admittedly..
I've asked you 3 separate questions..
The first one took you 13 posts to answer, I asked why you were voting me..
The second took you 2 posts to answer, I asked you who your suspects were/.
The third one you answer immediately and dismiss the question, I asked why it took you so long to answer the first.

I press again, why so long to answer why did you take so long to answer why you voted me? You might not care but I certainly do.

The rest is seemingly half assed questions which are never followed up on and no use 1-liners.

[AntB]

@Archer
there was a spam attack on another site which I had to handle...

@All
I have a couple more I need to look at and potentially build a case on, not happening at 3AM however.

[AntB]

I've read up and checked my other suspects (looker, sots), nothing for a case so I'm holding on to my andrew vote.

A spam attack can happen at any time on any website, the person in question created several account, spammed over 400 posts and comments on the saves which myself and the only other moderator online at the time had to fight through, I can provide an image from one of the tools at our disposable to trace multiple accounts if needed.

[AntB]

RL is truly a bitch and I'm sorry I haven't been able to provide more.

Andrew is scum, farside is leaning that way.

Pulling my selfr-hammer policy on me when we're NO WHERE NEAR the deadline is trying for quicklynch IMO..

My claim is thatI am VT. Pure an simple, no power but my vote.

Unless AntB claims VT or scum he is 100% lying. After day 1's PR being outed I certainly don't want a doc outed do you?

Well placed little nugget, here's my translation: "AntB: Claim VT or Scum and be lynched, claim a PR and we'll lynch you faster"

Awesomesauce. G'night.

[AntB]

@IHSIB
spammer

@All
I claimed VT so speculation about me claiming Town PR is pointless and detracts from useful discussion. Scum score an easy lynch and Farside is probably the ring-leader. Her unvote is realisation that if I am quick-lynched she would be first in the firing line. We also have an attempt to hammer a nail in the coffin just before this:

Andrew is scum, farside is leaning that way.

Oh look who's following the crowd with no actual case again.

Case? You turned on me quickly D1 with little case yourself, you've riding the living crap out of my wagon all day so far, purely because I missed Battousi.
Your case is so good, even I'm convinced I'm scum(!) x)

Remaining scumteam is 2 of 3: Bella ("Okay, can we please get on with lynching AntB now?"), Andrew(Look at the case), Farside22 (slip and backtrack).

[AntB]

1) I rode Nacho all day yesterday your point?
2) I made a case on you based on your play and lack of scum hunting which is still happening. I also pointed out how you in your post town games, push and question and push more on those you find scummy which is sorely missing in this game
So far nothing you said has changed my view. Part of my case was also Batt's and your lack of comments in regards to the case and pushing a Bella lynched instead. Thanks as always proving that you are not reading the game.
Lets add OMGUS to more bad scum hunting to the list.
Also I would like there to be a replacement for SoS in place before the day ends. What's your hurry?

1) Nacho flipped town. It goes pretty heavily against both of us.
2) All of your cases are based on Meta which I find very amusing. Your slam me for failing to hunt yet all your doing is meta-searching. While this may pass as a valid tactic for other, I don't like meta - I recently flipped town in another game where I was repeatedly slammed for my apparent inactivity. It shouldn't be hard for you to find it and review. - Morale: Meta sucks unless you take EVERYTHING into account.

So far nothing you said has changed my view.

Then how did I go from Town to Scum?

Part of my case was also Batt's and your lack of comments in regards to the case and pushing a Bella lynched instead.

I genuinly missed Batts tells until the JK claim when I was a little too late to join in, as for Bella. I don't remember actually pushing any case on her, but asking her a few hypotheticals and saying I would be happy with her lynch IF it came to it... but its only part of your case, not a large chunk, not a majority of it, just part of it.

Lets add OMGUS to more bad scum hunting to the list.

And you only just notice? You do all that meta-hunting, and despite me and nacho having a brief conversation about it earlier you bring it up as a fresh point.
VOTE: Farside22

Farside is resurrecting old points on me as part of her case despite seeing me as town for a lot of time

after

those points came up and failing to challenge me at the time. #591 is a blatent AtE if you ask me, a lot of people look on self-hammering with disgust, I see it as a tool. I know this provokes emotional reaction as its heavily frowned on - as does farside... but I challenge you to find where I've actually done it.
She's also WIFOMing, discussing potential claims and scenarios and basically fuelling the distraction from town-beneficial conversation.


Also,

@MOD: I just realise your last vote count is wrong, lord_hur unvoted at the bottom of pg25.

[AntB]

Well aren't you the hypocritical scum man. First it's wrong to meta you and aparently your lack of case means nothing here. Then it's wrong for me to miss a meta that you OMGUS people? Seriously this is your best case.

@Archer: You completely missed the point. He's attacking that meta is weak reasoning but complains about missing the OMGUS. You can't have both ways. It's weak, weak reasoning.

I never said it was wrong to meta me, I just find it a bad and flawed way to build cases. Some people swear on it however and will build the majority of their case on it. Your essentially saying that because I don't like using meta, I can't defend against it in any way. If someone is going to-meta case me then I expect it to be done properly. Your choosing which bits suit you when they suit you. Then attacking me for pulling you on it.

Morale: Meta sucks unless you take

EVERYTHING

into account.

You need to work on being scum better.

While also true, you need to stop pushing an apparent easy lynch, scum. You probably want to tell Bella to back down a touch in your QT tonight. Her case is worse than any of mine. Yet, your ISO is full of pseudo-defences for her, you attack people for attacking her and subtly defend her against everything... Search Bella in her ISO, please don't tell me its just me seeing this.

@lord_hur:

I want to remind people in case AntBscum tries to fake claim what he said earlier in the game.

I will happily die (and even self hammer) if my flip will provide sufficient information, and even as scum if I feel it will throw the trail off my scumbuddies. However, my death now will provide nothing but a lot of "meh!"

That's an AtE resurrection, which (As I've stated before) is IMO just an attempt to stir up and lynch me. Why would any town post this, when she posted it? Why not just bring it up if/when I try to fakeout what I said earlier?

Lets add OMGUS to more bad scum hunting to the list.

And you only just notice? You do all that meta-hunting, and despite me and nacho having a brief conversation about it earlier you bring it up as a fresh point.

AntB being a little prone to OMGUS at times[...][AntB]'s prone to OMGUS

The only consistency being, I like OMGUS

he only things I used to conclude from your meta is that you're not a fucking terrible player, and that you're prone to OMGUS.

If she missed this then she loses all ground for attacking me for not reading the game...


@Archer

Farside was asked to explain it all, hardly brought it up herself. This is a big reach if you are really using it as part of your reasoning

Looking back, no she wasn't. She brought it up herself.

[AntB]

This is the only point of your argumentation that I find any value in, yet it is not precise enough. Can you link me these "old points", please?

Which I did.

The claim was called, so I provided. Giving the impression of VT is always a good thing IMO as it deceives town or fools scum.

[AntB]

You should not deceive town, when playing town, unless you're a great player, which you are not (yet)

The original line was in reference to when playing as scum.

@AntB - I'm human, I will miss things and I don't have time to reread the game over and over.

Considering your level of detail has been quite high overall, that's why it seems bad to me. The question you quoted was also rhetorical aimed at lord_hur.

[AntB]

Are you saying you play to be read as VT because it is a good strategy as scum?

No, I'm saying I believe it to be good all round.

[AntB]

You would.

[AntB]

@Andrew
There's a lot more than one...

[AntB]

@Archer
I've made my cases and they've been ignored, I'm evidently the lynch of the day, today so I'm rolling with it.

[AntB]

@Andrew
It won't take much...

Anyway, seeing as people have been re reading and we have replacements, whose views have shifted where? Mine are still the same...

[AntB]

@Andrew
goddamnit man make a useful post, anyone who thinks I'm making no contribution and flying under the radar or whatever really needs to take a look at this guy! he hit cruise control as soon as we were out of the stalls and hasn't turned it off at all...

@farside
He was asking IF you would have preferred him to hammer, NOT that you told him too, way to dodge...

[AntB]

@Lord_Hur

@AntB : does farside22's soft claim look like the PM you received? (that way, it gives no extra info to scum, since he claimed VT)

Doesn't look anywhere near the PM I recieved. Looks like a generic VT soft claim to me, no VT ever has any power beyond a vote... I would have missed it had it not been highlighted.

[AntB]

So basically I'm scum in several peoples eyes but I'm town if they're scum...

Are these reads 2 way at all? IE if I flip town, person X is obviscum?

[AntB]

Has to be six. I am wiIlling to hammer CS if needs be. I will check at around 12-1AM GMT and hammer then if needed (11 hours from now.)

[AntB]

I realised the deadline is 24+ hours.... I thought it was 3..

[AntB]

VOTE: ConSpiracy

Vote only to prevent no-lynch. - Deadline in approx 5:28 mins from this post.

[AntB]

scum can ride each others wagon you know...

[AntB]

@Andrew
wow. just wow.
VOTE: andrew94 <-- why is he still here?

[AntB]

@Farside
I have and I know my scumpicks. I want something more than a one liner out of andrew. He's done NOTHING this entire game. He's promised content and fluked.

[AntB]

My vote ain't moving, andrew is classic flying-under-the-radar, non-contributing, avoid-posting-anything scum. He refuses to post more because it will out PRs ¬_¬ all his case has ever been on me is "die scum die".

[AntB]

@Farside

I found "Bella" 4 times in his ISO, I don't see anything resembling a case.

[AntB]

Just realised I misread batts as bella. it could be a bus, we'll never know until he flips. My vote is still staying where it is.

[AntB]

I can't believe my eyes.

Andrew has done nothing but coast all the way through, offered next to no opinions on ANYONE except "die scum die" aimed at me once or twice...

I'll go down happily at this rate but when andrew wins as scum I will be loling all the way through the post-game.

[AntB]

@Farside
I ain't done much since D1 but I've done a hell load more than andrew ¬_¬

[AntB]

Hey Andrews posting more, guess he just needed the right kick up his arse.

also @antb, more people think im town then you are town. so.. die scum die

So now I'm scum because people have more town reads on you than me...

I honestly give up on this guy...

[AntB]

Don't like this "DO OR DIE!" attitude from Regfan, why not move some pressure on to either me or andrew to do your bidding? And the last I checked we don't need a unanimous vote to lynch, nor is a deliberate mislynch better than a scum mislynch...

[AntB]

You're going to have to explain this 'do or die' concept you believe that I'm using

Do as I say or I'll kill you.

I generally have a good idea of how his play-style his, his push on CS doesn't fit his good-town meta, that being said I had a town-read on his spot before he filled it. Therefore essentially I'm asking him to pick up his game or I don't need him in here.

This fits with the do or die thing...

we need every vote we can get on farside.

Then why is your on Magua?

[AntB]

EBOWP: *why is your vote on magua

[AntB]

@Regfan
You didn't answer my question but instead seemed to evade it by adjusting your vote. My question still stands.
Why vote Magua when you "need all the votes we can get" on Farside?
I'm also curious as to why your expecting a possible CC on the Jailkeeper?

[AntB]

@Regfan
If you were stating that CC to a JK now would be stupid, then why state it when its pretty obvious?
As for my reads, remaining scums are in you, looker, andrew, farside and bella.

[AntB]

VOTE: Farside

got more on her than I have on Looker, this should be interesting.

[AntB]

0% pro-scum voting record (On Battwagon, off Conwagon, off farsidewagon): andrew94

This worries me more than anything. No one ever has a perfect record as town... VOTE: Andrew
I'm happy calling out Looker and Andew at this point as definitive.

I oppose the Doc claim until (s)he is 100% sure of scum being lynched.

[AntB]

And before anyone says "omg must've been an epic bus then" - I wouldn't be surprised. I know Batt will sacrifice himself to clear his buddies.

[AntB]

Don't expect me to have any dignity when I'm screaming I told you so about andrew in the end game.

[AntB]

@Mod
I voted Andrew.

VOICE OF MOD: Cool, got it![/mod edit]

Town with good reads and doing a good job are pefectly capable of achieving a good voting record. On the other hand, scum with such a record is severely sandbagging his team, and making it much harder for them to win. And you think it makes him scum?

GOOD voting record, NOT perfect.

[AntB]

2 words:

retard antb

Feelings mutual. gg scum.