New York 182 - Game Over

[Thor665]

in what world does scum intentionally lie about what actually happened in a game, when it can be easily fact-checked?

Because they are more interested in pushing a lynch that looks good on the surface than analyzing it.
The only town defense for doing the same is "she wasn't reading gak and didn't want to admit to it" which...yeah, is a plausible story, but is *still* well worth attacking someone over it to try to get a read on the slot over it.

Why are you totally against that concept?

For the record, her defense ended up amounting to "talking about someone when I ask you about them shows scum intent".
So...

[zMuffinMan]

so you do have scum reads outside of the people you listed yesterday, yet it's unreasonable for me to ask for your reads on the entire game

yeah

that makes perfect sense

[zMuffinMan]

a recap of the conversation so far:

muffin: reads list please
thor: i gave reads yesterday, it should be clear what my reads are
muffin: so you have no scum reads outside of the ones you listed yesterday?
thor: no
muffin: wait a minute, you're voting ZZZX who wasn't in the ones you listed yesterday
thor: *blush*

[Thor665]

so you do have scum reads outside of the people you listed yesterday, yet it's unreasonable for me to ask for your reads on the entire game

yeah

that makes perfect sense

You were unaware of my vote at the point you asked the question?

[zMuffinMan]

it didn't register until i thought about your answer

[zMuffinMan]

to be honest, my immediate reaction to your answer was "what a load of smurfing bullsmurf"

it made me forget how inconsistent it was with your current vote

[Thor665]

So you find my admission of not following up on an easily fact checkable thing to be scummy because it suggests that it slipped my mind for a reason or that I didn't process properly because I'm scuma nd am lying?

I agree - it looks wonky.
Proceed as you will.

By the way - what are your thoughts on my push on Elusive again"
Does that push make sense to you now, or still no?
Clarify?

[Thor665]

And my actual answer is: I'm scumhunting ZZZX - I would put him as null currently, but I'd like to run him up and shake the tree to see what happens, and maybe lynch him for lulz.

[zMuffinMan]

The only town defense for doing the same is "she wasn't reading gak and didn't want to admit to it" which...yeah, is a plausible story, but is *still* well worth attacking someone over it to try to get a read on the slot over it.

nah what i'm suggesting is what happened. she used poor wording to describe the point she was making and you attacked her over the wording rather than the actual content

a brief history of thor v elusive, act 1

elusive: here is a list of all the places you were heavily focusing on choof in the early stages of the game
thor: yeah but you said i made a bad "case"!! prove it!
elusive: this is what i meant by that - specifically that your early-game play was heavily focused on choof and questioning people about choof
thor: show me evidence of this
elusive: i have no idea what more you're asking of me
thor: dodge

[zMuffinMan]

So you find my admission of not following up on an easily fact checkable thing to be scummy because it suggests that it slipped my mind for a reason or that I didn't process properly because I'm scuma nd am lying?

yep i was actually going to make that exact joke and call you confirmed scum for being a liar liar pants on fire but i deleted it

the point, however, is that you weren't making an "easily verifiable" error, you were saying something completely inconsistent with your current vote

you are voting someone you didn't give a read on yesterday

yet when i ask for reads, you act like it's ludicrous that i could even consider this question when it should be clear what your reads are from a reads list you gave yesterday (that doesn't include your current vote)

it's inconsistent, not a fact-checkable error

[Thor665]

The only town defense for doing the same is "she wasn't reading gak and didn't want to admit to it" which...yeah, is a plausible story, but is *still* well worth attacking someone over it to try to get a read on the slot over it.

nah what i'm suggesting is what happened. she used poor wording to describe the point she was making and you attacked her over the wording rather than the actual content

a brief history of thor v elusive, act 1

elusive: here is a list of all the places you were heavily focusing on choof in the early stages of the game
thor: yeah but you said i made a bad "case"!! prove it!
elusive: this is what i meant by that - specifically that your early-game play was heavily focused on choof and questioning people about choof
thor: show me evidence of this
elusive: i have no idea what more you're asking of me
thor: dodge

Her list of places that I was heavily focused on choof included multiple posts where she had asked me about choof and I had answered her.
Was that also a Poor wording" error on her part?

[zMuffinMan]

no, that's common sense since of your first 4 posts in the game, the only one that wasn't focused on choof was the vote on varsoon. the fact that she asked you about it is because of this

then you used copper's read specifically on choof to question him, which was another point she brought up

it is not unreasonable for her to think that you spent an abnormal amount of time focused on choof rather than the rest of the game

look, i'm not elusive (clearly) so i'm not exactly the most qualified to have this discussion but if you're acting like what she was saying didn't make sense then no. if your argument is semantically she shouldn't have said "case" then whoop-de-doo

[zMuffinMan]

ftr, i did take the time to read over the elusive v you arguments during the night and these are the conclusions i came to

though obviously i could be seen as biased since the arguments are on my slot and i already know how factually accurate they are

[Marquis]

i'm in bed and on my phone and i decide to click thor's sig

Subject: ASOIAF: Test of Faith Mafia (Game Over!)

Thor, you realize that I'm now going to treat "You're better than this" as a legitimate scumtell I can use on you.

and of course this isn't meant to be taken too seriously in Modern Times™ but lol i'm fine with letting go of my second thoughts now

[zMuffinMan]

no, that's common sense since of your first 4 posts in the game, the only one that wasn't focused on choof was the vote on varsoon. the fact that she asked you about it is because of this

then you used copper's read specifically on choof to question him, which was another point she brought up

it is not unreasonable for her to think that you spent an abnormal amount of time focused on choof rather than the rest of the game

look, i'm not elusive (clearly) so i'm not exactly the most qualified to have this discussion but if you're acting like what she was saying didn't make sense then no. if your argument is semantically she shouldn't have said "case" then whoop-de-doo

oh, also, in addition to this, you directly called choof her scum buddy

so i mean... when you say it included multiple posts she asked about choof, what exactly were you expecting?

[The Bulge]

Replacing ika. Reasons will be given post-game.

[pisskop]

piss. He knows things.

[Seohyun]

hello hi
day 3 is a go
reading

[The Bulge]

RIP replaces ika.

[RIP]

Hello strangers!
I'm new in

TOWN

. Look forward to chopping up some evil mafia so they Rest.In.PIeces

[copper223]

This is me saying that we still shouldn't lynch pisskop and copper today or tomorrow for that matter.
All things considered.

pisskop, yes
copper, ehhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

i'll agree not today but he's a name floating around my head for sk

since you can't scumread me now based on play this is what you come up with? If you are town this game you are getting carried so hard this game it's not even funny. I still think Antihero and Thor should be vig. shot or lynched before we get close to lylo situations.

@All
The CW's from yesterday tell a story, especially the three players that vote parked on TFL I find fishy, those bring Droog, Flubber and Ika, as they were voting the main pusher behind the NS lynch, at least one of those three is very likely scum.

Based on having played with scum Ika this didn't feel like the same play, I know that Flub.'s activity was low at the time so he might conceivably not have been there to change his vote, hence:

VOTE: Droog

[RIP]

Votecount 1.8

notscience (0) -

Antihero (1) -

copper223

Boonskiies (0) -

TheFuzzylogic99 (0) -

copper223 (0) -

elusive (0) -

Flames of Disaster (LYNCH) -

notscience, Sakura Hana, House, OkaPoka, Flames of Disaster, pisskop, droog, Flubbernugget, Varsoon, Marquis, Antihero

Flubbernugget (1) -

elusive

Gorkington (0) -

House (0) -

droog (0) -

Marquis (0) -

OkaPoka (0) -

Otolia (2) -

ZZZX, Seohyun

pisskop (1) -

Gorkington

Sakura Hana (0) -

Seohyun (0) -

Formerfish (0) -

Thor665 (0) -

Varsoon (2) -

Thor665, Formerfish

ZZZX (0) -

Not Voting -

TheFuzzylogic99, Boonskiies, Otolia

With 21 alive, it's 11 to lynch.

Deadline in (expired on 2015-03-27 20:43:00) (March 27^th).

Lynch!

Flames of Disaster has been lynched. He was a

Town Watcher

.

It is now Night 1. Please submit all Night Actions within (expired on 2015-03-19 19:10:00).

Day 2

Sakura Hana has been killed. She was a

Mafia Roleblocker

.

Formerfish has been killed. He was a

Mafia 2-shot Tracker

.

Wow that's impressive n1. Way to start the day 2

[copper223]

Another reason to kill Oka Poka independent from Antihero's haze induced fantasies is mnemonic device is scum, so that's a good player to check out as well.

[RIP]

Hello copper. Any Important info I should know? How did my successors looked to u?

[RIP]

Knowing that former was evil I think that it's less likely that Thor is also evil, at least in my exp evils try to stay away from teammates specially in meaningless and small wagons