I'm bowing out early tonight because I have to get up at 4:30 am. But I am completely fine with lynching Light tomorrow after rereading him talking rings around Hitmon like his own patter is proof positive of a catch.
the ironySigh you didn't answer my actual questions at all. Also no if am telling the truth about you I am scum that means two things, either you are also scum, or you have been acting suspicious, lying about your initial asek read, lying about how you progressed to it changing, lying about wanting to protect proph, lying about your reasons for voting me, lying about your overreaction earlier this day and lying about me tunneling you. One of us has to be lying in these cases, that is a fact. Explain the actions I questioned how they can come from a town perspective without a shred of manipulation, if you can't justify them, then they are scummy, simple as that.
quote the post where he does ?Also MoodyCloud what is your opinion on Former pushing the idea of if Asek scum Hitmon scum day 3 which translated into him jumping on Hitmon day 4 while reading me positively only to start this day completely 180ing to suspecting me despite only really bring me as scum up previously when directly talking of if DLE scum then LW scum.
that first sentence is pretty worthyI have been staring and slow blinking at 1843 for about 15 minutes now.
I don't give a fuck about your wifom justifications I want you to stop ignoring the posts where I call you out for spending day 4 in a tunnel bubble without looking at the other wagon which you have claimed to seriously suspect or even showing an intent to solve the game by associating a Leet scum flip with other people. Pushing Leet D4 looked bad but it's not the reason I'm pressing you today so stop pretending it is.Okay then why ain't you calling Moody out for that as well. Or are you saying he hasn't spent all day making me justify every single move I made against Hitmon?
That's literally not true town can screw up and say incorrect things too that's pretty much half of your defenseAlso, again context, Hitmon was not engaging me on my actual points while scumreading me for pushing him. So I put things in simple terms for him, if I am scum and he is town, then my arguments shouldn't hold up to scrutiny, ergo he should try to do so. He was not engaging me so what do I do, keep screaming out reasons he keeps ignoring and despite scumreading me never engaging me or blackmail him into actually engaging my points. My answer is making him engage me, and would always be. You can't say all I did was tell him to prove he isn't scum, I made points why I think he is scum and asked him to reply to those accusations, not exclaim he is scum, prove he isn't.
You can't honestly say I didn't propose an argument he was refusing to respond in the first place. What do you expect me to do, drop my push on him when I think he is scummy because he refused to acknowledge any of my points after my first damn reply to him. You yourself were consistently pointing out how much he willingly avoided the thread and used it as part of your reasoning, so just because you worded it differently in the end it still boiled down to his refusal to engage me among many other things. Was my way to get him to engage me perfect? No, but if I didn't keep calling attention to his consistent ditching and call it scummy most of the thread would have just let him do it. Yes I was wrong about him, but never was given a chance by him to change my mind about him either.Rereading you, I can see where Moody is coming from. You're using Hitmon's lack of response as justification for a scumread, even now when we already know your argument leads to a false conclusion.
If you want to prove something is ironic it'd help if you put out what makes it ironic.the irony
quote the post where he does ?
day 4 he was on AG iirc ?
Okay then. There's feuding going on and reading this stuff is annoying, so let me go back to the start and figure out where I stand
Asek ISO pt.2
Starts the game off throwing an RVS vote on leet. It's at this point I actually remember doing this ISO earlier and coming to the idea of leet and asek being scum buddies. Still, at least in my current head space the thought of scum RVSing each other comes off as distant but possible
page 19 aka aseks dead period
KOC has weird pings of Asek, logical pings. But pings.
but then this. Does scum KOC actually push for Asek to be first lynched here? ngl I don't think so.
Asek then does the big wall of fluff in which of the people still alive, his really only wolf call is on KOC.
Only a few things stick out to me here
1. Asek keeps pushing KOC claiming gas and stuff
2. He reads moody positively, well, null, but then he puts them in the same pile as metal sonic who he says he town leans
Rule of 3 here says that leet is likely scum (aka when scum tend to do this, it's fairly common for them to put 1 scum in a threesome)
Some of the random stuff that made me SR them in the first place. But at this point I do think this play was scum asek going "I don't think anyone is buying this KOC push so I'm going to push someone else" which again makes KOC seem town
"-Asek #556 looks spectacular to me, tbh. It's what I like to see in a reads post. Big town read on him." - Leet
still weird even if explained
KOC instantly votes Asek after texas asks. This is either next level scum bussing or KOC is town.
It's also at this point where I call out MoodyCloud and KnightsofCydonia for being lame and not reading my post about not being avaliable most of the hours since day started so now I've had to take out time from trying to analyze to read their comments showing their lack of reading comprehension to my earlier comment. Anyways, back to analysis
More stuff I've already ISO'd. but asek defends the leet slot.
Pushes empoof/AG here for behavior (and lol, I said I would do analysis even though here I'm just stating events. That said, this particular push from him. Maybe a bus? idk, I actually feel from this one post that he's genuinely pushing AG here but my current dislike of his play makes me honestly just want to read this as a well played buss.
But ugh, he actually follows up and goes so far as to vote empoof. Is this really a bus?
Then leet does a break down of Aseks post while both calling him out for fluff but also saying he has a lot of good points. Leet concludes that aske is town out of gut.
How to: read this post
Softly defends LW here
end of page 43. Leet does a weird progression post for why he TR asek and then scum read him. Then says outloud he did a 180 on asek. At this point... I'm remembering why I thought Asek+Leet might be a scum team. These d1 interactions are awful.
Hmm...D1 analysis. Would Proph really be an all town wagon? Like, of the 3 I'm fairly certain KOC is town, limbo with moody and scum lean DLE. Asek also parks his vote on leet....
D2
The nothing day. Asek votes leet, leet votes asek. Neither really try to say why.
Another good moody post vs asek
Page 65
AG leans scum on Asek. So buss vs buss? idk.
Actually yeah. On 2nd read. This is a pretty shallow read and feels more like it came from a buss than something else.
LW posts his take on Asek. This read is better than AGs at least but incorperating the yeti/me thoughts into there is ew.
I like this
Well this happened. So how do you see DLE getting to MS to l-1 now?
AG defends asek here. Which is weird af given that he leaned scum him earlier.
LW answers asek here. I do like this post.
and then LW and AG hammer Asek with AG following LW.
Those end the day of aseks.
Results
KOC - I think he's probably lock town to me
Moody - you moved up in townyness
LW - just a smidge from the day 3 interactions
Leet - I think I had been gut TRing you before? But yeah, ISOing asek your interactions with him were very poor day 1, and day 2/3 did little to improve them
AG - Idk, I half feel I have confirmation bias but yeah, feels like asek and ag tried to bus each other. Then AG also says he's going to ISO asek but unless I missed it, he never does.
So yeah.... oog. I'm really tired. My last 48 hours have been working morning shift, spending the night doing Agape/AG's pathfinder campaign and into another morning session so I'm just super wiped. Luckily I have tomorrow off so I can spend more time catching up on teh game because honestly right now I don't feel like critical thinking and analyzing are my brains strong suit right now.
In both he expresses a dislike of Hitmon based on his Asek reread, but it does actually say that if AG flips town look at epik instead(that being said does not mention why AG scum means DLE or why it doesn't mean Hitmon)Okay. So basically just most of this day has been a clown feista of KOC/Moody/Leet where people are delving into convoluted and hard to follow logic.
Followed by LW pushing for a possible last mason to claim
Followed by AG just being a floppy and non persuasive fish
Followed by the newest episode of "Where's the DLE slot" in which we all wonder if EPIK will post reads or not.
Adjusting from the day's prior, I think my current game solve is: Lynch AG today,
if town: lynch leet (aka as much as I think Asek and Leet feel like they are buddying and that AG and Asek buddying is weird and sketch, I SR AG individually the most at this point)
if scum: Lynch epik unless he provides more context
and then probably the final scum for me would be (Leet/Epik) or hmm... Moody or LW? I think again KOC is lock town and I don't particularly feel like Moody is scum so I guess my actual solve is AG -> EPik/Leet -> other one -> LW? But I think AG/Epik/Leet solves the game anyways.
This is where he proposes DLExMe day 4, to which I quoted AG's reaction, follow the link it's quite interesting.Flash read, if epik is scum so is lw
The first sentence where I'm disappointed that instead of Hitmon discussing my arguments he tries to justify that I can be scum and make solely arguments with are true and town would make?(cough you are literally arguing I haven't a done a single towny thing while pushing Hitmon, ergo you yourself if correct have proved Hitmon wrong) There is nothing that I hate more than people saying something is bad without attempting to justify it. Justify that smiley on my first sentence there, I double dare you.that first sentence is pretty worthy
Firstly that's inherently wrong, I told you why I pushed Leet, it's because I suspected him the most. The end, what other justification do I need to push my suspect beyond pushing my suspect? I made no theories as to who Leet's final scumbuddy would be or if he flipped town where I would go, so what? Yes I didn't do those things and all you did with that was ask me why I didn't, and when I told you why I didn't you point at me saying it's WIFOM I did it because I am scum. So yes you are exactly doing what Knights is accusing me of doing, Burden of Proof. I cannot justify any of the stuff you are questioning me off, because the answer always boils down to a wifom, I can tell you in detail why I did what I did, but that's a WIFOM. I haven't dodged a single question of you, you will be hardpressed to find a 10 posts of yours I didn't quote and reply to. Let me make things clear:I don't give a fuck about your wifom justifications I want you to stop ignoring the posts where I call you out for spending day 4 in a tunnel bubble without looking at the other wagon which you have claimed to seriously suspect or even showing an intent to solve the game by associating a Leet scum flip with other people. Pushing Leet D4 looked bad but it's not the reason I'm pressing you today so stop pretending it is.
That's literally not true town can screw up and say incorrect things too that's pretty much half of your defense
Day 3 you stated that depending on which way Asek would flip you'd then go for X or YIf you want to prove something is ironic it'd help if you put out what makes it ironic.
In both he expresses a dislike of Hitmon based on his Asek reread, but it does actually say that if AG flips town look at epik instead(that being said does not mention why AG scum means DLE or why it doesn't mean Hitmon)
This is where he proposes DLExMe day 4, to which I quoted AG's reaction, follow the link it's quite interesting.
The first sentence where I'm disappointed that instead of Hitmon discussing my arguments he tries to justify that I can be scum and make solely arguments with are true and town would make?(cough you are literally arguing I haven't a done a single towny thing while pushing Hitmon, ergo you yourself if correct have proved Hitmon wrong) There is nothing that I hate more than people saying something is bad without attempting to justify it. Justify that smiley on my first sentence there, I double dare you.
Firstly that's inherently wrong, I told you why I pushed Leet, it's because I suspected him the most. The end, what other justification do I need to push my suspect beyond pushing my suspect? I made no theories as to who Leet's final scumbuddy would be or if he flipped town where I would go, so what? Yes I didn't do those things and all you did with that was ask me why I didn't, and when I told you why I didn't you point at me saying it's WIFOM I did it because I am scum. So yes you are exactly doing what Knights is accusing me of doing, Burden of Proof. I cannot justify any of the stuff you are questioning me off, because the answer always boils down to a wifom, I can tell you in detail why I did what I did, but that's a WIFOM. I haven't dodged a single question of you, you will be hardpressed to find a 10 posts of yours I didn't quote and reply to. Let me make things clear:
GUYS I THOUGHT LEET WAS SCUM SO I PUSHED HIM BECAUSE IF I PUSH HIM I PUT PRESSURE ON HIM AND THEN I CAN CONVINCE OTHERS OF MY THINKING EASIER. I DIDN'T GIVE A RATS ASS ABOUT ANYONE ELSE BECAUSE I WAS CONVINCED I CAUGHT HITMON AND IF I DIDN'T OUT HIM NO ONE WOULD. SO I SPENT 2 DAYS TRYING TO GET HIM LYNCHED OR KILLED AT NIGHT TO RESOLVE HIS ALIGNMENT AND CLEAR ANY DOUBTS. THE END.
I'm done fucking entertaining your stupidity Moody, you clearly haven't even done a reread of at the very least Former, if not more despite being in a situation where if you lynch me and I flip town you have to fucking acknowledge that I was suspecting Former from a purely town view. Ignoring that this is the exact time when people should review every fact and get themselves caught up on what everyone still alive has done. Instead you have been solely obsessing with me and have not proposed any alternates. After all you have been jabbing at Knights but that is it, you barely touched upon Epik even if it's suggested that's where you'd be looking next. Maybe take your own advice and your own views of the ideal town play and look into the people you will have to suspect if you are wrong about me. Unless you put forth something productive I am ignoring it. I will do an ISO of Former then lynch myself, I suggest you use that time to research shit. LightWolf out.
Quote the posts I ignored, I double dare you.Day 3 you stated that depending on which way Asek would flip you'd then go for X or Y
Then you tell me that trying to make pre-flip implications is just not your play style and that I'm an idiot for assuming that blatantly refusing to look at a wagon in relation to another and to make conjectures from the wagon you're pushing is not towny behavior.
You completely ignored some posts I've made where I pointed that out, prompting me to repeat myself at like three times to get it addressed, when I'm now supposed to believe that I was misrepresenting you by doing that yet that you waited for me to grow impatient with my call-outs before you responded. Since you claim that I'm using player meta and self projecting too much here's what self projection makes me think of that : a towny annoyed that they're being misrepresented doesn't sidestep issues multiple times but rather makes an angry post about how I'm full of shit.
Even now you are still half dodging my problems with you by going on a rant about your reasons for pushing Leet when that's just not what I'm calling you out for.
instead of stopping for one second and looking at the other wagon on someone you had called highly suspicious.What pattern? ONE confirmed scum pushed for him. Yeti goddamn pushed for him day 1.
Also stop with the pointless wifom that everyone dead supported Leet. Fucking Texas was if leet isn't mason obviously just trying to implicate hitmon as his partner. That alone removes his read of him as anything we can put any weight into.
It's everything after it that makes my eyes glaze over.that first sentence is pretty worthy
I went down a tinfoil road where his lack of presence combined with the push from and response to Asek led me to think that Asek got pissy about having to solo carry in D1 and retaliated with a bus. It was never about "respond to me how I want you to or you're scum".You can't honestly say I didn't propose an argument he was refusing to respond in the first place. What do you expect me to do, drop my push on him when I think he is scummy because he refused to acknowledge any of my points after my first damn reply to him. You yourself were consistently pointing out how much he willingly avoided the thread and used it as part of your reasoning, so just because you worded it differently in the end it still boiled down to his refusal to engage me among many other things. Was my way to get him to engage me perfect? No, but if I didn't keep calling attention to his consistent ditching and call it scummy most of the thread would have just let him do it. Yes I was wrong about him, but never was given a chance by him to change my mind about him either.
Asek or Aura? And no, the Aura breakdown wasn't formatted like the one I did on you.someone look into whether the Knights iso where wrecks Asek was the only one he did back then / how he announced it for me
It wasn't about him not responding how I wanted him to, it was about him not responding at all, and again as you have brought up plenty of times ditching the thread in favour of being active on discord. I mean are we gonna ignore the part where I give in an quote my arguments against him, he says he will reply, then doesn't do shit about it? There was obviously a corelation between my problems of him avoiding me and your problems of him ditching the thread in favour of discord, it's a literal case of my problem being a symptom of your overall problem. Dunno why this is worth arguing over anyways.It's everything after it that makes my eyes glaze over.
I went down a tinfoil road where his lack of presence combined with the push from and response to Asek led me to think that Asek got pissy about having to solo carry in D1 and retaliated with a bus. It was never about "respond to me how I want you to or you're scum".
Yes, it bothered me. I saw it as behavior that was both anti-Town and anti-scum, and as such thought it was tied to an association with Asek.It wasn't about him not responding how I wanted him to, it was about him not responding at all, and again as you have brought up plenty of times ditching the thread in favour of being active on discord.
No. But neither going to ignore the parts where you repeatedly say that he's not giving you what you want and therefore must be scum, and that since you're not lying and one of you has to be lying it must be him who is the liar. I think that latter part is called false dilemma?I mean are we gonna ignore the part where I give in an quote my arguments against him, he says he will reply, then doesn't do shit about it?
The correlation is in the conclusion reached, but not in the methods used to reach that conclusion. It's a conclusion where I can see not only that I was wrong but how I was wrong, and a conclusion you keep saying was justified.There was obviously a corelation between my problems of him avoiding me and your problems of him ditching the thread in favour of discord, it's a literal case of my problem being a symptom of your overall problem.
Maybe because you're defending yourself right now and a fallacy-laden push that you continue to treat as if justified when it is Mod-proven wrong is a part of the case against you?Dunno why this is worth arguing over anyways.
Firstly, all I ever intended to do with those parts what you call false dilemma, was to make Hitmon respond to me. If I am scum there has to be a hole in my arguement, you think I am scum so to prove it find that hole, if you are town you'd obviously do so. I only ever addressed those posts to Hitmon and only ever whenever he claimed it was pointless to engage me I'm scum the end.Yes, it bothered me. I saw it as behavior that was both anti-Town and anti-scum, and as such thought it was tied to an association with Asek.
No. But neither going to ignore the parts where you repeatedly say that he's not giving you what you want and therefore must be scum, and that since you're not lying and one of you has to be lying it must be him who is the liar. I think that latter part is called false dilemma?
The correlation is in the conclusion reached, but not in the methods used to reach that conclusion. It's a conclusion where I can see not only that I was wrong but how I was wrong, and a conclusion you keep saying was justified.
Maybe because you're defending yourself right now and a fallacy-laden push that you continue to treat as if justified when it is Mod-proven wrong is a part of the case against you?
The assumption is as far as I understand that the reason Texas believed scum had no day chat was because Masons don't have one? After all the rules say "- Masons only have night chat". So if that is the premise, then couldn't the reverse be true as well? Former's reaction to the claim of Texas is that BOTH chats remain open during the day questionmark. By the same logic that Texas assumed his chats rules counted for the other, would it make sense that Former saying both were open because his chat was open? Frankly both are farfetched and I find it surprising it held true for Texas in the first place. Still if I want to prove Former guilty I need to look for whatever I can.Whatever, I'm annoyed now and it's a low chance scum will miss it especially after all the attention it's getting
But texas derp claimed mason
Reads Proph and Knights positively. (Yes this ISO will also include segments merely recording interactions and stances in a neutral way to get them on the record so I can get an overview)I don't disagree with the knights read
Soft tr on proph as well. His backing of the wagon on me felt pretty towny compared to opportunistic
This stinks, it's a post questioning the basics of pressuring people to expand reads on them and force them into a less comfortable situation. Not to mention part of it screams TELL ME WHAT YOU READ AS SCUMMY AND WHAT YOU DON'T.What things are you looking for? What would you expect to see if proph was scum vs if proph was town. And how do you see Wagoned proph being more readable than non wagon proph
Calls out Asek 200 pages in after someone mentions positively reading Texas' early Asek vote. Asek vanished within the first 20 posts and then only showed up for the 300s and never acknowledged this callout. At this point in time Former has not mentioned any of the other idlers.Speaking of which hi Asek any thing to add to the game?
While during Texas' push on FH, he rescinded the derpclear from Texas, it feels odd that he'd be on his case afterwards without readdressing the derpclear, especially when I don't understand why it was dropped except as an OMGUS to Texas pushing Former which defeats the claim of Texas slipping mason if that's all it took to undo that.Any game I can recall of you (which have all been town? Huh) you've always chosen to take an active role and usually by proxy become the leading voice. So I'm finding it strange and unusual you relent to someone else like you are in that post