[Official] Breaking Bad Mafia 4/18 Blue. Town&DEA+rug win

[TheForgivenOne]

Holy smokes, I missed a lot. For now, no, i'm not a busdriver.

(Don't have time to go more into thoughts, will do that later today)

FP by virus.

I've seen people be killed over saying their win condition before, so..

[MoB Deadly]

Virus - I think he can safely paraphrase his win condition based on the Rules of the OP. But he cannot quote the mod directly. Some moderators do not allow you to even hint or tip toe around win conditions but it looks like Strike allows it based on his rules.

[cooldeals]

Let's wait for strike before anyone does anything with a win condition. He specifically states what you can say: name, role and abilities. So that's all I feel you can assume is safe.

I also have been grilled hard by clanmates when I paraphrased win conditions unknowingly so I may be a little gun shy of them now....cough....cough...MoB....cough....cough

[MoB Deadly]

It varies mod to mod, so yeah it is important to double check

as a moderator myself, I personally hate when win conditions are used as an argument to determine if someone is scum. I think it is an abused loophole that defeats the purpose of the game.

A lot of times, moderators will provide scum with the towns win conditions as a fail-safe if it gets brought up in debate accidentally.

[StorrZerg]

welp back on main computer, unfortunately as i expected data lost. ill try and get my post on super by tonight done

[strike wolf]

Paraphrasing is fine. I do not like green eggs and quotes. I would not like them with a goat I would not like them on a boat.

[MoB Deadly]

Paraphrasing is fine. I do not like green eggs and quotes. I would not like them with a goat I would not like them on a boat.

Now is the time to claim JOAT, we need to kill that mafia turncoat

[betiko]

Paraphrasing is fine. I do not like green eggs and quotes. I would not like them with a goat I would not like them on a boat.

vote strike I don't understand yur mambo jambo!

[StorrZerg]

All right, going to redo the Super Read. My thoughts inside quotes will be in Green Big read, grab some coffee boys.
The first case i made on super is in spoiler, as well as additional comments

Spoiler

Unvote

SuperKeener and Virus.

Wow. I wake up to a lot of X-Stor

I agree with Nebuchadnezer that XStor is dominating the conversation, but I disagree with Nebuchadnezer that it is a negative thing. Maybe just a little overbearing, but I can see how many would find it "off-putting"

However, after getting caught up on the 3 pages... It was basically noise to me.

I have always been on the fence about pushing for a D1 lynch on the inactives. I think it is still too early in D1 to start lynching inactives, hopefully we can get some more replacements if they do not have time for this game.

This post bothers me still, just rereading the thread. To say that 3 pages of content was "noise" is just a cop out. He could have easily said anything else, but to say it was nothing is soo scummy. I pressured people, i pushed. (heck a lot of it had to do with me and IAC which seems to be important now!) besides that comment what does he have to say? In reality nothing, he had nothing new to add regarding to the game, only a snip-it about inactive players." Just policy talk
So this bothered me when i read it originally. I was trying very hard to generate discussion, making cases on people, giving my reads, asking others to answer questions and to have someone come into the game and say it was "noise" and basically say past 3 pages don't mean anything.

I agree with betiko on the case of nark.

My read on him right now is on the fence. Was his VT claim a mistake or a tactic? I am tending towards mistake; however, regardless it may be unsurmountable at this stage.
So this concerns me. With the word of insurmountable, anarks mistake was hardly game ending for anark. It is not like he claimed mafia then said no im not. Other options could have happened. (Considering the timing of THIS post). To me it says he doesn't care about the life of anark. "anark made a mistake, no use in trying to save him"
At this point, I will choose not to cast a vote on him just yet since we do have a few more days to see if another option presents itself.
The next point regards, he is not willing to cast a vote till something else shows. Fine sorta, but he is not actually looking to find mafia it is clear. He really only talks about the major case at hand and nothing else. (hint day 2 is very similar).
@Mets
What do you mean by “awful misread of a post.”? If you are talking about when I asked if he softclaimed the role of Badger. I do not think it is an “awful misread.”
Badger, even though not a main character, is a good friend/dealer for Jesse. If Walt and Jesse are Town PR’s the badger would fit the role of VT very nicely.

Also, badger is a crappy enough character to be one of the fake claims.

I can see Badger has a fake claim, but I think he maybe one of the top 18 characters of the show and has a real chance of being an official role. However nark did say he wasn’t claiming Badger, so I don’t know.

So this post just baffles me a bit. You make it sound like to push a vote on him would be ok. Yet you also say, you are on the fence, and you are waiting for something else to happen, so you will not vote.

This quote is longer, so i will input my comments in blue.

A Nark lynch just isn’t sitting well with me.
First we have this:

So you start off with "THIS IS NOT SOMEONE WE SHOULD LYNCH" ok you said some other words, but thats how i see it.

As for saying I was badger... That isn't what I did at all... I dropped clues in previous posts, not the one I was replying in...
Haven't people heard the term "badgering the witness?"

I know he doesn’t straight out say “I’m not Badger”, but even at my first read, I instantly interpreted it as him denying the role of Badger. And I still feel he was denying it.
Then he posted this speaking of the term “to badger”:
Now this is where your thought process is kinda messed up... You decided to quote a bunch of anarks comments regarding his claim.

Actually, it is very commonly used in my line of work... The term, that is...

Since badgering a witness is something a lawyer would do, I had a thought…. Maybe he is Saul, since he says he drops “hints” in his post…
A think Saul could be a town PR.
Such a farfetched thing to think imo, specially since you have all of anarks comments here, the idea to bounce around like you are is just ODD.

I can kinda see your thought process in arriving to Saul, how ever to keep with "theme" saul doesn't smoke meth iirc. So this seems like you are reaching to get to this point.
Next:

And of course I am Badger... So, that makes me assume Skinny Pete is out there somewhere, too.

Can I believe this? I don’t know.
Now you have all the quotes lined up!, its quite easy to believe what the REAL claim is, and that there is no Hidden subplot of anything! The tangents you go off regarding his possible role with anything else doesn't help us determin ANYTHING about anark. it is FLUFF and FILLER. Not to mention you QUESTION his Claim. IMO you are casting DOUBT onto anark, you are not calling him town with that question.
I think it is pretty obvious to this point, yes that is what he is telling us. This is narks Claim.
Finally:

WHERE ARE YOU:
3. Rishaed
9. Iamcaffeine
12. Rodion
13. Theforgivenone

Maybe this is just my thought, He could be trying to get the inactives more involved and I do not blame him for that, but I get the sense he is trying to redirect the attention currently on him... maybe we should look somewhere else.
Again this is more DOUBT you are casting on ANARK. If you are town, and you think anark is town, it would make sense to say something like "i really like how anark is trying to keep things moving in a positive direction, getting more input from others. W/E you wanna add. Instead its more DOUBT. which imo Contradicts your original thought of "this lynch isn't sitting well"
Could he be redirecting, sure! Yet i find this phrasing weird. You start off saying a Nark lynch is bad, yet you question something he does, yet you are ok with it. The "maybe we should" at the end is what gets me. You start off saying Nark is NOT the person to lynch, and to this point it feels contradicting.

I have no idea what to think about nark. However, I am leaning that he is either Badger, Skinny Pete, Combo, or Saul. All of which I believe to be a town role. And for this reason I cannot support a lynching of him right now.
Again coming back to this, I've hit it on the heads a few times. The claim of anark should be blatantly clear what he is claiming. The fact that you DO go out of your way to talk about something regarding Anark, that isn't remotely helpful in deciding if Anark is Town Or Mafia. So much of these quotes is regarding Anark's Possible 4 different role possibilities. I do find it odd that you conclude that all these roles must be town aligned. Specially for a first day read. You state at the end This is WHY you can't lynch anark, because you think his ROLE is town. Not because you think anark is town. THIS is what bothers me.

How are you hung up on his claim? (well you are so o well) That doesn't baffle me as much as the group of names you give, and to say you believe all those to be town. As if to say "it doesn't matter what nark is, i think any possibility of what ever role he might have soft claimed to be town" Nark has clearly stated what he is, what he soft claimed as. So again i find this Very strange for you to bring up that he might have soft claimed several different people, and to conclude that all of those people are town, so by that reasoning anark is not a good lynch. That thought process does not sound town to me. I can agree its "a different opinion"

But I have no strong feelings about any other players right now. This has been the topic that has held my attention the strongest. I think a re-read can perhaps shed some more light for me.
Again, nothing to add on the other 16 players in the game. Rereading his day 1 up to this point. I cannot tell who he likes, or dislikes. All i can tell is he does not want to lynch anark, and for imo weird reasoning.

And to end, this is the only thing he has a strong opinion on, yet it doesn't feel like a strong opinion since he ends with questioning himself again.

So the TL DR version.
His manner of play has been very odd to me, he has no strong opinions about something, and is constantly contradicting himself. The posts do not feel fluid, they feel like forced and awkward. The way in which he tries to defend nark feels off. Specially with the quote at the end "nark could be any of these guys ( Badger, Skinny Pete, Combo, or Saul. ) and since he believes all those characters to be town, nark is town. The lack of talk regarding if Narks ACTIONS have been town or scum bothers me, and when he does talk about NARKS actions its always wishy washy and could or could not.

##Vote superkeener

(small snip-it about virus)
Virus in short, my opinion hasn't changed much.
And he has not posted in several days, even though I've seen him browsing the mafia forum.
I find this very lurky and shady.

I have a quote from Betiko now, regarding the Super "wagon" Now several people pointed out that the wagon was sketchy. Fewer people said my case was crap. (mets, but then again mets didn't like me day 1)

i find the wagon terribly oportunistic and probably scummy. I'm willing to reconsider my vote on nark. basically, I feel nark 70/30 town, so that 30% (for the big wifom) is worth checking.
Should be able to rethink the idea that the wagon is Opportunistic and scummy. I'm going to point out a few things.
I did not like how easy and fast the wagon on Super formed outof thin air. i'm not sure which of the 3 i'd rather go after... they probably wanted a fast case/claim to start other anark to have a last day choice.... and basically voting for any of them would be like doing exactly what i blame them to do lol.
kind of stuck here... should we ask super to claim then? that's another option...

So I'm now going to talk about some voting that happened. PCM voted Virus 2x. PCM flipped scum, because of this i think it is more likely that Virus is town. (PCM did push a bit onto virus) Neb flipped town. I know i am town. IB is the only unknown that voted onto Super. Still i can say for good certainty that it looks like the "super wagon" was not support by majority scum. I would find it unlikely that scum would go on Super. 1, if there are 2 groups of scum, they are both on anark for good reason. He is not with them, and its better to just have the focus on someone who made a mistake, than to keep hunting for scum. Again, we know this because Anark flipped town.

I'm going to continue with Day 1 Super posting now. This is his defensive post regarding the wagon, and his Vote for day 1.

So the TL DR version.
His manner of play has been very odd to me, he has no strong opinions about something, and is constantly contradicting himself. The posts do not feel fluid, they feel like forced and awkward. The way in which he tries to defend nark feels off. Specially with the quote at the end "nark could be any of these guys ( Badger, Skinny Pete, Combo, or Saul. ) and since he believes all those characters to be town, nark is town. The lack of talk regarding if Narks ACTIONS have been town or scum bothers me, and when he does talk about NARKS actions its always wishy washy and could or could not.

First off. In forum mafia, I do not think a TL DR (Too Long Didn’t Read) is ever a good thing to add. Everyone should read everything so there is no confusion.
You say I have contradicted myself, but where exactly? Also, I never tried to “defend” nark. I just stated my opinions on the entire scenario regarding him and his claim.
I still believe Nark is town. Thus, why I have yet to vote for him. Maybe nark has used “bad” play but I have yet to see anything tangible that identifies him as scum.
The first part of his defense is attacking the structure of the case, and not the arguments itself. "i think tl dr is bad" I'm fairly certain i pointed out several times where he spoke in 2 different direction. 1 in calling anark town, and in another Calling anarks actions suspect. Again i have added in a few more point son day 1. So he is asking for clarification, i should have gave that. Instead i was pushed off. he states he never tried to defend nark, yet imo to call someone town is "defending" TBH what this screams is, he read the TLDR version, and Skimmed the actual attacking arguments. Thus being a hypocrite.

VOTE SUPERKEENER
I can support this case. As I said earlier I believe Anarchist is town.

I said that I think nark is town as well. And yet you vote me for thinking the same as you… strange.
Everyone who voted you, thought anark was townie. So this comment seems strange to single out.
This compels me to vote for you. Also, I understand that this might come off as a little OMGUS-ish but I do not even think you understand X-stor’s case on me. I think you are just looking for a last-minute bandwagon to jump on.
This is the definition of an OMGUS vote. The only reason you are voting LB is because you have the same town read. (NO idea how that makes someone scum) and because he voted you. Sure i can see several things in my eyes on how LB actions could have been scummy, or Neb, or Virus. But you do not talk about them. It would be far easier for any of them as mafia to say w/e and vote anark with very little input.

The other votes for me were also just based on x-stor’s reasoning that since basically I feel that nark is town, that makes me scum.
Yes, and that is why LB voted you. Again to attack a single person and yet they all did pretty much the same thing. At least IB and Neb are very close in that regards. (virus voted you cause he thought i was town it seems. That would have been something to talk about) Yet again this is weird.
I do not have any solid leads on scum play right now except for how IB just votes for me even though we have the same opinion and with time running out, I feel this is the best place for me to throw my vote.
Again ends day 1, with only 1 town read who he will not defend. And 1 OMGUS mafia read.
Vote Iron Butterfly.

I ask him to explain his town read more

WHy is Anark town in your eyes? disregard his claim plz. (@super)

His claim AND the way he acted after being pressured on it is why he comes across as town to me. If I disregarded his claim and all posts related to his claim, then I guess I would have only a neutral read on him.

He comes to the conclusion, which i have been pushing. He doesn't know what to think of Anarks actions, instead he is only willing to read into the role claim.


Day 2, can Super progress reads? nope!

WHy is Anark town in your eyes? disregard his claim plz. (@super)

His claim AND the way he acted after being pressured on it is why he comes across as town to me. If I disregarded his claim and all posts related to his claim, then I guess I would have only a neutral read on him.

(I am writing this in real time as I read through D2 dialogue, so bear with me if I touch on something that has already been addressed or my opinions changes throughout this post. I will try my best to edit it for a smooth flowing read.)

N1 Actions Thoughts.
Neb, The Doc was killed. Lucky mafia hit if you ask me. Plain and simple.
Pancake being Mafia. Lucky (2nd) Mafia Faction hit or SK role. Not so plain and simple. However, I think it had to be a luck for who/whatever ordered the kill.
Everything was luck to him. Sure there can be some luck, but i disagree. People got shot for a reason. PCM imo was shot cause of theme talk regarding mafia factions and probably being right on the money. (if it turns out only 1 mafia faction then SK i suppose) IMO you should h ave some read into it besides "luck" Luck doesn't' tell us anything Its a huge fence opinion.

D2 Dialogue Thoughts.

Caf is the first to be brought up into question. Not for sure how I feel about him yet. I do believe it is too early in the day to request a claim. However, I am inclined to see something in this wagon.
Doesn't have a strong read on IAC. Yet fine with seeing a claim.


X-stor’s Vote post. Good information listed, but finding out where the scum are lurking could be tricky with such a spread out vote. However what stood out to me i: x-stor has been very “aggressive” in almost all fronts and issues in this game. However, when the caffeine wagon gets a little steam (perhaps the biggest D2 play as of yet), all we get from the thread’s leading poster is:
Vote post is not alignment indicative. Every game should have one up. Again general talk. And slight cast of suspicion. Note that All super can seem to do is cast "doubt"

btw not opposed to the caffeine crap. Seems kinda weird tbh.

I would just expect a lot more from x-stor on this, since he has been very vocal in basically everything else. He quickly disregards the caff wagon and just dives straight back into greg.
Seems like a miss read from what i wrote. Something did feel weird, and my gut was right. (cop check on IAC) again more Doubt.
Gregwolf now has had enough time to post. I will not hold him accountable for a “Lack” of D1 posts. D2 is now upon us and he has started posting. Nothing really substantial yet.
says he will not hold him accountable for day 1. How ever he does not follow with that in regards to day 2. "I will hold greg accountable for lack of day 2" instead it is "nothing substantial" again Doubt.
I do not like virus’s vote on rishead. I feel it to be too early in D2 to be justified. It seems like he is just trying to throw his vote somewhere, just for the sake of voting. (Rishead’s response was all confusing to read because of the format of his post, still would like a clarification on it)
This almost feels like double standards. Doubt on virus, but none on anyone who is on IAC. Yet seems to be he loves casting doubt on people who voted him Day 1.


IB still has my FoS lingering from D1. Not warranted of a D2 vote atm.

So here is my "questionable" reads in order from highest to lowest.
IB, Virus, caff, x-stor

So in short, He doesn't like everyone who is alive that voted him day 1. (omgus) and IAC had the largest wagon, and is willing to not give a side on IAC, but he is ok with listing him as a scum. He has yet to give town reads. And infact he has yet to give scum reads. All his wording has been "doubt casting"

HMMM anyone want to still defend Gregwolf121?

I agree. More than enough time has been allowed for greg to make some decent contributions.
Agreeing on Policy, not actions.

As far as the whole “typo” thing. I am not interested in it. Maybe it is because that conversation was very hard to follow (even after a few re-reads) and I just don’t think if it is significant.

However, the following comment popped out at me very strongly.

I don't like to be straightforward usually, it takes a bit of fun out of the game, but yes I am town.

The only people that would not be straightforward in Maifa would be scum. I was already on the fence about you, but this shoots you to the top of my list.
I find this very ironic coming from Super. Specially his day 1 play. And i find it a VERY VERY poor reason to finger someone for a vote. Same could be said for myself, "x-stor-x plays different guess he is mafia!" or anark played weird, he was mafia right? (nope town) What im saying is, for supers only contribution to the IAC lynch is "he said he plays different and i think that is scummy" I find that weird. Super really has not commented on anything regarding peoples views on others, opinions etc. His reads have almost entirely been OMGUS, role claims, playstyle.

VOTE: iAmCaffeine

Probably the only good thing I've seen from a super post

"This vague or passive approach you have is not pro-town. A more straightforward answer from you could stop a day's worth or dialogue that is going in the wrong direction, just because you find it “fun” to use bread crumbs that might just lead us away from what we really need to know."
Yet it is ironic, since anark did the whole bread crumb thing and Super liked anark....

Second day continues with no more added discussion, only a weird unvote and revote onto IAC.

Super has continued to provide no reads on people in the game that he thinks are town. (alive town) Anyone who voted him has been OMGUS. He has casted "doubt" several times. And is unwilling to call peoples actions scummy. (Save for IAC after many people voted IAC) I do believe he is mafia, I do believe he is scared to give town reads. I'll re hit on anark, If anark flipped 3rd party or scum. Super could just say "well i did point out some stuff that was scummy" and with anark flipping town "I did say he was town" Super is unwilling to be held accountable for actions, and that as a result imo is why he is playing low key with casting "doubt" and "OMGUS" as well as bandwagoning after a clear course has been set.

[virus90]

well i was first to "bandwagon" (according to some) your case against super last time and i still agree this time, he has not been very usefull to town.
Only thing is that i dont get why it gets pointed out now. after a page of discussion whether someone is allowed to paraphrase their goals in the game i am happy we are back to the game (opinions and votes) but i feel like caff is the "proven" scum, and his case gets pushed aside sometimes. why not wait till caff is lynched and see day 3 ?

[StorrZerg]

Rather get my opinions on day 2 out. Than have day 2 be "dead" because a cop claimed, and then day 3, dead cop and no other thoughts happened on day 2.

Still think looking at anark voting is worth a shot too.

+ will help a lot if IAC flips Town and he was framed. or bus driver.
+ helps people get a read on me.

Some side thoughts on IAC.
It is pretty good that He claimed before Cop Check.
We confirmed a lot of things that happened n1.
It is interesting that TFO and Rugbirn did not deny visiting myself.
I would agree framer / bus dirver seems unlikely to be used on IAC.

Side stuff, TFO just cause you cannot vote, does not mean you cannot pressure and give reads.
Mets, i have not see much of you, whats changed. Whats new.
Jonty with limited "post count" imo you need to be adding more value to your posts. If you are limited on posts, your posts imo should be longer and filled with content.

[jonty125]

The internet just ate my post, which is a change from it's normal order of meth. So, in short virus is a scummy skimmer. Gregwolf looks a like a good lead, for D3. And I don't agree with the case on superkeener, which I'll elaborate on later, when I don't feel like punching my computer.

[StorrZerg]

Metsfanmax
Rodion
Cooldeals ()rishaed
Mob Deadly
Gregwolf121 () Stor, Rugbirn,
Theforgivenone
iAmCaffeine () Betiko, Cooldeals, TFO, SuperKeener, Mob Deadly, gregwolf, Cooldeals, Virus, Iron Butterfly, SuperKeener,
Betiko
x-stor-x
Ironbutterfly
Superkeener
Rugbirn () iAmCaffeine
Jonty125
Rishaed ()virus
Virus

Things to note. Rugbirn votes with me after IAC claims.
Cool deals second vote is when he claims cop. (he unvoted when IAC claimed)
Betiko was the first to push IAC
Virus made his own case on Rishaed
Rishaed made his own case on Cool Deals

People who have not voted
TFO (claims he cannot vote because he used meth to get a watch, confirms the IAC/TFO/Rugbirn trio on Storr)
Jonty125
mets
Rodion

[Rodion]

Looks like everyone denied having tampered with CD's investigation, so it's a certain Caffeine lynch.

iAmCaffeine () Betiko, Cooldeals, TFO, SuperKeener, Mob Deadly, gregwolf, Cooldeals, Virus, Iron Butterfly, SuperKeener

I think the analysis needs to take into account the VC at the moment of CD's claim, which is basically Strike's VC at the end of page 46 (remove Virus' vote and add Betiko's to get the accurate VC).

Now we have 4 more days worth of deadline to discuss things. We should fully use that time. Caffeine has enough votes to be lynched at the deadline, so voting him isn't even necessary anymore.

Stor, I want to know your conditional reads on Greg and Keener supposing 3 scenarios: Caffeine flipping town, mafia 1 (PCM's) and a possible mafia 2 (note I don't think there is a second mafia, but let's be comprehensive since we have the time). You seem to highly suspect both, but:
a) not sure who you think is scummiest atm
b) would like to know how Caff's flip would alter the likelihood of each of them being scum in your eyes

[StorrZerg]

@Rodion A) top super/greg As far as best lynch, still deciding. Obvious choice screams IAC.
B) if Caff flips town. They both look terrible. If caff flips scum, they sort of look better. How ever again if it shows that there are 2 scum teams (latter on), then it means nothing imo for them.

tbh i've gotten almost all the stuff i wanted to get out. I still want to look again at the vote on anark. Be nice if someone else would do analysis on it as well. on that subject.

[StorrZerg]

Jonty125
mets
rodion

need to be adding to discussion and have not placed any votes day 2.
Besides that if no one else wants to add anything we could just end day 2 early...

[StorrZerg]

@IAC you need to be talking a lot.. it does seem like we have to lynch you because of the cop check.

you need to do your best in calling out and explaining your reads. Granted if you are scum. then you don't have to bother

[Metsfanmax]

Jonty125
mets
rodion

need to be adding to discussion and have not placed any votes day 2.
Besides that if no one else wants to add anything we could just end day 2 early...

I'm with Rodion, there's no need for an early lynch if there's more to be said. It's puzzling that you now think we can end early, since you were asking people to hold off so you could get your opinions in. Or do you think that only yours count?

Your case on super is still awful, by the way.

The first part of his defense is attacking the structure of the case, and not the arguments itself. "i think tl dr is bad"

It was the first thing you said, so it makes sense for him to say it first, and the fact that he called you out for tl;dr means absolutely zero.

I'm fairly certain i pointed out several times where he spoke in 2 different direction. 1 in calling anark town, and in another Calling anarks actions suspect. Again i have added in a few more point son day 1. So he is asking for clarification, i should have gave that. Instead i was pushed off. he states he never tried to defend nark, yet imo to call someone town is "defending" TBH what this screams is, he read the TLDR version, and Skimmed the actual attacking arguments. Thus being a hypocrite.

What you are calling "contradicting," the rest of us call "changing your mind." superkeener did say that he was leaning toward the Badger namedrop being a mistake, but then decided he could get on board with it. That's pretty much how most people felt at the time. And note that this was largely based on flavor speculation, something you have repeatedly said you don't care for, which is maybe why you don't understand this decision.

Everyone who voted you, thought anark was townie. So this comment seems strange to single out.

No it's not strange. Iron Butterfly was just straight out bandwagoning without a good explanation. Note that betiko and I said as much at the time, so it wasn't only super.

This is the definition of an OMGUS vote. The only reason you are voting LB is because you have the same town read. (NO idea how that makes someone scum) and because he voted you. Sure i can see several things in my eyes on how LB actions could have been scummy, or Neb, or Virus. But you do not talk about them. It would be far easier for any of them as mafia to say w/e and vote anark with very little input.

The reason for his vote was that IB was being scummy and jumping on a wagon without a good explanation. Your argument that he didn't describe neb is irrelevant, because he had to pick someone to vote for if he was going to respond to that wagon (and you gave a reason why you agree with the decision not to pick virus -- so what exactly is your point here by bringing up virus?). You can call it OMGUS if you want, but there's no content in there (especially if he's right about IB, which he is).

Again ends day 1, with only 1 town read who he will not defend. And 1 OMGUS mafia read.

A lot of people didn't have many public town/mafia reads at the end of D1. If you're going to hold up your own argumentative standard, surely you'll explain why it's worse for super to have done that than everyone else?

Everything was luck to him. Sure there can be some luck, but i disagree. People got shot for a reason. PCM imo was shot cause of theme talk regarding mafia factions and probably being right on the money. (if it turns out only 1 mafia faction then SK i suppose) IMO you should h ave some read into it besides "luck" Luck doesn't' tell us anything Its a huge fence opinion.

Someone can have an informed opinion as to who to target and still be completely wrong. On D1 it is all luck. Your sample size is too small here. If pcm had flipped town, your argument would work the other way.

Doesn't have a strong read on IAC. Yet fine with seeing a claim.

He literally says in that sentence that he doesn't think we should yet request a claim. Fail reading is fail.

This almost feels like double standards. Doubt on virus, but none on anyone who is on IAC. Yet seems to be he loves casting doubt on people who voted him Day 1.

So he is casting doubt on both you and virus, and somehow that's "everyone" who voted for him on D1? That's weak.

Yet it is ironic, since anark did the whole bread crumb thing and Super liked anark....

Super liked the role claim, not necessarily the playstyle. Get it straight.

Since I'm casting doubt onto your argument, does that make me scum btw?

[StorrZerg]

Jonty125
mets
rodion

need to be adding to discussion and have not placed any votes day 2.
Besides that if no one else wants to add anything we could just end day 2 early...

I'm with Rodion, there's no need for an early lynch if there's more to be said. It's puzzling that you now think we can end early, since you were asking people to hold off so you could get your opinions in. Or do you think that only yours count?

Yep im a supper selfish townie, you got me gesh. what am i gonna do now that people posted.

Your case on super is still awful, by the way.

The first part of his defense is attacking the structure of the case, and not the arguments itself. "i think tl dr is bad"

It was the first thing you said, so it makes sense for him to say it first, and the fact that he called you out for tl;dr means absolutely zero.
Well now this is silly! of course the first thing i said was not TL DR, that was obviously at the END of my POST

I'm fairly certain i pointed out several times where he spoke in 2 different direction. 1 in calling anark town, and in another Calling anarks actions suspect. Again i have added in a few more point son day 1. So he is asking for clarification, i should have gave that. Instead i was pushed off. he states he never tried to defend nark, yet imo to call someone town is "defending" TBH what this screams is, he read the TLDR version, and Skimmed the actual attacking arguments. Thus being a hypocrite.

What you are calling "contradicting," the rest of us call "changing your mind." superkeener did say that he was leaning toward the Badger namedrop being a mistake, but then decided he could get on board with it. That's pretty much how most people felt at the time. And note that this was largely based on flavor speculation, something you have repeatedly said you don't care for, which is maybe why you don't understand this decision.
Super was "changing his mind" mid paragraph and sentence several times. I made a case on what he said, i explained why i thought it looked scummy.

Everyone who voted you, thought anark was townie. So this comment seems strange to single out.

No it's not strange. Iron Butterfly was just straight out bandwagoning without a good explanation. Note that betiko and I said as much at the time, so it wasn't only super.
Yes it is strange. I called anark townie. I pulled my vote off him. Neb did the same thing. Yes it was weird to ONLY single LB. He could have made the exact same case against NEB. Change the name, and nothing changes. His reasoning was so vague it could be applied to more than one person. I find that scummy.

This is the definition of an OMGUS vote. The only reason you are voting LB is because you have the same town read. (NO idea how that makes someone scum) and because he voted you. Sure i can see several things in my eyes on how LB actions could have been scummy, or Neb, or Virus. But you do not talk about them. It would be far easier for any of them as mafia to say w/e and vote anark with very little input.

The reason for his vote was that IB was being scummy and jumping on a wagon without a good explanation. Your argument that he didn't describe neb is irrelevant, because he had to pick someone to vote for if he was going to respond to that wagon (and you gave a reason why you agree with the decision not to pick virus -- so what exactly is your point here by bringing up virus?). You can call it OMGUS if you want, but there's no content in there (especially if he's right about IB, which he is).
Neb had pretty much the exact same reason as LB. Virus thought i was town so he voted with me. Again the issue is, how vague and little detail he puts into LB. I clearly put some effort into explaining my scum read on Super. To say he has been doing a good job of expressing his opinions on his town and scum reads is just blasphemes. Hell he even admits his vote is A LITTLE OMGUS

Again ends day 1, with only 1 town read who he will not defend. And 1 OMGUS mafia read.

A lot of people didn't have many public town/mafia reads at the end of D1. If you're going to hold up your own argumentative standard, surely you'll explain why it's worse for super to have done that than everyone else?
Sure you could build a case on myself that i am avoiding some people and try to build up on that then do so! But the deal is opinions matter in this game. Arguments NEED to happen. As for the Super, in simple terms he looks scummy so i'm doing my job and building a case to get him lynched or force him to prove himself as town

Everything was luck to him. Sure there can be some luck, but i disagree. People got shot for a reason. PCM imo was shot cause of theme talk regarding mafia factions and probably being right on the money. (if it turns out only 1 mafia faction then SK i suppose) IMO you should h ave some read into it besides "luck" Luck doesn't' tell us anything Its a huge fence opinion.

Someone can have an informed opinion as to who to target and still be completely wrong. On D1 it is all luck. Your sample size is too small here. If pcm had flipped town, your argument would work the other way.
yet my argument is based on this game (hence the flips on Neb town and PCM mafia. So not luck, i'm giving mafia/sk credit on the kill.

Doesn't have a strong read on IAC. Yet fine with seeing a claim.

He literally says in that sentence that he doesn't think we should yet request a claim. Fail reading is fail.
Sure you got me there mets! let me edit that. "Doesn't have a strong read on IAC, but is fine to push on IAC" Glad to know so far you are not actually talking about if you think Super is town or Scum. You are hard defending him

This almost feels like double standards. Doubt on virus, but none on anyone who is on IAC. Yet seems to be he loves casting doubt on people who voted him Day 1.

So he is casting doubt on both you and virus, and somehow that's "everyone" who voted for him on D1? That's weak.
His questionable people are "LB Virus IAC, myself. save for IAC all 3 DID VOTE ON HIM YESTERDAY. So that is EVERYONE that is ALIVE.

Yet it is ironic, since anark did the whole bread crumb thing and Super liked anark....

Super liked the role claim, not necessarily the playstyle. Get it straight.
No, he had no idea what to think. Hence why he was saying he still thought anark to be a list of possible people. All of whom he believed town.

Since I'm casting doubt onto your argument, does that make me scum btw?

Actually it is interesting on what you are doing. IMO you honestly don't seem to give a shit what Super's alignment is. You are just taking pleasure in harassing my case against super. Yes i say harassing because that is what you are doing. You are not trying to convince people if super is town. You are not agreeing with my opinions that Super is scum. All you are doing is nit picking. If you think Super is town, then why are you not showing it. This kind of "attack" is not helpful to anyone. It is not showing or progressing the read on Super at all. Since you had so much fun doing this on super, Why don't you make a case of your own and push it (yes i know IAC is "locked" for today, doesn't mean you can't do something). Give reasons to why that action is scummy. Lord knows you would like to see my head on a spike and flip scum, but you are in for a raw deal cause im town pudding cup.

[superkeener]

I tried doing a step-by-step rebuttal on all of his thoughts about me, but I got all jumbled up in the formatting and I couldn’t concentrate on my response. I will try it here. If I miss a point let me know and I will address it.

First off, I would like to start off with some errors I see within x-stor’s comments. (Again, I apologize if the following is difficult to follow in regards to the format. )

I said (in regards to nark) “Maybe this is just my thought, He could be trying to get the inactives more involved and I do not blame him for that, but I get the sense he is trying to redirect the attention currently on him... maybe we should look somewhere else.”

X-stor’s comments: “Could he be redirecting, sure! Yet i find this phrasing weird. You start off saying a Nark lynch is bad, yet you question something he does, yet you are ok with it. The "maybe we should" at the end is what gets me. You start off saying Nark is NOT the person to lynch, and to this point it feels contradicting.”

The entire post suggest that I do not feel that nark is the best lynching possibility. If you would post the entire quote instead of what suits your thoughts, then there would be no confusion.

The entire quote is:

Maybe this is just my thought, He could be trying to get the inactives more involved and I do not blame him for that, but I get the sense he is trying to redirect the attention currently on him... maybe we should look somewhere else.

I have no idea what to think about nark. However, I am leaning that he is either Badger, Skinny Pete, Combo, or Saul. All of which I believe to be a town role. And for this reason I cannot support a lynching of him right now.

But I have no strong feelings about any other players right now. This has been the topic that has held my attention the strongest. I think a re-read can perhaps shed some more light for me.

http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewto ... 5#p4433541


Now on to my IB vote.

VOTE SUPERKEENER
I can support this case. As I said earlier I believe Anarchist is town.

I did not see any comments about myself from IB before this. What I take for his post was. Vote Superkeener because I believe Anark is town... it does not look like he is voting for me for any other reason…. I felt this was VERY opportunistic from him, and thus why I voted for him.
Of course, I could have voted from any other of the people voting for me and called it OMGUS, but like I just said IB's vote seemed opportunistic and scummy to me. If IB, or any other player would have voted for another player in the same style and circumstance of: "VOTE I can support this case. As I said earlier I believe Anarchist is town." I can honestly say that I would have most likely thought that as an opportunistic vote.

I said “Caf is the first to be brought up into question. Not for sure how I feel about him yet. I do believe it is too early in the day to request a claim. However, I am inclined to see something in this wagon. “

X-Stor says: “Doesn't have a strong read on IAC. Yet fine with seeing a claim.”
If you read what I said, I said “it is too early in the day to request a claim”…. I don’t understand why you would think that I was fine with seeing a claim?????

I don't think I saw any open questions that needed an answer. Most of the information, if I understood it right is just X-stor's analysis/opinions of my posts with really no way for me to "defend" myself. However, the errors of blatant misreads you have made on some of your points can be very misleading. But, if x-stor, or anyone else, needs further explanation I am willing to.

-----

**** Off topic, I will be traveling from the the March 15-18, so I will only have limited availability. However, I do think I should be able to post at least once a day.

[StorrZerg]

A lot of my read on you, is your lack of reads on other people...
You can "defend yourself" that way by actually making reads on people

[StorrZerg]

might read my response to mets, as it talks about a few things you mention..

[iAmCaffeine]

I'm not going to keep defending myself, it's not worth it. I have given reasons for everything and it's not worth my time to continue to do so. If you want to lynch a watcher then go ahead.

[betiko]

Well even if he s town, that s pretty much giving up on the game. Are we a L-1 or something? Can we get a vote count? Before that, can jonty and TFO vote for each other? Who else hasn t been on any vote count on day 2? I would just want to check this before night.

[Metsfanmax]

Neb had pretty much the exact same reason as LB. Virus thought i was town so he voted with me. Again the issue is, how vague and little detail he puts into LB. I clearly put some effort into explaining my scum read on Super. To say he has been doing a good job of expressing his opinions on his town and scum reads is just blasphemes. Hell he even admits his vote is A LITTLE OMGUS

You're not addressing my point. My point is that all three of them were roughly equally scummy. For some reason I happened to trigger on Iron Butterfly over the others emotionally, but looking back on it I don't see why that would have been justified. If you're agreeing that they did something scummy, and there's not a clear route for choosing one over the other, then you pick one and see what happens. Avoiding putting pressure on someone in a group because you're not sure which to choose is a recipe for disaster. Because I'm betting that at least one of the four of you is scum.

Sure you could build a case on myself that i am avoiding some people and try to build up on that then do so! But the deal is opinions matter in this game. Arguments NEED to happen. As for the Super, in simple terms he looks scummy so i'm doing my job and building a case to get him lynched or force him to prove himself as town

I think that what you're doing is building a case on super because you formed an opinion early on that you don't like him, and then finding evidence to support the claim. Instead, it's better to be able to adjust your perception as the game goes on, taking the new evidence into account objectively. I agree with your statement that super hasn't been super opinionated this game, but he did push relatively hard on nark being town and was right about that.

yet my argument is based on this game (hence the flips on Neb town and PCM mafia. So not luck, i'm giving mafia/sk credit on the kill.

And my point is that you could be giving them credit for a lucky shot.

Sure you got me there mets! let me edit that. "Doesn't have a strong read on IAC, but is fine to push on IAC" Glad to know so far you are not actually talking about if you think Super is town or Scum. You are hard defending him

Again, I am not defending him. I certainly don't have a strong townread on him, though if I were forced to choose right now, I would lean town. I am just calling out bad reasoning.

His questionable people are "LB Virus IAC, myself. save for IAC all 3 DID VOTE ON HIM YESTERDAY. So that is EVERYONE that is ALIVE.

My point was that a sum total of two people doesn't make for a strong argument that he's going on a OMGUS rampage.

No, he had no idea what to think. Hence why he was saying he still thought anark to be a list of possible people. All of whom he believed town.

He clearly did have some idea of what to think. It's a very reasonable stance to not know which of the three VTs he was, but still think he was one of them. I was mostly on board with that reasoning at the time.

Actually it is interesting on what you are doing. IMO you honestly don't seem to give a shit what Super's alignment is. You are just taking pleasure in harassing my case against super. Yes i say harassing because that is what you are doing. You are not trying to convince people if super is town. You are not agreeing with my opinions that Super is scum. All you are doing is nit picking.

Actually, what I'm doing is demonstrating that you are scummy. We just don't have time in this day to build a case around that. Like you, I'm getting my opinions out there so that later we can return to this.

Lord knows you would like to see my head on a spike and flip scum, but you are in for a raw deal cause im town pudding cup.

Oooh, "I'm town and you're going to regret lynching me?" Never heard that one before.