Confirmed. Activity spikes in hours past 10pm :/
Zrk2Zrk2: Is lurking no longer a cause for suspicion? Because UI only has 4 posts up till now, and a few others haven't posted much either.
I picked the two with the fewest posts. Four is also terrible.
Ugh :/
So of all leads, you decide to poke
at lurkers without threatening them or inquiring the usual "WHERE ARE YOU [LURKER]" along with a probable coloring of their name in blue or red.
Lurking is a damnable offence because it is unproductive. It hurts the town because you aren't finding scum. It hurts the town because they can't get reads on you. It hurts the town because there could be a more productive player in your place. Lurkers are a waste of a player space.
I lack faith in D1 lynches because almost every last one ends in a townie lynch. As I said earlier there simply isn't enough information available D1 to make a conclusive case, so rather than risk the lynch on someone who has been productive but "scummy" is a bad idea. If they really are scummy they will still be scummy D2, and lurkers will also still lurk D2. Thus lynching a lurker is more likely to pay off because it gets rid of a guaranteed threat rather than a possible one.
My case on Ranger was summarized above. It is that he wanted to hurt the town with a D1 no-lynch. BUT ALSO did not shift away from that stance until it threatened to get him lynched, not after it had been demonstrated to be fallacious.
Thus I think he is scum. But if he is town and he lives on he may shape up, but he also may not. That's just semantics.
...Because there could be a more productive player in your place...Ok. So by all that in the first statement, it smells like you're painting them as town. Useless town, but town. So what in the world is the logic of lynching scum at all?! That in itself is fallacious.
Useless =/= scum. Being a raging a** =/= scum. The indicators are in the essence of their posts, and I've not seen once that you're poking at those indicators.
On your faith, do you even see the context behind the lynch? Yeah, it may be a townie, but then people can also detect the intentions behind the lynches then poke at that. Using said information in the later days. WHile there isn't enough conclusive information to make a case, that information (regardless of the lynch alignment) ALSO leads to information later on.
The whole premise of "If lurker = D1, then lurker = D2." or "Scummy D1 = Scummy D2" all reside within the context, and you're relying on a general explanation to fortify your argument. And what, if Ranger is town? Your next two leads (for
lack of you giving reads after being asked),
ARE ACCUSED LURKERS. What will you build your case on? A weak "WHY U NO POST D1"? Then start from there?
You aren't questioning those who lurk as opposed to that who you target. I mean, I could agree with you on the lurker stance, but then think its weak -- still valid in thought, except you lacked to question them. Or poke them. At all.
Then you say
It's an acceptable loss because they weren't doing anything for the town anyway.
Regarding Griff's idea
So Zrk2, my vote is on you primarily because I feel the way you are acting in D1 is the most harmful to the town in the long run. Yes you're playing qualitatively better than Ranger, but Ranger has been learning over the course of the game, and has expressed what felt like genuine concern that he doesn't have reads yet. You on the other hand seem to be playing a self-fulfilling prophesy, if the only lynch we should do D1 is the weakest player, then the town will always be lynched D1. Not [#mafia]/[#players]*100 percent of the time. ALWAYS. Why you ask? the mafia have their chat, the strongest player can help the weaker players play better in the game, ensuring that if that rule is followed D1 will end in a town lynch.
But more than that, you deprive us of a valuable read on you as I mentioned earlier. You're crippling the town N1 and early D2 by your vote for the weakest strategy.
Please tell me why you feel that this is an acceptable loss again?
And then earlier
Unfortunately I'm not very good at forcing people so I tend to keep an eye on everyone, responding to questions and analyzing the arguments of others until I find someone who I think is scum. Then I check through their posts, and if it seems likely I compile my case and move my vote. It's simply a different approach to scumhunting.
I ask you to summarize your reads or in the very least to summarize why you think your target is scum. Do you believe that every other case is as weak as the probability of getting a town lynch is more possible than a scum lynch? Numbers
don't matter, but how the person defends him/herself, including how communication is given. Wherein numbers pertain to the majority vs informed minority. It's all within their context and
not just because of numbers, which I seem to think you're getting at.
Your case on Ranger? It falls purely on the basis of him suggesting a No-lynch, then...backing off? I don't see that. Probably because we're looking at it differently, but the timing doesn't correlate to that.
Quote it. Link it. You say he wanted to hurt town, but I see him communicate and then argumentatively accept the consensus as well as voicing his opinion on the no-lynch thing. While he was flailing about "Oh woe be the lynch", he did add his (however superficial) reads and view on the matter, including an understandable case on himself regarding the no-lynch.
Did you press Ranger then? Hows about continuing the pressure now? Your case seems to be locked in the past as you keep on pointing to "I summarized it above".Please, answer in full. Thanks. Because I'm really under the impression of vagueness regarding your case.
What are your full reads on everyone, and details on who you suspect?
FordNQT: Why are you still voting UI? Why did you let your scumhunting fall completely to the wayside once you claimed your ability?
From lack of context, seems like you're defending UI. Why the first question?
RangerCaptain: Since this appears to be something Zrk did before and flipped town, (i did go and read it and it feels all to similar to this) i'll unvote.as for who would seem lynch worthy, i would say Urist Imiknorris. He was my second scum pick and i still think his reasons of going after me are as bad as Zrk's. If Zrk continues his behaviour into day 2 (provided he and i survive) I will continue to go after him unless the behaviour becomes productive. Also to answer your first question, I was panicing a bit and from the start i was a bit of a trainwreck. I've improved since and kinda regret doing that.
UI: Given recent and previous developments, do you really believe i or Zrk should be lynched?
Dear me. Metatell on Zrk?!
Why do you feel Zrk is innocent. Purely because of meta? In THIS GAME'S CONTEXT, why did you unvote?-snip-
...And what is your reason on voting UI so late in the day?
Why aren't you going after Zrk
now? Is there anything hindering you from
now instead of
D2, as you point out there?
Also, how do those reactions from Zrk correlate from what you've seen before, to poke on your tangent of thought?
GriffyVector:
Vector - town
It's nothing major, just saying that if you actually took the time to analyze yourself and came up with that (rather than just saying it because "why not"), it'd be suspicious. And you seem to have gotten mostly the same reads I have, which makes me feel more confident... Which could be a ruse (rattles off into WIFOM land).
You're...second guessing yourself because Vector mentioned herself as town?
Ok...what's up with that? You doubt that Vector is town or...?
TolyKHm. Experiment. If Uri Eye notices that I said this, then he I have a hypothesis. I don't want anyone other than him to answer this, just for the interest. If he doesn't answer in his next 2 posts then I get information as well, and I might pressure-vote him. As I said, I want ONLY him to answer this, don't quote or refer to it until he posts. Alrite?
Uri Eye? You mean UI? Use more conventional acronyms or abbreviations :/
Also. What information did you get due to the next 2 posts there? It's real confusing given that
we have timezones. And then a "Might pressure-vote him", why the transparency?
You really seem to be flailing over NQT's case given that he hasn't responded to it, muchly. It could be trapped/warped or whatnot, and we could always ask the Mod.
Is this all you've got regarding NQT's power? because that comes off as confused poking at a future point.
@TolyK: Judging by your words there, you paint NQT as scum, and yet your vote is...? Still on TWS for trivial reasons.
No, I paint him pink. Or rather, I only say that his proposal is unlikely to be pure.
TWS - ?
Pink. Are you being sarcastically vague? Because if a proposal is unlikely to be pure; and in context this being D1 (in the viewpoint of NQT=Town), then what reason would he have to give an 'impure' proposal? To catch scum? If this is your reasoning, how is it possible? Depriving town of a resource, yeah, perhaps. I just don't see how that is practical.
TWS...TheWetSheep. :/ Anyway,
so what do you think about NQT's proposal, really? Vague, justified town/scum move or...what? It's confusing trying to sort you being confused.
Regarding your view on the vote record, what is your take on those nearing the lynch? Details included; all of them, please. Meaning those you named.
TolyK: As the day starts coming to a close, who do you think is the most likely to be lynched and who will you vote for based on the current information?
Judging by the votecount and what I've read into so far, probably Ranger or NQT, with a chance of Zrk. NQT due to his claim, though I think we should wait on it and posibly experiment with it. Ranger due to being "different" in his thoughts. Zrk due to the vote record.