Caz: Weird reactions, to both me and Tiruin at very least. Seems somewhat, but not highly Scummy to me. Doesn't always answer questions asked, doesn't always chase when others don't answer his questions. Tiruin called him 'slippery' and a few other adjectives. I agree with slippery the most. Seems very willing to target people for 'single issues', such as Persus13's comment to Cmega about unvoting or not, then not follow up more widely. Medium lean Scum.
notquitethere: Responding to pressure oddly. Made resurrection choice for reasons that seem odd and contradictory to me, seems to be calling Nerjin both a good choice to res and a good choice to lynch, which may not contradict but the same behavior that makes someone a good lynch should make them a good choice to stay dead. Also had weird, overstrong reaction to my challenge that it wasn't actually impossible for him to be the vampire lord (given that we don't even know we have vampires). But I wonder greatly if he's trying to get lynched, because I've never seen NQT respond to pressure like this. (I cite day one of recent Witches Coven as example - he was an early high suspicion player - I have not read many of his old games). If he is trying to get lynched - it would have to be to prevent someone else from being lynched? I think. I could live with a NQT lynch, but I also believe that he'll keep talking if he's not today's lynch (more information is usually good) and I worry that he's trying to get lynched by throwing weird reactions. Medium lean Scum - but seems to be trying to offer self as target - if so, protecting who and why? Caz seems likeliest target to protect.
Toonyman: Still deeply unsatisfied with his involvement in the game. He has asked a handful of questions, he has checked out a few leads to a satisfying conclusion (apparently his satisfaction as well as mine) but I saw him put more effort into 'not dying/Scumhunting after his scare' than I see him having given during D2. I'm glad he followed up on some things, but I still get a solid 'Survivor/not Town' feel of him. There -are- probably some third parties. Some might be benign to Town, but I think 'just trying to not die' is a perfectly fine strategy for Scum too, and I'm concerned he's using it. Low lean Scum (High lean not-Town - Scum are also not Town).
Persus13: Seems off to me for reasons I cannot take time to find again and expound on. Note to self - prepare that for D3. - Slight lean Scum.
Nerjin: Upset about his lack of participation in D2. Appreciate that he did answer questions. He is choosing to show nothing of his new Wincon (which could still be the old Wincon). Hope he plays soon or replaces soon. Worried about why he's 'not in the mood for this game for some reason' as he says. Null read/Slight lean Scum.
Cmega: To newbie to read. - Null read.
Jim Groovester: Seems quite still, possibly because there's 'still a lot of kids on his lawn'. I have no meaningful read of Jim as Town or Scum, but it bugs me that he didn't explain what he was doing in terms of starting D2 with a vote on Persus13, and why he isn't (that I can tell) doing any overt Scumhunting of Persus - it's the vote and not much else from Jim to Per. Day 1 didn't have a lot of interaction from Jim to Per - though he does challenge another player for not really interacting with the person who was voted for. I don't know how to interpret this weird-seeming behavior though. Null read.
Toaster: No strong feel on. Slightly more Town than Null, so - Null read/Slight lean Town.
Max White: I liked how he played better in S4, I found his posts very easy to follow and his reasoning made a lot of sense to me. I'm concerned that his focus appeared way narrow D1 and was very surprised that Tiruin's
answering my old RVS question confused him so much (she did quote me at the top of the post and the answer came at the bottom, after she shows her research on the question - but the links to my question are painted clearly I believe). - Slight lean Town
Tiruin: Time pressured. Posts are a bit harder to figure out than usual, lines of thought are less explained or less clear (reading posts of Tiruin's from older games, I felt I understood most of them easily). Slight lean Town.
My analysis of others' cases on Caz:
I'm really unhappy with Toaster's 'case' on Caz. "Well, we're back to Day 1 again. Did anyone learn anything useful?" does NOT to me seem 'blatant rolefishing' as Toaster calls it, and that appears to be the entirety of Toaster's case.
I'm not thrilled with Tiruin's case on Caz, because it involves both 'Caz didn't answer Tiruin's questions' combined with the unsaid 'Tiruin didn't answer Caz's completely either'. His 'error' about Tiruin switching her vote could have been an error of memory (thinking of someone else who did vote switch, or straight out misremembering and not fact checking), and that's not been talked about really.
But Caz should have been talking about it - Caz should have brought it up himself and explained it clearly. Instead Caz basically bows out, abandoning all further attempts to Scumhunt and telling Tiruin that he doesn't really understand what she's saying - which she responds to with:
Thanks for sealing in my doubts. Instead of asking to restate or inquire on what exact portion is confusing you, you fall back on one of the less obvious, yet still apparent, methods of denial. I am open for all queries regarding my accusations of you, and all I get is a backhand and a discarding handwave.
She challenges him for not attacking her back, she says several other things - what she doesn't try to do is restate her case in different terms (hopefully easier for him to understand). Now I can see a big reason not to - debating with certain Scum is a total waste of time, and if Tiruin's that sure he's Scum, she's not really talking to him (I assume) but answering him for the rest of Town to see and understand). Thing is, though -I- think I understand her case against him, I do think it's not very clearly stated in the most part. I can buy him not understanding it, and sincerely being confused.
And I'm really unsure about Persus's case, which essentially is 'Tiruin convinced me' on top of suspecting Caz for
The others I'm suspicious of are Cmega and Caz. ... Caz hasn't been making much sense today so he seems scummy. He also seems to be overconfident and making two many assumptions, almost like he knows things about other people for certain.
That case doesn't convince me either.
My own case on Caz:
What does convince me, my case: Caz is slippery. He has been scumhunting, or making the appearance of it - but my own interactions with him on D1 left me with a weird feel and a lessened desire to interact more with him - my analysis then was that he was responding quite satisfactorily to others and interacting well in general, so how I write probably bothers him and we're most likely having a personality/style conflict rather than something Scummy is going on. I did not then see the level of concern which Tiruin was developing from her own interactions with him - nor did I until she made it a lot clearer and I put a lot of effort into trying to figure out what she was explaining.
I actually thought Caz would be a likely person to reach Lylo, as I analyzed people at the end of D1, because he seemed really middle ground to me.
Day two I don't see wrong in his opening question about people learning stuff - I wouldn't have asked that exact question but I might have asked a somewhat similar one. He tries to shut down a line of inquiry even as he opens another (line happened to be considering value of Ressing Nerjin)
Waste of time. We should be asking ourselves
He responds to Tiruin with
Vote tracker doesn't show FoSes. You were jumping around to whoever was being pressured the most. It didn't look like you believed your own arguments because as soon as an easier target came along, you gave up your attack and jumped on the new one.
Sadly, Think's tracker DOES, and even if you don't know that, it can be done by manually searching the thread, with or without using a lurker tracker to open a questionable player's posts.
D1, Tiruin voted first for Caz, then switched to Cmega3. She placed one FoS again on Caz. That was the entirety of her D1 'vote switching and FoS use'.
I can get making one mistake, remembering wrong. But when someone calls you a liar about what you remember, then it's time to get to work and check your facts (if it wasn't time before).
If NQT is protecting anyone, he is most likely protecting Caz. Caz initially called the discussion about the resurrection "Waste of time" - later and most recently he says
NQT: You're saying that you lynched Nerjin because you could bring him back if he was town? Don't you think it's a risky strategy? If you thought he could be town, why did you want to lynch him? Do you think Nerjin is still town now, or has his playstyle changed? From what I see, he's claiming to be lurky because he thought he was going to be dead and could focus on other games. What do you say to the possibility that he's lurking to keep out of what's happening here, and avoid suspicion?
I think that may be supporting the 'point fingers at the Scum who sacrifices for me, if we can't actualy get the focus onto Nerjin instead of you'. It is a pretty strong reversal from 'Waste of time" to discuss.
"Warning - while you were typing 8 new replies have been posted. You may wish to review your post."
And that's just flipping weird. If he was working on that post for the time it took 8 replies to be posted - He posted it at November 07, 2013, 08:29:46 pm thread time...
The 8th reply previous to his post was made on November 07, 2013, 10:11:24 am thread time.
He claims to have been working on that post for over 8 hours? Why claim that, and in such an indirect fashion? Tentative conclusion, for misdirection/sympathy.
Notes to/about NQT (and a question for D3 if that's possible to answer then):
I don't say that you -are- a vampire lord, nor that it's likely that you are one - all I challenge is that it isn't impossible for you to be one.
Why this strong reaction?
Imp
Oh not you as well. Do you really think it's plausible that I could learn of a team mate having a priest role and decide to collude with them in bread-crumbing it all in the first hour of playing the game? It's not logically impossible, but it's not very plausible either.
Plausible? I consider it unlikely. But I think reacting to people debating if it is impossible or not is a VERY weird thing for you to do. However, in terms of how long you needed to create that 'breadcrumb' -
You posted your answer to Max White,
the one with the breadcrumb, was placed at 6:19:06 PM. You are replying (and quote) Max's post (which is also an answer to you) from 6:11:36 PM that same day. So it took you 8.5 minutes to notice his post, read it, start to quote him, figure out how to answer it in a way that includes the 6 breadcrumbed words in a post of 86 words total, and complete your post.
This isn't at ALL proof that you arranged the post and answer with Max ahead of time - I could probably create a post similar to yours if I was motivated to in about 2-3 minutes, all the other bits require lucky timing (forum working fast and right, you saw Max's answer immediately) - so I definately believe you could have created that breadcrumb off the cuff and with motivated high speed.
But I also believe that yes, you could have participated in a plan involving two players given 70 minutes + whenever you actually got your role PMs/Scumchat opened (my role PM was sent several minutes before the thread opened, no idea about others).
Note that the above is ALL supposition. I consider possible/impossible, not likely/unlikely. It isn't even established that we have a converting cult. Wanting it deemed 'impossible' that you could be such a cult's leader and protesting "Oh not you as well" to discussion about it actually being possible - that seems weird to me.
Author
Topic: Supernatural Mafia 6 - Game Over! (Read 170570 times)