I've done my detailed reexamination of the game. Sorry about the wall.
Reads:*Jim Groovester: Lucky enough to get into the game after the worst of Day 1. Came in with a
competent post and took a reasonable shot at flabort. Early anger is justified.
Proceeded to tear Jiokuy apart, placing his final Day 1 vote. Reasons were initially that Jiokuy was refusing to answer questions while doing no more than pushing a terrible case against Jim.
Day 2, Jim
voted for Persus based on a mix of Persus's old IG vote being poor and Persus's generally bland day game. Neither side has done much regarding that vote. Jim has
asked Persus one question since the vote, but has done nothing more to strengthen the case, and his pushing of the case has consisted of the occasional offhand mention. Even in Day 1, Jim's discussion of Persus stopped when Jim started attacking Jiokuy.
In the middle of my writing of this post, Jim posted a new reads post, placing several people as scummier than Persus13 ("scummyish" instead of "slight scummyish"). Despite that, his vote is still on Persus.
Conclusion: Otherwise fine play is hampered by a troubling lack of effort in his current vote case, which does not seem to be on his top suspect. Slight scum read pending responses to my new questions.
*ToonyMan: Is activeish when he can be, it seems.
Took a shot at 4maskwolf early on, but this got nowhere. After that, he poked at zombie urist. Vote has been on ZU since then, but he's been pushing weakly. He is, however, at least continuously pushing and trying to strengthen his vote.
Conclusion: Huh. Slight town read, but he's not the most helpful player.
*flabort: Day 1, he went from being controlled by his scumometer to just being confused. Day 2, he became confused and rolefishy, and also confused and survival-focused. Based vote targets on how he would look, though he eventually came to understand that that was a bad idea. Eventually, he figured out that evidence is the best way to convince people of the scumminess of others. He's not doing all that well at that, but he's trying. Despite the changing playstyle, he's been consistent about targets: his top suspect has been Toaster since his late scumometer days, and he's held his position on Jim since
post 305[/b]. Has been defending zombie urist lately. Basis: [url=http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=139118.msg5403193#msg5403193]ZU forms strong cases (...what?) and there are better targets to lynch than ZU.
Conclusion: While his behaviour has been poor, that seems to be primarily due to ineptitude. I am troubled by his defense of ZU, but flabort seems to have generally been acting with the intent to help town. Town lean.
*Persus13: Bland play. Did some good work pressuring Guardsman at the start of the game, long before IG's claim. That's probably Persus's best play this whole game. He later took
mild shots at Jiokuy and flabort,
pushed a dubious case against IG, and
took another mild shot at Jiokuy. He did try to talk to most people, and actively questioned people, at least.
Day 2, he's still trying to undermine Guardsman's claim, but is focused on flabort. Activity is low. More content has been promised. Doesn't really seem to have a case yet. I am troubled by a
possible bit of buddying towards me.
Conclusion: Bland background player, who has not really pushed much in the way of cases. Mild scum read.
*notquitethere: Likely breadcrumbed his role in his first post ("What's hiding underneath the hood?"/"Battle bind a pact man?"), which is normal for him.
Not really much to say here that I haven't already said. I will say, though, that I don't think he's cult leader. Too attention-grabbing.
Conclusion: Wary neutral read, but probably not cult leader.
*Tiruin/Hapah: Tiruin, who is usually quite careful with her vote, made a mid-Day 1
Toaster vote based purely on a disagreement over how survivors act. An odd move for anyone, and quite an odd move for Tiruin. She later
voted for IG based on his claim. Her activity, while high in quantity of posts, was primarily during the high-speed parts of day 1. Mostly, she was just getting what she could in while awaiting a replacement. Nothing wrong there except a troubling Toaster vote.
Hapah... is sort of here. A bit. Understandably, he had a bit of trouble pulling reads together immediately. Less understandably, he eventually decided to
vote for IG for some reason several days after replacing in. Apparently, IG's a useless hypocrite and his claim is fishy. The attack is vague and key points are left completely unexplained. Hapah's also showing quite a bit of nervousness about actually lynching Guardsman. Troubling, especially this close to the end of the day.
Conclusion: Tiruin wasn't acting quite right, and Hapah's not doing his job. Low-moderate scum read.
*Toaster: Consistently active, and has a strong day game. Pushed a solid case on NQT and then a shot at ToonyMan Day 1, while questioning everyone else as well. Has switched away from Toony since then, but continues a push against NQT. His current vote is on TheWetSheep, and it's not an unreasonable vote.
Conclusion: Mild town read.
*zombie urist: It's serial killer hunting time! YAY! By the way, there's no cult and focusing on SKs over fighting scum is fine with no cult! YAY!
I've said a lot already about ZU, and my reread doesn't change much. I will say, recently, he's gone from arguing that there's not much evidence of there being a cult to arguing that we more likely than not do not have a cult. An interesting shift he's made as he's arguing more and more strongly against believing a cult is what we're dealing with.
Conclusion: Moderate scum read.
*4maskwolf/The Wet Sheep: 4maskwolf was a hyperactive and flaily mess who reacted excessively to every vote. This seems to have been in part due to a strategy that, frankly, wasn't very good.
I've discussed that before. Also, Wolf spent much of his time in the game with no vote placed.
Now, Sheep's far more interesting. As an actual player, he's posted 7 posts. Throughout Day 1, Sheep's vote was on Ottofar. This
was apparently not a lynch vote. Sheep says it was just an attempt to improve reads, and that he felt it was a safe vote because Ottofar wasn't up to be lynched. So, there was nobody Sheep wanted lynched Day 1. But at least he got reads to base his Day 2 actions on, right? ...No.
His Day 2 vote was on Jim. That vote was, as it turns out,
for the same reasons as his Ottofar vote. So he claims, at least.
Add an apparent greater interest in finding "good pressure points" than finding scum and a refusal to answer at least one question of mine to his positionless voting behaviour and complete lack of suspects and we get probable scum.
Conclusion: Moderate scum lean.
*Ottofar: Apparently, he's one of the people in this game. He's not exactly showing it. Has promised content today. Has sort of been fighting flabort. Sort of. Day 1 votes on 4maskwolf, IG, Jim, and flabort were each rather weak. Says he's swamped with real life, but intends to post today.
Conclusion: Ottofar's lurky once again. Null read, but he had better give us that content.
*Imperial Guardsman: Useless. Third party. Not actively hostile, but a LYLO breaker for the scumteam. Not worth lynching, though.
Questions:Jim Groovester: Why are you putting so little effort into your Persus13 case? Do you have any comments on Persus's
second Day 1 defense against your accusations? Is there a reason your vote is still on him?
Regarding my activity, it wasn't so much decreased due to the weekend as it was due to my focus on setting up my BYOR.
flabort: What is it that makes zombie urist's cases strong? Quantity of points certainly isn't strength when the points end up being "Persus said he used around 8 sentences and he really used 6!" and stuff like that.
Persus13: What is your case against flabort, exactly? Please provide evidence.
Hapah: What is it about Guardsman's claim that is fishy? Do you think he is a third party? Do you have any other suspects?
TheWetSheep: Is there anybody whatsoever who you think is scummy? Is there anybody you want lynched? Are you going to do any more of these "I didn't really mean that vote, I was trying to get a read" votes? Have either of those votes actually helped you get reads?
In response to your question about my question, I meant the latter post. However, you did not answer the following question, for some reason, despite it being right after the question you did answer:
Furthermore, do you consider NQT's habit of responding to questions with more questions to be useful? If not, please explain.
Answer it.
Author
Topic: Supernatural 7 - Game over - Town Win! (Read 195969 times)