I am Rose Lolande and analyzing lone wagons is pretty great.
As far as I know, Affinity is the only person to have said I was really scummy beyond the D1 post. What do you feel is the scum motivation behind my D1 actions?
Let's see... you prodded Shadoweh and argued that HW is scummy only from the logic he's been using. Basically, voted for something you'd have no need to commit yourself to later on (and, indeed, you seem to be reading Shadoweh as town now) and showed dislike on someone over things you disagree with. I see no scumhunting here and only fake productivity.
I dunno, I think I made a pretty big deal out of how I think You and Huh What are scummy.
And, like I said a few lines above, the thing is that your 'accusations' against HW were your disagreement with him, nothing to follow up with a real lynch effort. The only one you've showed true "let's lynch this man" conviction against is me.
You call my case "exaggerated at best", citing my accusation of tunnel-vision. However, up to that point you had devoted most of your posts solely to Serela and complaining that Serela is scummy and smokescreening. How is that an exaggeration of your tunnelling?
I fail to understand how pursuing a lone scumpick in a timeframe of 12 hours (at worst, as I haven't actually counted) is as horribly tunnel-ish as you present it, even until now. In addition, I wasn't the only one being "horrible tunnel-scum", in the way you presented it, at the time. Why am I, and only I, on the receiving end of this accusation?
Why do you feel it is an exaggeration to assert that you are not actively scumhunting and just flinging shit at Serela for things he always does?
Help I'm still lost on how this is what he always does. Is horribly scum-like smoke-screening something he always does? This is unreasonable/illogical because you expect me to know that this is part of his meta and, therefore, take it as a good idea to pursue him for his meta, and it is exaggerated also because I had easier people to fling mud at
if that was what I was aiming to do. You fail to consider the 12 (now 10) other players itg in contrast to what you're accusing me for, and this focus on me is why I accuse you of being just bad as you claim I am.
Why do you feel that asserting your case on Serela is weak is "a clean defence of Serela", which more than anything just seems to reek of OMGUS? "I think Serela is scummy. These people think my suspicions are bad, so I think they are defending someone I think is scummy". It's just one step further to call me scum for finding your push on Serela to be bogus and tunnelling.
Wrong. The case isn't "they think I'm scummy --> they are defending Serela". The case is that "they're defending Serela
only due to the fact that they think I am scummy". This is a scummy sort of defense. I don't understand how you completely misinterpreted what I was saying here.
Everything I said the day previous still stands. Add to that a lengthy OMGUS and a refusal to say anything on the Hero train save for some role-related speculation.
About this. I noted in one of my posts that I find Hero excessively annoying to read. And, to be frank, I didn't want to read him so much that I delayed it for as long as I could. I had started rereading a few minutes before Headcrabs conveniently hammered the wagon, which was a thing. I see no need for your exaggerated use of the word 'refusal' here when I clearly stated that I
would read Hero. May I also remind you that you were the one who was conveniently away for late-D1 while supporting the Hero wagon beforehand?
Gah tl;dr things. Dislike Bardiche for fake productivity, exaggeration and over-inflation of his case on me and the tunnel-ish mindset he has while analyzing me.
I dislike how BT jumped off the Schezo wagon for negligible reasons after it lost Shadoweh's support, only to vote unlikely lynch targets for the rest of the day without having any particularly strong opinions on other players or pushing his reads.
A few problems with this.
Serela's lynch definitely wasn't unlikely during the time of voting (I would even put it down during ED1), as I thought 'bringing to light' the accusation I had would make people change their minds regarding derptown-Serela. That's one of the things in scumhunting, isn't it? Making people see things they've overlooked?
I had recalled some dislike towards Bardiche before my case so I did not think his lynch was unlikely at all. In fact, if his lynch was unlikely, you can go ahead and say that any of the wagons aside from Hero's were unlikely. Is everyone not pushing Hero's wagon scummy now? Of course not.
OK let's look at other stuff finally. When analyzing the wagon, I couldn't exactly find something rotten at its core; Shadoweh seems like the same let's-push-derptown-off-cliffs Shadoweh from last game, and the full commitment to the case kind of cements a town read, even if it was a 'tad' focused. Serela is still scummy in my eyes (the only reason this read hasn't strengthened much is because he barely did anything from the time I accused him) but his weak vote on Hero can be excused for the fact that he literally had no better reads. Which is bad on its own, but whatever.
HW bugs me the most here because his case on Hero, when it comes down to it, is basically "his attack on Shadoweh makes him solid scum", but, as Shadoweh noted, he was the only one to interpret it as an attack. Why was this? Because of Hero's jokevote from ED1, apparently. This makes the case pretty damn weak and I'm surprised he went for it above Bardiche's. Have you not been the one to accuse me of dropping Schezo for Serela because he's an easier vote? Going for Hero over Bardiche is bad in the same way, as what your 'solid stance' on Hero boils down to is far from justifying your voteswitch. Despite this, though, I don't see Scum!HW at the moment. But I'm definitely keeping my eyes peeled.
The latter votes are all passable. I especially like Dan's, mostly due to how his thought process was crystal clear, and his townie-ness shines later when he 'games the game' (in PX's words), as his whole questioning of Hero after his pubclaim looks genuine and out of actual fear-of-mislynch concern. I'm not safisfied with Affinity's rather blatant wagon hop but I can't point it out as something outright scummy either. Rawr's hop, although much less wordy, I see in pretty much the same way.
Then there's the people who -weren't- on the wagon, that, of course, need to be analyzed as well! I already covered Bardiche, I am myself, Maav and Headcrabs are too vague to get a strong read on (and currently are in deep null territory) and iirc that only leaves Dormio and PX.
Dormio does this thing where he voices his dislike of Hero but does not vote due to not having a strong enough read, and then because Dan doesn't respond to him. The latter, even if true, is a bad excuse for not manning up and joining a wagon you're fine with. What I find odd about this time period of passiveness is that he continues to act as a plank between Hero's and Shadoweh's accusations, often commenting on good points Hero or Shadoweh have made or questioning either of them on -stuff-. When he doesn't actually take a stance while doing this, he's only making the whole Shadoweh vs Hero thing take a bigger spotlight than it should, and almost effortlessly at that, and this is fishy.
PX bugs me only for the reason that he never mentions Hero at all and goes on to pass judgement on how scummy Hero's pubclaim is just out of the blue. This lets him be involved somehow in the whole shenanigan but at the same time reveal completely nothing as to what he thinks about Hero himself, just talking about his claim. This waffle is fishy as well.
And, at the end of the day, Bardiche is still my strongest scum read, and I will continue to
##Vote Bardiche. I simply do not see how his behavior reads as town, and if people like Shadoweh can -show me the light here-, they probably should. I'm only seeing Scum!Bardiche otherwise.
