I do recall Lift letting his RVS vote turn into an actual vote on at least one previous occasion, but not his alignment in that game (nor which game it was), nor any other occasion which would turn it into the "pattern" that you claim. I kinda get where you're coming from with not wanting to respond to HSL's questions (though suspect you're doing all of us a disservice there; as you mention, HSL is a very effective scum hunter, so if he's town, giving him the input needed to do his thing can only be a net positive). However, if this is an actual scum-tell for Lift, you'd be doing us a great favour by giving us the necessary pointers so we can confirm it.

I can see how it might be a disservice. Similar to how you can't get trent to vote for somebody he doesn't think is scum, I have an enormous distaste for doing a postmortem of a previous game in the middle of an active one. Analysing these games takes long enough without them becoming a recursive nightmare of internal references to other plays. I think you'll just have to take it as a gut read that Lift's segue from RVS to a serious vote is scummy. It could be that trent is right and it's consistent with his Town play (he has, after all, had more experience with Lift than I have), but I'm not feeling it.

(If you spotted the irony in this post, well done.)

Nice job putting words in my mouth, it's fun to flip accusations against you into accusations against your accuser isn't it? I'm not going gravedigging, but I'm more than happy to answer questions about the game we're actually playing.

The red flag was this:

Wouldn't it be ever so convenient that the person you just happened to RVS was actually scum? It's weak, and it's scummy. My vote stays on you.

It happens. With a chance of about 25%. That's not scummy, that's maths. ... But of course your vote has to stay on me. You have to try to look somewhat consistent after all.

Follow-up thought: if you actually believed that my vote was just an OMGUS, I don't think you would be sticking to your guns as strongly as you are. Flimsily made votes should roll off like water on a duck's back, because votes without conviction behind them are easily swayed. Votes come and go as people's reads shift. Three votes isn't anyhing to be concerned about; the only vote on me that causes me concern is trent's, because trent's votes are made with conviction. If you're Town, then it should be enough that I'm wrong about you, and it's just a T/T folly. Instead, you launch into attack mode to shred my credibility. And over what? Sure as heck seems suspicious, doesn't it?

My vote stays on you because you are my strongest scum-read. Nothing more, nothing less.

The bulletproof talk comes from Poppy saying "I'm sure I'll live" in post 45

I haven't come across an early reveal before and I'm simply questioning whether it's a certainty. I think it's likely to be true but that doesn't mean we don't need to question it at least.

The main thing between yourself and Poppy was when she said 'I'm not the only one who saw it'. It seemed cryptic to me. I wanted to know what she meant when she said this. I thought 'Is Poppy going to be lynched without revealing what she knows about this?'. Which is ofcourse a concern for us if Poppy is town. So Poppy didn't say what she meant and I tried to analyse. If Poppy is Scum it doesn't mean much. If she's town, maybe it does.

When I spoke of aggression it was more your questioning of Poppy's motives for defending Flub. So aggression maybe was a harsh word. I was trying to probe her for her initial comment, which she didn't want to expand on.

As for irrelevant reason for voting. Most posters have in R1. Again I'm trying to find out 'what has Poppy seen that I have not?' I'm not necessarily labeling you I want her to expand here.

Last game I made several mistakes such as focusing too much on lurkers but I don't think I ever actually voted for Sage before changing my vote. Poppy has been very helpful thus far and I think it would take a bit of a pyscho to lie about a friends illness. This doesn't strike me as her persona. I could be wrong, but I think that is unlikely. Whether the suspicions of her being scum or not are another matter but she hasn't attempted to lurk yet.

I find everything you've written here baffling, and I'd suggest shifting your focus elsewhere. Between myself and gogtrial upthread you've got a bunch of answers to these queries, but the queries themselves aren't looking to be useful.

IF you are town I would suggest you re-read our exchange. Because you just described your own behaviour. Launch into attack mode because I dared to suspect you, try to shred my credibility ... I agree that seems suspicious.
My initial suspicion was weak. True. It's D1 and weak tells are all we got. It was just a pointless role-discussion on your part. But the real tell was how you reacted to being questioned about your motive for that role discussion and how you try to pretend that suspecting you is scummy. That is indeed scummy.


I'm sure that was just a quip. Did you really read that as a claim? I think no one would claim bullet-proof in a setup where the only possible bullet-proof role is anti-town.

Did it feel she's on the verge of getting lynched back then?


Not to mention that bulletproof is a whole lot stronger when one doesn't claim it. Then again we might be having some next level pre-emptive counter plays. Sounds plausible on D1.

New page bug. Nothing to see here.

I just did a re-read, as you suggested. Here's what I see:

I shrugged off your initial post. It was RVS. I shrugged off your first accusation initially (#64), and I don't think my reaction to it (#67) can be construed as strong in any way. It was only when I was rereading the thread on my walk home that it stuck out to me, and I noted it down. Then you went into "attack mode" in #70 with three separate accusations:

1. That I was presenting a purposeful distraction to the Town.
2. That my analysis must be explicitly anti-Town, hence I am anti-Town
3. That I am trying to appear busy in order to look Town.

All expressed with far greater vitriol than presented above, of course. That turned my hunch into full-blown suspicion.

You're not innocent here, Lift. Don't even pretend to be. You made this bed of accusations, and you're going to lie in it. Or, rather, die in it, since at this point I don't think there's anything that's going to convince me that you're not scum. As such, my vote is staying squarely on you until I've secured your lynch.

I think that's the most sensible thing you've said all game. ;)

*-*-*

Anyway, just to cap off the discussion about play in previous games from HSL and Lift, since it's sticking in my craw:

This is a game. Games are supposed to be fun. If you want to go digging to find a specific post that seemingly backs up whatever pet theory you have, then go ahead. I'm probably going to ignore it anyway. Most versions of this game take less than half an hour to play. They're tense and quick-paced, and you don't remember the specifics of what a person said but you remember the feel of it, and that's what sticks with you. On the forums, these games can go on for months, and each game can be a thousand or more posts long. They are still tense, but that tension is drawn out much longer, and instead of being quick and impressionistic you read and re-read what people have said to discern their motives. Tracking through 50 or so other threads of the same scope to find something or other that somebody might have said or done in a previous game feels like pointless drudgery, and I don't think it's even helpful. Any suggestion that a person is somehow obliged to go to such effort will be roundly rejected and mocked by me. That's not a game, it's homework.

I'll stick with my impressions, thanks.

With that said, anyone who wants to read through my previous games as a player is very much out of luck as they are all in the read-only general discussion archive, and I requested that all of my posts in that forum be deleted as I was unable to edit out anything that I might not wish to have shared in retrospect. Given that they are about seven years old, they would be worse than useless anyway.

So your town game is strong and we shouldn't consider you as scum unless you make an egregious error?

Take Lift out of the picture. Anything else stand out to you about anyone else?

Important: guys, my grandmother died yesterday. Because of work I can't travel to my country to participate in funeral at this time, so I shall pay my respects at a later time. So, it's somewhat hard. At least I had my chance to say everything I wanted to her last time I saw her.

So, gamewise, this means I can still play. But my participation for a while will not be as detailed as expected. Lack of content from my side is not an indicator of my alignment. The content itself is. If you feel like I should be lynched or night killed, so it should happen. If everyone is ok with this, I will continue to play as best as I can. If you think it may be a problem, I am comfortable asking for a replacement to keep the game more fluent. Just let me know.

...

Back to the game, I can't help but think PoppyAppletree and supplementscene are scum buddies. Poppy is trying to find figure something out way too hard. While supplementcare seems to encourage the train of ideas and stand by side like a lord protector. Seems strange to make friends with a stranger on D1. My vote stays. I will elaborate more on this soon.

Sorry to hear about your grandmother. May her soul rest in peace.

About the game I actually am getting different vibes than you, I like that she's standing her ground. (Especially in post I quoted below)

With supplement I'm not sure I can see what you are referring to. Let me have another look at their interactions. (Posting from tablet sure is PITA)