I don't agree that they are dangerous to the point that they shouldn't be considered. There is a lot of information to be found in taking this angle, and while you say that these lynches are based on the 'If' factor, I could just as easily put the same cases forward without the link between you and I would still feel confident that you are all bad. I don't think you should be refuting this, because information is good information regardless of its form.Sloonei wrote:I'll stop you right here and say that this line of thinking can often be dangerous. The likelihood that you'll ever catch 4 baddies together because of their interactions with one another in the thread when NONE of the players in question are even confirmed as bad is slim to none. But, onto the individual cases...Quin wrote:There are four ideal choices for me right now. Part of why I asked you in the first place was because I wanted to know about what kind of links you could make between your lynch choices. I didn't get exactly what I wanted, but I supposed that's what I get for not making myself clearer.
I've had four people in my mind who would be great lynches. Each of these four have had connections with each other which, to me, came across as building an association with each other that might spare them scrutiny if the others were lynched. You could argue that the links I've made could apply to anybody, and you're not wrong. But I feel confident in these specific ones.
I'm not sure what you mean when you say you can't "see a side of him to get a good read from". Does "good" mean "strong", or does it mean "town"? Either way, I'm not sure what the suspicion is based off of. If it's just that he's hard to read, shouldn't that make him a null read? Also, what do you make of his big chaindeath ISO that he just told me to look at? I've had doubts about Scotty too, but the investigation he put on in that one post made me feel a bit better about him.Scotty would be the first. I'm yet to see a side of him in this game I could get a good read from. I think other people are coming around to that realisation as well, which is good. Couple that with my original 'what if' in regards to Tranq, I think he's playing a clever, under the radar game.
For clarification to anyone else who might be reading, the "you" in this post is Golden, I believe. Quin can correct me if I'm wrong.If he flipped scum, you would be my next point of interest. I think a lot of your posts have been black and white, an interpretation that others also have commented on. You are also connected to my Tranq case, as you made up a shaky defence for Scotty by saying that the police probably knew Tranq can be a threat, but that didn't address my original point at all.
Back to Quirinius, my sirens are again going off at that big "If" at the beginning of this paragraph. IF scotty flips scum. You are now putting the cart in front of the horse. If that happens, sure, this can be a legitimate line of thought, but I can't approve of any case that relies on such an unsubstantiated piece of evidence. I also still don't agree with your assessment that Tranq's N1 arrest should be connected back in any way to Scotty. Frankly it seems like an odd connection to make, and I'm not sure what drew you to it. I can't think of any reason why a player voting for the person killed on Night 1 should indicate that that player is bad.
So I am a suspect on the third layer of If? Golden's been a solid town read. I also still have trouble grasping why you thought my Day 2 and 3 behavior was so outrageously scummy. I began to formulate stronger reads because the game had been going on for a while. This is a normal thing that happens (and then unhappens when work interferes).If you then flipped scum, I'd lynch Sloonei. He and you have had a very interesting relationship in this game. I am almost convinced that you have a BTSC link together. I take this interpretation since you are quite possibly the only player Sloonei has yet to question. (I just confirmed this, and in doing so, I learned that I can filter things!) From my understanding of Sloonei's personality, there's no other conclusion I can make. I don't have the same level of tangible evidence to argue for Sloonei's lynch, but I don't think I was seeing a civilian Sloonei throughout EoD2 to EoD3.
Four Ifs, and even you are now admitting that you're reaching. Nero was also a strong town read for me early on, but he's kind of lost that spot as the game has worn on.If I was correct yet again, at which point you should be revering me as your one true mafia god, I would lynch Nerolunar. There was a moment that really caught my attention very early, when Sloonei asked if there were any cases that would paint Nero as scum. At this point, I don't think any strong cases painting Nero as scum or civ were out there, so it just seemed a bit wild. This is admittedly the weakest link between the four of you, but no less significant in my eyes. Nero also jumped on the idea of lynching Epignosis for the sake of obtaining information. This is definitely ironic of me to scum read him for, since it was my idea, but Nero has been very 'passive' in this game. He also suggested lynching sig so people would stop talking about him. This is not GOOD town behaviour, in my eyes, so I can only hope is scum for suggesting that.
This post has way too many Ifs in it for me to get behind, and I don't agree with points 1-3 anyway. If you have time, I wouldn't mind hearing some more complete and isolated thoughts about each of Scotty and Nero.
also to hyperlink a post you simply click the red heading that appears at the top of the post ("[DAY 5] Turf Wars...") and the link in your search bar becomes a direct link to that post.
i assume there will be a mountain of linki that i'm just gonna ignore.
or just the one post.
With Scotty, 'good' means 'civ'. I haven't seen anything that I can label as civ-like. I feel good about that assumption because I'm not the only person to say this. I haven't read his chaindeath ISO. I'll do so and tell you, but at this point I am feeling good about chaindeath. I don't think that my thoughts on Tranq are stretched at all. Why do you think Tranq was lynched? Do you agree that it was because he might pose as a threat early on? I don't. I see Scotty arresting his EoD1 vote as an attempt to exploit the fact that being wrong in a lynch can give you civ-points.
You are correct that 'you' is Golden. I posted that and thought that things would be misunderstood, but I think most people would catch on to it anyway. I think you're taking my 'If' routine to mean that I wouldn't want any of the four of you lynched unless one of the others flip bad first. Make no mistake that I think all of you are worth lynching. The 'If' is the icing on the cake to say that, based on this persons associations, that person would come off badly.
I would like to hear more about Golden and your relationship in this game, what is it exactly that gives you so much trust in him? That other post tells you what I think already, but I'd like your input.
With Nero, I don't think you should take 'The weakest link' to mean reaching. That's like saying that the slowest runner in the 100m sprint in the olympics is a bad runner. No, I said what I said there to mean that compared to the others, the amount of conclusions I can draw are a lot larger than with any of the other three.
---
This may have been better written had I kept it within the quote and coloured it, but I'm just a bit tired.
I'll do another ISO of both Scotty and Nero at some point, but I've got an exam to study for tomorrow that I really need to focus on. Even so, what I have right now is most definitely 'complete'