|
EccoRaven posted:I mean really merk, Anon uses a power that (hypothetically please do not feel the need to clarify either way, keane!) gives keane a one-shot BP. if keane were to say so and then die at night, bam, Anon is probably scum, easy vote. Yeah I am with ecco on this, I think. I'm not writing Anon off entirely, because I do think her play has been scummy, but based on role and such I think she is not a good pick for today.
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 19:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 20, 2024 01:53 |
|
|
Re: why I did not give an item on day 1, I didn't want to make myself a target by claiming. Today I felt I didn't have a choice.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 19:24
|
|
|
AnonymousNarcotics posted:How the gently caress is it scummy to prevent a no lynch? I didn't vote her before then because I didn't think she was scum. And oh, look, I was right. Working in read through now. My time zone stuff might be messed up, did this vote come in right at deadline or an hour before? If it was right on deadline, than it makes sense. If it was an hour early, it makes a little less sense. Plus inventor role doesn't seem like a scum ability. Read through continues.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 19:29
|
|
|
I'm not liking pinmom or KB pinmom is just tunneling in on narc, who honestly is pretty much like this in every game. pinmom also isn't giving very good reasons for it either he just hopped on on day 1 with a fairly weak thing about bolding words being cases and hasn't jumped off since. ##vote pinmom Also KB is being lurky and acting like scum KB would act. I've been scum with him a few times now, that's all just gut though with him.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 19:31
|
|
|
CapitalistPig posted:I'm not liking pinmom or KB Started a new job this week. Flew out to Utah last night to meet my new team this week. On my phone at the moment while I wait for someone to install the proper version of visual studio on my virtual box but chances are high that I won't be around much except at night this week. And Thursday night I fly back home so not even at night that day except for at the airport. As someone who has been scum with me should know by now, activity is not a scum tell for me. In most games as scum I've been top poster or near that. So I'm super curious how you figure that is indicative of scum kb. I'd love some examples because that seems made up to me.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 19:42
|
|
|
OmegaGoo posted:Roy isn't the only one who got an item. Everyone who had a key at the end, including TMM, got an item. Keep that in mind. In retrospect, Birdstrike posted:I disagree with this. I think scum would be spread on D1 at least in case the role that yuming could be used against them. I like you for town but to imply that scum would know or be able to predict yumming's ability is silly. That being said, it is likely for scum to spread out early... D1 kills are usually done by momentum than scum manipulation.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 19:42
|
|
|
AnonymousNarcotics posted:Re: why I did not give an item on day 1, I didn't want to make myself a target by claiming. Today I felt I didn't have a choice. So you were potentially going to go the whole game without giving away items to not out yourself if you didn't have to? Or am I misunderstanding?
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 19:43
|
|
|
QuoProQuid posted:Narco, please claim. The rush of four votes right in a row and the demand to claim doesn't sit will. I have more to read, but it seems like less of a scum hunt than a manipulation to reveal a claim.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 19:48
|
|
|
CapitalistPig posted:I'm not liking pinmom or KB
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 20:01
|
|
|
Pinterest Mom posted:that was a strong thing, tyvm Nah
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 20:03
|
|
|
explain it back to me.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 20:04
|
|
|
King Burgundy posted:As someone who has been scum with me should know by now, activity is not a scum tell for me. In most games as scum I've been top poster or near that. So I'm super curious how you figure that is indicative of scum kb. It's the way you are posting plus gut , not really the inactivity. Which I explained already.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 20:04
|
|
|
Pinterest Mom posted:explain it back to me. weak
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 20:04
|
|
|
CPig, he wanted you to describe his case, not himself.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 20:05
|
|
|
CCKeane posted:CPig, he wanted you to describe his case, not himself. Oh pardon me the case can be described as follows  blah blah blah bolded words blah blah blah terrible cases
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 20:08
|
|
|
I'll back off of my argument because Keane said that the item doesn't make any sense as scum. Ecco, your analysis of this is really suspect though. We wouldn't know whether the item didn't do what Keane thought it did unless Keane told us what it said it would do and somehow we found out it didn't do that thing. That's the point I'm making. Your assumption that we would immediately lynch Narc if Keane died requires that we know what Keane was told the item would do X, he used it at night, and it failed to do X. We wouldn't have that information. If we did, the scum could play around it anyhow.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 20:12
|
|
|
##vote Goo
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 20:12
|
|
|
merk posted:I'll back off of my argument because Keane said that the item doesn't make any sense as scum. Ecco, your analysis of this is really suspect though. We wouldn't know whether the item didn't do what Keane thought it did unless Keane told us what it said it would do and somehow we found out it didn't do that thing. That's the point I'm making. Your assumption that we would immediately lynch Narc if Keane died requires that we know what Keane was told the item would do X, he used it at night, and it failed to do X. We wouldn't have that information. If we did, the scum could play around it anyhow. Jesus Christ man, can you draw this in a flow chart?
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 20:15
|
|
|
merk posted:I'll back off of my argument because Keane said that the item doesn't make any sense as scum. Ecco, your analysis of this is really suspect though. We wouldn't know whether the item didn't do what Keane thought it did unless Keane told us what it said it would do and somehow we found out it didn't do that thing. That's the point I'm making. Your assumption that we would immediately lynch Narc if Keane died requires that we know what Keane was told the item would do X, he used it at night, and it failed to do X. We wouldn't have that information. If we did, the scum could play around it anyhow. Merk is scum, I watched him kill the English language.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 20:16
|
|
|
I said the item could be a one-shot protection that doesn't actually protect. Ecco said we would immediately lynch Narc if that was the case. I say: How would we know? Even if we do know, couldn't the scum just play around it?
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 20:16
|
|
|
King Burgundy posted:So you were potentially going to go the whole game without giving away items to not out yourself if you didn't have to? Or am I misunderstanding? No I was just hoping to get a read on who seemed townie to make sure the items go to the right people. Although with the challenge thing, it is a bit of a crapshoot, but at least that person would have a good chance of ending up with it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 20:18
|
|
|
bye
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 20:38
|
|
|
cya
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 20:42
|
|
|
CapitalistPig posted:I'm totally lost Stuff like this is why I don't like CPig in the game.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 20:49
|
|
|
CCKeane posted:Merk was completely true to his word, which does speak well of him here. Yes, and I think there is something to be said for turning down items of protection. The only ones who NEED it are scum, the rest have nothing to fear. That being said, were merk scum, he wouldn't need a one time bullet proof and he could earn town trust by giving it away.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 20:53
|
|
|
Roydrowsy posted:Yes, and I think there is something to be said for turning down items of protection. The only ones who NEED it are scum, the rest have nothing to fear. What?
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 20:55
|
|
|
Birdstrike posted:Romani Ite Domum I don't recall playing with them before, but their CCKeane posted:Yeah I am with ecco on this, I think. In particular, if she has more items to give, which can be use of town.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 21:07
|
|
|
Roydrowsy posted:I don't recall playing with them before, but their Stupid awful app didn't delete a thought I started and didn't finish. It wasn't an important thought... Just that qpq at times posts highly detailed posts, which could serve as good cover, but if need to reread them to get a feel of they are good or not.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 21:09
|
|
|
Roydrowsy posted:he wouldn't need a one time bullet proof and he could earn town trust by giving it away. Who said that this was the item?
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 21:10
|
|
|
CapitalistPig posted:I'm not liking pinmom or KB This. Feels more useful.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 21:11
|
|
|
merk posted:Who said that this was the item? Making assumption based on "shield"
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 21:17
|
|
|
Roydrowsy posted:##vote yumming ##vote Roydrowsy This is the entirety of your scum hunting this game. Who do you think is scum and why?
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 21:18
|
|
|
You have four (three now) more posts than me and about 2% of my content.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 21:19
|
|
|
CCKeane posted:What? I am on my phone almost out the door. Didn't she throw out a shield? Shields are typically items of protection. Which one could assume either lynch proof or bulletproof, unless there is another type of protection out there.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 21:20
|
|
|
merk posted:##vote Roydrowsy It was an idea... I post things I think of when I think them. You got real defensive over a notion.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 21:21
|
|
|
Roydrowsy posted:You got real defensive over a notion. Defensive?
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 21:22
|
|
|
merk posted:Defensive? I though you quoted a different post. Trying to sneak posts without getting yelled at for being on my phone. I'll get another chance to post and respond to thoughts in about thirty min.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 21:25
|
|
|
Roydrowsy posted:I am on my phone almost out the door. Why would the scum need protection and town not?
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 21:28
|
|
|
EccoRaven posted:- murmur made a jokevote on you and then here tried to say it was super townie of her to do so, but then backs away as soon as someone calls her out on it. if she double-downed on her initial "it's so pro-town to make obvious joke cases!" I'd believe it was something she genuinely believed but she didn't, she immediately said "oh well it's just something I've been doing lately" (and later admits she's done it as scum before, too). It seems like you're trying to make it look like I was heavily invested in using the Keane Case to prove my towniness, and that I was somehow foiled into admitting that I've done it before as scum, thus catching me in a contradiction? I feel like my point of view was consistent throughout the entire exchange. To address the links you use, I was (a) responding to PMom/CPig calling me scum for making said vote on Keane, (b) explaining to Roy why I made said vote (to facilitate discussion, not to drop a cheap "gotcha!"), and (c) responding to yuming who felt my play was suspicious because she's seen me do it recently as scum. EccoRaven posted:- she made a post here that seems townie at a glance, since she's calling a poster scummy and engaging them with questions, but despite goo responding MT never follows up on it. just a hit-and-run kind of suspicion, much like she has against me later. In the case of OmegaGoo and KB, I saw posts that I felt were scummy, questioned them about my suspicions, and was satisfied with their answers enough to move on to other suspects. I feel like that's a natural progression on D1 with the lack of concrete information. EccoRaven posted:- she votes me here and left it there for the deadline, but when day 2 begins (and throughout all of day 2 for that matter) she never followed up on it. she asked me to clarify my suspicions on opop and, again, I do so but she never engaged with me about it. Regarding my throwing a vote on you on the day of deadline and not being around in the hours leading up to it: My bad. Regarding my not casing you on D2: I wasn't around during the yuming/Anon push, but went back and read ANarc and felt that the cases on her had merit. I cased ANarc, she cased me back, somewhere in all of that I noticed that Merk was (in my opinion) acting suspicious, and so my attention was focused there. Also of note is the fact that Merk made the case that got yuming dunked, and ANarc (the other vote leader) directly benefitted from it. EccoRaven posted:- here points against anon here are actually really bad? like if you actually read them they're not "anon is scum for her posts" points, it's half "merk did weird things" + "anon didn't pursue QPQ" (which is lol considering the above) and then "she said one thing about my jokevote and then said it later!" (which is like, recontextualizing is totally a thing). No kidding recontextualizing is a thing! I feel like this whole bulletpoint is basically rephrasing my earlier case, but using dumbed down language to give it less validity. That she didn't pursue QPQ and that she changed her mind about my alignment based on my casing her are absolutely "anon is scum for her posts", and my point is that they're indicative of her not believing the things she's saying. And regardless of how fair/correct it may be, the timing of Merk's cases / his waffling on an opinion of her are suspicious to me and are shaping my reads, and I'm not going to not share that just because they're not open-and-shut cases.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 21:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 20, 2024 01:53 |
|
|
If I was Vegas, I'd give the odds of Ecco being scum here at about a 2:3 payout.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 21:59
|
|