|
Anomalous Amalgam posted:##vote illegalysober From when I made my vote on them, what changed?
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2016 17:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 24, 2024 03:10 |
|
|
Your Personal Muse posted:I retracted my case on him (although I am still voting him I realize ##unvote). This is why people don't think you read. I read your backpedaling post and I also saw that you did not unvote him (until just now). So, you know, reading.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2016 17:56
|
|
|
i wonder how many ppl talk about me in their therapy sesses
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2016 17:57
|
|
|
dongsbot 9000 posted:i wonder how many ppl talk about me in their therapy sesses this would imply people care about your existence enough to talk about you  Anomalous Amalgam posted:From when I made my vote on them, what changed? I cased IS in the past already
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2016 17:58
|
|
|
kash whats your fav fragrance
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2016 18:00
|
|
|
I really like old spice deodorant
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2016 18:04
|
|
|
I wear it between my butt cheeks to protect against bad smells
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2016 18:04
|
|
|
It makes wiping with anything other than a wet wipe really hard
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2016 18:05
|
|
|
Offer a game opinion please.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2016 18:05
|
|
|
Okay, did some reading and I have a moment right now. I'm leaning ##vote IS for a few reasons. One is that after reading what he's posted he seems to not have any actual opinions about much pertaining to this game. Also, this vote of his on AW is his first vote of the entire game other than the Jimson turbo. I'm not sayin lurking/not voting is scummy in and of itself, but he seems to have plenty to say about things but not enough to glean an actual opinion from him. Also, his whole case on me was 'Tpink thinks she's playing scummy, and I disagree but will totes vote her anyway' followed by not voting me.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2016 18:11
|
|
|
IllegallySober posted:I mean, okay, random is random, I guess This is IS's vote on Jimson. In a vacuum its fine. But he then proceeds to be ultra self-conscious about it. In fact the thing that keeps setting me off about IS is that he is super self-conscious about people questioning his actions. IllegallySober posted:To be honest I was waiting for a PM telling me what the result of my night action was to check this thread and y'all have put up like four pages of posts in the four hours I wasn't checking the thread. This was in response to a general callout on lurkers by AA and a case that AA had made on his vote that amounted to "LOOK AT THIS VOTE" with no case behind it and subsequently abandoned. Scum generally tend to be paranoid and think that there is alot more heat on them than there is (which I believe I already said in this game). He put that "random is random" thing up there as an explanation? Its a loving turbo on a scum and he is worried about a case that is already old at that point that no one is worried about. It just doesn't seem like a town mentality to be super worried about what people think about his hammering vote on a scum. IllegallySober posted:As lovely as I think AA's fit was, Nexus is both a plausible claim in this game and a really unlikely role to lie about having because I'd think a counterclaim would be highly likely. This was the general attitude he had toward AA. There are very few times if any he talked about AA's play and instead focused on the validity of his claim, even past the point that people cared. He looked at the wiki that said Nexus is town and stuck with that. Its hard when scum have to case someone's gameplay, so if they can hide behind analyzing claims or mechanics, thats so much easier for them. IllegallySober posted:I think Li Dawny's wound up being scum in like the last two or three games I've seen/read, but her play seemed different in those than in this one. You might have a better read than I, though. I'd be okay supporting this if we decide to go that direction. IllegallySober posted:The point I was making was that her lack of content, according to tpink, reads scummy. I'm fine with that opinion if he knows her better than I. Here IS is putting the burden of a case on someone else. While I will admit that sometimes I trust other people's opinion more than mine when it comes to meta, that is when I literally never played with that person as that particular alignment. It seems weird that someone has a different opinion as him about a scum meta when IS admits that he had played with LD when LD was scum and he goes with that person instead of his opinion. Seems like an easy way for scum to lynch someone without taking the blame. IS did not vote LD, which couple with the above paragraph, suggests that IS was waiting for someone else to start the vote train on LD so IS could have a guilt free lynch that he could pin on someone else. IllegallySober posted:Actually, if we're being technical, I'm pretty sure the hammering vote was mine, and we already went over my logic for that. This was in response to my musings (GET IT?!??!?!) over AsiinaRarity's push of Jimson's lynch. Just shows the paranoia of IS. I never questioned his logic nor did I care. But he assumed I cared because he wants to make sure there is nothing that I could perceive as scummy, which comes from a scum mindset because only they would assume that everything they do could be considered scummy. The AW vote is an easy, safe, lurker vote TL;DR: IS is scum because he is super self-conscious. ##vote IS
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2016 18:26
|
|
|
ive barely paid attention to IS this game but on a reread they're pinging all over my scumdar the self awareness and excuses, the contentless posting disguised as reads, the hedging, it's bad ##vote IS have you ever been scum before sober?
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2016 18:35
|
|
|
Absurd Revolver posted:ive barely paid attention to IS this game but on a reread they're pinging all over my scumdar I believe he said in one of his posts "never having been scum before" which could be read as a slip but slips are dumb and I don't pay attention to it
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2016 18:51
|
|
|
YPM did you see TPink during your watch night 1?
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2016 18:53
|
|
|
inb4 tpink comes in with a weird side comment without offering any opinions
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2016 18:53
|
|
|
JakeP posted:YPM did you see TPink during your watch night 1? I saw everyone but AA visit whoever I watched.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2016 18:53
|
|
|
Like if you saw literally everyone but AA that is weird, especially considering that Tpinks claim wouldn't have him visit anyone
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2016 18:54
|
|
|
It did not list who visited, only that it excluded AA, and did not list who I watched.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2016 18:54
|
|
|
JakeP posted:Like if you saw literally everyone but AA that is weird, especially considering that Tpinks claim wouldn't have him visit anyone It did not list tpinks specifically, just everyone but AA. I assume I was redirected to tpink just like everyone
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2016 18:55
|
|
|
Your Personal Muse posted:It did not list who visited, only that it excluded AA, and did not list who I watched. If Tpink was the lightning rod it doesn't make sense that Tpink would have visited himself since he would have not had a visiting role, it would mean AA forced everyone to visit him, or someone else forced everyone to visit AA
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2016 18:55
|
|
|
JakeP posted:If Tpink was the lightning rod it doesn't make sense that Tpink would have visited himself since he would have not had a visiting role, it would mean AA forced everyone to visit him, or someone else forced everyone to visit AA But it didn't list everyone individually. Like it didn't say "JakeP, tpink, Kash, etc visited him". I am trying to not quote exactly but it was a list that excluded rather than included
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2016 18:57
|
|
|
And dong brought up good points about AAs claim. AAs claim if true is just a super weak version of everyone elses role. Like a vanilla redirector could just redirect themself to another player every night, a 1 shot nexus doesn't really make sense
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2016 18:57
|
|
|
Your Personal Muse posted:But it didn't list everyone individually. Like it didn't say "JakeP, tpink, Kash, etc visited him". I am trying to not quote exactly but it was a list that excluded rather than included doesn't make any difference
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2016 18:58
|
|
|
JakeP posted:doesn't make any difference It does, because it doesn't mean I saw tpink visit himself.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2016 18:59
|
|
|
I think Jake is onto something here.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2016 18:59
|
|
|
Your Personal Muse posted:It does, because it doesn't mean I saw tpink visit himself. Why wasn't tpink excluded from your list?
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2016 19:00
|
|
|
Kashuno posted:Why wasn't tpink excluded from your list? Probably because CPig wanted to keep it vague who I was watching because it was a redirect. If what AA is saying is true, then the person I watched also visited themselves if we are going by Jake's logic
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2016 19:01
|
|
|
Your Personal Muse posted:It does, because it doesn't mean I saw tpink visit himself. If tpink is a lightning rod he wouldnt have visited anyone
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2016 19:01
|
|
|
including himself
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2016 19:01
|
|
|
Like if the lightning rod was forced to visit himself so would AA
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2016 19:02
|
|
|
JakeP posted:If tpink is a lightning rod he wouldnt have visited anyone
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2016 19:02
|
|
|
Your Personal Muse posted:Right and the way the PM was written it leads me to believe that I was redirected to tpink and saw everyone but AA visit him Why would Tpink visit himself but AA wouldnt?
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2016 19:03
|
|
|
Like if a watcher targets a player and no one targets that player, you don't get that player as your result, you would get "no one visited that player"
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2016 19:03
|
|
|
JakeP posted:Why would Tpink visit himself but AA wouldnt? I'm saying that there was no one specifically named except AA. Like there wasn't an individual list of people who visited this person, it was a sentence that said everyone but AA visited him
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2016 19:03
|
|
|
JakeP posted:Like if a watcher targets a player and no one targets that player, you don't get that player as your result, you would get "no one visited that player" Right and in this case the result was everyone but AA
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2016 19:04
|
|
|
Your Personal Muse posted:I'm saying that there was no one specifically named except AA. Like there wasn't an individual list of people who visited this person, it was a sentence that said everyone but AA visited him How are you not getting this?
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2016 19:04
|
|
|
JakeP posted:How are you not getting this? How are you not?
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2016 19:04
|
|
|
Your Personal Muse posted:Right and in this case the result was everyone but AA That includes tpink, why would tpink visit himself if he doesnt have a targetting night action, yet AA did not?
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2016 19:04
|
|
|
JakeP posted:That includes tpink, why would tpink visit himself if he doesnt have a targetting night action, yet AA did not? I assumed it was implied that the person I watched did not visit themselves
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2016 19:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 24, 2024 03:10 |
|
|
Your Personal Muse posted:I assumed it was implied that the person I watched did not visit themselves It wasn't. Cpig sent you a list of who didn't visit them and Tpink wasn't on it
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2016 19:05
|
|