|
a worthy uhh posted:Ernie is also 3P so I am more than willing to bet that he is fakesoftclaiming his way to "confirmation" Wait, what?
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2015 18:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2024 13:31 |
|
|
hahahaha holy poo poo that was a scumslip wasn't it ##unvote ##vote a worthy uhh
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2015 18:22
|
|
|
Pinterest Mom posted:Why do you say Ernie is 3p? His initial bullshit, which I am now remembering "was a joke", which led to your actual 3pclaim. I am confusing myself.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2015 18:22
|
|
|
Pinterest Mom posted:hahahaha holy poo poo that was a scumslip wasn't it Why the hell would knowing alignment make me scum rather than, say, some kind of cop
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2015 18:23
|
|
|
a worthy uhh posted:Why the hell would knowing alignment make me scum rather than, say, some kind of cop You know Quandary's alignment?
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2015 18:24
|
|
|
Pinterest Mom posted:You know Quandary's alignment? No?
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2015 18:24
|
|
|
You say you think Ernie is fakeclaiming a result that will "confirm" him. If you think Ernie is fakeclaiming a result, there's no reason to think the result would confirm him unless you know Quandary is scum.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2015 18:26
|
|
|
The " on "confirm" implies the assumption that Q flips scum Ernie's post is extremely to back out of as 'not a claim' since Ernie has already backed out of one claim Until you called it a softclaim I just read it as being overly confident
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2015 18:29
|
|
|
a worthy uhh posted:The " on "confirm" implies the assumption that Q flips scum No. Your beef with Ernie wasn't "he's throwing poo poo out and hoping he'll be right", it was "he's a 3P softclaiming a result that will 'confirm' him as town". That's not consistent with the confirmation being conditional on Quandary flipping scum - you were trying to say that Ernie should still be viewed as suspicious after Quandary flips scum.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2015 18:32
|
|
|
Pinterest Mom posted:No. Your beef with Ernie wasn't "he's throwing poo poo out and hoping he'll be right", it was "he's a 3P softclaiming a result that will 'confirm' him as town". That's not consistent with the confirmation being conditional on Quandary flipping scum - you were trying to say that Ernie should still be viewed as suspicious after Quandary flips scum. if his post is a softclaim, i think he's lying i also think q is scum A + B =
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2015 18:34
|
|
|
We're not going to get anywhere if we just keep "nuh-huh"ing each other, anyone else wanna weigh in and say if I'm crazy/not?
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2015 18:36
|
|
|
I was voting Quandary BEFORE it was cool but I think his vote on Jedit wasn't a bus. It doesn't read like one to me. When did it become so popular to vote him and why?The Ninth Layer posted:I am pretty neutral on Quandary and would be fine voting him. I get that you're saying you'd support a Quandary execution but it seems opportunistic to vote them when neutral. Wouldn't you want to suspect them in the slightest? Ernie. posted:okay so Amoeba is scum, every time someone threw a curve-ball their reaction stuck out from everyone else's and they seem to be pushing an agenda different from everyone else's I'd need to you to explain this because it seems to me that Amoeba's been pretty level-headed.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2015 18:47
|
|
|
CCKeane posted:1958 chat So Della Porta were the only actual scum team and the Basque's and Cops were 3P? That said wouldn't the Cops be exactly what Pmom and Narc are describing, a pro town 3P. Or mostly because if the Basque's becomes the scum then they don't care what happens I guess. Could the Cops win and town lose then? Because the only way that could be the case here is the 3P's known win condition needs mafia dead, which is what town needs, at that point how much could their 2nd unknown second prevent town from winning?
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2015 18:48
|
|
|
That is pointless if not actively harmful theorycrafting. We shouldn't be expecting that Ecco repeated a setup and making any decisions based on that.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2015 18:57
|
|
|
Pinterest Mom posted:Five posts above your first post today, Ernie is softclaiming a result on Quandary. this is not what i meant to do i just have a strong gut feeling that i know what jedit was trying to do with his post (i.e. sneak a negative opinion about quandary right when we were all discussing him without outright bussing) a worthy uhh posted:Ernie is also 3P so I am more than willing to bet that he is fakesoftclaiming his way to "confirmation" anytime you actually want to start reading the thread would be nice 
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2015 19:26
|
|
|
Pinterest Mom posted:You say you think Ernie is fakeclaiming a result that will "confirm" him. that's not how i read it AWU was just saying that there are reasons not to trust my actions (from his pov)
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2015 19:27
|
|
|
100YrsofAttitude posted:I'd need to you to explain this because it seems to me that Amoeba's been pretty level-headed. right let me go find the pertinent posts
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2015 19:28
|
|
|
Ernie. posted:that's not how i read it okay ##unvote ##vote quandary (with an eye to voting somber after quandary gets dunked)
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2015 19:31
|
|
|
Brief skim of Amoeba's post history -- he does a LOT of pulling teeth to get people to explain their posts/votes and that reads pretty town to me
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2015 19:37
|
|
|
Pinterest Mom posted:Here's Somber's content about Jedit, chronologically I think you are viewing the latter two incidents out of context. I understand your issue with the first post, but the second incident occurs when Somber was making his big push for a Numerrick lynch. Given his other posts, I don't see Somber so much as trying to distract away from jedit as complaining about the shift in focus away from Numerrick. Besides, drawing attention to a vote on a scum buddy seems like a poor way to discourage his lynch. The last comment took place in context of the general frustration near the deadline. He's trolling, not seriously trying to seriously suggest a last minute jump to Anarc. 100YrsofAttitude posted:I was voting Quandary BEFORE it was cool but I think his vote on Jedit wasn't a bus. It doesn't read like one to me. When did it become so popular to vote him and why? I'm getting really weird ~~~vibes~~~ out of this post. It reads like 100Years is simultaneously trying to get town cred, for attacking Quandary before anyone else, while throwing suspicion onto his case and those who support it. 100Yrs, do you still support a Quandary lynch?
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2015 19:38
|
|
|
re-read imgay and his post history is nothing his votes are barely backed up, and if backed up it's just "agree. ##vote person". would dunk imgay today too.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2015 19:41
|
|
|
Pinterest Mom posted:##unvote this is pretty much what we should be thinking right now, come on people. Im on board with this narco / pinmom 3p thing and I believe that they are legit townsided. ##vote quandary then somber
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2015 19:43
|
|
|
a worthy uhh posted:re-read imgay and his post history is nothing replace imgay with Little Mac except a tiny bit of content both of their immediate bandwagon votes today read scummy
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2015 19:44
|
|
|
CapitalistPig posted:this is pretty much what we should be thinking right now, come on people. seriously? pintmom did some soft defense of ernie's 3p claim while claiming town THEN pintmom claims 3p but not anti-town 3p then narco claims confirmed town with merk merk counters that, whoops they're unconfirmed pintmom and narco are 3p-bros, not town masons
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2015 19:45
|
|
|
##unvote If that wasn't an investigation softclaim then I want more time to think.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2015 19:46
|
|
|
a worthy uhh posted:seriously? pintmom did some soft defense of ernie's 3p claim while claiming town I believe them 
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2015 19:46
|
|
|
a worthy uhh posted:re-read imgay and his post history is nothing Please don't kill me, I've just voted from what I got from my readings of posts, I'm bad at explaining things though so I probably don't elaborate enough. I am town though. I have no possible way to prove it to you myself though.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2015 19:47
|
|
|
We should have lynched Quandary yesterday. ##vote: Quandary Don't have anything to add from my earlier case (1), (2). Quandary, please post your reads ASAP.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2015 19:47
|
|
|
Quandary is -3 to lunch, slow down.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2015 19:50
|
|
|
a worthy uhh posted:
Nah Quandary was a nonentity in my reads of yesterday. I'm voting because I trust Ernie mostly.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2015 20:24
|
|
|
Little Mac posted:Nah Quandary was a nonentity in my reads of yesterday. I'm voting because I trust Ernie mostly. Why do you trust Ernie?
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2015 20:27
|
|
|
Just so we're all clear: I am absolutely not claiming or soft-claiming an investigative role this game.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2015 20:27
|
|
|
And why are you voting for someone if you don't have any kind of read on them yourself? Even if you trust Ernie, not verifying his suspicions seems dangerous.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2015 20:30
|
|
|
QuoProQuid posted:Why do you trust Ernie? He's a nice guy
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2015 20:31
|
|
|
Hmm I probably have to read some people over again, didn't see Jedit flipping scum there.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2015 21:04
|
|
|
The Ninth Layer posted:Hmm I probably have to read some people over again, didn't see Jedit flipping scum there. very anti-Somber, pro-numerik (paraphrase) would vote jedit if i have to, don't think he's scum "I am pretty neutral on Quandary and would be fine voting him." I could see TNL and Somber being scumbuddies with two very vocal opposing opinions, because TNL's post history is almost entirely defending numerik against somber 
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2015 21:11
|
|
|
a worthy uhh posted:very anti-Somber, pro-numerik I don't think Jedit named two scum and a ~town~(3p) in his list of three reads.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2015 21:19
|
|
|
Pinterest Mom posted:I don't think Jedit named two scum and a ~town~(3p) in his list of three reads. i forgot about that post, i need to re-read jedit next
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2015 21:23
|
|
|
a worthy uhh posted:very anti-Somber, pro-numerik Busing is a loser's strategy. You can bet that if I was scum I would not be pushing for my scumbuddy as a lynch candidate on Day 1.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2015 21:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2024 13:31 |
|
|
100YrsofAttitude posted:I get that you're saying you'd support a Quandary execution but it seems opportunistic to vote them when neutral. Wouldn't you want to suspect them in the slightest? I was pro-lynch since I figured numerik would probably flip town and I didn't have anything on Quandary that made me feel good about him.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2015 21:49
|
|