|
Asiina posted:So I'm scum for making a case? No, I think you're scum from your cumulative play this game, but don't fret mon ami, I'll elaborate.
|
#
¿
Nov 21, 2016 18:33
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 25, 2024 13:41 |
|
|
Truth Quark posted:Did anyone visit Asiina? Sorry, I answered this in the original post where I claimed my actions but it wasn't clear. I failed both nights so far. I was neither able to get a read on Asiina or Infinitum. So either I've been blocked both nights or they have a mechanism in their role that prevents being watched. ---- Rebuttal to Asiina A. First, he jumps onto ANarc's bad case based on future meta: I said that ANarc may have a point. The intention of my agreement had no reference to future meta, but rather my own existing meta read on how you play as scum from the few games I've been in with you, where you were scum, and yes I did defend the stance while calling it a lovely meta read, because that's what meta reads are. They are lovely and based less on the actual play and more on the character of the individual based on your experience with them, but it's not entirely invalidated as one can infer patterns in play styles. So yes, you are playing, in my opinion, like you play as scum. B. He claims that the chores lynch was dumb and bad because "lol jokephase" but never actually pushes anyone else strongly enough. In fact his only other vote of the entire game was this one he doesn't really follow up on. / So Jedit does respond to AA's accusation and AA's response is to never bring up Jedit ever again and instead fully pivot into "I told you so" on the chores vote: This is false, because I do point out the reason why I jumped onto Jedit. I believed his surprise and reaction to how events were unfolding were very disingenuous, and then I simply forgot to follow up on his response as I've been tending to other real life obligations. Additionally, because I didn't try to further push a case on someone I was suspicious of, that's a scumtell? No, and I also stated why I didn't want to vote chores, and elaborated as to why I didn't on the next day, but you continually reduce my day 1 reluctance to voting him and my response to it on d2 as "lol jokephase" and "I told you so", as far as I'm concerned, you're intentionally skewing my representation of a defense to those views. C. JimmyHat I have stood by the idea that Double Voter is a scumrole and that he was likely god father. I never swayed from that, and didn't vote during d2 because the deadline happened in the middle of my workday. Say what you will about my presence and voting on D2, but I argued in earnest with infinitum, defended my stance on the chores vote and reaffirmed that I would vote jimmyhat. D. Fabricated Narrative I'm not pushing a fabricated narrative, I was expressing a theory because you two were the loudest to defend the chores vote as good, which seems like the right thing to do as scum trying to control the vote. So you can continue labeling it as such, but it's no different than you presenting your case against me. My thoughts and reads are genuine, and even if they are not as fully formed as you'd like, they are legitimate. I restate, I am a Watcher. I have failed to watch my targets, Asiina and Infinitum, both nights.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 21, 2016 19:16
|
|
|
King Burgundy posted:Wait. You think Asiina is playing her scum meta right now? Like currently? Can you explain to the rest of the class what her scum meta is, then? Judging by your incredulous reaction, I'd wager you don't believe her play to be scum meta. However, I believe that she starts off with disingenuous posts, and votes like she made at the start of the game with chores, and then once the game has progressed switches to attack relentlessly the people who've called her out, while trying to make their stances and opinions appear entirely invalid. At least infinitum could respond to my evaluation where Asiina demonstrates little in the way of even considering my stance... because I believe she is scum, and now more than ever wants to lynch a claimed watcher. I mean if I make it through the night provided I'm not lynched today, I'd be surprised.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 21, 2016 19:27
|
|
|
King Burgundy posted:Yeah, I hesitate to make meta reads on her since I know she went out of her way to establish a new meta at some point, and I'm not sure where she is at currently. But the meta AN was standing behind was the old meta I'm familiar with. And that version of her would never make effort cases like the one she made on you. Then we will just have to agree to disagree. I'm getting ready to go to the doctor and won't be around for most of the rest of this IRL day.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 21, 2016 19:35
|
|
|
Asiina posted:So your first point is that you are agreeing with the meta case that ANarc made that it is matching your own meta beliefs, but that meta which she clearly states is that I don't contribute when I'm scum, which is obviously not true here since you just said I was the loudest, so how am I still "So yes, you are playing, in my opinion, like you play as scum." Which is it? The alternative is any person whom I actually found scummy. Just because I didn't provided a structures case for an alternative doesn't make me scum, it means there was not much to go on, but I stated during the day why that vote on chores was bad. Just as you and inf stated why it wasn't. There's no difference in how we presented justifications for our stances except that they are opposed
|
|
#
¿
Nov 21, 2016 19:37
|
|
|
She probably blocked me. My guess is she's a roleblocker.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 21, 2016 19:38
|
|
|
Or She'll claim jailer, because if she claims any investigative abilities and I get lynched, it'll only prove she's lying. So which is it asiina, role blocker or jailer...?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 21, 2016 19:39
|
|
|
Truth Quark posted:Which is one possible explanation for the lack of night kill. Of course there are others, but a double blocked Watcher claim is a very easy claim to make. Well you'll see the truth of it later. I suppose. Would it explain why there was a kill N1?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 21, 2016 19:42
|
|
|
Truth Quark posted:We don't have to mass claim but my results are so closely tied to the people involved in this discussion that I feel like now is a good time for me to bring them forward. Also voting me before you even hear asiinas actions... OK.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 21, 2016 19:42
|
|
|
Truth Quark posted:Regardless of Asiina's claim (I also have been assuming she is a jailer/roleblocker), your posts haven't really seemed to be coming from a town mindset. Well then go ahead and prepare you a plate of crow and be prepared to lynch more reasonably the following day if scum don't roll you in the night, tracker.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 21, 2016 19:45
|
|
|
Asiina posted:I wish you hadn't forced the claim. I was really hoping on not having it be about night actions at least a little longer, which is why I didn't mention my result in my case. Only I was also blocked N1 so if ??? Visited you and I visited you. Three possible things happened. A. You roleblocked me. ??? Visited you. I failed watching you. B. ??? Visiting you caused me to fail in watching you and you blocked anarc as you claim C. ??? Visited you and another ??? Blocked me trying to watch you and you blocked anarc.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 21, 2016 19:54
|
|
|
Which of those three is more plausible?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 21, 2016 19:55
|
|
|
Truth Quark posted:Yeah, but I figured town really needs to lynch scum today so getting as much info as possible was the way to go. I could be wrong but the cats out of the bag now. If town really needs to lynch scum today, well you're about to gently caress up.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 21, 2016 19:55
|
|
|
Truth Quark posted:The simple answer to this is that Asiina might have been jailed. She claims to have gotten a jail of her own off on ANarc, so she clearly was still able to take actions. It couldn't have been a traditional jail then, but a role that solely blocks other people's actions from taking effect. I don't know of a role like that off the top of my head but I guess its possible, along with several other scenarios. Please explain what type of role you're implying exists in this game. I'll wait... Simplest, no that's loving contingent upon an unheard of role.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 21, 2016 19:58
|
|
|
Well I'm out for the foreseeable future. Doctor time. If you turbo me... I'll ready up a big fat I told you so.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 21, 2016 19:59
|
|
|
King Burgundy posted:Yeah, I'm coming back around on this. A gamble. On the off chance they were killed, painting those of us who openly voiced dissent to the chores vote as scum. Also I figured it'd be informative either way. I'd be able to make connections to other players that would likely target them because they were most vocal. However. I learned nothing. Failing both nights.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 21, 2016 20:21
|
|
|
King Burgundy posted:I don't love this reasoning. Like, as a town watcher, I want to catch the person doing the kill so I want to guess who the scum are going to kill. I understand not everyone is like me, but this still doesn't fit for me. This seems more like the reasoning scum would have. They want to identify the other moving town power roles so target someone scummy to see who targets them. It's a gamble either way. I target someone Whose said or done little or target someone who is almost guaranteed to be visited by someone? I know it's not the most Orthodox approach, but who would you have watched?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 21, 2016 20:35
|
|
|
Well my justifications are what they are here. I've said all there is to say.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 21, 2016 20:38
|
|
|
King Burgundy posted:Armed with the new claims/info that has spilled into the thread, have your reads changed at all? I'm willing to admit that if asiina is a jailer and n1 jailed anarc, that there has to be a scum blocker. That's the only possibility where asiina and I are both town.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 21, 2016 20:42
|
|
|
King Burgundy posted:So who are your thoughts on who scum would be then? I'll have to get back to you.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 21, 2016 20:45
|
|
|
King Burgundy posted:So who are your thoughts on who scum would be then? Provided Asiina is town, but not necessarily requiring that she is. c pig and Flying leatherman. Interactions with asiina are minimal but in general their actual effort in this game is worse than TMs IMO. It seems fakes in FLs case or unabashedly detached in pigs. Outside of that tobbs heavy handed flavor casing rubbed me wrong but I didn't speak against it because he was the only person remotely not making GBS threads all over my idea and challenging the status quo at the time. And even with your posts, unless your masonry is confirmed there is no guarantee asiina is town. I'm willing to say she is contingent upon us lynching a scum role blocker.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 21, 2016 20:59
|
|
|
Here's how this day/night will play out though... A. I get lynched. I am confirmed town. A claimed bodyguard, a mason, a jailer, and a tracker are outed... B. I don't get lynched. A claimed watcher, a bodyguard, a mason, a jailer and a tracker are outed... Either way, town is going to be at a loss, because while we've put the pieces together to make our picture clearer, scum just got targets. And are still probably presently lying through their teeth
|
|
#
¿
Nov 21, 2016 21:04
|
|
|
I'd believe the exe to be third party more than scum or town IMO, but I think trying to get to the bottom of our actions is most beneficial right now.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 21, 2016 21:04
|
|
|
King Burgundy posted:We could mass claim. Might be for the best at this point, but how will we determine whose claims are bullshit and whose claims are legit.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 21, 2016 21:05
|
|
|
Asiina posted:Also something that was brought up in the doc but hasn't been said in the thread. There could be 3 or 4 members of the scum team. 15 is a strange number in that 4 scum is slightly too many but 3 is quite a bit too few if we're aiming for a 25% scum ratio. Well to set you all on the straight path provided town can still afford a mislynch, its in our best interest to lynch me and refocus our efforts in light of the knowledge that all my opinions were in fact genuine.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 21, 2016 21:21
|
|
|
##unvote About to leave the doctor's office, but I'd rather vote pig than TM. Both are mostly null, but Pig reinforces that he's making no effort.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 21, 2016 21:38
|
|
|
Asiina, KB, INF, Tobbs are you a handheld item?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 22, 2016 02:08
|
|
|
Anomalous Amalgam posted:Asiina, KB, INF, Tobbs are you a handheld item? Or something used on the body
|
|
#
¿
Nov 22, 2016 02:10
|
|
|
Infinitum posted:I've claimed. Yeah, you fit what I'm getting at
|
|
#
¿
Nov 22, 2016 02:10
|
|
|
Anyone else whose claimed, please flavor claim.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 22, 2016 02:17
|
|
|
Hmm
|
|
#
¿
Nov 22, 2016 02:19
|
|
|
Anarc what's your flavor?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 22, 2016 02:20
|
|
|
Glowku flavor claim
|
|
#
¿
Nov 22, 2016 02:24
|
|
|
So be it. Id still like to know
|
|
#
¿
Nov 22, 2016 02:25
|
|
|
OK that's enough. So asiina, jedit and glowku are the only two so far that aren't controllers or wearable gear. I'm the u force controller
|
|
#
¿
Nov 22, 2016 02:34
|
|
|
King Burgundy posted:I'm also not. Tobbs is also not. R.o.b. is a controller, you have one in your equipment. A direct peripheral.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 22, 2016 02:51
|
|
|
Flying Leatherman posted:I'm an adapter cable. :\
|
|
#
¿
Nov 22, 2016 02:55
|
|
|
God drat
|
|
#
¿
Nov 22, 2016 14:35
|
|
|
Asiina scum role blocker probably.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 22, 2016 14:36
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 25, 2024 13:41 |
|
|
Infinitum posted:
Agreed mostly. I think KB is town
|
|
#
¿
Nov 22, 2016 14:58
|
|
me