|
CHIZURU IS MY GODDESS AND I LAY MYSELF AT HER ALTAR OF SIMPING. By that I mean I am coming out of mafia retirement to play this game. Yes, all it took was someone to make a game about a very trashy anime. Don't judge me.
|
#
¿
Oct 4, 2020 13:03
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 25, 2024 18:44 |
|
|
Amnistar posted:but trash anime wasn't enough to read the op, or the two reminder posts from OP... Nobody reads the OP. But yes, I am happy to send badly written slash fiction to Taste.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 4, 2020 14:23
|
|
|
|
|
#
¿
Oct 12, 2020 20:57
|
|
|
##vote amnistar
|
|
#
¿
Oct 12, 2020 23:50
|
|
|
Ngl I don't know how to stop the head flicker on that one.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 12, 2020 23:54
|
|
|
Gumball Gumption posted:oh I like the gifs! 
|
|
#
¿
Oct 13, 2020 00:19
|
|
|
I will now reply to all votes and make all arguments purely in gif form.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 13, 2020 00:20
|
|
|
Bif was our first date getting drunk with goons? I feel like it was. Well that or Shine V. Do you think just retelling the story of Shine V is a good first date for the prize?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 13, 2020 00:55
|
|
|
Natural 20 posted:Bif was our first date getting drunk with goons? Oh who am I kidding we all know I'm just going to submit the plot to Bible Black.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 13, 2020 00:55
|
|
|
Grandicap posted:Oooh, a whole lotta names I don't recognize. Who's new, and who do I just not know? Long ago there was a great and fearful mafia player. After wandering the scum plains for many years and foiling both town and mafia alike he wandered into the wastelands never to be seen again. Until now. Drawn by the lure of trashy anime he has arisen once again and foolish be those mortals who think that they may best him, for they shall know the power that is. Natural 20.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 13, 2020 00:58
|
|
|
Gumball Gumption posted:Burma Shave I had to look this up. drat Yanks.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 13, 2020 01:29
|
|
|
Scientastic posted:So who here actually likes anime? Who here doesn't like anime? 
|
|
#
¿
Oct 13, 2020 10:36
|
|
|
Yes tell me more about how the man who has spent the entire day posting custom gifs specifically for this anime is embarrassed about liking anime.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 13, 2020 11:50
|
|
|
I will admit I have also joined the Rent-a-Girlfriend discord and am stealing emotes from there as well now.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 13, 2020 11:56
|
|
|
Scientastic posted:My goodness, it's almost like accusing someone of being cagey and not answering the question when he had a loving anime image in his post was not entirely serious. OH SO YOU ADMIT TO LYING IN YOUR POSTS? ##vote Scientastic See you Day 2. 
|
|
#
¿
Oct 13, 2020 12:04
|
|
|
SolusLunes posted:it's yiff I WILL TURN THIS THREAD AROUND I SWEAR TO GOD. 
|
|
#
¿
Oct 13, 2020 17:17
|
|
|
Okay I'm going to sleep and when I wake up I'm declaring joke phase over and going all crazy on reads.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 14, 2020 00:57
|
|
|
 JOKE PHASE IS OVER LET'S GET DOWN TO BUSINESS.The first major exchange as I see it starts with this Bif post. Bifauxnen posted:Anyway, to get serious now for a minute, Bif basically contests that Sci's shade on me wasn't necessarily a joke and was reframed subsequently and that Sci's vote on Bif was also potentially a serious vote reframed to seem facetious following subsequent posting. Broadly she concludes that this makes Sci tread a line between being serious and comedic that he can jump either side of whenever is convenient. All of this though is based on an assumption that Sci's two comments here were actually reframed, or set up in a way to be reframed. For the comment on me, I'm certain it was a joke, took it as a joke and don't think there's room for interpretation that it was anything but a joke. For the second, again, this seems like an easy jokephase vote to dump out, but the language around it is significantly harsher than I'd expect from that. Given that I can see a case for the vote and second post to be in line with Bif's thoughts, but not the first. My read overall is probably null. I don't think Bif's case is unsubstantiated but I also don't think it's consistent enough to make me believe that it might be true.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 14, 2020 13:33
|
|
|
 The second major exchange starts here with Sandnavyguy explaining his change in posting style. (That I can't verify on a meta level, I've never played with him and I don't have my gigantic spreadsheets any more)sandnavyguy posted:I’m here, just trying a more subdued approach. Blabbing awayhas gotten me lunched D1 or D2 my last couple town games.i plan on engaging more with reads in the morning. After a little more pressure from Sci: sandnavyguy posted:In Fox News yes, but I’m talking more along the lines of jury duty and the one game I was scumin but for all intents and purposes was lunched due to talking too much by D2. Sci responds pretty quickly: Scientastic posted:This is very concerning: you are changing your play to benefit your scum game, not just to benefit the town. Scientastic posted:This would be less bad if you had announced this change at the start of the game, but only bringing it up when challenged is scummy This is honestly absolutely bizarre to me. It is absolutely a town play to try to avoid being lunched early because as town you don't want to eat the lunch since it's an active disadvantage for your team. It's offset by lower contentposting for sure, but it's also just a very natural new player reaction to eating early lunches over multiple games, be it scum or town. And given that SNG appears to have played for just over 4 months, I'd still consider him to be relatively new. What really gets me is Sci's assertion that SNG should have stated at the beginning of the game "Hey guys, I'm going to be low content posting early because I don't want to get lunched." I cannot imagine a weirder way to open the game but more to the point, SNG is saying this on Day 1 as is. It's not as if this has been obfuscated in any real way. I can't comment further on the actual meta read as I've noted above, but SNG appears to just be a relatively new player reacting naturally to certain games going a certain way and Sci is making this natural behaviour seem insane. I lean towards scum Sci from this exchange. I'm null on SNG, this is common behaviour from scum or town. Oh also ##unvote Sci's at like 5/7 and I'm not ready to let the day end to some driveby shitposting.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 14, 2020 13:48
|
|
|
Third exchangeBiaga posted:Bif and sci are jumping at shadows pretty hard. It is like they are coordinating their actions to spread dissent and acuse others for their own benefit. This is really interesting as a take. You'll note from my read on the first exchange that I thought it came out as a null which is genuinely the perfect sort of exchange for this kind of behaviour. And Bif, at least, is perfectly capable of doing something like this if she wants to. I don't think however, that you can make such a strong assertion without actually backing it with a more detailed case, especially so early. So I think that Sci and others are right to pressure Biaga on this, if not because I think the take is outlandish but because it's not sufficiently justified to be made alone. So after pressure what's Biaga's response. Biaga posted:The last few posts between them seem driven by the same goal of pinning focus and votes on a single person. Their posts and opinions are empty and shallow in focus and drive and are less about finding value and more driven by removing someone cause "lunch d1!!!". The fact that they are jumping on my so quickly without defending themselves doesn't help justifying their actions.  This is where I think things go wrong for Biaga here. If you look back at the exchange from Bif and Sci earlier, they don't pivot to anyone subsequently. Bif disappears to work and Sci goes on to talk about other posting. So the claim that the initial exchange was done to allow them to pivot onto someone else doesn't stand.This reads to me as basically a defensive response immediately following pressure. Specifically it's the sort of response you get when someone has a hunch, is challenged on it and then struggles to justify the hunch subsequently. So the question for me is whether that comes out as scum or town. Thinking about it, it's a very, very strong assertion to make as a scum player onto town so early. And I can imagine scumchat, if consulted would tell you not to do it. So either, an inexperienced scum player didn't consult scum chat and posted something really difficult, or a town player got a hunch and then struggled to find evidence for the hunch under pressure. At the moment, I feel like Biaga's argumentation makes a better case for town than scum. It's messy, which is actually good because I don't think it's being curated in any way and it's still occurring which I think is indicative of town when scum would have told you to shut up by now. The rate with which votes have accumulated on Biaga doesn't concern me and is consistent with such a wild take coming out and then being so poorly justified subsequently. If anything I think the most interesting part of the entire thing is that SNG and Sci have both got votes on Biaga now after their exchange moments earlier suggesting the other was scum. I think if there is scum to be found it's one of them leaping away from that exchange to an easier area to pressure.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 14, 2020 14:08
|
|
|
Grandicap posted:Hmmmm, I think Nat 20 is scum.  This is actually very reasonable given the timing and content of my case.All I can say is that I always intended to break down the D1 interactions like this and my lunch time is at 1:00pm UK. Additionally I would note that i broke down all the major interactions I saw, with reasoned town/scum leanings, instead of purely deflecting off Biaga. So either I'm tremendously thorough scum (which in fairness, were I scum, I would be) or I'm on the up and up as town. Scientastic posted:I don't agree with this sentiment (pretty obviously) because it ignores the fact that suspicion is a spectrum, not a black or white thing. I still think SNG is scummy for his behaviour, but I think Biaga is scummier. Hence moving my vote. Suspicion is a spectrum, but votes aren't and votes are obvious and visible. Ignoring that both of your votes went to the same person immediately after pressuring each other would be neglectful. If you don't think that there's something worth noting when you seemingly agree with someone you just found scummy moments ago then you're either being ignorant or lying. Surely at least it should make you consider whether you're being played in some way.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 14, 2020 15:35
|
|
|
 Is this a lazy lunch target? I don't actually know either way so let's have a look at the votes shall we? The votes currently on Sci are Toal/Retro/Bif/Biaga/Solus Toalpaz posted:Sorry you rolled scum. Toal's vote is obviously a joke vote, so off the table for discussion. It's not relevant other than that Toal hasn't removed it yet which could mean anything. Retro's vote is a joke that is now real as of: Retro Futurist posted:Ok mine was just a joke vote but now I'm fine keeping it there This is calling out a "Woe is me" style statement from Sci. It's a knee jerk but again, it's not what i would describe as lazy. There's a clear reason that the vote is where it is, backed up deeper by further statements from RF, which Sci actually agrees to. Bifauxnen posted:Anyway, to get serious now for a minute, Bif's case is clearly substantiated. Whilst I've mentioned before that I don't necessarily buy it, it's mad to say that the vote is lazy. Biaga posted:What about you? What is your defence? You have been a self appointed hawk of this game without justifying or legitimising your own posts. I post a single statement saying that I believe your actions are scummy - on day 1 - and you turn around and push it as the poster child example of scummy behaviour. Given that your entire accusation against sng is based of pervious experience in other games, I think you are just defaulting to kill because you have no experience with me. You assume the worat, you know nothing of my play style so you see it as the most glading threat. I get your vote, but my guess is your usual day 1 kills rarely lead to successful scum kills. Biaga posted:The last few posts between them seem driven by the same goal of pinbing focus and votes on a single person. Their posts and opinions are empty and hallow in focus and drive and are less about finding value and more driven by removing someone cuse "lunch d1!!!". The fact that they are jumping on my so quickly without defending themselves doesn't help justifying their actions. Biaga's case, as mentioned before, largely doesn't really make sense. I've mentioned before that this reads to me as an inexperienced town player rather than a scum player of any experience level. It reeks of someone going very very defensive because they've managed to bind themself by accident because of a stray thought. SolusLunes posted:While I don't think his case is right, I also don't think it's coming from a scummy place. You, however, have tossed shade on Nat from dumb poo poo in jokephase which read serious to me, and your weird-rear end suspicion of SNG just because he knowingly changed his playstyle makes me think that none of your casing is coming from a town mindset. You're trying to find some case to latch onto that sounds reasonable and you finally found one that isn't terrible, but you're also unwilling to add to it in any way. Solus' case is again, reasonable and there's at least evidence to back up the claims that are being made here as well. Two things strike me from this analysis: 1. The reasons for votes on sci are very disparate. A lot of people have votes for lots of different reasons stemming from different sets of posts. This is, to me indicative of one of two things. Either Sci's aggressive posting style rubbing people the wrong way and resulting in individual votes, which is null town or scum. Or that different people are seeing different sets of behaviour that they believe to be scummy at which point, unless the entire scum team is on this vote, it seems like there's a decent reason to believe that there might be some issue with the way Sci is posting. So yeah, knee jerk or genuinely scummy here. 2. The players claiming that we're sleepwalking into this vote are wrong. Q_res posted:Yeah, this push just feels low effort, I don't like it. Grandicap posted:P Sure Sci is town. I think this is a bad and boring execution. People are grabbing onto it because Sci is being aggressive early, but without the cache of a merk to back it up. Gumball Gumption posted:It's both odd that the votes are so low effort and that Sci is acting like it's real momentum. But Sci is like 4th down on my suspicion list right now so I'm still happy with my vote. This is disingenuous to me. All the votes apart Toal and at a stretch RF have reasons behind them that are, if not reasonable, then at least show some effort. And Bif and Solus at the very least show good effort for D1. I'm thinking about how to parse that thought right now. I think it means that the Sci lunch is correct and that if it is then that there's at least one scum member somewhere here. If the lunch is wrong then I still feel good about a scum member being among these three.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 14, 2020 20:18
|
|
|
Scientastic posted:OK, yeah, Nat is scum. Setting up a chain execution for when I flip town. It's interesting that you're completely certain of this and yet you don't vote me. I'm aware that you're not here.  For the record, saying "I think x are scum given this either way on the flip" isn't setting up a chain execution, it's asserting that I think my belief is flip agnostic. But even if it was, the objection to suggesting chains of people is just idiotic. It's a tactic, the same as basically everything else in the game that can be used by town or scum to varying degrees of efficacy. Bifauxnen posted:I keep coming back to that first post that set things off: "coordinating our actions to spread dissent" is such a wild thing to come up with outta nowhere. There was no one around to even dissent with. I edge newbie town because Biaga didn't abruptly stop speaking and just kept digging a hole.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 14, 2020 23:35
|
|
|
Well it's getting close to my bedtime (ish). Looking at the two vote leaders, I'm okay with either. I'm going to lean towards keeping the newbie alive. Firstly because that's a nice thing to do for a newer player. Secondly because whilst i think the contradictions that Bif has pointed out are legit, I already saw them and felt they were a newbie fuckup whereas even though I think the case on Sci is more tenuous, there are more angles to it from more different people and I think Sci's flip will reveal more about the game owing to the level of defense and engagement with that set of cases.  ##vote Scientastic
|
|
#
¿
Oct 15, 2020 00:24
|
|
|
Bifauxnen posted:Wow thank you scum, I can never read RF and prolly woulda just led a bad lunch on him eventually, glad that's out of the way  Smells like vengeance. Vengeance for Jeabus.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 17, 2020 14:15
|
|
|
Okay first part of a new day recap, let's look at RF's posting:Retro Futurist posted:Wow that isn't what I said at all, I'm pretty sure that's illegal  So from RF's statements, this is the only one that I can see that would imply cop of any sort and it's from joke phase. Beyond that RF's only statement of importance was their vote on Sci and I discussed that to death yesterday as being relatively low effort but still reasonable. So the only thing I'd suspect is a potential Sci sus still from the NK, but that's pretty limited.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 17, 2020 22:18
|
|
|
Okay let's break down the other part of the flip / day end from yesterday: Biaga as town. Firstly, I called it. This is because I am a genius.  Thoughts on Sci So the first note is from what I said yesterday. Both Sandnavy and Sci vote Biaga after being certain that the other is scum and neither considers this odd. Sci notably defends this stance by saying: Scientastic posted:I don't agree with this sentiment (pretty obviously) because it ignores the fact that suspicion is a spectrum, not a black or white thing. I still think SNG is scummy for his behaviour, but I think Biaga is scummier. Hence moving my vote. So this was something I said we should note on Day 1: Natural 20 posted:Suspicion is a spectrum, but votes aren't and votes are obvious and visible. Ignoring that both of your votes went to the same person immediately after pressuring each other would be neglectful. At the time I said this, but what I was getting at was that if you think a scummy person is voting the same way as you, surely you should at least consider that you might be being played? Sci never does that. In fact he doubles down later: Scientastic posted:I like Grandicap as player anyway, but so far his posts are good, I agree with his points on Nat20. With a scum team that is consistent but also definitely wrong as we know at this point. Given that I know that I'm town, going so hard after me and Biaga is an obviously bad look from a town player overall. The Grandicap Link This is the most committed statement from Grandicap as of D1. Grandicap posted:Hmmmm, I think Nat 20 is scum. We know in retrospect that this is very wrong. I come and correctly dissect D1 interactions and correctly defend a town player as a result. At the time I had to accept that the timing of the case might feel off, but knowing what we do now, I feel justified in saying that that's genuinely not the case. Grandicap posted:P Sure Sci is town. I think this is a bad and boring execution. People are grabbing onto it because Sci is being aggressive early, but without the cache of a merk to back it up. And again, we have something I looked at yesterday, a claim that the votes on Sci were lazy, when that was only really true of one. I didn't like that post then, and I don't like it now. I don't think there's much to add from interactions today so far, there's some back and forth about a mason also being a cop which is potentially true, but certainly not enough that I'd base anything on it. Mostly I think these two are pretty strongly tied at this point, from the vehemence of Grand's defense of Sci. My thoughts are that if Sci is scum, then I think Grandi is also scum, trying to pivot the vote from scum to town. I think if Sci is town then Grandi is also likely town because such a defense doesn't make sense as a scum player trying to move votes from one town to another. That's all for now I think. As an aside I think Bif's case on GG is interesting but I think it's probably less compelling than an individual case on either Grand or Sci.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 18, 2020 23:00
|
|
I AM GOING TO ASSUME THREE SCUM, BECAUSE THIS IS A TWELVE PLAYER GAME: THIS IS NOT INDICATIVE OF INSIDE KNOWLEDGE, SO DON'T EVEN BRING IT UP
|
Alright work is over, I'm back. I think any vote on Solus is wrong. Toalpaz posted:i love solus lunes but I am getting some scum pings on my scum dar. I want to say it's the whole doing the scum claim thing but not calling attention to it too much. This is all of Toal's case which is, "I gutfeel him to be scum" with absolutely no evidence behind it beyond a Solus meta that's never even described. Scientastic posted:##Vote Solus This one is a lot better from Sci but suffers from the same problem that the Biaga case yesterday suffered from, which is to say that if Solus made an error then the case is a nothing. Scientastic posted:You know what, I’m back to Solus now, whiteknighting GG when there’s so little pressure on him just pushing him over the edge in the scumminess score for me But this is a really really bad vote as well. Unless you've been playing the oldschool Bif game of monitoring online status on the forums or on discord to figure out if people are active then someone coming back to post when called out is likely a coincidence. And Solus is absolutely right to point out that it's a catch 22 where the player can either choose to not respond for a bunch of time and get called out for lurking more or start posting and get called out for immediately responding to lurker questions. The literal same thing happened yesterday with Grandi's case on me for showing up to defend Biaga when it just so happened to be lunchtime where I was. If you have an actual meta case where GG has done this before then there's something but I'm pretty sure we don't have anything like that. I had this as D1 and I don't think this is changing as D2. I think Sci is scum. The reason is that I think most of the major cases Sci has latched onto that are substantiated sit on issues that are resolved easily by people either being new at the game or making a simple mistake. It was true of Biaga, it's true of his case on GG based around timing and it's also true of the important part of the case on Solus. Leaping at people for reasonable mistakes or misstatements is something an aggressive town does but it's also an incredibly good move as proactive scum. Given that with the exception of Gumball, these to me are focused on definite or relatively strong town players (based on D1 flips and D1 votes) I feel like that this is scummy. But the other side is that I think Sci is deeply linked to other players in this game at this point. I think he's linked to Grandi owing to the D1 defense, I think that he's also linked to SNG owing to their double pivot to Biaga. So yeah ##vote Scientastic.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 19, 2020 21:16
|
|
|
Bifauxnen posted:Why would anyone risk getting themselves into a contradiction over meaningless flavor? This is a slice of life anime where the most evil person in the cast (Mami) is just a bitter ex doing teen drama stuff who could still conceivably just be a regular townie  It was actually pretty important imo. The presence of the grandma isn't important so much as which grandma he was. Second question for you Bifu, how do you feel about Gumball being on the same vote as you now?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 19, 2020 21:19
|
|
|
Scientastic posted:That's exactly what I was doing, there were posts by you and GG elsewhere in SA while you were both not posting in the game. That's why I called it out, I'm not going to call someone out for having a life. Okay so how do you make a mistake in this game then? Apparently you can't just immediately own up and apologise because that's a scum move. So the answer is to just deny you ever made one? Like I honest to god missed the post where you claimed that you were stalking us in the thread. Scientastic posted:Hell, I'd vote Nat20 and Gumball Gumption for obviously ignoring the thread despite being online and posting on SA. At least other lurkers have plausible deniability. If I'd seen this on a scan through I might have responded immediately which would have nailed me in the catch 22 from you.  Super creepy by the way. There's a reason we stopped doing this.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 19, 2020 22:08
|
|
|
Toalpaz posted:This post in particular is why Nat20 is on my lunch leaning category, just because a soft call out on me plus a strong case on sci, (IN MY MIND NOT LITERALLY!) sets up Nat20 for an easy chain lunch tomorrow if Sci is town. If this Sci lunch goes through Nat would just point to his D2 read of me saying I'm probably scum on the solus lunch, and could get away with it probably. When really it would just be call out for being a gut feel.  Setting up links between players isn't bad. That's like the entire point we flip people and get information. If I do it preemptively it's because I'm noticing patterns now and want them recorded. The link between you and Sci is tenuous at best in that you both have a case on Solus that I don't buy. If Solus were to flip town it's something I'd look at deeply but otherwise you're reading too deeply into my motivations there.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 19, 2020 22:48
|
|
|
SolusLunes posted:yeah you're even backing off your vote on Sci right here and throwing shade on Nat at the same time. This is a misreading I think. Toal's saying that the case that I put on Sci is correct but they're also potentially leaning scum on me because they think I'm setting up a chain lunch. That would explain both a scum read on Sci and a potential scum read on me, although it doesn't explain why they would buy my case on Sci if they think it leads to me being scum. Hrm.  I'm going to have a think about that. I don't think Toal is a today vote though. I'm not happy with Gumball going out if Sci's vote is there. I could live with a SNG vote but I also think that's wrong. My vote stays where it is for the moment. I should have another half hour or so to look through things.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 20, 2020 00:54
|
|
|
Bifauxnen posted:You've brought this up several times now, for yourself now, but to others before. Where your vote agrees with someone you think is scum, so won't you reconsider?  It's something I've been thinking about for a while. We ignore the consistency of people's vote patterns in this game. If someone finds two people scummy and votes in tandem with a person that they find scummy to take someone out then that should be a tell. There's no meaningful difference between that and what we've just looked at Toal for, which is saying I'm scummy whilst also agreeing with my argumentation around Sci. I think Solus rightfully engaged Toal to try to get the logic of that and similarly I think that engaging people with the logic of why they're voting the same way as someone they think might be scum is important. In the case here, my top scum pick is on a vote. I don't think I'm wrong so why on earth am I going to vote a person out when I think that they're almost certainly town as a result of the push?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 20, 2020 01:47
|
|
|
Bifauxnen posted:Hmmmmm nah It depends on how strongly you rate your choices. I can see the case on Gumball but I think the early votes were because of an unfair catch 22 created by Sci as I've noted before so I'm very cool on that case overall. Whereas I'm confident in my Sci as scum call. If my top picks were both outrageously scummy and in conflict then I'd consider it much of a muchness as to who went out. But I'd still expect and justify questioning on it. In this case, my top scum pick is voting for someone I'm ambivalent on. The key to all of this is you should poke at this stuff when it happens. (I can't edit in a Chizuru face on mobile)
|
|
#
¿
Oct 20, 2020 02:22
|
|
|
Hey town. You can powerup yourself by ##using on yourself in your confessional channel. If you're town I would *strongly* suggest doing that because it's the only way you're guaranteed to give a town player a powerup.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 21, 2020 23:25
|
|
|
If you're scum then I'd strongly recommend giving me all your powerups so I can crush you.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 21, 2020 23:26
|
|
|
I'm going to ask for a very strange set of information. I need to know from everyone still alive if you visited anyone last night. I don't care what you did and I don't care who you visited. I just care if you visited someone. I realise that this is essentially a request to out all active town power roles but we've all just received a trinket that can be used to grant new roles, so I don't think the information bridge is as bad as a full claim. Additionally we're at Lylo so if ever there was a time, this is it. (There are 3 scum if there are 4 we would have lost already. If we lunch incorrectly we lose, if we no vote we potentially survive another day)
|
|
#
¿
Oct 22, 2020 00:27
|
|
|
Jesus christ don't vote yet you idiot.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 22, 2020 02:24
|
|
|
loving christ I should be asleep. Unvote. Please please unvote. We can get whoever tomorrow, but we need Sci to wake up.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 22, 2020 02:34
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 25, 2024 18:44 |
|
|
 Prepare yourselves bitches, I'm about to blow this game open. SNG is confirmed town. Sci is almost certainly confirmed town. I am absolutely not touching either of them going forward. My powerup let me ask a single Yes/No question to the mod. The question could not be about a specific player alignment or role, so no "Is Bifauxnen scum?/Is SNG a cop?" Additionally I couldn't echo cop with it either, so no "Is there a scum in the grouping of Sci/SNG/Bif?" When I asked about visits last night, town would have had no incentive to lie about it. If they were being tracked, their actions could be confirmed etc. Scum obviously have an incentive to lie because they don't want to be tracked to the kill. The only person who admitted to moving anywhere after that was SNG saying that he copped Sci. So I asked the question "Did town players visit anyone last night?" And the answer was Yes. Given that SNG is the only player to admit moving and town had no incentive to lie about moving, this means that necessarily SNG is town. If that's the case I believe his cop claim is also town and that means that Sci is also town.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 22, 2020 13:03
|
|