In post 636, Cthylla wrote:I'm skipping ahead and talking about this reads list.
In post 490, Green Crayons wrote:Hurrah. I read the thread.
---
clidd: lean scum. I don't like his fixation on me.
After a page or two of plenty others talking about mechanics strategy, he focuses on me, draws us into a 1v1, later declares 1v1 likely to be tvt, and then calls it a day.
This is a lean and not a full scum read because, upon seeing the Word-town flip, his discussion about still supporting the Word elimination before the Word-town flip seems town.
Why is any of the highlighted demonic? He's listed out what happened but explained why it's demonic in any way.
Because he targeted a specific player to have a 1v1, which means he was looking for a fight.
The result of the 1v1 fight that clidd created was HEY EVERYONE WE'RE TOWN 1V1ing!
That looks like scum trying to gin up town cred.
Cthylla: scum. Passing over his initial reason to vote me, on the basis that my perspective of that reasoning might be biased, I think he's more likely scum because his suspicions seem to wait until thread approval. For example, he seemed followed Dannflor's, Walter's, and Norwegian's suspicions to Word; he followed clidd's suspicion for onto and then away from GC; and then hammered Word in a pretty scummy hammer post that rushed the day to a premature end.
This is false. I express my concern at Word early in
180, and before there's any votes on him. When asked, I explain my reasons in
232. Rather than looking at my reasons and talking about whether GC thinks they're fabricated or not, he's reducing his reasoning to a surface-level "he voted Word only once there were other votes on him."
Nothing false about it at all.
Dann
, not you, first articulated Word suspicions in
Post 172. You jumped on 8 posts later in 180. Then you dropped it, even ignoring my
Post 199 asking you to explain it. You only went back to the Word-suspicions well once others started voting Word and voicing suspicions of Word again.
Dannflor: lean town. I think I saw one post early game that struck me as maybe scummish, but I read his Word justification posts are being pretty open. Overall Dann has been a nonentity relative to everyone else, and so only a lean read here.
Isis: lean scum. I think her push on Word was objectively bad. Town can be wrong but the 350s interaction between Isis/Word, ending with her vote in
Post 380 as being "way too dissonant" just looks manufactured. I also think Word had a point that her walls make her look more productive than actually being productive. it's hard to follow threads of conversations when people respond to walls. Also, some of her content towards me looks like make-work. Take
Post 341, where she thinks my explanation "doesn't make sense," she essentially retypes what happened in a way that shows she understands perfectly. This is only a lean because I think suspicions based on posting style get half credit.
He's saying it's hard for people to follow threads of conversation when responding in walls, this is only demonic if he thinks Isis is intentionally doing this with that intended effect, which seems ridiculous. He also has a lot to say about Isis here which feels a little TMI in some places. Could be a partner.
NorwegianboyEE: lean town. I view Norwegian as in the same basket as Dann. They're present, and have made substantive posts, but haven't rocked the boat for me to get strong AI feelings one way or the other. For both Dannflor and Norwegian, gun to my head I'd say town but I'm not comfortable enough to commit to beyond a lean read atm.
"haven't rocked the boat for me to get strong AI feelings one way or the other." should not equate to "lean town"
Interesting that you have nothing to say about Dann, but I put Dann and Norweign in the same boat of them being present and some town vibes, but nothing major.
Also haven't rocked the boat doesn't mean that I don't have lean feelings. lol @ you trying to police how I'm not allowed to have moderate town feelings at players.
As for Isis, I think walls upon walls is a good scum tactic but recognize that posting style isn't a sure-fire scum tell. Notably that's the *only* thing you focus on, handwaving my other problems with her actions as TMI. Mmmhm. Can't help but feel like trying to set the groundwork for pushing GC anew if Isis does in fact flip red.
Hayasaka: town. This is a stupid little thing, but I think town are more likely to openly state their desire to be heavened rather than scum, and so
Post 32 on my reread jumped out to me. Hayasaka raises a perfectly good strategy to think up and follow on page 3, which nets town points. Her Page 14 posts are all open and town to me. And similar to the town pings I get from clidd's twilight commentary about Word, I think her support for the Word lynch before the Word-town flip is more likely to come from town.
I openly stated my desire to heavened too, did he forget that? He's applying his reasoning selectively which is a very bad sign.
1. Where?
2. Just because I missed it doesn't mean I'm selectively reading shit. It means I missed it. This is supplying scum reasoning based on nothing more than you want it to be the reasoning.
3. I've already told Walter that the declaration in and of itself isn't a town-tell. It's all about context. thanks for ignoring that. Convenient.
Green Crayons: me
WaltertheDunce10: null. tbh I forget Walter is in this game until he posts.
--
Town
Hayasaka
Dannflor
Norwegian
Walter
Clidd
Isis
Cthylla
Scum
Burp.
"This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).
