kjq: still the scummiest-looking to me. driving force behind the gimli mislim (jackson didn't start heavily scumreading the black/gimli slot until it was a matter of defending/siding with their main townread). we've lost if it's kay though so i hope i'm wrong.
purplemango: very resistant to expressing opinions of his own rather than just responding to others'. very resistant to voting ever. noncommital enough that he could be plausibly paired with anyone and not be obvious at all. and from skimming over previous games it looks like this is all completely NAI for him so i'm right back where i started. not sure i'd ever be able to read his alignment tbh.
thomith: coming into the uneviable position of having to follow on from jupiter's reaction to the 'perspective slip' situation (which i think i chose to take as charitably as possible just to move on at the time, but it's kinda hard to overlook on reread), but their own posting doesn't have anything scummy in it to me. all the solving attempts look completely honest to me (i assume this is sorta what jackson meant when they said thom looked like they's 'positioned as uninformed', in which case i agree). predecessor makes it hard to completely write off the slot as town though.
ming: still thinking that scum-ming probably doesn't bother to resist the purple-wagon so that looks good. but then he puts me back on the rollercoaster by pretending not to know why i scumread him so hard (e-1? d1? with no acknowledgement? ring no bells?). who knows man. probably the most likely to be town of these four but idk.
yeah going over d1 again pretty much gave me nothing new. 95% it's not fire or jackson so it's two out of the four above. i can't pair 'em up well enough to get to any conclusion as to who. sorry if this post seems more confused than coherent but that's where i'm at.
basically gotten lost in d2 since i can't fully follow the logic following the jake kill. i understand the assumption that it would come from me/fire/thomith on the logic that we were on the ming wagon and scum might not want to kill within their own assumed voting block. but this is being conflated with with the issue of who would've picked up on jake's possible hints that he was a mason, and seemingly to the exact same conclusion. i don't understand the method of reading who would be capable of seeing that. is it based on personality? experience (which wouldn't really track)? i genuinely just don't follow it. that's all i got.
there's like a specific reason why i think you would have caught a soft and if it's wrong it's like very unfortunate but i also think it's probably better not to talk about it too much unfortunately
In post 1652, halfasleep wrote:
i understand the assumption that it would come from me/fire/thomith on the logic that we were on the ming wagon and scum might not want to kill within their own assumed voting block.
i don't really understand where this came from at all
In post 1654, fireisredsir wrote:
i actually wasn't making the assumption at all that scum was on the ming wagon. what posts gave you the impression people were thinking that?
In post 1394, JacksonVirgo wrote:
This kill comes from someone specific. I can’t think of who yet but one in fire/asleep/thom.
jackson said this before pivoting into talking about the 'soft'. is there another obvious connection between these three players that i'm missing?
I'm not sure that this VC makes sense in a Purple/halfasleep world?
Why would either not hammer in this scenario, as they would know both wagons are town?
why would they hammer? the wagons aren't going to pivot onto scum
In post 1654, fireisredsir wrote:
i actually wasn't making the assumption at all that scum was on the ming wagon. what posts gave you the impression people were thinking that?
In post 1394, JacksonVirgo wrote:
This kill comes from someone specific. I can’t think of who yet but one in fire/asleep/thom.
jackson said this before pivoting into talking about the 'soft'. is there another obvious connection between these three players that i'm missing?
I wasn’t at all thinking about the wagon formation
"Am I a ghost like you, caught between the seams of two intertwining melodies?"
In post 1654, fireisredsir wrote:
i actually wasn't making the assumption at all that scum was on the ming wagon. what posts gave you the impression people were thinking that?
In post 1394, JacksonVirgo wrote:
This kill comes from someone specific. I can’t think of who yet but one in fire/asleep/thom.
jackson said this before pivoting into talking about the 'soft'. is there another obvious connection between these three players that i'm missing?
id be interested to know if that's what jackson meant i guess
i had the exact same thought as him as soon as i saw the kill but it didn't have anything to do with the ming wagon so i assumed it wasn't about that
In post 1654, fireisredsir wrote:
i actually wasn't making the assumption at all that scum was on the ming wagon. what posts gave you the impression people were thinking that?
In post 1394, JacksonVirgo wrote:
This kill comes from someone specific. I can’t think of who yet but one in fire/asleep/thom.
jackson said this before pivoting into talking about the 'soft'. is there another obvious connection between these three players that i'm missing?
id be interested to know if that's what jackson meant i guess
i had the exact same thought as him as soon as i saw the kill but it didn't have anything to do with the ming wagon so i assumed it wasn't about that
I thought my thought process was obvious, it’s speculation on the kill not the ming wagon
"Am I a ghost like you, caught between the seams of two intertwining melodies?"
In post 1654, fireisredsir wrote:
i actually wasn't making the assumption at all that scum was on the ming wagon. what posts gave you the impression people were thinking that?
In post 1394, JacksonVirgo wrote:
This kill comes from someone specific. I can’t think of who yet but one in fire/asleep/thom.
jackson said this before pivoting into talking about the 'soft'. is there another obvious connection between these three players that i'm missing?
id be interested to know if that's what jackson meant i guess
i had the exact same thought as him as soon as i saw the kill but it didn't have anything to do with the ming wagon so i assumed it wasn't about that
I thought my thought process was obvious, it’s speculation on the kill not the ming wagon
In post 1654, fireisredsir wrote:
i actually wasn't making the assumption at all that scum was on the ming wagon. what posts gave you the impression people were thinking that?
In post 1394, JacksonVirgo wrote:
This kill comes from someone specific. I can’t think of who yet but one in fire/asleep/thom.
jackson said this before pivoting into talking about the 'soft'. is there another obvious connection between these three players that i'm missing?
id be interested to know if that's what jackson meant i guess
i had the exact same thought as him as soon as i saw the kill but it didn't have anything to do with the ming wagon so i assumed it wasn't about that
I thought my thought process was obvious, it’s speculation on the kill not the ming wagon
i see? (i don't). i assumed the kill was being connected to the ming wagon. i don't see the connection otherwise. i assume no explanation is forthcoming and i guess i'll have to take it on some level of good faith that there's a good reason for that. all can do is note my bafflement ¯\_ (ツ)_/¯
Maybe she is more informed than we are and assumed town would realize scum was off the Gimli wagon and was trying to defend herself against something she wasn’t being accused of (yet)