In post 1804, Cephrir wrote:It's strong in that I'm voting for scum. Is it likely to result in a lynch today, probably not.
And this will help town...how?
So...how do you know it's a scumtell then and not a 'he plays the game badly' tell?
In post 1804, Cephrir wrote:Soft supporting? So you're trying to tell me the only reactions possible to a wagon are voting for it and the AA9 brand "OMG hell no" reaction? I know that I'm not the world's best at reading other players, so I never get confident enough in my reads to have either of those reactions. I don't feel strongly enough about this to try to derail the wagon, I see better scumhunters than myself on it, but I'm not going to put my vote where my own honest opinion isn't except to get a deadline compromise lynch.
Here you are soft supporting it again.
In post 1804, Cephrir wrote:I don't see the use in quoting random posts and saying "well why don't you try voting for fuzzy?" like you're doing with your suspects. That's not going to get you any more votes, all it does it remind everyone with every other sentence where your vote is. I'd love this to be a valid wagon but the Nacho lynch seems like such a foregone conclusion at this point that I know that wouldn't work even if it was within my playstyle (it's not). When I push a wagon I do it by presenting a case and then rebutting arguments against me.
Yes, I was, what are you going to do with that information besides act like it somehow means something while doing nothing with it?
In post 1804, Cephrir wrote:I also sensed a contrived as hell attack coming for your direction, so I figured I might as well pre-emptively defend myself at the same time. I would have discussed it more amicably if your initial posts weren't obviously hostile.
It was only hostile based on the concept that you weren't pushing your lynch - something you fully agree with, so why is that a scummy thing to point out if you agree it is true?
In post 1805, Cephrir wrote:Correction: I have a *slight* idea from the one game I've played with fuzzy. He didn't scumhunt very hard, but as I've said before, he at least made an effort, and didn't bandwagon hop as shamelessly. But this doesn't approach an actual meta read.
As least you realized how bad that stance was.
Link?
In post 1806, BeautyAndTheBeast wrote:well your action so far is to keep your vote on us. which is pretty dumb since you could be using that power elsewhere
Ah, so now we're changing the focus of the attack away from hypocrisy (proven false) and over towards stupidity. In other words, you got new information, and decided to change your reasoning in order to still hold the same conclusion.
That is not the way logic works.
Do you do that as town, or only scum?
Stop trying so hard to earn it.
In post 1806, BeautyAndTheBeast wrote:what are you even talking about I did not "wilt" in that game if anything you dramaqueened all over the place. and as far as you not believing me I think it is cos you are not reading my posts except for the ones that have to do with you
I caught you because you presented a false argument and then tried to keep it going and I noted how you were trying to bulldog through and ignore logic and heavily pressured you until it became obvious to everyone else that I was right. If you don't want to call that 'wilting' that's fine with me - tell me what word you think it is, and then I'll say that's what I expected you to do to my pressure...which, y'know, was your original point 'Thor, why pressur eme ecause you know it won't work' when, clearly, I have seen it work.
Explain this. Because I have no idea why my push should feel different because you're a hydra.
That doesn't even begin to make sense, frankly.
Because you didn't understand what I just typed.
1. Thor points out a valid meta point about Nacho playing badly as town.
2. Mollie uses meta to explain why Nacho is town because he's playing badly.
3. Mollie is confused by Thor.
I am more confused now.
So game is back on despite Majiffy telling you to stop and you stopping on his word?
Ooooookay.
Still waiting for you to do more than throw random and nonsensical scumtells at me, accept my responses are true, and then bend the answers into still being scumtells.
I'm sure that's how scumhunting works - because town would totally respond to that differently than scum.
In post 1827, Nachomamma8 wrote: In post 1802, Thor665 wrote:because he can be quite terrible, lurky, and unresponsive as town. I think it's a shame he does that, but he does do that now. I agree that he didn't use to. Meta changes.
Do you think that this is one of those games?
It's unquestionably one of those games, because you are being terrible.
The only question is if it is terrible town or terrible scum Nacho.
I personally think you are town Nacho for other reasons unrelated to your meta - I find the meta case on you to be weak because 'oooh, Nacho is scuking' is not convincing because I know you can do this sort of gak as town.
I'd love it if you killed that part of your town meta though, just saying.
I don't like the Oversoul push - I lean town on that slot.
I don't like the Nacho one either - same deal.
People are raging lackwits about Majiffy/Mollie - that is a blatant scum Mollie, and I want to hear reasons from people why it looks town when it is lying and misrepping.
Unvote: B&tB
Vote: Red Ryu
This.
@KK - c'mon back, pl0x, Oversoul is more likely town from that gak than scum, seriously.
@Nacho - you can come play here too, it looks tasty, like red velevt cake, Mmmmm.
