Open 598: GAME OVER
-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
The "three votes in rapid succession" entrance reads like a forced attempt to not look rigid and scummy, but fluid and townie."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).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
In post 32, lane0168 wrote:@green canyons, who are you quoting? you look like a forced attempt at scum hunting and not actually scum hunting.
Crayons.
What do you mean who am I quoting? I am not quoting anyone."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).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
I find green funyuns acceptable, and will respond accordingly."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).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
Oh, that wasn't an actual quotation. The quotation marks were to house the characterization of your entrance."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).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
@Newbie:if you accept that lane thinks both ika and YGS are suspicious, but not necessarily buddies, why are you having a problem with lane voting YGS and simply vocally supporting ika votes (what actually happened) rather than voting ika and vocally supporting YGS votes (what you appear to be suggesting to be the non-suspicious thing to do)?
p-edit:@YGS:you can answer this too."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).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
In post 68, You Got Schooled wrote:
In post 66, You Got Schooled wrote:Lane, if you thought both us and ika were scum, why would you not vote for the bigger wagon?
Why compliment wagon on player you're scum reading and then vote elsewhere?
It makes no sense.
Lane was scum reading both slots, that's a little stronger than the 'suspicion' you're trying to imply.
???
I used the word "suspicion" as interchangeable with "scummy."
The question I asked still stands."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).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
@Newbie:
In post 72, Newbie wrote:It looks like scum knowing what ika will flip. If ika flips town, then lane can get town cred by not being on the lynch. If ika flips scum, then he can try and get town cred by saying he acknowledged that the lynch was solid.
This theory doesn't really match up with lane's play, though.
lane doesn't get any credit for a ika-town flip, as lane was cheerleading the ika wagon from the sidelines."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).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
UNVOTE: lane
VOTE: YGS
You're being completely non-responsive to my question, and instead are focusing on whether I used the word "suspicion" or "scummy" when they both mean the same damned thing. Which we appear to agree upon, but you nonetheless ignore the whole point of my question (of why, between two scum reads, it was suspicious for lane to vote one over the other)."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).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
@BB:I sign up 100% with your plan.
I also unilaterally appoint you to match up the players who are to target other players."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).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
Oh wait I just read the part where we no lynch today.
Ew gross. Do we have to?"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).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
@YGS:
1.
In post 84, You Got Schooled wrote:I answered your bad question. You're either not reading or 'see above'.
You can be suspicious of somebody without thinking they're scum. This is obvious. I feel you should know this.
This head of yours continues to be suspicious and obtuse.
You see that bolded part?It's beside the entire point of the question I'm asking.You keep focusing on "suspicious v. scummy" as if that's something that actually matters.
Congrats, I'm not moving my vote for the time being. Stop making issues out of things that aren't even issues in order to avoid answering a pretty simple question.
2.
In post 94, You Got Schooled wrote:@ GC: 'if you accept that lane thinks both ika and YGS are suspicious, but not necessarily buddies, why are you having a problem with lane voting YGS and simply vocally supporting ika votes (what actually happened) rather than voting ika and vocally supporting YGS votes (what you appear to be suggesting to be the non-suspicious thing to do)?'
I think you are asking why we have a problem with why lane's vote is bad WHILE he is scum-reading our slot? I think the question I just asked him explains that: he's not really established a reason behind his read on us, but would rather scum-read us than see our vote as town voting ika for the same reasons he 'suspects' them. Seems like he's reaching. Does that answer your question?
At least this head is attempting.
You're still not getting the point of my question.
And I find it pretty hard to believe that my question was obtuse, as Newbie answered it perfectly fine.
Here, let me rephrase by quoting you:
In post 66, You Got Schooled wrote:Lane, if you thought both us and ika were scum, why would you not vote for the bigger wagon?
Why compliment wagon on player you're scum reading and then vote elsewhere?
It makes no sense.
In Post 34, lane voiced support of ika wagon and voted YGS.
YES, LET'S ACCEPT THAT THIS IS LANE SAYING THAT HE THINKS BOTH IKA AND YGS ARE SCUM AND/OR SUSPICIOUS. (Jesus I can't believe I'm tying that again.)
HERE'S THE QUESTION: Why is lane voting YGS and voicing support of the ika wagon vote worthy if lane thinksbothYGS and ika are scum? What's wrong with voting YGS-scum over ika-scum if lane thinks that both are scum?"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).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
Well, I'm reread and rethinking 94 and I guess it does answer my question."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).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
But fuck talk about pulling teeth."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).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
Are you asking me w/r/t sthar?
I agree with BB."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).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
In post 216, You Got Schooled wrote:92 - Quick note on the attempt at game breaking; can we not do that?
Thanks.
In post 223, You Got Schooled wrote:Game breaking is finding a method in which to break the game; i.e we don't actually have to scum hunt/play mafia (which funnily enough is why I join games) because there is an optimal way of playing that ends the game without actually doing anything.
This is anti-town posting: finding an optimal town strategy for night actions is not "breaking" the game. Particularly when there are potential issues with the optimal strategy that both BB and ika have pointed out.
This is also pro-scum posting: pushing against a strategy that optimizes a town's night action on the basis that it's somehow antithetical to the "core" of what mafia is. By this logic, town shouldn't use PRs because with PRs town "don't actually have to scum hunt/play mafia"
Vote stays.
Busy busy at work so only skimming, but this caught my attention and required a shout out."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).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
Your response to everything is "this could theoretically apply to town and therefore this is not a Real Scum Suspicion."
Congrats, you're unhelpful."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).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
In post 250, You Got Schooled wrote:PEdit - @GC - That is so fucking weak. Because I want to enjoy playing the game it makes me scum? That is quite possibly the worst shit I have ever read in my life.
PR's are different when everybody doesn't know what everybody else is doing. That comes down to the individual player, not the whole group working out how to break the game.
For example, I recently finished an Open where all we had to do was protect the tracker while she searched for movement in VT's to win game. That's not mafia, it's fucking boring.
Boo hoo it's boring.
Get a new/fix the setup if the setup is boring because town can attempt to come together and try to strategize night actions.
Pushing for less than optimal town play because it's boring is anti-town, pro-scum."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).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
town shouldn't tell doctor to protect cop because BORING"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).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
I'm taking your bad argument to it's logical conclusion."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).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
Also lol @ BB's strategy "breaking" the game.
Pretty sure it isn't foolproof.
So isn't game breaking.
Hyperbole. Stop it."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).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
In post 258, You Got Schooled wrote:In post 222, You Got Schooled wrote:137/138 - This feels off. Are you seriously saying you read BB's plan, agreed with it, posted that you agreed with it, then went back to read THE EXACT SAME POST AGAIN, only this time noticing the no lynch part?
Like, I could see this if BB made two separate posts but it was all in one post.
This looks like a very weak attempt at some sort of town cred (scum going along with a plan that is made to catch scum) and then finding a reason not to shortly after. I would expect better from you as scum but I can't pretend this doesn't exist. I don't like it.
I read BB's plan when it was initially presented, posted, read the next page, saw the no lynch, posted again."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).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
The plan and the no lynch was in two separate posts.
Unlike what you say in 258."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).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
In post 92, BBmolla wrote:Hey I haven't read anything but
I believe optimal strategy is to plan out our visits tonight and to have two players visiting different people.
Player A and B visits Player X
Player C and D visits Player Y
Player E and F visits Player Z
Player G and H visits Player ?
Player I and J visits Player !
This prevents PGOs from activating without confirming them as scum and allows cop to get reports relatively safely.
It also may be optimal to no lynch and then do that twice?
In post 105, BBmolla wrote:If we want to go with my plan we need to no lynch. If things go wrong, 3 people could die (1 by NK, 2 by PGO) and we need to have that mislynch we get from having 7p in the case of that happening."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).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
Oh there's a mention of no lynch in 92, but I didn't see it because lol @ reading a whole post about night strategy."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).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
In post 267, Green Crayons wrote:Oh there's a mention of no lynch in 92, but I didn't see it because lol @ reading a whole post about night strategy.
A bloo bloo
You either believe me or you don't."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).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
In post 270, You Got Schooled wrote:I don't.
And I don't care."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).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
In post 272, lane0168 wrote:@gc, see? Other people call out crap arguments when they can be applied the exact same elsewhere. I guess it's just how one views what's going on at the time
I understand what you are doing.
But I don't think your point holds for a lot of the times you're making it."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).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
In post 95, ZZZX wrote:I am really busy for 3 days but it shouldnt be a problem. will read up really soon (and i will have limitless free time !)
This is scum?"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).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
It's null to me.
Unless if he is posting elsewhere on the site?
POE makes sense though."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).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
In post 307, ika wrote:GC if you were to pick the scum team who would it be right now?
YGS: BBT-head (is that really him?) is acting SUPER WEIRD for all reasons I have stated in thread. Not like the BBT-scum I have played with, but also not like the BBT-town I have played with. Also this isn't a personality clash, because BBT and I get along just fine, so something is very much up. (pre-post edit: maybe this is what BBT-town acts like if he thinks GC is scum? my god that's frustrating.) Bella seems much more reasonable, if I were to assume that she has to believe that BBT-head is town, which I hate because ugh goddammit just make me warm and comfortable with my scum read.
uhhhh, POE after that.
Jeanne11 is comical "failed to pick up PM" scum.
I don't see anything scummy OR SUSPICIOUS OH MY GOD EQUATING THE TWO?!?? about lane's, Newbie's, or BB's play, and affirmatively think that there has been town play from each (in descending order of strength of reads).
I can't read ika. At least not atm.
sthar could be lazy scum.
ZZZX could be IRL busy scum.
Persivul I thought was town for the first half of what game there is, but after that he's been saying things that don't really get me feeling rad."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).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
Ah so you are going to take the "this is how I play when I read you as scum" out to explain away your weirdness.
w/r/t "suspicion v. scummy," Are you referring to Post 215? That's a weaksauce after-the-fact explanation of why, instead of simply answering my question (like Newbie did very easily), you instead go "WHOA LET'S USE THE WORD SCUMMY NOT SUSPICIOUS" as if that was relevant at all."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).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
I'm not good at reading ika, but I don't care for his buddying of me."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).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
In post 321, ika wrote:GC, gun to head am i town or scum?
At the moment? Town.
I just get antsy when I see buddying."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).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
I'm trying to do a reread from page 8 tonight.
Will post stuff later."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).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
@BB:
In post 189, BBmolla wrote:In post 187, ika wrote:in the meantime got any reads?
GC town, Lane town, Newbie is scummy, YGS is town
mainly
I came to the opposite conclusion w/r/t Newbie and YGS from the same set of posts (everything up to page 8). Why your reads on those two?"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).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
Okay.
So if not Newbie, who?"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).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
"not Newbie" as in not lynch material atm.
I don't care if you keep reading them as scummy."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).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
@Persivul:
YGS's Persivul suspicions are credited.
Also Persivul's Post 271 is a muddle. Post 281 and Post 283 is an equally confusing follow up. Like, Persivul is reaching to attack his voter kind of muddle.
Ugh. I don't like anything on Page 12.
-----
@YGS:
- YGS's interaction with ika is bad.
Spoiler: oh god I couldn't help myself
-----
@Newbie:
In post 261, Newbie wrote:I also completely agree abut GC. They seemed to be laying it on a little too hard when accepting the plan.
I'm still 100% down with the plan. None of ika's problems really bothered me now that I actually read through the ika/BB exchange.
-----
Feeling better about ika, but I do not feel confident in my ability to evaluate his type of player."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).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
UNVOTE: YGS
VOTE: Persivul
I think his 180 on the BBmolla plan is also iffy, as well as his mix of knowing what is going on + "I'm newbie so help me out here""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).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
Your plan still holds up if we simply start it a night other than N1, yeah?"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).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
It might be optimal pre-LYLO plan when town sometimes NL anyways?
I don't know specific circumstances when that occurs, just know that it occurs sometimes."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).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
Oh Yeah.
Grinding people down with fatigue.
/shades"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).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
In post 381, Antihero wrote:gonna' end up being a poe read. i kind of started skimming over his posts on my first once-over andi don't really want to bother since last game was so wearing.
Responding to this."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).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
Agreed about pretty small lynch pool though."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).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
YGS, for reasons stated
Persiv, for reasons stated
Newbie, because BB and Anti said so"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).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
I'm POE.
ika, you're breaking my heart."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).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
YGS and Persiv unlikely scumpair based off of YGS push on Persiv (unless WIFOM bus but don't think so) so preference lynch out of those two"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).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
In post 393, You Got Schooled wrote:@ gc, Okay, so it's just a pot shot back? Or do you think there's intent behind it?
-Bellaphant
???
My response was making light of the fact that the last time Anti and I played together, he read me wrong and I got butthurt. Where's the pot shot?
No idea what you're asking in the second question."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).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
@ika:
In post 380, Antihero wrote:perseus has a really sledge-hammerish, black-and-white,newbtownnewbscumapproach to the game that i pick up on gut feel
I basically came to the opposite conclusion as Anti on the same factual basis."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).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
That sounds like something I should remember, but honestly I don't remember swag at all."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).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
Well are we YGSing or Newbieing?"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).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
Oh, well I don't think Persiv is posting like that, and looks much more like clunky attempts at manipulation/accusations."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).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA