In post 146, The Archmage Ludicrous wrote:
Syndesis:Seems to be tunnelling Diego a bit. I'd have to throw a light town-reading, nothing really suspicious that I saw.
Townslip or nah?
In post 146, The Archmage Ludicrous wrote:
Syndesis:Seems to be tunnelling Diego a bit. I'd have to throw a light town-reading, nothing really suspicious that I saw.
In post 146, The Archmage Ludicrous wrote:Syndesis:Seems to be tunnelling Diego a bit. I'd have to throw a light town-reading, nothing really suspicious that I saw.
In post 148, Garmr wrote:archmage you know syn is innocent child
In post 150, 3dicerolling wrote:In post 146, The Archmage Ludicrous wrote:
Syndesis:Seems to be tunnelling Diego a bit. I'd have to throw a light town-reading, nothing really suspicious that I saw.
Townslip or nah?
In post 151, Syndesis wrote:You bring up a good point. I doubt mafia wouldtrulybe unaware of my conftownness (having, presumably, pregame chat?) but this is an easy to fake "slip", so I'd say no.
In post 153, All Alone wrote:Archmage's last post was a gigantic wall of IIoA, and I really have a hard time believing a townie would think that was useful.
Pistachi0n is also likely scum. She's very noticeably more reactive as scum and more proactive as town, and I've seen no proactive out of her.
In post 155, 3dicerolling wrote:@Syndesis - It's been awhile since I've played on here. Do mafia get pregame chat?
In post 47, 3dicerolling wrote:I'm not sure I like the precedence of the unvote.
In post 150, 3dicerolling wrote:In post 146, The Archmage Ludicrous wrote:
Syndesis:Seems to be tunnelling Diego a bit. I'd have to throw a light town-reading, nothing really suspicious that I saw.
Townslip or nah?
In post 68, 3dicerolling wrote:In post 60, Syndesis wrote:In post 47, 3dicerolling wrote:I'm not sure I like the precedence of the unvote.
"Precedence of the unvote"? Could you clarify that?
Well, Firebringer unvoted right after Iceninja called out a town read on him, which is IMO kind of scummy.
In post 163, Garmr wrote:Fire people don't understand our bond after numerous games together
Garmr wrote:
His accusing me of having one post of content and doing nothing which is flat out wrong and I'm offended
3dice wrote:
The only thing I wanted clipped out of 127 was the "oops" thing. Sometimes when I try to clip quotes I screw up, so I usually tend to not, but I can start for this game.
In post 167, Syndesis wrote:
You agree that Archmage is IIoAing, correct? Same question to you, then. Do you believe that this is a scumtell in this instance? Of what strength?
In post 166, ICEninja wrote:Garmr wrote:
His accusing me of having one post of content and doing nothing which is flat out wrong and I'm offended
I accused you of having one post of contentthat doesn't DIRECTLY pertain to me or my vote on you. I also believe it is accurate. If you feel it is inaccurate feel free to ISO yourself and demonstrate where you have contributed content that isn't fluff or doesn't involve me in any way shape or form. Prove me wrong and I will concede the point.
3dice wrote:
The only thing I wanted clipped out of 127 was the "oops" thing. Sometimes when I try to clip quotes I screw up, so I usually tend to not, but I can start for this game.
Using the preview function makes it quite easy to see if you messed up any quote clipping.
Archmage seems to spend a LOT of effort on 146, but the only actual read he seems to have is on Garmr. I like the read on Garmr, but that's pretty much all I like about the post. Recaps don't help much, and I agree with everyone who attacks him for IIoA. Since I know Archmage is going to ask, this stands forInformation Instead of Analysis, and is a tactic frequently used by scum to act as if they are taking a stance without actually taking a stance. Recap, give information, but commit to nothing.
Garmr continues to fluffpost. Fire continues to fluffpost.
Pistachi0n pops in with a vote for "lazy play". What the hell does that even mean? Please come back and explain your vote with something that indicates alignment.
In post 95, Garmr wrote:I can attest to this is what a town fire bringer would act like as well.
In post 154, Syndesis wrote:Hi AA Nice to play with you again!
I do agree that it is mostly IIoA (Information Instead of Analysis), but do you think that IIoA is a scumtell in this instance?