In post 196, Night Hunters wrote:All he's done is basically say gee Fire, you need reasons. He's trying to deflect attention off himself.
Now, onto the actual issues you're expressing now. First, SC was hyper about the wagon but this seems a little semantic or a differnce of what is called hyper. SC was very vocal about getting people to hurry up and wagon our slot before we could post. If I thought it was aggressive, I'd say aggressive. Maybe impulsive you'd like better, but he was definitely pushing that hard.
Bullshit on town being more likely to make consistency mistakes. Town should be clear and transparent with their reads. If not, they are doing it wrong.
SC "pushing" fire is because he's desperate to have a place to go that isn't him.
Can you respond to my concerns about GL BBT?
~MamaBear
I disagree that he is trying to deflect attention away from him - how would you expect town!SC to react?
Again, I disagree that SC was pushing hard for your wagon. I don't see it. Scum are much less likely to make consistency mistakes because they're always thinking about what they post and does it fit with the narrative they're trying to sell. Town don't think about such things and are much more likely to post instinctively/on the fly without checking whether what they're saying lines up with previous posting. It's not bullshit, it's legit.
In post 203, Night Hunters wrote:We have been trying not to clutter the thread because we both generally post a butt ton.
-Dad
OK, well I'm not asking you to clutter the thread. I'm asking you to take over some of the posting from Titus.
In post 204, GuiltyLion wrote:
I don't think I ever pushed NH, I poked at them to get a reaction and develop a read. If I were pushing them I'd be voting them.
My phrasing there isn't clear though, at the time I was null on SirCakez. I wanted to emphasize that I didn't think their reasons for scumreading him were all that alignment indicative. Basically, instead of reading it as "I'm seeing him scum, but not as much as they are", which seems to be how you're interpreting it, it should be read like "I see what they're saying, but I don't think it necessarily makes him scum".
I thought their points in
83 were valid, but then their
90 was way overconfident and I don't see pro-town motivation in it. Further,
106 didn't really show any of the deeper level thinking or doubt that I was looking for with my question, it was just "he's scummy". Again, I didn't really disagree with their points about SC, but I didn't think they were as indicative as NH seemingly thinks they are in
90 and
106.
Maybe pushed was too strong - you certainly looked interested in going down that avenue though. The avenue you led them down with your question.
Your phrasing was perfectly clear but now you're trying to change it. It's not 'how I'm interpreting it' it's exactly what your words were saying.
In post 108, GuiltyLion wrote:
So the reason I asked that question to NH is because I'm not seeing SirCakez
as strongly scum as they are
- their push feels forced.
The 'as' is key, it implies you at least agree to an extent with what NH are seeing. So it's pretty scummy for you to try and turn this around to say I'm interpreting your posts incorrectly, I think you realised you couldn't respond to my post and as such needed to try and change the original meaning of what you wrote.
In post 211, massive wrote:
I'm reading it all and I'm trying to figure out who I want to work with / who sounds reasonable. It's not quite so cut and dry this game, and it's early going, and I don't have experience with most of these players. It's not like I've played twenty games with Titus and can magically townread her, or throw out "BBT is scum" because we're always opposite alignment.
There must be some sort of contribution you can make?
In post 214, shaddowez wrote:
I liked his question to NH in
103 and his explanation in
108. I can see not liking his later posts, although
204 looks like he did actually put thought into what he was doing and is able to explain it again.
Tell me specifically what you liked about his question and explanation because I have a serious problem with both of them. What do you think of the above regarding GL? What can you see to 'dislike' about GL's posting?
In post 234, Firebringer wrote:I am fine with lynching BBT or Night Hunters I am sure at least one of the two is scum.
Walk me through this?
In post 246, tojam2 wrote:@BBT or @GL: could you explain why agreeing with someone is scummy?
What is this in reference to?
In post 248, Night Hunters wrote:#232 and 233
I am sorry. I may be a mama hen but I absolutely do not run a charity house. You're griping that I'm uncharitable. Well, if scum are obvious, they are obvious. I don't do pity parties for scum who do not fake reads well. Here, I find it very telling you're saying that there's evidence against SirCakez but there's not enough for a legitimate scumread. You're criticizing the validity of my read while hand waiving the inconsistencies in SirCakez's read on us. We can play the semantic game about whether he was "hyper" about pushing my wagon, but SirCakez was. Then, he was objecting to a counterwagon on his town read. He needs rope for that.
You're attempting to copy and mutilate arguments BBT made against your push on us. Bbt caught you using a leading question and you've changed it to a response to a question means someone else cannot use it.
~Mom
Titus, how do you feel about lynching GL Today? I still really dislike your SC push and I wish you would stop with it
Meta this. Meta that. Meta Everything. Meta is not a good scum-hunting tool. PEOPLE CAN MANIPULATE THEIR META. Stop it. Stop. It. Now.
