In post 172, Hellhound wrote:asking for reasons on an early wagon is already sending up red flags for me, mostly b/c i think in the early game, scum are a lot more likely to feel around and ask for town positions and opinions to be fed to them (as opposed to letting them naturally form on their own)
Shiro's post fits a scum painting but i also think this fits a town-that-hasn't-read-the-thread painting. you're saying that it's more likely to fit a scum narrative but i'm not sure how valid of a point that is.
In post 172, Hellhound wrote:this pinged me something fierce. here i'm feeling like shiro is a lot more concerned w/ ingratiating himself to lane and formulating/peddling this narrative that looks good (but is flimsy and doesn't really stand up to much thought) than actually getting the foundation to intuitive and solid reads going
this one i do agree with but do you think that the sircakes scumread is bad coming from people other than shiro or do you think that the specific way that shiro theorized sircakes interactions was bad? does the quality of the "narrative" affect the read in any way?
here's a flubb isodive
138 i'm having a hard time wrapping my head around this post.
find it also interesting that flubb is "building up" to a cakez vote. i find the timing of the vote as something potentially scum indic but will wait to hear your response. seems like you want to build up a progression without voting until that progression is strong enough so that people won't call you out on that shit. basically you were calling out multiple scummy things that cakez did without placing a vote. why did you do that?
In post 146, Flubbernugget wrote:I also have Hellhound for scum right now, but I could easily see that changing within the next 24-48 hours
you gonna explain this?
In post 174, Flubbernugget wrote:low-key noting I didn't have to vote to get the game out of rvs B-)
don't like this post
-ep
