and go back and turn it to rain.
And I lived in your chess game,
but you changed the rules everyday.
— "Dear John",
In post 372, LucianRoy wrote:So, not to bring up inconceivable scenarios, but is it possible that the scum team was entirely inactive, and didn't even make a kill?
Naw, I think it'd be better to put faith into the protective rolls.
But still, it makes me wonder...
In post 229, DarkLightA wrote:I find it very strange that the game has split into two "factions" the way it has. In my read-through, while not as thorough as I would have liked, I found that Soren and LR struck me as particularly town. Aristophanes struck me as gut scum—I really really really didn't like his wall posts. Bookitty takes a good second place.
I'll go through player-by-player sometime if I get around to doing so. Till then I'm happy to leave my vote here:
VOTE: Aristophanes
In post 236, DarkLightA wrote:In post 235, Soren wrote:Is it really a gut scum read anymore? You've stated that his argument was forced and ended with a weak reason to sheep the vote on me.
It's not really that important; it depends on how you define gut read. I guess you could call it a "light read".
In post 237, DarkLightA wrote:It's just that I don't feel like I have enough to be past the initial stage of reads.
In post 241, DarkLightA wrote:In post 240, Bookitty wrote:@Darklight: Why was Aristophanes sheeping me suspicious and Soren's previous sheep wasn't, please?
Point out Soren's sheep to me
In post 243, DarkLightA wrote:It's not the nicest thing I've seen, but it has a different feel to it that Aristophanes' vote. Soren's vote was relatively early in the game, and I myself frequently go through a player that I've previously ignored if someone brings out a vote, especially that early. I don't like that it was done without acknowledging Boo's vote though.
On the other hand Aristophanes' post felt—like I said—forced. It felt like he was fitting the scumread to the player, rather than having any natural analysis.
In post 247, DarkLightA wrote:Before I forget (I've forgotten to say something several times already):
@Marquis:You are absolutely beasting this modding. You also introduced me to a new song! La la, la la la la la...
Thank you! This is by far my favorite game to mod yet, and I'm glad so many of you appreciate it.
In post 378, ika wrote:i call dibs on hammer
In post 381, Bookitty wrote:Endless Possibilities is town.
Pretty sure Elyse is town too.
Not sure about Empking saying he wasn't voting Anti ever, but I'm thinking about it.
These are pinging me:
LucianRoy: "The Meta read on Anti was okay for a while, but now he's basically lynch-bait due to not even being here."
Aristophanes: "I see Anti is pretty close to lynch, but also hasn't been here.
Are these things related or did he do something before disappearing that was scummy?"
I can get the posts for those if needed, but I'm kind of pressed for time just at the moment so if you need them, let me know.
In post 385, killerjester wrote:Bookitty what's your read on ika?
In post 384, LucianRoy wrote:A) Why did you enter the thread with reads on people that weren't even on the wagon? Was this in response to my "vote somebody who wasn't on the train"?
B) Nice cherry picking, but pointing out that someone's lynch-bait, which he definitely was, doesn't really strike me as a scum-ping, (from what you imply).
On top of that, I still ended up voting him, but somehow you didn't.
In post 389, Not_Mafia wrote:Why is it spurious?
In post 268, DarkLightA wrote:We're not policy lynching. Give me a reason Anti's scum and I'll be the happiest guy in the world, but policy lynching serves no one.
In post 276, DarkLightA wrote:I see what you're saying, but I don't agree that his lurking is scummy.
In post 305, DarkLightA wrote:At least let him speak before lynching him, k?