dlfjlfklakalsdkajdklakdadIn post 1924, Andresvmb wrote:You know how absurd this is in light of the fact that T3 posted 936?In post 1727, T3 wrote: 956 I didn't see Salsa scum, then I saw your actual reasoning.
What is happening here?
i point out scummy posts about townreads but don't usually vote them for itIn post 1936, Andresvmb wrote:I’m SR’ing the shit out of the slot. Shading half the game (literally) and still not acknowledging that fact or really providing some more detail on where they stand now, or providing more TRs than what, DW, and going with whatever they think can get executed, why is this not being SR’ed?In post 1934, Iconeum wrote:T3's been shading a good number of people, including myself
but he hasn't really stuck his neck out on any them that I can remember, including the ones that actually got pressured so I don't know what to make of it
at the very least he's here and talkative and responding and stuff
if i seriously scumread his actions i'd be all over his ass trust me
not as strong as the other townreadsIn post 1970, Datisi wrote:why am i a maybe? i feel like you called some bits of my posting town quite a few times recently.
Note that my comment is more targeted at Ico than you. I actually do think you’re cognizant of the fact that you would pay a price if you tried to force a mis-execution of Ico in the hypothetical situation that you’re Scum and Ico is Town. Fundamentally, I’m trying to better understand the lack of uncertainty that Iconeum is expressing around your slot and alignment. Because the main argument they’re using for determining that you’re Town seems weak to me. There’s other indicators, Ico has alluded to them, and that’s all good, but I do think this is a bit curious.In post 1966, Datisi wrote:i can guarantee you that scumtisi has never in his life once thought that.In post 1937, Andresvmb wrote:I don’t buy in the least that Datisi thinks they could get you mis-executed easily and not pay any price for it.
that being said, iconeum is probably the number one threat to scum!me in this playerlist. while solo pushing town!ico to execution is something scum!me isn't suicidal enough for, you're mistaken if you think that i wouldn't try to take the opportunity to *help* get him misyeeted if others started scumreading him. hell, i've done it before.
also, inb4 anyone asks, "how do you know so well what you would do against town!ico? r u scumz?", i had a huge red streak last year, and about 2/3rds of those games had town!ico in them. so like, i know.
How could I possibly know that you aren’t bussing here? Fine if you want to argue that you would have more TRs, but the other part of your argument is impossible for me to know unless I had perfect knowledge of who is Town and who is Scum.In post 1979, T3 wrote:@andres
if you see... basically any of my scumgames then you'll see that as scum i tend to bus and townread a lot of people early
the exact opposite of what i'm doing here
1799 and 1826.In post 1953, Looker wrote:Which post was this explanation?
dorsey, un to recently a50, geraintm.In post 1953, Looker wrote:Also, which good part of the game is not playing, as in player names?
here's the bad faith tone again... i'm saying that going "wow, you were on a lot of wagons, therefore you're scum" is an extremely Bad And Simplistic take that's more likely to come from scum than someone who's actually solving the game. i'm not claiming i would've townread myself because of it.In post 1953, Looker wrote:Are you saying that you would've drawn a different conclusion from that information? Because, when I presented [1533] to you in conversation, all you said was "okay" and stopped talking.
i mean i think their attempts at solving the game are coming from a genuine place. cursory glance at iso, 636, 1459, 1543 are GoodpostingIn post 1953, Looker wrote:Re:Selynee - Can you elaborate on what you mean by "solvey"? Which posts of hers has made you see her as town?
i don't have a non-philosophical answer to this without concrete examplesIn post 1953, Looker wrote:How are you determining which inconsistencies that appear scummy are coming from town and which are coming from scum? I ask because it came off as if you felt I was going about this all wrong.
okay first of all, expecting that i'm gonna connect this paragraph as your answer to a completely different question is way too high expectations of meIn post 1973, Andresvmb wrote:@Datisi, this paragraph is literally the explanation as to why I’m still dragging your Selynee vote despite your re-evaluation. You can be annoyed all you want, but stop repeating ad naseum I’m not responding to something when I have.In post 1932, Andresvmb wrote:If I see that a player is acting Townier and Townier as the game goes on, to the point were people are forced to change their stances around a player, then early attempts to sideline them or push them for execution could be thought of as coming from Scum. After all, Scum want to get a mis-execution above having to execute their own Partners. It’s the same reasoning I would apply to anyone that pushed Dorsey in hindsight (particularly if Dorsey flips Town, but I have to assume it in part given my perception of the slot).
Does that make sense?
I don’t think your vote for geraintm points any which way (or at least not looking back). I was just trying to make sure I was not ignoring votes that don’t necessarily agree with what I put forth. If geraintm flips Town and Three flips Town maybe I’ll start thinking my early suspicions weren’t all that off but I can’t fault you for that particular vote. I’ve already expressed some mild suspicion of geraintm so if anything that’s a positive. I will also say that I don’t expect to be alive before geraintm flips haha so maybe for whoever is still in the game have a think around this if Datisi is also around.In post 1983, Datisi wrote:okay first of all, expecting that i'm gonna connect this paragraph as your answer to a completely different question is way too high expectations of meIn post 1973, Andresvmb wrote:@Datisi, this paragraph is literally the explanation as to why I’m still dragging your Selynee vote despite your re-evaluation. You can be annoyed all you want, but stop repeating ad naseum I’m not responding to something when I have.In post 1932, Andresvmb wrote:If I see that a player is acting Townier and Townier as the game goes on, to the point were people are forced to change their stances around a player, then early attempts to sideline them or push them for execution could be thought of as coming from Scum. After all, Scum want to get a mis-execution above having to execute their own Partners. It’s the same reasoning I would apply to anyone that pushed Dorsey in hindsight (particularly if Dorsey flips Town, but I have to assume it in part given my perception of the slot).
Does that make sense?
on a more serious note, this feels like working backwards. like, there's no way to determine who is town who genuinely had that progression, and who is scum that went "oh shit, there goes my misyeet, better townread them". which might be the point considering you're not making a huge deal out of it, but it's like. making a lot of assumptions, when it's also possible we live in a town!sel world where no scum ever scumread her.
mind doing the one for geraintm now?
yeahIn post 1981, Andresvmb wrote:How could I possibly know that you aren’t bussing here? Fine if you want to argue that you would have more TRs, but the other part of your argument is impossible for me to know unless I had perfect knowledge of who is Town and who is Scum.In post 1979, T3 wrote:@andres
if you see... basically any of my scumgames then you'll see that as scum i tend to bus and townread a lot of people early
the exact opposite of what i'm doing here
i just rememberedIn post 1872, Datisi wrote:not quite sure why [1801] makes salsa town? defending a scumread townie, or...?
Your extended case for Three is coming after they’ve been pushed loudly by other players. It’s not original. Sheeping is the wrong word. It’s more like you’re piling on there. Your detailed case against Three comes in 1883, though you were already drafting it around 1849. Up to that point, you had signaled you SR there (374, 1346, though only partly contradicted by 1299), but nothing really substantial. Well, before your extended case, Three seemed to be gathering more meaningful pressure by Datisi and to a lesser extent Iconeum (though Ico’s vote on Three in 1876 comes before your extended case but after you had hit submit on a bunch of quotes, which was clearly signaling your intent to build a case there).In post 1974, T3 wrote:how is what i did sheepingIn post 1919, Andresvmb wrote:You know we can vote wherever we want right? Every single possible wagon has been tried by certain players but nobody is really touching my T3 case, there hasn’t been much of a disagreement from anyone really, and T3 is just constantly sheeping whatever they think will get through instead of them.In post 1917, Dorsey wrote:And @Andres, because clearly Datisi is the boss.
i had all these reasons as to why i thought three was scum but then i complied it in 1883In post 1989, Andresvmb wrote:Your extended case for Three is coming after they’ve been pushed loudly by other players. It’s not original. Sheeping is the wrong word. It’s more like you’re piling on there. Your detailed case against Three comes in 1883, though you were already drafting it around 1849. Up to that point, you had signaled you SR there (374, 1346, though only partly contradicted by 1299), but nothing really substantial. Well, before your extended case, Three seemed to be gathering more meaningful pressure by Datisi and to a lesser extent Iconeum (though Ico’s vote on Three in 1876 comes before your extended case but after you had hit submit on a bunch of quotes, which was clearly signaling your intent to build a case there).In post 1974, T3 wrote:how is what i did sheepingIn post 1919, Andresvmb wrote:You know we can vote wherever we want right? Every single possible wagon has been tried by certain players but nobody is really touching my T3 case, there hasn’t been much of a disagreement from anyone really, and T3 is just constantly sheeping whatever they think will get through instead of them.In post 1917, Dorsey wrote:And @Andres, because clearly Datisi is the boss.
Okay I get that now. You weren’t expressing a read in that earlier post.In post 1975, T3 wrote:dlfjlfklakalsdkajdklakdadIn post 1924, Andresvmb wrote:You know how absurd this is in light of the fact that T3 posted 936?In post 1727, T3 wrote: 956 I didn't see Salsa scum, then I saw your actual reasoning.
What is happening here?
i didn't see why dwlee or whoever i responded to thought salsa was scum
Wait no hold on. That post is you putting a vote down for Salsa saying you didn’t like their tone. How could that possibly be you questioning someone else about their read?In post 1992, Andresvmb wrote:Okay I get that now. You weren’t expressing a read in that earlier post.In post 1975, T3 wrote:dlfjlfklakalsdkajdklakdadIn post 1924, Andresvmb wrote:You know how absurd this is in light of the fact that T3 posted 936?In post 1727, T3 wrote: 956 I didn't see Salsa scum, then I saw your actual reasoning.
What is happening here?
i didn't see why dwlee or whoever i responded to thought salsa was scum
I think you need a crash course in punctuation.
miscommunication AGHIn post 1993, Andresvmb wrote:Wait no hold on. That post is you putting a vote down for Salsa saying you didn’t like their tone. How could that possibly be you questioning someone else about their read?In post 1992, Andresvmb wrote:Okay I get that now. You weren’t expressing a read in that earlier post.In post 1975, T3 wrote:dlfjlfklakalsdkajdklakdadIn post 1924, Andresvmb wrote:You know how absurd this is in light of the fact that T3 posted 936?In post 1727, T3 wrote: 956 I didn't see Salsa scum, then I saw your actual reasoning.
What is happening here?
i didn't see why dwlee or whoever i responded to thought salsa was scum
I think you need a crash course in punctuation.
And how is this even remotely accurate? You’ve put votes down for Three, Selynee (377), A50 (514, 1834), Salsa (936, 1342), Dorsey (1191). Which is 2 less votes than the slots you’ve actually shaded (no votes for Datisi who you seem to TR and Ico, who you haven’t really indicated how you feel).In post 1977, T3 wrote:i point out scummy posts about townreads but don't usually vote them for itIn post 1936, Andresvmb wrote:I’m SR’ing the shit out of the slot. Shading half the game (literally) and still not acknowledging that fact or really providing some more detail on where they stand now, or providing more TRs than what, DW, and going with whatever they think can get executed, why is this not being SR’ed?In post 1934, Iconeum wrote:T3's been shading a good number of people, including myself
but he hasn't really stuck his neck out on any them that I can remember, including the ones that actually got pressured so I don't know what to make of it
at the very least he's here and talkative and responding and stuff
if i seriously scumread his actions i'd be all over his ass trust me
i've said this like 5 times
But you did. You're such an easy push for Scum none of them is going to try and save youIn post 1988, Datisi wrote:i just rememberedIn post 1872, Datisi wrote:not quite sure why [1801] makes salsa town? defending a scumread townie, or...?
@a50, you never answered this
All I ever hear from you is blah blah blahIn post 1994, Wiki wrote:Ok, andre is good, maybe datisi is also good
T3 is not so good. A50, dwlee, gera...
I have some difficulties to read looker and three now, i need to do it later. I liked some moments of them, but this is not enough...
Rn i dont read much.