come at me bro.
@Juls - you claiming scum? That would make my life easy if you were so inclined.
Beck wrote:I am inclined to disagree with the read on Vp, but im waiting to hear from charter and for Phoebus to actually say something.
phoebus wrote:Can anyone tell me how to make the hr tags work?
Code: Select all
[hr]value less than 100 (I commonly use 90)[/hr]
Beck wrote:Phoebus votes pan, and quickly 2 people hop on
Vp decides Phoebus is following charter and votes him
pappums wrote:I have done a lot of arguing to pressure Panacea
pappums wrote:have probably brought forth the most reasoning why she is likely scum
pappums wrote:I never even said I was a "significant mover", I said I shared with Phoebus responsibility for her, meaning we have both done a lot to push this wagon.
pappums rat wrote:VP Baltar wrote:pappums rat - you would say the main case you are making against Panacea is that she is not contributing content to the thread even though she's posting, right?
I have already made my case against Panacea, you should read through my posts again. But no, that is not the main case I have been making, though it did influence my vote.
pappums rat wrote:VP wrote:
Pappus Rat - how much of the panacea wagon do you think is your doing? What exactly are the suspicions you see about me regarding her?
I think Phoebus and I have about equal responsibility for the Panacea wagon.
Phobeus wrote:2. I've +1'd this before. I did not like the way VP Baltar seemed to be coaching Panacea away from being reactive the way she was, early in the game. I also +1'd the idea that Baltar and Panacea are scum together, because of this.
This kind of business rubs me the wrong way. Not only do you call scumteams based upon no flips (which is being dumb-town at it's very best, trying to set up mislynches at its worst), but you also go on to ignore everyone else in the game. I'm pretty tired of the limited interactions in this game. I'm glad to see you've posted a full list in that big post, although I do find it kind of vague in regards to everything after the Panacea talk.Phobeus wrote:4. I get the feeling that either one of charter/Baltar has successfully diverted attention from Panacea to other targets, which is now resulting in the current general confusion/cross-fire.
I can foresee one of three scum combinations at this time:
--> Panacea + Baltar
--> Panacea + charter
--> Baltar + charter (this one, somewhat unlikely... but could be possible)
If anyone else is scum(my), well I haven't really caught on to much.
Beck wrote:I think it's funny VP says "stop the walls" Jul basically says, "I remember you posting walls before VP, than VP basically changes his stance.
nothing major just funny
Juls wrote:VP, these posts since you posted to "be succinct" have hardly been walls. It looks like you just don't want to read what they say.
Budja has been following me around all game without making any contribution of his own. he clearly got the message of that vote because his following post was original questions. Needless to say, that doesn't exactly quell my suspicions of him. I do think Budja gets kind of a slow start to games when he's town, so I'm certainly not saying I have a strong scum read on him. But my vote would have had very little impact if I had explained that at the time. Either way, I want to see some more out of Budja so I can get a better read of him, and following me around is only going to make me further want to lynch.Panacea wrote:VP wrote:
unvote, vote: Budja
Care to elaborate?
Juls wrote:3) I think Beck is scum. A townie would be able to admit they are wrong. But Beck-scum is so deep in this argument he can't dig himself out. I think my pressure on him the past several pages have shown how scummy he is. His lying is just icing on the cake.
Juls wrote:VP, regarding Panacea, what changed between this:
VP wrote:
I need to read these walls closely at some point today, but my gut reaction to Panacea was the same as Juls unfortunately.
and this...
VP wrote:
I actually like Panacea's play after she gets her head on straight.
Juls wrote:Also, what happened between this:
VP wrote:
Very happy with my vote [on Beck.
and this...
VP wrote:
failure to admit being wrong isn't really a scumtell so much as a stubborn-tell. I've lynched too many townies over this.
In general, VP you have been the paragon of inconsistency and obscurity. Can you please define your current reads on each person?
Juls wrote:He got caught lying when I called him on saying that I was "defending hiplop". It's ludicrous. And his whole case on me is I am "fake scumhunting" (I guess because he is the target of it) and that I "defended" hiplop. No one in their right mind would think I defended hiplop. No one in this game agrees with him, yet he still keeps pushing that me and hiplop are scumbuddies. He very well may be stubborn town but the fact that he is tunneling me on a weak case and he can't get out of his own argument makes me think he is scum. People keep saying he is scum hunting but all he has done is tunnel me and hiplop with a little VP Baltar on the side. All of which revolve around one completely wrong point that he thinks hiplop is scum and me and VP "defended" him. It's called latching on to a weak argument.
Juls wrote:Thanks. I am fine with your style of playing, I was just having a bit of trouble seeing where your head was. I don't recall that ever being a problem before. Then again, I have only played with you when you are scum (I think).
hiplop wrote:VP Baltar wrote:no one is unmetable. I just find it hard to make sense of your play as either alignment.
lots are; meta is trash and its how scum lynches town.
hiplop wrote:charter wrote:I think I'm just going to vote whoever of Budja, Hiplop, or Panacea posts most recently. It's like the scum olympics and each time they post, they go for the gold.
unvote, vote Budja
forshadow much?
charter wrote:I don't think I've said more than two sentences about Budja, and he's fluffposting like a heavyweight champ. My reasons for suspecting who I do is not 'people not contributin', which is obvious if you were reading my posts and not what you want to read.
charter wrote:I'm not going to call people out, but I feel as if I'm wasting my time playing in this game, which is quite frustrating. I doubt I'm the only one who feels that way either, and it isn't fun for myself/anyone else who feels that way.
charter wrote:And anytime someone replaces in and says "wow, I thought my slot was scum" always makes me think, "I wonder why.. probably are scum". More than once, I've replaced in to a game, and before reading my role, I read the game and make my notes. I read my role, and I had the person I'm replacing down as scum, and they're scum...
Pappums wrote:Budja's reasons for voting people do not seem to have sincerity behind them (as in, they seem like made-up reasons to me).
I am just not seeing the scum-motivation behind his posts like I was before, he just looks more like a lost townie to me now.
pappums wrote:Also, his vote on Budja seems to me kind of like a weak bussing attempt.
Psyche wrote:Eh. I suppose my commitment to the whole statistics thing was a bad idea, considering what panagea did.
Psyche wrote:She could of been more disciplined, but she was hardly scummy if you think about it. Scumminess is more than an unwillingness or inability to post useful content.
Psyche wrote:Beck's not scum because his emotion is genuine.