In post 923, pisskop wrote:Itslike its a new (awesomer) game now!
good job I subbed in then, we needed to balance it out.
i see there's a lot of time until deadline so I'll read up over the weekend
In post 923, pisskop wrote:Itslike its a new (awesomer) game now!
In post 936, Froot Loop wrote:I still think Jake/Max is a scum slot.
In post 857, Jeanne11 wrote:I am in a cage and the key is thrown away
Gently do the winds in the trees sway.
VOTE: Jake
In post 863, Jeanne11 wrote:Because he just is. I will always chase tunnelers as tunnelers will always be scum to me.
In post 944, Clumsy wrote:Ugh, yeah, I like it too unfortunately.
In post 945, Froot Loop wrote:Re: Max's post 937 - It's true that scum can hide away during a tunnelly TvT argument but I also think scum could dominate the thread like this.
In post 950, shaddowez wrote:Why APF?In post 937, Maxous wrote:vote: Clumsy
I would focus on either Clumsy or A Plain Farmer.
...snip...
i feel Clumsy's been overly quiet in general anyway.
In post 958, Roshar wrote:What is town arguing anyway?
In post 987, Clumsy wrote:What would you like to know Max?
In post 996, Roshar wrote:Oh, and Maxous was the first to unvote Clumsy. Hmmmm....
In post 1022, Nosferatu wrote:Evaluating the likelihood of Clumsy being VI vs scum.
In post 1003, shaddowez wrote:In post 999, Maxous wrote:
I kinda agree regarding Shadowez, I wasn't stoked with him popping in with a wall full of questions earlier.
And what would you have rather seen? I mean, if you're scum I can understand why you wouldn't want me to try and figure out people's motivations or get explanations.
In post 1078, Froot Loop wrote:Why Huntress? This is the second time you seem to have scumread someone without giving a reason.
I'm leaning town on Shaddowez. I like his post 950 - I think it's asking for and responding to clarification. I do think it was a bit early for his vote on Clumsy though.
In post 965, Froot Loop wrote:About Jake/Max, most of this is repetition but it's what I'm thinking:
1) I think he's presented conflicting information in the thread and then been misleading about it. I linked to the posts I'm talking about in post 663
2) The way Jake was posting at the beginning of the game and the way he reacted to questioning about his pre-game opinion makes me think that he wouldn't back down from being questioned. The argument that he would do this as town isn't applicable, for me.
3) I get a bullying impression from his interaction with FA. I think he was panicking and responded like this to FA's questioning.
4) His discussion of reads lists (post 356, post 446, post 472) is theory-based posting rather than analysis of the game.
In post 1162, JohnnyFarrar wrote:Gotcha. So if Huntress comes in and says the same?
In post 1171, Huntress wrote:In post 1157, Maxous wrote:Huntress took a week to briefly explain one read and pop up with zero town-reads.
So taking the time to read the thread and giving my scums reads (plural, not just one) is scummy is it? Please explain that one for me. And why are you so concerned about my town reads?
In post 1177, mhsmith0 wrote:Why would this be absurd to do as wolf? Popping in to give enough content to diminish the momentum against you, then popping back out and returning to regularly scheduled non production, seems pretty wolf to me.In post 1077, Maxous wrote:skimming here, sorry.
clumsy seems like town just for writing a million posts when called out on content. Seems pretty absurd to do as scum.
I would be looking at Shadow or Huntress I think for the vote.
In post 1269, JohnnyFarrar wrote:For me it's the willingness to believe what's his name was just busy instead of lurker scum but not that other person. Makes her reads seem arbitrary.
In post 1285, Froot Loop wrote:Max didn't respond to my questions until I pushed him on it. Could be that he felt like he didn't need to because he was feeling particularly secure.
In post 1292, JohnnyFarrar wrote:I saw you respond once to the idea when I posited it here, but that was hardly a defense from the accusation.
In post 1295, Titus wrote:Why did you ignore my question?
In post 1299, Huntress wrote:I've replied to this already, but you apparently just ignored it.
In post 1309, Froot Loop wrote:Can you quote what makes you think this?
In post 1318, Titus wrote:Why are you voting Lowell out if wifom and not Huntress who you have a scumread on based on play?
In post 1323, Huntress wrote:Because you still haven't backed up your claim that I'm "struggling" yet you keep repeating it as if it's a fact, which it isn't.
In post 1298, JohnnyFarrar wrote:As for your explanation I just can't bring myself to assume scum is lost, well, ever, really.
In post 1350, JohnnyFarrar wrote:Advocating Max's NKA. "There was no reason for Nos to be NK'd tbh " is just wrong. Maybe Nod crumbed or slipped.(1)Maybe they had some power that revealed Nos's role.(2)Maybe Nos seemed just a little too smart to let live (Nos has beat me before, I can attest)(3). Maybe scum was comfortable so they just rolled some dice. You don'tknow(unless you're scum) so trying to make it seem like that kill tells you anything and then trying to push a lynch because of it is just stupid.(4)
In post 1397, FA_Q2 wrote:In post 1371, Huntress wrote:In post 1330, Maxous wrote:you have literally only elaborated on one read.
I'm only pushing one read at the moment. The others are sitting on the back burner because I want to reread some stuff in context first and then update my reads. I should be able to do some of that tomorrow.
Your vote preceded the back and fourth between lowell and rosh. What are your thoughts on lowell's charge?
In post 1411, Titus wrote: His big deal is Huntress didn't comment
In post 1430, Froot Loop wrote:@Titus - I agree that Max is still scummy. He's voted for Huntress before so this is going back to a previous thought. He seems kind of apathetic and isn't responding much to the suspicion on him. This is subjective, so I don't think it's AI, but it's not doing anything to change my opinion.
In post 1437, mhsmith0 wrote:Max, what is your opinion on the allegations made by Lowell against roshar?
In post 1477, Roshar wrote:Would have preferred to wait until max replied to me, but he essentially ignored my post a second time.
In post 1493, Garmr wrote:Also before clumsy he doesn't really push that hard and his reaction to jake vs frozen was weird to me it's like he was trying to keep in it and be active while making sure not to get to drawn into if you know what I mean(don't know if I conveyed that right).