In post 172, Terata wrote:i think you should adapt Frogg's approach in this case, Sheep. Show us you can focus on something else than the one you're tunneling with shit thats boring to read. That will help both you and us more than reading whatever you're doing now, which is being salty at Frogg's annoying (to you) playstyle. Something scum and town could do, so we dont get any info.
I'm sorry I'm boring - I'm not trying to be, and it's how I communicate.
It's page 7 and I've focused on quite a few people - who do you think I need to focus on that I haven't?
I agree that scum could do what Frogger is doing.. I also agree that town could, and it would be bad. Beyond the idea that town might not care to understand someone they're calling scum for bad logic - why is that, in your opinion, *my* issue and not *his and my* issue?
In post 174, Terata wrote:i get all this. What i don't get is how i would get cred as scum after me pushing you and you flipping town, just because i was 'right' for a small amount of time in the very start of the day. Get me?
I get that - my answer is, as stated, that you changed tact when my lynch no longer looked speedily imminent.
In post 173, Cooperative Sheep wrote:So you admit you might be misunderstanding me - but your case on me is based on your understanding of my actions
wrong.
My case on you is you had a leap in logic. Him not wanting to sheep you, or X or Y or anyone else does not imply
a) he would have been ok with voting there if nobody else did
b) that he was being difficult to cooperate with
c) that even if he was being difficult to cooperate with that it meant anything for his future prospects on how he'd play this game
it was just an attempt to make someone look bad by you
"I officially announce Fro99er the king of guilties because this is the second time he has guiltied a slot I was really unsure about.
Heil King Froggo.
Ribbit ribbit." -Transcend
STOP FUCKING USING THIS BULLSHIT REASON AS A REASON I AM SCUM
THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT AXEL DID
"I officially announce Fro99er the king of guilties because this is the second time he has guiltied a slot I was really unsure about.
Heil King Froggo.
Ribbit ribbit." -Transcend
@Frogger - The idea that he would never sheep does support A and B cleanly and without effort.
You attacking me off making up my attack on him is just an attempt to make me look bad - and at least I didn't make up anything he said to draw my conclusion.
@Terata - okay, I was only answering because you challenged the logic.
In post 172, Terata wrote:i think you should adapt Frogg's approach in this case, Sheep. Show us you can focus on something else than the one you're tunneling with shit thats boring to read. That will help both you and us more than reading whatever you're doing now, which is being salty at Frogg's annoying (to you) playstyle. Something scum and town could do, so we dont get any info.
I'm sorry I'm boring - I'm not trying to be, and it's how I communicate.
It's page 7 and I've focused on quite a few people - who do you think I need to focus on that I haven't?
I agree that scum could do what Frogger is doing.. I also agree that town could, and it would be bad. Beyond the idea that town might not care to understand someone they're calling scum for bad logic - why is that, in your opinion, *my* issue and not *his and my* issue?
make a quick reads list on the people you have reads on with a sentence or 2 explaining each read, would help. I don't remember much of your reads except for Frogg and the WK stuff
In post 181, Terata wrote:make a quick reads list on the people you have reads on with a sentence or 2 explaining each read, would help. I don't remember much of your reads except for Frogg and the WK stuff
Basically it's still this, but Frogger looks worse for...well, how he's reacting and being hypocritical, and is actually pressing a scum case of 'Sheep attacked someone and asked them to support their stance...then asked me to answer a question, which is something some other player who was scum did in some other game" which looks pretty scummy to me.
In post 107, Cooperative Sheep wrote:I continue to dislike Lowell for the early stuff that he opted to dodge and the notes mentioned here.
Frogger is also looking bad - I stand by the salivating scum comment.
I agree with those who think Gerry bought the slip, I don't think it looks like a slip but I don't need to squint hard to see why he thought it did. I find it a little odd that he's not still pushing on it if he actually thought it was a slip though.
I generally like Naomi's entrance.
I also am okay with Terata.
That said I would tend to expect one scum amongst Terata, Naomi, and Chaos - just due to not having a town read on him and having one on the other two, I'll call it as Chaos.
I agree with people that are not a fan of Uzi's vote, but find it odd that some of these same people aren't citing Lowell.
I think I find Hawk scummier than Uzi, and of about equal scumminess to Lowell.
I'd like to lynch Lowell or Hawk right now, with optional secondaries for Chaos and Frogger.
"I officially announce Fro99er the king of guilties because this is the second time he has guiltied a slot I was really unsure about.
Heil King Froggo.
Ribbit ribbit." -Transcend
ok, i get what you meant now. Even if i don't think the pressure on the is all that relieved even now? but i get it.
and to the list answer. i dont see the "generally like" and "ok with" and "i find Hawk scummier" as explanations. Thats stale reads that i don't see the thought process for and cant evaluate
In post 180, Cooperative Sheep wrote:@Frogger - The idea that he would never sheep does support A and B cleanly and without effort.
"I officially announce Fro99er the king of guilties because this is the second time he has guiltied a slot I was really unsure about.
Heil King Froggo.
Ribbit ribbit." -Transcend
You made one post against me, I responded, you declared that to me being too argumentative to talk to. Eh...okay, I guess?
I don't buy it, but I get what you're selling.
Spoiler: Read Explanations/Embiggenings
In post 185, Terata wrote:ok, i get what you meant now. Even if i don't think the pressure on the is all that relieved even now? but i get it.
and to the list answer. i dont see the "generally like" and "ok with" and "i find Hawk scummier" as explanations. Thats stale reads that i don't see the thought process for and cant evaluate
Well, it is a bunch of reads made off a few posts, i supoose I could say "I like Naomi's entrance because she showed up, made a few reasoned reads I could understand, and applied some pressure out in multiple ways that reads to me like real scumhunting" but I honestly think that's just as empty as saying "I like her entrance" and just as informative.
But, okay, I also like Tetara's entrance, he assessed the game day and didn't immediately align his reads to the crowd which suggests to me the possibility of independant thought (aka I am okay with him) I find Hawk scummy for the reasons implied in the questions I asked at the time;
In post 65, Hawk wrote:Do you not link early wagons? I think it's getting nice content from Sheep. And generating discussion.
What nice content do you think it's getting from me? Mostly I've just been asking questions back.
In post 75, Hawk wrote:Where/are you that confident that Sheep is scum??? Don't you think L-2 this early is dangerous? I mean I understand pressure but that was playing with a bit of fire there Uzi.
You opted to play with a fire, and so did Uzi - what makes his fire the bigger and more dangerous one really?
Basically I felt he was applying double standards (when X does it, it's scummy, when I do it, it's fine) and also that he was making empty commentary about why he did something without actually having gotten anything out of it - which strikes me as a hallmark of fake scumhunting.
In post 180, Cooperative Sheep wrote:@Frogger - The idea that he would never sheep does support A and B cleanly and without effort.
Why not though? If someone will never sheep, which means they never follow anyone elses' thoughts, they aren't cooperating ever.
Sure, reads might align - but they are openly stating zero cooperation unless I'm missing something.
"I officially announce Fro99er the king of guilties because this is the second time he has guiltied a slot I was really unsure about.
Heil King Froggo.
Ribbit ribbit." -Transcend
In post 173, Cooperative Sheep wrote:So you admit you might be misunderstanding me - but your case on me is based on your understanding of my actions, and you don't wish to read my posts nor discuss anything with me?
Here's some shade - if this is how you play as town, it's not good. The very concept of the game is about communication and correctly understanding people to get reads on them. Why are you a proponent of your method instead?
I actually didn't say it made you scum - I did explain why I thought it was bad play.
Am I writing in a way that is confusing somehow? You keep misunderstanding/misrepping me. It's not a good feeling on my end, and seems prone to create argumentative walls, which you suggest you dislike.
In post 177, Fro99er wrote:Him not wanting to sheep you, or X or Y or anyone else does not imply
a) he would have been ok with voting there if nobody else did
Him not wanting to sheep someone does not imply he would have been ok voting there. We cannot make that leap in logic. Perhaps he didn't want to sheep AND he wasn't ok with voting there anyway. WE DONT KNOW THAT.
You simply cannot make that leap in logic.
NOT
FUCKING
AT
ALL
"I officially announce Fro99er the king of guilties because this is the second time he has guiltied a slot I was really unsure about.
Heil King Froggo.
Ribbit ribbit." -Transcend
In post 107, Cooperative Sheep wrote:I'd like to lynch Lowell or Hawk right now, with optional secondaries for Chaos and Frogger.
Says the guy voting Wheme.
(Who also failed to point out Wheme did a WK on him as well but also listed Naomi and Terata as one scum between them and Chaos for a supposed WK (and Terata is the most obvtown in the game so far))
Somehow I moved from secondary to primary.
Got it.
In post 161, Cooperative Sheep wrote:Yeah, when you dodged a question about your lie and are acting like on Page 7 that my reads are changing too much and that my vote isn't changing enough it does get a reaction from me, I'll agree.
You used dodging as a reason for moving me from secondary to primary.
So yes, you used it as a reason to scum read me.
"I officially announce Fro99er the king of guilties because this is the second time he has guiltied a slot I was really unsure about.
Heil King Froggo.
Ribbit ribbit." -Transcend
The leap in logic was about lack of cooperation - I explained why it makes sense to me. It has nothing to do about whether he may or may not have eventually been okay voting there - AND I NEVER SAID IT DID.
There is ZERO attempt from you to understand if misreps and ignoring walls is even my town play. You're either in a confbiased tunnel because you hate my push on you...or you're scum. Probably scum for not even attempting to understand my play. Just shouting MISREP and YOU DIDNT READ
"I officially announce Fro99er the king of guilties because this is the second time he has guiltied a slot I was really unsure about.
Heil King Froggo.
Ribbit ribbit." -Transcend
In post 192, Fro99er wrote:You used dodging as a reason for moving me from secondary to primary.
So yes, you used it as a reason to scum read me.
I also cited your lie - want to discuss it now?
WHAT LIE?
"I officially announce Fro99er the king of guilties because this is the second time he has guiltied a slot I was really unsure about.
Heil King Froggo.
Ribbit ribbit." -Transcend
In post 164, Fro99er wrote:I never dodge questions as town. Never. (sarcasm for those that don't get it)
Do you misrep as town?
No,
but I can misunderstand as town.
I didn't even read that part of your wall because I am sick of your walls and your demands that I answer you.
I addressed what you thought was a lie. I said I misunderstood.
"I officially announce Fro99er the king of guilties because this is the second time he has guiltied a slot I was really unsure about.
Heil King Froggo.
Ribbit ribbit." -Transcend
