In post 135, Burning_Earth wrote:
Basically Cho exhibited strong town reads. She used the word 'unlynchable' as strong town reads shouldn't be lynched. It is, I admit, a little odd to include herself within they 'unlynchable' pile, but is it really that different to putting yourself at the very top of a T/S list?
Yes, it is, and if you want to continue the comparison you would then suddenly not appear on the T/S list.
In post 135, Burning_Earth wrote:
A: She was right, RVS was over. Don't know what you're getting at.
B: Oh come on, everyone uses strong language early game. I didn't really want to lynch egg when I voted him, I just scum read him mildly. The same with cho making out her townreads as stronger than they really were
C: see B
This is such a terrible way of justifying Cho's actions. I don't know why you're wasting your time with this guff other than some ridiculous innate need to go against my opinions.
Maybe RVS was over; I'm not scumreading her for believing it, but it shows that she's already following Elyse blindly.
I've said before, though, that my main problem isn't even the term of Unlynchable. It's the backtracking after, the regressing of the reads in that section and regression of criteria needed to leave them, to be wordy.
This is a great example of you not actually reading my posts, but skimming and seeing what you think you should see.
In post 135, Burning_Earth wrote:
I retract my statement that this point was OMGUS. In fact, cho was OMGUSing. However, that is a reasonable town tell, not a scum tell. Scum know not to OMGUS like that.
OMGUS. Is. Not. A. Town. Tell. This is a really, really bad meta which is starting to spread around the site and I hate it so much. OMGUS is the easiest thing for scum to do under pressure, as well as the most likely. OMGUS is a definite scumtell. There's a strong difference between Town OMGUS and Scum. Hers is undoubtedly scum; her reasoning is she doesn't like me/I'm scumreading her. Not Town, no no, bad Burning_Earth.
Lurking after sustained pressure, however, is scummy as it gets.
In post 144, Cho wrote:
T S O is a
null
leaning
I-hope-you-are-scum
read for me.
My vote is still on him because I don't like unnecessarily mean people.
So you don't have any real reason for voting me, in other words.
In post 144, Cho wrote:I was lurking out the pressure like a true townfuck.
No, you weren't.
In post 144, Cho wrote:It's also depressing to try and fight off a lynch when certain people are determined to use every new post you make as a way to further their confirmation bias.
Confirmation bias implies I'm scum. Apparently you're not calling me scum. Which is it?
In post 144, Cho wrote:I am aware T S O posted a "case" that apparently proves that I am scum.
I'm not responding because anything I say will just give him more "ammunition".
Alternatively, to me, you can't respond because it's all true, and then you act like it's unbelievable I'm still calling you scum.
In post 156, Elyse wrote:Didn't like Cho's most recent post but I don't know if it's necessarily scummy.
I didn't like it either, but it's not particularly scummy.
It doesn't alleviate my read, though.
That's great and all, I guess.
Oh you.
In post 181, Cho wrote:
Where did I say that I won't lynch scum? I like my vote on you because not only is trying to read you...
polarizing
... but I don't particularly like your behavior either.
You can't read me and you don't like my behaviour, so you're voting me.
How many explanations have you given for your vote on me now? You can't read me, you don't like my behaviour, I'm trying to run the game, more ...it's remarkable.
In post 181, Cho wrote:You may be a null read for me now, but I'm ok with my vote because you still could be overaggressive Scum, according to what people have said about your playstyle.
Who are these people, Cho?
In post 183, Cho wrote:
I like to think I can deal with regular tunneling.
Well, your lurking suggests you can't.
In post 183, Cho wrote:Lashing out at anyone who tried to tell you that you're wrong- I'm less inclined to accept.
I agree with this. Although I didn't lash out at people for disagreeing with me (I haven't attacked Elyse, I attacked Burning for laziness and rudeness) your voting of me for scumreading you is something I have said I don't accept.
In post 183, Cho wrote:It's not like everything Scum say is textbook-scummy.
And I haven't picked on everything you've said, so this is true, but you have told me and the game a whole load of scummy stuff and your explanations don't add up whatsoever for the majority of them.
In post 183, Cho wrote:And it's not like everything Town does is "by the book". I've been hoping this whole time that your blind aggression comes from Scum for sanity's sake, but with so many people saying you read as Town, I want to be stubborn with my read but I know I need to concede in some way at some point or another. So you're Null for now.
So you're bowing to pressure in not scumreading me, because you stand out by scumreading me, then.
And they say I'm dramatising this case.
Explain how your read transitioned from T -> S -> T to me, Elyse.
In post 193, Egg wrote:
Cho's disappearance is pretty bad. It's pretty common for scum to feel pressure and fade into the background until someone else does something scummy. Her admission of this doesn't make it a town thing to do by the way.
THANK YOU, EGG.