"I hope one day I can openly play as wolfy as Pooky and get zero pressure for it grumble grumble."
-MariaR
"I can't even look at the game anymore.
That evil teddy bear has got everyone twirling by his thumb.
It's like witnessing an slow but unavoidable train crash you can't stop."
Art is scum.
I can't really put my finger on it but the way they're viewing the game is very 1 dimensional.
Also has to do with who i think they are
Its all "this post good so player good" and vague assignments like logic/tone that aren't even valid tools outside of pushing out of RVS.
After their accusation of putting implo and i as teamed i realized their pov is completely whack and their perspective is not town here.
In post 94, The Coalition wrote:GL reasoning works backwards, starting at "this person is X" and then tries to manufacture reasons for it. I'm not sure where people get townreads on that but its like blatantly scum and I'm vetoing all coalitions with them on it.
a) where do you see me doing that?
b) Do you disagree with any of my townreads (Iverson, Cheek, Vulture) in my coalition? If not, this is a bizarrely harsh reaction to the fact that I'm scumreading you
I really liked 94. The "fuck you and the horse you rode in on" vibe I'm getting does read completely like bravado and may even be performative. How has The Coaltion being outed as Koba as of post 128 effected how you feel about the theatrics of their behavior?
Also, what experience do you have with Koba? I'm looking over MN 2199 (starting at day 2) and MN 2205 to spot a difference.
Also i figured out Iverson= Nexus, only person who is offended by my mere existence. If anyone has meta on them. Still think they're town from a fresh perspective though.
In post 408, PookyTheMagicalBear wrote:cuz my boy Prism told me Implosion's a scumbag and I can always blame him if the read is wrong.
Also I'm just sticking to townteaming the people I think I have a decent read on and I'm not gonna bother trying to read people I might not be able to read well.
>:/
so you're just reading implosion based on the say-so of your predecessor? That seems like a pretty shitty way to play. If your predecessor is wrong, it allows for no correction of the read because there's no effective way to change the mind of someone who has left the game.
you've netted a demerit to your townpoints, because tbh this feels like how scum!menalque tried to SR me off my predecessor's meta in Pokemon Ruby Mafia
-G
In post 408, PookyTheMagicalBear wrote:cuz my boy Prism told me Implosion's a scumbag and I can always blame him if the read is wrong.
Also I'm just sticking to townteaming the people I think I have a decent read on and I'm not gonna bother trying to read people I might not be able to read well.
>:/
so you're just reading implosion based on the say-so of your predecessor? That seems like a pretty shitty way to play. If your predecessor is wrong, it allows for no correction of the read because there's no effective way to change the mind of someone who has left the game.
you've netted a demerit to your townpoints, because tbh this feels like how scum!menalque tried to SR me off my predecessor's meta in Pokemon Ruby Mafia
-G
This comes across like a punishment for not townreading implosion more than an effort to get Pooky to think critically.
well that's because I'm not going to jump straight to SRing pooky over something that admittedly is probably a minor issue
Do I think what he is doing looks questionable, yes, but when pretty much everything else from that slot has felt towny, I think the best way to express my feelings is to say "you're losing points for this".
-G
In post 437, Vulture wrote:What’s your read on implosion again, and why?
I think he's town, because he's been posting things that seem well-thought out and genuine, and he also just isn't giving me the vibes I've gotten when playing against scum!implo before
-G
In post 437, Vulture wrote:436 feels like an inappropriate reaction. “Well I guess I shouldn’t talk at all, huh?” Rather than engaging the point.
also that wasn't what I meant
I don't feel like your criticism applied to anything but the last line of my post, so like, why does "I guess I shouldn't have mentioned any of this" seem like a logical response to "the scum feelings mentioned don't feel genuine"? This honestly feels like an uncharitable interpretation of my response.
-G
In post 377, PookyTheMagicalBear wrote:dude if you have a problem with my coalition you need to tell me who on my coalition is a baddie and why they're a baddie
There's nothing mandating I do this.
this feels dodgy/hedgy/scumbaglogic
Well, it's poorly phrased but he's right
As I just did, it is possible to object to a coalition because someone is not in it that you think should be, rather than someone being in it that you think shouldn't.
-G
In post 432, The Coalition wrote:Also i figured out Iverson= Nexus, only person who is offended by my mere existence. If anyone has meta on them. Still think they're town from a fresh perspective though.
In post 36, Iverson wrote:For anyone who missed it in signups, I am publicly Prism.
I thought the angle they took to use Vulture as a way to attempt to read/sort implosion as well as the Gamma metaread were nuanced thought processes that are difficult to fake as scum, also the way they navigated reading GL vs Kobalition as a TvT - didn't try to stir things up from the sidelines nor make a bid for towncred by over-emphasizing it as a TvT read.
"I think I no longer believe in monsters as faces in the floor or feral infants or vampires or whatever. I think at seventeen now I believe the only real monsters might be the type of liar where there's simply no way to tell. The ones who give nothing away"
In post 350, Datisi wrote:PookyTheMagicalBear [5]: GuiltyLion, PookyTheMagicalBear, Art, The Cheek of Gamma, Vulture
does any1 have a problem with my coalition
lets hear some criticism.
"im not on it" is not a valid complaint.
I'm not confident about Art, what makes you more sure on Art than higher content slots like Kobalition/implosion?
overall I think it's a good coalition though I don't think I'd object to it
"I think I no longer believe in monsters as faces in the floor or feral infants or vampires or whatever. I think at seventeen now I believe the only real monsters might be the type of liar where there's simply no way to tell. The ones who give nothing away"
I think we need to be forcing the issue more on the Coalition, we can't delay that until the last second before deadline cause we'd be forced into a rushed elimination if it fails. And scum panic/manipulation if they are not included will be easier to see if we're closer to locking a Coalition.
I think I'll join Pooky's coalition at the moment, I'm confident in Pooky/Cheek/Vulture and willing to sheep on Art HURT: implosion HEAL: Art
"I think I no longer believe in monsters as faces in the floor or feral infants or vampires or whatever. I think at seventeen now I believe the only real monsters might be the type of liar where there's simply no way to tell. The ones who give nothing away"
