In post 766, Dunnstral wrote:The only thing these players are experienced in is getting banned, and it shows.
In post 781, Dunnstral wrote:Can you explain to me how, if I'm scum, me allegedly not trying to lynch you is scummy? Especially with this wagon on me. Simplify it for me, please.
In post 795, Dunnstral wrote:There are a good amount of players with less scumhunting than I.In post 791, thepixiecollective wrote:I think it isIn post 772, Dunnstral wrote:Well, I don't think that's fairIn post 770, thepixiecollective wrote:you are being pushed for your lack of scumhunting.
dissuade me
Espeonage, Kokichi, Camntsuki, arguably Nacho, arguably Kuribo
That's not to say they're scummy for it - just seems weird that I'm the one being pushed for it with everything else going on
Besides, I've done my fair share of scumhunting. You think just because my read on someone is null, that I haven't been doing any sorting? Null is where they belong, I don't need a conclusion day 1. I've been progressing the game.
he didIn post 794, Dunnstral wrote:I want camntsuki to explain why, in their own words.In post 792, thepixiecollective wrote:because your vote on cupcake w/o you explaining it looks like you are just going along with a cupcake lynch and its not something you believe inIn post 784, Dunnstral wrote:Don't give me that. I want you to explain why It is scummy, because you are pushing it like it is a reason to vote for me. Unless.... you don't want to advance your scumread? No, say it isn't so camntsuki. Surely you can explain your reasoning here.
you look like scftwr instead of pushing a lynch that you actually believe in
by voting some1 you are not pushing for? how is that gamesolving?In post 795, Dunnstral wrote:There are a good amount of players with less scumhunting than I.In post 791, thepixiecollective wrote:I think it isIn post 772, Dunnstral wrote:Well, I don't think that's fairIn post 770, thepixiecollective wrote:you are being pushed for your lack of scumhunting.
dissuade me
Espeonage, Kokichi, Camntsuki, arguably Nacho, arguably Kuribo
That's not to say they're scummy for it - just seems weird that I'm the one being pushed for it with everything else going on
Besides, I've done my fair share of scumhunting. You think just because my read on someone is null, that I haven't been doing any sorting? Null is where they belong, I don't need a conclusion day 1. I've been progressing the game.
I don't consider this an explanation, Pixie. He even says "who knows" in there, as well as "we don't try to understand"In post 783, camntsuki wrote:BAD IS BAD WHO KNOWSIn post 781, Dunnstral wrote:Can you explain to me how, if I'm scum, me allegedly not trying to lynch you is scummy? Especially with this wagon on me. Simplify it for me, please.
WE DONT TRY TO UNDERSTAND THE THOUGHT PROCESS OF THE SUTPID
sometimes repeating 1self gets oldIn post 797, Dunnstral wrote:Camntsuki is anexperienced player, Pixie. I'm sure they can back up what they said on their own.
If I'm mafia with 4 votes on me, why is "not pushing the player I am voting" scummy, in my position? That's what I'm asking Camntsuki. I don't want you to asnwer that. I want to see Camntsuki's thought process here.+In post 806, thepixiecollective wrote:sometimes repeating 1self gets old
you can only say "I think you are scum because you are not pushing the player you are voting" so many times.
I didn't say you were scum. I never did. You're dead null.In post 801, kuribo wrote:This is rich coming from a guy who refuses to vote me but still wants to paint me as scum
HOW THE FUCK AM I NOT SCUM HUNTING
In post 809, Dunnstral wrote:But mafia isn't a one on one kind of game,
that said, "this person can explain this better than I can". how is saying "yikes" a ladder response?In post 798, AnonymousGhost wrote:Alright then. /shrugIn post 788, thepixiecollective wrote:except you are connecting me to the player you are saying is my scum partner, so yes, you ARE saying I am scum because of it.
FMPOV I'm voting scum, thus furthering the game. I'm not picky.In post 788, thepixiecollective wrote:if you think that muffina and I are scum together why wld you not push 1 of us? it seems like it wld further the game from your (very wrong) perspective more than a staeg lynch.
Based on our back and forth alone, people might go back and check out what my original point against both you and Muffin was... so there's no need to clog up the thread with a neon flashing sign of my push.
In post 788, thepixiecollective wrote:cos the timing and interaction of dunns/muffina did not make sense from a town POV. and it seems weird that you did not pick up on that.In post 798, AnonymousGhost wrote:What exactly was Isupposedto pick up from that? Like... you're telling me how Dunn validated something based off of what Muffin said earlier was funny, but it seems like a case of "this person said it better than I can, so please look to your left [at what they said]".
[/quote][/quote]In post 798, AnonymousGhost wrote:so then what do you think scum are exactly doing here? discussing reads and voting the person they are pushing for? if so then scum are doing a much better job at scumhunting then scum themselves.In post 798, AnonymousGhost wrote:I want a Staeg lynch. He's a scum read and unrelated to both Muffin and scum theater.In post 788, thepixiecollective wrote:what is it that you specifically want? and besides "gut" and scum theatre with muffina, whom you cld also be going after but for some reason are not, do you think that I am scum?
yeah except that isn't what we did. we discussed reads. this is pretty apparent in the discussion of reads that we gave.In post 798, AnonymousGhost wrote:Both Muffin and you are scum because of the hedging/waffling - lots of "buts", "I'm not sure", "I'll solve it later", etc. - I saw in that interaction on pages 23 and 24 and nothing changed about either of your opinions about the alignments of the players that you guys talked about, hence... scum theater, talking for the sake of talking, yada yada yada.
That's literally it.
That is why I scum read you two. Not Steag. You two: Muffin and Pixie.
muffina thinks cupcake is sus and that dunns is town. he disagreed with my readslist.
how is that "talking for the sake of talking"
In post 789, thepixiecollective wrote:you are going for the "safe" read of a wagon that was already started that I am not really clear on your motivation for doing so except its popular.In post 798, AnonymousGhost wrote:Except Staeg is a scum read... so, my motivation should be clear.
[votes a proclaimed scum read][it's a good guess that this person wants to lynch scum]
Like... who cares if it's popular? Or safe?
If Staeg gets lynched and flips green, then it'll be clear that it's the furtherest thing from safe and everyone on that wagon will probably get squinted at and maybe someone on that wagon will get lynched on D2.
what you seem to be telling me is that you feel wishy washy about staeg.
I kinda get what you're saying with me not pushing an "unpopular" read, but I gave the reason why I scum read both you and Muffin. If people ask me for my reads, I'm literally just going to quote those posts for them. That's about as much effort as I'm willing to push my reads.
Not sure where you're going with this, yikes is hundreds of posts before the other thing, not a response to itIn post 813, thepixiecollective wrote:that said, "this person can explain this better than I can". how is saying "yikes" a ladder response?
except...I sometimes get the right conclusions so why are you discrediting that?In post 807, Dunnstral wrote:I think AG is pretty obvious town, and their recent posting reinforces that. I think you're getting whooped by them in this argument you two have going too. I see where they're coming from when they explain how you/muffins can be scum together for coming to no conclusions, though don't really agree with it (like I can see it, but it doesn't have to be true). I don't really think you're mafia Pixie, you just have a different way of looking at things, which I believe gets you a lot of wrong conclusions
and how in the world did you arrive to this conclusion?In post 810, Dunnstral wrote:Pixie, what do you think about Nacho? I have them leaning as town
except you said it was a response to muffina's reads.In post 815, Dunnstral wrote:Not sure where you're going with this, yikes is hundreds of posts before the other thing, not a response to itIn post 813, thepixiecollective wrote:that said, "this person can explain this better than I can". how is saying "yikes" a ladder response?
AG isn't voting you, you're just one of many possibilities to them. I don't think you are a likely possibility. I didn't discredit you.In post 816, thepixiecollective wrote:and if you think ag is "whooping" me then why do you not agree with it? I mean "whooping" implies that you think he has valid points against us which you are saying that he does not have.
Muffin said he'd lynch camntsuki, me, kokichi, feysal, nacho in post 141. I didn't agree with that list of early reads, so I said yikes. Case closed.In post 141, zMuffinMan wrote:currently want to lynch in these players, unless they start looking town:
{cupcake, dunnstral, cupcake, kokichi, cupcake,feysal, cupcake,nacho, cupcake}
maybe add cupcake to that list
This is talking about me hundreds of posts later from the second part of the sentance, you're confusing yourselfIn post 813, thepixiecollective wrote:that said, "this person can explain this better than I can"
cos if you are looking for associations and trying to sort my alignment it wld be a good place to start to see if I am coming from a town POV which you are refusing to do and instead are pushing a narrative that requires muffina and I to be scum together while not voting either of us. when I think muffina might be scum with dunnstral.In post 818, AnonymousGhost wrote:Why should I pay attention to this yikes?
If that's what you think I'm telling you after all this time, then I'm going to stop explaining. I can't get my point across to you and no amount of me repeating myself is successful. So... YOLO~
In the realm of numbers, there's currently 8 votes split even between Staeg and Dunnstral. The likelihood that these wagons are going to self-vote is minimal, so that leaves 3 votes floating in oblivion. Me splitting off my vote for some vanity wagon is stupid because all it's doing is subtracting from the majority, thus lessening the chances of a lynch occurring.