omg you broke my post chain meanie
best remember that i fucking eat roosters for breakfast n00b
omg you broke my post chain meanie
oh just saw this post, I understand your progression a bit more now.In post 2099, rosterfoster wrote:I was getting some town feels from HL with the latest posts. I think they were after my vote though, and I was considering HL. *shrug*
I don’t really count my reads tbh.
Pedit we’re *shrug* buddies! :O.
as long as it isnt shitposting ;DVedith wrote:Can I just say I'll make a productive post on Thursday and just slide by until then?
Yeah I'm behind due to work.
umIn post 1974, Wiisp wrote:#1960 was a good post btw, probably should be a good enough post to move you up to town, but I'm not, because I'm petty and I don't like you
how have i been townie?this feels like too easy of a readIn post 2078, rosterfoster wrote:And Sky’s been townie.
I haven't read anything you posted in fairness.
I fundamentally disagree with this.In post 1960, Shining Dreamers wrote:Meta absolutely is still valid. Less than a year is enough time to change your playstyle if you've been active, but less than a year is not enough time for a change to occur when you've been inactive. That's 1-2 years, minimum.
considering ive had at least three major life events in that past month (graduation/new job/moved), plus the fact that my play here is reflective of 6 months of absence whereas my play when i left the site was reflective of a few months of playing forum mafia constantly, i also have to disagree w this as there's been a lot that's changed me as a person and my absence undoubtedly changed my play as it took me a bit to get back into the swing of thingIn post 1960, Shining Dreamers wrote:Meta absolutely is still valid. Less than a year is enough time to change your playstyle if you've been active, but less than a year is not enough time for a change to occur when you've been inactive. That's 1-2 years, minimum.
Yeah no.In post 1992, Game of Throws wrote:Stop hiding behind this notion that people need to explain their scumreads more than they have - everybody has gone in depth on scumreads on the wagons in question. Instead of asking for people to take a step back, is there anything you can point to that makes the wagons bad to you? Who would you rather lynch? And yes you really need to have an answer for that question this far into the gameIn post 1868, Reasonably Clever wrote:I also fundamentally disagree with the idea that the onus lies on everyone else to explain why they're townreading any particular slot, in the absence of anything resembling a smoking gun for any given slot. Most of the game is town. The onus is on the people who want a lynch to go through to provide compelling arguments for why that lynch is the best, NOT encourage town apathy/laziness by suggesting that "oh hey, you might as well just jump on this wagon because it's D1 and you don't have a defensible reason to townread anyone".
Are those mechanical reasons strong enough that getting those votes transferred to you would be okay?In post 2117, Skygazer wrote:if i said there are mysterious mechanical reasons as to why i don't want to lynch lightning rn would you all take ur votes off of them?