yeah I would 100% pocket you for sureIn post 373, skitter30 wrote:ngl none of this has really reassured me of you being town, and i'm also a little paranoid because i don't think that scum!you tries to mislynch me here like ever; i think you nearly always try to pocket me till u can nk me so when i see you hard-townreading me and trying to get me to townread you i get a little nervous
i wonder why 
Same with this post where he makes sure to explain why the question is relevant. This one comes with the added benefit of undercutting a vote on him.In post 166, ChannelDelibird wrote:You're clearly reading in order; why did you not respond to #121?
I think the post i quoted in an earlier post is a pocket attemptIn post 123, ChannelDelibird wrote:Bob, did you consider voting for Egix in this post? Your reasoning here doesn't seem any weaker than the reasoning for your previous vote on me.
quoting this because I didn't like how I buried it in the previous postIn post 174, ChannelDelibird wrote:UNVOTE: Egix
I'd pretty much convinced myself as of my own #121 ('Egix decided he'd done a clever and useful reactions test, therefore assumed one of the reactions to it must have been from scum' is a reasonably common town thought process and the one that made the most sense to explain #104), and his responses just now all fit with a pretty solid 'bullheaded town' mindset. I think scum would have been more likely to concede me a point over #121, but Egix is sticking with his (misguided) thought process while still being able to open-mindedly address other issues like my calling out of RuiRui. Not lynching here for now.
VOTE: RuiRui
I am definitely trying to pocket you, but as town. =PIn post 380, skitter30 wrote:kinda paranoid you *are* trying to pocket me
Thanks mate, appreciate ya.In post 385, ChannelDelibird wrote:Urap: I've already pretty much answered your question to skitter earlier, but: I would describe myself as a competent-but-unexceptional player who is capable of occasional great scum games but usually is noticeably worse at it than town.
this is probably a better way of describing my read on him ^^^^In post 128, skitter30 wrote:you fall into that group of people that i want to townread for arguing well and for making sense, which is a bit of a blindspot for me
not entirely sure how i'll sort you
like, this is clearly a guy hamming it up rn.In post 389, ChannelDelibird wrote:I'll see if I can actually find words for 382 tomorrow instead of just rolling my eyes at it. Yeesh.
I got to the gambit discussion through gamr's iso, loveIn post 392, Inferno390 wrote:If you haven’t read through Exil, how are you so sure on the Gamr/Exil associative?
This makes me roll my eyes probably more than it make CDB roll his eyes at 382.In post 391, u r a person 2 wrote:like, this is clearly a guy hamming it up rn.In post 389, ChannelDelibird wrote:I'll see if I can actually find words for 382 tomorrow instead of just rolling my eyes at it. Yeesh.
town can be dramatic, but it's gotta be scum indicative over all, ya?
I believe in my town reads.In post 393, skitter30 wrote:bleh idk everything you're saying feels kinda reachy
like you're looking for things to push but like don't really believe it idk
like no why is this scum indicativeIn post 391, u r a person 2 wrote:like, this is clearly a guy hamming it up rn.In post 389, ChannelDelibird wrote:I'll see if I can actually find words for 382 tomorrow instead of just rolling my eyes at it. Yeesh.
town can be dramatic, but it's gotta be scum indicative over all, ya?
I think over reactions probably come from scum more than town? I really don't think this is controversial, and I didn't say it was damning. I said that town can be dramatic, but that it's probably scum-indicative in the aggregate and I think that's absolutely true?In post 397, skitter30 wrote:like no why is this scum indicative
like if i don't think about it sounds good but if like i actually think about it ... why is this obviously scum indicative?