I feel your pain; let me help.In post 430, Wake1 wrote:Hey all.
I'll be more active at night (I work nights).
After about 10 PM I'll be able to read through the game.
![:]](./images/smilies/icon_smiling.png "Cheerful Smile"){kind=icon}
No.In post 520, pisskop wrote:looker, do you agree with me re:flub?
I agree.In post 608, Wake1 wrote:Day 1 I've got nothing to work with, so someone needs to die, and soon.
I thought it was to purposely discourage reading the thread.In post 631, Doctor Drew wrote:Is shit posting a thing that Pisskop does normally?
Especially since Gamma joined the game it has been shade throwing, drunk posting, all with little actuall content.
And don't me wrong, I am all for that......but maybe with a smidge more solving of the game.
No.In post 642, Flubbernugget wrote:Guys should I vote tse or gamma
I was unaware I was supposed to take this seriously; however, checking any of the votecounts adds clarity.
Pisskop and anyone else who uses four consecutive posts to write four sentences.In post 650, Gamma Emerald wrote:Sometimes, who do you think is spamming?
So the intent is to remove the mystery? There'd be no way to hide being a double-voter until L-2 hammer. It's above my comprehension at this point.In post 691, The Baker wrote:In post 690, Blatant Scum wrote:@mod, if there were a guy whos votes count as 2, would you count his vote under "not voting" section as one vote or as two votes? Is the threshold based on number of living players or number of votes? (if yurkin is telling the truth about having his vote count as two, would this increase the threshold?)The threshold is for the amount of living players. If yurkin votes for someone at L-2, that's the lynch. I didn't at first, as to let them decide when they came out as double voter, but from now on (since it is public knowledge) if yurkin is not voting anyone, the amount of votes they have will be reflected in the not voting count.
Hey
Agreed.In post 750, Crimson97 wrote:VOTE: pisskop
I'd have to check Gamma's metal but if two people say he always plays like he's playing, i believe it. Scum wouldn't expose themselves like that.
In post 710, pisskop wrote:it's when I am universally townread that you should be concernedAlso i don't like these.In post 711, pisskop wrote:not when i aim to offend as a habit
Was this vote random or was there a legitimate suspicion?
In post 772, pisskop wrote:[drunken rabble]
I just learned a new word/phrase. Thank you.In post 805, pisskop wrote:none of 772 et al. is drunken, memetic jerk
I agree; it's also condescending and negligently convenient.In post 812, Crimson97 wrote:Wouldn't this be borderline gamethrowing if real?In post 797, pisskop wrote:its a lesson i think we need to teach the newer players on the list.
Are you more comfortable with Lavender's questioning? Because, despite her interactions giving you the heebie-jeebies, the only interaction you've really had with her is to ask others why they suspect her over anyone else.In post 825, Gamma Emerald wrote:Hm
I kinda think Looker is a decent counter to EFN
Questioning just feels empty to me
VOTE: Looker
Do you feel that replacing out makes a slot scummier?In post 826, Gamma Emerald wrote:Ok this increases my willingness to let EFN be lynchedIn post 799, The Baker wrote:SMDH, also looking for a replacement for Emperor flippyNips. Too many damn replaces. I wish I could do something about this, sorry.
Are you saying that you found EmperorFN scummy before and don't want to vote him now because he's replacing out, or do you have someone else who is more deserving of your vote?In post 830, Yodavader wrote:I don't know if this is needed or not but UNVOTE: . I had PK as a random to start the game and kept it on him because I didn't like the shitposting that was going on but when I think about it, I don't think that he is the best place to keep my vote.
I don't like voting for a person who is about to be replaced without the replacement having a chance to play, at least with a couple of IRL days left before the end of the day.
I'm pretty sure he'd die as scum as well.In post 834, Blatant Scum wrote:Emperor is L-1?
If someone hammers him (and Emperor ends up town), he will die.
I still want more information from the EmperorFN and Gyro Zeppeli slots, but it'll take time for their replacements to catch up. I think Lavender should be caught up by now.In post 800, Looker wrote:The high replace rate is throwing me off. I'm biased and find it somewhat towny. I'm willing to keep my vote on FlippyNips until they actually replace out, but I'll then be moving my vote to Gyro. I find pisskop annoying; however, paranoia of opportunistic scum won't allow me to jump on his wagon.
This reads to me that you're not actively pursuing scum. It reads to me that you're only looking for info to run up wagons and build your own defense. Especially when you only mention people with high wagons.In post 802, Lavender wrote:I’ll also keep my vote on Flibby, since kop is doing stuff and getting conversation going.
If Flibby’s replacement seems well and good I’ll read other ISO’s and see who else seems scummy.
In a post from sometime yesterday, Looker wrote:Now that she's back on it, what are your thoughts?In post 851, Gamma Emerald wrote: EFN repping out recontextualized my thoughts to where I was okay with the lynch since it didn’t feel like beating a dead horse.
And Lavender slipped under my radar.
I look forward to hearing what you think about the player list.In post 856, jjh927 wrote:Disperse wagon
If EmperorFN's wagon was based on inactivity and wanting to run anyone up to L-1, then why was he chosen over Lavender? Also,, I'm not seeing where yurkin voted Emperor. The last vote I have him placing is below.@MOD
That's good. Now why?In post 866, yurkin wrote:Well between lavender and looker I'd rather lynch looker
Posts his thoughts. Are you familiar?In post 873, TrueSoulEnergy wrote:Are you blind?In post 872, Looker wrote:I'm assuming Emperor's wagon will remain until his replacement posts thoughts?
His replacement did post.
Is that the plan? Just work from that post onward?In post 881, Titus wrote:The skeletons will greet you before that happens.In post 850, Doctor Drew wrote:Also Titus has replaced, correct? Awaiting their catch-up.
Do you want it to end with a dead jjh927?
So is it that you're saying that scum wouldn't be cautious enough to build protection from the other half of night investigations?In post 930, jjh927 wrote:I have high confidence that it's a trueclaim and have identified the strongest reason for this.
What specifically makes you not trust the claimIn post 879, jjh927 wrote:I'll give very strong odds on that being a trueclaim that can only come from town
Scum odd-night commuter wouldn't claim miller commuter when they're already gonna be immune from investigations half the nights anyway
Would you feel more comfortable if she sniffed out OMGUSers? Is there anyone else that gives you 'the heebie-jeebies'?In post 1023, Doctor Drew wrote:Jesus Lavender....you are voting the leading wagon partially because RVS?
I can't process this, crazily is a town tell now for me. I can't see a scum lavender being so brazen.
Would DEB put in a jester? Was this known as bastardy going in?
I don't remember how to play. Also, I was suspicious of a distracting player at that point. It could've been innocuous, but I just wanted someone to notice me. I'm out of my depth here.In post 1165, yurkin wrote:What was the point of these questions, and I'm talking about looker
The adamance with which he urged everyone to claim doesn't line up with simply forgetting to perform a night action. You appeared intensely focused beforehand.Alchemist21 wrote:If this is true that’s actually kind of hilarious.In post 2622, Creature wrote:I forgot to :/
I need more of your help than you've been giving. Who do you suspect? (Because I suspect you)In post 2649, Flubbernugget wrote:Bruh the game just opened relax
Interesting. "Stupid".In post 2665, Titus wrote:Then talk to me Looker. Pisskop's TR of you buys you a day. No matter how stupid I think your opinion is, I will not vote you today. I am following his reads.
I'm not stuck; I have a read on everyone here. I didn't trust the cover of claims that was going around - I thought yours and pisskop's claim was the least confirmable. Now that he's flipped, I'm sure I can find where he named you as his buddy. I'm biased toward Creature and Eve being town because I'm accustomed to scum enjoying their role and not replacing out as much. I've never seen a scum double-voter, so I don't suspect yurkin, and Egix is an innocent child. The rest I determine by how they interact with each other.In post 2665, Titus wrote:If you are stuck at where to start, ask yourself why you thought I was scum and write stream of consciousness until you hit every player.
What specifically? I think that would help.In post 2666, Doctor Drew wrote:Titus, you cannot in good conscience say that Looker is town here. I understand you trusting pisskops reads, but look at their posts today..... especially in regards to Creature.
Where? If he is, as long as no one else votes him, he should be fine. I sometimes use votes to remind me players exist, especially when they don't post and require prods. I'm still not opposed to replacing him.In post 2672, chennisden wrote:I think that if looker believes grudgingly flub is town he should unvote
Also isn't flub semicleared
Your sig is gone, sir.In post 2673, Doctor Drew wrote:Also, I am I crazy.....do you see my sig?
I don't believe you. I believe you're bluffing and desperately stirring up nonsense to see what sticks.In post 2674, Looker wrote:What specifically? I think that would help.In post 2666, Doctor Drew wrote:Titus, you cannot in good conscience say that Looker is town here. I understand you trusting pisskops reads, but look at their posts today..... especially in regards to Creature.
That was passive and wishy-washy - which question would you like answered? Also, who are you? Your replacing in is null because TSE flaked the site.In post 2675, chennisden wrote:Idk looker seems kind of below the surface to me
Her answers feel evasive
I kinda dont like the slot
Scum would know and we haven't lynched any of them yet, so I'd be leery of multiple units acting as one in order to deceive, like a ring of "confirmed claims" using themselves as investigative roles.In post 2679, Titus wrote:But we don't know either alignmentIn post 2669, chennisden wrote:I also don't like how Looker didn't unvote fluber
In post 2674, Looker wrote:I'm not stuck; I have a read on everyone here. I didn't trust the cover of claims that was going around - I thought yours and pisskop's claim was the least confirmable. Now that he's flipped, I'm sure I can find where he named you as his buddy. I'm biased toward Creature and Eve being town because I'm accustomed to scum enjoying their role and not replacing out as much. I've never seen a scum double-voter, so I don't suspect yurkin, and Egix is an innocent child. The rest I determine by how they interact with each other.
I second this, if you even have a result to share.
In post 2696, Doctor Drew wrote:Where the fuck is Creature?
I am still not claiming, I will only divulge my role to confirmed Town. If you are in fact a neighborizer, put me in a hood with either Titus or Egix and I will tell them my role. Then they can do whatever they feel comfortable doing with this info. This also has a secondary effect of confirming your(Creatures) role.
I am not giving my role when there are scum eyes looking.
Also forgot I wasn't voting Looker.
VOTE: Looker
Where did I tunnel Titus? I don't recall doing that. I suspected him because, as stated in Post 2674, "I didn't trust the cover of claims that was going around - I thought yours and pisskop's claim was the least confirmable."In post 2701, chennisden wrote:For starters why did you tunnel Titus
In post 2702, chennisden wrote:Do you have a good reason to believe his role is not valuable
And if so
Why does his bluff make him scum
I have no reason to believe you or your results.In post 2704, Alchemist21 wrote:Looker, I have given my result already when I said Flubber is innocent. This was pointed out again to BS by Titus just before that big post of yours. I am voting you because you have ignored the result and continue to vote Flubber, and the first time you were called out for this you tried to pass it off as some kind of reminder to yourself. I don’t see your actions here as coming from Town.
I also don't feel that bad distrusting you, knowing that I'm not alone.
You also didn't answer my question - what were your results? I feel like you're letting me down by potentially wasting an investigation on a lurker when it could've been used to confirm an active player. That could've also been "purposely" done.In post 2614, Titus wrote:That's the beauty. We don't need to trust him. We'll confirm his results at lylo plus 1 day worst case scenario. He could also claim something else but in that case there's nothing we can do to prevent it.In post 2608, Creature wrote:I don't trust Alchemist at all though