Newbie 2031 - The Wild Hunt (End!)

Satisfaction · Post Post #175 (ISO) » Mon Sep 21, 2020 10:40 am

^ this has me wondering if her freakout about my "accusation" was alignment indicative.

My "hm" in #157 was me noting internally that she still seemed to be butthurt. Or maybe she just didn't get my joke.

Redados · Post Post #176 (ISO) » Mon Sep 21, 2020 11:08 am

In post 175, Satisfaction wrote:^ this has me wondering if her freakout about my "accusation" was alignment indicative.

My "hm" in #157 was me noting internally that she still seemed to be butthurt. Or maybe she just didn't get my joke.

I played a full game with her and that was generally how she communicated. Although she was scum that game. My instinct is to say that it's NAI.

ClarkBar · Post Post #177 (ISO) » Mon Sep 21, 2020 2:47 pm

In post 99, Mundivore wrote:I think there's at least a 25% chance that both the scum are in this current wagon. It came together really quickly and in my experience scum doesn't usually like to hammer.

I do love percentage talk, but I don't engage in it. I'm a gut guy. I look at interactions and behavior and pursue players and cases if something sticks out to me that I want to explore. That said, I do suspect that at least one scum may have been on Satisfation's wagon (provided he is town). Both might be asking a bit much.

I for one am not alarmed by NK15's E-1 vote on Satisfaction. Yes, a vote should be explained, or some form of questioning related to it. In my first game a player placed an E-1 vote without providing any reasoning. I kinda freaked out over it, and it factored into my voting to execute him in exlo and losing the game. Since then I've come to learn that E-1 votes aren't bad, and to look at larger reasoning and context to votes.

That NK15 didn't respond to criticism and unvote is a very good sign to me.

95 Is a very good point.

I have a light town lean on Mundivore.

107: Yuck.

In post 100, Noraa wrote:Dont ever accuse me of pocketing. it annoys the hell out of me.

This tone concerns me. If somebody accuses you of pocketing you can disagree with them in a variety of ways. I don't see any town-motivation in trying to scare off people from engaging with what they may find questionable in you actions/motives.

I need to look at AC more. Sorry guys, my posting will tick up. Tough last few days.

Satisfaction · Post Post #178 (ISO) » Mon Sep 21, 2020 6:33 pm

In post 176, Redados wrote:
In post 175, Satisfaction wrote:^ this has me wondering if her freakout about my "accusation" was alignment indicative.

My "hm" in #157 was me noting internally that she still seemed to be butthurt. Or maybe she just didn't get my joke.
I played a full game with her and that was generally how she communicated. Although she was scum that game. My instinct is to say that it's NAI.

I’m about halfway through Doggos. I want to come back around to this.

ArthurConyl · Post Post #179 (ISO) » Mon Sep 21, 2020 8:41 pm

Since Clark is doing a reread of everyone, I'm going to follow his example and do the same.

Bluebell, ClarkBar, Egix:

Please post more. You guys only have a few posts, though I appreciate that Clark is trying to catch up. However weird/wonderful your posts are, it will generate content and be pro-town in the long run. I can barely read anything off these guys.

Fferyllt: Definitely scum.

@Mundivore:

Can you explain this? I'm not at all experienced with scum team/wagon analysis.

Spoiler:

After this you unvoted Satisfaction in post #102, saying that Satisfaction had "town vibes." Can you explain the "town vibes" you felt?

Then there's this:

Spoiler:

Geez, this one. I'm not sure how I overlooked this post before, but it's giving me very scum signs. Noraa never really gave a good reason for scumreading me, except for him saying I was starting all the wagons. Which I'm not. If a town player were voting someone, I would expect to hear at least a reason or some thoughts. If they were sheeping like NK15, at least say you agree with someone, etc. You did neither and you also tried to fish for support. Kickstarting my wagon.

Perhaps the most worryingly, the next post is:

Spoiler:

I mean what? You just voted for me without any reason and now you're asking him for his reasoning? Bruh. You're looking a lot like scum lurking and posting fluff.

I feel like Mundivore has a moderate chance of being scum. Wouldn't be upset if we lynched him.

ArthurConyl · Post Post #180 (ISO) » Mon Sep 21, 2020 8:52 pm

Reread Part 2:

Noraa:

Ok, so at the start Noraa was kinda sitting on the fence. Not really saying much either way. Then he starts saying I'm scummy and later votes me in post #105. Really he only gives one reason-post:

Spoiler:

I read my own ISO at this point to see if I was starting "all the wagons." Uh no. The only guy I focused on from the start was Satisfaction. Never started any other wagons. You can read my ISO if you want. So I feel like Noraa's one reason for voting me is quite weak.

I'm leaning scum on Noraa, but less scummy than Mundivore. Either that or he's not a very pro-town player.

ArthurConyl · Post Post #181 (ISO) » Mon Sep 21, 2020 8:58 pm

Reread part 3:
NK15: Ok, first off I admit it. I overreacted to his E-1 vote. Also I accept Clarkbar's post. Thanks for sharing your experience:

Spoiler:

Yeah so this one, I checked the page his vote was on. My own vote was further up the page and Satisfaction's first vote was way back. And that was only his 4th post. So yeah I totally accept his post was an honest mistake.

His next post, viewtopic.php?p=12153238#p12153238
I feel that his reasons for voting Satisfaction were valid. Overall NK15 hasn't posted that much and I would consider him neutral.

ArthurConyl · Post Post #182 (ISO) » Mon Sep 21, 2020 9:18 pm

Part 4?

Redados:

Overall, I'm leaning town on Redados. His reads and analysis are reasonable, even if he has the inverse of my reads. Btw I hate meta

One thing I would like to ask you. In post #129 you said Mundivore was town. Would like to hear some reasons please.

Satisfaction:

Best for last? XD

Spoiler:

Actually I do like this post. I would read you town for it. But it feels like you're trying hard to say everything and nothing at the same time. The section about me, fair. I do have a big problem with you not acknowledging my post #73:

Spoiler:

In both your posts, #91 and #98, you should have addressed it. In #91 you stated that I was lying. This is very much what I would expect scum to do. I would expect town to keep pushing and prodding, asking me why I do this and that. Instead you just stop and say "you're lying." If you had more solid reasons for scumreading me I wouldn't be scumreading you so much.

Satisfaction I still find to be moderately scummy. If you can back up your vote on me, I'll take my vote off you.

Not Known 15 · Post Post #183 (ISO) » Tue Sep 22, 2020 12:01 am

Why aren't you voting Satisfaction?

In post 172, Redados wrote:
In post 171, Noraa wrote:this, on the other hand could be pocketing. However it's too early to tell so we'll just say ur trying to be nice
Satisfaction is playing in a pro-town way and I think that he's town.

Explain this.

Redados · Post Post #184 (ISO) » Tue Sep 22, 2020 1:57 am

In post 182, ArthurConyl wrote:Part 4?

Redados:
Overall, I'm leaning town on Redados. His reads and analysis are reasonable, even if he has the inverse of my reads. Btw I hate meta
One thing I would like to ask you. In post #129 you said Mundivore was town. Would like to hear some reasons please.

Unfortunately, Mundivore dropped off the face of the earth and has only posted once since I townread them. Very unfortunate. Before then, I agreed with their thoughts/attitude re: the Satisfaction wagon. Also, I think it was pro-town that when I hopped on the Arthur wagon with them, they pushed me to explain my reasoning.

Since then, Mundivore hasn't posted, so the townread there is getting weaker.

Redados · Post Post #185 (ISO) » Tue Sep 22, 2020 2:00 am

In post 183, Not Known 15 wrote:Why aren't you voting Satisfaction?

In post 172, Redados wrote:
In post 171, Noraa wrote:this, on the other hand could be pocketing. However it's too early to tell so we'll just say ur trying to be nice
Satisfaction is playing in a pro-town way and I think that he's town.
Explain this.

Satisfaction was being friendly and Noraa jumped down his throat and said he was pocketing. This was unnecessary; he was being friendly and being pro-town in the way he was approaching the discussion.

I think that Satisfaction is town.

Egix96 · Post Post #186 (ISO) » Tue Sep 22, 2020 3:46 am

In post 177, ClarkBar wrote:That NK15 didn't respond to criticism and unvote is a very good sign to me.

I can see how it's good for someone to stick to their guns, but how is not responding a good thing?

In post 177, ClarkBar wrote:107: Yuck.

What's the problem with that post?

In post 184, Redados wrote:Also, I think it was pro-town that when I hopped on the Arthur wagon with them, they pushed me to explain my reasoning.

Sorry, but I'm with Arthur on this one - why would someone question a read that they agree with? If anything, it's LAMIST (look at me, I'm so town).

In post 182, ArthurConyl wrote:Actually I do like this post. I would read you town for it. But it feels like you're trying hard to say everything and nothing at the same time.

I'm willing to give that readslist the benefit of the doubt since we don't have many pages so far, but generally the lack of meatiness (for want of a better term) would be a red flag since it's something I would associate with scum making a reads dump because that's what town would do, but limiting how much they commit to so as not to give away who the partner is.

Redados · Post Post #187 (ISO) » Tue Sep 22, 2020 3:54 am

In post 186, Egix96 wrote:
In post 184, Redados wrote:Also, I think it was pro-town that when I hopped on the Arthur wagon with them, they pushed me to explain my reasoning.
Sorry, but I'm with Arthur on this one - why would someone question a read that they agree with? If anything, it's LAMIST (look at me, I'm so town).

I'm going to go on a tangent with this one, but I distinguish towny/scummy vs pro-town/anti-town. I think that scum can act in a pro-town way and that town can act in an anti-town way. But when I look at everything together in combination, that's how I create my reads.

This one action by Mundivore in isolation? It isn't alignment-indicative. However, it's pro-town. Mundivore pushing me to better explain my FoS is good for the town.

This one action by Mundivore is only part of my read. But I definitely stand by saying that that single action was pro-town.

Egix96 · Post Post #188 (ISO) » Tue Sep 22, 2020 4:18 am

In post 99, Mundivore wrote:I think there's at least a 25% chance that both the scum are in this current wagon. It came together really quickly and in my experience scum doesn't usually like to hammer.

Further, I think that in the world that both scum are already on the wagon, it's probably Egix and Arthur about 45% of the time versus Egix and Not Known about 40% of the time.

Some scum-team analysis: I think that Satisfaction/Not Known is an impossible scum team. If one is scum, the other is town. I think that Arthur and Not Known are a very unlikely scum team: Not Known is in the SE slot and probably wouldn't sheep their scumbuddy so readily.

In post 103, Mundivore wrote:
In post 101, Noraa wrote:I think Arthur is a scum as for who the buddy is, I'm not sure
I think scum!Arthur is pretty likely. Put some pressure on with me?

VOTE: ArthurConyl

Looking back at this, I'm a bit surprised you didn't vote me, considering what you wrote. What would you have done, had Noraa not said anything?

Egix96 · Post Post #189 (ISO) » Tue Sep 22, 2020 4:26 am

In post 187, Redados wrote:
In post 186, Egix96 wrote:
In post 184, Redados wrote:Also, I think it was pro-town that when I hopped on the Arthur wagon with them, they pushed me to explain my reasoning.
Sorry, but I'm with Arthur on this one - why would someone question a read that they agree with? If anything, it's LAMIST (look at me, I'm so town).
I'm going to go on a tangent with this one, but I distinguish towny/scummy vs pro-town/anti-town. I think that
a) scum can act in a pro-town way
and that
b) town can act in an anti-town way.
But when I look at everything together in combination, that's how I create my reads.

This one action by Mundivore in isolation? It isn't alignment-indicative. However, it's pro-town. Mundivore pushing me to better explain my FoS is good for the town.

This one action by Mundivore is only part of my read. But I definitely stand by saying that that single action was pro-town.

The difference is that a) is usually on purpose whereas b) is usually not. I'm saying that sometimes it can help to think about

why

someone is doing what they're doing.

Satisfaction · Post Post #190 (ISO) » Tue Sep 22, 2020 6:00 am

VOTE: Bluebell How’s that next poem coming along?

Satisfaction · Post Post #191 (ISO) » Tue Sep 22, 2020 7:41 am

In post 186, Egix96 wrote:why would someone question a read that they agree with

This is the second time in the game you've had a stance that doesn't seem genuine to me. I can think of what.... at least 3 answers to this question right now. It's hard for me to believe that you cannot.

Mundivore · Post Post #192 (ISO) » Tue Sep 22, 2020 8:25 am

Hey folks. I've been keeping up with the thread, but a bit busy/depressed and so haven't been posting much. Lot happened, so I'm going to respond to the new things that I found were pertinent.

In post 177, ClarkBar wrote:
In post 99, Mundivore wrote:I think there's at least a 25% chance that both the scum are in this current wagon. It came together really quickly and in my experience scum doesn't usually like to hammer.
I do love percentage talk, but I don't engage in it. I'm a gut guy. I look at interactions and behavior and pursue players and cases if something sticks out to me that I want to explore. That said, I do suspect that at least one scum may have been on Satisfation's wagon (provided he is town). Both might be asking a bit much.

I mean, I'm a mathematician, so I'm just expressing my gut feelings in terms of percentages. It's how I think. I agree with your sentiment.

Usually when people start getting into real probability talk with actual statistics, it's because they're scum. Trying to convince town that something is good for town on average because the mathematics make it town-favored on average is usually a scum-tell. This is because scum have advanced knowledge of the game: they can safely perform 'mathematically town' actions over and over again so long as they don't actually elim a scumbuddy, because for them, killing a person never has a probabilistic outcome on whether town or scum wins. They know the outcome for certain.

In post 179, ArthurConyl wrote:Since Clark is doing a reread of everyone, I'm going to follow his example and do the same.

Bluebell, ClarkBar, Egix:
Please post more. You guys only have a few posts, though I appreciate that Clark is trying to catch up. However weird/wonderful your posts are, it will generate content and be pro-town in the long run. I can barely read anything off these guys.

Fferyllt: Definitely scum.

@Mundivore:
Can you explain this? I'm not at all experienced with scum team/wagon analysis.

Spoiler:
In post 99, Mundivore wrote:I think there's at least a 25% chance that both the scum are in this current wagon. It came together really quickly and in my experience scum doesn't usually like to hammer.

Further, I think that in the world that both scum are already on the wagon, it's probably Egix and Arthur about 45% of the time versus Egix and Not Known about 40% of the time.

Some scum-team analysis: I think that Satisfaction/Not Known is an impossible scum team. If one is scum, the other is town. I think that Arthur and Not Known are a very unlikely scum team: Not Known is in the SE slot and probably wouldn't sheep their scumbuddy so readily.

Yeah, sure. The first two lines are my gut feelings / intuition / experience talking. Usually when a wagon comes together really quickly, it's because of scum. Scum are more inclined to vote for people who already have votes on them than to start their own wagons, because more votes on one person makes it easier for a mislim to happen or easier for them to threaten a hammer and force out info on power roles. When a wagon comes together

super

quickly, it's usually because of both scum being on the wagon. I said 25% chance of both scum being on the Satisfaction wagon because it came together quite quickly, but not super quickly. If I were to break my gut feeling down more concretely, I'd say there's probably a 25% chance of both scum having been on that wagon, a 60% chance of one scum being on it, and a 15% chance that all four were townies.

The second line is less thought-through: just the possible scum-teams that it could be in the world where both of the scum were on that wagon. Very hypothetical, very hunchy.

In post 179, ArthurConyl wrote:
After this you unvoted Satisfaction in post #102, saying that Satisfaction had "town vibes." Can you explain the "town vibes" you felt?

Satisfaction gave a note-dump, which is fairly pro-town. More important to that for me, though, was the prior component of me having a strong suspicion that there was scum on the Satisfaction wagon. If we live in the world of scum!Satisfaction, their scumbuddy probably wouldn't hop onto that wagon so aggressively, it was an RVS wagon without any thought and so

not

hopping on the wagon is totally justifiable (by town or by scum). No reason to risk interaction like that if you're Satisfaction's scumbuddy.

The third line contains the most useful and definite analysis. Keeping track of who can be scumbuddies with who is a great way to narrow down scum. Basically Not Known wouldn't just slap Satisfaction with E-1 (or E-2, even if we take them at their word that they missed one of the votes). Scumteam analysis is the sort of thing that's pretty reliable compared to most scumhunting, and its value accumulates as the game goes on. Knowing that two or three scumteams are impossible isn't super useful early (when, such as right now, there are 36 possible scumteams) but as the number of people narrows, the number of viable scumteams keeps shrinking. As long as the scum haven't tried any crazy gambits, this is the easiest way to find scum in lategame (IMO).

So, for instance, I'm pretty comfortable saying that Satisfaction can't be scumteam with you or Not Known, and also that Not Known probably can't be scumteam with you (the probable in this case referring to the situation where Not Known legitimately missed your vote even when you were both scum... but I rate that at low odds).

As long as my reasons for determining that a scumteam is impossible or not are solid enough, then I can use it to intuit new information as the game goes on. For instance, say we end up eliminating Satisfaction today after all. Say Satisfaction flips scum. Then, I'd have fairly concrete reasons to believe that both you and Not Known were town. One townie would die at night, and presuming that townie wasn't me, you, or Not Known, then

this analysis alone

allows me to redirect my scumhunting efforts away from three out of seven people remaining.

In post 179, ArthurConyl wrote:
Then there's this:

Spoiler:
In post 103, Mundivore wrote:
In post 101, Noraa wrote:I think Arthur is a scum as for who the buddy is, I'm not sure
I think scum!Arthur is pretty likely. Put some pressure on with me?

VOTE: ArthurConyl

Geez, this one. I'm not sure how I overlooked this post before, but it's giving me very scum signs. Noraa never really gave a good reason for scumreading me, except for him saying I was starting all the wagons. Which I'm not. If a town player were voting someone, I would expect to hear at least a reason or some thoughts. If they were sheeping like NK15, at least say you agree with someone, etc. You did neither and you also tried to fish for support. Kickstarting my wagon.

Here, I could tell Noraa was already scum-reading you, and figured I'd capitalize on it by putting some pressure on you. I wanted to see how your reaction felt, so I'd have a better idea of your alignment. As for why I thought there was a decent chance you were scum, it's just that I feel second vote and third vote are the scummiest positions on an RVS wagon. Scum wants to look like an early arrival, not one of the primary pressuring players. They prefer to leave reasonable room to defer attention.

Also, I disliked your #93—calling out suspicious behavior and then not acting upon it rubs me the wrong way. Threatening a scumread rather than stating it, also feels like a bit of a scumslip. Townies have reads on everyone. They scumread people who are fishy and townread people who aren't. Threatening a scumread conflates the purpose of a person's read, and their vote. You meant to communicate, 'I may try to get people to vote for you' and used the phrase 'scumread' to do it. It's certainly something town (especially new town) could do, but it still stood out to me, which in my mind was enough to start a vote. Voting for someone gets them to be a lot more active, and gives you more material to work with as far as investigating them.

In post 179, ArthurConyl wrote:
Perhaps the most worryingly, the next post is:

Spoiler:
In post 141, Mundivore wrote:
In post 129, Redados wrote:UNVOTE: Noraa

reads, ordered from towniest to scumiest within lists--

Town:
Satisfaction
Mundivore

Null:
ClarkBar
Bluebell
Not Known 15
Noraa
Egix96

Scum:
ArthurConyl

This is page six of the game so I don't have strong reads right now I'm feeling pretty towny on Satisfaction. It sucks to have so many null reads because that's not super helpful. But I want my thoughts out there regardless.

I was about to vote Arthur, but that would put him at E-1. I didn't realize that he had quite that many votes, so I assume that others might not realize as well, so this seems like a situation where it would be easy for someone to accidentally hammer. I'll leave it at
FoS: ArthurConyl
.

Also Arthur please don't self vote!
Please explain your reasoning for Arthur as scum.

I mean what? You just voted for me without any reason and now you're asking him for his reasoning? Bruh. You're looking a lot like scum lurking and posting fluff.

I feel like Mundivore has a moderate chance of being scum. Wouldn't be upset if we lynched him.

Hm. I don't know if the response feels like town!Arthur.

I didn't explain my reasoning because I hadn't yet been asked. It's safe to assume most votes are for information gathering at this stage of the game, but you're kind of out of hand dismissing my contributions as 'fluff' and trying to call me out for hypocrisy. Pathos arguments aren't innately scummy, but they also aren't super useful for finding scum.

I have a question for town!Arthur. How much do you think your scum read on me is due to the effect of OMGUS—essentially, reading me as scum because I'm putting voting pressure on the one person you know is definitely town—and how much do you think can be attributed to external factors? Other than my vote on you, which you don't like, why do you think that I am scum?

Satisfaction · Post Post #193 (ISO) » Tue Sep 22, 2020 8:27 am

In post 73, ArthurConyl wrote:What makes you think I was fishing for support?

Maybe I didn't explain it well enough. Let's step through it.

Emphasis mine, numbers inserted:

In post 35, ArthurConyl wrote:
In post 7, Satisfaction wrote:Hello. My name is Satisfaction and I am town-aligned. Good luck and have fun.

@Clark I just finished reading Space. Tough break. Is there anything you wish you would have done differently in that game?

VOTE: Bluebell For Feryland!

1)
That sounds a bit robotic/awkward to me.
2)
This is Satisfaction's first game, so I'll give him the benefit of the doubt.
3)
Does sound like it could be a noob scum,
4)
I'd be suspicious if it wasn't his first game.

1) Shade
2) Backing off
3) Shade
4) Backing off

In post 37, ArthurConyl wrote:@Noraa

Maybe try reading it again? xD "Hello. My name is Satisfaction and I an town-aligned. Good luck and have fun."

5)
Doesn't it sound odd to you? No offence, it sounds like an automated message.
6)
People are hardly ever that formal on the internet and certainly not on here.

5) Polling for support.
6) Shade

In post 40, ArthurConyl wrote:Yeah I agree with you there,
7)
scum wouldn't be that obvious.
8)
The post is NAI, but it's
9)
just something to think about. Do you know anyone here?

7) Backing off
8) paraphrasing: "Oh I'm just kidding, none of this matters..."
9) "... oh but maybe we should still keep it in mind"

Essentially you made no claim here you stick to. It was wishy washy. All it really did was associate my name with scum and leave you room to back up and say:

In post 73, ArthurConyl wrote:I also explained that
10)
I was trying to generate discussion and clearly stated in my original post that
11)
it was probably NAI. If anything, it feels more like you're trying to start a wagon on me for arbitary reasons.

FoS Satisfaction

10) paraphrasing: "I'm just town doing town things."
11) paraphrasing: "Remember when I said it didn't really matter?" Remember the other half of that sentence?

Just for the record, I'm old.

Back in my day

people were plenty formal on the internet. I also work in tech where people are similarly formal all day, on the internet. All of that said, my intro was purposefully stilted. You and Egix chomped down on it hard. We are past the point of this wagon (the wagon on me) generating information and unless you actually think I'm scum because of the way I introduced myself in the second post of the game I think it's time to move on.

I'm here to win the game, not to win the day. Let's go. Thanks for the reads.

Bluebell

is next.

Satisfaction · Post Post #194 (ISO) » Tue Sep 22, 2020 8:29 am

Take care of yourself Mundivore.

Mundivore · Post Post #195 (ISO) » Tue Sep 22, 2020 8:29 am

Sorry for the wall of text.

Also, I made a mistake putting this post together—the line which starts with "The third line" and then going down to the next quote is mispositioned. That line is supposed to start directly after the line which starts with "The second line."

Which is amusing and frustrating.

Is it acceptable to edit a post for clarity's sake? I can't see an edit button, so I presume not. It does seem like a feature that shouldn't be allowed for game balance's sake.

Mundivore · Post Post #196 (ISO) » Tue Sep 22, 2020 8:31 am

In post 193, Satisfaction wrote:
In post 73, ArthurConyl wrote:What makes you think I was fishing for support?
Maybe I didn't explain it well enough. Let's step through it.
Emphasis mine, numbers inserted:

In post 35, ArthurConyl wrote:
In post 7, Satisfaction wrote:Hello. My name is Satisfaction and I am town-aligned. Good luck and have fun.

@Clark I just finished reading Space. Tough break. Is there anything you wish you would have done differently in that game?

VOTE: Bluebell For Feryland!

1)
That sounds a bit robotic/awkward to me.
2)
This is Satisfaction's first game, so I'll give him the benefit of the doubt.
3)
Does sound like it could be a noob scum,
4)
I'd be suspicious if it wasn't his first game.
1) Shade
2) Backing off
3) Shade
4) Backing off

In post 37, ArthurConyl wrote:@Noraa

Maybe try reading it again? xD "Hello. My name is Satisfaction and I an town-aligned. Good luck and have fun."

5)
Doesn't it sound odd to you? No offence, it sounds like an automated message.
6)
People are hardly ever that formal on the internet and certainly not on here.
5) Polling for support.
6) Shade

In post 40, ArthurConyl wrote:Yeah I agree with you there,
7)
scum wouldn't be that obvious.
8)
The post is NAI, but it's
9)
just something to think about. Do you know anyone here?
7) Backing off
8) paraphrasing: "Oh I'm just kidding, none of this matters..."
9) "... oh but maybe we should still keep it in mind"

Essentially you made no claim here you stick to. It was wishy washy. All it really did was associate my name with scum and leave you room to back up and say:

In post 73, ArthurConyl wrote:I also explained that
10)
I was trying to generate discussion and clearly stated in my original post that
11)
it was probably NAI. If anything, it feels more like you're trying to start a wagon on me for arbitary reasons.

FoS Satisfaction
10) paraphrasing: "I'm just town doing town things."
11) paraphrasing: "Remember when I said it didn't really matter?" Remember the other half of that sentence?

Just for the record, I'm old.
Back in my day
people were plenty formal on the internet. I also work in tech where people are similarly formal all day, on the internet. All of that said, my intro was purposefully stilted. You and Egix chomped down on it hard. We are past the point of this wagon (the wagon on me) generating information and unless you actually think I'm scum because of the way I introduced myself in the second post of the game I think it's time to move on.

I'm here to win the game, not to win the day. Let's go. Thanks for the reads.
Bluebell
is next.

Oh, that's good.

Mundivore · Post Post #197 (ISO) » Tue Sep 22, 2020 8:41 am

In post 194, Satisfaction wrote:Take care of yourself Mundivore.

I'm doing my best.

Satisfaction · Post Post #198 (ISO) » Tue Sep 22, 2020 8:55 am

In post 183, Not Known 15 wrote:Why aren't you voting Satisfaction?

Who are you talking to here @Not Known?

Redados · Post Post #199 (ISO) » Tue Sep 22, 2020 8:56 am

Posts 192 and 193 for sure read as town to me. I'm glad you're back, Mundivore.