@c4In post 244, safebet222 wrote: Also, do you think the game's general low activity so far is bad for town? If so, what should we do about it?
Any thoughts?
In fact, anyone care to share their thoughts?
@c4In post 244, safebet222 wrote: Also, do you think the game's general low activity so far is bad for town? If so, what should we do about it?
In post 167, AGamblingPig wrote:I don't have any defense for my posting so far other than I haven't played text mafia in close to a decade and am super rusty when it comes to developing reads. Your thorough analysis from you first post does make me feel better about removing my vote from Bipolar. My read on them was admittedly weak.
Based on how I'd been following the thread my next target was 72, but having read him in isolation I'm now convinced my sketch read on him was just gas.
SO now I'm going toVOTE: Muh316. He said last night that he was going to start participating more but since then has 4 posts none of which have any real game content besides refusing, repeatedly to give a read on hunterr when asked by 72. His posts read more like prod dodging, which could be scummy to avoid attention
Agree with Mizzy that this is lazy low effort scum sort of post. I think its a scumslip.In post 195, AGamblingPig wrote:In post 194, c4e5g3d5 wrote: Looking at the player list, the people who haven't had a significant positive impression on me at any point are muh, Egix and AGamblingPig.
I wouldn't be surprised if 2 of them are scum.
Lynch All Lurkers.In post 253, safebet222 wrote:Sure... Any ideas on making that happen?
In post 252, c4e5g3d5 wrote:I mean... when town is inactive, the remedy is usually... activity...
(Hypocrisy oof)
Re Hunter:In post 48, hunterr wrote:But yes, I do think that "cus RVS lol" is a cop-out from c4 and my votes stays on him.
This feels to me like scum trying to fuel a TvT clashIn post 85, hunterr wrote:Mizzy vs 72 in posts 61-69 feels passive-aggressive from both sides, more from Mizzy especially in post 69.