Me too, and I was not emotionally prepared.In post 1449, Rannygazoo wrote:Ok, I thought you were about to tear into it
etymonline.org wrote:compete (v.)
1610s, " to enter or be put in rivalry with," from Frenchcompéter"be in rivalry with" (14c.), or directly from Late Latincompetere"strive in common, strive after something in company with or together," in classical Latin "to meet or come together; agree or coincide; to be qualified," fromcom"with, together" (see ) +petere"to strive, seek, fall upon, rush at, attack" (from PIE root "to rush, to fly").
According to OED, rare 17c., revived from late 18c. in sense "to strive (alongside another) for the attainment of something" and regarded early 19c. in Britain as a Scottish or American word. Market sense is from 1840s (perhaps a back-formation fromcompetition); athletics sense attested by 1857. Intransitive use is by 1974. Related:Competed; competing.
because I'm literally insecure about it being important content.In post 1452, Bypasser Catcher wrote:supposedly important content?
I really still can’t believe for the life of me that after this many pages of content, the biggest reason you want to vote someone is because of a retracted claim that happened eons ago. Really fascinating stuff.In post 1331, DrippingGoofball wrote:molla's fake miller claim doesn't sit well with me.
As for Binatog, the short iso is the case.
I scumread Hawker since go?In post 1445, Rannygazoo wrote:In post 1438, Titus wrote: Hawker voteUh, this is pretty lazy. I voted Hawker because NM claimed and I was sheeping others to get off that wagon. I even said later that I don’t know what makes Hawker stand out from other lurkers. Is lazy the new Titus meta?In post 1438, Titus wrote:Ok, I missed NM claiming. What was it?
In post 1336, Gamma Emerald wrote:HuhIn post 1305, Bypasser Catcher wrote:im sad because i lean scum on NM here
If we wanna vote BC I think that’s a good move
That Scum Lean did not sit well with me either, actually. So I’m with you there. Don’t know that I want to break up the wagon on Hayker for it just yet.In post 1343, Gamma Emerald wrote:I think you decided to whiteknight NM and once the momentum slowed felt like expressing a lean scum read on NM that you still have no intention of acting on
I might discuss it with others but I don’t think you’re gonna change my mind
just full FOS me so i dont get night killed plsIn post 1460, Andresvmb wrote:In post 1336, Gamma Emerald wrote:HuhIn post 1305, Bypasser Catcher wrote:im sad because i lean scum on NM here
If we wanna vote BC I think that’s a good moveThat Scum Lean did not sit well with me either, actually. So I’m with you there. Don’t know that I want to break up the wagon on Hayker for it just yet.In post 1343, Gamma Emerald wrote:I think you decided to whiteknight NM and once the momentum slowed felt like expressing a lean scum read on NM that you still have no intention of acting on
I might discuss it with others but I don’t think you’re gonna change my mind
Except your argument for shielding Not_Mafia had nothing to do with vibes, and everything to do with game state. What evidence did you see that changed your mind? I might have missed it so I’ll keep reading.In post 1357, Bypasser Catcher wrote:This isn't a place where I'm seeing the same vibe from NM. I'm not infallible. I make mistakes. I'm definitely allowed to rectify them later when I see evidence that shows that I was wrong.
Plus you’re so horribly underwhelming it makes me sad.In post 1361, PlusJOYED wrote:scumreading for early lurking without content is the same thing as scumreading for not having contentIn post 746, Luca Blight wrote:I've given a number of non-lurker reads already.In post 733, quiet wrote:I’m on board with all of these, especially hawker.In post 728, Luca Blight wrote:Hayker. PlusJOYED. Cheeky.
These are also (I believe) the first, second, and third most lurkey slots. Do you have any reads that aren’t on lurkers? Or was that the basis of your reads?
I'm also not scumreading those slots for their lurking, but for their content (or lack thereof).
motherfuckerIn post 1466, DkKoba wrote:alright i wanna say this too: i wanna say that im comfortable townblocking these people right now: luca blight, andres, gamma, binatog(i know, hot take but thats my view. but trust me on it if i die tonight. at least for d2/d3.)
close to doing so: norwegianboy
potential addition down the line: ranny, titus
I’ve seen Not_Mafia make a Claim that actually made them a dangerous player for Scum to keep around (as Town), and Scum chose not to execute there anyway. Unless Not_Mafia had claimed Cop or something, I don’t know that the Claim itself matters that much for what’s going to happen. That’s my prediction.In post 1362, Vaxkiller wrote:Makes sense. I just don't like that his PR claim is good enough to be useful, while at the same time weak enough to be believable as to why they would not to be killed overnight.
This kind of thing pings me coming from you plus. I have you as a rather cheery Town that likes to go into the weeds of things and try to surmise big picture what’s happening. You’ve paid this game so little attention, I have to think there’s something else going on. I’m not even sure it’s game related.In post 1410, PlusJOYED wrote:I'm waiting for something of substance to happen like an elim
I want to see this plus you’re talking about. The plus we have now is EXACTLY the one from Mini Theme 2172.In post 1470, Andresvmb wrote:This kind of thing pings me coming from you plus. I have you as a rather cheery Town that likes to go into the weeds of things and try to surmise big picture what’s happening. You’ve paid this game so little attention, I have to think there’s something else going on. I’m not even sure it’s game related.In post 1410, PlusJOYED wrote:I'm waiting for something of substance to happen like an elim
I don’t know that Scum comes on and posts this sort of nonsense - it’s like too obviously bad.
Gamma, yes. Binatog? I think so? They didn’t take me up on deep diving one player and just giving us their unfiltered thoughts, but the perspective seems Town. Luca? It depends. If Hayker flips Scum, definitely not. They’re softly trying to move the wagon to plus without sticking their neck out too much. I have them as Town but would reconsider with a Hayker Scum flip.In post 1473, Bypasser Catcher wrote:andres, even excluding me, can you agree with my townblock list? I wanna try approaching this game in a way that puts scum in a really shite situation of being PoE'd.