In post 217, Galron wrote: In post 186, redcardinal wrote: In post 163, Galron wrote:Redcardinal what's scummy about few words on day 1 of day 1? You'd rather no posts at all. I don't understand that
well I'd like to get rid of people who contribute little so we don't have to worry about them on later days. with lurkers you either hit a hard to read scum or hit less than useful town. however, I do think engaging just enough to exist without actually saying anything is more scummy than saying nothing at all tbh, and I'd be happy to vote you today for it
That's fair. I can understand getting rid of dead weight and how you see me as scummy.
Ok. I mean redcardinal seemed very decent and friendly in tone so the following analysis might be based off off false instincts. but, one above mentioned post, and now here, like the interactions feel very... chummy. maybe galron engineered this and this clears red idk, but im noting it either way.
In post 218, Galron wrote: In post 191, KittyTacky wrote:
CAUGHT SCUM
CAUGHT SCUM
CAUGHT SCUM
CAUGHT SCUM
CAUGHT SCUMCAUGHT SCUMCAUGHT SCUMCAUGHT SCUMCAUGHT SCUMCAUGHT SCUM
CAUGHT SCUM
How do you figure?
hmmm like galron might also be playing a deep game here about being flippant, or can one frame it as being cool knowing kitty is ur partner? too little info for me here.
Again, double bluff and that shit. The simple assumption to make for me as that this town spews haschel and ill readjust if later data counteracts conclusion.
In post 220, redcardinal wrote:I want to sit on galron for a few days and see what happens, give the people who haven't said much time to weigh in. galron, what's your take on seanzie?
ah haha. ok. well... from one viewpoint i cans see this post as town. on another, its "ok imma show i voted here but we all know theres enough time to wrangle and wiggle so galron still has breathing room." the town angle is generating discussion, and pressing on scum galron. so meh this is 50/50 except......
for the recurring theme from redcardinal of introducing seanzie into the galronverse. this an interesting pattern and ill see where it leads me.
In post 221, redcardinal wrote:also I want literally everyone's take on galron before we even get within one vote of it happening
yup ok at the time i liked this post, answered it. i felt at the time, in line with cres, that gal was being rushed, like, what are the chances of some1 being called scum on page1? so yeah this post was ok from red at that moment. now? honestly so far out of all the players this post reads as the hardest defense of galron, it might read that way but that's how it feels to me.
In post 222, Galron wrote: In post 220, redcardinal wrote:I want to sit on galron for a few days and see what happens, give the people who haven't said much time to weigh in. galron, what's your take on seanzie?
I guess after thinking about it I can kind of see the reaction test thing but I'm still not sure why the "this is a non-RVS vote." It sounds almost like the latter was trying to distract from the former. But overall they're slightly townie I guess. I mean I can at least follow them to a point.
hmmmm. i think.... well this might be a town spew of seanzie. again the double edged blade: either red/gal are buddies or galron is using red's posts to make it appear that way.
In post 223, redcardinal wrote: In post 221, redcardinal wrote:also I want literally everyone's take on galron before we even get within one vote of it happening
specifically eateroftime, fancypants replacement, eiralox, and kirigiri. post your hot takes to be rated. no rush eiralox, but I am looking closely at you on this one.
Ok. heres the post i answered. not that the people being asked, singled out, are the inactives, now a thrice-recurrent theme in cardinal's posts. like yeah maybe strat but..... hmmm the wording? to be rated? so its clear to me, going over this after the fact, that this post is less about galron and more about: 1. getting inactives to post. 2. perhaps getting them sussed, or even scum shading them if gal flips. I'll be reading what redcardinal did after these posts very carefully.
In post 224, redcardinal wrote: In post 222, Galron wrote: In post 220, redcardinal wrote:I want to sit on galron for a few days and see what happens, give the people who haven't said much time to weigh in. galron, what's your take on seanzie?
I guess after thinking about it I can kind of see the reaction test thing but I'm still not sure why the "this is a non-RVS vote." It sounds almost like the latter was trying to distract from the former. But overall they're slightly townie I guess. I mean I can at least follow them to a point.
awesome, appreciate it
how about kittytacky?
so again the friendly tone. like i said way at the start its not a tell rn, but it's something i have to mention. Redcardinal was voting Galron after all so rn im not pushing a solid theory yet. we'll see.