Open 871 - The Haunted Village | Postgame

[Wednesday Addams]

Kaito, can you give us some reads?

Town: Kyoko, Kokichi, Wednesday, Gimli, Furtive
Less sure: Penguinpower, Save the Dragons
Possible mafia: Fuyuhiko, Maki

Don’t hate this but it’s also a pretty much consensus readslist. Kaito why do I still have you as a dead null?

You are currently my weakest read and unless either you do something to change my mind or someone does something to make my want to vote them, I’m currently leaning to voting you.

[Gimli]

Here's the wall. In nice spoiler so that it won't fill the screen.

Spoiler: Wednesday

I will ignore posts I don't find significant.
118: I agree with Wednesday here that Gimli's sus on her is not really founded, in fact just posting some rvs placeholder and then disappearing is the sort of thing I'd do myself if a game were to begin while I had RL things to do -- frankly, I don't really care for the implication here that Wednesday was faking that.
That said, I'm unsure if that line of thinking is necessarily scum indicative, it is going for the easy fish though, so Wednesday's vote may be justified; it is however a somewhat agressive post (yes, I used that adjective myself this time).
As for the buddying comment, well I also saw it as already remarked, but people seem to think it was just a joke and I can get behind that, I just don't think it was a good joke.

133: I don't necessarily agree that switching votes rapidly during D1 is very scum indicative. If anything reveals some fluidity that I believe could more easily come from town. And I don't think that Gimli is "making votes for the sake of it", his votes are justified (even if, indeed, flimsily). I think this post is +scum actually.

146: that's fine, but I think asking to motivate a sus read on oneself is more likely to come from groupscum (I have no data on this, this is just based on my forma mentis. If anyone has data to back off the converse, I'll gadly hear it). So half +scum.

148: I actually like this interaction. The unvote seems to corroborate that Wednesday actually espouses the view in #133, as #142 does indeed alleviate the perception she had that Gimli's vote were just random. +town

149: whatever. The explanation is sound, and I also agree to the distaste of Gimli's vote for her, but I won't give her town cred for this.

176: see, this is a pretty inconsequential friendly banter. However, I point that out because post #127 is also inconsequential banter, and their both with STD. At this point I don't think it's consequential, but notice how STD was actually the only player Wednesday approached to in this manner (excluding quoting NM's read list, but then again lots of people, myself included, did that at some point).

total: 0.5+scum

Spoiler: STD

20: you already know what I think of this. +scum.

38: a bit defensive, idk if that was warranted. I'm gonna give this a 0.25+scum.

42: this and the following are nulls. I don't know why exactly STD had to remark in #43 that #42 was stilted, I don't think it particularly was and I don't get the need to excuse oneself even if it was, but I don't want to read to much into it.

76: idk, I don't agree with this vote. While I don't agree with Kyoko's criticism of me either, that seemed to me an honest attempt to scumhunt. Scumreading them over "being too nitpicky" with that (cfr #91, #92) seems a little forced. +0.5scum

90: of this post I like how my TR is apparently, cfr 94, not set in stone. It was not actually challenged afterwards, hough one must assume that if #76 were genuine than the TR on me probably is too. The Kaito TR is also reasonable.

132--141, 179: I'm ignoring meta posts rn, at least possibly until I find the will to go read games.

144: eh, the question is legitimate. +town

157: eh, this one I like less, falls somewhere in the category of asking about own SRs. Though I'm giving STD some slack for it.

159, 165: gut readings are fine, especially this early. Fuyuhiko apparently doesn't like that, and that may be reasonable, I just don't agree that's particularly AI at this point.

180: I genuinely didn't understand this post. Does what? @STD, I'm not trying to be an ass or anything, I would just like a clarification. I'm guessing it is trivially linked to 183?
Btw, 183 seem like a genuine attempt to workshop, I'm giving it +0.25 town.

191: while I also find #38 distasteful, this response to Kokichi is credible. I guess it could be construed as attempting to negate all further attempts at using meta to read him, which idk if I like. +0.25scum.

total: 0.75+scum

Spoiler: Penguin

65: it's possible I'm just dumb, but this post doesn't make any sense to me? There were not two competing equivalent wagons, mine was already the largest and not tied with anyone. +0.25scum.
Also I resent the implication that my user is difficult >:(

67: uhm. Noncommital, but idk how much to read into it.

135: I mean, the wiki says that buzzword is a buzzword. Though I'm willing to actually give this and 137 +0.5town, this is a gut feeling but it's just that it seems to me it is quite to brazen for a scum.

total: +0.25town

Spoiler: Penguin

Spoiler: furtive

9: I actually read this as null. I guess it could be beneficial to town to start analysing mech early, though this one remark is pretty shallow and quite trivial, so a scum could have easily made it without really hurting anything.

13: this I like... a bit less, since he was the one to start doing setup spec. I'm giving it +0.25scum for that, though the awkward thing is that I actually agree with the suggestion here.

15: eh, that explanation does not actually completely alleviate the uneasiness.

21: this is a bit brazen, I actually don't hate it. At the very least is not panicky. Let's say +0.25town.

30: same thing as for #9; it's all well and good we know that, but the utility is so little that a scum could have easily made this observation without hurting anything. I'm not gonna give town cred for that.
About the Wednesday jokes, I do believe he just meant he didn't like those as jokes, at least as of 40, so whatever

117: about PP, I don't like doing meta, maybe when I'll have the will I'll check the veracity, though I do appreciate the comment.
I'm not 100% sure I do like the Gimli comment though, in a way it's, somewhat ironically, a bit surface level. Now I like that furtive is sharing some early reads, and I'm giving some town cred for that, but that's not really enough effort for me to give much. +0.5town

129--138: meta, meta, meta. I don't know meta.

151, 158: I don't care much for the assumption that Wednesday's vote would look particularly bad after town!Gimli flips; it is true that Wednesday was tunnelly and all, but to say that would implicate that Wednesday is probably not town if Gimli is is a lot of a stretch. I also don't care about the need to comment on the optics of what will happen when Gimli flips town, I of course get that it was just an argumentative hypothesis, it's just that sussing Wednesday on the fact that she would be sus assuming the veracity of a particular hypothesis sound off. +0.75scum, not a full +scum because I liked #151 in isolation.

199: eh, may be a decent attempt to get some interactions. +0.25town

205: That's bantery. May mean nothing though.

Spoiler: Gimli

6: I though it could be buddying, but people seem to think it's just a joke and whatever, I can manage to see it being that.

22, 23: that's well and good, but, like, why? +0.25scum
(also, I noted Gimli did call Fuyuhiko as huyuhiko a couple times. Is this just a typo or there is some lore reason to it, just curios)

28: I am willing to concede this may just be a late RVS vote and go on.

39: okay, but again, why exactly is that? Like, am I wrong in getting so upset about this? +0.5scum

46: eh, I actually do like this post. It's attempting to call out furtive on backpedaling, though I'm not convinced he was in the first place. Still, +0.25town.

56, 59: the TRs are fine. I'm unsure how I should thik about being defended like this though, I'm always a bit paranoid it may be buddying. Whatever, +0.25town.

63, 64: inciting discussion; that's good. +0.5town

87, 100: idk, lots of TRs. The STD things is probably a joke, but a bit distasteful to me, though I'll leave this at null.

116: it's a bit of a stretch alright. She may have had RL issues or whatnot, I feel like discounting this may be the case is slightly rude, but more to the point is slightly going for the easy target. +0.25scum, but I'm not sure on this.

122--124: uh. What. +0.25scum

142: the explanation makes sense. +0.25town

total: 0.75+scum

Spoiler: Kokichi

33, 37: this to me seems a towny thing to do. I suppose it's possible for scum to do that to throw some easy shade, but also I don't think it would be effective at all. On the other hand, a Townie is either genuine, and so the vote is fine and also trying to see if someone else is of the same opinion to corroborate one's own is fine, or is attempting a reaction test which clearly has more utilty for town. +town.

190: this is on the same page as me thinking #38 to be slightly defensive. Kokichi here seems to be genuine, +0.25town

196: yeah, that line of reasoning is... flimsy at best. Though they're right that it would have taken us out of RVS, and doing so I believe is protown. I'm not giving extra town cred for this post in itself, since it was after the fact.

total: 1.25+town

Spoiler: Saihara

49: this post I like. I don't think it seemed fabricated concern, and it was good to initiate the game proper. +town

95--103: It was not a good job at convincing, but wathever.

total: 1+town
In all manners, my previously stated TR on Saihara stands.

Spoiler: Kyoko

50: I have already answered to the content of this post, and made clear my opinions on it. I want to say that, however, that some of the criticism in my original 78 are clearly resolved by 80, which does clear a lot of the doubts I had on her. With that, #50 does seem actual effort to scumhunt, so +town.

104: I'm not sure I understand the meaning of the embedded picture. Not reading anything wrong into it, I'm just genuinely unsure.

112: eh, that's good. Well, I don't agree completely, though this is a pretty lucid explanation that I don't see scum making. +0.5town.

total: 1.5+town

Spoiler: Fuyuhiko

14--18: eh, a little quick to draw conclusions, but not completely unreasonable. +0.25town

145: ok. Don't think it's an AI thing to say though.

149 (I also believe 152 ties to this): since you're not the first to ask, I was under the impression that a FoS was just a way to signal willingness to vote a spot one find suspicious -- and so that a vote is no longer a FoS, since you already acted on that willingness. From what I'm understanding from here, I probably understood that wrong.

154: that's actually a reasonable question, though my judgment of Kaito may be clouded, since most of the things they said tie to me. +0.25town

156: why? It does come across as a bit brisky, I'll admit that.

164: as I said, I don't think gut reads are necessarily scummy. And the tone here seems a bit sarcastic to me, which I would imagine could possibly be some sort of veiled accusation. +0.25scum (but I'm not the best at reading tone...)

172: is this remark somewhat offhanded or what? I don't get if it sais that they're reading Gimli as town for that post, or sarcastically that they find all their other post so scummy that that one is the towniest.

178: this actually shows coerency with #156 and #164, so I'm gonna put it down as a bit townie-looking. +0.25town

total: 0.5+town

Spoiler: others

• Kaito is mostly talking about me and others' interactions with me, so it would be difficult for me to comment on them. I don't have actual reasons to scumread them at the moment, and in fact
  I do like the fact they're not hard TRing me
  and are in fact willing to entertain Kyoko's points, like in #108.
  
• Not_Mafia is just null. I don't think that the fact they put themself on the bottom does necessarily mean the list is trash, I think it's just memey. I also don't think the list is of much value, looks like is there mostly as joke anyway.

This list doesn’t look great for either Kaito or Maki. Maki is left out completely but the Kaito read is strange. He seems to like Kaito but fails to give him any kind of rating.

What strikes me as bizarre was bianco saying he really liked that Kaito wasn’t “hard townreading [him]”. but like why would he even have that thought since I don’t think Kaito had even given any reads at this point but will cross check, just to make sure.

that probably does make them more likely to be aligned. it's weirdly constructed like he was somehow too aware of kaito when writing about him, even though he left both him and his other team mate as footnotes on his big MQ.

[Wednesday Addams]

Here's the wall. In nice spoiler so that it won't fill the screen.

Spoiler: Wednesday

I will ignore posts I don't find significant.
118: I agree with Wednesday here that Gimli's sus on her is not really founded, in fact just posting some rvs placeholder and then disappearing is the sort of thing I'd do myself if a game were to begin while I had RL things to do -- frankly, I don't really care for the implication here that Wednesday was faking that.
That said, I'm unsure if that line of thinking is necessarily scum indicative, it is going for the easy fish though, so Wednesday's vote may be justified; it is however a somewhat agressive post (yes, I used that adjective myself this time).
As for the buddying comment, well I also saw it as already remarked, but people seem to think it was just a joke and I can get behind that, I just don't think it was a good joke.

133: I don't necessarily agree that switching votes rapidly during D1 is very scum indicative. If anything reveals some fluidity that I believe could more easily come from town. And I don't think that Gimli is "making votes for the sake of it", his votes are justified (even if, indeed, flimsily). I think this post is +scum actually.

146: that's fine, but I think asking to motivate a sus read on oneself is more likely to come from groupscum (I have no data on this, this is just based on my forma mentis. If anyone has data to back off the converse, I'll gadly hear it). So half +scum.

148: I actually like this interaction. The unvote seems to corroborate that Wednesday actually espouses the view in #133, as #142 does indeed alleviate the perception she had that Gimli's vote were just random. +town

149: whatever. The explanation is sound, and I also agree to the distaste of Gimli's vote for her, but I won't give her town cred for this.

176: see, this is a pretty inconsequential friendly banter. However, I point that out because post #127 is also inconsequential banter, and their both with STD. At this point I don't think it's consequential, but notice how STD was actually the only player Wednesday approached to in this manner (excluding quoting NM's read list, but then again lots of people, myself included, did that at some point).

total: 0.5+scum

Spoiler: STD

20: you already know what I think of this. +scum.

38: a bit defensive, idk if that was warranted. I'm gonna give this a 0.25+scum.

42: this and the following are nulls. I don't know why exactly STD had to remark in #43 that #42 was stilted, I don't think it particularly was and I don't get the need to excuse oneself even if it was, but I don't want to read to much into it.

76: idk, I don't agree with this vote. While I don't agree with Kyoko's criticism of me either, that seemed to me an honest attempt to scumhunt. Scumreading them over "being too nitpicky" with that (cfr #91, #92) seems a little forced. +0.5scum

90: of this post I like how my TR is apparently, cfr 94, not set in stone. It was not actually challenged afterwards, hough one must assume that if #76 were genuine than the TR on me probably is too. The Kaito TR is also reasonable.

132--141, 179: I'm ignoring meta posts rn, at least possibly until I find the will to go read games.

144: eh, the question is legitimate. +town

157: eh, this one I like less, falls somewhere in the category of asking about own SRs. Though I'm giving STD some slack for it.

159, 165: gut readings are fine, especially this early. Fuyuhiko apparently doesn't like that, and that may be reasonable, I just don't agree that's particularly AI at this point.

180: I genuinely didn't understand this post. Does what? @STD, I'm not trying to be an ass or anything, I would just like a clarification. I'm guessing it is trivially linked to 183?
Btw, 183 seem like a genuine attempt to workshop, I'm giving it +0.25 town.

191: while I also find #38 distasteful, this response to Kokichi is credible. I guess it could be construed as attempting to negate all further attempts at using meta to read him, which idk if I like. +0.25scum.

total: 0.75+scum

Spoiler: Penguin

65: it's possible I'm just dumb, but this post doesn't make any sense to me? There were not two competing equivalent wagons, mine was already the largest and not tied with anyone. +0.25scum.
Also I resent the implication that my user is difficult >:(

67: uhm. Noncommital, but idk how much to read into it.

135: I mean, the wiki says that buzzword is a buzzword. Though I'm willing to actually give this and 137 +0.5town, this is a gut feeling but it's just that it seems to me it is quite to brazen for a scum.

total: +0.25town

Spoiler: Penguin

Spoiler: furtive

9: I actually read this as null. I guess it could be beneficial to town to start analysing mech early, though this one remark is pretty shallow and quite trivial, so a scum could have easily made it without really hurting anything.

13: this I like... a bit less, since he was the one to start doing setup spec. I'm giving it +0.25scum for that, though the awkward thing is that I actually agree with the suggestion here.

15: eh, that explanation does not actually completely alleviate the uneasiness.

21: this is a bit brazen, I actually don't hate it. At the very least is not panicky. Let's say +0.25town.

30: same thing as for #9; it's all well and good we know that, but the utility is so little that a scum could have easily made this observation without hurting anything. I'm not gonna give town cred for that.
About the Wednesday jokes, I do believe he just meant he didn't like those as jokes, at least as of 40, so whatever

117: about PP, I don't like doing meta, maybe when I'll have the will I'll check the veracity, though I do appreciate the comment.
I'm not 100% sure I do like the Gimli comment though, in a way it's, somewhat ironically, a bit surface level. Now I like that furtive is sharing some early reads, and I'm giving some town cred for that, but that's not really enough effort for me to give much. +0.5town

129--138: meta, meta, meta. I don't know meta.

151, 158: I don't care much for the assumption that Wednesday's vote would look particularly bad after town!Gimli flips; it is true that Wednesday was tunnelly and all, but to say that would implicate that Wednesday is probably not town if Gimli is is a lot of a stretch. I also don't care about the need to comment on the optics of what will happen when Gimli flips town, I of course get that it was just an argumentative hypothesis, it's just that sussing Wednesday on the fact that she would be sus assuming the veracity of a particular hypothesis sound off. +0.75scum, not a full +scum because I liked #151 in isolation.

199: eh, may be a decent attempt to get some interactions. +0.25town

205: That's bantery. May mean nothing though.

Spoiler: Gimli

6: I though it could be buddying, but people seem to think it's just a joke and whatever, I can manage to see it being that.

22, 23: that's well and good, but, like, why? +0.25scum
(also, I noted Gimli did call Fuyuhiko as huyuhiko a couple times. Is this just a typo or there is some lore reason to it, just curios)

28: I am willing to concede this may just be a late RVS vote and go on.

39: okay, but again, why exactly is that? Like, am I wrong in getting so upset about this? +0.5scum

46: eh, I actually do like this post. It's attempting to call out furtive on backpedaling, though I'm not convinced he was in the first place. Still, +0.25town.

56, 59: the TRs are fine. I'm unsure how I should thik about being defended like this though, I'm always a bit paranoid it may be buddying. Whatever, +0.25town.

63, 64: inciting discussion; that's good. +0.5town

87, 100: idk, lots of TRs. The STD things is probably a joke, but a bit distasteful to me, though I'll leave this at null.

116: it's a bit of a stretch alright. She may have had RL issues or whatnot, I feel like discounting this may be the case is slightly rude, but more to the point is slightly going for the easy target. +0.25scum, but I'm not sure on this.

122--124: uh. What. +0.25scum

142: the explanation makes sense. +0.25town

total: 0.75+scum

Spoiler: Kokichi

33, 37: this to me seems a towny thing to do. I suppose it's possible for scum to do that to throw some easy shade, but also I don't think it would be effective at all. On the other hand, a Townie is either genuine, and so the vote is fine and also trying to see if someone else is of the same opinion to corroborate one's own is fine, or is attempting a reaction test which clearly has more utilty for town. +town.

190: this is on the same page as me thinking #38 to be slightly defensive. Kokichi here seems to be genuine, +0.25town

196: yeah, that line of reasoning is... flimsy at best. Though they're right that it would have taken us out of RVS, and doing so I believe is protown. I'm not giving extra town cred for this post in itself, since it was after the fact.

total: 1.25+town

Spoiler: Saihara

49: this post I like. I don't think it seemed fabricated concern, and it was good to initiate the game proper. +town

95--103: It was not a good job at convincing, but wathever.

total: 1+town
In all manners, my previously stated TR on Saihara stands.

Spoiler: Kyoko

50: I have already answered to the content of this post, and made clear my opinions on it. I want to say that, however, that some of the criticism in my original 78 are clearly resolved by 80, which does clear a lot of the doubts I had on her. With that, #50 does seem actual effort to scumhunt, so +town.

104: I'm not sure I understand the meaning of the embedded picture. Not reading anything wrong into it, I'm just genuinely unsure.

112: eh, that's good. Well, I don't agree completely, though this is a pretty lucid explanation that I don't see scum making. +0.5town.

total: 1.5+town

Spoiler: Fuyuhiko

14--18: eh, a little quick to draw conclusions, but not completely unreasonable. +0.25town

145: ok. Don't think it's an AI thing to say though.

149 (I also believe 152 ties to this): since you're not the first to ask, I was under the impression that a FoS was just a way to signal willingness to vote a spot one find suspicious -- and so that a vote is no longer a FoS, since you already acted on that willingness. From what I'm understanding from here, I probably understood that wrong.

154: that's actually a reasonable question, though my judgment of Kaito may be clouded, since most of the things they said tie to me. +0.25town

156: why? It does come across as a bit brisky, I'll admit that.

164: as I said, I don't think gut reads are necessarily scummy. And the tone here seems a bit sarcastic to me, which I would imagine could possibly be some sort of veiled accusation. +0.25scum (but I'm not the best at reading tone...)

172: is this remark somewhat offhanded or what? I don't get if it sais that they're reading Gimli as town for that post, or sarcastically that they find all their other post so scummy that that one is the towniest.

178: this actually shows coerency with #156 and #164, so I'm gonna put it down as a bit townie-looking. +0.25town

total: 0.5+town

Spoiler: others

• Kaito is mostly talking about me and others' interactions with me, so it would be difficult for me to comment on them. I don't have actual reasons to scumread them at the moment, and in fact
  I do like the fact they're not hard TRing me
  and are in fact willing to entertain Kyoko's points, like in #108.
  
• Not_Mafia is just null. I don't think that the fact they put themself on the bottom does necessarily mean the list is trash, I think it's just memey. I also don't think the list is of much value, looks like is there mostly as joke anyway.

This list doesn’t look great for either Kaito or Maki. Maki is left out completely but the Kaito read is strange. He seems to like Kaito but fails to give him any kind of rating.

What strikes me as bizarre was bianco saying he really liked that Kaito wasn’t “hard townreading [him]”. but like why would he even have that thought since I don’t think Kaito had even given any reads at this point but will cross check, just to make sure.

that probably does make them more likely to be aligned. it's weirdly constructed like he was somehow too aware of kaito when writing about him, even though he left both him and his other team mate as footnotes on his big MQ.

I suppose no one would think anything about him giving NM no rating since NM did absolutely nothing. And although Kaito’s readlist is fine, town!him is far more likely to give reads unprompted and much earlier and he only really focussed on the players who were scumreading bianco pretty much: Suichi and Kyoko.

Kaito’s usually more agressive in scumhunting based on that other game he was in.

[Wednesday Addams]

viewtopic.php?t=73745

Found this link and Maki, Kokichi and Kaito were all in this game. Kaito was scum and Maki, Kokichi town.

I’ll also look up a towngame.

[furtiveglance]

I think we can assume Gimli, Wednesday, Fuyu, Kyoko and Kokichi are all town

Uhh. Not really

Who in particular are you doubting?

[furtiveglance]

Kaito, can you give us some reads?

Town: Kyoko, Kokichi, Wednesday, Gimli, Furtive
Less sure: Penguinpower, Save the Dragons
Possible mafia: Fuyuhiko, Maki

Can you explain why bianco's vote on Fuyuhiko looked partnered to you?

[Wednesday Addams]

viewtopic.php?t=73745

Found this link and Maki, Kokichi and Kaito were all in this game. Kaito was scum and Maki, Kokichi town.

I’ll also look up a towngame.

viewtopic.php?t=73937

Here’s a game with Kaito!town and Maki!scum for comparison.

[furtiveglance]

Here's the wall. In nice spoiler so that it won't fill the screen.

Spoiler: Wednesday

I will ignore posts I don't find significant.
118: I agree with Wednesday here that Gimli's sus on her is not really founded, in fact just posting some rvs placeholder and then disappearing is the sort of thing I'd do myself if a game were to begin while I had RL things to do -- frankly, I don't really care for the implication here that Wednesday was faking that.
That said, I'm unsure if that line of thinking is necessarily scum indicative, it is going for the easy fish though, so Wednesday's vote may be justified; it is however a somewhat agressive post (yes, I used that adjective myself this time).
As for the buddying comment, well I also saw it as already remarked, but people seem to think it was just a joke and I can get behind that, I just don't think it was a good joke.

133: I don't necessarily agree that switching votes rapidly during D1 is very scum indicative. If anything reveals some fluidity that I believe could more easily come from town. And I don't think that Gimli is "making votes for the sake of it", his votes are justified (even if, indeed, flimsily). I think this post is +scum actually.

146: that's fine, but I think asking to motivate a sus read on oneself is more likely to come from groupscum (I have no data on this, this is just based on my forma mentis. If anyone has data to back off the converse, I'll gadly hear it). So half +scum.

148: I actually like this interaction. The unvote seems to corroborate that Wednesday actually espouses the view in #133, as #142 does indeed alleviate the perception she had that Gimli's vote were just random. +town

149: whatever. The explanation is sound, and I also agree to the distaste of Gimli's vote for her, but I won't give her town cred for this.

176: see, this is a pretty inconsequential friendly banter. However, I point that out because post #127 is also inconsequential banter, and their both with STD. At this point I don't think it's consequential, but notice how STD was actually the only player Wednesday approached to in this manner (excluding quoting NM's read list, but then again lots of people, myself included, did that at some point).

total: 0.5+scum

Spoiler: STD

20: you already know what I think of this. +scum.

38: a bit defensive, idk if that was warranted. I'm gonna give this a 0.25+scum.

42: this and the following are nulls. I don't know why exactly STD had to remark in #43 that #42 was stilted, I don't think it particularly was and I don't get the need to excuse oneself even if it was, but I don't want to read to much into it.

76: idk, I don't agree with this vote. While I don't agree with Kyoko's criticism of me either, that seemed to me an honest attempt to scumhunt. Scumreading them over "being too nitpicky" with that (cfr #91, #92) seems a little forced. +0.5scum

90: of this post I like how my TR is apparently, cfr 94, not set in stone. It was not actually challenged afterwards, hough one must assume that if #76 were genuine than the TR on me probably is too. The Kaito TR is also reasonable.

132--141, 179: I'm ignoring meta posts rn, at least possibly until I find the will to go read games.

144: eh, the question is legitimate. +town

157: eh, this one I like less, falls somewhere in the category of asking about own SRs. Though I'm giving STD some slack for it.

159, 165: gut readings are fine, especially this early. Fuyuhiko apparently doesn't like that, and that may be reasonable, I just don't agree that's particularly AI at this point.

180: I genuinely didn't understand this post. Does what? @STD, I'm not trying to be an ass or anything, I would just like a clarification. I'm guessing it is trivially linked to 183?
Btw, 183 seem like a genuine attempt to workshop, I'm giving it +0.25 town.

191: while I also find #38 distasteful, this response to Kokichi is credible. I guess it could be construed as attempting to negate all further attempts at using meta to read him, which idk if I like. +0.25scum.

total: 0.75+scum

Spoiler: Penguin

65: it's possible I'm just dumb, but this post doesn't make any sense to me? There were not two competing equivalent wagons, mine was already the largest and not tied with anyone. +0.25scum.
Also I resent the implication that my user is difficult >:(

67: uhm. Noncommital, but idk how much to read into it.

135: I mean, the wiki says that buzzword is a buzzword. Though I'm willing to actually give this and 137 +0.5town, this is a gut feeling but it's just that it seems to me it is quite to brazen for a scum.

total: +0.25town

Spoiler: Penguin

Spoiler: furtive

9: I actually read this as null. I guess it could be beneficial to town to start analysing mech early, though this one remark is pretty shallow and quite trivial, so a scum could have easily made it without really hurting anything.

13: this I like... a bit less, since he was the one to start doing setup spec. I'm giving it +0.25scum for that, though the awkward thing is that I actually agree with the suggestion here.

15: eh, that explanation does not actually completely alleviate the uneasiness.

21: this is a bit brazen, I actually don't hate it. At the very least is not panicky. Let's say +0.25town.

30: same thing as for #9; it's all well and good we know that, but the utility is so little that a scum could have easily made this observation without hurting anything. I'm not gonna give town cred for that.
About the Wednesday jokes, I do believe he just meant he didn't like those as jokes, at least as of 40, so whatever

117: about PP, I don't like doing meta, maybe when I'll have the will I'll check the veracity, though I do appreciate the comment.
I'm not 100% sure I do like the Gimli comment though, in a way it's, somewhat ironically, a bit surface level. Now I like that furtive is sharing some early reads, and I'm giving some town cred for that, but that's not really enough effort for me to give much. +0.5town

129--138: meta, meta, meta. I don't know meta.

151, 158: I don't care much for the assumption that Wednesday's vote would look particularly bad after town!Gimli flips; it is true that Wednesday was tunnelly and all, but to say that would implicate that Wednesday is probably not town if Gimli is is a lot of a stretch. I also don't care about the need to comment on the optics of what will happen when Gimli flips town, I of course get that it was just an argumentative hypothesis, it's just that sussing Wednesday on the fact that she would be sus assuming the veracity of a particular hypothesis sound off. +0.75scum, not a full +scum because I liked #151 in isolation.

199: eh, may be a decent attempt to get some interactions. +0.25town

205: That's bantery. May mean nothing though.

Spoiler: Gimli

6: I though it could be buddying, but people seem to think it's just a joke and whatever, I can manage to see it being that.

22, 23: that's well and good, but, like, why? +0.25scum
(also, I noted Gimli did call Fuyuhiko as huyuhiko a couple times. Is this just a typo or there is some lore reason to it, just curios)

28: I am willing to concede this may just be a late RVS vote and go on.

39: okay, but again, why exactly is that? Like, am I wrong in getting so upset about this? +0.5scum

46: eh, I actually do like this post. It's attempting to call out furtive on backpedaling, though I'm not convinced he was in the first place. Still, +0.25town.

56, 59: the TRs are fine. I'm unsure how I should thik about being defended like this though, I'm always a bit paranoid it may be buddying. Whatever, +0.25town.

63, 64: inciting discussion; that's good. +0.5town

87, 100: idk, lots of TRs. The STD things is probably a joke, but a bit distasteful to me, though I'll leave this at null.

116: it's a bit of a stretch alright. She may have had RL issues or whatnot, I feel like discounting this may be the case is slightly rude, but more to the point is slightly going for the easy target. +0.25scum, but I'm not sure on this.

122--124: uh. What. +0.25scum

142: the explanation makes sense. +0.25town

total: 0.75+scum

Spoiler: Kokichi

33, 37: this to me seems a towny thing to do. I suppose it's possible for scum to do that to throw some easy shade, but also I don't think it would be effective at all. On the other hand, a Townie is either genuine, and so the vote is fine and also trying to see if someone else is of the same opinion to corroborate one's own is fine, or is attempting a reaction test which clearly has more utilty for town. +town.

190: this is on the same page as me thinking #38 to be slightly defensive. Kokichi here seems to be genuine, +0.25town

196: yeah, that line of reasoning is... flimsy at best. Though they're right that it would have taken us out of RVS, and doing so I believe is protown. I'm not giving extra town cred for this post in itself, since it was after the fact.

total: 1.25+town

Spoiler: Saihara

49: this post I like. I don't think it seemed fabricated concern, and it was good to initiate the game proper. +town

95--103: It was not a good job at convincing, but wathever.

total: 1+town
In all manners, my previously stated TR on Saihara stands.

Spoiler: Kyoko

50: I have already answered to the content of this post, and made clear my opinions on it. I want to say that, however, that some of the criticism in my original 78 are clearly resolved by 80, which does clear a lot of the doubts I had on her. With that, #50 does seem actual effort to scumhunt, so +town.

104: I'm not sure I understand the meaning of the embedded picture. Not reading anything wrong into it, I'm just genuinely unsure.

112: eh, that's good. Well, I don't agree completely, though this is a pretty lucid explanation that I don't see scum making. +0.5town.

total: 1.5+town

Spoiler: Fuyuhiko

14--18: eh, a little quick to draw conclusions, but not completely unreasonable. +0.25town

145: ok. Don't think it's an AI thing to say though.

149 (I also believe 152 ties to this): since you're not the first to ask, I was under the impression that a FoS was just a way to signal willingness to vote a spot one find suspicious -- and so that a vote is no longer a FoS, since you already acted on that willingness. From what I'm understanding from here, I probably understood that wrong.

154: that's actually a reasonable question, though my judgment of Kaito may be clouded, since most of the things they said tie to me. +0.25town

156: why? It does come across as a bit brisky, I'll admit that.

164: as I said, I don't think gut reads are necessarily scummy. And the tone here seems a bit sarcastic to me, which I would imagine could possibly be some sort of veiled accusation. +0.25scum (but I'm not the best at reading tone...)

172: is this remark somewhat offhanded or what? I don't get if it sais that they're reading Gimli as town for that post, or sarcastically that they find all their other post so scummy that that one is the towniest.

178: this actually shows coerency with #156 and #164, so I'm gonna put it down as a bit townie-looking. +0.25town

total: 0.5+town

Spoiler: others

• Kaito is mostly talking about me and others' interactions with me, so it would be difficult for me to comment on them. I don't have actual reasons to scumread them at the moment, and in fact
  I do like the fact they're not hard TRing me
  and are in fact willing to entertain Kyoko's points, like in #108.
  
• Not_Mafia is just null. I don't think that the fact they put themself on the bottom does necessarily mean the list is trash, I think it's just memey. I also don't think the list is of much value, looks like is there mostly as joke anyway.

This list doesn’t look great for either Kaito or Maki. Maki is left out completely but the Kaito read is strange. He seems to like Kaito but fails to give him any kind of rating.

What strikes me as bizarre was bianco saying he really liked that Kaito wasn’t “hard townreading [him]”. but like why would he even have that thought since I don’t think Kaito had even given any reads at this point but will cross check, just to make sure.

that probably does make them more likely to be aligned. it's weirdly constructed like he was somehow too aware of kaito when writing about him, even though he left both him and his other team mate as footnotes on his big MQ.

If bianco really put both their teammates as 'others', that's cold. What can you expect from undead I guess

[Wednesday Addams]

I think we can assume Gimli, Wednesday, Fuyu, Kyoko and Kokichi are all town

Based on what?

So Kaito’s only doubting Kuzo based on his readslist.

[Wednesday Addams]

Here's the wall. In nice spoiler so that it won't fill the screen.

Spoiler: Wednesday

I will ignore posts I don't find significant.
118: I agree with Wednesday here that Gimli's sus on her is not really founded, in fact just posting some rvs placeholder and then disappearing is the sort of thing I'd do myself if a game were to begin while I had RL things to do -- frankly, I don't really care for the implication here that Wednesday was faking that.
That said, I'm unsure if that line of thinking is necessarily scum indicative, it is going for the easy fish though, so Wednesday's vote may be justified; it is however a somewhat agressive post (yes, I used that adjective myself this time).
As for the buddying comment, well I also saw it as already remarked, but people seem to think it was just a joke and I can get behind that, I just don't think it was a good joke.

133: I don't necessarily agree that switching votes rapidly during D1 is very scum indicative. If anything reveals some fluidity that I believe could more easily come from town. And I don't think that Gimli is "making votes for the sake of it", his votes are justified (even if, indeed, flimsily). I think this post is +scum actually.

146: that's fine, but I think asking to motivate a sus read on oneself is more likely to come from groupscum (I have no data on this, this is just based on my forma mentis. If anyone has data to back off the converse, I'll gadly hear it). So half +scum.

148: I actually like this interaction. The unvote seems to corroborate that Wednesday actually espouses the view in #133, as #142 does indeed alleviate the perception she had that Gimli's vote were just random. +town

149: whatever. The explanation is sound, and I also agree to the distaste of Gimli's vote for her, but I won't give her town cred for this.

176: see, this is a pretty inconsequential friendly banter. However, I point that out because post #127 is also inconsequential banter, and their both with STD. At this point I don't think it's consequential, but notice how STD was actually the only player Wednesday approached to in this manner (excluding quoting NM's read list, but then again lots of people, myself included, did that at some point).

total: 0.5+scum

Spoiler: STD

20: you already know what I think of this. +scum.

38: a bit defensive, idk if that was warranted. I'm gonna give this a 0.25+scum.

42: this and the following are nulls. I don't know why exactly STD had to remark in #43 that #42 was stilted, I don't think it particularly was and I don't get the need to excuse oneself even if it was, but I don't want to read to much into it.

76: idk, I don't agree with this vote. While I don't agree with Kyoko's criticism of me either, that seemed to me an honest attempt to scumhunt. Scumreading them over "being too nitpicky" with that (cfr #91, #92) seems a little forced. +0.5scum

90: of this post I like how my TR is apparently, cfr 94, not set in stone. It was not actually challenged afterwards, hough one must assume that if #76 were genuine than the TR on me probably is too. The Kaito TR is also reasonable.

132--141, 179: I'm ignoring meta posts rn, at least possibly until I find the will to go read games.

144: eh, the question is legitimate. +town

157: eh, this one I like less, falls somewhere in the category of asking about own SRs. Though I'm giving STD some slack for it.

159, 165: gut readings are fine, especially this early. Fuyuhiko apparently doesn't like that, and that may be reasonable, I just don't agree that's particularly AI at this point.

180: I genuinely didn't understand this post. Does what? @STD, I'm not trying to be an ass or anything, I would just like a clarification. I'm guessing it is trivially linked to 183?
Btw, 183 seem like a genuine attempt to workshop, I'm giving it +0.25 town.

191: while I also find #38 distasteful, this response to Kokichi is credible. I guess it could be construed as attempting to negate all further attempts at using meta to read him, which idk if I like. +0.25scum.

total: 0.75+scum

Spoiler: Penguin

65: it's possible I'm just dumb, but this post doesn't make any sense to me? There were not two competing equivalent wagons, mine was already the largest and not tied with anyone. +0.25scum.
Also I resent the implication that my user is difficult >:(

67: uhm. Noncommital, but idk how much to read into it.

135: I mean, the wiki says that buzzword is a buzzword. Though I'm willing to actually give this and 137 +0.5town, this is a gut feeling but it's just that it seems to me it is quite to brazen for a scum.

total: +0.25town

Spoiler: Penguin

Spoiler: furtive

9: I actually read this as null. I guess it could be beneficial to town to start analysing mech early, though this one remark is pretty shallow and quite trivial, so a scum could have easily made it without really hurting anything.

13: this I like... a bit less, since he was the one to start doing setup spec. I'm giving it +0.25scum for that, though the awkward thing is that I actually agree with the suggestion here.

15: eh, that explanation does not actually completely alleviate the uneasiness.

21: this is a bit brazen, I actually don't hate it. At the very least is not panicky. Let's say +0.25town.

30: same thing as for #9; it's all well and good we know that, but the utility is so little that a scum could have easily made this observation without hurting anything. I'm not gonna give town cred for that.
About the Wednesday jokes, I do believe he just meant he didn't like those as jokes, at least as of 40, so whatever

117: about PP, I don't like doing meta, maybe when I'll have the will I'll check the veracity, though I do appreciate the comment.
I'm not 100% sure I do like the Gimli comment though, in a way it's, somewhat ironically, a bit surface level. Now I like that furtive is sharing some early reads, and I'm giving some town cred for that, but that's not really enough effort for me to give much. +0.5town

129--138: meta, meta, meta. I don't know meta.

151, 158: I don't care much for the assumption that Wednesday's vote would look particularly bad after town!Gimli flips; it is true that Wednesday was tunnelly and all, but to say that would implicate that Wednesday is probably not town if Gimli is is a lot of a stretch. I also don't care about the need to comment on the optics of what will happen when Gimli flips town, I of course get that it was just an argumentative hypothesis, it's just that sussing Wednesday on the fact that she would be sus assuming the veracity of a particular hypothesis sound off. +0.75scum, not a full +scum because I liked #151 in isolation.

199: eh, may be a decent attempt to get some interactions. +0.25town

205: That's bantery. May mean nothing though.

Spoiler: Gimli

6: I though it could be buddying, but people seem to think it's just a joke and whatever, I can manage to see it being that.

22, 23: that's well and good, but, like, why? +0.25scum
(also, I noted Gimli did call Fuyuhiko as huyuhiko a couple times. Is this just a typo or there is some lore reason to it, just curios)

28: I am willing to concede this may just be a late RVS vote and go on.

39: okay, but again, why exactly is that? Like, am I wrong in getting so upset about this? +0.5scum

46: eh, I actually do like this post. It's attempting to call out furtive on backpedaling, though I'm not convinced he was in the first place. Still, +0.25town.

56, 59: the TRs are fine. I'm unsure how I should thik about being defended like this though, I'm always a bit paranoid it may be buddying. Whatever, +0.25town.

63, 64: inciting discussion; that's good. +0.5town

87, 100: idk, lots of TRs. The STD things is probably a joke, but a bit distasteful to me, though I'll leave this at null.

116: it's a bit of a stretch alright. She may have had RL issues or whatnot, I feel like discounting this may be the case is slightly rude, but more to the point is slightly going for the easy target. +0.25scum, but I'm not sure on this.

122--124: uh. What. +0.25scum

142: the explanation makes sense. +0.25town

total: 0.75+scum

Spoiler: Kokichi

33, 37: this to me seems a towny thing to do. I suppose it's possible for scum to do that to throw some easy shade, but also I don't think it would be effective at all. On the other hand, a Townie is either genuine, and so the vote is fine and also trying to see if someone else is of the same opinion to corroborate one's own is fine, or is attempting a reaction test which clearly has more utilty for town. +town.

190: this is on the same page as me thinking #38 to be slightly defensive. Kokichi here seems to be genuine, +0.25town

196: yeah, that line of reasoning is... flimsy at best. Though they're right that it would have taken us out of RVS, and doing so I believe is protown. I'm not giving extra town cred for this post in itself, since it was after the fact.

total: 1.25+town

Spoiler: Saihara

49: this post I like. I don't think it seemed fabricated concern, and it was good to initiate the game proper. +town

95--103: It was not a good job at convincing, but wathever.

total: 1+town
In all manners, my previously stated TR on Saihara stands.

Spoiler: Kyoko

50: I have already answered to the content of this post, and made clear my opinions on it. I want to say that, however, that some of the criticism in my original 78 are clearly resolved by 80, which does clear a lot of the doubts I had on her. With that, #50 does seem actual effort to scumhunt, so +town.

104: I'm not sure I understand the meaning of the embedded picture. Not reading anything wrong into it, I'm just genuinely unsure.

112: eh, that's good. Well, I don't agree completely, though this is a pretty lucid explanation that I don't see scum making. +0.5town.

total: 1.5+town

Spoiler: Fuyuhiko

14--18: eh, a little quick to draw conclusions, but not completely unreasonable. +0.25town

145: ok. Don't think it's an AI thing to say though.

149 (I also believe 152 ties to this): since you're not the first to ask, I was under the impression that a FoS was just a way to signal willingness to vote a spot one find suspicious -- and so that a vote is no longer a FoS, since you already acted on that willingness. From what I'm understanding from here, I probably understood that wrong.

154: that's actually a reasonable question, though my judgment of Kaito may be clouded, since most of the things they said tie to me. +0.25town

156: why? It does come across as a bit brisky, I'll admit that.

164: as I said, I don't think gut reads are necessarily scummy. And the tone here seems a bit sarcastic to me, which I would imagine could possibly be some sort of veiled accusation. +0.25scum (but I'm not the best at reading tone...)

172: is this remark somewhat offhanded or what? I don't get if it sais that they're reading Gimli as town for that post, or sarcastically that they find all their other post so scummy that that one is the towniest.

178: this actually shows coerency with #156 and #164, so I'm gonna put it down as a bit townie-looking. +0.25town

total: 0.5+town

Spoiler: others

• Kaito is mostly talking about me and others' interactions with me, so it would be difficult for me to comment on them. I don't have actual reasons to scumread them at the moment, and in fact
  I do like the fact they're not hard TRing me
  and are in fact willing to entertain Kyoko's points, like in #108.
  
• Not_Mafia is just null. I don't think that the fact they put themself on the bottom does necessarily mean the list is trash, I think it's just memey. I also don't think the list is of much value, looks like is there mostly as joke anyway.

This list doesn’t look great for either Kaito or Maki. Maki is left out completely but the Kaito read is strange. He seems to like Kaito but fails to give him any kind of rating.

What strikes me as bizarre was bianco saying he really liked that Kaito wasn’t “hard townreading [him]”. but like why would he even have that thought since I don’t think Kaito had even given any reads at this point but will cross check, just to make sure.

that probably does make them more likely to be aligned. it's weirdly constructed like he was somehow too aware of kaito when writing about him, even though he left both him and his other team mate as footnotes on his big MQ.

If bianco really put both their teammates as 'others', that's cold. What can you expect from undead I guess

NM though would be understandable since he did absolutely nothing other than make a highly entertaining readslist.

[furtiveglance]

Here's the wall. In nice spoiler so that it won't fill the screen.

Spoiler: Wednesday

I will ignore posts I don't find significant.
118: I agree with Wednesday here that Gimli's sus on her is not really founded, in fact just posting some rvs placeholder and then disappearing is the sort of thing I'd do myself if a game were to begin while I had RL things to do -- frankly, I don't really care for the implication here that Wednesday was faking that.
That said, I'm unsure if that line of thinking is necessarily scum indicative, it is going for the easy fish though, so Wednesday's vote may be justified; it is however a somewhat agressive post (yes, I used that adjective myself this time).
As for the buddying comment, well I also saw it as already remarked, but people seem to think it was just a joke and I can get behind that, I just don't think it was a good joke.

133: I don't necessarily agree that switching votes rapidly during D1 is very scum indicative. If anything reveals some fluidity that I believe could more easily come from town. And I don't think that Gimli is "making votes for the sake of it", his votes are justified (even if, indeed, flimsily). I think this post is +scum actually.

146: that's fine, but I think asking to motivate a sus read on oneself is more likely to come from groupscum (I have no data on this, this is just based on my forma mentis. If anyone has data to back off the converse, I'll gadly hear it). So half +scum.

148: I actually like this interaction. The unvote seems to corroborate that Wednesday actually espouses the view in #133, as #142 does indeed alleviate the perception she had that Gimli's vote were just random. +town

149: whatever. The explanation is sound, and I also agree to the distaste of Gimli's vote for her, but I won't give her town cred for this.

176: see, this is a pretty inconsequential friendly banter. However, I point that out because post #127 is also inconsequential banter, and their both with STD. At this point I don't think it's consequential, but notice how STD was actually the only player Wednesday approached to in this manner (excluding quoting NM's read list, but then again lots of people, myself included, did that at some point).

total: 0.5+scum

Spoiler: STD

20: you already know what I think of this. +scum.

38: a bit defensive, idk if that was warranted. I'm gonna give this a 0.25+scum.

42: this and the following are nulls. I don't know why exactly STD had to remark in #43 that #42 was stilted, I don't think it particularly was and I don't get the need to excuse oneself even if it was, but I don't want to read to much into it.

76: idk, I don't agree with this vote. While I don't agree with Kyoko's criticism of me either, that seemed to me an honest attempt to scumhunt. Scumreading them over "being too nitpicky" with that (cfr #91, #92) seems a little forced. +0.5scum

90: of this post I like how my TR is apparently, cfr 94, not set in stone. It was not actually challenged afterwards, hough one must assume that if #76 were genuine than the TR on me probably is too. The Kaito TR is also reasonable.

132--141, 179: I'm ignoring meta posts rn, at least possibly until I find the will to go read games.

144: eh, the question is legitimate. +town

157: eh, this one I like less, falls somewhere in the category of asking about own SRs. Though I'm giving STD some slack for it.

159, 165: gut readings are fine, especially this early. Fuyuhiko apparently doesn't like that, and that may be reasonable, I just don't agree that's particularly AI at this point.

180: I genuinely didn't understand this post. Does what? @STD, I'm not trying to be an ass or anything, I would just like a clarification. I'm guessing it is trivially linked to 183?
Btw, 183 seem like a genuine attempt to workshop, I'm giving it +0.25 town.

191: while I also find #38 distasteful, this response to Kokichi is credible. I guess it could be construed as attempting to negate all further attempts at using meta to read him, which idk if I like. +0.25scum.

total: 0.75+scum

Spoiler: Penguin

65: it's possible I'm just dumb, but this post doesn't make any sense to me? There were not two competing equivalent wagons, mine was already the largest and not tied with anyone. +0.25scum.
Also I resent the implication that my user is difficult >:(

67: uhm. Noncommital, but idk how much to read into it.

135: I mean, the wiki says that buzzword is a buzzword. Though I'm willing to actually give this and 137 +0.5town, this is a gut feeling but it's just that it seems to me it is quite to brazen for a scum.

total: +0.25town

Spoiler: Penguin

Spoiler: furtive

9: I actually read this as null. I guess it could be beneficial to town to start analysing mech early, though this one remark is pretty shallow and quite trivial, so a scum could have easily made it without really hurting anything.

13: this I like... a bit less, since he was the one to start doing setup spec. I'm giving it +0.25scum for that, though the awkward thing is that I actually agree with the suggestion here.

15: eh, that explanation does not actually completely alleviate the uneasiness.

21: this is a bit brazen, I actually don't hate it. At the very least is not panicky. Let's say +0.25town.

30: same thing as for #9; it's all well and good we know that, but the utility is so little that a scum could have easily made this observation without hurting anything. I'm not gonna give town cred for that.
About the Wednesday jokes, I do believe he just meant he didn't like those as jokes, at least as of 40, so whatever

117: about PP, I don't like doing meta, maybe when I'll have the will I'll check the veracity, though I do appreciate the comment.
I'm not 100% sure I do like the Gimli comment though, in a way it's, somewhat ironically, a bit surface level. Now I like that furtive is sharing some early reads, and I'm giving some town cred for that, but that's not really enough effort for me to give much. +0.5town

129--138: meta, meta, meta. I don't know meta.

151, 158: I don't care much for the assumption that Wednesday's vote would look particularly bad after town!Gimli flips; it is true that Wednesday was tunnelly and all, but to say that would implicate that Wednesday is probably not town if Gimli is is a lot of a stretch. I also don't care about the need to comment on the optics of what will happen when Gimli flips town, I of course get that it was just an argumentative hypothesis, it's just that sussing Wednesday on the fact that she would be sus assuming the veracity of a particular hypothesis sound off. +0.75scum, not a full +scum because I liked #151 in isolation.

199: eh, may be a decent attempt to get some interactions. +0.25town

205: That's bantery. May mean nothing though.

Spoiler: Gimli

6: I though it could be buddying, but people seem to think it's just a joke and whatever, I can manage to see it being that.

22, 23: that's well and good, but, like, why? +0.25scum
(also, I noted Gimli did call Fuyuhiko as huyuhiko a couple times. Is this just a typo or there is some lore reason to it, just curios)

28: I am willing to concede this may just be a late RVS vote and go on.

39: okay, but again, why exactly is that? Like, am I wrong in getting so upset about this? +0.5scum

46: eh, I actually do like this post. It's attempting to call out furtive on backpedaling, though I'm not convinced he was in the first place. Still, +0.25town.

56, 59: the TRs are fine. I'm unsure how I should thik about being defended like this though, I'm always a bit paranoid it may be buddying. Whatever, +0.25town.

63, 64: inciting discussion; that's good. +0.5town

87, 100: idk, lots of TRs. The STD things is probably a joke, but a bit distasteful to me, though I'll leave this at null.

116: it's a bit of a stretch alright. She may have had RL issues or whatnot, I feel like discounting this may be the case is slightly rude, but more to the point is slightly going for the easy target. +0.25scum, but I'm not sure on this.

122--124: uh. What. +0.25scum

142: the explanation makes sense. +0.25town

total: 0.75+scum

Spoiler: Kokichi

33, 37: this to me seems a towny thing to do. I suppose it's possible for scum to do that to throw some easy shade, but also I don't think it would be effective at all. On the other hand, a Townie is either genuine, and so the vote is fine and also trying to see if someone else is of the same opinion to corroborate one's own is fine, or is attempting a reaction test which clearly has more utilty for town. +town.

190: this is on the same page as me thinking #38 to be slightly defensive. Kokichi here seems to be genuine, +0.25town

196: yeah, that line of reasoning is... flimsy at best. Though they're right that it would have taken us out of RVS, and doing so I believe is protown. I'm not giving extra town cred for this post in itself, since it was after the fact.

total: 1.25+town

Spoiler: Saihara

49: this post I like. I don't think it seemed fabricated concern, and it was good to initiate the game proper. +town

95--103: It was not a good job at convincing, but wathever.

total: 1+town
In all manners, my previously stated TR on Saihara stands.

Spoiler: Kyoko

50: I have already answered to the content of this post, and made clear my opinions on it. I want to say that, however, that some of the criticism in my original 78 are clearly resolved by 80, which does clear a lot of the doubts I had on her. With that, #50 does seem actual effort to scumhunt, so +town.

104: I'm not sure I understand the meaning of the embedded picture. Not reading anything wrong into it, I'm just genuinely unsure.

112: eh, that's good. Well, I don't agree completely, though this is a pretty lucid explanation that I don't see scum making. +0.5town.

total: 1.5+town

Spoiler: Fuyuhiko

14--18: eh, a little quick to draw conclusions, but not completely unreasonable. +0.25town

145: ok. Don't think it's an AI thing to say though.

149 (I also believe 152 ties to this): since you're not the first to ask, I was under the impression that a FoS was just a way to signal willingness to vote a spot one find suspicious -- and so that a vote is no longer a FoS, since you already acted on that willingness. From what I'm understanding from here, I probably understood that wrong.

154: that's actually a reasonable question, though my judgment of Kaito may be clouded, since most of the things they said tie to me. +0.25town

156: why? It does come across as a bit brisky, I'll admit that.

164: as I said, I don't think gut reads are necessarily scummy. And the tone here seems a bit sarcastic to me, which I would imagine could possibly be some sort of veiled accusation. +0.25scum (but I'm not the best at reading tone...)

172: is this remark somewhat offhanded or what? I don't get if it sais that they're reading Gimli as town for that post, or sarcastically that they find all their other post so scummy that that one is the towniest.

178: this actually shows coerency with #156 and #164, so I'm gonna put it down as a bit townie-looking. +0.25town

total: 0.5+town

Spoiler: others

• Kaito is mostly talking about me and others' interactions with me, so it would be difficult for me to comment on them. I don't have actual reasons to scumread them at the moment, and in fact
  I do like the fact they're not hard TRing me
  and are in fact willing to entertain Kyoko's points, like in #108.
  
• Not_Mafia is just null. I don't think that the fact they put themself on the bottom does necessarily mean the list is trash, I think it's just memey. I also don't think the list is of much value, looks like is there mostly as joke anyway.

This list doesn’t look great for either Kaito or Maki. Maki is left out completely but the Kaito read is strange. He seems to like Kaito but fails to give him any kind of rating.

What strikes me as bizarre was bianco saying he really liked that Kaito wasn’t “hard townreading [him]”. but like why would he even have that thought since I don’t think Kaito had even given any reads at this point but will cross check, just to make sure.

that probably does make them more likely to be aligned. it's weirdly constructed like he was somehow too aware of kaito when writing about him, even though he left both him and his other team mate as footnotes on his big MQ.

If bianco really put both their teammates as 'others', that's cold. What can you expect from undead I guess

NM though would be understandable since he did absolutely nothing other than make a highly entertaining readslist.

I don't see myself as death stare, more like a resigned look

Your avi is somehow in time with every song I listen to

[furtiveglance]

What happened to spoiler tags?

[Wednesday Addams]

What happened to spoiler tags?

Use [ spoiler = ] NOT [ spoiler minus the equal symbol ]

[Wednesday Addams]

Anyhow ISOing Maki in that scumgame of hers makes me feel better about her anyway.

[furtiveglance]

Spoiler: testing

What happened to spoiler tags?

Use [ spoiler = ] NOT [ spoiler minus the equal symbol ]

Spoiler: If there's one player that the group consensus isn't suspicious of but I'm secretly paranoid about, it's:

made you look

[Wednesday Addams]

Spoiler: testing

What happened to spoiler tags?

Use [ spoiler = ] NOT [ spoiler minus the equal symbol ]

Spoiler: If there's one player that the group consensus isn't suspicious of but I'm secretly paranoid about, it's:

made you look

Spoiler:

made you look needs to die asap

[Save The Dragons]

i will always look

[furtiveglance]

I like looking even when I know what's gonna be there

[Kaito Momota]

Kaito, can you give us some reads?

Town: Kyoko, Kokichi, Wednesday, Gimli, Furtive
Less sure: Penguinpower, Save the Dragons
Possible mafia: Fuyuhiko, Maki

Can you explain why bianco's vote on Fuyuhiko looked partnered to you?

I don't see a single vote as precluding partners and think fuyuhiko could be mafia due to not really interacting with the Bianco wagon and not having much of an impact today

[Kaito Momota]

OK let's make this easy. I'm another Witch Hunter on the town side; last night I shot at not_mafia. The last mafia is going to be somebody who isn't taking strong stances today and maybe isn't too into the game. Maki and Fuyuhiko stand out.

I'll go ahead and vote for Maki roll since I think she has done an impressive amount of nothing today, she really just said "you guys are on the right track"

VOTE: Maki Harukawa

----

The undead would have seen "Witch Hunter, X" for the town roles (or x, y), so it is 50/50 to them whether town would have another one, unless there is a third one, in which case they'd know there was 3. Long story short Kokichi was right and voting to no eliminate today would have made things much harder for the mafia team. I think Kokichi probably isn't shooting themself in the foot here so they seem pretty obviously town to me, while those arguing against that play could have undead motivation.

[Gimli]

VOTE: maki

[Save The Dragons]

easy breezy lemon squeezy

[Kokichi Oma]

viewtopic.php?t=73745

Found this link and Maki, Kokichi and Kaito were all in this game. Kaito was scum and Maki, Kokichi town.

I’ll also look up a towngame.

What a trip down memory lane.

[Kokichi Oma]

OK let's make this easy. I'm another Witch Hunter on the town side; last night I shot at not_mafia. The last mafia is going to be somebody who isn't taking strong stances today and maybe isn't too into the game. Maki and Fuyuhiko stand out.

I'll go ahead and vote for Maki roll since I think she has done an impressive amount of nothing today, she really just said "you guys are on the right track"

VOTE: Maki Harukawa

----

The undead would have seen "Witch Hunter, X" for the town roles (or x, y), so it is 50/50 to them whether town would have another one, unless there is a third one, in which case they'd know there was 3. Long story short Kokichi was right and voting to no eliminate today would have made things much harder for the mafia team. I think Kokichi probably isn't shooting themself in the foot here so they seem pretty obviously town to me, while those arguing against that play could have undead motivation.

Agreed.

[furtiveglance]

Good job on shooting a Ghoul. shoot for goal pun

Might as well follow the claimed TPR's vote

VOTE: Maki Harukawa