usesPython: great catch in 813. I can't see scum cross-referencing lists & pages like that.
ketchup: while I don't agree with their reads, they're actively trying to scumhunt and think
drew: good logic, I like how he argued with both usesPython and JV
neutral:
HT: i said they were towny earlier, but that dropped back to neutral after mischaracterizng me in JOAT.
JacksonVirgo: frustation over tunneling chat seems genuine. But I can't tell is frustration is from not wanting to admit tunnel or scum mad that their pushed collapsed. good taste in gifs tho
DkKoba: miller claim, ignore until d3 unless something super scummy happens
scummy:
Ranger: still dont like dem magic lists. Super easy to fake the progression to just coast along with prevailing opinions while looking like you're scumhunting
light_ganski: see 827
Everyone else either has low posts or I'm having trouble reading still.
Why do you feel the need to specify your agreement with ketchup when the read has nothing to do with that.
How much of a gap is between ganski and ranger
he needs add a bunch of extraneous information to make the list look like it actually contains any original thought on most of the players in it, that's why
(it doesn't)
I didn’t really get where either of you were coming from here. I think saying whether you agree with someone‘s reads is an integral part of most analysis?
In post 993, Political Clout wrote:
I would have accepted it slipped my mind. I forgor oopsie. if you're having trouble reading me why am I not in the neutral bin as I assume that is what it's there for.
I treat neutral as "I have thought about them a bunch but I'm still not sure what's going on" or "you did something towny but then you did something scummy and they've cancelled out". DkKoba's in neutral because miller claim. HT had town vibes and then mischaracterized stuff hard. Neutral to me is "there's some shit going on with them, but I'm not sure how to resolve it yet", not no information. Tossing people in neutral because I haven't found anything interesting to discuss yet is just a waste of space
you should have done your homework and counted my posts I only had 27 when you posted your reads list so I also would have accepted your first reason that I hadn't posted enough. I believe you less now.
VOTE: laplacian
This response from PC felt like it was ignoring the bulk of Lap‘s response on purpose. Seemed like PC was trying to look smart by quoting the number of posts in his ISO (which takes like 6 seconds to check) and use that to fuel a rubbish discrediting of Lap‘s explanation. In the nicest possible way, PC‘s post reminded me of Dudley Dursley:
"36? But last year, last year, I had 37!"
which probably means it was written by someone unwilling to see other people‘s perspectives
In post 1019, Laplacian wrote:
Yeah, it's a slightly cursed role. I 100% believe there's both a miller and roleblocker out there so I can't trust any results
Wtf?
why did this make you u wtf titus
Also please respond to this when you can Titus
Titus and Drew are oh so good at dodging questions. It won’t work tho. Please say Titus why Lap‘s post made you post 'Wtf?'.
Lap was suggesting cop but a cop that couldn't trust themselves. I didn't know what to do with it and posted off the cuff.
The miller was already claimed (twice!), and a roleblocker would play into the whole idea of the setup being questionable and memey. I believed that there was probably Miller+roleblocker when I read Lap‘s post at the time. The fact that no one said they were roleblocked
probably
means there’s no roleblocker, also I’m not sure if
Roleblocker Godfather
counts as a normal role? is there a modifier that would make it work, combined or simultaneous maybe?
Anyway, I thought Lap was on the money. certainly not far enough to go 'wtf'
if this is wrong, I’m sorry. I think you could make more of an effort to seem towny; dat‘s 2 games in a row now you’ve been pretty quickly wagoned. hopefully this one you are actually scum
usesPython: great catch in 813. I can't see scum cross-referencing lists & pages like that.
ketchup: while I don't agree with their reads, they're actively trying to scumhunt and think
drew: good logic, I like how he argued with both usesPython and JV
neutral:
HT: i said they were towny earlier, but that dropped back to neutral after mischaracterizng me in JOAT.
JacksonVirgo: frustation over tunneling chat seems genuine. But I can't tell is frustration is from not wanting to admit tunnel or scum mad that their pushed collapsed. good taste in gifs tho
DkKoba: miller claim, ignore until d3 unless something super scummy happens
scummy:
Ranger: still dont like dem magic lists. Super easy to fake the progression to just coast along with prevailing opinions while looking like you're scumhunting
light_ganski: see 827
Everyone else either has low posts or I'm having trouble reading still.
Why do you feel the need to specify your agreement with ketchup when the read has nothing to do with that.
How much of a gap is between ganski and ranger
he needs add a bunch of extraneous information to make the list look like it actually contains any original thought on most of the players in it, that's why
(it doesn't)
I didn’t really get where either of you were coming from here. I think saying whether you agree with someone‘s reads is an integral part of most analysis?
I said it because it felt like they wanted to read you a particular way but wanted to lessen the worth of your input or put their foot in the door so they can back out of the read with no serious repercussions as they seeded a reason to flip on you already
"Am I a ghost like you, caught between the seams of two intertwining melodies?"
usesPython: great catch in 813. I can't see scum cross-referencing lists & pages like that.
ketchup: while I don't agree with their reads, they're actively trying to scumhunt and think
drew: good logic, I like how he argued with both usesPython and JV
neutral:
HT: i said they were towny earlier, but that dropped back to neutral after mischaracterizng me in JOAT.
JacksonVirgo: frustation over tunneling chat seems genuine. But I can't tell is frustration is from not wanting to admit tunnel or scum mad that their pushed collapsed. good taste in gifs tho
DkKoba: miller claim, ignore until d3 unless something super scummy happens
scummy:
Ranger: still dont like dem magic lists. Super easy to fake the progression to just coast along with prevailing opinions while looking like you're scumhunting
light_ganski: see 827
Everyone else either has low posts or I'm having trouble reading still.
Why do you feel the need to specify your agreement with ketchup when the read has nothing to do with that.
How much of a gap is between ganski and ranger
he needs add a bunch of extraneous information to make the list look like it actually contains any original thought on most of the players in it, that's why
(it doesn't)
I didn’t really get where either of you were coming from here. I think saying whether you agree with someone‘s reads is an integral part of most analysis?
I said it because it felt like they wanted to read you a particular way but wanted to lessen the worth of your input or put their foot in the door so they can back out of the read with no serious repercussions as they seeded a reason to flip on you already
Ketchup+Jackson—> cop Hu Tao
Hu Tao+Black—> cop Jackson
Ranger+Titus—> cop Doctor Drew
usesPython+Doctor Drew —>cop Black
Political Clout—> cop Ketchup
resurfacing this, proposing sub light in where Titus was. Python‘s idea about all of us should initially claim to be a modifier cop at the start of the next day and cop 'who we want to' also has merit.
Python’s plan was:
—>if normal town cop according to the list
above
—> if modified cop, you can cop whoever you think you should
—> at the start of tomorrow, we all pretend/truly say that we are a modifier cop and copped someone else than who we were meant to.
—> unless we happened to get a guilty on the list check, then we should out that
—> if a town cop dies, we know for sure they had an inno on the list check. If you don’t come out without guilty on your list check, it’s assumed you got an inno or you are modifier cop
