In post 999, curiouskarmadog wrote:In post 847, farside22 wrote:Someone who doesn't think chaos/beli are scum together need to sell me on scum motivation from beli not looking to self preserve
explain to me what you meant/were asking here farside. when you posted this, did you think bel and chaos are a scum team or not.
In post 1000, farside22 wrote:
I meant to post who does, not doesn't.
I was asking those who had them as scum together thought it was scum motivation.
In post 998, acryon wrote:In post 997, Titus wrote:Scrambles stop avoiding me.
If you are referring to you questioning him about linking his completed games and time-frames, you could have easily done it yourself in the time you've been waiting.
In post 1002, Titus wrote:In post 998, acryon wrote:In post 997, Titus wrote:Scrambles stop avoiding me.
If you are referring to you questioning him about linking his completed games and time-frames, you could have easily done it yourself in the time you've been waiting.
Not if he has played on other sites with usernames. I want this for a reason.
In post 984, ChannelDelibird wrote:OK, let's get into details about why I think Amy is probably scum. This is the expanded version of my notes from time of replace in; I'll go over Amy's latest contributions next.
--
This post is oddly over-explainy for a non-newbie game, which leads me to suspect that Amy is more interested in presenting a squeaky-clean image than is normal for town.
I like to call that reasoning, but... whatever floats your boat.
Here Amy frames Belisarius's prime purpose as gaining "towncred", which doesn't sit right with me. If Belisarius is town, then his main purpose is to lynch scum, not to gain towncred. If Belisarius's purpose was to gain towncred for himself rather necessarily than get his target lynched, then that would be indicative of scum - but, although Amy is voting for Belisarius already, she's not addressing him like scum here. Town finding further proof of a scumread like this say to everyone else "hey, look, this guy's trying in vain to gain towncred!", not "this isn't the way to gain towncred, man". This reads like an awkward interaction between buddies, where Amy is leaving room for Belisarius to buck up his ideas.
Maybe I'm just tired but I don't get WTF you're on about here, sorry.
This is an example of what I previously referred to as Amy appearing to already know people's alignments. It's an extremely spurious reason to townread somebody and feels much more like Amy trying to ingratiate herself with the town than it does like a really considered read.
Other people townread him for that too, go pick on them. And I read him as town for that due to the reasons I stated there and then. I really can't see how that shows that I 'know other people's alignments'.
I also think it's telling that absolutely nobody engages with this Toby post. It's a post that goes against the grain of most people's last stated Amy reads at the time, but nobody points out how random or strange it is? I think scum would be happier to just leave that alone and hope it goes away rather than either explicitly throw down a read or attempt to somehow act like they know why Toby is saying it.
The way I saw that was a semi-joke and not really something realistic that she intended to actually happen, as seen via the reasoning and such. Try harder.
So Amy comes in at the start of Day 2, all high and mighty about how it's a travesty that Skelda got lynched over Belisarius, it should have gone through, can't believe you didn't listen to me etc etc etc. But where was she to push it through? There were over three days between Amy's last post of Day 1 and the lynch scene. Worse than that, the last time that you could even generously say that Amy actively pushed to promote a Belisarius lynch was this - POST 99. Everybody gets busy sometimes, something which I certainly appreciate given my record, but I'm just not seeing the conviction in getting it done that Amy would have us believe was there all along.
I don't believe I was 'high and mighty' in that post. I provided reasons for not being there, stop picking on me for that, it's pretty unfair, I'd have been there if I could have.
This is the start of an absurd angle of attack that also bothers me about Amy. It is not at all healthy to be so absolute about lining up scumlynches before a single one of those reads has flipped, when god knows what happens in between Days to affect how you go. Scum are more likely to see the longer picture for lynches because they know that they have to get a certain amount of town players lynched before them in order to win.
That was my theory, I went with it, I want to lynch you to follow through but that's not going to happen. I worked it out that way, and I was fine with it.
Here's Amy not saying anything. I don't buy it when Amy says that she's happy for the discussion to be dominated by the Chaos wagon instead, because it's inconsistent with the tone of her post at the start of the Day decrying our failure to get Belisarius the day before and demanding that we put it right that day. It's yet another sign that Amy doesn't believe in the Belisarius lynch anywhere near as much as she would have us believe and is, IMO, a sign that you should be extremely wary when people encourage you to believe that I could be one of Belisarius's buddies.
The tone of my post does not match up to that, that was my honest input at the time.
In post 1004, Amy Farrah Fowler wrote:Replies in bold.
In post 984, ChannelDelibird wrote:
This is an example of what I previously referred to as Amy appearing to already know people's alignments. It's an extremely spurious reason to townread somebody and feels much more like Amy trying to ingratiate herself with the town than it does like a really considered read.
Other people townread him for that too, go pick on them. And I read him as town for that due to the reasons I stated there and then. I really can't see how that shows that I 'know other people's alignments'.
I also think it's telling that absolutely nobody engages with this Toby post. It's a post that goes against the grain of most people's last stated Amy reads at the time, but nobody points out how random or strange it is? I think scum would be happier to just leave that alone and hope it goes away rather than either explicitly throw down a read or attempt to somehow act like they know why Toby is saying it.
The way I saw that was a semi-joke and not really something realistic that she intended to actually happen, as seen via the reasoning and such. Try harder.
So Amy comes in at the start of Day 2, all high and mighty about how it's a travesty that Skelda got lynched over Belisarius, it should have gone through, can't believe you didn't listen to me etc etc etc. But where was she to push it through?......
In post 116, Amy Farrah Fowler wrote:In post 111, SnugglyDuckling wrote:In post 53, Mr_Blonde wrote:Generally players that hand out reads for seemingly arbitrary reasons get the stink eye from me.
Fair enough but I rarely find reasons to suspect people other than arbitrary ones so prepare to give me a lot of stink eyes.
Townpoints for the above post.
While I partially agree with acryon and hope you find some legitimate reasons too, this post jumps out to me as towny, if only because I can't really see scum, especially newbie scum, replying in that way.
In post 1006, Amy Farrah Fowler wrote:I'm slowly convincing myself to replace out. I stopped having fun when CDB came in, he's a jerk, I'm taking this way too seriously and I have better things to do with my spare time than getting upset with morons on a message board.
On the other hand replacing out can be considered bad in my situation and no doubt someone will yell at me for it. Nevertheless if I get this annoyed/upset again I'm going.
In post 1006, Amy Farrah Fowler wrote:I'm slowly convincing myself to replace out. I stopped having fun when CDB came in, he's a jerk, I'm taking this way too seriously and I have better things to do with my spare time than getting upset with morons on a message board.
On the other hand replacing out can be considered bad in my situation and no doubt someone will yell at me for it. Nevertheless if I get this annoyed/upset again I'm going.
In post 1012, curiouskarmadog wrote:and while you are here playing "nice" CD...answer my question in regards to your case.
In post 966, curiouskarmadog wrote:In post 948, Amy Farrah Fowler wrote:
And last but not least, I'm happy with my 'elaborate' triple scumread. It works, and I connected the dots that way, and we have one scum down.
You're scum #2, I know that much.
CKD has been slowly reducing in scumminess, although I'm not happy with that. I think I'm less inclined to scumread people who contribute a lot of non-fluff. But I'm still aware of the associative tell (or at least that's kind of how I interpreted it) and with Beli flipping scum, I'm going to point out that that's still out there.
(consider this comment a reverse WIFOM post)Okay going to help you out there a little bit. As Scum, I also post a lot of “non-fluff”, if you meta my scum games, you will see that I will go after a scum buddy mightily if I feel like they might be coming off scummy to the town. So I know you are saying I am townish for non-fluff posting, but I am telling you I do that as scum too. Now that I am telling you this, what are your thoughts on me now? Still less inclined to scumread me?
In post 588, Amy Farrah Fowler wrote:
CKD = scum then Beli = scum (defence of Beli, deflected wagon)
Beli = scum then Chaos = scum (protectiveness, made up an imaginary wagon earlier in the game), a little more so than CKD (as mentioned above)
Chaos = scum then Beli = Scum (defence, as mentioned above)
I guess I am confused how I got downgraded in my scumminess between 588 and 948. I mean with Bel flipping scum, given your rationale I should have been MORE scummy right?
I am asking this, because I am trying to understand your reasoning for scumreads (for everyone/or in general/for CD) in this game.
In post 1011, curiouskarmadog wrote:edit.."what is exactly bothering you right now? CD's Case against you? Why?"
In post 1008, curiouskarmadog wrote:In post 1006, Amy Farrah Fowler wrote:I'm slowly convincing myself to replace out. I stopped having fun when CDB came in, he's a jerk, I'm taking this way too seriously and I have better things to do with my spare time than getting upset with morons on a message board.
On the other hand replacing out can be considered bad in my situation and no doubt someone will yell at me for it. Nevertheless if I get this annoyed/upset again I'm going.
well this is all types of bullshit. Consider this post "yelling".
you are basically saying "people leave me alone or I am taking my ball and going home". THIS IS THE GAME! I get why you might be upset (that is why I retired years ago). BUT YOU FINISH YOUR COMMITMENT.
In post 1016, Amy Farrah Fowler wrote:Generally town don't need to add extra negative adjectives to get their point across. And scum have to fabricate reasons for scumreads.
In post 1018, acryon wrote:In post 1016, Amy Farrah Fowler wrote:Generally town don't need to add extra negative adjectives to get their point across. And scum have to fabricate reasons for scumreads.
I don't know that I quite agree with this. I often see town using added negative adjectives to get their point across. Especially with a reluctant town, you sometimes need to do this to get people on board a wagon that you know is the right one. In your case, since you were town-read by most people, it may take some negative adjectives to help overcome that initial read people had on you.
In post 962, Titus wrote:Scarmbles, random question. Can you link me to all finished games you have and include the proximate timeframe.