Eh. I gotta agree with this somewhat.In post 397, Alisae wrote:Once again, no real conviction in his voting. To him it honestly doesn't matter.
Not a fan of the unvote because there was no danger of Alisae being flashlynched while he slept.
Eh. I gotta agree with this somewhat.In post 397, Alisae wrote:Once again, no real conviction in his voting. To him it honestly doesn't matter.
Gimme yo vote then.In post 401, Gamma Emerald wrote:Alisae is still scum for trying to twist his playstyle as scummy.
Grey, whats your current read on Gin?In post 400, -Grey- wrote:Eh. I gotta agree with this somewhat.In post 397, Alisae wrote:Once again, no real conviction in his voting. To him it honestly doesn't matter.
Not a fan of the unvote because there was no danger of Alisae being flashlynched while he slept.
Null. You're far more interesting.In post 404, Alisae wrote:Grey, whats your current read on Gin?
I know right! Want my life story? It's pretty interesting.In post 405, -Grey- wrote:Null. You're far more interesting.In post 404, Alisae wrote:Grey, whats your current read on Gin?
I'm all ears except for the parts that aren't.In post 406, Alisae wrote:I know right! Want my life story? It's pretty interesting.In post 405, -Grey- wrote:Null. You're far more interesting.In post 404, Alisae wrote:Grey, whats your current read on Gin?
Thank you for the exception.
In post 366, Alisae wrote:Qutie frankly I am calm, collected, and tired. Not freaking out. Press my buttons a bit and I can do that.
Either way, your voting is...I believe the right term is wishywashy?
VOTE: TheRealGin-N-Tonic
I'm Still where I was in my last posts. and reactions like these just cement it for me.
In post 398, Gamma Emerald wrote:Okay don't attack him for his playstyle. You just set my scumdar off big time.
What's the point of the blank quote?In post 412, Naomi-Tan wrote:In post 398, Gamma Emerald wrote:Okay don't attack him for his playstyle. You just set my scumdar off big time.
In post 102, TheRealGin-N-Tonic wrote:Ah, game did start, got it :p
@work right now so I'll be on to talk in like 4 hours maybe 5.
Quick scim tells me we are doing a gamma wagon. Why is that?
In post 114, TheRealGin-N-Tonic wrote:Nah it's town.In post 108, All Alone wrote:This post reads scum to me. I don't really see a town motivation for counting on an inactive player to provide discussion. I mean, that's kind of the opposite of what "inactive" means! A townie who's frustrated with the discussion not going their way usually takes the initiative to provide that discussion themself, but Gamma doesn't. As scum hoping to hold back, his mindset here makes a lot more sense.In post 93, Gamma Emerald wrote:I'm not seeing the type of discussion I want.
Maybe the inactives will provide.
VOTE: Gamma Emerald
It's day 1 first few pages. It's evident, at least to me that Gamma doesn't care about the wagon on him, but instead is interested in the inactives, or those that will try to hide behind a bandwagon so they don't have to contribute much to the discussion.
In post 163, Gamma Emerald wrote:GinNTonic could be a bad townie too.
In post 183, TheRealGin-N-Tonic wrote:Gamma you okay?
So You enter defending Gamma with rather limp reasoning. Gamma then distances himself from you. Taking the hint you back off and red read him despite spending the majority of the early game being on their side. This says to me there is 2 things going on 1) There is a connection between Gamma and Gin and 2) They don't want Greens to know there is a link going on.In post 333, TheRealGin-N-Tonic wrote:Whew, caught up. Okay reads and then questions
Reads:
Gamma scum butt$Most, if not all posts are highly frivolous and are just fluff. Post 119 is using self-meta as a form of defense and I won't read it because that's bullshit. Anyone can copy and paste a personality D1.
To me it looks like you fell into a red trap. They set you up by asking a leading question and then span that as fence sitting. But if you look at your play you can see the weakness's as well as the townie aspects of it. Its not explicitly bad to examine things carefully before voting (It took me till page 11 to vote) To say your fence sitting would be incorrect. You gave your thoughts on things as the game went on you just didn't vote. This to me says that You wasn't sure enough to vote. which is a Green trait as reds don't hesitate as much especially on people who are weaker players as they can shrug it off if they turn out to be proactive // good for greensIn post 418, Alisae wrote:Naomi what does the interaction between me and gin tell you about the both of us?
Like, I dunno if Gin just really doesn't know how to handle pressure and he's townie because he seems genuinely frustrated or if he's scum.
Like, I think this might be his first game on site as well tho.
Instead of understanding his playstyle, she prefers to push her narrative of Gin's actions. Scum.In post 397, Alisae wrote:Once again, no real conviction in his voting. To him it honestly doesn't matter.
Okay, that makes sense.In post 372, TheRealGin-N-Tonic wrote:All-Alone, you're gonna have to trust me in a game about mistrust here. That was a forbidden phone post where I wasn't reading the thread, fully because I was at work making a series of linearities and looked at the post by itself. It was only then after fully reading the game from page 1 and taking notes that he's had an overall scummy behaviour posting fluff.
Also, to make sure everything is clear, I also at first thought Ircher was "townish" during my work but then a full read made me believe he was scum. Only then after seeing his reads list, I felt content with leaving him alone because he's backing up what he said with quotes.
So with that in mind, I really,In post 216, Alisae wrote:I need more on AA9 before I post my reads, I have no idea what to think of AA9 currently so yeah.