Mini 1991: Taking Justice Into Our Own Hands (Town Win)

[Lexa]

I'm down for the self-hammer

VOTE: Havo

[Lexa]

Also hi, hello, hey there! Think I've only played with rb before so if anything you want to know I'll be here all day

[Lexa]

Also hi, hello, hey there! Think I've only played with rb before so if anything you want to know I'll be here all day

What is your alignment?

Chaotic good

[Lexa]

I'm down for the self-hammer

VOTE: Havo

Oh yeah, well I won’t self hammer.

You know, goes against my win condition and all.

But you hate Day 1s and want to get to Night 1 to get the game rolling.

Man those stinking technicalities.

Honestly I'm pretty bad at d1s too but they're definitely not a crapshoot if you're looking for the right things. Why don't you want to draw out the d1, have more to look at once a scum flips?

[Lexa]

Hi fitz

what are you uncertain of?

[Lexa]

Hi fitz

what are you uncertain of?

Your post to Havo seemed to imply the town attitude of not rushing to end D1 so that we have more to look over. All the while you are supporting (and still are) his rather quick wagon. Which is on the verge (L-1 or 2?) of bringing D1 to an early end.

So it seems to me you are more interested in the negative...quick end of D1 then the alternative good situation you question Havo about.

Fair interpretation. It's much simpler though. Wagons are good. Discussion is good. Interactions are better.

If we're at all competent Havo doesn't get lynched unless his defense of his position is specifically incriminating so helping create the wagon serves to both identify whether that will be the case and move us out of RVS. Follow up questions help make the situation clearer in that regard, and getting to know why Havo is against D1s can be an important data point to hold him to later.

[Lexa]

Has anyone played with Cedrick before? His opener of digging into Havos game history is interesting and I'm curious if anyone has seen him put in that degree of effort in a scum game in the past.

[Lexa]

Has anyone played with Cedrick before? His opener of digging into Havos game history is interesting and I'm curious if anyone has seen him put in that degree of effort in a scum game in the past.

Never played with him before, but I don't put much stock in meta. It has its place I suppose, but in general I prefer going off of what happens in this game. Cedrick's meta investigation against Havo was circumstantial and lacked context, and I don't think your current meta investigation against Cedrick is going to uncover anything worthwhile. Would a previous scum game of his where he put in this exact amount of effort make him more suspicious in your eyes?

I wouldn't go so far as to say it would make him more suspicious, not at this stage yet anyway. Entering with a meta dive shows a certain investment in the game and interest in sorting people out that in my opinion tends towards town sided, if he's done it before as mafia than that aspect can be discounted as a possible reason to town lean him.

[Lexa]

@northsidesegal I don't think I understand the position where your vote on me is coming from so I'm going to ignore that for now

What are your thoughts on users: fitz and riggs, specifically the vote to content pattern of the former and the tone of post #26 for the latter

[Lexa]

I'm more interested in why Cedrick would hammer Havo but doesn't want to vote him.

if he is willing to hammer anyone who gets to l-1, he has to be willing to receive the same and so I will be happy to oblige. I am not going to vote him because I am not convinced he is scum yet.

Hello fellow off-siter!

I'm curious why you would be willing to proceed with a quickhammer, neglecting claims and such. I'm not sure I see Havo's willingness to do the same as justification to turbo him off hand

[Lexa]

@northsidesegal I don't think I understand the position where your vote on me is coming from so I'm going to ignore that for now

What are your thoughts on users: fitz and riggs, specifically the vote to content pattern of the former and the tone of post #26 for the latter

i'd appreciate if you could explain

your

thoughts on those people first, because you haven't really said anything about either so far and i don't want to just give you my thoughts for you to just agree with or say that that's what you were thinking.

Sure, haven't said anything about them so far because they're on my radar for trying to sort them!

With respect to Riggs I'm trying to determine if his entrance was genuine or not. His #26 seems towny on the surface from a tonal level but it's also the kind of vanilla entrance I've seen scum do practically every game; I'm trying to decide if there's more to read below the surface or not which is why I wanted your thoughts, to see if I was the only one it concerned.

Fitz is on my radar for his curious mode of engagement, entering with the naked RVS vote into the naked vote on me, yet responding to dialogue with me fairly quickly. Usually I'm familiar with people taking one tack or the other, dropping naked votes to pressure people without giving them much to rebut against, probing for reactions, or engaging with them directly to try and suss out their alignment. I don't often see the pressure voting tack dropped so quickly and so I'm wondering if there's more to that pattern. In general nothing he's said has been specifically alignment indicative but his analysis of me was fairly surface level which could be an indicator of scum if he uses future surface level analysis to push for a lynch.

[Lexa]

Hello fellow off-siter!

I'm curious why you would be willing to proceed with a quickhammer, neglecting claims and such. I'm not sure I see Havo's willingness to do the same as justification to turbo him off hand

what makes you call him an off-siter and not an alt?

why ask the same question that a few people have already asked at this point?

Just my natural thought process I guess. My home site doesn't allow alt accounts.

I don't really care if other people have asked similar or the same questions, I want engagement and I want dialogue, preferably with me so I can sort people

[Lexa]

Cedrick, why do you want to hammer havo? You know this implies the final vote of a lynch correct? Is this a misunderstanding or do you actually want to lynch him? provide reasoning.

=========
I don't know what to make of Q's reaction to my vote. Made me say "wtf". Here's why I'm voting Q:

- Don't like his tone
- Asking a lot of unnecessary questions 34, seems like the only purpose of that is to """be town""" or show concern for the game
- 43 wtf
- What north said too
- Doesnt understand that im going to win the game 31
- 71 [talking about self voting] [Also, why are we arguing the merits of self-voting?] more useless posts why??
- 72 @Q ok what do you make of this? is it AI? because there are votes on lexa, so what do you think of that?
-74 - doing it again "look at me ive been asking those questions and analyzing" - you shouldnt have to bring this up. your ""townyness"" is being shoved in my face so much that I am forced to question your motivations!

oops sorry if i just made a case on the third page x-D

===============
PEDIT:
Hey north!! see my opener, im taking it easy now. this should have good results ))))))))

Good case

VOTE: numberq

@awoo: what about his tone is pinging you? Has seemed fairly par for the course so far

[Lexa]

lol

14 posts and one vote

such momentum

[Lexa]

Good misrep tho keep it up!

[Lexa]

With respect to Riggs I'm trying to determine if his entrance was genuine or not. His #26 seems towny on the surface from a tonal level but it's also the kind of vanilla entrance I've seen scum do practically every game; I'm trying to decide if there's more to read below the surface or not which is why I wanted your thoughts, to see if I was the only one it concerned.

i don't see anything alignment indicative about riggs' 26 and i'm not sure why this specifically was something that caught your eye as something to be analyzed.

You know the feeling you get when something is so nondescript it stands out to you? Basically that. The rest of the playerbase so farmostly have had something distinctive or defining about them. Not so much riggs. Hence, caught my notice, hence, thinking about if it's meaningful

Fitz is on my radar for his curious mode of engagement, entering with the naked RVS vote into the naked vote on me, yet responding to dialogue with me fairly quickly. Usually I'm familiar with people taking one tack or the other, dropping naked votes to pressure people without giving them much to rebut against, probing for reactions, or engaging with them directly to try and suss out their alignment. I don't often see the pressure voting tack dropped so quickly and so I'm wondering if there's more to that pattern. In general nothing he's said has been specifically alignment indicative but his analysis of me was fairly surface level which could be an indicator of scum if he uses future surface level analysis to push for a lynch.

neither of fitz's votes have been naked, even if there wasn't a lot said in either of the posts. i'm also not sure what you mean by him "dropping the pressure voting tack" – clearly his initial vote on you had some reasoning, which he followed up on and described to you.

In my experience people who pressure vote as a primary tactic continue that for some time and don't typically engage with the people they're pressure voting. Fitz followed on with neither of those things which makes it notable to me. Personally, I'm rather pleased he responded because it's rather irritating to try to start a conversation and get ignored (which has usually been the case when I've been subject to pressure votes in the past).

I'm guessing we have different meanings of naked voting cause idk how you'd define his rvs vote as anything else

[Lexa]

You smell funny

[Lexa]

That

was a naked vote.

"Vote: Luca Blight because i liked his old avatar better" is a random vote, but not a naked one.

Ah, see I see a naked vote as one without game related reasoning attached. Duly noted!

[Lexa]

You know the feeling you get when something is so nondescript it stands out to you? Basically that. The rest of the playerbase so farmostly have had something distinctive or defining about them. Not so much riggs. Hence, caught my notice, hence, thinking about if it's meaningful

This smells funny. Other players are more distinctive so Riggs is suspect? That doesn't make any sense.

While I'm here show me anywhere I said that I was suspecting riggs

Misrep #2

[Lexa]

Was his vote on you not attached with game related reasoning? He quoted some of your posts, expressed confusion/doubt, and voted you.

PEDIT: This is where you said you were suspecting Riggs, maybe not in so many words but I'm not gonna get into a semantics argument. The point I was making is you were throwing him into doubt because he wasn't distinctive enough? If I'm understanding correctly.

With respect to Riggs I'm trying to determine if his entrance was genuine or not. His #26 seems towny on the surface from a tonal level but it's also the kind of vanilla entrance I've seen scum do practically every game; I'm trying to decide if there's more to read below the surface or not which is why I wanted your thoughts, to see if I was the only one it concerned.

Did you not read my posts. I literally asked northside what he thought about fitz because of the disparity between the pressure voting tactic and the discussion engagement. His first two posts were (relatively) naked, his third was very much not. That distinction was what I was looking for input on. smh

lol fuck off with semantics. If I were suspecting riggs I'd be pushing and/or voting him. "Hey this post seems towny but there might be more to it what do you think" is not making someone a suspect

[Lexa]

It's none of the above and I already said the reason, my home site doesn't allow alts ergo I don't assume people are one

[Lexa]

Hi yourself

VOTE: mumble

[Lexa]

What pressure exactly?

[Lexa]

If you're not getting votes you're not scum hunting

Speaking of not scum hunting, hi mumble

[Lexa]

Of being made the leading wagon?

See, this is basic psychology, something that I said or did struck a nerve. I'm inclined to think it was me voting you and making you the leading wagon. It's why you didn't really react strongly to NSG or rb, but you did to me.

I've got to do the dishes. Be back soon. Much love, Lexa.

Ah, I see where you're coming from. Interesting train of thought. I thought I was already the leading wagon so no, it wasn't that, it was that you chose to enter the game by hopping on the wagon without any other form of contribution. Not good enough.

Alexcellent is now guilty of the same thing

[Lexa]

I thought I was already the leading wagon so no, it wasn't that

No you didn't. Your post was immediately after the votecount.

Try again.

I'm really not a fan of people telling me things I did or did not do so if there's a bite to this I apologize

I don't give a shit when the vote count was. I was reading the thread and posting from mobile using quick reply, replaying to a specific chain of conversation. This occurred concurrently to the vote count being posted and it wasn't something that affected my response when the pedit thing came up. That's a fact and don't you dare try and tell me otherwise.

Alexcellent is now guilty of the same thing

And, so...

And so you're my current priority and he's joined the line.

[Lexa]

EBWOP: disregard my last re: post timing, thought you were referring to a different post

As for voting reasons, they are what I said. You entered the game by jumping on a wagon without any game advancing content. That gets a vote everytime.

[Lexa]

This occurred concurrently to the vote count being posted and it wasn't something that affected my response when the pedit thing came up. That's a fact and don't you dare try and tell me otherwise.

Vote count came an hour before my post/vote.

Try again.

And so you're my current priority and he's joined the line.

Why me over him? Am I pushing to hard, and he's just kinda "meh"?

You came first? Really not that difficult lol.

Moreover it's a lot easier to prioritize someone who's actively engaging with you so on that front I appreciate it

[Lexa]

EBWOP: disregard my last re: post timing, thought you were referring to a different post

As for voting reasons, they are what I said. You entered the game by jumping on a wagon without any game advancing content. That gets a vote everytime.

My defense is faltering! Grasps for straws, ensign!

So me and Alex did the same thing. Why not vote him. It gets a vote everytime.

Okay dude at least try and put some half-thought reasoning in your attacks, drop the semantic nitpicking

You're my priority for doing a thing that gets a vote: shocker! My vote is on you! He did the same thing which I noticed: shocker! He gets a vote after I resolve you.

[Lexa]

Pretty sure we got ourselves a textbook case of OMGUS right there. Can't handle the pressure very well, can you?

Like literally what is this post

[Lexa]

So, in your thought process, me and Alex are both scum? Why not NSG or havingfitz (or rb for that matter)?

You know what, why don't you take a moment and iso me because that's not my thought process and there's really no rational way you could conclude that it is

[Lexa]

It was a post that happened an hour or so ago, and pointed out that you naked voted me after I voted you, thus pointing out the OMGUS-factor.

Is it not a requirement for you that OMGUS have some sort of emotional investment?

As far as I'm concerned my vote on you neither was nor is OMGUS, rather calling you out on the flop of an entrance to get you to engage

[Lexa]

So, in your thought process, me and Alex are both scum? Why not NSG or havingfitz (or rb for that matter)?

You know what, why don't you take a moment and iso me because that's not my thought process and there's really no rational way you could conclude that it is

I did. Didn't see a thought process.

Care to explain?

Fine. You want my approach to the game or thought process on your vote?

[Lexa]

Here's a thought, how about you stop projecting your own thoughts and ascribing behaviours to me that aren't true?

[Lexa]

Mumble is OMGUS scummy? I mean you keep saying OMGUS but is it a general scumtell? better question how is it scummy in this case? A lot of the time I see OMGUS i never see it pushed with this angle, its always ironic or overlooked kind of like how no one does NKA

Yes? It's an emotional reaction to pressure. When there is an immediate reactionary vote without reason, it lends credence towards some reason for it happening.

Why vote me immediately after I start pressuring? Sure, an hour later the slot came up with somewhat of a reason, but there was an immediate reaction.

Granted, it could be newbtown who doesn't want to get lynched, but I don't see that in Lexa.

And once again, you're flat out wrong.

You voted me on zero reasoning after directly claiming not to have invested in the game state.

I voted you for that and your immediate reaction was to claim I was OMGUS voting you, immediately to ascribe some degree of emotionality to me. Are you sure you're not projecting anything?

Also, I'm sure this might come as a surprise to you but I have a life, commitments, that sort of thing. I've been in the middle of packing tonight in preparation for a move out tomorrow. I saw your first post at the time you posted it, I saw the other post an hour later when I got back to a computer.

[Lexa]

Every single thing you've accused me of are some emotional reaction you're imagining I've having and you're trying to push a narrative based on that that's flat out wrong.

I don't know if you're aggressive town trying to gun for someone he thinks he's caught or mafia trying to push for an early lynch but cut it out and actually have a conversation without twisting the narrative

[Lexa]

Mumble is OMGUS scummy? I mean you keep saying OMGUS but is it a general scumtell? better question how is it scummy in this case? A lot of the time I see OMGUS i never see it pushed with this angle, its always ironic or overlooked kind of like how no one does NKA

Do you think Mumble pushing the OMGUS narrative comes from town or scum?

[Lexa]

Jesus fucking christ dude learn some reading comprehension

Read the game =/= invested in the game state!!!

Hey cool...it's Friday night and I don't feel like reading.

Who do I need to vote? I'm leaning towards purplename guy.

Also...

Hi.

Literally asking people who to vote, following the main wagon, voting without rationale. Yeah no shit you read the game but you blatantly didn't give a shit about who you voted for.

And big fucking surprise someone's iso is fairly defensive when they've spent two hours defending themselves from a player who seems aggressively determined to twist their interpretations to fit the view they've decided on

[Lexa]

Yeah, no, it's not. Talking to people and engaging with them and talking about their thought processes is not being defensive. It's fucking playing mafia. Someone questions something I do? I'm responding and telling them why.

So how about you take off the mafia coloured glasses you're wearing, use some critical thinking, and come back to sort me once you're not biasing every single thing you see

[Lexa]

If nothing else I can't see mafia being this obtuse so at least this was good for something

VOTE: Alexcellent

Expecting a better second post from you than your first

[Lexa]

finished moving aka prodge post see y'all tomorrow

This kind of post doesn't usually count for prod dodging, but I'll allow it in this case as a sort of retroactive V/LA.

[Lexa]

12 pages ought to be enough, let's see what we got

[Lexa]

Yeah yeah wall posts scummy zzz whatever they work for me

(I will preface by saying that the wall contains my thought process as I go through the thread so it might be hard to follow or so I've had that complaint before anyway)

numberq's post 6 piggybacking off of fitz's rvs vote, suggests a preference for building wagons possibly to create content, watch future votes for wagon building vs wagon creating coherence

Havo's disclaimer in 7...hmm. By definition it can't be alignment indicative but could it imply something about his state of mind that he felt the need to post the disclaimer in the first place? Inherently it has to lean town because while both alignments want to notify the game of their intent here, scum can't be as willing to get policy lynched. If future posts hold coherent with a town mindset this slot probably sorts town. The more pressing inference is of his playstyle, the severe disagreement with D1 as a concept and the refusal to give reads suggests that Havo either is unconfident with or doesn't believe in independent behaviour as reliably indicating alignment and prefers either role results or flip associations to sort people. If Havo starts attempting to sort people based on behavioural reads that could be a scum indication.

Riggs at post 26 still feels weird. Yeah it's only page two but to this point the game is already out of RVS with a 3 vote wagon on Havo and two previous votes sitting on mumble, plus a lot of relevant posts related to Havo's principle. Entering by ignoring all of that is...weird...but I'm not certain if it's alignment indicative. Have to imagine it signifies either cautious mafia or busy/unaware town. Could be a relevant marker but it seems more likely that he would have read the 25 posts than not.

Huh then he follows up at 30 by voting Havo after prompting by zito. Seems to support both narratives, either not noticing the wagon or not wanting to join until prompted. Possibly self-conscious? Feeling awkward for not having joined or commented on the existing wagon?

q is feeling gross. His comment to cedrick in #40 feels tonally different from the rest of his posts so far and his assertion in #54 of fitz catching me in a contradiction is an extremely generous interpretation if he's town.

fitz 55 seems fine on the surface but that's kind of the problem I have with it, very surface level reasoning. Seems more interested in pointing out things to use as ammunition rather than thinking about why that thing exists. Note to check future posts for this degree of thinking.

Hm interesting. NSGs vote on me at 67 seemed fine at the time, if weird based on assuming a scum team with cedrick, but in retrospect looks rather manufactured. Seems to imply that a users join date is information that every user should always be aware of and that not factoring that into your posts can be a reason to be scum. Reasoning seems flaky to me at best unless someone is known to specifically consider that information. FoS here.

The piggyback by q at 72 is equally bad, especially given his previous stretch of a situation. Scum lean.

At 76 cedrick hasn't really provided any content thats alignment indicative but I like he way his tone comes off. Every post I've seen him make is clear and direct in its meaning and implication, might be biased because that makes it easy to see where his thought process is at on a specific topic, but it feels very townie.

Ah a case at 79! I liked this by Awoo on numberq the first time let's see if it holds up. 1: tonal reads are pretty subjective so sure, reasonable. 2: can't say I agree with his citation for asking unnecessary questions to look town, requests for info are NAI to me and there's other kinds of questions, like asking someone to clarify an apparent position or easy 1v1 questions that imply "trying to look town" more reliably. 3: for example, calling out 31 for the easy "you said what?" post on an obvious meme is a much better indicator. 4: agree on the volume of useless posts, don't agree it's AI particularly given the volume of discussion Havo's principle caused. 5: hard agree that 74 is the LAMIST post to ever LAM. Overall: very valid reasoning and a strong case to make for page four. That being said, similar to fitz a lot of this is fairly surface level and could be manipulation of qs positions, though I read him fairly similarly so I'm inclined to put this as a town lean.

q's 86 pedit is still hilariously awful

NSG's 110 is something of a follow up to 67 and curiously enough actually makes me think she's town. The assumption that I would have had access to information from a pre-game discussion thread is a pretty large leap of logic to make and one that I would expect her to know wouldn't hold up if she were in fact scum but doubling down on this tack here somewhat suggests that she thinks she's figured out a tell and isn't going to drop it, it's somewhat tunnel vision-y in combo with 67 and suggests a coherent mindset in scumhunting. Solid town lean after this.

Ah. It's mumble. Note to self: probably scum but be careful of bias

But seriously what the fuck is this opening. 119: "Hi I don't feel like reading tell me who to vote". 120: "k I read here's a vote on a main wagon". 122: "Whoa fuck you hahaa I got you you OMGUSer ggggg!!!" Really, really, just want to call this aggro scum and call it a day but I can't discount acerbic town, they get me every friggin time.

Mumble's 125 is kinda confusing though, on the one hand you have massive assumptions creating a justification for voting me, but on the other hand this argument is also extremely self-centered which is typically more town indicative. "You don't care about these people but you care about ME" kinda suggests the same thing as NSG, that they think they might have got someone and they're going to tunnel in on it no matter what.

alex and rb entered in the past 25 posts too with fairly NAI posts but with alex needing follow up for the complete lack of content

Reading Mumble's posts over is pissing me off again :/

Right so Mumble is being a dick while pushing me in 132/135/137, sure fine, whatever. It's posts like 140 that really support the aggro scum theory: it's Mumble who comes up with the idea that I'm voting him (and not alex) for thinking that they're scum. Except that at no point did I suggest he was scummy, my vote and follow up was entirely about getting him to post content. It's Mumble who creates my supposed mindset and it's Mumble who uses that creation as a means to attack me for voting him (and not alex). He's manipulated the situation and filled in gaps with his own ideas in order to put me on the defensive and discredit my vote on him. Like there's some behavioural considerations that he might be town but fuck that, this is scum. Looks a lot less obtuse and a lot more manipulative with a clear head looking at it.
VOTE: Mumble

Note to self, 1v1 Luca. 178 suggests that he's having thoughts and engaging in some way but it's all surface level, need to see the thought process.

Note to self, keep an eye on potential buddying from Cedrick (i.e. 179)

Bunch of rb posts through 180s-190s, interesting content but hard to sort, very sparse. The reasonings against me/mumbles seem based in logic if nothing else.

Awoo has a bunch of posts up to and including 201 that are notable but don't engender much in the way of commentary. Nothing specifically alignment indicative but all very positive in terms of tone.

rb's 206 is the first post of his that's specifically notable with his commentary of false positives and that I really like because it suggests he's thinking about alignments at a higher level more likely to be town.

(kinda burnt out and took a break here)

Riggs is back at 227 with a curious vote on mumble, it's now the second time he shows up and makes a relatively empty post onto one of the main wagons. It does seem to provide some light support for the cautious mafia theory since it's impossible to argue he's unaware here. It's also curious to me because it seems like an awkward way to enter into a wagon on your scumbuddy, very low committal when your justification is "has been rubbing me the wrong way". Comfortable putting riggs in my scum pile but I'm also thinking that riggs isn't scum if mumble is and if mumble is town riggs is scum. Don't think town riggs impacts mumble's alignment yet.

Luca's 244 is a good look. Valid arguments and reasoning in response to NSG's case on Cedrick, but doesn't use it as a segue into a vote or case on NSG.

Alexcellent is lock town for me. 276 is a really strong thought process, a very natural read devlopment and a coherent mindset justifying their read on me. 278 is even better, a very high level reasoning trying to get at numberq's mindset when posting. Straightforward, rational, no exaggeration or misdirection, I would be shocked if this flipped scum.

Town

Alexcellent

Awoo

northsidegal

Cedrick

rb

Luca Blight

Havo

Papa Zito

havingfitz

Riggs

numberQ

Mumble

Scum

scum on my wagon are within mumble / q / fitz, alex vote is pure
mumble wagon looks good under the assumption that mumble/riggs aren't scum together, green flip mumble=scum riggs every time

need to see more from luca/havo in particular

[Lexa]

She made a bunch of references to posts without links or quotes so it's gonna take me time to parse. I did enjoy my color, I've been campaigning for a similar color for the chat mods for ages now.

Oops sorry meant to go back and fill those in

[Lexa]

The fact she was exerting some effort.
I thought her final reads list was decent with the exception of my position on it.
The more in depth opinionations will require a more in depth review when able.

What did you think of it aside from the move to Mumble?

Is effort posting enough to shift your opinion of someone? What if a scum read of yours effort posts?

[Lexa]

oh hey eddie

[Lexa]

anyone remember when i asked if anyone had played with cedrick before?

eddie town af

[Lexa]

eddie who you scum reading so far in your readthrough

[Lexa]

It's a bird! It's a plane! It's rddir canr!

[Lexa]

If you stop posting I'll allow it

[Lexa]

lexa, was any / most of 303 just a copy of notes that you took as the game was going on? or was that entirely newly created? it seems to be to be the former.

Dunno how you'd get that impression but no, that was my train of thought going through the game started after my post at 301(?)

[Lexa]

I do that in most games i play in, helps me sort people on later days

[Lexa]

Not quoting because fuck formatting on mobile but responding to you Luca

Something can be inherently NAI (havo's principle) while being more probably town motivated (scum avoidance of policy Lynch). Straight forward

The key word in that sentence was reliably, if have doesn't believe that reads are reliable D1, something he said explicitly iirc, then it stands to reason he prefers to use flip analysis and role results as the core of his reading. Doesn't mean he'll never use behavior to make a read but by being unwilling to do it D1 it shows a possible tell against him if he were to start doing so D1

Sure it's a standard RVS opening for a standard game. Except this isn't really a standard game. Standard games don't typically have multiple wagons with potential momentum by the end of page 1. I don't believe riggs, or anyone, jumps in with an RVs vote without at least skimming the first page and noticing the numerous votes placed

Aside from the fact the stance isn't even contradictory you're missing the point, pointing out something surface level and using that as ammunition doesn't work if you aren't considering the implications of why what you're attacking was posted, and you don't need to see someone post to think about that - the surface level posting suggests hes not concerned with sorting alignment

Cringe away, I said from the start it was a layout of my thought process

Want to engage with you specifically because you've been posting things that are generally on the ball imo but I've not been getting a good feel for why or how you're getting there

If they were scum buddies I'd expect he enters the wagon with a definitive stance, at least sheeping the reasoning of someone else on the wagon or avoiding it entirely

I wasn't shading you? Was appreciating if anything, you had a situation where as scum you could have used your counterarguments as a means to easily transition into a justified vote but instead simply guided NSG away from their stance on cedrick, that you didn't is a positive marker for me

Alex's posts were more than decent they were hugely town telling and more than enough for my "over analysis" to sort them. Don't need to take 50 posts when they show you in two

[Lexa]

Responding to Luca in 393 damn that's a lot of posts in between ._.

[Lexa]

[
How is lobbying for a player to consider the benefits of having a long day while actively efforting to end the day for that same player not a contradiction?

Is this seriously your read on a day 1 vote?

[Lexa]

Page 1*

[Lexa]

"More interested in the negative" is a fair interpretation

"Actively efforting to end the day" is garbage

[Lexa]

Odd night watcher fuck off and vote the fake claim

[Lexa]

Don't give a shot about counterclaim you're just lying

[Lexa]

Yeah we'll see how dumb it is when you die

[Lexa]

Don't give a shot about counterclaim you're just lying

How can you be so sure he's lying?

And it is a bit weird how you stated your role as if it was poof he's scum.

Made up shit I didn't say to shade me suddenly he's L-2 and oh wait he's a unrestricted doctor don't fucking think so

[Lexa]

@Lexa why did you claim there? You say you don't believe his claim which is fine but why did you claim when you did?

In the moment, honestly as a fuck you to mumbles

Everything else is post-hoc justification

[Lexa]

Someone who I

know

has directly lied about things I've done or said to push pressure on me comes out at the most convenient moment for him to claim what is in theory the safest role claim in this game* to attack me again is the reddest of red flags. Especially when my own role implies that his claim should at least have a modifier attached.

*idk how 'role power' is seen but i would assume that in a game with no cops doc is pretty up there

[Lexa]

eddie i'm not power towning for 14 day cycles lol

[Lexa]

@luca 100%

@zito was dealing with other shit today

[Lexa]

i'll devote some time tomorrow to looking at shit in more detail but in the meantime if people aren't willing to follow through on mumbles i would support a riggs wagon, will take another look at fitz too to see if cedrick's case holds weight

[Lexa]

I'll be around this evening to focus on game

[Lexa]

aight i'm back

gonna look at mumble for a bit

[Lexa]

black panther was v good btw, would recommend

[Lexa]

going to

try

and be objective about this

enters game with blah post and empty vote on me. gets an empty vote in return and accuses me of omgus voting. two issues I have with this that led to our spat, first the obvious weak entry that led to a pressure, asking who to vote and ending up on me, honestly probably does this as either alignment but looks scuzzy regardless. 122 though.

Pretty sure we got ourselves a textbook case of OMGUS right there. Can't handle the pressure very well, can you?

There's so many assumptions in there that just don't make sense. Assuming that his vote creates meaningful pressure. Assuming that the pressure is sufficient to cause someone to panic. Assuming that the vote is defensive and not aggressive. It doesn't make sense for him to making these assumptions if he doesn't know my alignment. It reads like he "knows" he's attacking scum and that's why his vote carries pressure and that's why the return vote is defensive. Except he can't know if I'm scum, he can only ever know if I'm town. I'm pretty sure this was the post that set off the whole thing with him, he has all these underlying assumptions set up and the assertion he makes is that the return vote is OMGUS, the immediate response is to attack the attacker, to discredit the vote, to position them as scum. I don't get the mindset where town mumbles plays this way with all the assumptions he has to make to assume his vote is immediately pressuring.

justifies position stating the assumption that some action he did caused some reaction from me. seemingly justifies his previous assumptions i guess? kind of makes his mindset make sense I suppose but i don't know that i see how he gets from that to omgus. idk it feels like a really aggressive position to take that because you did a thing and this person reacted in some way they are definitively as a direct result of your underlying assumption and definitively as an emotional response

is a dick in 132. is a dick in 135. is a dick in 137. this is fun. common to 135/137 is linking his vote to alex's vote on me. weird tack to push on, dunno what he expected to gain by asking someone why they're voting the person they're engaging with but not the person they aren't engaging with for doing the same thing as they are. kinda weird that i see more scum reasoning for pushing like this but more town motivation, a scum would want to benefit from spreading the focus of their opponent and attacking them from multiple angles to spread their defense but would presumably know the tactic wouldn't stand up for long while a town thinks none of that and is pushing for reaction tests i suppose.

ah then there's this

So, in your thought process, me and Alex are both scum? Why not NSG or havingfitz (or rb for that matter)?

Look at every other post leading up to this one. The singular indication that maybe I think he's scum is that I voted his entrance, not a single other post has any indication that he's under suspicion or that I think he's scummy. Not a single one. But now in his mind I not only think he's scummy but also Alex too? Like I just don't understand this whatsoever, what could he possibly be trying to learn from suggesting this, how could he even possibly draw this conclusion? Whereas if he's scum he's creating a situation where he can present that I'm making a weak push on him and Alex that can be easily desconstructed and used to discredit. Example 1 where I know definitively that he's either lying or has some twisted version of reality.

is a dick in 151. 154comes up with some weird reasoning to justify calling my response OMGUS, seems more conf biasy than anything. asdadfasdghf frickin 155 its like he's intentionally trying to conf bias -_-. Obnoxious semantic argument/failure to read properly in 159. and then disappears for a bit.

like i guess i can see worlds here where he's just aggro town conf biasing his way into a read and pushing it with narratives he thinks he's connecting. i just can't understand what he stands to gain as town by making shit up the way he's doing here, makes so much more sense if he's just scum trying to solidify a negative view on a suspect slow

and we're back at 330 with a throwaway question to fitz and follow up at 332/335, nothing of interest here except for engaging fitz in relation to aggro on me. could be a possible scum connection? giving a buddy a natural way to transition into me? Interesting theory actually, fitz had unvoted me at 304 and then after this exchange with mumble comes back onto me at 451. Could just be a result of a supposed TR on mumble, but interesting

Spoiler: possible connections from fitz's iso

entry rvs vote, fine with me switching to vote mumble in 311, town reads in 327, transitions to revote me thereafter, anti-mumble wagon in 498, fully believes mumble's claim as at 524, defends mumble claims at 530 and 557, more of the same from hereon post claim.

Conclusion: definitely possible. would be a pretty aggressive stance to take on defending a partner which ironically has been the exact thing he's accusing cedrick of doing towards me. don't think it makes sense for scum!fitz to so aggressively buddy town!mumble so based on these linkages it would make sense to me that they're either both town or both scum.

back to mumble, humour at 384/387 and then we hit the claim at 484 which in context occurs just after mumble is voted to put him at L-2 where his wagon is now equal to mine

I'm Town Doctor, so you all can fuck the fuck off and vote Lexa.

Eddie is town.

So, problems I have with this claim. To quote mastina from my first game on this site (ironically in reference to my own fakeclaim in that game), evaluate the claim or lie on mindset, circumstance, and intention. How did the claim come about? As a reaction to being put in range of a lynch. What are the circumstances around the claim? Used in accessory to continuing an aggro push on me and to state a TR on eddie. How convenient is the claim? The claim is doctor in a set up without cops.
So we have Mumble's coming up with a claim that is in all likelihood the single claim most likely to guarantee survival and to dissipate the wagon on him (Cedrick, Guy_Named_Riggs, Havo, Lexa, rb), the claim is made as a direct response to being made an equal wagon to the player who he's been targeting all day at L-2, and the claim is used as a base to continue to push on that target. In that moment every single red flag goes up here. The mindset is self-preservation, the circumstance is convenience of claim, and the intention is to get someone else to die.
Compound this with the factors of the claim being umprompted and with no intent to hammer plus the conflict with my own role suggesting a high probability of roles themed around odd/even night balance and in my eyes this is an insanely scummy claim to be making.
Could it be town mumbles? It's possible but there's major questions that raises. If you're a doctor that's a valuable role, why would you out yourself without even being at immediate risk of death? Why is your first response to wagon pressure to claim role? Why wouldn't you pursue some other way of convincing people of your alignment? It's theoretically possible that it's just a town doctor who doesn't want to die but I can't understand why a townie would out themselves like this after not even having posted in the six pages prior.

485 shades rb for not being more active in sorting. 487reacts to my claim - immediate response is to assume it's a counterclaim, why have reason to expect to be cc'd?

is a dick in 489...490...491

last post is 538 with this

I missed that I suppose. Even so without the vote cast and without someone declaring intent it's premature.

Luca said he was going to put me at L-1 -> I was headed to bed -> seeing games/players on this site (see: Not_Mafia), I had absolutely not trust that someone would give intent and everyone would wait. You can think it's premature. I didn't.

Someone who I

know

has directly lied about things I've done or said to push pressure on me comes out at the most convenient moment for him to claim what is in theory the safest role claim in this game* to attack me again is the reddest of red flags. Especially when my own role implies that his claim should at least have a modifier attached.

*idk how 'role power' is seen but i would assume that in a game with no cops doc is pretty up there

I haven't lied about shit you twit.

used to justify claiming prematurely (sure) and to claim he's never lied (objectively false)


summary of above: motherfucking mumble is still scum, his claim is still fucking awful, has done literally nothing this game except aggro me and coast off his claim, and fitz is probably his partner, but you fuckers won't lynch him so i guess we compromise on someone else. yay. there's some worlds that exist where he's just insanely conf biased bad town but what the hell game has he been playing if that's the case


p.s. apparently spoiler tags inside spoilter tags don't work?

[Lexa]

going to look at reactions post-claims, see if anything turns up

[Lexa]

p sure eddie is town btw, last time i saw him like this he was aggressively tunnelling a slot b/c he was (we all were) having a bitch of a time sorting it

[Lexa]

why are you so obsessed with mumble tho

i thought maybe there was a chance i was conf biasing myself into seeing him as scum, turns out not so much

[Lexa]

vis-a-vis fitz it seems pretty likely he's projecting his worries over buddying mumble into his tunnel on cedrick for "doing the same" to me

[Lexa]

1) I'm tr'ing Mumble.
2) I believe a straight doc claim more than odd night watcher.
3) That Mumble wagon is terribad.

Why did you feel the need to qualify your belief of mumble's claim with your TR of them?

[Lexa]

mumble's claim makes some sense i guess? based on the analysis of hyperactive inexperienced player who thinks the walls are closing in (he /was/ l-2 or something to his credit iirc), i see that coming from town him more than scum. like i said, bad claim but not awful. as for texas... don't think i've ever seen him claim like that as scum nor town in like 15 games. i'm lost.

This isn't true though? Mumble had gained votes slowly since his previous post, his claim came unprompted over a 150 posts after his previous engagement with the thread. I could buy the walls are closing in argument if he'd been involved and someone had been pressuring him but you'd have to believe he'd been following the thread the entire time without posting and that pressure alone was enough to make him claim.

[Lexa]

Not much else of interest before people moved to other wagons, looking at the recent cedrick stuff now

also zito new top town read

[Lexa]

Today’s lynch should be fitz. If not him I’d go gnr or maybe Eddie.

If we lynch a Pr claim it should definitely be mumble.

Like the reason that gives Zito pause about me is exactly what mumble has done. At least Lexa under pressure attempted to do something but mumble hasn’t done anything useful all game and is now hoping the doc claim buys him extra time.

I still won’t vote mumble today unless I absolutely have to

+1

[Lexa]

thought to be fair to fitz that was an impressive tunnel

[Lexa]

idk where the vote count is rn so this is effectively a vote on riggs

[Lexa]

)with reference to someone called derpy)

All the signs point to it. Lol.

I’m sure of it.

So I say we lynch either Lexa or Cedrick.

Who are your scum reads

[Lexa]

alex still town

[Lexa]

this case against cedrick is ass

[Lexa]

ew gross i think fitz and cedrick is tvt

literal bulls slamming face first into each other screaming that the other is scum

[Lexa]

rb talk to me about northside

[Lexa]

zito
alex, eddie
cedrick, luca
awoo, havo. rb
nsg, fitz
riggs
mumble

[Lexa]

Setting aside scum!fitz for the moment who else would you lynch right now

[Lexa]

VOTE: Riggs

[Lexa]

it means i've become more certain of my zito read

[Lexa]

lexa does it at all bother you that your top2 townreads (papa zito and alex) are on a wagon you think is terrible (cedrick)?

because they're my top2 townreads and i think this wagon is good, but your perspective doesn't make sense really since you're not engaging the players who're your top2 reads to try and get them to sync up with you? like wot

not rly no

[Lexa]

talk to me about nsg though

[Lexa]

what specifically indicates that her activity has been fake?

i found her pressure on me early in the day to be fairly real and she hasnt been around since the claim stuff happened

[Lexa]

p sure eddie is town btw, last time i saw him like this he was aggressively tunnelling a slot b/c he was (we all were) having a bitch of a time sorting it

which was this?

yeti game in march or april or w/e though you were even more aggro then lol

[Lexa]

no not popcorn i wasnt in that one

you/me/yeti all ended up being town

[Lexa]

ahh matrix 12

[Lexa]

holy shit how was that game 200 pages

[Lexa]

soo lexa

give me a rundown of each player rn, your thoughts and shtuff. 2-5 lines each.

gimme a min to finish my gwent game and then i gotchu

[Lexa]

Yea I reallllly don't love how Ced and Lexa joined it, and how quickly. I'm not moving my vote on principal though.

As far as I go I did make note earlier that I was voting riggs, just not officially cause I didn't know where his wagon was at after a bunch of switches

[Lexa]

soo lexa

give me a rundown of each player rn, your thoughts and shtuff. 2-5 lines each.

Papa Zito: They've gone way up in my esteem once they started posting. Clear, consistent, logical thoughts, nothing hasty or rash, I pretty much find myself nodding along with them every time they post. I don't agree with their stance on cedrick but everything they were saying when they were part of the earlier push on him was meritous and reasonable. Are now actively pushing to sort people, seemingly successfully. In a roundabout answer to rb I'm not worried about him being on cedrick because I'm confident he's either going to move away or prove me wrong.

Alex: Wish they would post more. They're pretty similar to zito in how they post and I've really liked their thought process. The things they laid out way back at the beginning of the game were thought processes and explanations that you don't see scum have or certainly don't see them lay out. They haven't posted enough to really gauge how they'll perform for the rest of the game but in a vacuum a happy town read.

Eddie: To be perfectly honest I'm completely meta reading you knowing how you post and I'm pretty sure you're town, willing to bet it's more likely that numberq was a LiquetyQuickety type situation where everything they say just comes off scummy. Confident I can tell if you're actually scum by day 3 at worst.

Cedrick: Not really impressive as far as gamesolving goes but the strongest tone read I have, helps that I know that they're defense of me has been accurate and to keep up that degree of conviction for so long is almost impossible as scum.

Luca: Getting kind of null her but he's produced strong content overall, he's been level headed, pushed in appropriate places and at appropriate times and has generally been a voice of reason. Could definitely see this slot flipping red down the line but it would take night results to lynch him in the next couple days.

Awoo: I want to think this slot is town but I don't really know anymore tbqh, I've liked what I've seen from them in general but their content has fallen off a lot and they haven't really pushed to advance the game state since early in the day. They have some good faith from me but I'm watching.

RB: As enigmatic as they were the first time we played. Pretty sure I'm going to have to leave the reads on this slot to others but I'm trying to get what I can from him. Haven't seen anything noticeably scummy from him, a couple town tells here and there, him and Havo are pretty much as hard null as it gets.

Havo: Needs to post more. Presumably we'll get something from them on d2 given their dislike of d1. I've got my walls to reference in any case so I expect to have them somewhat sorted soon.tm

NSG: Falling in esteem as I think she is with everyone but there's still decent reason to think she might be town, as I said to rb I found her pushes on me early in the day to be fairly genuine so she gets credit for that. Should be something more concrete once she catches up.

Fitz: Can see this slot going either way and it's the most interesting for that reason. Their interactions with cedrick feel a lot like the way I was being seen after mumble fight #1, they're being obnoxious for no particular reason and it could easily stem from some bullheaded conviction that they're right. On the other hand there's some fairly compelling evidence to their buddying Mumble which makes that a viable scum team and he's essentially been doing the exact thing to mumble that he's crucifying Cedrick for. Beyond that his posts aren't really impressive either way as far as game sorting goes, it's been one tunnel to another for a while now.

Riggs: Can't rightly scum read what doesn't post but the whole will catchup in a few mins and then disappear is a baaaad look. Lurk scum, lurk town, who knows.

Mumble: See wall #235239

[Lexa]

Not really impressive as far as gamesolving goes

If my reads end up being right I’ll be waiting for an apology.

Riddle me this though. Easier you were worried I was buddying you. I’ve been accused of hard defending you the entire game (per fitz) so why hasn’t your read on me weaken? Hard defending you should me you think I’m actually buddying you.

That's not really how I see buddying? If you were buddying me I'd think you'd be supporting positions I was taking on people or wagons I was pushing, doing things to manipulate the way I see you. Hard defending me is kind of the farthest thing from that and I can't see you defending me as you are as scum when you're hitting the nail on the head every time.

[Lexa]

That's kind of Luca for me though, there's a lot to look at and like and not a lot concrete to nail down his alignment

[Lexa]

I don't think we've actually played a game to date where we were opposite alignments iirc

Pedit: that's my updated list post stuff from earlier

[Lexa]

Not in the last seven hours no, wasn't exactly a lot of participation lol

Maybe I'm being over optimistic, I'd like to think I have a handle on how you play at least

[Lexa]

Especially when the days here are five times as long as I normally have

[Lexa]

Oh you were in that one? I only remembered the one where we were scum with trans but I subbed out early d1

But in any case I haven't played here in 8 months so the 5x longer thing is completely valid

[Lexa]

You and me both. Your iso is pretty empty though and we're most of the way through the day, who have you found for your town reads?

[Lexa]

I'd prefer you stay in but I get it if you get to the point where you don't think you can manage both, been there done that

[Lexa]

You and me both. Your iso is pretty empty though and we're most of the way through the day, who have you found for your town reads?

It hasn’t been easy. I haven’t played with most of this list, usually by now I have a few decent TRs.

Right now I’m -

Town - PapaZ, Eddie
Lean town - Luca, RB, Fitz, Lexa
Null - NSG, Ced, Awoo,
Lean scum - GNR, mumble, Alex

I'm really interested to see Alex in your scum lean group he's mostly been town read from what I've seen and i town read him myself. What are you seeing differently?

[Lexa]

That's kinda bullshit mate, I don't think his posts were "just decent"

[Lexa]

Just a few other things

I don't hate the numberQ case. And in particular 54 struck me as off.

Everyone who was or is on Havo's wagon: why were you or are you on Havo's wagon? None of those votes looked random, so why'd you do it? I'm on it because I wanted to form a wagon so I could ask questions like this.

When you answer why you're on a wagon before anyone's asked you why you are on said wagon, it makes me think that you feel like there's something wrong about being on that wagon, and hence need to pre-emptively give an explanation for it. I just got a very guilty and self conscious vibe from this.
So, maybs scum in numberQ

He's had a couple posts like this that I thought showed a really town oriented mentality to his sorting. He's been looking below the surface and trying to get in the mindset of the people he's reading to find scum and I've found his thought process to be really valid

[Lexa]

Now to be fair, outside of a couple specific posts his iso isn't all that impressive but I'm far more confident in finding my town reads out of a small number of posts, got a great track record with that

The vast majority of posts are nai anyway

[Lexa]

Circumstance i think? If I'm remembering the timing correctly his stuff came after my fight with mumble and while I was in the middle of moving

[Lexa]

Do you want me to explain my playstyle here lol? That's basically what you're asking and I can do that if you want but every answer i can give you comes down to "I did or didn't do x because when I play I look for y" and this is shit that's constant across every game and as every alignment because it's based in my mindset about the game

[Lexa]

Like I don't really give a shit if someone scum reads me or cases me of that post gives me an indication of what alignment they are. If I can sort them as town I don't need to think about the post beyond that, if I call them out on it something is catching my eye or needs to be clarified

[Lexa]

Like I don't really give a shit if someone scum reads me or cases me of that post gives me an indication of what alignment they are. If I can sort them as town I don't need to think about the post beyond that, if I call them out on it something is catching my eye or needs to be clarified

So you're basically saying you never respond to anyone's suspicion/points made against you?

It just seems peculiar to praise a strong townread's reasoning for suspecting you without any sort of explanation on your part.

Cane seems to know your meta like the back of his hand so I guess he can answer if this is normal for you.

That's not what I said no, I'll put it like this:

Luca makes a case against me where he comes to the conclusion that I'm scummy

Situation A: I find his thought process and reasoning to be strong and I think it's reflective of a town mindset. I know him to be wrong (or right!) but I don't feel the need to respond because I can sort his alignment from it which I may or may not comment on

Situation B: same as above except I don't follow his thought process and I'm not sure where he's coming from. I'll respond and engage with him, get him to explain further where he's coming from and try and use that understanding to sort him

Situation C: same as above except I find his reasoning to be garbage and scum indicative. I will respond and challenge him on it, defend myself and refute arguments as necessary until I've either determined he's scum or just town making a bad case

With Alex it was always less about the reasoning itself and more about the mindset that led to his reasoning

[Lexa]

Now that can obviously change if I'm close to a Lynch but in general I'm not really fussed by scum reads because I expect their read will change on me as the game progresses

[Lexa]

Oh also just a general heads up I start my new job on Tuesday so activity might be spotty while I get settled

[Lexa]

Thoughts on Alex's Cedrick vote?

Nothing specific other than a general dislike of it. Can see where his mindset gets him to that though, weak reasoning but not uncommon. Could call it opportunistic maybe but honestly just feels lazy.

Off to bed

[Lexa]

1110

Anyone disagree with this

If there's a fake claim between Mumbles and Lexa, it's Lexa. I CAN see potential scum motivation. Scum!Lexa sees Mumble suddenly claim doc, and pre-emptively claims to avoid the potential of anyone from Mumble's wagon changing to her. Lots of talk of quickhammers this game as well, so maybe she felt threatened that she may get quicklynched following Mumble's claim. I can see that kneejerk reaction coming from town though too... but it hurts town more than scum? So more than likely comes from scum?

And yeah. The immediate dismissal of the idea that Mumble's doc claim can't be true followed by the wall either means they're town super hard tunnelling Mumble or scum.

The 826 change to GNR feels opportunistic as well.

So I dunno, I don't disagree, Lexa's probs scum. Need to think about it though.

Read 826 in context of 809 and tell me if it still feels opportunistic

[Lexa]

Is mulch normally this trash at mafia?

[Lexa]

Les put this here

Lexa IMMEDIATELY

And ON THE SPOT

Bullshit called mumbles claim fake

He should have a gut fucking reason for it


Instead apparently it’s this wall of a post well thought out logical reason???


Hell fucking no

You decided it was scum and then decided to spend a fuckton of time building a reason around it

What’s more everything in that post is shit and your use of profanity is masking it

Mumbles claim is fine

Mumbles play is fine

If you read the post it’s BS

400 posts and 2 days later I go back and reevaluate the slot and you're acting like it came as a knee jerk follow up to his claim

Garbage

[Lexa]

L
He should have a gut fucking reason for it


Instead apparently it’s this wall of a post well thought out logical reason???

It's exactly what he said are you fucked

[Lexa]

alright that's all fair (and much more articulate than the garbage he posted)

it's still bullshit though since it assumes that it's not both possible to have a knee jerk gut reaction (and gut reactions are based in...what?) and then later go through it and lay out your thought process as to why you're later reading something the same

going to get into self-meta a bit here, that mastina game i referenced was my first game on this site and one that i used to improve from being trash tier player to competent and the stuff that i referenced from here are principles that i've pulled into my own game when looking at things. so you are absolutely right that i wasn't thinking those things in the moment with my gut reaction but to assume that my later, long form thought process wouldn't be based on the same principles that influence immediate gut reads is naive at best

[Lexa]

damn it's been a long time since i was wagoned this far

[Lexa]

VOTE: Mumble

let it die

[Lexa]

read my fuckin' iso

[Lexa]

Eddie I'm not tryharding. I'm going to bed to wake up early for the new job first day and shit

[Lexa]

Rip watcher joat was all ready to fake a guilty d2

[Lexa]

For the record I didn't give up I legit was starting the new job and had to be up at like 5:30 the next day lol