really it is kind of justIn post 823, Hu Tao wrote: Funny how I was a top Town read yesterday and now I am scum read by someone for voting scum
I (perhaps mistakenly) thought that he was implying Enchant might actually be serious there, and if they were, I would have hard-scumread them for publicly narrowing down possible doctors, among other things. Wasn't going to say that though. So I decided to actually consider it, and after 536, I logged off for the night and Enchant was dead before I got the chance to post again. I wouldn't have defended them in any case, the timing just didn't work out great.In post 514, Doctor Drew wrote:I actually have been flip flopping a bit myself, I kinda believe that FL found out I am not a tracker.....but would be incredible balls for Enchant to come and say that I am ALSO not a doctor(despite the username contradicting them lol)In post 513, Alianna wrote:I guess I won't ask why, but at the moment, I'm leaning the other way.In post 511, Doctor Drew wrote: Also, I did make a boo boo saying FL was being righteous. Won't elaborate at this point.
I believe Encha.nt now and don't believe FL.
I think it's irrelevant because it could be either. And just going off of that is silly. Who has been scummiest till now should be the most important thingIn post 826, Theta Alpine wrote:really it is kind of justIn post 823, Hu Tao wrote: Funny how I was a top Town read yesterday and now I am scum read by someone for voting scum
were scum trying to save enchant from dying
in which case i would think it is doctor drew and alianna
or were scum just bussing cause enchant was caught
in which case i think it would actually be you and bristep together
And again, hop aboard the Aliana train Theta. I saved a seat just for you.In post 833, Hu Tao wrote:I think it's irrelevant because it could be either. And just going off of that is silly. Who has been scummiest till now should be the most important thingIn post 826, Theta Alpine wrote:really it is kind of justIn post 823, Hu Tao wrote: Funny how I was a top Town read yesterday and now I am scum read by someone for voting scum
were scum trying to save enchant from dying
in which case i would think it is doctor drew and alianna
or were scum just bussing cause enchant was caught
in which case i think it would actually be you and bristep together
Enablers can be of a different alignment as negative feedback, to kneecap a faction when it gets ahead.In post 787, redFF wrote: i claimed because i figured a scum enabler to my role would be sus, i assumed enablers were usually of the same alignment, so i figured claiming now rather than it coming out later was the best move.
Could be but the chance is lower than other players so we should hunt elsewhere. We have time.In post 801, Hu Tao wrote:Wait I just saw this. If it's confirmed there is a traitor then delta could be scum just solo scum that would get an inno result from you?In post 761, KittyTacky wrote:I get a guilty if they're not alone in a PT. So sole scum would get an inno even if traitor. So innos are pretty soft. I have a hunch it's 3 scum and tater however.In post 756, Alianna wrote: @Kitty - how exactly does your role work? Enchant was executed D2 and you checked Delta N2, so if it's just them and a traitor, they technically have no one to talk to in the PT. I realize 3 scum + traitor is technically possible, just interested in this scenario. Would you get a positive or negative result on groupscum if they're the last one left, assuming they can't communicate in another way?
Traitor counts as like, half of a groupscum or even less.In post 803, Hu Tao wrote:Wouldn't 4 scum be way too strong with the amount of people we have in the game? If it's confirmed there is a traitor then it should be 2 + traitorIn post 781, Alianna wrote: I can see 3 + traitor, but wouldn't Kitty's role technically be stronger in that setup than in 2 + traitor?
In post 835, Alianna wrote: Doc, what are you even scumreading me for?
Somewhat correct in that I wanted to test her, but I don't reveal all my methods.In post 838, Alianna wrote: Correct me if I'm wrong, but all I can see is that Doc voted me because Theta's posting around my associatives pinged him and he wanted to test her, but she's semi-confirmed now. I don't recall him ever expressing an actual reason to SR me. So what's the point of 834?
makes senseIn post 839, KittyTacky wrote:Enablers can be of a different alignment as negative feedback, to kneecap a faction when it gets ahead.In post 787, redFF wrote: i claimed because i figured a scum enabler to my role would be sus, i assumed enablers were usually of the same alignment, so i figured claiming now rather than it coming out later was the best move.
Fine, keep your secrets.In post 842, Doctor Drew wrote:In post 835, Alianna wrote: Doc, what are you even scumreading me for?Somewhat correct in that I wanted to test her, but I don't reveal all my methods.In post 838, Alianna wrote: Correct me if I'm wrong, but all I can see is that Doc voted me because Theta's posting around my associatives pinged him and he wanted to test her, but she's semi-confirmed now. I don't recall him ever expressing an actual reason to SR me. So what's the point of 834?
I will for now.In post 844, Alianna wrote:Fine, keep your secrets.In post 842, Doctor Drew wrote:In post 835, Alianna wrote: Doc, what are you even scumreading me for?Somewhat correct in that I wanted to test her, but I don't reveal all my methods.In post 838, Alianna wrote: Correct me if I'm wrong, but all I can see is that Doc voted me because Theta's posting around my associatives pinged him and he wanted to test her, but she's semi-confirmed now. I don't recall him ever expressing an actual reason to SR me. So what's the point of 834?