Perhaps you should check the wagon composition compared to my reads again.
In post 3262, Punreader wrote: In post 1036, GuyInFreezer wrote:Ventriloquist (10):
Ouroboros,
ManWithNoName
,
MariaR (Investigative)
, Wraith, Alchemist21,
Kaede Akamatsu
,
davesaz (negative utility)
, Tchill13, wilky (Miller Slow Cop), Ankamius
It is true that I am not
voting
a pun busser. But I have reasons not to. Namely, I only have one vote; they don't have wagons; Impossibear has a plan which will help prove them to contain pun.
I have been quite consistent in calling MariaR a possible candidate for pun, a read strengthened into fullblown punread. I had given davesaz a minor pass off of a misunderstanding, which I rescinded once it was clarified and lumped him in as well.
You can also at least partially chalk this up to my readthrough of D1 having been so abruptly interrupted by the rush to mislynch Wraith, as I indicated I was only half-way finished with my readthrough of the day and I've yet to finish it. I haven't actually
seen
most of the votes on Ventriloquist in context. D2's sudden end interrupted this. I'm quite confident that had I seen the votes, I would be rather able to demonstrate conclusively why they were pun bus-votes.
You are treating me as if I have read the game.
I have not.
I have read a small fraction of the game. And at the time of the quotes you are using? I had read
none
of the game.
If you expect me to have a fully formed opinion on players when
I replaced in essentially blind
. You are absolutely insane.
In post 4346, OnTheMark wrote:Another dodge of giving reads or anything “concrete” except to buddy up with Ank.
Again.
I had not, and STILL have not, read the game.
At the time of the post indicated, do you know how much of the game I had read? At the time of
3253, I had read...
3060 -
3068 (6 posts), and
3247 -
3252 (5 posts, + 6 posts = 11 posts), plus at Ankamius's request,
3243. I had read
12 posts in the entire game thread
.
Tell me.
If you were in my shoes.
Having read literally TWELVE posts.
What kind of content would
YOU
be able to deliver? Can you honestly say you could do any better than I was doing?
I think not.
In post 4346, OnTheMark wrote:This is another stall and “bear with me post” that punreader NEVER revisits.
Apparently, you missed the pun. I was making a joke.
Furthermore, I
did
revisit it.
Multiple times, in fact.
The post I stated there is one of the foundations of my MariaR punread, something I already laid out and which you should have perfect awareness of (IN THIS VERY POST YOU ARE QUOTING WHERE I USE
3261 LATER IN
4167) if you had actually read my later content. My content builds off of prior content I've posted. Just because I don't always quote the prior content doesn't mean it no longer applies to my current additions to it.
You are saying I didn't follow through.
I am saying you didn't read my posts
, and so blatantly it is impossible to miss. How could you not see that I pushed MariaR, with this?
Pun busser D1? MariaR and davesaz, my strong punreads.
One of the investigatives is pun? MariaR, a claimed investigative.
These are crystal clear in my content.
In post 4346, OnTheMark wrote:Now you think there is a scum in a cluster yet never push there and now are not willing to lynch them.
My stances were quite clear. 1 pun in the claimed roles, 2 pun in the unclaimed players. Overnight, my stance on the two numbers has reversed (2 pun in the claimed roles, 1 pun in the unclaimed players), but the basic reasoning and process I outlined has never changed.
My lynch pool on D2 was MariaR(role)/projectmatt(not claimed role)/Ouroboros(not claimed role)/Ramicus(not claimed role).
Given there is an expectation of 3 pun in the game, that is
precisely
the right number to have. (Well, one more than the right number, but the right zone.)
Given the fact
I was still a replacement having read almost nothing
, having a lynchpool narrowed down to four names at that point is as good as could be gotten. And for the most part, aside from Ouroboros, my pool remains fairly solid, with new evidence corroborating my prior conclusions.
In post 4346, OnTheMark wrote:You also have yet another undelivered promise of Wraith/Alchemist21 content.
Well maybe I would have given content on Wraith
if he hadn't been lynched
while I was still catching up
and was V/LA
.
As for Alchemist21, once more, I DID give the content, something you seem to have forgotten about.
In post 4346, OnTheMark wrote:What’s even more sketchy is you’d be willing to lynch Ramcius without reading and without scumreading him and won’t lynch the people you do scumread.
That's called being realistic. I'll lynch a null-read. Why wouldn't I? They're null, I have no read on them, I wouldn't expect them to flip pun sure but that also means I wouldn't expect them to flip town, either.
I wasn't going to get an Ouroboros lynch, in spite of scumreading them. I wasn't quite comfortable yet pushing a MariaR lynch in spite of thinking she may be pun. I was
quite
willing to lynch projectmatt, and I NEVER said anything otherwise, contrary to what you seem to be saying. I was PERFECTLY WILLING to lynch my punread there. I just never got the chance.
No, that was RadiantCowbells trying to use the
Loaded Question fallacy on me and me recognizing he was doing that, not being able to remember the exact term, and defending against it appropriately. RadiantCowbells asked a question which he was trying to present as a "yes or no" question, e.g. "When did you stop beating your wife?" But the actual answer was neither yes or no; the answer was something different altogether.
I explained my stance as clearly as I could.
In post 4346, OnTheMark wrote:Here again you take careful pause to say it is ‘uncertain’ and summarizes into “I haven’t read but I will lynch Project Matt or RCdra
Groundbreaking idea.
Did this ever occur to you?
Perhaps.
Just maybe.
The reason I am uncertain is
because I haven't read
?
And yet in SPITE of not having read, I was still attempting to take stances?
These are not objective stances, now, are they?
In post 4346, OnTheMark wrote:Wilky FMPOV is lying. My action comes first in NAR. This means it cannot be redirected. As of making this post you would have known Wilky is lying. What pisses me off is that Wilky is Guilty won’t be lynched. Jungle is guilty won’t be lynched. Dave should have been lynched yesterday and wasn’t and you supposedly being good at mechanics make up a town slip that just isn’t there and is unsupported
The "wilky is lying" has been disproven; see also my analysis demonstrating quite plausible ways this could have happened, along with Impossibear's own comments on the subject. Furthermore,
I back the davesaz lynch up
.
And the slip IS there. wilky is fairly new to the site, unless you can demonstrate evidence to the contrary.
From this, you can conclude wilky does not have experience with theme games, unless you can demonstrate evidence to the contrary.
If you assume wilky lacks experience with theme games, stating that he doesn't believe the mod gives out safeclaims is a townslip because only a pun player or an experienced player would know that the mod would give them out.
False. The quote
is
the depth. It's your fault for never asking what I found in
37 to be suspect, not mine.
In post 4346, OnTheMark wrote:so you can buddy me? Why would you be tempted? Why do you have to plan strategically what you would do?
This is answered by
having paid attention
when
I laid out my
extensive Nero Cain history
. The answer lies within my posts later, and here was the earliest hint of it.
I was stating, quite simply, that as a long-time associate of Nero Cain, I knew his content to be squarely within his pun meta. I did so by making a pun (that is, MY GIMMICK), but while I conveyed it as a joke, the meaning carried was quite serious. The read was, instantly, "very likely to be a pun player, albeit not guaranteed".
In post 4346, OnTheMark wrote:This is the billionth+1 you avoid taking a hard stance or using your theories in your posts.
This is the billionth+1 time you've ignored that I HAVE taken hard stances and HAVE used my theories, with everything I've said building upon what I said before.
Again.
I asked if you read my posts.
I did not ask that lightly.
Because I have been providing, constantly, nonstop, my contribution, while
still dealing with a limitation
of not having read most of the game.
There is absolutely no way to read either
3296 or
3298 as "meh whatever" as there is absolutely no content even remotely conveying that meaning.
In post 4346, OnTheMark wrote:and then emphasize project Matt scum trying to get MariaR to do your dirty work. Which is funny as you haven’t read yet? Or have you?
Not having read the game thread does not preclude me from quoting content AS I am reading the game thread to pick up on the better points. What, you expect me to read in total silence? You expect me to not bring up good points from the past, just because I'm not caught up? A good point is a good point, regardless of the author or the time.
Hey so remember how you said I wasn't building on my points? Remember how you said that I didn't do anything with my analysis of the roles?
...This was me
doing something with my analysis of the roles
. This was me
building on my already existing point
. This was me, using
what was already established
. As for why? Because there is literally no harm. In a game where almost every player is a power role, stating that Dunnstral is one gives the pun nothing they don't already know. They already know that the game's virtually role madness. They already know that no matter who they target they will target a PR. They already knew if they caught the same slip that I did that Dunnstral had slipped PR. I told them nothing.
What I DID do was tell the town information that was relevant and pertinent to my earlier point.
In post 4346, OnTheMark wrote:You’re not using whether this game is roleheavy or not to find the people you suspect to be truthtelling. You’re pushing the unclaimed
Again, this is why I asked if you actually READ my posts.
I pushed the unclaimed, yes. This I did. But did you miss the part where I
laid out why I felt pun were in the unclaimed
? Did you miss the part where I laid out why the game being almost role madness meant that the large number of claims wasn't suspect and that in fact it was the large number of UNCLAIMED which was suspect?
Apparently you lack reading comprehension.
I was reading DAY ONE. I never said I had given up on reading. That's, again.
Why I question if you actually READ my posts.
You keep on stating things which indicate you didn't read because these things are literally right in front of you.
In post 4346, OnTheMark wrote:*shakes head* You seem like a competent player yet are putting stock in a scum who was clearly going down day one. That is crap. This entire post is again I MIGHT do something. You’re asking more questions than you’re attempting to answer and expecting others to do it for you
I don't know what you were reading, but it sure as hell wasn't my post. Because HAD you read my post, you would have seen I was calling Wraith town for a solid, slam-dunk case against Ventriloquist; a case better than the alleged leader of the lynch Ouroboros's case.
I felt that Ouroboros's case on Ventriloquist was possibly pun bussing; him KNOWING Ventriloquist was pun and then making points which were based upon insider info (and thus, looking weaker to an outsider). In contrast, Wraith's post delivered a solid case I felt was STRONGLY indicative of a position formed from genuinely having caught pun.
This was rather explicit.
So whatever you're reading, it sure isn't what I wrote.
Oh really? I'm copying others? Do quote where, I'm quite interested to see where their content predates mine because I'm quite certain I was the first one to make this point and that others copied ME.
"But this can be explained by daychat!" sounds an awful lot like "but this could be WIFOM" to me, unless you can explain the difference. "But, Daychat!" is not a magical answer to everything, just like "But, WIFOM!" isn't a magical answer to everything.
In post 4346, OnTheMark wrote:Again you go out of your way to defend wilky yet there is zero clue who you scumread or what you’re doing
Oh so apparently all the times where I explain my suspicion on Ramicus, Ouroboros, MariaR, projectmatt, and davesaz don't count.
Apparently you didn't read, again why I asked if you actually read my posts, where I laid out precisely why that narrative doesn't actually work out.
It's both! I have read the content since I replaced in; every post since
3247 and some here and there even before then.
I have read the first twenty pages of the game.
I have not read any of the content from
500 to about
3050. That is approximately 2,500 posts of the game, 100 pages, which I have not read.
You are also ignoring how it is rather unambiguous the timeline. At the beginning, where I had not read the game, I had not read the game. I was directed to read all of D1, but skip D2. I then proceeded to
quote content from D1
; the reasonable inference from this would be that was the point in the game where I read the first 20 pages. I was then hit with a V/LA, and day ended...thus, ending my D1 readthrough, half-finished, where it remains.
I still have that tab open and would screenshot it if such things weren't highly in violation of site rules.
And you're clearly biasing your narrative to fit your read rather than thinking about my viewpoint from a more objective standpoint. But let's not split hairs.
Oh? And who's the one not giving reasons now?
Not objective. If anything, it's an objectively wrong statement, too, given the players who're supporting me.
Which might have to do with
not having read the game,
yet still wanting to contribute something in spite of not having read the game
.
Except I did EXACTLY this when I told Impossibear their mechanics talk was wrong. Again, reason why I asked if you had read my posts.
also, how to classify your Vent vote? I can't find any reason, but i find something better 
Kaede had a point on asking who would have disrupted the quest to help a scum!jungle. But this is scum disrupting the quest despite of jungles alignment.