|
On April 18 2013 12:32 yamato77 wrote: I'm taking a REAL break from mafia now.
On April 18 2013 15:26 yamato77 wrote: /in
Player list looks interesting, not the usual faces I play with.
that 3 hour break
|
|
I would kill to be something other than a VT, but hey.
|
On April 21 2013 17:12 yamato77 wrote: I would kill you.
Thoughts?
Seems like a bad idea to me.
PS: Anyone who tries to analyse my first post in the future is dumb.
|
On April 21 2013 18:18 yamato77 wrote: You seem a little too nervous about my post.
Maybe you are a good person to kill.
Er, what makes me come off as nervous lol
|
As per usual, at work at the moment, I only skim read but I hope I can properly catch up once I get home tonight.
On April 22 2013 05:17 ObviousOne wrote:Show nested quote +On April 21 2013 18:43 Sylencia wrote:On April 21 2013 18:18 yamato77 wrote: You seem a little too nervous about my post.
Maybe you are a good person to kill. Er, what makes me come off as nervous lol Sylencia this post makes you sound nervous. The structure of the sentence, as normally seen in literature, makes it look like you are hiding something. You seem to have let this drop off rather casually, as did Yamato. IMO the early prod of you on Yamato's part worked because you have demonstrated here that you are possibly hiding something. Your second post says to disregard your first, so all I have to go on from you is that you are nervous. So are you hiding the fact that you are scum? Or are you hiding that you haven't a clue what is going on? Please explain thoroughly your opinion on at least two players so I can learn about you. Your filter is too scummy to ignore.
You think that if I was hiding something I would make it so blatantly obvious that I was nervous? This isn't a real time conversation where I have 10 seconds to come up with a response. Anyone can take time to craft a response that makes them seem like whatever they want to, so trying to read into someone's emotions based on their response (unless it's in the middle of some heated argument) isn't going to get you anywhere.
So to answer your questions, no I'm not, and at the time there was less than 1 page of discussion, of course there wasn't any idea as to what was going on yet. Won't be diving into reading people deeply until I get home tonight. If you think that's scummy you can look at my past games and look at every other game I've played in recent times and compare posting times.
(In any case I'm only on page 25 or so and I don't think I'll get much further while here)
|
Ok, I'm back, and going back to the start to see what I can gather:
Notes: - I don't care about meta reads very much. It's easy to manipulate, especially when people outright say 'based on X's meta, he is acting like his town self'. Unless it's obvious, I generally disregard meta arguments.
Comments / Observations: - Oats v Palmar early on. The way I read it, Oats seemingly made a joke statement about Palmar, yet the response was ever so serious. Palmar: Is your vote just parked on Oats while you look for actual suspicious people or do you seriously believe that Oats was calling you out there? Since it's instant majority lynch, a single vote doesn't really matter until we get to 10+ votes, but I'm just interested if your read on Oats has changed since the initial accusation.
- I was actually suspicious of gemoript due to the super weak town reads / don't kill these guys yet post until the hydra cut occurred, and valid points have been raised about that action, but I don't really want to talk about that any further.
On April 22 2013 05:20 Sharrant wrote: Noticed this too, I think Sylencia would be a good lynch today as well.
Based on one statement I make which isn't indicative of anything whatsoever makes you think I'm scummy? It's fine if you're accusing me if you have a case but casual accusations with no followups don't sit well with me since it ends up being bait for people to jump on.
So other than the lack of activity which I have shown thus far, are there any other points you'd like to make?
On April 22 2013 10:24 ObviousOne wrote: @Sylencia, I would be most pleased if you could follow up with reads as you have them instead of posting them in batches, especially considering I have witnessed your activity levels in at least one past game where you post from work (This Town Ain't Big Enough, for example) so even if your questions are repeats of things that happen on future pages it would help a lot with getting a read on you to bang them out. I don't think you're scum necessarily yet; I just want to see more from you. Help me out?
Trying. Not easy though, 20 pages of catchup doesn't make it easy to digest the content.
On April 22 2013 10:32 TheRavensName wrote: I would be against lynching Rayn. In one of the Newbie games we played together we were in a similar situation and he took the opportunity to rip through me and just tunnel the entire game, so I think if he was scum this would be unlike him and I feel like I could have been a pretty easy push if he wanted to since he managed to basically do it before off less, even if there are much better people here who could see through it. (Unless he wantsto be my budy. dun dun dun.)
In the same vain, I think Sharrant started out by taking a really easy way out of attacking me right out the gate and then just focuses on me and pushes around till hearing a few people saying that I was at least not scum, and then hops on Rayn without any real expliantion besides that hes going after BM for the miller soft claim and the fact that BM seems to be being useless, but that makes Ray more scummy then BM or someone else when Ray is actually being fairly active?
So based off what I can figure out, I dislike Sharrant. He was convinced I was vote worthy, then hoped off before I got a chance to respond, but doesn't want to make a comment on BM til lBM shows up. Seems sketchy for me, and would probably be my vote target at the moment, but there is plenty of reading to be done and lots of time for more things to read.
From the pages regarding TRN and Rayn, both have been hard at work defending each other, though I don't really understand the point being raised about why Rayn isn't scum.
Was he scum when he tunneled or was he town? Rayn has shown tendencies in other games to shotgun vote and accuse others, and it's seen here and from your games he can tunnel too. His behaviour is erratic and so unless there's points regarding the content being townie, I don't think anything can be said about the way he plays.
You dislike Sharrant, so does that mean you suspect him or are you just putting it out there? Does Rayn's activity put him in the town books for you, because while it can be used as a basis for a case when none others appear, it's pretty alignment indicitive. If it's not part of your reasoning behind it, why is rayn already town in your eyes?
(Okay, seems like this is asked later on, but I'm leaving it here as per OO's request)
On April 22 2013 10:46 TheRavensName wrote: Its enough that I like him a little more then everyone else. I am taking it with a grain of salt though. I was under the impression that out of 25 people one should do what they can to try and limit the number just a little bit to a more managable size.
I'm somewhat doing the same, so I'm wondering how you can see someone as town without looking at the whole picture. I haven't really got any town reads due to this, but the fact you're able to either means you're doing something wrong, or you know something we don't.
- Following from this there's a clear TRN-Sharrant-Rayn argument breaking out, with Sharrant backtracking on past accusations and rayn aggressively defending while accusing Sharrant as well.
Rayn: Pushing for all millers to die (and voting on it) on day 1 honestly doesn't sound like a great plan. It wastes days where there's actually stuff to analyse, it creates a lazy town atmosphere which only helps scum, and with that comes a lot less conversation. You said you thought that BM was scum but what makes him so much more scummy at the time than someone else with low number of posts and providing just words and not content (eg. me)?
In any case:
On April 22 2013 01:16 raynpelikoneet wrote: Anyone who claims miller on D1 should be lynched.
##Vote: Bill Murray
On April 22 2013 07:31 raynpelikoneet wrote: I am not trying to "policy lynch" BM. I think BM is scum. Bringing up the miller policy into this discussion adds nothing, because it's irrelevant regarding my reasons for wanting to lynch BM.
This looks so dumb honestly.
Ok, I'm done for now, ##vote rayn at the moment because of the weirdest irregularities in posts.
|
On April 22 2013 21:03 TheRavensName wrote:Show nested quote +On April 22 2013 20:45 Sylencia wrote:On April 22 2013 05:20 Sharrant wrote: Noticed this too, I think Sylencia would be a good lynch today as well. Based on one statement I make which isn't indicative of anything whatsoever makes you think I'm scummy? It's fine if you're accusing me if you have a case but casual accusations with no followups don't sit well with me since it ends up being bait for people to jump on. On April 22 2013 10:46 TheRavensName wrote: Its enough that I like him a little more then everyone else. I am taking it with a grain of salt though. I was under the impression that out of 25 people one should do what they can to try and limit the number just a little bit to a more managable size. I'm somewhat doing the same, so I'm wondering how you can see someone as town without looking at the whole picture. I haven't really got any town reads due to this, but the fact you're able to either means you're doing something wrong, or you know something we don't. - Following from this there's a clear TRN-Sharrant-Rayn argument breaking out, with Sharrant backtracking on past accusations and rayn aggressively defending while accusing Sharrant as well. Rayn: Pushing for all millers to die (and voting on it) on day 1 honestly doesn't sound like a great plan. It wastes days where there's actually stuff to analyse, it creates a lazy town atmosphere which only helps scum, and with that comes a lot less conversation. You said you thought that BM was scum but what makes him so much more scummy at the time than someone else with low number of posts and providing just words and not content (eg. me)? In any case: On April 22 2013 01:16 raynpelikoneet wrote: Anyone who claims miller on D1 should be lynched.
##Vote: Bill Murray On April 22 2013 07:31 raynpelikoneet wrote: I am not trying to "policy lynch" BM. I think BM is scum. Bringing up the miller policy into this discussion adds nothing, because it's irrelevant regarding my reasons for wanting to lynch BM. This looks so dumb honestly. Ok, I'm done for now, ##vote rayn at the moment because of the weirdest irregularities in posts. Sharrant's done that a lot this game. As for Rayn, I guess I don't know what to think about him right now. It doesn't help the two real people until this oint that have been attacking my town read on him are people I dislike so... there is that. But when I read Rayn's statement about the miller lynch being more of a scummy time to claim then because hes a miller it makes more sense to me, especially when you couple with BM lurked for quite a bit after his claim then coming back and calling it a joke when he comes back and see people were upset with it and it lends itself to the gamble of: "I'm mr Mafia, please don't check me cause I am the miller and don't worry about me guys cause I'm town and you all bought that right?" But that is just my opinion.
he didn't lurk, he clearly said he was sleeping :\ and I'm not saying millers shouldn't get lynched at some point, I was saying there's better days in choosing to do so. Doing it on day 1 is literally asking to
On April 22 2013 21:04 kushm4sta wrote: @Sylencia I'm having trouble understanding your scumread/vote on rayn. Right now it looks like you are voting him because he wanted to lynch BM due to his claiming, but said it wasn't a policy lynch. Is that it?
Rayn thinks the claim makes BM scum. That is why he doesn't consider it a policy lynch. I get how it can seem like a contradiction, but it all comes down to how you define the phrase "policy lynch."
It really didn't seem phrased that way when it was first put down, if you're going to say he's scummy by posting a claim wouldn't you say it straight rather than "all miller claims should be lynched"?
On April 22 2013 21:40 raynpelikoneet wrote: EBWOP: Above was to Hopeless.
I really need some people who can actually think here. I'm not interested in continuing this discussion with kush/Hopeless/Sylencia because they clearly can't read.
On April 22 2013 01:16 raynpelikoneet wrote: Because the OP clearly states there can be multiple number of same roles, so discussing if there are one or more self-aware millers in stupid in the first place.
Anyone who claims miller on D1 should be lynched.
##Vote: Bill Murray
Again, where do I see "Bill Murray is scummy" in this?
|
On April 22 2013 13:40 Bill Murray wrote: and idc if they're unhappy. i have 1 vote on me. i didnt "pull any stunts". I was entering the thread in the random voting stage, and goofing off mildly, because I am happy that I rolled a good role for my win %.
Town: 10-6 Scum: 4-1 3p: 1-1
Great scum win % = scum???
(relax, i'm joking)
|
Catching up again to see what the case is on Oats, only caught a little of the random posting but I will change/sheep if I see the points valid
|
Oats is the vote for me. Case from Vivax + aftermath between yamato vs Oats has convinced me more to taking down Oats. The thing that was holding me back most was that my primary scum suspect (rayn) was on Oats fairly early on. However:
On April 23 2013 22:36 Vivax wrote: Whatever, you're at L-1, dead. If you're town you shouldn't jumping around hysterically, but tell us who we should look at after your flip.
TRN, if you want to have yamato lynched instead of Oats, it's not my job to find arguments for you. I'd want to have Oats lynched first.
Given that Oats never actually provided anything for us in terms of reads afterwards and posted crap about being green and telling people to push others. If he has nothing to say either: a) He's playing as the bad townie b) He's withholding that info from us to stop us from gaining more than we need from the lynch.
Either case is bad for town, so that's why I'm willing to go down on Oats.
##Unvote ##Vote Oats
|
On April 24 2013 00:02 yamato77 wrote: Let's not hammer Oats when his wagon is just a carbon copy of mine.
Kthnxbye.
Yet you actually provide something for us to go off in comparison to Oats.
|
On April 24 2013 00:07 yamato77 wrote:Show nested quote +On April 24 2013 00:03 Sylencia wrote:On April 24 2013 00:02 yamato77 wrote: Let's not hammer Oats when his wagon is just a carbon copy of mine.
Kthnxbye. Yet you actually provide something for us to go off in comparison to Oats. I'm fairly confident he's not mafia based on the fact that Oats' wagon encounters ZERO resistance up to this point, and the fact that his posting lately IS more what I expect out of town Oats. Just because people don't necessarily play up to your expectation of the ideal state of the game does not mean you lynch them, if you want to win. I want to win. I'm willing to let Oats be silly, so long as I believe he's town.
If you're at L-1, you provide whatever reads you have. Look at his list of reads from this morning. Out of the 4 scum "reads" he has listed, 3 of them I believe were "I feel like they are scum" or "because someone has to be scum". It's bare minimal, counterproductive for if he does flip green, and nothing else he has said has really been of any content.
It's not like I hold a high standard for what is good play and what people should be doing, I'm horrible myself for that situation, but what use is it if Oats is not giving us anything when others ask? All I ask for is even just 1 or 2 reads with some explanation other than feel based reads.
|
CC - Kush Town Voted Getmoript due to wishy washyness Unvoted due to incident. Leaned towards oats based on effort. Wants to lynch ShiaoPi Sharrent Town read Note: Mentions being town billions of times
WaveOfShadow: VE Town Read Voted Getmoript due to answer dodging Unvoted due to incident. Becomes a bit suspicious of VE due to lack of posting. Sharrant town read Suspicious of ShiaoPi due to attack on Sharrant Reinforced Sharrant town read
grush: bandwagons yamato suspects gigyas due to bandwagon. a lot of off topic comments
Note: I'm suspicious of grush here for his hypocritical reasoning:
On April 24 2013 04:42 grush57 wrote: Gigyas
He literally reposts what others say a page later and contributes jack shit to get on a bandwagon between 2 town players, yamato and oats. He also screams scummy through the power of starsenses.
Yet his bandwagon:
On April 23 2013 05:01 grush57 wrote: I guess I didn't because I'm not sure yet of who to lynch and who would get lynched. I would glady do it though.
When asked about whether he would vote Yamato.
Tube: ???
Drazak: Has posted, but has never returned since.
Giygas: Suspected Oats due to attitude and lack of posts. Hopeless not suspected as scum Sharrant town read Would've supported yamato lynch if hammertime.
Sylencia: Semi-suspected TRN due to the rayn defense provided Suspects Rayn due to inconsistent statements about miller lynch / scum suspicion of BM Wagoned on Oats due to lack of town contribution from Oats.
VisceraEyes: Early on uneasy about Palmar. Voted getmoript for bad case against yamato (?) Suspected yamato due to "Oh well you know my posting was INTENTIONALLY bad". types of posts voted BM due to his response to BC (quote is below)
On April 23 2013 07:51 Bill Murray wrote: first off, i was just scum with him, and i don't think he's scum this game what makes the bolded so bad? i don't see it. that's actually when it started getting a more lilting tone, and felt like he was trying to be big-papa-bear, to me
Note: I don't see what is so bad about this post in general, apparently it comes off as antagonistic.
Switches to yamato a few hours later without ever mentioning BM again, despite already getting a response from him and being responded to with a request for an explanation. Says he can get behind an Oats lynch. Only now does he decide to actually read yamato's filter. (Vote was originally pure omgus) switches to oats for original suspicion of oats (2 points above)
Note: Reading the filter and looking at some of the points in context such as the argument for BM has made me feel rather suspicious towards VE.
Now, I will continue going through everyone's filters for their suspicions and other points tomorrow if I am still alive (public holiday hooray), but from what I have seen as of so far, I would like opinions on VE and grush (am I missing something about grush gameplay here?)
Also, I fully know well that filter dive posts doesn't show anything about alignment, so no need to mention that too thx
|
On April 25 2013 01:36 Sharrant wrote: Hey, Sylencia, glad to see you around. It looks like you put in a lot of work going through filters, but I don't see a lot of reads, just a lot of summary. Is this a list of your top suspects or just a collection of players? Because at one point you actually mention yourself on your list, and that just seems a little strange to me.
I can tell you've got a scum read on VE, and at least a bit of a scum read on Grush, does this mean the other players are also suspicious in your eyes or are they town or null? I'm just having a bit of trouble making heads or tails of it all.
I've been going through people as a collection (hence why the list is so messy), yet going through them I found myself to become more suspicious of VE and grush so far. Unless something pretty much proves them to be innocent, I don't generally find true town reads since it's dependent on having information you don't have. In any case, no one on that list (other than myself) I can say that I have a strong town read on, Wave of Shadow is probably the person on that current list I have the least suspicion on, but in any case, I am more concerned with the ones I find most suspicious, not the least.
|
Also, are you guys actually serious about grush starsenses things... That's like saying WoS isn't scum becuase he hasn't rolled scum.
(Am I not allowed to go watch Game of Thrones after posting)
|
On April 25 2013 02:27 Sharrant wrote:Show nested quote +On April 25 2013 02:23 Sylencia wrote:On April 25 2013 01:36 Sharrant wrote: Hey, Sylencia, glad to see you around. It looks like you put in a lot of work going through filters, but I don't see a lot of reads, just a lot of summary. Is this a list of your top suspects or just a collection of players? Because at one point you actually mention yourself on your list, and that just seems a little strange to me.
I can tell you've got a scum read on VE, and at least a bit of a scum read on Grush, does this mean the other players are also suspicious in your eyes or are they town or null? I'm just having a bit of trouble making heads or tails of it all. I've been going through people as a collection (hence why the list is so messy), yet going through them I found myself to become more suspicious of VE and grush so far. Unless something pretty much proves them to be innocent, I don't generally find true town reads since it's dependent on having information you don't have. In any case, no one on that list (other than myself) I can say that I have a strong town read on, Wave of Shadow is probably the person on that current list I have the least suspicion on, but in any case, I am more concerned with the ones I find most suspicious, not the least. Okay, so would it be accurate to say anyone on that list not explicitly marked as suspicious ranges somewhere in slight townie-null-slight scummy? Or townie-slight townie-null-slight scummy? And is there a specific reason you chose those people to start with? And last but not least, can you give me a quick read on Yamato?
Scum [-------------[--|----]-----------] Town is the bracket I'd put most of them.
On yamato: I don't see him as scummy at the moment. At one point when there was a wagon on him, I do agree that there was reasoning there, but the effort he has put in after that, and his attempt to move the wagon away from Oats (a right move from him in the end) leads me to believe he is more likely to be town. Naturally, this could also just be a play from him if he is scum, choosing the greatest moment ever at L-1 at the dead of night to try move the case away, but for now I don't see myself targetting him on Day 2. This could change once I dive into his filter, but that's based on what I remember reading.
|
On April 25 2013 02:37 getmoript wrote:Show nested quote +On April 22 2013 20:45 Sylencia wrote: Comments / Observations: - Oats v Palmar early on. The way I read it, Oats seemingly made a joke statement about Palmar, yet the response was ever so serious. Palmar: Is your vote just parked on Oats while you look for actual suspicious people or do you seriously believe that Oats was calling you out there? Since it's instant majority lynch, a single vote doesn't really matter until we get to 10+ votes, but I'm just interested if your read on Oats has changed since the initial accusation.
This is an exceptionally interesting quote. Sylencia is saying that he has a town read on Oats. I don't see any particular reason early in Oat's filter to think that he's town. Neither is there any sort of reasoning for this read given. This is an odd way of saying "Palmar, what is your current read on Oats?"
I never mentioned having a town read on oats there? I said he made a joke statement, that doesn't equate to he is not scum. The question was asking for why he reacted he way he did, not what his read was. That already came with a vote.
Beyond this I don't want to continuously copy paste so I'll jsut quote it:
"One of the points from Gonzaw's case on Artanis in PYP was that scum tend to complain about activity more than town."
Does this make the other 3-5 people who mentioned something along the lines of what I said scummy? Pretty sure I've said something along those lines nearly every game I've played in.
"So because Sylencia hasn't gotten any town reads out of the back and forth, no one else can? Like, WTF? That doesn't make any sense. "
Different strokes for different people then? I personally find it to be impossible to take a subset of players, read their posts and just outright say "he's a townie" and start defending them. Sounds absurd to me.
"Throughout the whole post Sylencia hasn't said 1 thing that has pointed to Rayn being scum. Not a single thing. As a matter of fact, Sylencia is calling out Rayn for wanting to lynch BM for being scum but not giving actual reasons for him being scum. So what does Sylencia do pray tell? Not give any reason for Rayn being scum whatsoever. At best this is a policy vote to remove stupidity from the thread. "
Lying/changing the apparent meaning of what he said isn't a reason for wanting to lynch him now?
"Read this twice. Do you ever see any inclination that Sylencia thinks that Oats is scum here? It's not A--Bad Townie vs B--Scum. It's A--Bad Townie vs B--withholding information. What information could someone be withholding on D1? None. Period. You either think Oats was town or you think he's scum. Sylencia is still reading Oats as town AND still voting for Oats."
Next time I'm scum, I'll be sure to hand out information as I'm about to be lynched on Day 1 which will help out townies in the long run (y)
"Bald faced lie. Sure Oats didn't contribute much. But if that's the case then Sylencia voted him for being bad town which is not a reason to vote for someone period. Seeing as how Sylencia didn't think Oats was scum anyways why 180 on why he voted for him? Image control, nothing more."
Again, how are you getting "Oats made joke comment" -> "Oats is townie in my eyes"?
Anyways, bed time.
|
EBWOP: I don't want to requote it so I'll copy and paste it.
|
On April 25 2013 03:18 getmoript wrote:Show nested quote +On April 22 2013 20:45 Sylencia wrote: Comments / Observations: - Oats v Palmar early on. The way I read it, Oats seemingly made a joke statement about Palmar, yet the response was ever so serious. Palmar: Is your vote just parked on Oats while you look for actual suspicious people or do you seriously believe that Oats was calling you out there? Since it's instant majority lynch, a single vote doesn't really matter until we get to 10+ votes, but I'm just interested if your read on Oats has changed since the initial accusation.
Read the bolded section. This shows that Sylencia didn't think that Oats was suspicious. Admittedly, I guess I presumed 'not suspicious' = town, but that's reasonable assumption. Show nested quote +On April 25 2013 02:50 Sylencia wrote: "So because Sylencia hasn't gotten any town reads out of the back and forth, no one else can? Like, WTF? That doesn't make any sense. "
Different strokes for different people then? I personally find it to be impossible to take a subset of players, read their posts and just outright say "he's a townie" and start defending them. Sounds absurd to me.
Are you trying to say that people can't form town reads and can't defend them? Are we supposed to believe that you just classify everyone in shades of null-leaning-town/scum? I don't understand this outlook, can you explain this further? This just looks like you're trying to bypass the point. How do you form your tells? Show nested quote +On April 25 2013 02:50 Sylencia wrote: "Throughout the whole post Sylencia hasn't said 1 thing that has pointed to Rayn being scum. Not a single thing. As a matter of fact, Sylencia is calling out Rayn for wanting to lynch BM for being scum but not giving actual reasons for him being scum. So what does Sylencia do pray tell? Not give any reason for Rayn being scum whatsoever. At best this is a policy vote to remove stupidity from the thread. "
Lying/changing the apparent meaning of what he said isn't a reason for wanting to lynch him now? If you think he's a liar, then why not pressure him flat out for lying. You keep on taking this observer aspect to the game instead of being a participant which doesn't feel towny to me. Show nested quote +On April 25 2013 02:50 Sylencia wrote: "Read this twice. Do you ever see any inclination that Sylencia thinks that Oats is scum here? It's not A--Bad Townie vs B--Scum. It's A--Bad Townie vs B--withholding information. What information could someone be withholding on D1? None. Period. You either think Oats was town or you think he's scum. Sylencia is still reading Oats as town AND still voting for Oats."
Next time I'm scum, I'll be sure to hand out information as I'm about to be lynched on Day 1 which will help out townies in the long run (y)
If B is supposed to be scum, then why not say scum? If he is scum, then what information do you think that he could be withholding? If you think he's withholding information, then why don't you try and pressure him to get that information out of him. It just looks to me like you're more than happy to pop in and out when you please and download whatever information you please to the thread to avoid suspicion/being lynched. How is what you're doing beneficial? You've given summaries, not analysis. How is that town-motivated?
1. Cool, I didn't find Oats to be suspicious from the first page of the game, what of it? 2. People can make town reads, but if you're limiting yourself to a subset of the game and then calling them town because their actions replicate those of previous games, I consider that to be weak. 3. Because I already covered what I wanted from rayn from the quotes I found, he continued with the same reasoning, and it was going to continue along in that cycle. 4. Does everything need to be spelled out to you for you to understand what is being meant? Point B has already been mentioned in the game, and it's pretty much meaning the same thing.
On April 22 2013 05:17 ObviousOne wrote:Show nested quote +On April 21 2013 18:43 Sylencia wrote:On April 21 2013 18:18 yamato77 wrote: You seem a little too nervous about my post.
Maybe you are a good person to kill. Er, what makes me come off as nervous lol Sylencia this post makes you sound nervous. The structure of the sentence, as normally seen in literature, makes it look like you are hiding something. You seem to have let this drop off rather casually, as did Yamato. IMO the early prod of you on Yamato's part worked because you have demonstrated here that you are possibly hiding something. Your second post says to disregard your first, so all I have to go on from you is that you are nervous. So are you hiding the fact that you are scum? Or are you hiding that you haven't a clue what is going on? Please explain thoroughly your opinion on at least two players so I can learn about you. Your filter is too scummy to ignore.
This is the quote. Are you reading the thread at all?
On April 25 2013 03:37 raynpelikoneet wrote:Show nested quote +On April 25 2013 02:23 Sylencia wrote:On April 25 2013 01:36 Sharrant wrote: Hey, Sylencia, glad to see you around. It looks like you put in a lot of work going through filters, but I don't see a lot of reads, just a lot of summary. Is this a list of your top suspects or just a collection of players? Because at one point you actually mention yourself on your list, and that just seems a little strange to me.
I can tell you've got a scum read on VE, and at least a bit of a scum read on Grush, does this mean the other players are also suspicious in your eyes or are they town or null? I'm just having a bit of trouble making heads or tails of it all. I've been going through people as a collection (hence why the list is so messy), yet going through them I found myself to become more suspicious of VE and grush so far. Unless something pretty much proves them to be innocent, I don't generally find true town reads since it's dependent on having information you don't have. In any case, no one on that list (other than myself) I can say that I have a strong town read on, Wave of Shadow is probably the person on that current list I have the least suspicion on, but in any case, I am more concerned with the ones I find most suspicious, not the least. Wtf man, i though I was definitely scum as you voted for me (for reasons i don't even understand) on D1. Y U no hate me anymore?
You still are though I haven't looked into your filter since the last time I accused you. Also, I've seen you do this before but why do you ask people to label you as scum for life after they suspect you?
In either case, I haven't been looking at filters like I had hoped, I've now read ShiaoPi's filter and from the points: - Considers TRN, myself and rayn to be potential scum - Hammers Oatsmaster I have to wonder why he decided to do so considering 2/3 of this suspected scum were on that wagon. In addition, the reasoning of:
On April 25 2013 16:15 ShiaoPi wrote: Look at the vote counts at the time when I "magically" returned. It's pretty much obvious that no one else besides Oats or yamato would get lynched that day.
given that there's no deadline so a change in votes was still entirely possible makes this so wrong.
As for my current vote, I'm really wanting to go with Shiao but given VE is the one who has started the wagon I don't even know if that's the right move given I still don't see him being townie in my eyes. I'm going to hold onto the vote for now, but as of right now my read on who is scum are: VE, Shiao, grush (you guys are dumb with starsenses).
|
|
|
|