TM 2021 Large Normal: OEIS Mafia (Part Two Is Out)

[hercule]

I should rephrase - I don't care if you suspect me - I do care about your thought process

[innocentvillager]

hahah oh boy more votes

im not as easy to miseliminate as i was before, sorry scum

mark your fucking days

[hercule]

@Ythan if my characterization is ridiculous, I feel like you should easily be able to provide an alternative (and correct fypov) narrative of what your "big pings" are

[DrippingGoofball]

IV is town and that wagon is rubbish.

[Ythan]

I'm perfectly content to do that and will do so momentarily. I still call your mischaracterization insensible.

[hercule]

I'm perfectly content to do that and will do so momentarily. I still call your mischaracterization insensible.

alrighty

[Hopkirk]

@Ythan if my characterization is ridiculous, I feel like you should easily be able to provide an alternative (and correct fypov) narrative of what your "big pings" are

from your experience is not being able to provide an alternative narrative actually scum indicative? i always kind of characterize scum as being able to justify anything as they aren't bound to one specific motivation. technically town aren't, but it's rarer for them to lie about it

hahah oh boy more votes

im not as easy to miseliminate as i was before, sorry scum

mark your fucking days

i don't really like the general scope of this comment? are there any specific votes you don't like on you right now

[Ythan]

Numbers twenty four and thirty seven were the springs beginning to tense

[Ythan]

I'm perfectly content to do that and will do so momentarily. I still call your mischaracterization insensible.

alrighty

The implication being that illogical nonsense also tends scumward

[innocentvillager]

i don't really like the general scope of this comment? are there any specific votes you don't like on you right now

by general scope do you mean my scope is too generally sahding my votes? or you generally don't like my scope?

im gonna assume the former, but to answer your question no not really in particular atm. i will look more at some point maybe

[OkaPoka]

i don't really like the general scope of this comment? are there any specific votes you don't like on you right now

by general scope do you mean my scope is too generally sahding my votes? or you generally don't like my scope?

im gonna assume the former, but to answer your question no not really in particular atm. i will look more at some point maybe

not even my vote?!

[innocentvillager]

gypyx and i agree unwnd is town. i think he's more confident than i am. to paraphrase, he thinks the push on me at the start was a bad case but his entrance and engagement with me was towny, all of which i agree with and none of this matches his general busy/narrativy bullshit scum style. this might be my first real townread, congratulations unwnd.

[innocentvillager]

by real i mean a read i feel somewhat more confident in.

[hercule]

@Ythan if my characterization is ridiculous, I feel like you should easily be able to provide an alternative (and correct fypov) narrative of what your "big pings" are

from your experience is not being able to provide an alternative narrative actually scum indicative? i always kind of characterize scum as being able to justify anything as they aren't bound to one specific motivation. technically town aren't, but it's rarer for them to lie about it

yeah 100%? I'm surprised that's even up for debate. If he's town he knows his thought process, and has a basis to say I'm mischaracterizing him, and can simply state it.

it's something that always resonates with me, when someone tries to define my actions in a certain way that doesn't fit what actually occurred (from my point of view, which is the only POV that I have 100% truth for), I want to set the record straight. So I am interested in his claim that I am doing this to him and I want to see what his side of the story is

If he's scum he will have to make something up, which we can compare to the actual content of his posts and see if it passes the smell test. By asking him to back up his claim, I am forcing him to do so (if he's scum etc etc)

[Hopkirk]

i don't really like the general scope of this comment? are there any specific votes you don't like on you right now

by general scope do you mean my scope is too generally sahding my votes? or you generally don't like my scope?

im gonna assume the former, but to answer your question no not really in particular atm. i will look more at some point maybe

pretty much the first one. trying to understand if your issue is votes being on you at all, or the votes that

are

on you and

which

votes.

[hercule]

I'm perfectly content to do that and will do so momentarily. I still call your mischaracterization insensible.

alrighty

The implication being that illogical nonsense also tends scumward

lmaoooo coming from the person who said they were vibing with DGB this is incredible

[innocentvillager]

i don't really like the general scope of this comment? are there any specific votes you don't like on you right now

by general scope do you mean my scope is too generally sahding my votes? or you generally don't like my scope?

im gonna assume the former, but to answer your question no not really in particular atm. i will look more at some point maybe

not even my vote?!

i don't townread you like, whatsoever but you also have like 20 contentless posts which is fine. your vote on me was like "lol look at me im so sheepy lol" which yeah could be scum deflecting responsibility but maybe not. idk.

[Ythan]

@mod: 122112122122112112212

[Ythan]

I'm perfectly content to do that and will do so momentarily. I still call your mischaracterization insensible.

alrighty

The implication being that illogical nonsense also tends scumward

lmaoooo coming from the person who said they were vibing with DGB this is incredible

Still not sure who tf you are lol

[OkaPoka]

i don't really like the general scope of this comment? are there any specific votes you don't like on you right now

by general scope do you mean my scope is too generally sahding my votes? or you generally don't like my scope?

im gonna assume the former, but to answer your question no not really in particular atm. i will look more at some point maybe

not even my vote?!

i don't townread you like, whatsoever but you also have like 20 contentless posts which is fine. your vote on me was like "lol look at me im so sheepy lol" which yeah could be scum deflecting responsibility but maybe not. idk.

so u dont like my vote on you

[innocentvillager]

am i not allowed to give gut reads and then come up with a reason afterwards to potentially explain why i might've had that read? this is to everyone who has been like "omg, you didn't explain your read progression from A->B->C, i can't follow, scum!"

[innocentvillager]

so u dont like my vote on you

mild dislike sure

[Hopkirk]

@Ythan if my characterization is ridiculous, I feel like you should easily be able to provide an alternative (and correct fypov) narrative of what your "big pings" are

from your experience is not being able to provide an alternative narrative actually scum indicative? i always kind of characterize scum as being able to justify anything as they aren't bound to one specific motivation. technically town aren't, but it's rarer for them to lie about it

yeah 100%? I'm surprised that's even up for debate. If he's town he knows his thought process, and has a basis to say I'm mischaracterizing him, and can simply state it.

it's something that always resonates with me, when someone tries to define my actions in a certain way that doesn't fit what actually occurred (from my point of view, which is the only POV that I have 100% truth for), I want to set the record straight. So I am interested in his claim that I am doing this to him and I want to see what his side of the story is

If he's scum he will have to make something up, which we can compare to the actual content of his posts and see if it passes the smell test. By asking him to back up his claim, I am forcing him to do so (if he's scum etc etc)

just checking


(more seriously, i kind of misread your intent when i was asking this question. i was essentially asking are scum more likely to have a

good

justification for their thought processes- and whether town are more/less likely to have good justifications. if you mean you can't see any thought process, which is what the post i'm responding to you now reads as, then my question becomes less relevant)

pedit - i phrased that badly because i should probably sleep soon but i think the meaning comes out ok? having a

bad

looking explanation comes from town more than scum (albeit idk how much this is compared to the % a random slot is town)

[OkaPoka]

so u dont like my vote on you

mild dislike sure

could one say of unwnd, Dunnstral, Dannflor, OkaPoka, Ceph votes on you

you don't like my vote on you in particular?

[hercule]

@Ythan if my characterization is ridiculous, I feel like you should easily be able to provide an alternative (and correct fypov) narrative of what your "big pings" are

from your experience is not being able to provide an alternative narrative actually scum indicative? i always kind of characterize scum as being able to justify anything as they aren't bound to one specific motivation. technically town aren't, but it's rarer for them to lie about it

yeah 100%? I'm surprised that's even up for debate. If he's town he knows his thought process, and has a basis to say I'm mischaracterizing him, and can simply state it.

it's something that always resonates with me, when someone tries to define my actions in a certain way that doesn't fit what actually occurred (from my point of view, which is the only POV that I have 100% truth for), I want to set the record straight. So I am interested in his claim that I am doing this to him and I want to see what his side of the story is

If he's scum he will have to make something up, which we can compare to the actual content of his posts and see if it passes the smell test. By asking him to back up his claim, I am forcing him to do so (if he's scum etc etc)

just checking


(more seriously, i kind of misread your intent when i was asking this question. i was essentially asking are scum more likely to have a

good

justification for their thought processes- and whether town are more/less likely to have good justifications. if you mean you can't see any thought process, which is what the post i'm responding to you now reads as, then my question becomes less relevant)

pedit - i phrased that badly because i should probably sleep soon but i think the meaning comes out ok? having a

bad

looking explanation comes from town more than scum (albeit idk how much this is compared to the % a random slot is town)

to be honest I don't really see the point of debating this before he has even replied