You and your partner have played far far far too many games for me to believe you actually mean this.In post 103, Seiko x Naomi wrote:at best it says he thinks town have reasons to lie in a mass flavorclaim, or any massclaim at all and that needs to be addressed now rather than later. Town have no reason to lie. At all.
I almost got away with this shit too. Should've.
All absolutes are bullshit.The Oxford Bubbles wrote:Scum don't scumhunt. They use their actions to tell a story they're creating. True events aren't like constructed stories. They aren't simple and don't follow an easy sequence - linear.
Syryana doesn't use his actions to probe further, dig deeper than he could. He makes a move, explains it, and then moves on.
Controlled. Linear.
~ Raven
Scum can pretend to scum-hunt, but they can't scum-hunt unless they're in a multi-ball game. I think we're on the same page but you're thinking of pretending to hunt for scum as being the same as scum-hunting.In post 128, Aj The Epic wrote:All absolutes are bullshit.
In honesty, scum can scumhunt, they're just going to be wrong. You're writing a narrative that is pretty patently not true.
for what it's worth, I agree with you that notty's stance here is wrong; do you want me to talk more about it or do you want to sort it out with him directly?In post 125, Syryana wrote:You and your partner have played far far far too many games for me to believe you actually mean this.In post 103, Seiko x Naomi wrote:at best it says he thinks town have reasons to lie in a mass flavorclaim, or any massclaim at all and that needs to be addressed now rather than later. Town have no reason to lie. At all.
VOTE: Seiko x Naomi
I generally agree that his posts aren't scummy, and that his opening was either a legitimate reaction test or him feigning a reaction test, but I don't know if I see why the way he did it is more likely the former than the latter. can you walk me through it in more depth?In post 134, borkjerfkin wrote:I'm around-ish, a lot of people are going to bed. What do you want to talk about?
(When did you misread me badly? Tales of you?)
Really? Even after that last game?In post 132, Seiko x Naomi wrote:I don't have any town read on Dunn; I don't have any issues with the bulk of his push on us (save potentially the post bork pointed out), but it's nowhere near unfakeable.
And to clarify, i am not scumreading him for not being here (although what he has posted has been pretty banal) just wish he was.In post 136, borkjerfkin wrote:FWIW I was hoping for more of an NS presence early game -- I find him easier to read than you (I don't feel that I've ever really had a game where I was super wrong about him)
notty's RL is really busy. I think he should be around at some point or another, but regardless, I was only even able to drag him into this game because you were in it. <_>In post 136, borkjerfkin wrote:FWIW I was hoping for more of an NS presence early game -- I find him easier to read than you (I don't feel that I've ever really had a game where I was super wrong about him)
I mean, the last game you were making a push on me that was really obviously contrived.In post 139, Dunnstral wrote:Really? Even after that last game?In post 132, Seiko x Naomi wrote:I don't have any town read on Dunn; I don't have any issues with the bulk of his push on us (save potentially the post bork pointed out), but it's nowhere near unfakeable.
the way he reached out to me specifically as if i was in danger of dissecting the issue too much before people talked about it fully. I don't think scum would have cared if i did that.In post 138, Seiko x Naomi wrote:can you walk me through it in more depth?
You are most certainly not commenting on anything but the lowest hanging "bad theory" fruitIn post 143, Aj The Epic wrote:Why? You'd advocate a PL 2 days into d1?Dunnstral wrote:Wouldn't mind lynching shadow-step at the moment
Never said anything about plIn post 143, Aj The Epic wrote:Why? You'd advocate a PL 2 days into d1?Dunnstral wrote:Wouldn't mind lynching shadow-step at the moment
I think you should talk more about it; 87 is, by his own admission, not a legitimate claim. Why is this a slam dunk town post for you?In post 132, Seiko x Naomi wrote:second, Charl is town. I don't think 87 comes from scum, and beyond that I'm fine with his posts in general. I pretty obviously disagree with notty's read here; ideally I'd let him handle it himself, but if he continues not to be here poke me again and I can talk more about it.