Mafiascum.net

In post 118, Zyla wrote:Here's what I have for reads so far

Town

Town-lean

Alstro
James
T3

Null

Cook

Scum-lean

VFP
Grandpa

Scum

Not Enough Info:

MiniMeg
Val


VOTE: Grandpa

In post 123, Cook wrote:TR VFP
SL James
SR GrandpaMo, Val89, MiniMegabyte

In post 124, alstroemerial wrote:

In post 111, GrandpaMo wrote: Yea, that's why I said bad reaction because it was a weird omgus. I don't fully scumread you but you are like the only one who I see that could be possible scum. Also I agree with T3 and I do think your introduction is actually towny.

Can you just confirm if I'm reading right that both of those "yous" are at me? I do agree that I look bad if James flips green, but can you explain a little more why I'm the only possible scum? Besides that you said my post with the most content so far was towny, I'm personally concerned at the number of people we just don't have a lot of information about at this point.

In post 116, JamesTheNames wrote: I think it can be very productive. I don't think there are many more efficient ways of getting reads day 1. You have no power role reads, no night kills, no eliminations. You can't use hindsight to justify applying pressure onto somebody either. However tunnelling somebody, especially one who you don't have a town read on, be it null or scum instead, applies more pressure than splitting your attention between multiple people, goes further than split attention pressure would apply, and in general makes the game easier to solve.

You have to dig for treasure, you have a shovel and it could only dig so much, what happens if you split the shovel between multiple holes, maybe you didn't dig deep enough to get the treasure, whereas if you dug as deep as you could on one hole, you'd know if the treasure was there or not. In this analogy shovel = time, treasure = solid read, multiple holes = people.

Also I should probably have clarified instead of making the post so short, it doesn't necessarily mean tunnelling for the entire remaining 8~ days, just for a period of the remaining 8~ days.

I think maybe we then just had different interpretations of "tunnelling." I was taking it to mean, roughly, "lock onto target with full confidence and push as hard as you can for as long as you can." With the treasure metaphor, I agree for the same reason that I think having a vote somewhere is more productive than not voting at all.


Question for

Zyla

regarding your Val read. Does your scum-lean on Grandpa make you think Val is more likely to be town, given all of the back and forth that they had? I ask partially because I have them as flipped. It doesn't read like scum v scum to me.

In post 124, alstroemerial wrote:

In post 111, GrandpaMo wrote: Yea, that's why I said bad reaction because it was a weird omgus. I don't fully scumread you but you are like the only one who I see that could be possible scum. Also I agree with T3 and I do think your introduction is actually towny.

Can you just confirm if I'm reading right that both of those "yous" are at me? I do agree that I look bad if James flips green, but can you explain a little more why I'm the only possible scum? Besides that you said my post with the most content so far was towny, I'm personally concerned at the number of people we just don't have a lot of information about at this point.

In post 116, JamesTheNames wrote: I think it can be very productive. I don't think there are many more efficient ways of getting reads day 1. You have no power role reads, no night kills, no eliminations. You can't use hindsight to justify applying pressure onto somebody either. However tunnelling somebody, especially one who you don't have a town read on, be it null or scum instead, applies more pressure than splitting your attention between multiple people, goes further than split attention pressure would apply, and in general makes the game easier to solve.

You have to dig for treasure, you have a shovel and it could only dig so much, what happens if you split the shovel between multiple holes, maybe you didn't dig deep enough to get the treasure, whereas if you dug as deep as you could on one hole, you'd know if the treasure was there or not. In this analogy shovel = time, treasure = solid read, multiple holes = people.

Also I should probably have clarified instead of making the post so short, it doesn't necessarily mean tunnelling for the entire remaining 8~ days, just for a period of the remaining 8~ days.

I think maybe we then just had different interpretations of "tunnelling." I was taking it to mean, roughly, "lock onto target with full confidence and push as hard as you can for as long as you can." With the treasure metaphor, I agree for the same reason that I think having a vote somewhere is more productive than not voting at all.


Question for

Zyla

regarding your Val read. Does your scum-lean on Grandpa make you think Val is more likely to be town, given all of the back and forth that they had? I ask partially because I have them as flipped. It doesn't read like scum v scum to me.

In post 120, JamesTheNames wrote:

In post 119, VFP wrote:No! Not Grampa! >:|

Weren't you aware of GrandpaMo's once putting a horse's head in somebody's bed?

In post 118, Zyla wrote:Here's what I have for reads so far

Town

Town-lean

Alstro
James
T3

Null

Cook

Scum-lean

VFP
Grandpa

Scum

Not Enough Info:

MiniMeg
Val


VOTE: Grandpa

In post 81, Zyla wrote:VOTE: VFP I don't like the fact that you seem to have chosen no-elims on D1 to be a hill you're willing to die on, nor the fact that you implied that you've won multiple games with a D1 no-elim when I can't find any examples

In post 86, JamesTheNames wrote:

In post 84, GrandpaMo wrote:

In post 63, Val89 wrote:

In post 49, GrandpaMo wrote:i don't know if you were serious at all

No, I wasn't.

In post 49, GrandpaMo wrote:and realized it was just a BS post to make it seem long, with no content providing and voting someone other than your scumread xD

Absolutely correct. It was a straight-forward RVS vote dressed up in the style of a serious wall post. You correctly identify the most obvious punchline there, but I dropped a few other things that should have made it clear it was entirely non-serious. I don't really claim to have invented the acronym 'WIFOM', to take another example. Of course, if it transpires that

MiniMegaByte

is scum, I reserve the right to imply I was in fact being serious and I knew from day one.

My post #27 was equally non-serious. Technically, reading you as null was serious, but the reasons equally BS. The clue there was the fact the that you HAD put your vote on one of the 3 - and Cook, MiniMegaByte and me are definitely 3, by the way - with the kicker being the reference to

alstroemeria

, whom was yet to be mentioned. I read you as null because I was reading everyone as null. There is nothing upto #27 I consider indicative either way.

Okay I guess we both misunderstood? LOL. I just thought my RVS didn't really count as a "joke" scumread or whatever you want to read it as and so I just assumed you would imply that the people I scumread (and not the person I voted!) was scum.

In post 60, MiniMegabyte wrote:Who would've thought that at the beginning of the game people joke around

Indeed.

In post 49, GrandpaMo wrote:you can see how it's bad and you should admit that.

To be clear - I do nothing of the sort.

Okay this was also sort of a wifom post to see your reaction to how well you took pressure early game. You took it well, unless this how you play good as scum. But I will give you towncreds for now as this post was not expected (yes, I expected a manipulative scummy post for some reason lol) but you did well responding to my points.

How well he took pressure? He just said his stuff wasn't serious? That get's town cred?

In post 88, GrandpaMo wrote:

In post 86, JamesTheNames wrote:

In post 84, GrandpaMo wrote:

In post 63, Val89 wrote:

In post 49, GrandpaMo wrote:i don't know if you were serious at all

No, I wasn't.

In post 49, GrandpaMo wrote:and realized it was just a BS post to make it seem long, with no content providing and voting someone other than your scumread xD

Absolutely correct. It was a straight-forward RVS vote dressed up in the style of a serious wall post. You correctly identify the most obvious punchline there, but I dropped a few other things that should have made it clear it was entirely non-serious. I don't really claim to have invented the acronym 'WIFOM', to take another example. Of course, if it transpires that

MiniMegaByte

is scum, I reserve the right to imply I was in fact being serious and I knew from day one.

My post #27 was equally non-serious. Technically, reading you as null was serious, but the reasons equally BS. The clue there was the fact the that you HAD put your vote on one of the 3 - and Cook, MiniMegaByte and me are definitely 3, by the way - with the kicker being the reference to

alstroemeria

, whom was yet to be mentioned. I read you as null because I was reading everyone as null. There is nothing upto #27 I consider indicative either way.

Okay I guess we both misunderstood? LOL. I just thought my RVS didn't really count as a "joke" scumread or whatever you want to read it as and so I just assumed you would imply that the people I scumread (and not the person I voted!) was scum.

In post 60, MiniMegabyte wrote:Who would've thought that at the beginning of the game people joke around

Indeed.

In post 49, GrandpaMo wrote:you can see how it's bad and you should admit that.

To be clear - I do nothing of the sort.

Okay this was also sort of a wifom post to see your reaction to how well you took pressure early game. You took it well, unless this how you play good as scum. But I will give you towncreds for now as this post was not expected (yes, I expected a manipulative scummy post for some reason lol) but you did well responding to my points.

How well he took pressure? He just said his stuff wasn't serious? That get's town cred?

Look at the full context please. Smh. The answer you are looking for should be within the conversation. I will give you a hint; the reason relates to a misunderstanding we BOTH had. (I am assuming)

In post 103, Zyla wrote:Alright, I'm going to try to condense the "No Lim" convo so far.

In post 7, VFP wrote:Hi, I'm VFP and I have never played with anyone in this player list.

VOTE: No lim

Here's the original post, they posted a vote for no lim. They could be posting it as a joke, they could seriously be not wanting an elimination day 1, this might be their way of getting the ball rolling. (If the last one, mad props my friend, as it certainly worked) I don't know why they posted it, which is why I pointed it out so I could figure out the purpose of it.

In post 44, Zyla wrote:

In post 7, VFP wrote:Hi, I'm VFP and I have never played with anyone in this player list.

VOTE: No lim

Hm. As [you are] an SE, I find it surprising you'd open with this. Why not a random vote, or some questions to get the ball rolling?

In post 57, VFP wrote:Zyla maybe town, I don't see anything scum motivated to point out the no lim and as an experienced player probably just isn't used to this.

I'll be honest, I completely missed this post the first time around. Unfortunately I'm not really sure what they mean with the part past '[nothing] scum motivated', so I don't have a response

In post 78, VFP wrote:I have never lost a game with a D1 no lim on here.

Here

is where it goes from "what's the meaning of your vote?" to scum reading.

In post 80, Zyla wrote:That's quite interesting, considering I haven't even found a game of yours that had a D1 No Lim. I guess you're 0for0 instead of 7for7

Why are they saying that they never lost a game that they've never played? (And if I missed the one where it did, why are they treating 1 or 2 as a rule?)

In post 87, GrandpaMo wrote:

In post 68, Zyla wrote:

In post 67, VFP wrote:RVS sucks

True, but it's one of two options I know of to get the ball rolling. If you don't like RVS, how would you prefer town getting conversation going?

This is very very ironic because a No Lim has caused this conversation to get started and maybe get a read on you and maybe see interactions with other people. This is why I pointed you out earlier.

I lied.

This part is true, and again, if this was VFP's point, props to them.

Yes, I lied to you, it wasn't just because I pointed it out to say "it was funny", I pointed it out because I knew this was going to happen, and you weren't going to realize it after questioning hence why I had to lie so I can drop it off. But since, it has escalated ever since, the only reason this conversation happened was because VFP did a no lim. It's really NAI, and it seems like you are trying to set him up as scum for it. Yes, maybe he could be scum however, this is something more of NAI in my opinion, and shouldn't be taken as a regard. Many people no lim on day 1 and many people vote on day 1.

We will all be voting regardless by day 1, so there is no point to continue this conversation. I thought you would stop because you would find it unnecessary and NAI to keep going about a specific vote, specifically a no lim.

But you didn't.

So I will give you scumpings for this. I don't fully scumread you because you initiating this conversation could be towny of you but the way you are handling it could be scummy of you if you understand.

Then there's this. I'm not sure if I'm somehow not understanding a couple of sentences in there or something, but I don't follow the logic at all. Frankly, this post just confuses me , and I'm struggling to understand where his scum read is coming from.

In post 113, GrandpaMo wrote:

In post 103, Zyla wrote:Alright, I'm going to try to condense the "No Lim" convo so far.

In post 7, VFP wrote:Hi, I'm VFP and I have never played with anyone in this player list.

VOTE: No lim

Here's the original post, they posted a vote for no lim. They could be posting it as a joke, they could seriously be not wanting an elimination day 1, this might be their way of getting the ball rolling. (If the last one, mad props my friend, as it certainly worked) I don't know why they posted it, which is why I pointed it out so I could figure out the purpose of it.

In post 44, Zyla wrote:

In post 7, VFP wrote:Hi, I'm VFP and I have never played with anyone in this player list.

VOTE: No lim

Hm. As [you are] an SE, I find it surprising you'd open with this. Why not a random vote, or some questions to get the ball rolling?

In post 57, VFP wrote:Zyla maybe town, I don't see anything scum motivated to point out the no lim and as an experienced player probably just isn't used to this.

I'll be honest, I completely missed this post the first time around. Unfortunately I'm not really sure what they mean with the part past '[nothing] scum motivated', so I don't have a response

In post 78, VFP wrote:I have never lost a game with a D1 no lim on here.

Here

is where it goes from "what's the meaning of your vote?" to scum reading.

In post 80, Zyla wrote:That's quite interesting, considering I haven't even found a game of yours that had a D1 No Lim. I guess you're 0for0 instead of 7for7

Why are they saying that they never lost a game that they've never played? (And if I missed the one where it did, why are they treating 1 or 2 as a rule?)

In post 87, GrandpaMo wrote:

In post 68, Zyla wrote:

In post 67, VFP wrote:RVS sucks

True, but it's one of two options I know of to get the ball rolling. If you don't like RVS, how would you prefer town getting conversation going?

This is very very ironic because a No Lim has caused this conversation to get started and maybe get a read on you and maybe see interactions with other people. This is why I pointed you out earlier.

I lied.

This part is true, and again, if this was VFP's point, props to them.

Yes, I lied to you, it wasn't just because I pointed it out to say "it was funny", I pointed it out because I knew this was going to happen, and you weren't going to realize it after questioning hence why I had to lie so I can drop it off. But since, it has escalated ever since, the only reason this conversation happened was because VFP did a no lim. It's really NAI, and it seems like you are trying to set him up as scum for it. Yes, maybe he could be scum however, this is something more of NAI in my opinion, and shouldn't be taken as a regard. Many people no lim on day 1 and many people vote on day 1.

We will all be voting regardless by day 1, so there is no point to continue this conversation. I thought you would stop because you would find it unnecessary and NAI to keep going about a specific vote, specifically a no lim.

But you didn't.

So I will give you scumpings for this. I don't fully scumread you because you initiating this conversation could be towny of you but the way you are handling it could be scummy of you if you understand.

Then there's this. I'm not sure if I'm somehow not understanding a couple of sentences in there or something, but I don't follow the logic at all. Frankly, this post just confuses me , and I'm struggling to understand where his scum read is coming from.

i literally give u a tldr at the end

In post 124, alstroemerial wrote:Question for

Zyla

regarding your Val read. Does your scum-lean on Grandpa make you think Val is more likely to be town, given all of the back and forth that they had? I ask partially because I have them as flipped. It doesn't read like scum v scum to me.

In post 130, GrandpaMo wrote:

In post 118, Zyla wrote:Here's what I have for reads so far

Spoiler:

Town

Town-lean

Alstro
James
T3

Null

Cook

Scum-lean

VFP
Grandpa

Scum

Not Enough Info:

MiniMeg
Val

VOTE: Grandpa

also sad how u and james dont wanna interact wit me right after just replying to u lmfao wit yall answers

In post 131, GrandpaMo wrote:

In post 81, Zyla wrote:VOTE: VFP I don't like the fact that you seem to have chosen no-elims on D1 to be a hill you're willing to die on, nor the fact that you implied that you've won multiple games with a D1 no-elim when I can't find any examples

wait what?

why the pivot?

In post 129, GrandpaMo wrote:

In post 120, JamesTheNames wrote:

In post 119, VFP wrote:No! Not Grampa! >:|

Weren't you aware of GrandpaMo's once putting a horse's head in somebody's bed?

what?

In post 128, GrandpaMo wrote:

In post 124, alstroemerial wrote:

In post 111, GrandpaMo wrote: Yea, that's why I said bad reaction because it was a weird omgus. I don't fully scumread you but you are like the only one who I see that could be possible scum. Also I agree with T3 and I do think your introduction is actually towny.

Can you just confirm if I'm reading right that both of those "yous" are at me? I do agree that I look bad if James flips green, but can you explain a little more why I'm the only possible scum? Besides that you said my post with the most content so far was towny, I'm personally concerned at the number of people we just don't have a lot of information about at this point.

In post 116, JamesTheNames wrote: I think it can be very productive. I don't think there are many more efficient ways of getting reads day 1. You have no power role reads, no night kills, no eliminations. You can't use hindsight to justify applying pressure onto somebody either. However tunnelling somebody, especially one who you don't have a town read on, be it null or scum instead, applies more pressure than splitting your attention between multiple people, goes further than split attention pressure would apply, and in general makes the game easier to solve.

You have to dig for treasure, you have a shovel and it could only dig so much, what happens if you split the shovel between multiple holes, maybe you didn't dig deep enough to get the treasure, whereas if you dug as deep as you could on one hole, you'd know if the treasure was there or not. In this analogy shovel = time, treasure = solid read, multiple holes = people.

Also I should probably have clarified instead of making the post so short, it doesn't necessarily mean tunnelling for the entire remaining 8~ days, just for a period of the remaining 8~ days.

I think maybe we then just had different interpretations of "tunnelling." I was taking it to mean, roughly, "lock onto target with full confidence and push as hard as you can for as long as you can." With the treasure metaphor, I agree for the same reason that I think having a vote somewhere is more productive than not voting at all.


Question for

Zyla

regarding your Val read. Does your scum-lean on Grandpa make you think Val is more likely to be town, given all of the back and forth that they had? I ask partially because I have them as flipped. It doesn't read like scum v scum to me.

no im talking bout zyla here sorry nd yea u right. no comment yet. i would just like to redact that info rn, im looking at something rn

In post 84, GrandpaMo wrote:

In post 63, Val89 wrote:

In post 49, GrandpaMo wrote:i don't know if you were serious at all

No, I wasn't.

In post 49, GrandpaMo wrote:and realized it was just a BS post to make it seem long, with no content providing and voting someone other than your scumread xD

Absolutely correct. It was a straight-forward RVS vote dressed up in the style of a serious wall post. You correctly identify the most obvious punchline there, but I dropped a few other things that should have made it clear it was entirely non-serious. I don't really claim to have invented the acronym 'WIFOM', to take another example. Of course, if it transpires that

MiniMegaByte

is scum, I reserve the right to imply I was in fact being serious and I knew from day one.

My post #27 was equally non-serious. Technically, reading you as null was serious, but the reasons equally BS. The clue there was the fact the that you HAD put your vote on one of the 3 - and Cook, MiniMegaByte and me are definitely 3, by the way - with the kicker being the reference to

alstroemeria

, whom was yet to be mentioned. I read you as null because I was reading everyone as null. There is nothing upto #27 I consider indicative either way.

Okay I guess we both misunderstood? LOL. I just thought my RVS didn't really count as a "joke" scumread or whatever you want to read it as and so I just assumed you would imply that the people I scumread (and not the person I voted!) was scum.

In post 60, MiniMegabyte wrote:Who would've thought that at the beginning of the game people joke around

Indeed.

In post 49, GrandpaMo wrote:you can see how it's bad and you should admit that.

To be clear - I do nothing of the sort.

Okay this was also sort of a wifom post to see your reaction to how well you took pressure early game. You took it well, unless this how you play good as scum. But I will give you towncreds for now as this post was not expected (yes, I expected a manipulative scummy post for some reason lol) but you did well responding to my points.

In post 138, JamesTheNames wrote: "no comment yet"

In post 140, JamesTheNames wrote:

In post 138, JamesTheNames wrote: "no comment yet"

This isn't town sided.
Combined with 139
The unnecessary tone in 88 and 99
I'm not stubborn enough.

UNVOTE: Val89
VOTE: GrandpaMo

In post 138, JamesTheNames wrote:

In post 128, GrandpaMo wrote:

In post 124, alstroemerial wrote:

In post 111, GrandpaMo wrote: Yea, that's why I said bad reaction because it was a weird omgus. I don't fully scumread you but you are like the only one who I see that could be possible scum. Also I agree with T3 and I do think your introduction is actually towny.

Can you just confirm if I'm reading right that both of those "yous" are at me? I do agree that I look bad if James flips green, but can you explain a little more why I'm the only possible scum? Besides that you said my post with the most content so far was towny, I'm personally concerned at the number of people we just don't have a lot of information about at this point.

In post 116, JamesTheNames wrote: I think it can be very productive. I don't think there are many more efficient ways of getting reads day 1. You have no power role reads, no night kills, no eliminations. You can't use hindsight to justify applying pressure onto somebody either. However tunnelling somebody, especially one who you don't have a town read on, be it null or scum instead, applies more pressure than splitting your attention between multiple people, goes further than split attention pressure would apply, and in general makes the game easier to solve.

You have to dig for treasure, you have a shovel and it could only dig so much, what happens if you split the shovel between multiple holes, maybe you didn't dig deep enough to get the treasure, whereas if you dug as deep as you could on one hole, you'd know if the treasure was there or not. In this analogy shovel = time, treasure = solid read, multiple holes = people.

Also I should probably have clarified instead of making the post so short, it doesn't necessarily mean tunnelling for the entire remaining 8~ days, just for a period of the remaining 8~ days.

I think maybe we then just had different interpretations of "tunnelling." I was taking it to mean, roughly, "lock onto target with full confidence and push as hard as you can for as long as you can." With the treasure metaphor, I agree for the same reason that I think having a vote somewhere is more productive than not voting at all.


Question for

Zyla

regarding your Val read. Does your scum-lean on Grandpa make you think Val is more likely to be town, given all of the back and forth that they had? I ask partially because I have them as flipped. It doesn't read like scum v scum to me.

no im talking bout zyla here sorry nd yea u right. no comment yet. i would just like to redact that info rn, im looking at something rn

"no comment yet"

In post 140, JamesTheNames wrote:

In post 138, JamesTheNames wrote: "no comment yet"

This isn't town sided.
Combined with 139
The unnecessary tone in 88 and 99
I'm not stubborn enough.

UNVOTE: Val89
VOTE: GrandpaMo

In post 143, GrandpaMo wrote:

In post 140, JamesTheNames wrote:

In post 138, JamesTheNames wrote: "no comment yet"

This isn't town sided.
Combined with 139
The unnecessary tone in 88 and 99
I'm not stubborn enough.

UNVOTE: Val89
VOTE: GrandpaMo

Also something really funny to point out is that you said you would never move off ur vote off Val but you just did and contradicted yourself in post 85.

In post 141, GrandpaMo wrote:

In post 140, JamesTheNames wrote:

In post 138, JamesTheNames wrote: "no comment yet"

This isn't town sided.
Combined with 139
The unnecessary tone in 88 and 99
I'm not stubborn enough.

UNVOTE: Val89
VOTE: GrandpaMo

this is a really weird pivot xD

this should make me town LMAO

VFP townreading me, cook scumreading me, Zyla scumreading VFP + Grandpa then pivoting onto me then as soon Zyla pivots, you pivot LMAO.

I think scum lies between u and Zyla could be both.

dw i will anaylyze every maniupulative post that u have misunderstood (half i believe)

In post 139, JamesTheNames wrote:

In post 84, GrandpaMo wrote:

In post 63, Val89 wrote:

In post 49, GrandpaMo wrote:i don't know if you were serious at all

No, I wasn't.

In post 49, GrandpaMo wrote:and realized it was just a BS post to make it seem long, with no content providing and voting someone other than your scumread xD

Absolutely correct. It was a straight-forward RVS vote dressed up in the style of a serious wall post. You correctly identify the most obvious punchline there, but I dropped a few other things that should have made it clear it was entirely non-serious. I don't really claim to have invented the acronym 'WIFOM', to take another example. Of course, if it transpires that

MiniMegaByte

is scum, I reserve the right to imply I was in fact being serious and I knew from day one.

My post #27 was equally non-serious. Technically, reading you as null was serious, but the reasons equally BS. The clue there was the fact the that you HAD put your vote on one of the 3 - and Cook, MiniMegaByte and me are definitely 3, by the way - with the kicker being the reference to

alstroemeria

, whom was yet to be mentioned. I read you as null because I was reading everyone as null. There is nothing upto #27 I consider indicative either way.

Okay I guess we both misunderstood? LOL. I just thought my RVS didn't really count as a "joke" scumread or whatever you want to read it as and so I just assumed you would imply that the people I scumread (and not the person I voted!) was scum.

In post 60, MiniMegabyte wrote:Who would've thought that at the beginning of the game people joke around

Indeed.

In post 49, GrandpaMo wrote:you can see how it's bad and you should admit that.

To be clear - I do nothing of the sort.

Okay this was also sort of a wifom post to see your reaction to how well you took pressure early game. You took it well, unless this how you play good as scum. But I will give you towncreds for now as this post was not expected (yes, I expected a manipulative scummy post for some reason lol) but you did well responding to my points.

I'm going to apologise for not being able to mind read, there was no mention of any other posts here from you. Nothing. Zilch. Nada. Was it clear you were relating to anything other than just Post 63? No it was not.

Let's pretend it was telling us to look into context and other posts between 49 and 83.
Post: 65 has no relation to 49
Post: 72 has no relation to 49
Post: 76 has no relation to 49

The only post relating was of course number 63.
His first quote isn't either of your 2 points and he responds by saying he wasn't serious.
His second quote was him confirming that it was a BS non-serious post.
Let's say the whole misunderstanding thing you claim is true, for the sake of your argument holding:

This means he gets town cred either for not having serious posts early, or for having agreed with you on some misunderstanding.
Get back to me on how either are valid before coming at me with the same thing over and over again which holds no value. Thank you.

In post 145, JamesTheNames wrote:

In post 141, GrandpaMo wrote:

In post 140, JamesTheNames wrote:

In post 138, JamesTheNames wrote: "no comment yet"

This isn't town sided.
Combined with 139
The unnecessary tone in 88 and 99
I'm not stubborn enough.

UNVOTE: Val89
VOTE: GrandpaMo

this is a really weird pivot xD

this should make me town LMAO

VFP townreading me, cook scumreading me, Zyla scumreading VFP + Grandpa then pivoting onto me then as soon Zyla pivots, you pivot LMAO.

I think scum lies between u and Zyla could be both.

dw i will anaylyze every maniupulative post that u have misunderstood (half i believe)

You're attempting to pocket Val89, with non-sensical justifications for town cred.
Not to mention there are different reasons for me and Zyla scumreading you. It's also weird you referred to yourself in the third person.
Also it doesn't make you town.

In post 144, JamesTheNames wrote:

In post 143, GrandpaMo wrote:

In post 140, JamesTheNames wrote:

In post 138, JamesTheNames wrote: "no comment yet"

This isn't town sided.
Combined with 139
The unnecessary tone in 88 and 99
I'm not stubborn enough.

UNVOTE: Val89
VOTE: GrandpaMo

Also something really funny to point out is that you said you would never move off ur vote off Val but you just did and contradicted yourself in post 85.

Funny, I don't remember saying never or ever or anything like that. You going to bend words the entirety of this game?

In post 142, GrandpaMo wrote:

In post 138, JamesTheNames wrote:

In post 128, GrandpaMo wrote:

In post 124, alstroemerial wrote:

In post 111, GrandpaMo wrote: Yea, that's why I said bad reaction because it was a weird omgus. I don't fully scumread you but you are like the only one who I see that could be possible scum. Also I agree with T3 and I do think your introduction is actually towny.

Can you just confirm if I'm reading right that both of those "yous" are at me? I do agree that I look bad if James flips green, but can you explain a little more why I'm the only possible scum? Besides that you said my post with the most content so far was towny, I'm personally concerned at the number of people we just don't have a lot of information about at this point.

In post 116, JamesTheNames wrote: I think it can be very productive. I don't think there are many more efficient ways of getting reads day 1. You have no power role reads, no night kills, no eliminations. You can't use hindsight to justify applying pressure onto somebody either. However tunnelling somebody, especially one who you don't have a town read on, be it null or scum instead, applies more pressure than splitting your attention between multiple people, goes further than split attention pressure would apply, and in general makes the game easier to solve.

You have to dig for treasure, you have a shovel and it could only dig so much, what happens if you split the shovel between multiple holes, maybe you didn't dig deep enough to get the treasure, whereas if you dug as deep as you could on one hole, you'd know if the treasure was there or not. In this analogy shovel = time, treasure = solid read, multiple holes = people.

Also I should probably have clarified instead of making the post so short, it doesn't necessarily mean tunnelling for the entire remaining 8~ days, just for a period of the remaining 8~ days.

I think maybe we then just had different interpretations of "tunnelling." I was taking it to mean, roughly, "lock onto target with full confidence and push as hard as you can for as long as you can." With the treasure metaphor, I agree for the same reason that I think having a vote somewhere is more productive than not voting at all.


Question for

Zyla

regarding your Val read. Does your scum-lean on Grandpa make you think Val is more likely to be town, given all of the back and forth that they had? I ask partially because I have them as flipped. It doesn't read like scum v scum to me.

no im talking bout zyla here sorry nd yea u right. no comment yet. i would just like to redact that info rn, im looking at something rn

"no comment yet"

Yes I am looking at a specific interaction happening. If I spoil the interaction and it happens to be scum -- Scum know how to coordinate now with each other against me hence why I redacted. This shouldn't be alignment indicative only usually towards EoD or even towards the end of the game where you are trying to garner more specific info.