Posted: Wed Mar 31, 2021 12:08 am
And of course you do nothing to counter. Keep flailing bro.
I'm not scum here, sorry.
I don't like you and Koba's push on Elsa because it feels like it's made in bad faith.
In post 1973, KittyTacky wrote: DK's softclaim counts as a claim by the way.
In post 2008, KittyTacky wrote: I blocked DK. They implied they'd be able to confirm it.
:/In post 2197, KittyTacky wrote: N2: RBing a non-claimer who I read as a VT.
explain whats bad faith about it.In post 2201, NorwegianboyEE wrote:I'm not scum here, sorry.
I don't like you and Koba's push on Elsa because it feels like it's made in bad faith.
Kitty is sus and would be my top pick for scum if we're in an Elsa town world, but I really don't see Koba scum.In post 2203, NorwegianboyEE wrote:Yeah if either of the two is scum here the other goes next.
I literally said I ignore PR claims?In post 2195, UNOwen wrote:Was expected by me at least. Too many PR claims in play, if Koba was an investigative I'd have expected them to more strongly push to solve Elsa/Anya yesterday. I agree there's not much point to the gambit but the most reasonable justification is that they were VT bluffing to test the claims, because otherwise the plan would be even more pointless.In post 2193, NorwegianboyEE wrote: How was it expected? I really don't see the point in doing all of that hoobla to confirm their supposed PR role just to reveal surprise, they were VT all along.
When?In post 2207, DkKoba wrote: I literally said I ignore PR claims?
no its not - you're just in the flail club with elsa running out of mislim options it seems.In post 2194, NorwegianboyEE wrote:That's like policy lynch material.
In post 2175, NorwegianboyEE wrote:UNOwen is in this game too.
Hmm, idk what to make of him. I’ve liked some of his questions and activity.
In post 2179, NorwegianboyEE wrote:I’m torn here because i still don’t feel like i understand or can trust Elsa, but i really don’t like this boogaloo team push on them from Koba/Kitty and their reasoning doesn’t seem very good either.
In post 2180, NorwegianboyEE wrote:This bothers me too. Them claiming VT here just shows their plan had no meaning at all. And i don’t even see how it makes sense or is advantageous for town.In post 2178, Anya wrote:their all prs on me plan wastes both elsa's and i's abilities when we could be vanilla copping other players and gives us no info
In post 2194, NorwegianboyEE wrote:That's like policy lynch material.
In post 2198, NorwegianboyEE wrote:Well that wasn't a surprising take from Kitty at all.
In post 2201, NorwegianboyEE wrote:I'm not scum here, sorry.
I don't like you and Koba's push on Elsa because it feels like it's made in bad faith.
Sure, I was just explaining why I thought you were bluffing. If you said this during day 2 and I missed it then I guess my reasoning was wrong, but the conclusion that your gambit isn't AI stays the same.In post 2210, DkKoba wrote:im not focusing on who claimed what unless it egregiously doesnt fit in the setup
"They" was referring to whatever other role would be able to confirm. Sorry if this was ambiguous.In post 2202, UNOwen wrote:In post 1973, KittyTacky wrote: DK's softclaim counts as a claim by the way.In post 2008, KittyTacky wrote: I blocked DK. They implied they'd be able to confirm it.:/In post 2197, KittyTacky wrote: N2: RBing a non-claimer who I read as a VT.
You're not actually countering my argument about how I'm not likely to be a scum roleblockerIn post 2214, NorwegianboyEE wrote:Pray tell, where have i been "flailing"? >_>
Also I was kinda doubting my VT read on DK after their crumbs. But I thought it could be an attempt to draw the NK. Still thought someone else would confirm, we have a claimed role that could.In post 2202, UNOwen wrote:In post 1973, KittyTacky wrote: DK's softclaim counts as a claim by the way.In post 2008, KittyTacky wrote: I blocked DK. They implied they'd be able to confirm it.:/In post 2197, KittyTacky wrote: N2: RBing a non-claimer who I read as a VT.