You are town and I dropped it is my answer. If you want a bettee answer with more detail I guess I can provide vut it isn't going to be much more insightful than that.
Posted: Wed Jan 05, 2022 6:45 am
by Dwlee99
The entire point is your confidence is fake as fuck because if you were town you'd know you literally have never read me right but instead you're wallposting me
Posted: Wed Jan 05, 2022 6:47 am
by skitter30
When did you start townreading me @lld?
(Ftr i've not read the lld/dwlee stuff, and probably wont until this evening)
Posted: Wed Jan 05, 2022 6:47 am
by Dwlee99
It's also to say if you are town there is still time to back up and not do this crap
(Ftr i've not read the lld/dwlee stuff, and probably wont until this evening)
After you asked me to consider why you would jump in front of the train as scum
And then I considered our most recent game interaction
And understood what you were pointing at.
Then considered the difference between there nd here and decided you were town.
Posted: Wed Jan 05, 2022 6:56 am
by Lady Lambdadelta
Like you could be mindgaming me and have chosen a path of growth from that game that is getting under my guard but I don't feel that way right now
Posted: Wed Jan 05, 2022 6:57 am
by Rogue
I need to read more in depth but I don’t like 228 at a glance while I’m wrapping up lunch
Posted: Wed Jan 05, 2022 7:32 am
by Rogue
Update on further reading I still don’t like it
VOTE: dwlee
I don’t like how they keep flip flopping with their LLD stance while their vote is still there- 228 feels very much like something you’d say to a townread you think is in a dumb tunnel… which doesn’t bode well cognitively with the whole… ya kno… vote on LLD?
In post 130, skitter30 wrote:I mean you said something interesting (that i also think is kinda silly), so i responded, yes
Not sure what's strange abt that, but noting the vague shade
Not really shade, more a general observation that you and JJH both stepped into a line of questioning, resulting in a lessening of pressure.
I've made the same observation every time this has happened before, I think you may have even seen me make this observation before.
Ok so i just want to discuss why i hate this post:
- 126 was absolutely shade, as basically acceded in 139, as the implication was 'people getting in the way of lld's inquiry of bombay' are scummy
- so i really dislike the first paragraph, because its trying to walk back the shade and reframe as a 'general observation' that doesnt necessarily have scum implications after i called that out
- the second paragraph i find oddly conciliatory and defensive, which i find curious because her reason to townread me comes from a later post i made (142, 148)
VOTE: lld
Posted: Wed Jan 05, 2022 7:35 am
by The Bombay
Yeah, Dwlee99s response to Lady Lambdadeltas vote was super weird and kind of an over reaction in my opinion.
In post 130, skitter30 wrote:I mean you said something interesting (that i also think is kinda silly), so i responded, yes
Not sure what's strange abt that, but noting the vague shade
Not really shade, more a general observation that you and JJH both stepped into a line of questioning, resulting in a lessening of pressure.
I've made the same observation every time this has happened before, I think you may have even seen me make this observation before.
Ok so i just want to discuss why i hate this post:
- 126 was absolutely shade, as basically acceded in 139, as the implication was 'people getting in the way of lld's inquiry of bombay' are scummy
- so i really dislike the first paragraph, because its trying to walk back the shade and reframe as a 'general observation' that doesnt necessarily have scum implications after i called that out
- the second paragraph i find oddly conciliatory and defensive, which i find curious because her reason to townread me comes from a later post i made (142, 148)
VOTE: lld
Not conciliatory, evidence. The purpose of the line was to force you to accept that this has been my position on this topic regardless of my alignment for years to remove that aspect from the conversation.
I don't quite understand what you are trying to say here Tbh. It isn't shade because it is me trying to read you directly. I am applying pressure directly and then reading from that. The goal of the exercise was to get a read on you and I did.
I'm not really sure what is shady about that. There is nothing underhanded about it at all?
Posted: Wed Jan 05, 2022 7:44 am
by Lady Lambdadelta
like I really don't get the assertion you are trying to make, skitter.
Do you think I am calling it scummy to provide some later discreditation of your play? Am I trying to slip something into zeitgeist that is critical of you?
Like I am being pretty direct in that manner and pretty transparent about my reads and thoughts here, at least that is what I am attempting to do.
So your comments don't make a lot of sense to me.
Posted: Wed Jan 05, 2022 7:50 am
by Lady Lambdadelta
Like can you define shade for me in this context actually?
Or if you prefer I can define how I interpreted it first for you. Because this didn't feel like a case of interpretation and more a case of... Well being frank it just felt obviously not shady?
Like I really don't get it
Posted: Wed Jan 05, 2022 8:47 am
by Dwlee99
In post 232, Rogue wrote:Update on further reading I still don’t like it
VOTE: dwlee
I don’t like how they keep flip flopping with their LLD stance while their vote is still there- 228 feels very much like something you’d say to a townread you think is in a dumb tunnel… which doesn’t bode well cognitively with the whole… ya kno… vote on LLD?
If you're town stop doing this shit means I townread LLD? Ok
In post 72, T3 wrote:
marci seems very subdued. I wonder why.
She felt a little awkward but I know it’s tricky to break out of a typical posting style so I’m giving her the benefit of the doubt. It’s something to monitor though, yes.
