Posted: Fri Mar 18, 2022 7:26 am
*scummiest slot on the wagon.
i think bussing was the play but maybe she thinks that it was so clearly the play that people will TR her for not doing itIn post 5276, Nero Cain wrote:to bus or not to bus, it a hard q isn't it?
If Galron is traitor scum may not know that.In post 5271, Titus wrote:Let's slow down and unpack this.In post 5264, MathBlade wrote:Because if I am right Galron is scum and they won’t know how or why Yeet thinks innoIn post 5257, Titus wrote:1) Why wouldn't scum just force Galron through until yeet was forced to claim, thus verifying the investigation result? If Enchant is town and honestly telling, then they net a dead Galron and possibly a dead yeet/blocked yeet and dead Math?
Could be Galron did the kill N1 as disposable scum
Or he’s traitor and didn’t want to risk it.
Then if they force Yeet to claim when Galron flips town learns a lot
If Galron was the traitor, then scum would have to know that and know yeet's result would be a good one. That is unlikely given how few posts Galron had d1. A traitor communication would have been spotted. Maybe it was before he came in but it'd have to be there. Then, they'd have to assume yeet cleared a player they're assuming to be bad.
If Galron did the n1 kill as "disposable scum", then this also makes suppositions. 1) That scum would infer that he wouldn't be blocked or 2) He's a goon with PRs and there's no multitasking. and 3) no one else fits better. That's still assumptions to make. They'd also have to assume yeet got a clear that shouldn't be true. They don't know his role.
Occam's Razor applies here.
He can’t or doesn’t accurately state what I am saying as it goes against his narrative.In post 5282, Titus wrote:Math, without referencing the hood/mechanics/votes, can you detail why VP is scum to you?
*side eye*In post 5279, fireisredsir wrote:i think bussing was the play but maybe she thinks that it was so clearly the play that people will TR her for not doing itIn post 5276, Nero Cain wrote:to bus or not to bus, it a hard q isn't it?
or she's just cocky and thinks her and VP can argue their way out of it
I need more than just conclusions. Talk to me like fire has please.In post 5284, MathBlade wrote:VP’s play just is all around atrocious
Combined with HEM scumread as well
It fits
I mean just recently VP has been demonstrated falseIn post 5286, Titus wrote:I need more than just conclusions. Talk to me like fire has please.In post 5284, MathBlade wrote:VP’s play just is all around atrocious
Combined with HEM scumread as well
It fits
yes it will. that's why i called it bold, i respect it tbhIn post 5285, Titus wrote:But extreme reluctance to vote and hard defense of scum on a likely largely driven town wagon would make me look bad.
In post 1111, VP Baltar wrote:Sigh....I kind of like fua for this exchange with fire.
Also I think Malcom is town.
UNVOTE:
VOTE: HEM
Maybe the best approach here is dueling HEM and Wu wagons since that seems to be a divide that is shaping up and I could see a world where either flips scum.
Right. I agree with most of his wall but minus a few conclusions. I feel he's taking chances and risks to save town. I haven't read D1 but leaders on D1 are usually town unless scum really need a shakeup. Given later days, that's not likely. I've engaged with fire to where I partially see his points but I feel fire assumes scum play like he would when there's multiple ways to go about things.In post 5287, MathBlade wrote:Why does it feel wrong? Iirc you’re the one that said there’s more than feelings?
This is the oddest suspicion in ages. It reminds me of the old fear Titus scum that both alignments used but you've never played with me during that era unless you're an alt.In post 5289, fireisredsir wrote:yes it will. that's why i called it bold, i respect it tbhIn post 5285, Titus wrote:But extreme reluctance to vote and hard defense of scum on a likely largely driven town wagon would make me look bad.
Doesn’t wanna de scum the hoodIn post 2606, VP Baltar wrote:Nero pushed me to talk about reads. I told him I'm not doing that in a hood with a potential scum, and that it was kinda antitown to push it repeatedly.In post 2501, MathBlade wrote:Hood people what happened in your hood overnight?
That was all.
I doubt the hood is gonna get used much until we descum it
That’s what I am doingIn post 5291, Titus wrote:Right. I agree with most of his wall but minus a few conclusions. I feel he's taking chances and risks to save town. I haven't read D1 but leaders on D1 are usually town unless scum really need a shakeup. Given later days, that's not likely. I've engaged with fire to where I partially see his points but I feel fire assumes scum play like he would when there's multiple ways to go about things.In post 5287, MathBlade wrote:Why does it feel wrong? Iirc you’re the one that said there’s more than feelings?
I'd like you to engage me like Fire has.
Can you slow down and combine into one post? It's hard to follow your train of thought.In post 5294, MathBlade wrote:That’s what I am doingIn post 5291, Titus wrote:Right. I agree with most of his wall but minus a few conclusions. I feel he's taking chances and risks to save town. I haven't read D1 but leaders on D1 are usually town unless scum really need a shakeup. Given later days, that's not likely. I've engaged with fire to where I partially see his points but I feel fire assumes scum play like he would when there's multiple ways to go about things.In post 5287, MathBlade wrote:Why does it feel wrong? Iirc you’re the one that said there’s more than feelings?
I'd like you to engage me like Fire has.
You said don’t use 3/4ths of the reasons to scum or TR someone and said to answer your question
So I am
its not a suspicion of you. my suspicion is unrelated to this. i was just having fun with nero commenting about what you're doingIn post 5292, Titus wrote:This is the oddest suspicion in ages. It reminds me of the old fear Titus scum that both alignments used but you've never played with me during that era unless you're an alt.In post 5289, fireisredsir wrote:yes it will. that's why i called it bold, i respect it tbhIn post 5285, Titus wrote:But extreme reluctance to vote and hard defense of scum on a likely largely driven town wagon would make me look bad.
I didIn post 5295, Titus wrote:Can you slow down and combine into one post? It's hard to follow your train of thought.In post 5294, MathBlade wrote:That’s what I am doingIn post 5291, Titus wrote:Right. I agree with most of his wall but minus a few conclusions. I feel he's taking chances and risks to save town. I haven't read D1 but leaders on D1 are usually town unless scum really need a shakeup. Given later days, that's not likely. I've engaged with fire to where I partially see his points but I feel fire assumes scum play like he would when there's multiple ways to go about things.In post 5287, MathBlade wrote:Why does it feel wrong? Iirc you’re the one that said there’s more than feelings?
I'd like you to engage me like Fire has.
You said don’t use 3/4ths of the reasons to scum or TR someone and said to answer your question
So I am
Well at least you're having fun being wrong. A lot of times people get heated and angry when wrong on me. Nero and I have had some pretty gnarly fights in the past.In post 5296, fireisredsir wrote:its not a suspicion of you. my suspicion is unrelated to this. i was just having fun with nero commenting about what you're doingIn post 5292, Titus wrote:This is the oddest suspicion in ages. It reminds me of the old fear Titus scum that both alignments used but you've never played with me during that era unless you're an alt.In post 5289, fireisredsir wrote:yes it will. that's why i called it bold, i respect it tbhIn post 5285, Titus wrote:But extreme reluctance to vote and hard defense of scum on a likely largely driven town wagon would make me look bad.