In post 3057, VP Baltar wrote:Haven't thought about it since I'm not in the position to consider. But Bingle has some fairly universal good will. It's not that I don't think a50 would have been considered, but what I'm saying is that it is half as crucial as pooky is claiming, it would be a reason for me to not want that.
ehhhhhhhh idk i'm still not sure i buy this or that this would be such a major factor in makign the nk
(at the very least i can't imagine it would be so important for me if i were making the kill in your position)
not sure i have much else to say on this point tho
In post 3055, Fun and Games wrote:andante you change your mind a lot lol
i think dueling vp and dwlee wagons would be great
~ skitter
You seem very concerned with enchant not getting run up. Why's that?
i don't think that that 'very concerned' matches the vibe of that post or really my entire trajectory today
~ skitter
When enchant came up seriously as a wagon was when yall started badgering me incessantly to vote dwlee. When andante votes there, you pop up trying to nudge her away from her vote. So yeah, you seem to have an interest
i don't think enchant's seriously been a wagon, and that was not the impetus for us trying to get u to vote dwlee, it was the factt aht dwlee starting posting and looks scummy and i think you're a viable partner
In post 3074, Dwlee99 wrote:But this isn't even a response to what I'm saying. The point is that pooky might have been suggesting we were scum, but when I'm around before then he doesn't interact with me, only linking me to VP to push VP. Then when I vote enchant he THEN starts going head-to-head with me, which is the point of the interaction I'm highlighting. Calling me scum indirectly ("dwlee is VP's partner") is not the same as directly attacking me (which is the interaction after I voted Enchant) which is why I think it's a chainsaw specifically and not just an extension of already saying I'm scum
i don't know what prompted pooky to go after you just then, but i also don't know if there's a massive difference between 'pushing you passively' and 'pushing you actively' that you're diffrentiating
i mean at least for me it wasn't in response to your enchant vote, but rather your vote on us ...
and yeah if it wasn't clear i am explcilty saying i think you're scum
In post 3084, Dwlee99 wrote:What about my reasoning for voting you do you think is scummy
Saying I'm buddying andante is also funny
Its functionally omgus and imo incredibly reachy, as i think our push on ico doesnt look anything like a bus
You're townreading andante for p meh reasons with what i believe to be the goal of getting her to stop pushing you which seems to have worked since she's fairly chaotic and has already moved on
In post 3082, Fun and Games wrote:i mean at least for me it wasn't in response to your enchant vote, but rather your vote on us ...
and yeah if it wasn't clear i am explcilty saying i think you're scum
~ skitter
Do you OMGUS a lot, or is your natural inclination to assume someone attacking you is scum?
- p sure dwlee's vote on us was a reaction to pooky calling them scum
- why do u reaf everything wr do in the worst possible light
- to actually answer the question: no
In post 3086, Fun and Games wrote:- p sure dwlee's vote on us was a reaction to pooky calling them scum
- why do u reaf everything wr do in the worst possible light
- to actually answer the question: no
Eh fine. You're right, I'm not being very generous.
Feel like your slot has made several bad faith arguments, and that's put things in a bad light for me.
Let me rephrase this, do you see dwlee as independently scummy or scummy because you think he is my buddy?
Independantly scummy first, and incidentally they might be partnered with u
Other than the fact that dwlee really didnt like us calling them partnered with you and you were oddly reluctant to vote them, i hadnt seen a ton of associatives
In post 3086, Fun and Games wrote:Its functionally omgus and imo incredibly reachy, as i think our push on ico doesnt look anything like a bus
I can look through the interactions with ico but they're not any part of my read on you so idk why it's relevant
You're townreading andante for p meh reasons with what i believe to be the goal of getting her to stop pushing you which seems to have worked since she's fairly chaotic and has already moved on
I'm townreading andante cause <reason> and she's so chaotic and unagenda'd it's obvious
In post 3121, Bingle wrote:My gamestate read, at the moment, is that we’re in a 1 in 1 out scum in {VP/DW/Andante/FG} scenario. There was just too much resistance for too long to looking outside of it for me to think that there are two scum in there actively, unless the team is specifically Andante/Dwlee and their goal was to flip FG and VP sequentially. There are a couple little troubling things that won’t let me take that entirely off of the table, but given Andantes play overall and how everything seems to be shaking, I don’t put much credence into it.
In post 3124, Bingle wrote:. From a gamestate standpoint, fighting a proxy war with your scumbuddy through two townies is a pretty healthy position to be in as scum this close to MYLO, (for proof of concept, check out the Mini theme from Team mafia this year where shea/FL did basically exactly that FL hiding behind Pine(my team) and Ramcius and Shea hiding behind TSQ.)
wait, i'm confused how this is playing out in this game
In post 3126, VP Baltar wrote:We should end this day at this point, unless SA has more to say. Think everyone has said their piece.
I think the the solve is 80% likely to be Enchant-Bingle, and have kind of been starting to feel this more as Andante town-spewed all over this thread with insane theories. It's also why I asked Bingle to give reads just to confirm if he was going to express original thought, which he did not do. Apologies to Anandte/F&G for the brawling today, but it was a necessary evil to get to a point of clarity. Feel free to flip me today if that's the consensus, but when you see green, please follow through on Enchant-Bingle and win this game or I will yell at all of you in the dead thread.
can u give me the tldr on this solve, and also explain why you're not considering dwlee?
It was that I felt your push on VP felt like a scum push but it wasn't clearing for VP
ok if that's been your main reason that's not been obvious to me at all, and why does it feel like a scum push
we didn't push you until well after that so our read on you is irrelevant to this
It was that I felt your push on VP felt like a scum push but it wasn't clearing for VP
ok if that's been your main reason that's not been obvious to me at all, and why does it feel like a scum push
we didn't push you until well after that so our read on you is irrelevant to this
~ skitter
Main reason has been Pooky jumping on me for voting enchant
The push reasoning was when I was just getting the vibe from the push and I think pooky removed/ignored context to paint VP scum with associatives
I ignored your question because I think it's stupid.
VPB then votes for Enchant with the reason "I trust Toogeloo" - which I don't really think is a very good reason. I don't even know what Tooge's case for Enchant!scum is so I don't see how VPB!town looks at Tooge's case and decides hey I want to sheep this.
You then voted for Enchant.
I then jumped on you for voting for Enchant because I don't see how you get from FG is bussing VPB to Let's kill Enchant.
You claimed that you did it because Enchant made some hideously bad posts.
You then start yelling at me for "pissing you off" or whatever.
If you actually want an enchant elim maybe you should actually write out why Enchant's posts are bad rather than flaming me for "pissing you off" or w/e you're accusing me of.
Also there's literally no incentive for scum!me to piss off town!you if I'm trying to eliminate town!VPB
In post 3216, Andante wrote:I see this word so many times, yall kept using it, wtf is chainsaw?
First of all, chainsaw defense isn't actually being used completely correctly in this game as a term.
It is specifically when one scum attacks another player for pushing their buddy while specifically avoiding calling the player being pushed town.
It's old. Like Tarhalindur tells old, and I don't think I've ever seen it used to catch an experienced scum player. It's the kind of thing you see rarely in a newbie.
Pooky here was using it as a more generalized "Scum is pushing someone for pushing someone else" which is very much a boring argument and not truly what the chainsaw defense is.
VPB literally didn't call Ico town when he was chainsawing SA
In post 3247, Dwlee99 wrote:Pooky, multiple times throughout your fight with VP he pointed out ways he thought you ignored context in much of your case
Do you have any thoughts on that
Is it unreasonable for me to think VP is right
We can talk through an example of a time that you think I took him out of context incorrectly.
In post 3222, Dwlee99 wrote:Main reason has been Pooky jumping on me for voting enchant
The push reasoning was when I was just getting the vibe from the push and I think pooky removed/ignored context to paint VP scum with associatives
Ok, a few followups:
- why is bad that pooky was pushing you for voting enchant
- i basically feel like vp is doing exactly what you're accusing pooky of: removing context in order to further a narrative
- remind me: if we're bussing vp why cant you help us do that again?
In post 3247, Dwlee99 wrote:Pooky, multiple times throughout your fight with VP he pointed out ways he thought you ignored context in much of your case
Do you have any thoughts on that
Is it unreasonable for me to think VP is right
Ok multiple times throughout my fight with vp i pointed out ways i thought he ignored context in much of my case
Why would scum-enchant be giving up here? He's not particularlu close to dying, and he still has a partner?
Whereas i think that this not exactly a tantrum but a continuation/followup on the sort of game he's been playing, and fits eith the sort of player he's demonstrated himself to be by hammering twice
I dont think it was in response to fear of dying as either alignment, rather how bad he feels quickhammering gamma, and it makes more sense for town to feel bad and act out there than scum imo
Like its bad, for sure, but bad play doesnt make someone scum
In post 3282, VP Baltar wrote:Both are highly detrimental plays to town as a whole, and flail moves in general.
For Enchant to SEE and EXPERIENCE the negative consequences of such actions by town through Gamma, and then to turn around and take similar action is grounds for suspicion.
Ok so if scum-him is worried abt the negative consequences for such an act after witnessting yhe backlash gamma got ... why does he immediately followup by doing something that would garner said negative feedback (i.e. quickhammering gamma), and then only show remorse abt it midway through the next phase
And why even mimic gamma as scum when *gamma got voted out* for it, that seems like a playbook of things to *avoid* doing
And once again i agree that sich behavior is detrimental. Gamma self-voted and he was town ... implying that all such behavior is suspicious when the example we have from this very game came from town is ridiculous
In post 3285, Bingle wrote:The fallacy you're thinking of (probably) is personal incredulity, which is, roughly: "I don't understand why that would happen, therefore it cannot happen."
No, its more: selfing and claiming scum are different levels of 'bad' and detrimental to the game, and i think its bad to equate them
Like, I understand but don't agree with your argument earlier, but you seem more confident. Is there a further reason or is it just the thing we discussed earlier?
In post 3287, Sleepless Assassin wrote:I meant think it's clear frustration was the reason. But if he did that as town that means there's a spitefulness on top of that that I just don't see.
The guy said himself he's scum. Why are we even arguing over it
I mean he's quickhammered twice now. While spite isnt quite the adjective i'd use, in my mind its p clear that he's the sort of player to lolclaim scum
Like yeah no spitefulness, but there is a level of trolling-ness in his play
