In post 643, Save The Dragons wrote:
your case is wishy washy, all over the place, and untrue. it feels like you decided i'm scum and are just coming up with more and more reasons to pigeonhole me into this mindset. i think you've confirmbiased yourself and need to reset and actually consider what's been put out vs. decided i'm low content and therefore must be scum.
i don't know why you think i'm dodgy, i don't think i've been dodgy at all. i've given my reads my way and have been pretty clear about them.
most of this post is blustering and not an actual case and i'm not sure what you're hoping to gain from this, it almost seems like you're being dodgy especially since someone asked you a question about me and you get distracted by someone else
Why does this sound like a copypasta?
i don't think it does but what does that even tell you about me? did you read what i said
Posted: Thu Oct 06, 2022 3:32 am
by MalcolmTucker
On STD, the big rant against Frogster does deflect a bit...but I feel like STD has typically been much calmer/less confrontational when I've correctly accused them of being scum previously? Or more hedgy at least. It's making me lean more to frustrated town here. Scum want to win sceptic townies over and I don't feel like their responses to Frogster come with that intention.
This post the last time (I think?) I played with scum STD feels very different to the more confrontational posts we've seen in response to suspicion. It still deflects and tries to use meta to direct me away from what ended up being an accurate scumread but it's not particularly abrasive or something that's necessarily going to harden my read on a personal level. I'm wary to rely on meta too much of course but not feeling STD scum here.
Posted: Thu Oct 06, 2022 3:38 am
by Save The Dragons
i don't really know what to think right now
i at first didn't like MT's catch up because it just seemed like an easy MarieR suspicion. He could be white knighting me but it's hard to want to vote someone who's reading me correctly literally at this very moment
Posted: Thu Oct 06, 2022 3:41 am
by Toogeloo
UNVOTE: VOTE: Big Chunga
Posted: Thu Oct 06, 2022 3:41 am
by Save The Dragons
i actually don't think BCG is doing nothing, but i'd like to see more from them though
Posted: Thu Oct 06, 2022 3:42 am
by Toogeloo
I actually like this vote from Pooky, tbqh.
Posted: Thu Oct 06, 2022 3:42 am
by Save The Dragons
are people over mariar
VOTE: MariaR for now
Posted: Thu Oct 06, 2022 3:42 am
by Save The Dragons
will you tell us why, toog
Posted: Thu Oct 06, 2022 3:45 am
by schadd_
Spoiler:
vote count 1.6 !
Big Chungus Gaming (3):
KittyTacky, PookyTheMagicalBear, Toogeloo
Save The Dragons (3):
Gamma Emerald, Frogsterking, Charloux
MalcolmTucker (2):
MariaR, Big Chungus Gaming
MariaR (2):
Nero Cain, Save The Dragons
Cape90 (1):
SirRhett
Toogeloo (1):
marcistar
Frogsterking (1):
Greeting
Charloux (1):
Cape90
not voting (2):
MalcolmTucker, Fennec
with 16 alive, it takes 9 to blow someone up. day 1 ends in (expired on 2022-10-12 15:00:00)
In post 643, Save The Dragons wrote:
your case is wishy washy, all over the place, and untrue. it feels like you decided i'm scum and are just coming up with more and more reasons to pigeonhole me into this mindset. i think you've confirmbiased yourself and need to reset and actually consider what's been put out vs. decided i'm low content and therefore must be scum.
i don't know why you think i'm dodgy, i don't think i've been dodgy at all. i've given my reads my way and have been pretty clear about them.
most of this post is blustering and not an actual case and i'm not sure what you're hoping to gain from this, it almost seems like you're being dodgy especially since someone asked you a question about me and you get distracted by someone else
Why does this sound like a copypasta?
If it isn't, it should be. It's a bit like a parody of a case rebuttal.
slot is bad and we might need to just policy elim them.
It isn't a policy if they're legit scummy. If they were just a townie-looking player with a bad playstyle it would be a policy and I oppose that. But it isn't imho.
In post 705, Charloux wrote:I admit my mistake. A true fencesitter should never, under any circumstances offer his opinion and only post fluff. Maybe a naked vote with no reasoning or context?
VOTE: Dragons
Now excuse me, need to eat some enslaved potasium.
This feels like an odd post, like an attempt at humour following a vote/bit of pressure which is actually just an attempt to deflect.
Nice double standard you got there. Is one of Pooky/Toog your scum buddy so you didn't call them out for naked votes? That doesn't make a lot of sense...
In post 234, Charloux wrote:Apart from Gamma; toogeloo, pooky and dragons are viable for me right now.
Well dragons will get replaced prob so not them.
I'm afraid of reading Maria because of ptsd.
I'm not understanding what you think makes Dragons particularly viable here if you expect they're likely to get replaced-out anyway, especially when you basically renege on the point yourself. That would surely be NAI no?
Ah your double standard makes a lot more sense if you are defending your buddy. What a big slip you made. That's 2/4 scum right here.
See this is a problem. I spent 4 posts talking about me. I'm tired of talking about me it's a distraction but I did it anyway. And you just ignored that fact to call me continuing to play the game a deflection.
You would have dammed me for any vote I made.
I don't know if you are just lazy scum or you need to take a breath but this is bullshit either way
Posted: Thu Oct 06, 2022 11:19 am
by Big Chungus Gaming
pooky why did you find crescent suspicious? Can you explain your read there?
No marci, do not sheep pooky, I'm town
I just got home btw reads list incoming.
Full disclosure i havent read most of the game yet.
@std i think ur town but maria is srsly not the play here. Pls consider voting with me here: VOTE: frogster
kitty is prob town here, i think they're grossly wrong, but probably town.
@charloux, consider reading some of STDs recent stuff. Let off the gas. Let the slot breathe. Their reaction is towny. If you are looking for them to do something you gotta let em breathe i get you feel you "got" them but considee that... you dont.
In post 705, Charloux wrote:I admit my mistake. A true fencesitter should never, under any circumstances offer his opinion and only post fluff. Maybe a naked vote with no reasoning or context?
VOTE: Dragons
Now excuse me, need to eat some enslaved potasium.
In post 643, Save The Dragons wrote:
your case is wishy washy, all over the place, and untrue. it feels like you decided i'm scum and are just coming up with more and more reasons to pigeonhole me into this mindset. i think you've confirmbiased yourself and need to reset and actually consider what's been put out vs. decided i'm low content and therefore must be scum.
i don't know why you think i'm dodgy, i don't think i've been dodgy at all. i've given my reads my way and have been pretty clear about them.
most of this post is blustering and not an actual case and i'm not sure what you're hoping to gain from this, it almost seems like you're being dodgy especially since someone asked you a question about me and you get distracted by someone else
Why does this sound like a copypasta?
If it isn't, it should be. It's a bit like a parody of a case rebuttal.
The whole thing is just
"You say "x" about me when I am not "x"
You accuse me of "y" also when i don't know why you accuse me of "y"
idk ur being dodgy"
