You may be right, but two mentions and a third that was prompted by another hardly constitute pocketing for me.
I'm still not a huge fan of her complaints about my Mylo wagon, and her Dunn push is just meh to me (but that's mostly because I just haven't cared enough to analyze that in any depth).
In post 851, Moment wrote:Also, for the record: I came to the distinctly opposite conclusion as the bolded. Just don't want my scumread on Mylo to be understated or ignored.
I said it looked okay (as in I can click a post and go like, maybe). I didn't say that I thought it was town.
Also, I skimmed it.
Posted: Mon Jul 23, 2018 2:47 pm
by Purrcocet
Nancy Drew 39 wrote:
Would Nos be this disengaged as scum?
You may be right, but two mentions and a third that was prompted by another hardly constitute pocketing for me.
I'm still not a huge fan of her complaints about my Mylo wagon, and her Dunn push is just meh to me (but that's mostly because I just haven't cared enough to analyze that in any depth).
Eh. I think her reaction to my pointing it out is also reason enough; I think the point she made about wanting to "bounce ideas off of Nancy" was patently false. I could agree with you on the dunn push, though.
------
In post 851, Moment wrote:Also, for the record: I came to the distinctly opposite conclusion as the bolded. Just don't want my scumread on Mylo to be understated or ignored.
I said it looked okay (as in I can click a post and go like, maybe). I didn't say that I thought it was town.
Also, I skimmed it.
Oh, don't get me wrong; I wasn't disagreeing with you or anything or saying that you had it wrong. Your mentioning of it just reminded me that I wanted to say something about it.
Posted: Mon Jul 23, 2018 2:50 pm
by FakeGod
Posted: Mon Jul 23, 2018 2:51 pm
by Moment
In post 855, Moment wrote:Eh. I think her reaction to my pointing it out is also reason enough; I think the point she made about wanting to "bounce ideas off of Nancy" was patently false. I could agree with you on the dunn push, though.
Perhaps "reason enough" was a poor choice of words; I think "is also worth consideration" gets across what I was trying to say better.
Posted: Mon Jul 23, 2018 2:51 pm
by Brian Skies
In post 768, Myloninja13 wrote:707 is a post that doesn't look good at all, the "I'm too good at scum." thinking isn't one I feel is a town one, at least not a sensible town mindset.
And that's it for their ISO. My conclusion is they seem a bit trolly in their game style, but honestly I'm actually town reading them here. Now to check up on the wagon next!
Like, the conclusion here seems pretty weird to have considering the last thought he ended his PbPA on.
"Doesn't look good at all" -> "actually townreading them here" ???
In post 769, Myloninja13 wrote:Okay, first thing to note is Dunn is a double voter, which from experience is generally more town, but I actually have to analyse and can't get away with just assuming that.
Soft fencesit.
In post 769, Myloninja13 wrote:Wisdom seems to have started the wagon in 273 (Despite already voting them from 114 ) And... they gave no reason why. They just voted them and said "Everyone looks like scum" without reasonings, which is again a pet peeve of mine. I've also played with Wisdom before, but the confusing part is that from what I've seen they put in more effort as both alignments anyway? So I have zero idea meta wise what they are, but from play there certainly isn't anything to indicate town here.
Another fencesit.
In post 769, Myloninja13 wrote:Ank is next with yet another unexplained vote on Spiffeh 301 and also trying the whole "Let's not post reasoning" trick later in their ISO. I also understand Spffeh's point on Ank clearer now, so I'll even add more town points to them. Ank themself has changed their meta since I last played with them, so I'm kinda empty there.
Fencesit.
In post 769, Myloninja13 wrote:Dunn votes with *Drum rolls* Actual Reasoning! In 653 Dunn actually explains his evidence for his vote. The only minor issue is I kinda don't really agree with him? Like, Spiffeh's case on Dunn isn't very good imo, but at the same time I don't think that really makes him scummy? But I give him points for actually explaining his vote, and honestly he's getting a bit of a townread from me.
Not really. He hasn't been much of a presence, especially as compared to his presence in Minuet's Trio (which I distinctly, distinctly remember). If that in itself is indicative one way or the other, I couldn't really tell you.
Posted: Mon Jul 23, 2018 3:00 pm
by Purrcocet
seems nonchalant like he usually is
doesnt seem to be looking to score mislynches
even if spiffeh is a mislynch he doesn't really care how he looks on that wagon or at all
(Hm, is this some kind of hint that Brian Skies is a serial killer?)
------
In post 860, Nancy Drew 39 wrote:So, should we vote elsewhere? He still has contributed the least to the gamestate, so . . . \_0_/
It sounds like you're basing your decision on who to vote for off of something other than who you think is likely to be scum...?
I have no idea if he’s scum or not but he was very different in Minuet. Unlike Muffin, he never actually said he was town or it was a mislynch iirc. I still prefer Katsuki but Dunn and his two votes is the only one interested in lynching there. Sakura said he could be this disengadged as scum, so probably?
Posted: Mon Jul 23, 2018 3:05 pm
by Moment
In post 870, Purrcocet wrote:seems nonchalant like he usually is
doesnt seem to be looking to score mislynches
even if spiffeh is a mislynch he doesn't really care how he looks on that wagon or at all
I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you, but I don't exactly think it's something worth going all that much into today, unless someone thinks he has a good chance of being scum.
Posted: Mon Jul 23, 2018 3:05 pm
by Nancy Drew 39
In post 865, Dunnstral wrote:How about Katsuki because he recently provided content and it's scummy content
I’m fine with that too. I feel much better lynching him over Nos.
Posted: Mon Jul 23, 2018 3:07 pm
by Kokichi Oma
I've seen Nos act like this as town in a previous fakegod game, so this is disappointing.