For example...
Gimme a piña colada, damnit. Drinking on kids shows is totally kosher.
No, only when at least one player FROM EACH team reaches a pre-determined amount of arbitrary votes.In post 50, enomis wrote:Amrun, how do you suppose we go about doing this? It seems that you have experience?
We can do something like only challenging when one guy get more than half of the "ARBITRARY" vote?
@Wisdom: Can you change back to your L avatar? I like that better.
In post 104, Wisdom wrote:Wisdom convinces those 4 people to sheep him and lynches B.
It's all about how able scum are.
If able scum were able to win every time, we wouldn't be playing. Why should we follow plans that make it easier for them to win?
Okay, I think you're missing the point I was trying to make, but this is something we can talk about.In post 109, Wisdom wrote:Dude.
Say your pair and another pair have four town in them.
Say I am scum and I know that.
I convince people to sheep me and make those two pairs challenge each other.
Boom, instant mislynch, AND lynchfodder for future days.
I only got the town read on him by HAVING the argument, which is fairly obvious. So this statement makes no sense.In post 115, AngryPidgeon wrote:Wisdom is town.
Amrun is scum. Off the bat strategy speculation is definitely more likely to come from scum than town and I love how she is trying to prove shes town in 94 without just saying she is. The argument with wisdom makes zero sense from a town perspective, especially since she thinks hes town.
It's a basic thing that could aid us in our comprehension. Is it the most important thing? No. But games get long and at the end of day 5, looking back will be a lot easier if we do this.Why does this matter?In post 48, Amrun wrote:We should all also agree to use the vote tags for real votes because it's a different color.
If people are reading and comprehending the thread, there is no need for overly formatted voting. That just lets people be lazy and skim crap anyways.
This is valid; in hindsight, this was poor phrasing. I didn't mean it to be taken literally.appeal to fear. And probably not unless you think its scum just targeting town/town groups and if that is the case then just PL their scumbutts for doing stupid shit like that. Self-correcting problem.In post 48, Amrun wrote:we will lose this game fast.
First of all, I never said experience makes a better player. In fact, I said it DOESN'T. It's not an "appeal to authority" as you called it either. You're reprinting context in a scummy way because I know for sure you are capable of understanding the difference. I never said "I'M EXPERIENCED; LISTEN TO ME!"Wow, and that talk about experience is BULLSHIT and completely irrelevant. Experience does not make someone a better player and really why the hell are you arguing this? You could be scumhunting people but instead you are having a pointless argument with someone you think is town - or do you?
Oh and the quick shift of tones suggests that amrun was faking all that outrage in the first place - which she was because shes scum so.
I am not at all saying I'm town for bringing up a plan. It's something I could do as any alignment. It doesn't make me scum, either.In post 122, AngryPidgeon wrote:And implies she is town for speculating on all this common sense and AtF in the first place? No.
Town typically doesn't argue bullshit with someone they think is town.
Do you see any holes in the plan?In post 179, Wisdom wrote:Okay I read it, and I'll admit it looks better the way you put it now.In post 173, Amrun wrote:If you don't even read, though, then why you expect to be treated seriously is beyond me.
I guess there aren't many alternatives anyway, and I guess you have a point that if scum are capable enough to exploit the plan, they are capable enough to win without the plan too.
Yes, which is why I said we should all do it in a particular way that's easy to keep track of. It doesn't have to be the way I suggested. Perhaps someone else has a better/easier idea.In post 191, Wisdom wrote:No, other than the fact our votes won't be counted; will we do it ourselves?
How can you not see that it is a plan? It's a systematic approach as opposed to a willy-nilly approach. In one, challenging whenever you feel like it is acceptable behavior; in my plan, that is NOT acceptable behavior. It's a significant departure from playing this game straight.In post 208, AngryPidgeon wrote:THERE IS NO PLAN. THIS IS COMMON SENSE. YOU ARE MILKING TOWNCRED FROM NOTHING.In post 190, Amrun wrote:Do you see any holes in the plan?In post 179, Wisdom wrote:Okay I read it, and I'll admit it looks better the way you put it now.In post 173, Amrun wrote:If you don't even read, though, then why you expect to be treated seriously is beyond me.
I guess there aren't many alternatives anyway, and I guess you have a point that if scum are capable enough to exploit the plan, they are capable enough to win without the plan too.
ffs venmar, how is Amrun not suspicious to you.
Awful idea. Terrible. I've already explained why.In post 257, Majiffy wrote:Shoot from the hip, remove as many possibilities for scum to just "slide in" to popular lynches. Force the issue, make them think on their feet. This is a game of reactions.In post 254, Amrun wrote:Talk about the plan, Majiffy. What is your alternative? Do you have any improvements?
She looks like she'sIn post 255, pirate mollie wrote:I don't see her blending in at all. she isn't taking easily defensible stances I don't think. what do you mean?tryingto, though. It's been bugging me, as well.
Of course I'm not milking town cred, which I had already addressed ten billion times. Do I have to repeat myself as nauseum? The whole thing is a farce anyway because I've gotten nothing but patently negative attention for proposing a plan, so who am I supposed to be milking towncred from, exactly?In post 300, Grimgroove wrote:I find it very striking you're not opposing the statement that you were in fact milking for towncred. What you're saying here is that you actually deserve it.In post 214, Amrun wrote:How can you not see that it is a plan? It's a systematic approach as opposed to a willy-nilly approach. In one, challenging whenever you feel like it is acceptable behavior; in my plan, that is NOT acceptable behavior. It's a significant departure from playing this game straight.In post 208, AngryPidgeon wrote:THERE IS NO PLAN. THIS IS COMMON SENSE. YOU ARE MILKING TOWNCRED FROM NOTHING.In post 190, Amrun wrote:Do you see any holes in the plan?In post 179, Wisdom wrote:Okay I read it, and I'll admit it looks better the way you put it now.In post 173, Amrun wrote:If you don't even read, though, then why you expect to be treated seriously is beyond me.
I guess there aren't many alternatives anyway, and I guess you have a point that if scum are capable enough to exploit the plan, they are capable enough to win without the plan too.
ffs venmar, how is Amrun not suspicious to you.
I didn't really like Angry Pidgeon's case up tothis point, but this response was bad in my eyes.
Because I don't think spelling it out even as specifically as I did is pro-town; in the spirit of transparentness I have explained more than I like to, but my limit has been reached. I am not at all interested in giving the scum in this game (or even future games) an exact map of how to get an early game townread out of me.In post 336, Wisdom wrote:Amrun, why do you have this frustration about explaining your townread? You're practically saying "omg guys I just townread him okay? i dont care if you agree just stop asking me to explain!"In post 330, Amrun wrote:Once again, I really don't care who agrees with me and I never will unless he was about to be lynched. I may change my read later; I may not. For today, I am not interested in him dying and that's that.
If you're always very sensitive, it's not relevant at all. If, however, you are displaying new behavior, or behavior you have not displayed as town, it could be indicative of a scum mindset (pre-emptively defensive and worried about criticism they expect to be coming). In your case, I think it's more of the former, but please never speak of ongoing games again.In post 372, Grimgroove wrote:Come to think of it: why is this relevant?
Way to fucking snip that sentence in half so it says the opposite of what I actually said. That's so blatantly scum I can't even believe it. Wow.In post 424, AngryPidgeon wrote:Yes, she did:In post 288, Grimgroove wrote:Part in bold: Not true.In post 149, AngryPidgeon wrote:
P-P-edit:She really did call herself likely town for the planand then defend the plan by pointing to "experience". That is not town motivated.
The rest: Don't agree.Grim is not commenting on my alignment but soft-agrees with Venmar's 'case' on me and implies I'm blatantly misrepping events in the thread. I'm basically down to lynch that with no questions asked right now.In post 94, Amrun wrote:In fact, traditionally, such suggestions are made far more often by town
Because taking the one scummy challenge out of the equation, of the pair I'd rather have killed piratemollie, and probably out of all four of them.In post 476, Wisdom wrote:Then why did you say this:
?In post 456, Amrun wrote:From your group I pick piratemollie,