VOTE: PisskopIn post 317, pisskop wrote:Why am I scum? And why is the vote spread so large?
The red letters in your role PM and the words you say.
/confirm
VOTE: PisskopIn post 317, pisskop wrote:Why am I scum? And why is the vote spread so large?
I'd be more concerned if Mr. rogers hadn't posted thereIn post 9, PeregrineV wrote:Vote: ThaD
You haven't posted in the neighborhood QT yet. What's up with that?
This is probably scum.In post 15, talah wrote:Yuppers, sure am.In post 12, DeasVail wrote:I am talah! Are you town?
Well this is good news! Perhaps if mastin is town too we shall be an unstoppable scumhunting force.
Or the first three nightkills ><
UNVOTE: mastin
VOTE: Doc
So Doc posts a one line, pretty whatever vote on Molla and votes on Doc are legit because? What do you expect from DV to help you read him here?In post 19, talah wrote:- I'm sheeping Deas to get a more solid read on him, and I think his vote on Doc was legit
Town.In post 21, bjc wrote:I'm scum.
No opinion on Talah's half of this?In post 24, ThAdmiral wrote:In other news I like being out of rvs within 3 live posts. While its sort of forced (what super early day 1 case stuff isn't) I still like rogers better for it.
There is no legitimate purpose to it as scum. And still, its PAGE ONE. Joke posts are pretty par for the course. This post reads awfully forced considering you are ignoring that context.In post 25, Doc Holliday wrote:There is no legitimate purpose to this as Town. bjc is either scum or not worth listening to. Obtuse gambits are anti-Town.
Ok, but it being Page 1 RVS excuses any actions you take.In post 29, Doc Holliday wrote:My vote on BB was strictly random. It was, like, the sixth or seventh live post of the game. BB still hasn't said anything, so obviously RVS.
This could be scum.In post 80, BipolarChemist wrote:I'm kind of in the boat that Mr. Roger's pressuring was over-done at game start.
VOTE: Mister Rog
What made you think Admiral disliked your post? His vote on you felt like he was trying to be humorous.In post 82, bjc wrote:So my question here is why the above fake-claim/joke is okay while mine isn't?
Talah continues to make scummy posts. Seriously look at this post ^. I guarantee you none of that bullshit is going to help Talah scumhunt anybody. All that is is OMGUS with a dash of "You can't PROVE Im scum" and trying to paint Doc as scummy with a pretty bad hypocrisy case. And a ton of smokey questions on top of that to make the post look actually meaningful. Wow. Lynch this.In post 87, talah wrote:1) What allies did I call for? Was it:
a) Deas and mastin, suggesting if we're all town we might join forces, in the extremely early (as in, I-couldn't-possibly-have-a-read early) response garnering comment I made?
or,
b) The entire roster of people I have previously interacted with in the playerlist?
2) Who were the other allies that I was *also* sheeping?
I'll tell you right now that I've sheeped scumreads before, because I think it's a useful way to find out if there's conviction and validity behind a case, and to see of others join a wagon and why.
3) What case did I react badly to? The case being made about me? Which I know to be bullshit? Do tell me how I was supposed to react in your eyes to a super-early overblown case which was 'ur post ain genuwin son', or if you're referring to something else, please clarify.
You appear to be twisting words to exaggerate the validity of your vote, and I might add that your entrance was pretty much what you appear to be accusing me of, in that you sheep Mister and appear to buddy up to him by implicitly agreeing with everything he's said and adding the 'coalition' statement.
Please be town this game mastin. You are off to such a good start.
I spent quite a while staring at this post cause it felt important. Leaning town I think. Its waffly as fuck, but the train of thought reads genuine. Despite the lack of satisfying conclusion, its still making his opinion plain and its fairly followable.In post 104, Damon_Gant wrote:People's reaction to my first post has been stupid. Mastin's in particular seems like he just has a problem with just the way that I weighed my words. It's how I post - particularly if I'm making a post with quite a simple and concise point. Indeed, just in general, I don't find Mastin's reads to be very good. The certainty in them is obviously part of his meta, but I do disagree with pretty much all of it. I'm not sure if posting such disagreeable reads is part of his meta! I don't have any particularly strong feelings on his proposal for a limit of posting - but as others do, I guess that's not happening.
Mastin, get back on Talah TIA. I'm willing to discuss Gant with you but I reaaally dont think hes scum?In post 107, mastin2 wrote:That said, while talah's scum...
VOTE: Damon Gant.
...My scumread here is much, much stronger.
Lets see, your post to Doc was TERRIBLE. Pointless questions, flinging a case at him offhandedly, and, essentially, OMGUS. You did the same thing with Rogers to a lesser extent and now with mastin. Its scummy and for the love of all that is holy Im not gonna let you push mastin off this one by being ham about it.In post 108, talah wrote:Let me address this first: "Hollow, shallow, easily faked and overall just feeling plain empty."
Your words. Can you point out instances of this, or are you happy to simply to cast a huge aspersion on my character without explaining your own thinking?
Coupled with a mastin policy vote. Wow. This needs to be lynched independent of a Talah flip.In post 117, BipolarChemist wrote:Prolly cuz posts like this. I'm townreading you pretty hard right now, Rachy.In post 116, RachMarie wrote:how the heck do you have me leaning town when I have barely posted Talah?
Nobody is allowed to read mastin except me. Not after anything goes. If matin is scum, I'll know by D2 at the latest. If I die tonight, consider that a mastin scum claim as well.In post 118, Damon_Gant wrote:Mastin's play continues to be very bleh. Giving garbage reads, and now trying to spoonfeed us what his meta is. That's not going to work - when I have time tonight I'll be looking at Mastin's meta for myself. It does need doing, because of the unorthodox playstyle - but I'm not going to be told by the player himself what his meta is, and essentially that his meta this game corresponds with his meta for town.
This is a little defensive. Rogers was saying no one should TOWNREAD you for simply not voting. AFAICT he thinks your a pretty null presence in the thread, which is a good opinion to have. You town?In post 121, aptil wrote:If you are not voting anybody , that makes you scum ?
Ya, but townies focus on nulltells all the time. Its not scummy, just bad.In post 122, SnowStorm wrote:This is scum logic. Damon is ignoring everything that's happened in the game so far to focus on something alignment irrelevant
Woah, +1In post 130, Damon_Gant wrote:That's not scum logic - that's bad logic
Im in for this wagon if it becomes a thing. BPC is pretty along for the ride this game.In post 125, Zdenek wrote:We could lynch this [Chemist], for instance.
This is scum upset at being caught for the wrong reasons.In post 134, talah wrote:So mastin's happy to townread, say, aptil on the basis of one very shonky post, but needs to reaction-test me when I'm the player who already has the most in-thread content to read from?
Loooool. Play with the fire and get burned. No backing down from this crapvote on mastin now, scumbutt.In post 134, talah wrote: Anyway, I don't think there's any reason for the Doc wagon to die, and regardless it's probably a bad idea to lynch mastin Day 1 on the off chance that she's town. So will be keeping an eye on.
UNVOTE: mastin
VOTE: Doc
Ok, so why is RachMarie probably town then? (FWIW, RM IS probtown after Chemist flips maf)In post 141, BipolarChemist wrote:Nah man, ain't forced. I've read through a few games and played with her. I'm finding her fairly town, yo. Why do you think she's town right now?In post 133, projectmatt wrote: C'mon man, you're better than that.
I actually read Talah's opening posts as pretty townie, and I'm not exactly prepared to give out a read on Mastin yet. I think future interactions in regards to those two will be very telling but I'm waiting. Right now, I don't have a lot that's concrete - my reads need time to develop. But we'll see.
Vote: BipolarChemistdue to the fact that his read on RachMarie looks forced.
Do you plan on doing anything useful this game or are you just gonna keep making excuses for posts?In post 142, BipolarChemist wrote:I agree with Smudger and Nero, would like to see posts from them, but poking a projectmatt is kinda dumb. He replaced in just about an hour before your post.
Ya that last ThAd post was "huh?" leaning towards eyebrow-raising.In post 150, Zdenek wrote:Oh and ThAd is literally voting me for scum-hunting.
You also managed to vote mastin for lolpolicy or something otherwise completely forgettable. Still, Id lynch you independent of Talah flipping scum.In post 156, BipolarChemist wrote:lol nah man. Considering I was the first to post after Rach, I think you're mistaking me saying Rach's post seemed uber town with me defending Talah.
Wow. I expected something more pragmatic from you at least. Thank fuck Yates has the common sense to recognize a nulltell when he sees one.In post 201, ThAdmiral wrote:Ok I take back everything I said about zdenek. The fake-vig was golden. bipolar is now basically conf-town, that reaction doesn't look fake at all.
Actually it makes perfect sense. You are trying to assign scum motivation to people's reaction to the bjc post whilst leaving the -exact- motivation up for interpretation. Is there a distinct -lack- of town motivation in the responses? I don't see any. Its realllly not going to fly to say "Ya these reactions are scum-motivated for whatever reason you want them to be". Justify yourself or get dunked. That vig gambit was pretty damn uninspired as well.In post 242, Zdenek wrote:Your thought progression here makes no sense to me at all.
This is town Pere. Im 80% sure. Pere isn't a flash-bang player, give him time. Still probs town though. I wanna say this looks like GoW mafia Peregrine.In post 260, Mister Rogers wrote:Yup. Not seeing the content I wanted from Pere.
Unf. Talk to me about this. I agree and Im concerned that Yates is the only other person to step up to the plate on this one.In post 267, talah wrote:I'm not buying the "fake vig". Nor the "town reaction". But I'll have to take a look back to see what exactly irked me about it.
Incorrect, check the pronoun.In post 277, RachMarie wrote:umm Mastin is a he
No? That trust in Zdenek being honest feels entirely misplaced and over-the-top nonchalant.In post 278, ThAdmiral wrote:and the asking to see if he could post before the mod confirmed his "death" just feels genuine.
A pass? What has mastin does that is explicitly scummy?In post 284, Mister Rogers wrote:It seems everyone is giving Mastin a pass due to self-meta
Convince me? I've got him down as a big fat null after that one post.In post 286, DeasVail wrote:Yates is so town. <3
Its really not.In post 301, Mister Rogers wrote:I'm not going to argue with you over your great desire to create naked town reads. Its scumtastic
The part where he auto-claims without bothering to figure out at all if you are full of shit. Townies are generally paranoid about that.In post 341, Zdenek wrote:What certainty?In post 340, AngryPidgeon wrote:ESPECIALLY the certainty that came with it.
http://forum.mafiascum.net/viewtopic.ph ... 7#p5750757It was page two and I was trying to provoke reactions. I find it hard to imagine that you could think I was doing anything differently.In post 340, AngryPidgeon wrote:Actually it makes perfect sense. You are trying to assign scum motivation to people's reaction to the bjc post whilst leaving the -exact- motivation up for interpretation. Is there a distinct -lack- of town motivation in the responses? I don't see any. Its realllly not going to fly to say "Ya these reactions are scum-motivated for whatever reason you want them to be". Justify yourself or get dunked.
Is it because you received a mafia role PM this game? I dont think we've been the same alignment ever. (Usually Im scum not you though )In post 358, ThAdmiral wrote:Why do we always disagree about everything?
Daytalk really isnt as uncommon as you seem to think it is.In post 363, Mister Rogers wrote:Quote me the post where ANYONE says they think scum have daytalk. The fact you bring this up NOW is 1) Tinfoil Hat, 2) +scum
The mod told me that someone recommended me as a replacement and the mod sent me a PM asking me to play.In post 366, Mister Rogers wrote:Can you please explain?In post 356, AngryPidgeon wrote:presumably mastin recommended me.
I think Anxiety is saying that Luca could be defending a scum buddy but trying to leave wiggle room should he flip? I just reread that like 5 times and Im still scratching my head.In post 367, talah wrote:Where does credit for a lynch factor in here?
Yates sort of actively discouraged people from badwagoning on PVIn post 363, Mister Rogers wrote:The BB issue is a non-issue and low hanging fruit. Its a great thing for scum to make noise about just as you seem to be doing. I would expect better from you.
You really think Yates is going for a low hanging mislynch whilst going out of his way to discourage voters on the wagon?In post 323, Yates wrote:Uh. How am I "advocating" a Pere lynch? My vote? You realize votes are scum hunting tools, right? My vote is on Pere specifically because I'mIn post 302, Mister Rogers wrote:How about I join Yates and adovcate your lynchin the processof determining his alignment.
Mr. Rogers wrote: There is a difference between accepting the possibility of daytalk and presumptively declaring that it exists in an argument.
Hes not though? Hes arguing that town reads on the situation are naive, not saying that day chat exists and therefore the situation was 100% fake.In post 323, Yates wrote:Are you guys high? If you think scum have day talk, isn't that exactly something someone would do? Also, even if you think Bipolar is Town how does that in any way reflect on Zdenek's alignment?
Wow, what a terrible post. No, I happened to agree with Yates about the Vig interaction. People townreading the situation ARE being naive and your stated reasons for voting Yates don't make any sense. I'll call bullshit out when I see it, thanks.In post 376, Mister Rogers wrote:Pardon me but are you guys a hydra? Or is it scum buddies? I mean, why are you answering for Yates here?
In post 350, pisskop wrote:At this point, I want to say that Talah's style of posting seems to have a natural town feel.
And the quoted posts seem mostly arbitrary on top of this. Then suddenly he affirms Talah is town after this post:In post 350, pisskop wrote:Not too sure on him, but still leaning scum.
In post 355, talah wrote:Pidgeon - quick one from work - were you asked to join this game, or did you replace in of your own accord?
And did you skim / read any of the thread prior to replacing in?
Which wasn't a townie post? I mean it was a pretty whatever post, dunno why pisskop cared about it unless he just wanted to rectify his previous waffle on Talah.In post 357, pisskop wrote:talah can be towny for now
That tidbit also pinged me. Not specifically for this reason (although it makes sense) but hes arguing about Gant's townread on him by throwing up meta for no real reason? Like why? It looks like smoke.In post 388, DeasVail wrote:Talah, convince me that there was any point to posting this other than to make yourself look more town.
Which I've taken issue with in case you haven't noticed : ). Prodding someone like mastin and then backing down for pointless reasons just looks like someone trying to ruffle feathers and then settle on softer targets. People have already been eyeing mastin suspiciously for no real reason but it looks like mostly piggy backed off your early pressure there which you are now actively declining to give an opinion on.In post 394, talah wrote:Anyway I'm not interested in a Day 1 mastin lynch if I haven't mentioned that enough times already.
Mm, ok. I still want to lynch Chemist the most right now I think, but people are acting (or actually believe, wow) that scum isn't capable of faking that. I mean maybe Im just paranoid because I've done far more elaborate shit than that as scum: (pretended I was hammered when I knew I wasnt and fake raged all over the thread) http://forum.mafiascum.net/viewtopic.ph ... 8#p5107138In post 396, talah wrote:I'm giving it the nullest of townreads on both, and a bit less on Chemist, if that's possible. Zdenek's leaning town for questioning and pushing anyway.
This is both hilarious and in line with what I was thinking re Yates on the Dayvig matter. Can you explain what felt different about Talah before and why you think he could fool you as scum? Also your DG read is A+.In post 399, DeasVail wrote:Going against what seems to be an already established opinion, while making a point that I actually agree with? If he was a girl and I was a girl, I'd probably say something like 'You go gurl!' Hey, I'll say it anyway. YOU GO GURL!
Are you my alt? I used the exact same word to describe him, >.>In post 399, DeasVail wrote:I find his scumhunting lacklustre
No, the only correct reaction to a dayvig in a NORMAL GAME is to not give a shit about it because its fake 99 times out of 100.In post 407, Mister Rogers wrote:Anyone else think "scum dayvig" here?
When did mastin stop scumreading you? Admittedly she hasn't been as active in this thread (or on site) as I'd like but I understand that is for personal reasons. And ironically, you are the one who is claiming to have dropped your mastin scumread or otherwise put it on the backburner.In post 408, talah wrote:I'm hedging hard on mastin because of the way she dropped off scumreading me.
Of course they can, thats the issue with lurkers. They're like a box of chocolates, you never know what ther're gonna flip. So wagoning random lurkers usually ends up hitting town since most of the game is town and scum will just convince people to not vote their buddy lurker. You declared intent to lurker hunt which is a great thing for scum to do (hits town a lot, no resistance from the people you pressure, low hanging targets). I mean townies do it to, so its no explicitly a scumtell but its never a great policy.In post 408, talah wrote:And you're irritating the shit out of me just coming back to me, again and again, and you're confused as to whether lurkers could be scum?
If this is referring to an ongoing game then stop right here. You shouldnt even have posted this. Also this shit wont fly for an argument since no one can actually verify it or read you off of it.In post 410, pisskop wrote:Nopers. Based on his play in another large game I don't like him here.
Wow this is legitimately terrible from Rogers.In post 413, Yates wrote:In post 400, Mister Rogers wrote:I can't figure out which is worse Yates pushing daytalk or...Are you trolling me right now?In post 363, Mister Rogers wrote:Quote me the post where ANYONE says they think scum have daytalk.I can't figure out which is worse Rogers pushing daytalk or pretending he didn't.
I was trying to resolve it by explaining what I thought you said? Thought that was fairly obvious.In post 418, 4nxi3ty wrote:(I dunno why you are encouraging this line of topic, AP, considering you recently called me town and that the mister rogers v. anxiety was a distraction.)
Meh, his reads are mostly alright. Gimme some time to sell him on this one.In post 418, 4nxi3ty wrote:Not sure how I feel about DV floating me into his scum section
Lol. This loosely reminds me of HPATPL where I got wagoned to like L - 4 and just flash-claimed VT and somehow it worked, my wagon kinda dismantled. (I was scum, but you know that )In post 419, Yates wrote:A VT claim DOESN'T mean that the person is auto magically vanilla OR town.
I think hes been lurking. PV is town so his vote there is useless, but its not scummy? I get a general town feel from his posts but its Yates and I respect his scum game so he never gets an early pass from me.In post 434, Mister Rogers wrote:@AP: So you disagree that Yates has been tunneling?
^ @Rogers: This makes perfect sense to me. Yates isn't actually shoving Chemist/Zd as scumscumscum? I know I was disappointed at the people tripping over themselves to shower towncred on the situation which seems to be Yates's exact thoughts on the matter. And I dont get your point about overall vs specifically here vig interactions. This dayvig interaction specifically is no reason to townread anyone. Who cares about dayvig's in general?In post 435, Yates wrote:What I find equally interesting is the number of people that all of a sudden were like "welp - I guess Zdenek and Chemist are Town now" when there is ZERO precident/reason for that change of heart ["game changer"]. In case you didn't notice, I've been asking for reasons why and have yet to see anything remotely persuasive.
So you agree with my assessment of the conversation about that post being pointless.In post 449, pisskop wrote:No the issue is he's bjc and we cant judge him on that alone.
Meh. Nothing about aptil is super interesting. His limited content feels lightly townish, but I disliked the above^. Rogers said that townreads on aptil for not voting were silly and aptil feels a little guilty here cause he is responding as if Rogers called him scum there.In post 121, aptil wrote:If you are not voting anybody , that makes you scum ?
So everyone in the game is a townread except...
Its not. It could have been a gambit they talked about pregame. It could be that only one is scum. <-- You seem to think either/both of us are shoving a connection case on the two of them which Im not. Using shortcuts like this for townreads will come back to bite you. Yes its plausible they ARE town, but the dayvig is null as hell. Im reminded of Posh Mafia (ny 161) where Mattp fakes a gunsmith guilty on IaI and IaI immediately claimed cop in response. Matt retracted his claim, but IaI's reaction to the gambit was largely considered probtown. Enough so that he went on to basically carry the game for his team. I think its pretty protown to actually encourage people to check their reads to make sure they aren't based on feelgood quickandeasy heuristics/gambits.In post 459, Mister Rogers wrote:It also occurred to me that daytalk would be the only way in which ZD-Chem interactions could actually be discredited
What on earth. How are you going to apply a metaread to somebody who has posted a grand total of 3 sentences, one of which was a proddodge?In post 466, Damon_Gant wrote:Checked Luca's meta - Luca pretty much doesn't have a meta, with as far as I could see, only 1 finished game to speak of. None of Luca's posts from that one game read as scummy as the one post Luca has here. I reiterate - I'm happy with my vote.
What? He was voting for BJC and now hes on Luca. Id hear arguments that his votes are easy to make, but I dont see how hes 'coasting' with it.In post 480, pisskop wrote: Damon is coasting with his vote. Do not like.
Well lets see. Yates claimed Professor Moody with a "Dabbles in the dark arts" guilty on youIn post 491, Nero Cain wrote:So 'fore I spend my time catching up later tonight has anything significant happened yet?
Pisskop? Did I miss something specific?In post 494, Mister Rogers wrote:I think the PK issue needs addressing though.
So cheeky, very wow.In post 527, bjc wrote:Well, I did claim my role before getting voted on so there's that.
And lol at that fucking question. I claimed scum and drew like three votes pretty quickly. So of course the content generated after that was in response to being voted on. Le'sigh.
-Shrug-, I prefer to vote actually scummy people and either investigate lurkers or have them replaced by someone who WILL contribute.In post 542, Damon_Gant wrote:Oh, and I definitely agree with this post by talah.
Ya, this sounded an awful lot like scumlogic. Hes sort of acknowledging that there IS a case on him by complaining about how hes being voted for one thing and not others and then says there actually is no case and your suspicious for sheeping me. It looks like scum caught for the wrong reasons and upset about it. And his point about you being "Silly" for scumreading Talah but voting him for waffling on Talah isIn post 546, Zdenek wrote:Also there's one of my favourite things, he asks me to get a case on him. That's just him telling us that he's scum.
This doesn't actually make any sense. It just looks like an attempt to discredit the vote on youIn post 528, pisskop wrote:Im unsure whats sillier -
-that you have a solid enough scumread on talah to vote me for (quite) publicly waffling on him and yet still vote me
This is what I meant specifically. You having done other things that you consider scummy is irrelevant? Your opinion on Talah made no sense and could certainly be from scum. That you've done other scummy things (in your opinion) doesn't make Zdenek scummy or his vote less valid?-that of all the content Ive put forth my read on Talah is your focus. nevermind my 'flip' on thad or my interactions with yates or my refusal to judge the absence of content.
So? Your Talah read was a contradiction followed by a hard townread on him over a mostly throwaway post with a couple question in it that he never followed up on or drew any conclusions from. You buddying up to that post is pretty bizarre. Just because I pointed it out, doesn't make it a less valid point.-that you responded to a quote of APs to vote me
This is just scummy defensive. Scum like to have cases to refute. Sure this is a point thats harder for me to expliain, but this attitude comes from scum a LOT.in short, get bent or get a case.
Why am I covered in ketchup ><In post 556, Mister Rogers wrote:C'mon, this guy? He just needs votes like nao?
Then...we vote you until you generate content. I dont get whts so hard to understand about this.In post 530, bjc wrote:And if I'm content with lurking?
Someone in this game used the word "vapid" to describe your scumgame. I sort of agree, no offense to your scum game . I think you just wear your town-cards on your sleeve if that makes sense. Its hard to fake genuine interest. Mastin is kind of similar, but mastin spins things actively and mimics meta well as scum so you have to peel the onion to get to the stinky center first.In post 563, PeregrineV wrote:I do sort of do that, but if I engage in things that don't interest me, then it's probably fake. Maybe a judgment thing that comes with experience.In post 514, AngryPidgeon wrote:Hes engaging in things that are interesting to him (imo)
That Talah is actually scumreading Luca over non-posting is worrisome. The distinction with which he assigns reads to lurkers is inscrutable and scummy.In post 566, PeregrineV wrote:Talah,
Can't help but notice your distinct lack of mentioning bjc at all in a post about lurkers. Nor about his attitude about the pressure being applied to him. Nor about the fact he finally posted.
Please help me to understand.
No one ever said anything about info? BJC is actively refusing to post anything readable which is anti-town at best, scummy at worst.In post 568, projectmatt wrote:Tell me some of the good info we'll get from his lynch.
Awesome, and the Luca and aptil wagons are better alternatives or are you just defending people randomly?In post 573, projectmatt wrote:Anyway, I don't like the wagon on BJC at all. No, claiming mafia is not objectively a towntell or anything but the way I see it, it looks like he got put as an easy target pretty early in the game and the amount of people jumping on something that is absolutely not a tell at all makes me worried.
Oh apparently I missed that Rogers post. I assumed Rogers was voting him for being willfully obtuse.In post 583, projectmatt wrote:Uh yeah actually, Mr. Rodgers literally said "we gain good info from their wagon". Did you just intentionally misinterpret what I said?
Ok, what is it founded on thenIn post 583, projectmatt wrote: What? I just said that I think that the Aptil wagon is a much better alternative and I am currently looking to get an opinion on Luca. Clearly, my defense on BJC isn't founded on nothing.
Yes that sure is what happened. And then you made an obscure-ass case on him for it:In post 612, talah wrote:Pidgeon - Oh I'm sorry, I must have missed the part where Luca said he had some intense real life issues happening and arranged V/LA with a view to replacing out if he was unable to play the game. What's that? He actually apologised for not providing content and promised content and then fucked off to 'scum iz intense'-land? Oh my. Well I suppose we should wait for LUCA TO RESPOND THEN, don't you think?
In post 534, talah wrote:There's that scum-cerity where he's expressing that he's sorry he can't post (because making a scum post he's happy with is so draining and unsatisfying). I've known the feeling.
LOL. IDK why site meta is holding you back, usually people end up waffling all day and compromise lyncinhing random lurkers.In post 603, Mister Rogers wrote:I am a closet lynch all lurkers fanatic but I have repressed that impulse due to site meta
Why snow? I cant actually recall anything hes posted which is probably a bad sign for him. If we're lynching lurkers I would support bjc (mostly policy) and aptil (latest post read a little forced, meh).In post 611, PeregrineV wrote:I would rather lynch bjc, but would consider Luca, maybe Aptil, maybe Snow. Probably not 4nxiety or DV or BiPolar out of the low posters.
Out of the high posters, cases require more validity. Only ones I'd really consider at this point are talah and pisskop.
ftfy. Stop trying to paint yourself like a bad policy lynch.In post 612, talah wrote:so I'll be back around my prod timer because you fucks obviously need time to work things out between yourselves anyway. Did I mention that I'm an excellent wagon for those of you that want topush a policy/informationscum lynch? Probably.
Wow. How are people townreading this.In post 638, talah wrote:And what, to you, indicates that this "obscure-ass case" isn't 100% accurate? Do you have information that Luca really *is* having RL issues which are affecting his ability to post - anything at all?In post 628, AngryPidgeon wrote:Yes that sure is what happened. And then you made an obscure-ass case on him for it:In post 612, talah wrote:Pidgeon - Oh I'm sorry, I must have missed the part where Luca said he had some intense real life issues happening and arranged V/LA with a view to replacing out if he was unable to play the game. What's that? He actually apologised for not providing content and promised content and then fucked off to 'scum iz intense'-land? Oh my. Well I suppose we should wait for LUCA TO RESPOND THEN, don't you think?
In post 534, talah wrote:There's that scum-cerity where he's expressing that he's sorry he can't post (because making a scum post he's happy with is so draining and unsatisfying). I've known the feeling.
Here's the post:And anyway like I say I saw him logged in about a day ago, and he posted nothing. Not another prod dodge, not general comments or an indication about how he was going to go about catching up - nothing.In post 287, Luca Blight wrote:Apologies for my lack of activity thus far, I will commit a bit of time later to going through this thread and will post my reads then.
If he was *really* apologetic and had RL issues, perhaps he'd flag a V/LA or replace out or something.
But the fact is, I'm seeing this as more likely a case of newb-scum who has no idea what initial angle to take to further his wincon. And without further information to dispute that likelihood, why would anyone give him a free pass to not be voted for not playing the game?
Why are you defending him?
(anyway back later, so I waive my right of reply for a couple of days)
The irony.In post 595, aptil wrote:Yates : 7 posts : Has only 7 posts but all of them have content . Reads town to me .
Was I right?In post 689, Mister Rogers wrote:Interesting you would pop up there with that statement.
Hey, referencing Nacho is my new schtick. I reserve the right to post his avatar in the thread at least.In post 716, Nero Cain wrote:die you scum fuck.In post 710, Mister Rogers wrote:@nero: Excellent Luca read btw. Could you please comment on Mastin's Luca read? Thanks.
Ya, I don't quite like the BJC defense specifically. He is talking about how lurker lynches are subpar in general (which I agree) but his previous vote on aptil is a little off considering that and he sort of transitions into a BJC specific defense and votes Yates at the same time. Buuuttt, I don't see this as particularly egregious unless BJC is actually scum and Matt is useful enough that I'd rather lynch BJC first of the two if Im going down that path. So still rather not lynch matt today.In post 718, Mister Rogers wrote:I also see an amazingly unbelievable ott defense of BJC -- I mean it might just be a noise issue to harp on and maybe its just coincidental regarding the Yates vote but -- he has become the biggest BJC defender in this thread.
1) Quick gut reads and updating them constantly is sort of a mastin thing in general. Im annoyed that shes V/LA but shes not posting anywhere on site so -shrug-. Shes not one to flake though, so she'll be back.In post 724, Mister Rogers wrote:1) Didn't his read look bizarre to you? And his opening reads in general (the 3 I mentioned)?
2) What do I need to know about Mastin as to why he's town i.e. why you are reading him as town?
BULLSHIT. You have been actively wagoning Luca because you think hes scum, not because you "want more info from him" and your previous post is you talking about all the scummy things hes GOING to do when he gets back. This is switching up your reason for voteparking Luca and that ain't gonna fly.In post 748, talah wrote:The other thing - err I don't even know what you're getting at. I knew AP didn't have info on Luca (or at least, strongly suspected he didn't), and if he actually did I would have dropped it immediately on a say-so. Turns out he didn't, so I am still Not seeing the issue with wagonning the crap out of lurkers while we have a week on the clock. Apparently that's scummy, to want content from lurkers.
lol.In post 742, Yates wrote:In post 738, aptil wrote:Hopefully the situation will be sorted by tomorrow .
Please hurry it along as quickly as possible. I would really like to see you come in here and Town up the joint so absolutely that Matt chokes on it. Thanks in advance.