In post 16, Paragon wrote:Help, Morning Tweet is chainsawing me!
VOTE: paragon
who does like being cut in half
In post 16, Paragon wrote:Help, Morning Tweet is chainsawing me!
Paragon what ahve you got to say. Even little kittens want your blood
maybe we should make an entire page of this
In post 55, Morning Tweet wrote:Paragon, Allomancer - lean town
CatScratch, mav - undecided
iDany, bob - lean scum
paragon 39 felt like a town reaction to me + i like the way the miller crumb interaction played out
dany is forcing voting me a lil, i dont buy his reasoningggg but it could be town struggling to find something to say
So your saying your not scum with para?In post 60, Morning Tweet wrote:he modded my first newbie game :conce i realized what he meant by what he said (that he was referring to a miller crumb), i don't find anything fishy about it now. i considered the possibility he made that explanation up, but im positive that's what he meant the whole way thruiDanyboy wrote:I'm not forcing anything. You said you found someone scummy with out a vote, then said your comment is stronger than a vote, but now you town read him for the same interaction which you called fishy.In post 55, Morning Tweet wrote:Paragon, Allomancer - lean town
CatScratch, mav - undecided
iDany, bob - lean scum
paragon 39 felt like a town reaction to me + i like the way the miller crumb interaction played out
dany is forcing voting me a lil, i dont buy his reasoningggg but it could be town struggling to find something to say
if i were scum with para, why bother to make the comment if i dont even have the resolve to vote him?
In post 69, Morning Tweet wrote:Are you baiting me into scumslipping something like "I'm scum, just not with Para"?
pedit: I KNEW IT
In post 70, Morning Tweet wrote:I said "If I were scum with Para" because I was being accused of bussing. It doesn't really imply that I'm putting emphasis on the *with Para* part
In post 73, Morning Tweet wrote:this is a loaded question that incriminates me for answering it and it feels like you're trying to make me "scumslip", which i neglected to put in quotes in my last message cause i'm a peabrainIn post 66, bob3141 wrote:So your saying your not scum with para?
In post 76, Morning Tweet wrote:no no he definitely did make a case for us being togetherIn post 44, iDanyboy wrote:Why note vote then. VOTE: Morning TweetIn post 34, Morning Tweet wrote:what town-motivation could there possibly be behind pointing out a potential crumb??? smells fishy to me, paragonIn post 31, Paragon wrote:Hmm, is that a crumb, Allomancer? Wouldn't it be more sensible to claim that outright?
VOTE: Allomancer
Morning Tweet/Paragon.
In post 99, Cat Scratch Fever wrote:I think it’s heavily implied given the contextIn post 81, bob3141 wrote:See here he says you might both be scum but he never says your trying to buss para.
In post 132, Paragon wrote:Hang on, Bob. You're of the opinion she's too concious about the meaning of her posts but also think this would be a more towny response:In post 113, bob3141 wrote:Its all about what a players first reactions are. And these are different if a player is town or scum. Now town can respond a little obliviously but scum actively checks all meaning s and how there words come across.
Isn't how you'd expect her to answer as town a far more controlled and conscious response?In post 75, bob3141 wrote:So you saying you cant answer the question.
When its easy to answer for any town. Correct answer is"i am town and thus cant be partnered with anyone"
So it is certainly answerable. But instead your trying to make reachy case out of it
In post 135, Cat Scratch Fever wrote:I don’t get the impression that MT was defensive or too self consciousIn post 113, bob3141 wrote:Its all about what a players first reactions are. And these are different if a player is town or scum. Now town can respond a little obliviously but scum actively checks all meaning s and how there words come across.In post 99, Cat Scratch Fever wrote:I think it’s heavily implied given the contextIn post 81, bob3141 wrote:See here he says you might both be scum but he never says your trying to buss para.
his reactions was everso defensive and leaves very much scummy taste to his posts.
I mean this is kinda silly. Not many people are going to think someone is stupid for having a wrong scumread on page 3, right?See he doesnt come from angle thinking that the guy was stupid for scum reading him but that his reason for suspecting him is wrong.His posts have very much a feeling of your rigth but your wrong to them.
In post 143, Morning Tweet wrote:How is carefully answering "I cannot be partnered with anyone because I am not scum" more townie than pointing out that's it's a very loaded question???
That was the posts. Its question your very reply to iDanyboys posts.In post 66, bob3141 wrote:So your saying your not scum with para?In post 60, Morning Tweet wrote:he modded my first newbie game :conce i realized what he meant by what he said (that he was referring to a miller crumb), i don't find anything fishy about it now. i considered the possibility he made that explanation up, but im positive that's what he meant the whole way thruiDanyboy wrote:I'm not forcing anything. You said you found someone scummy with out a vote, then said your comment is stronger than a vote, but now you town read him for the same interaction which you called fishy.In post 55, Morning Tweet wrote:Paragon, Allomancer - lean town
CatScratch, mav - undecided
iDany, bob - lean scum
paragon 39 felt like a town reaction to me + i like the way the miller crumb interaction played out
dany is forcing voting me a lil, i dont buy his reasoningggg but it could be town struggling to find something to say
if i were scum with para, why bother to make the comment if i dont even have the resolve to vote him?
In post 151, Morning Tweet wrote:I asked Dany about how pointing something suspicious about someone without voting them is indicative that we're partners. My line of reasoning was that calling attention to something is stronger than voting. I don't really know what you mean by the bolded phraseIn post 149, bob3141 wrote:And it in you never even deny being partnered with para. All you say is why would i comment on x if i wasnt going to vote for him. And that answers nothing.As it easy for scum to say they would do the opposite
Where it should be clear im asking, ok so you say you wouldnt be partnered with para if you were scum but that doesnt realy answer anyones suspicions that your scum. And is rather scummy avoidance of that very issue.
From what I'm gathering, you're saying that town!tweet wouldn't say that she's not partnered with Paragon, she would instead say "I'm not partnered with anyone, I'm not scum." Why would I be unwilling to say the phrase "I am not scum" as scum???
I see where you're coming from I THINK. Like, I subconsciously say "I'm not with Paragon" instead of "I'm not scum" to technically say the truth. I don't think looking for ways that someone subconsciously words things is a good tell, and it's certainly not working here.
Different attitude. Scum are far more likely to make posts like teh one you have made than tweets.In post 242, Paragon wrote:178: I don't like this Bob-post, I don't think Morning Tweet has said anything new here that she didn't already say before. This whole read/tunnel into reconsideration feels completely fabricated from Bob. The only reason I see scum!Bob doing it though is if he believes it'll look towny, I don't think scum!him actually thinks he can get Morning Tweet mislynched with that.
Bob, why did this post change your mind while previous ones didn't?
I like mavsfan so far, though he has fantastic hair which I fear may have pocketed me.
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!3In post 187, Bambi Jay wrote:Basically my response to the rest of the posts. I won't vote anyone ATM so if Bob wants to convince me of their innocence so be it.In post 159, Paragon wrote:!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!2
Why? Game got a lot more substance after the first couple of page.
Several people saying Bob's conviction is genuine and there's no scumtells in anything he said. Tempted to sheep the consensus, but I'm still paranoid that Bob dropped the tunnel when he was amassing votes, and I'm not completely sold on his reasoning for doing so.
I can see a world where town!Skellen is more so trying to get a better read on you by testing your reasons behind that statement, rather than caring about her read on Allomancer in 121. I don't think the case is super valid.In post 207, TheTrollie wrote:I'm not sure i love your summary of what the case is - The case is that in order for her to criticize me for feeling that Allo's potential towntells were fabricated, she would have to read allo as town. If she read allo ask scum even slighly, she would naturally also get that I thought Allo's posts were scummy and that those potential towntells were BS. But then she goes along and votes Allo in her next post. It stinks of scum going through and reading trying to poke holes and "scumfind" where she can because her two inqusitions don't match up to a single narrative of what her take on the game was as she read - she either thinks I'm stretching to make a case that Allo is scum or she agrees that allo reads scum
Having just said that, I don't like the justification here. Feels like she's over-justifying, and the reasoning for trying to get a better read on Allomancer by asking to elaborate someone else's read on him is... less likely?In post 227, Skellen wrote:Why shouldn't I question your reason for voting Allo while I also suspect Allo? I had my own reasons after all and bussing is a thing or even more simple, I might as well just be wrong with my read, I can't know prior putting on some pressure or questioning. I was asking for your reasoning because I am not familiar with Allo, I don't know his towntells (and still don't know in fact, only why they were bs to you) and it would give me more insight on whatever your push is based, after all I can still re-evaluate on my read.
{iDanyboy, bob3141, Skellen}
In post 241, Morning Tweet wrote:probably. I think it's an interesting point to bring up that bob chose me rather than Dany, but I'm gonna say it's just because he wanted to use his patented "Ask a loaded question" technique. Mav reads into it very closely, and I think that looks good on him
I'm still voting bob because I can totally see scum bob doing this; it's totally within town bob's realm too but I haven't seen anything from bob that I like yet. Not that I'm sure what that would be
In post 293, Paragon wrote:I think the word you're looking for there is fence-sitting, and it certainly can come from scum! Why can't scum!Morning Tweet be fencesitty on your alignment while you attack her - weighing up others' reactions and the wagon on you before taking a true stance?In post 260, bob3141 wrote:In you see that tweet inst talkign to me as though he thinks im scum nor that he even thinks im town. That level of compilation is hard for scum as they tend to end up either side but not the middle.
Note, I'm not accusing Morning Tweet of this, but I'd like to hear why you're so sure Morning Tweet is town for behaviour that could be perceived as coming from either alignment.
Bob's tone otherwise actually feels like town, but I just don't believe his progression and read on Morning Tweet.
In post 299, Morning Tweet wrote:who would you like to lynch instead bob
In post 305, Espressojet wrote:So I just took a look into Bob's posts and didn't really like what I saw.
Lots of prodding other people, a lot of posts starting with "So...", and I looked into other games he's been in.
First two I clicked happened to be scum games of his and the same pattern emerged. Prodding other people more than posting opinions
But I just came from a game where he did the same thing as town day 1, and we mislynched him.
In fact, he was right on target about who scum was. Probably got him lynched.
I'm not intuitive enough to figure out if Bob is scum or not, but I don't think this is what we should push overboard today.
If he's town, I guarantee one scum on his wagon like he says himself
In post 333, mavsfan41 wrote:@gearintm: thanks! Was looking at his more recent posts when he mentioned the whole “scum is likely on the wagon” thing from a couple of pages ago. Also, no mention of me? I remember that game also included me. You day 1 is pretty typical of you day 1 in that last game haha.
@bob: so the only other person would be Cat Scratch Fever. If you get a town read from them, that would mean Morning Tweet’s post about your wagon being entirely town would be the case. Thoughts? Cat Scratch Fever voted you in post 100. That would hardly be considered a wagon at that point. So she was on the wagon but how she joined wouldn’t match up with wagon jumping associated with scum. And if you think so too, perhaps we should look elsewhere rather than your wagon.
Also, holy prods Batman. This is how scum wins. Post more people! The deadline is still a ways away but right now I don’t have anything better than iDanyboy (feeling less and less confident about that one) and BBmola (and Espressojet, but I’m more familiar with his play) as policy lynches so far. Got town reads I feel good about though, so I guess that counts for something.
Its easily possible its all town sicne its gone no where. Was in game a few monsth ago where nearly every player in the game had there own 4 player wagon by end of day one. 10 wagons, 13 players and 3 of the 10 were scum. The wagons kept flaking as scum where avoiding being on wagon of 4. I do hope me mentioning the most wagons have 1 scum on played a role.In post 326, mavsfan41 wrote:@bob3141: I’m extremely confused by your post 297. Could you please clarify exactly what you’re saying? Specifically between your version of scum having to commit instead of sitting in the middle (post 260 for that language) vs Paragon’s more common definition of fence-sitting? My understanding of this is that you think Morning Tweet is town as she voted you back in 105 (vote is still there btw) where if she were scum she wouldn’t have voted you cause scum wouldn’t commit to voting you?
Do I have this correct? If not, could you please clarify.
From my perspective, her vote on you is NAI. With all due respect I think the premise on which you started pressuring her was very weak. Initially the first time you pressured her (prior doubling and tripling down) comes off as a scum-read on you for trying to jump start a wagon with little to no evidence. Scum could jump for a potential mislynch or town could jump on that reading you as scum for using a flimsy premise. The commitment as being a town tell vs scum being in the middle I think is most appropriately put into practice with you committing to your pressuring of Morning Tweet vs Morning Tweet voting you.
@Cat Scratch Fever: in 279, this is in hindsight. When bob3141 first pushed Morning Tweet rather than Dany, sure it wouldn’t be too far fetched to think Dany/bob as a scum pairing at the time, but as bob has committed more and more with a weak premise, I don’t think scum would make that gambit to put themselves in the spotlight like THAT. Inevitably a wagon started on bob3141 cause of his push.
@bob3141: what do you make of Morning Tweet’s Pi 314 post about the make up of your wagon vs 292 post? I tend to agree more with Morning Tweet, but boy, I really do get a town read from you and would find it difficult to think 4 townies jumped on that wagon. By the triple down on Morning Tweet (post 149 is where I would put this cutoff as that’s where I personally thought, scum! wouldn’t push THIS hard before giving up) and before your removal of her vote (post 178) is where I find you most town and if scum were to jump onto your wagon, here’s where they could.
This leaves Allomancer and Paragon within that timeframe. Idk what your cut-off in terms of vote count that you place on “wagon” but Allomancer is the 3rd vote and Paragon’s 4th vote could be the cutoff for wagon. If scum were on your wagon, here’s where I’d look. Any thoughts on either?
In post 577, Cat Scratch Fever wrote:Who are you talking about here?In post 575, bob3141 wrote:There is no reason for scum to push against my wagon unless they themselves wanted my vote. And if the player they were pushing was on my wagon. They could hardly call me scum at the same time.
They couldnt support my push as that would alienate those one the wagon. Especially if they felt that following would just look bad on them.
Yet at the same time if they got their target lynched. They could always swing back and try and revive the my wagon on that players flip.
In post 657, Morning Tweet wrote:BB/Allo/Danyboy is my town block for the end of the day. Mavs and Mala-Madoka-Skelly are runner-ups.
To be perfectly honest Espresso has been lightly toning town for me as the day winds down but I'd easily accept being wrong on that and I'd certainly vote him over Mala/Trollie.
Just need to figure Titus' claim out......................... somebody helpp
In post 699, Bambi Jay wrote:Uh... Your reading it wrong.In post 697, bob3141 wrote: I think teh interestign thing is that the the town roleblocker was simple. Thus his only use was to block the night kill.
Thus although he cant stop any scum pr. He also had no negative utility. i.e. he cant interfere with other town roles.
He was a RoleSTOPPER. They BLOCK people from visiting someone by roleblocking them. They usually also stop kills.
Basically he was a protective that could only protect VTs and Goons.
In post 707, Titus wrote:Also, this may get me lynched but I lied about being a PT cop. My scumsuspects were all those not voting minus MT. I wasn't going to be lynched before them.
a day should never end 2 days in. 10 days left to deadline there was always more for her to say.In post 829, iDanyboy wrote:I also don't get what answers you were waiting for, I'm pretty sure she had answered everything you asked already.
In post 832, Bambi Jay wrote:In post 828, iDanyboy wrote:My only guess is that they didn't know that the role stopper acted like a doctor and they were aiming for that instead. They probably also have a role blocker of some sort considering they left Titus alive.In post 826, bob3141 wrote:I was waiting for titus replys. Danny you did hammer far to hasty. Though my gut is saying in that situation any scum not already on the wagon would simply let a townie hammer.
The question today is why kill bbmola now rather than last night. With esp flip i would of thought bbmola nk would be more important than Tweets.Going by that logic, weird as it is, Does this seem like a slip from Bob then?In post 699, Bambi Jay wrote:Uh... Your reading it wrong.In post 697, bob3141 wrote: I think teh interestign thing is that the the town roleblocker was simple. Thus his only use was to block the night kill.
Thus although he cant stop any scum pr. He also had no negative utility. i.e. he cant interfere with other town roles.
He was a RoleSTOPPER. They BLOCK people from visiting someone by roleblocking them. They usually also stop kills.
Basically he was a protective that could only protect VTs and Goons.
This is fun.
In post 828, iDanyboy wrote:My only guess is that they didn't know that the role stopper acted like a doctor and they were aiming for that instead. They probably also have a role blocker of some sort considering they left Titus alive.In post 826, bob3141 wrote:I was waiting for titus replys. Danny you did hammer far to hasty. Though my gut is saying in that situation any scum not already on the wagon would simply let a townie hammer.
The question today is why kill bbmola now rather than last night. With esp flip i would of thought bbmola nk would be more important than Tweets.
In post 836, Bambi Jay wrote:So... Your saying you would do the opposite of that to align more with your town meta?
Cheeky.
In post 839, iDanyboy wrote:In post 657, Morning Tweet wrote:BB/Allo/Danyboy is my town block for the end of the day. Mavs and Mala-Madoka-Skelly are runner-ups.Since he said he didn't want to lynch Mav or gerain you could reduce it even more to Bambi, Bob, Troliie, CSF.In post 618, Morning Tweet wrote:Bob is my favourite lynch but I can compromise to Titus/Bambi/Espresso as the timer drains. I don't reaaly wanna vote mavs, iDany, or gerain
Now thats positioning if i have ever seen it.In post 841, mavsfan41 wrote:@bob3141: Your 826 is based in hindsight that BBmola’s role was known (and sure they claimed) by why not bring up Morning Tweet’s demise in 697 (your first post of day 2). With BBmola’s flip, now you’re questioning the Morning Tweet death especially how it clears you with 837? Your series of posts seemed based of the assumption that BBmola’s role was known back when the Morning Tweet kill was made. I understand BBmola claimed but this is now something you’re bringing up AFTER the flip and retroactively trying to play out night 1 with information known after night 2. This seems extremely disingenuous to me and a little too convenient here for you to clear yourself. Idk what the goal was of your series of posts about this topic, but it seems to simply just clear yourself.
Basically what I’m saying is that bob sees BBmola’s flip, then questions the order of the kills ONLY after BBmola flipped aka with info learned in BBmola’s flip and seemingly forcing a clear of himself based off the order of the kill assuming BBmola was the correct kill night 1 when that info was not yet revealed. To bring this up now rather than day 2 basically confirms bob3141’s logic is based on knowledge known now vs back then but framing it as info known all along.
Vote: bob3141