Me too TBH.
VOTE: Bennings
1. I use TBHs a lot in my writing style.In post 24, Palmer~ wrote:Yeah, that. It's a vibe. The TBH seems self-conscious, the post itself is short and seems to be made for the sake of making it and fitting in, and the vote on a person that hasn't posted yet vibes like he doesn't want to start ruffling feathers yet.In post 22, Clark~ wrote:In post 19, Palmer~ wrote:Ah, we're getting serious?
I like Lars' and MacReady's intros, probably for bad reasons. And I think Copper's is slightly more likely to come from a Thing.This? What sticks out to you as Thing-like?
I was just explaining myself.In post 27, Palmer~ wrote:Defensive much?
In a vacuum I'd call it a shitpush but we were still basically in RVS so I'm not scumreading him for it. Also if that's the hot new scumtell then it's understandable, I wasn't aware of that.In post 28, Clark~ wrote:Understandable, I suppose, I have tics of my own. What do you think of Palmer's vote and reason for voting you? Thoughts on mine are welcome as well.In post 26, Copper~ wrote:Abbreviations are something of a mild verbal (textual?) tic for me.
Well the push seemed genuine if on flimsy reasoning, why would I not defend myself?In post 50, Childs~ wrote:I also don't like this, seems overly defensive/survavilistic for page 2In post 25, Copper~ wrote:1. I use TBHs a lot in my writing style.In post 24, Palmer~ wrote:Yeah, that. It's a vibe. The TBH seems self-conscious, the post itself is short and seems to be made for the sake of making it and fitting in, and the vote on a person that hasn't posted yet vibes like he doesn't want to start ruffling feathers yet.In post 22, Clark~ wrote:In post 19, Palmer~ wrote:Ah, we're getting serious?
I like Lars' and MacReady's intros, probably for bad reasons. And I think Copper's is slightly more likely to come from a Thing.This? What sticks out to you as Thing-like?
2. I found myself to really relate to that post.
3. I voted that person because they were the first in the VC and I always do my RVS votes on arbitrary factors like that.
I'm thinking Cooper or Clark are good votes but I want to SEE where this is going
VOTE: Clark
I have a very formal tone in general as both alignments unless something really agitates me.In post 95, Bennings~ wrote:This feels like shading for something that's a lose-lose for Copper. However, I agree with the sentiment in the sense that Copper (and Clark for that matter) both have an over-explainy, formal kind of tone that I'd put as +Scum.In post 81, Childs~ wrote:I mean you can, but it just feels over cautious
Because of the shading, Copper/Child probably not scum together.
Lars prob-town.
Nauls: HumanIn post 111, Palmer~ wrote:I don't currently think Clark is a Thing. I can understand the feeling of annoyance that people took his post the wrong way. Though I don't have anything against a wagon there, as I don't think any of my ideas are going to be >rand right now, and info is info.
Nauls gives me town vibes. Gut tells me that a Thing, if they were planning an entrance to the thread with content, wouldn't have chosen a single post from page 2 to form all their content on.
Garry also feels slightly towny. Explanation purposefully omitted for now.
@Copper, give me your strongest Human and Thing read?
Gut and sheeping Lars.In post 190, Bennings~ wrote:Elaborate.
Opportunistic how? It's mostly a gutread but we're not even on page 10.In post 198, Bennings~ wrote:I'm also getting opportunistic vibes from Copper which is making me think Norris is more likely town here. Not huge on the (basically) naked vote from Copper there.
Garry = tone, Nauls and Lars seem to be trying pretty hard to solve even this early and that's +town imo, Windows mostly on tone, Norris on tone and sheeping my townread Nauls.In post 200, Palmer~ wrote:In post 186, Copper~ wrote:Nauls: Human
Garry: Thing???
I always find it very hard to make scumreads this early unless someone does something outrageously scummy. That second one is very faint and I mostly have townreads and nulls right now.In post 187, Copper~ wrote:Lars also town, as strong as Nauls.In post 188, Copper~ wrote:So is Windows on a re-read of everything.Can these actually be explained? They don't actually mean anything to me right now.
Windows' posts, while fewer, have a more solvy vibe if that makes sense.In post 209, Palmer~ wrote:How are Garry's and Norris' tones different than Windows'?
Me too but it's less that I can't distinguish men and more that I can't quite distinguish real people when normally there are more colorful things in their places.In post 225, Palmer~ wrote:Oh good, I'm not the only person having this issue.In post 221, Garry~ wrote:I’m having issues processing this game because of the familiar profile pictures and my inability to distinguish men.
I disagree with this, why exactly doesn't a code plan seem like a townie thing to do?In post 235, Windows~ wrote: I was of the impression you were posting your code plan as a serious suggestion and the way you went about it plus the fact you did at all both didn't feel to me like something a townie was likely to do.
I had not quite finished my backread when responding to Bennings, Norris started getting really trolly on page 8 which I didn't read during the "sheeping" comment, the "trolling" comment came after I read everything.In post 242, Windows~ wrote: On Copper:
This seems a straight up contradiction?
Is it just gut and sheeping? or is Norris being really scummy?In post 208, Copper~ wrote:Also this kind of trolling is really scummy imo.
I can't quite put my finger on it but there's a slight "going through the motions" vibe with his ISO.In post 257, Palmer~ wrote:Kind of, I thought Garry was pretty solvy. Do you think he's faking it? Why, if so?In post 251, Copper~ wrote:Windows' posts, while fewer, have a more solvy vibe if that makes sense.In post 209, Palmer~ wrote:How are Garry's and Norris' tones different than Windows'?
1. I read fast.In post 281, Windows~ wrote:Copper went from "mostly a gutread" to "this kind of behaviour is really scummy" in literally 2 minutes, you don't see a contradiction there?In post 249, Palmer~ wrote: Also, the "this is a contradiction from Copper!" is a horrible point in 242. It feels like desperately trying to fish out a gotcha
Cooper tries to justify this but I don't buy it:
You finished the backread in the 2 minutes between those posts?In post 255, Copper~ wrote: I had not quite finished my backread when responding to Bennings, Norris started getting really trolly on page 8 which I didn't read during the "sheeping" comment, the "trolling" comment came after I read everything.
And the "we're not even on page 10" sounds like you were caught up:
"I forgot to mention the scumminess of the posting style" is an explanation I could have bought but "I was still rereading" I don't think fits with that timeline.In post 206, Copper~ wrote: Opportunistic how? It's mostly a gutread but we're not even on page 10.
English is not my first language.In post 322, Windows~ wrote:I feel like if that were the case either the earlier post or the later one would be phrased differently. Like the second post might have begun "and since then" as an additional reason to stick with the vote rather than "also" which connects it back as a justification for the original vote.In post 319, Palmer~ wrote:I don't see a problem, no? Norris' trolling is on the same page as Bennings' question. It doesn't take a lot of time to read Norris' trolling and feel it's scummy and want to comment on it. Those sort of things happen to me as town a lot, so I can see it coming from a town perspective.In post 281, Windows~ wrote:You finished the backread in the 2 minutes between those posts?
"Scum"In post 304, MacReady~ wrote:This might seem sort of off-topic but I'm still curious and would be interested how people answer - are you calling scum 'scum' this game, or 'Thing' ?
Doesn't seem like genuine LHF town and more like scum trolling to look like LHF. Subtle difference.In post 343, Bennings~ wrote:Yeah I'm getting LHF vibesIn post 248, Nauls~ wrote:Honestly I’m not the biggest fan of the votes that have piled onto Norris, but Norris also hasn’t given me any reason to feel any better about them than before.
Possible but I'm like 95% sure there is at least one scum between those 3 wagons. imo it's Norris.In post 362, Palmer~ wrote:Or maybe these are three town wagons and the things don't give two shits about pushing town wagons when there's no threat for them. But I dunno.
Elaborate.In post 384, Fuchs~ wrote:ebwopIn post 383, Fuchs~ wrote:I think windows is town for this postIn post 281, Windows~ wrote:
Copper went from "mostly a gutread" to "this kind of behaviour is really scummy" in literally 2 minutes, you don't see a contradiction there?
Cooper tries to justify this but I don't buy it:
You finished the backread in the 2 minutes between those posts?In post 255, Copper~ wrote: I had not quite finished my backread when responding to Bennings, Norris started getting really trolly on page 8 which I didn't read during the "sheeping" comment, the "trolling" comment came after I read everything.
And the "we're not even on page 10" sounds like you were caught up:
"I forgot to mention the scumminess of the posting style" is an explanation I could have bought but "I was still rereading" I don't think fits with that timeline.In post 206, Copper~ wrote:
I think windows is town for this post
Opportunistic how? It's mostly a gutread but we're not even on page 10.
Put my comment in the middle of the quote lol
Yeah I agree with this, it's just... a weird defense. Scum can fake such things.In post 404, Nauls~ wrote:Clark is on E-2. Do not vote vote him.
With scum being able to jump accounts, putting someone on E-1 means scum could safely hammer and then jump away.
Also the fact the moment where the current wagons get questioned and momentum towards a Windows wagon actually starts to form, 2 players randomly show up to reawaken the Clark wagon, which they’ve been quiet on for a while. Veeeery iffy on that.
VOTE: Windows
Fuchs in particular looks bad.
Windows only mentioned Fuchs once ever and it wasn’t even when talking about their alignment. Fuchs has been quiet on Windows’ alignment and suddenly decided they liked a single post from Windows, then following that up with the vote on Clark saying they think all other wagons are on town.
May I remind you that Fuchs very briefly calling a single one of Windows’ post townie is his entire stance there.
Doesn’t help that every Fuchs post since 83 has varied from meh to bad and the Palmer push still looks terrible.
Pedit: 400 kind of looks more like scum defending a townie than scum/scum actually, which is interesting. Though it could just be Fuchs trying to justify a read that has no actual justification because he just made it up, regardless of Windows’ alignment.
Ppedit: 401 disagree. Scum can find things they assume to be gotchas and cling onto them, it’s not a purely town thing.
Pppedit: Timing!
Why can't scum fake a tunnel?In post 414, Fuchs~ wrote:This was not my point at all.In post 407, Nauls~ wrote:In post 401, Fuchs~ wrote:And like, as the person that he is suspecting, I get that the natural reaction to what feels like a bad push on you is this, there is just the question of why would he even need to be grasping at straws as scum to push you here.In post 332, Copper~ wrote:Windows stonks go down because really that was just grasping at straws.
At the time there was no wagon higher then 4 votes, and there were 3 total wagons with 3-4 votes.
With 3 different medium sized wagons, and 0 near-critical wagons, it is hard to imagine that scum!Windows was in a position where he was so desperate to get you miseliminated that he felt the need to be "grasping at straws." Just makes a lot more sense to me that it is a townie who is genuinely thinks that you are scum.If scum sees what they think is a contradiction or a potential gotcha on a townie, they won’t think “ehhh actually there’s no urgency so I just won’t call this out”,they’ll still call it out. The current gamestate is pretty meaningless, scum will almost always call out something that will push their agenda.
Also I’m pretty sure Fuchs just straight up knows that Copper is a townie here
My point is that when I see someone making arguments that come across as "grasping at straws," such as this timing argument, then it is likely either: a townie who is kinda tunneled and seeing evidence everywhere they look OR scum in a desperate position.
There is no reasons to think that if he were scum he would be in a desperate position, therefore, him being town confirmation baising his own read when looking back over it makes more sense to me.
In post 420, Windows~ wrote:The 'grasping at straws' comment reads to me like whatever the tell is for when scum feel like they've been caught for the wrong reasons.In post 407, Nauls~ wrote:If scum sees what they think is a contradiction or a potential gotcha on a townie, they won’t think “ehhh actually there’s no urgency so I just won’t call this out”, they’ll still call it out. The current gamestate is pretty meaningless, scum will almost always call out something that will push their agenda.In post 401, Fuchs~ wrote:And like, as the person that he is suspecting, I get that the natural reaction to what feels like a bad push on you is this, there is just the question of why would he even need to be grasping at straws as scum to push you here.In post 332, Copper~ wrote:Windows stonks go down because really that was just grasping at straws.
At the time there was no wagon higher then 4 votes, and there were 3 total wagons with 3-4 votes.
With 3 different medium sized wagons, and 0 near-critical wagons, it is hard to imagine that scum!Windows was in a position where he was so desperate to get you miseliminated that he felt the need to be "grasping at straws." Just makes a lot more sense to me that it is a townie who is genuinely thinks that you are scum.
Also I’m pretty sure Fuchs just straight up knows that Copper is a townie here
Copper's other posts since then don't give me reason to move my vote elsewhere:
Just restating their "Norris's trolling is scummy" point.In post 397, Copper~ wrote:Doesn't seem like genuine LHF town and more like scum trolling to look like LHF. Subtle difference.In post 343, Bennings~ wrote:Yeah I'm getting LHF vibesIn post 248, Nauls~ wrote:Honestly I’m not the biggest fan of the votes that have piled onto Norris, but Norris also hasn’t given me any reason to feel any better about them than before.
In order to contest Norris being defended.
Including their own wagon in the count, I don't know how to read that. Compared to "I'm 95% sure there's scum in one of the other two wagons". I'm trying not to be tunnelled here but gut feel is this feels off from how a towny would say it. Also maybe there's an element of "look I'm agreeing to people choosing among the three of us" which to my mind means if Copper is scum both Norris and Clark are likely town since I think if Copper were buddied with either of them it would be more tempting to agree with the "maybe all three are town" angle.In post 398, Copper~ wrote:Possible but I'm like 95% sure there is at least one scum between those 3 wagons. imo it's Norris.In post 362, Palmer~ wrote:Or maybe these are three town wagons and the things don't give two shits about pushing town wagons when there's no threat for them. But I dunno.
Yeah you're tunneled hard, if I was scum I wouldn't really have a reason to... put myself in that limpool. It just felt less clunky than saying "between the Norris and Clark wagons".
"Elaborate" isn't bad in itself but it's like, a lazy way to contribute. If Copper's other posts recently offered more then this wouldn't seem suspicious but it feels to me like scum skating by without doing much.In post 399, Copper~ wrote:Elaborate.In post 384, Fuchs~ wrote:ebwopIn post 383, Fuchs~ wrote: I think windows is town for this post
Put my comment in the middle of the quote lol
I mean what else would I say when I feel a post lacks substance.
I disagree for the reason Nauls provided, but this feels like a townie thought process (if a flawed one) rather than defending a buddy IMO.In post 453, Fuchs~ wrote:In post 449, Copper~ wrote:Yeah I agree with this, it's just... a weird defense. Scum can fake such things.In post 451, Copper~ wrote:Why can't scum fake a tunnel?This feels intentional
I don't know how many ways I can say that this looks like a genuine tunnel vs the angle that scum would consider taking in this situation.
Yes they can, it is a possibility. I am saying I don't think that they would.
Like subtract out my reaction to his push.
The reaction to it was that it convinced zero people that copper was more likely to be scum, convinced zero people that windows was more likely to be town (again subtracting me) and convinced 5 players to lower their read on him (Copper, Palmer, Clark, Nauls, MacReady). Ah yes, the tell tell calculated scum move.
So the repeated people chiming in with "but why couldn't scum him fake this," that is simply not how I am looking at the situation, and I am asking my self "why would scum him to this to himself." And I don't think that he would. That is what I was trying to say when I was talking about the game state. There was nothing about the situation, forcing him to make such a bad move.
And I simply dont think that people not liking his argument makes him more likely to be scum, because scum are actively trying to make arguments that people like. Townies are making arguments that they believe in, regardless of how other people are going to like it.
And yes scum can do it, and yes they can make mistakes or miscalculations, so sure him still being scum is possible. But it became a lot less likely from my pov. And I think about this game in terms of more or less likely.
Anyways, not sure how many other ways I can try to reword my thoughts before I go insane, so probably going to stop responding to all questions about my windows read from here on out toDay.
I hope Garry 2 is easier to read, Garry 1 was just... opaque, for lack of a better word. I ended up slightly scumreading them for it but I honestly wasn't sure.In post 461, MacReady~ wrote:Hello Garry 2.0
Norris really isn't doing all that much except troll up the thread. Could be frustrated town but more likely openwolfing.
Clark is kinda null for me, that's why, Norris is just scummier.In post 475, Fuchs~ wrote:Looking back at your iso, the last time you said anything about clark's alignment was this back on page 4In post 79, Copper~ wrote:I don't think Clark is scum. Off-the-hip gut read.
I explained it already, the trolling is just ridiculously scummy and not like town having fun. Also he's barely solving if at all, if he actually tried then I'd have looked past the trolling.In post 493, Garry~ wrote:what about norris do you think is scummy?In post 491, Copper~ wrote:Clark is kinda null for me, that's why, Norris is just scummier.In post 475, Fuchs~ wrote:Looking back at your iso, the last time you said anything about clark's alignment was this back on page 4In post 79, Copper~ wrote:I don't think Clark is scum. Off-the-hip gut read.
Makes sense but I have to wonder if the mod would actually have the roles be based on the characters in the movie because, well... they're public... which kinda "opens up" the setup?In post 500, Fuchs~ wrote:They way that Clark has gone existing in thread while close to elimination feels more likely to be scum then a town PR I think.
But on the other hand, looking at the Clark wiki, jailkeeper seems very thematically appropriate while jailkeeper seeming to be an unlikely role for scum to get.
Gonna think on it
The difference is that he actively seems to be out to annoy people, rather than floundering like LHF.In post 519, Bennings~ wrote:sure, there is a difference, but you haven't done anything to explain what the difference is, hence why your voting seems kinda fabricated/opportunisticIn post 397, Copper~ wrote:Doesn't seem like genuine LHF town and more like scum trolling to look like LHF. Subtle difference.In post 343, Bennings~ wrote:Yeah I'm getting LHF vibesIn post 248, Nauls~ wrote:Honestly I’m not the biggest fan of the votes that have piled onto Norris, but Norris also hasn’t given me any reason to feel any better about them than before.
just saying "this trolling seems scummy" and then voting him doesn't really seem like you're trying to figure out alignment, you're just finding a reason
In post 525, Fuchs~ wrote: Based on the mechanics of the game, I find it doubtful we have a vigilante. And therefore, there would be no mechanical advantage for scum to have a jailkeeper instead of a roleblocker -- unless peta put it in there just for the fake out.
So I think this point is moot since any claim from a Thing will be made out of whole cloth.Rules wrote:Things do not have powers beyond the factional kill and assimilation.
Not janky if it's to prevent Follow The Cop-esque strats.In post 529, Fuchs~ wrote:Wait. If scum cannot have any power roles, then jailkeeper is also kinda janky for town to have too.
In post 547, Childs~ wrote:I would prefer if everyone unvoted Clark right now, because regardless, I very strongly believe the claim.In post 546, Childs~ wrote:I'm pretty sure that we can completely confirm Clark's alignment, here, if I'm right.
It does require that y'all can make sure that a Thing doesn’t take over an account, which this strategy might do, but I believe that we can, genuinely, break the game open from the Things having no prs aside from body snatching and flip less nightkills.
I think that this game was balanced around requiring the Things to bodyswap, and if we deny them that tool, we have a huge advantage.
I NEED Clark to confirm that he doesn’t have certain gates on his role, though.
Your PFPs look so similar that I got really confused at first.In post 548, Nauls~ wrote:Oooooooh, nice!
How? Scum doesn't have a roleblock. If JK is real then vig won't shoot.In post 560, Palmer~ wrote:Uh. Even going by that plan, it doesn't even prove that Clark is town, it just guarantees that Childs doesn't die N1. And even that isn't good enough, because if Clark IS scum, she just jumps out of her own slot anyway.
Which also, why in the hell would you claim that openly.
Yeah, I hate this.
This line of thinking is why scum can openwolf.In post 566, Bennings~ wrote:see i still don't get thisIn post 533, Copper~ wrote:The difference is that he actively seems to be out to annoy people, rather than floundering like LHF.In post 519, Bennings~ wrote:sure, there is a difference, but you haven't done anything to explain what the difference is, hence why your voting seems kinda fabricated/opportunisticIn post 397, Copper~ wrote:Doesn't seem like genuine LHF town and more like scum trolling to look like LHF. Subtle difference.In post 343, Bennings~ wrote:Yeah I'm getting LHF vibesIn post 248, Nauls~ wrote:Honestly I’m not the biggest fan of the votes that have piled onto Norris, but Norris also hasn’t given me any reason to feel any better about them than before.
just saying "this trolling seems scummy" and then voting him doesn't really seem like you're trying to figure out alignment, you're just finding a reason
scum aren't trying to "annoy" people they're trying to get townread OR in this game specifically cause chaos and then assimilate
norris behaving that way just puts a target on him for elim D1. doesn't make sense to me from a scum pov
OH RIGHT SCUM CAN NO KILLIn post 626, Copper~ wrote:Am I dumb?
Voting when I finish my catchup.In post 723, Palmer~ wrote:I'm a 1-shot Cop, and I have a guilty.
VOTE: Windows
For anyone wondering, that is partly why I was playing kind of quietly on Day 1. I didn't wanna risk being widely townread and getting assimilated.