Yes, somehow my reads have developed over time and some players have risen into town reads, others have fallen.In post 976, Servant Lancer wrote:So you’ve gone from an early/strong townread on me to somehow reading possible scum motivation behind me trying to understand something that doesn’t make sense and you even admitted to not being optimal
ok
Stopping with the antagonism doesn’t sound to me like it would have added anything to the antagonism score card. Because that’s the whole point of stopping the antagonism.In post 968, Servant Beast wrote:Because that would have added another point to the pointless antagonism score card.In post 966, Servant Lancer wrote:Why out over just ceasing with the provoking comments?
It's scummy that Saber pushed to get the master for being super powerful and a great choice mechanically but then it turns out they arent powerful at all. Maybe that's a very strong difference of opinion but it sounds more like they're trying to convince us that they're powerful rather than actually being powerful. It is true that it was an odd time to claim as scum though. I need more time to think on this but if I had that role I would absolutely not want to get the master unless I was extremely confident in my scumreading and town leading abilitiesIn post 954, Servant Avenger wrote:I'm not sure how I feel on Sabers claim as scummy here.
What's the thought of it being scummy? The fact Saber said it was powerful late game or because of the power?
If you don't believe that Saber thought it was a powerful role then why do they claim it here? Either Saber thinks its powerful as either align or keeps quiet if scum who doesn't think it's a powerful role.
Not that this is very important to the points you're making, but shouldn't you be hyper aware of my stance on getting the master considering you knew I was town. Why would you think I expressed interest when I didn't.In post 959, Servant Beast wrote:Huh, I can't find it. I guess I hallucinated it. Oh well. If you didn't bring up interest, then you didn't bring up interestIn post 952, Servant Shielder wrote:Where did I say this...In post 896, Servant Beast wrote: Shielder did give information on interest for master, they said they "weren't against" it.
I'm not really buying that Saber thought his power was the best mechanically.
VOTE: Saber
That's E-2
Or maybe you realized buddying me wasn’t working and it wasn’t getting you towncred with anyone else eitherIn post 977, Servant Beast wrote:Yes, somehow my reads have developed over time and some players have risen into town reads, others have fallen.In post 976, Servant Lancer wrote:So you’ve gone from an early/strong townread on me to somehow reading possible scum motivation behind me trying to understand something that doesn’t make sense and you even admitted to not being optimal
ok
I was attempting to remove a point from the score card. This is a misinterpretation.In post 978, Servant Lancer wrote:Stopping with the antagonism doesn’t sound to me like it would have added anything to the antagonism score card. Because that’s the whole point of stopping the antagonism.In post 968, Servant Beast wrote:Because that would have added another point to the pointless antagonism score card.In post 966, Servant Lancer wrote:Why out over just ceasing with the provoking comments?
Explain how I’m misinterpreting what you said.In post 981, Servant Beast wrote:I was attempting to remove a point from the score card. This is a misinterpretation.In post 978, Servant Lancer wrote:Stopping with the antagonism doesn’t sound to me like it would have added anything to the antagonism score card. Because that’s the whole point of stopping the antagonism.In post 968, Servant Beast wrote:Because that would have added another point to the pointless antagonism score card.In post 966, Servant Lancer wrote:Why out over just ceasing with the provoking comments?
Most likely that Moon Cancer is straight up scum.In post 958, Servant Lancer wrote:There is probably something significant about foreigner and saber both voting moon cancer and then both becoming the counterwagons to moon cancer but I don’t yet know what that means
Uh, if I were scum and I wanted to buddy somebody I don't think it'd be you this game.In post 980, Servant Lancer wrote:Or maybe you realized buddying me wasn’t working and it wasn’t getting you towncred with anyone else eitherIn post 977, Servant Beast wrote:Yes, somehow my reads have developed over time and some players have risen into town reads, others have fallen.In post 976, Servant Lancer wrote:So you’ve gone from an early/strong townread on me to somehow reading possible scum motivation behind me trying to understand something that doesn’t make sense and you even admitted to not being optimal
ok
Have I started antagonizing them more after that point?In post 982, Servant Lancer wrote:Explain how I’m misinterpreting what you said.In post 981, Servant Beast wrote:I was attempting to remove a point from the score card. This is a misinterpretation.In post 978, Servant Lancer wrote:Stopping with the antagonism doesn’t sound to me like it would have added anything to the antagonism score card. Because that’s the whole point of stopping the antagonism.In post 968, Servant Beast wrote:Because that would have added another point to the pointless antagonism score card.In post 966, Servant Lancer wrote:Why out over just ceasing with the provoking comments?
I asked, why would you choose to out instead of deciding not to antagonize alter anymore?
You said “that” (which is surely not referring to outing unless you’re saying you deliberately outed in order to antagonize alter further, so must refer to “not antagonizing alter”) would increase antagonism. ??
Am I on planet earth right now.In post 983, Servant Saber wrote:Most likely that Moon Cancer is straight up scum.In post 958, Servant Lancer wrote:There is probably something significant about foreigner and saber both voting moon cancer and then both becoming the counterwagons to moon cancer but I don’t yet know what that means
I was hoping to find questions or things that would actually sort me. If I could claim my identity, people would see why my behaviors made sense. I feel that I am fighting with one hand tied behind my back since one of the FoSes on me was based on my identity.
I did accidently crumb my NP in a few places, but no one seems to doubt that. So providing that is just spam.
So shrug. I am going to brag a little instead. I self published a book. I don't believe I have mentioned this on MS so...
https://www.amazon.com/Mind-Walkers-Hel ... B084M83FTV
It's about a woman who finds a magical suit, gets abucted and winds up finding love with the enemy warrior princess.
This is not what you said, so I’m unclear as to how I was misinterpreting your words.In post 985, Servant Beast wrote:Have I started antagonizing them more after that point?In post 982, Servant Lancer wrote:Explain how I’m misinterpreting what you said.In post 981, Servant Beast wrote:I was attempting to remove a point from the score card. This is a misinterpretation.In post 978, Servant Lancer wrote:Stopping with the antagonism doesn’t sound to me like it would have added anything to the antagonism score card. Because that’s the whole point of stopping the antagonism.In post 968, Servant Beast wrote:Because that would have added another point to the pointless antagonism score card.In post 966, Servant Lancer wrote:Why out over just ceasing with the provoking comments?
I asked, why would you choose to out instead of deciding not to antagonize alter anymore?
You said “that” (which is surely not referring to outing unless you’re saying you deliberately outed in order to antagonize alter further, so must refer to “not antagonizing alter”) would increase antagonism. ??
I'm stating I wanted to remove some of the points of antagonism. I can both stop antagonizing someone and start treating existing wounds. They're not mutually exclusive.
At best, you just don't comprehend it. Rather than choosing not to.In post 986, Servant Lancer wrote:The part of your thought process that I’m trying to understand is, given the option of simply not antagonizing alter which is always available and costs nothing and reveals no information and solves the situation just fine on its own, why would you instead choose to out Shielder, after repeatedly telling everyone not to give unnecessary information?
And none of your responses have given me an understanding of this choice
the pointless anagonism in which I was sarcastically congratulating them on finding a scummy post from someone who wasn't scum. That was the crumb.In post 987, Servant Lancer wrote:What is this “existing wounds”?
The only possible interpretation I see of this is you chose to out Shielder rather than stop provoking Alter because you thought not provoking alter would have added more antagonism. which, obviously, doesn’t make sense to me as a reason to make the choice you did. now you’re saying I’m misinterpreting that. I don’t know how else I’m supposed to read this sentence.In post 968, Servant Beast wrote:Because that would have added another point to the pointless antagonism score card.In post 966, Servant Lancer wrote:Why out over just ceasing with the provoking comments?
What about the rest of my question?In post 994, Servant Beast wrote:I'm saying that town contradict themselves all the time, that just because I say, hey guys don't give out information unnecessarily means I'm incapable of doing so.
I'm not made of stone and I'm not perfectly rational. As scum I tend to be more rational if anything.
In post 993, Servant Lancer wrote:I don’t really care how you read me, I think it’s not very believable but that’s not really relevant. I’m more concerned with actually getting an answer from you that I can vibe with but you kind of seem intent on not giving me that and accusing me of misinterpreting you when I don’t know what other possible interpretation there was to what you said.
A better player would be able to read this post and figure out the player's alignment from it. Please specify the rest of your question.In post 996, Servant Lancer wrote:What about the rest of my question?In post 994, Servant Beast wrote:I'm saying that town contradict themselves all the time, that just because I say, hey guys don't give out information unnecessarily means I'm incapable of doing so.
I'm not made of stone and I'm not perfectly rational. As scum I tend to be more rational if anything.