In post 2164, Aneninen wrote:Hmmm... and has that claim changed your reads on Pere?
did you read what he claimed when? (follow the link?)
In post 2164, Aneninen wrote:Hmmm... and has that claim changed your reads on Pere?
In post 646, Garmr wrote:In post 562, Boonskiies wrote:Don't push me to claim, please.
In post 572, Boonskiies wrote:I'm almost positive it's multiball. My role basically implies it.
Kinda annoyed that someone would passively role claim day 1 with only one vote on them. If it is multiball all you had to do was wait one day and you could of keeped it hidden from scum. Unless your just saying that to get some town cred but that will sort itself out in time.
UNVOTE: boon
VOTE: Aneninen
In post 2155, T S O wrote:In post 2136, TierShift wrote:In post 2132, T S O wrote:Why would scum-GM randomly decide to push Thor?
well, why the heck would she not? Why would her scumreading thor make her have a 'death wish'?
Because there was no support for Thor being scum at the time and, more importantly, Thor is probably one of the worst players to pick a fight with as scum onsite due to his proficiency in winning arguments, propensity to re-evaluate reads and even tunnel if need be. GM's not stupid.
In post 2171, Scripten wrote:In post 2170, beastcharizard wrote:So, who is town and who is scum?
I'm town. Thor's probably town. TSO and Davesaz are probably town. AxleGreaser... might be town? It's a tough one.
In post 2158, goodmorning wrote:Townies that look scummy are townies that Scum can make eat a lynch. I thought that would be obvious.
In post 2164, Aneninen wrote:The thing you pointed out in your next post made me think about Goodmorning. I'll check that later.
In post 2123, Slandaar wrote:In post 2119, The Fonz wrote:#1819: I see no reason for town to make this post. Boonskiies was claiming non-specific PR. EVEN IF as town, you thought some nuance of it made clear he was cop, what would be the benefit?
I was explaining to Boon that as the cop you shouldn't be so obvious to ensure that other power roles, who are unsure of whether Boon was playing his role well and thought they may do similar, would know not to play like Boon.
Fonzie do you actually think I would post that without an actual reason even as scum? (Hint: that wasn't the real reason)
Some of the other stuff you wrote is also equally terrible.
In post 2124, Slandaar wrote:I wasn't going to reply to this but eh...
In post 2119, The Fonz wrote:1789 isn't entirely fair to goodmorning. What GM's saying, I think, is that a push on a claimed PR is unlikely to work and likely to make you look scummy.
What is the difference between scum trying to lynch a claimed PR and trying to lynch another unclaimed townie?
Neither is more or less scummy. The difference between them is the reasoning for trying to lynch - this is what defines if the person is scummy or not. Therefore if scum think they can lynch a claimed PR with the reasoning they have, then why wouldn't they?
In post 2127, goodmorning wrote:In post 2119, The Fonz wrote:coming in and pushing a case hard =/= tunnelling.
No, but coming in and pushing a case hard whilst not doing anything else is.
In post 2134, davesaz wrote:I'm quite surprised that nobody scumread me after I "caught" Egg having "scum knowledge".
This brings up two inconsistencies. Some players are seen as scummy if they point out other players who seem to have inside information, but other players who make the same observation are not scummy. And there seems to be a double standard on the posting of apparent inside information as well.
UNVOTE:
In post 2141, Egg wrote:
The Fonz wrote:I would kinda like to know why scum would come up with the super-derpy 'not talking to someone' reaction test, though, then openly admit it wasn't in keeping with her meta. That seems convoluted and unlikely to benefit any scum end.
Seems like keeping busy, scum hunting, and doing stuff, but isn't. And if I did something outside of my town meta as either alignment, I'd sure as fuck admit it. People research that shit.
In post 2182, Slandaar wrote:Also I don't have time to get quotes but basically GM said to someone Tier I think to reread Thors posts when Tier said he thought Thor was town. This is off because all GM has is 'tone' so what was Tier supposed to be rereading for?
I may try explain this better later. With quotes it's clearer.
In post 2184, The Fonz wrote:In post 2127, goodmorning wrote:In post 2119, The Fonz wrote:coming in and pushing a case hard =/= tunnelling.
No, but coming in and pushing a case hard whilst not doing anything else is.
No. What else are you supposed to do other than find scum and push them?
In post 2184, The Fonz wrote:I know I keep trying to read the TSO/Anen/Axle back and forth, but just get a headache very quickly and stop being able to follow it.
In post 501, PeregrineV wrote:4. Boonskiies- Probably scum
Goodmorning wrote:You've never PR hunted?
Aneninen to Thor wrote:Hmmm... and has that claim changed your reads on Pere?
Aneninen wrote:I've posted about that but this part is obsolete now, because Hephaestus replaced out.
Beast wrote:So, who is town and who is scum?
The Fonz wrote:Causation runs the other way: Scum tend to try to behave in ways they can justify as 'How I play as town,' and if called out on apparent meta-inconsistencies, try to claim the play wasn't inconsistent in the first place, imho. Town seem less likely to care about being meta-inconsistent if they think something could be useful.
The Fonz wrote:Oh, also, 'Literally doing nothing' doesn't seem to constitute 'seems like being busy, but not' to me.
In post 2181, Slandaar wrote:In post 2171, Scripten wrote:Everyone else is hinging on various levels of null for me.
Am I?
In post 2150, Garmr wrote:
To be fair I scum read people sheeping thor on the pere wagon If that's what you mean by thors wagon and thors town reading everyone of them and I felt he could only explain one adequately.
In post 2144, goodmorning wrote:
In post 2139, Slandaar wrote:In post 2127, goodmorning wrote:Why would I come into a fresh discussion with an agenda?
Is this a serious question?
Lets talk hypothetically; If you are scum do you think you would have an agenda while entering a fresh discussion?
I begin to see the problem here. One of us is wrong about my alignment. Hmmmmm.
The only agenda I have, as either alignment, is to figure things out.
I don't come into questioning intending anything else.
In post 2167, Muffin wrote:So in other words Aneninen, you can't demonstrate why Slandaar is scum, and can only throw Appeals to Emotion?
Why are you voting Slandaar? You can't even come up with reasons why he is scum.
In post 2175, AxleGreaser wrote:In post 2164, Aneninen wrote:Hmmm... and has that claim changed your reads on Pere?
did you read what he claimed when? (follow the link?)
In post 2180, Slandaar wrote:
In post 2164, Aneninen wrote:The thing you pointed out in your next post made me think about Goodmorning. I'll check that later.
It made you think? about what? how you should have been reading GM's posts?
In post 2190, Egg wrote:Aneninen wrote:I've posted about that but this part is obsolete now, because Hephaestus replaced out.
No. It's still relevant. He was still in this game with a role, alignment, and everything. You made an argument that I disagreed with. I was trying to see where you were coming from. The fact that he replaced out doesn't change that.
In post 2196, Muffin wrote:Can you guys stop theory crafting.
My opinion is that Aneninen is scum for reason s aforementioned.
It is a distraction to be arguing about theory, this game is long enough