Day 1 deadline - (expired on 2016-03-17 09:00:00)
Notes - All players have confirmed.
In post 86, BlueTrin wrote:
In post 64, Gale Wing Srock wrote:Lowellidk about that, but GuyFawkes just got serious after my post. And why are you town reading him?
Pista, I am not liking Blue because he is mixing troll posts with serious ones and is throwing around votes to get them to stick. Post 51 after 49 is what has pinged me the most, so thats why my vote is on him.
Lovelygiant, well GuyFawkes just mentioned that he was having fun in RVS. What do you think about that? Doesn't seem like he was faking with troll posts as Blue seems to be doing.
First, of all he says that I am wasting other people time in RVS, which is fair enough, but as you can see nothing was going on so it was actually the best way to get people to start talking, this is why it wasn't useful. You can see as well that we stopped immediately as the game was becoming serious.
So now he says that I must be scum for throwing random votes during a part of the gamewhere he was inactive and neither helping or participating and where people were just trolling around? Then he accuses GuyFawkes of becoming serious whenhe implicitly asked himself the game to be more serious.
This does not make any sense.
So I wanted to know if it was a reaction test and kind of wanted to know if it mostly a reaction test, it does not seems so.
In post 91, Postie wrote:In post 76, Gale Wing Srock wrote:Postie, I want to understand if my read on BlueTrin and Lovelygiant is something that matches yours or not. Makes me read the players better that way.
Well, the tone of BlueTrin's posts makes me uneasy, but it might be that he just always talks that way so ehh (I'll go take a look at some of his past games later when I'm not phone posting). Not sure on lovelygiant either, but I think I have gut townlean.
Why did you want to know about these two specifically and why did you choose to ask me about them over any other player?
In post 70, chilledtea wrote:There is a reason I don't like rvs. It just doesn't do much for me.
For eg, I personally think GWS reaction is null tell.
In post 98, Lowell wrote:I guess GWS is going to double-down on that try-hard thing by trying even harder to look like an active player. Whatever. There are worse things, I guess, but I'm not sold.
I like FA for town. Mostly. And dislike that guy (I forget who) who felt the need to give a treatise on why he doesn't like RVS. Dumb.
In post 94, GuyFawkes wrote:In post 93, lovelygiant wrote:So far, I like anyone who's not trying to perpetuate RVS and trolly unhelpful nonsense.
My vote stays comfortably in place for now.
oh I disagree. my "trolling" was very helpful nonsense.
It exposed you as scum.
Anybody that wasn't looking to make a BS case (ie town) took it for what it was. Only scum (ie you) would try to get somebody lynched for it.
In post 102, lovelygiant wrote:I appreciate your activity, Gale, but a lot of it seems flippant. Are the answers you recieve from your questions actually helping you with your reads, or are you asking them to just look busy and helpful?
In post 98, Lowell wrote:I guess GWS is going to double-down on that try-hard thing by trying even harder to look like an active player. Whatever. There are worse things, I guess, but I'm not sold.
In post 102, lovelygiant wrote:I appreciate your activity, Gale, but a lot of it seems flippant. Are the answers you recieve from your questions actually helping you with your reads, or are you asking them to just look busy and helpful?
Guy hasn't shown anything I've needed to ask about. I'm not parking my vote. It'll change when he does.
I actually think I like Lowell. FA as well. Towny vibes thus far.
In post 97, Dierfire wrote:
Postie's 75 feels theatrical if all that she needed to hear was "I want to know if my reads match yours" to answer. Her 91 still strikes me as slightly theatrical but the questions are more legitimate.
In post 107, Gale Wing Srock wrote:Regarding my activity or my playstyle, this is how I usually play so Idk what you guys are seeing scummy in this. Trying hard is what I usually do (because I play one or two games at a time), and I am all for working together.
In post 98, Lowell wrote:I like FA for town. Mostly. And dislike that guy (I forget who) who felt the need to give a treatise on why he doesn't like RVS. Dumb.
In post 75, Postie wrote:
I'll answer your question if you can tell me what you're hoping to gain from my answer.
In post 112, BlueTrin wrote:I didn't like this post from Postie:
In post 75, Postie wrote:
I'll answer your question if you can tell me what you're hoping to gain from my answer.
Why would he need to know what you hope to gain ?
In post 113, Postie wrote:In post 112, BlueTrin wrote:I didn't like this post from Postie:
In post 75, Postie wrote:
I'll answer your question if you can tell me what you're hoping to gain from my answer.
Why would he need to know what you hope to gain ?
Because the question was superficial, so I wanted to know whether there was some kind of town thought process or mindset behind it or whether GWS was just trying to look busy.
In post 87, Frozen Angel wrote:In post 60, Lowell wrote:guy is town. GWS is scum. That last post was an obvious try-hard.
I had the complete vise versa read.
why an attempt to end RVS is scummy move and a guy who responded I'm not trolling I' just keeping the game in RVS is town?
In post 66, Gale Wing Srock wrote:Well it could be, have been eagerly waiting for a game for the past few days, and may be my last win got stuck with me.
Anyways, what do you think of GuyFawkes? His sudden change from being casual to being serious is actually making me second guess my read on him. I haven't seen a townie change their play so quickly when pointed out.
In post 115, Almost50 wrote:Now; a HYPOTHETICAL QUESTION to all: If YOU were the Vigilante; who would you be shooting tonight? Name ONLY ONE player.
In post 115, Almost50 wrote:OK, here's an attempt to disrupt these still waters, but first:
To the VIG (if existent): This is NOT a claim, so do NOT out yourself.
Now; a HYPOTHETICAL QUESTION to all: If YOU were the Vigilante; who would you be shooting tonight? Name ONLY ONE player.
Thank you.
P.S. Even if you think the question is funny, scummy, irrelevant ..etc. PLEASE ANSWER THE QUESTION.
Note: My TUMMY does NOT HURT, but THANKS for ASKING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
In post 120, pistachi0n wrote:In post 66, Gale Wing Srock wrote:Well it could be, have been eagerly waiting for a game for the past few days, and may be my last win got stuck with me.
Anyways, what do you think of GuyFawkes? His sudden change from being casual to being serious is actually making me second guess my read on him. I haven't seen a townie change their play so quickly when pointed out.
He went from casual to serious as RVS was ending. Completely normal.
VOTE: Gale
In post 64, Gale Wing Srock wrote:Lovelygiant, well GuyFawkes just mentioned that he was having fun in RVS. What do you think about that? Doesn't seem like he was faking with troll posts as Blue seems to be doing.
In post 66, Gale Wing Srock wrote:Anyways, what do you think of GuyFawkes? His sudden change from being casual to being serious is actually making me second guess my read on him. I haven't seen a townie change their play so quickly when pointed out.
In post 74, Gale Wing Srock wrote:
In 79, you ruined my reaction test to GuyFawkes (proof 94 - 96). I was double checking my read on him, why would you obstruct that to prove your point?
In post 102, lovelygiant wrote:I appreciate your activity, Gale, but a lot of it seems flippant. Are the answers you recieve from your questions actually helping you with your reads, or are you asking them to just look busy and helpful?
Guy hasn't shown anything I've needed to ask about. I'm not parking my vote. It'll change when he does.
I actually think I like Lowell. FA as well. Towny vibes thus far.
In post 105, lovelygiant wrote:In post 94, GuyFawkes wrote:In post 93, lovelygiant wrote:So far, I like anyone who's not trying to perpetuate RVS and trolly unhelpful nonsense.
My vote stays comfortably in place for now.
oh I disagree. my "trolling" was very helpful nonsense.
It exposed you as scum.
Anybody that wasn't looking to make a BS case (ie town) took it for what it was. Only scum (ie you) would try to get somebody lynched for it.
I feel very unexposed. Sorry.
There's a difference between RVS and baiting. What you did was spread misinformation, wait for someone to correct you, and then claim they're scum for correcting you. You instigated. Your every response screamed predetermined, as if it didn't matter WHO was going to correct you. Bam, they're scum for it.
You're just looking for a lynch and I don't care for it.