for one, I was playing on a phone all day yesterday while road tripping, so it was difficult to go back through past pages and quote things out.. It wasn't a conscious effort to avoid you.
Posted: Mon Feb 27, 2017 3:44 am
by TwoFace
Posted: Mon Feb 27, 2017 4:39 am
by Barleycorn
@mod transcend is on both keyser and eddie in your vc
i wouldn't say transcend made up massive resistance. dog explicitly townreads keyser, fire explicitly townreads keyser, and despite many players townreading me they don't want to sheep the keyser wagon. there's definitely resistance, so you'd only be disagreeing with the word massive
VC fixed
Posted: Mon Feb 27, 2017 4:45 am
by Barleycorn
In post 242, Eddie Cane wrote:that was the second point there basically. so, I guess your answer is yes.
ok. then, for the third time, would you agree that this (189) is a different point than the one you made in 191?
i scum lean you because you made a case to support what you said was your scum lean on dog, i showed there was (at least one) issue with it, and then you made a new case. i am willing to believe the new case was your genuine thoughts on dog and not something you made up once you realized your scum lean was deteriorating, i think you've proved that in our exchange. but i do need you to acknowledge that they're two different cases.
Posted: Mon Feb 27, 2017 4:47 am
by Eddie Cane
In post 239, Eddie Cane wrote:I think the confusion is this. I'm explaining what I interpreted you asking me to explain. I'm not making a case against dog because I'm not voting him, I'm voting shadow. so a new argument in another post might seem strange, but it's more me trying to answer you and get my words out, it's not me trying to convince you to vote dog.
doesn't this answer that?
Posted: Mon Feb 27, 2017 4:52 am
by Barleycorn
i think my pressure on eddie would have been good if he were actually scum. but reading our exchange again i think he genuinely thought from the very beginning that his two cases on dog were actually one case. this goes against my suspicion that he realized his original case was NAI and made up a new one to support his scum lean.
i think eddie is town and i wonder why transcend is voting him.
pedit: oh i see. that post is really vague. you were basically saying what i am thinking now? which is that you believed both cases from the beginning and the timing of your posts was not connected to my question in 190.
Posted: Mon Feb 27, 2017 4:54 am
by Barleycorn
VOTE: mozamis
keyser feels slimy. but i'll go back here since i think we can actually lynch this one.
Posted: Mon Feb 27, 2017 4:56 am
by Eddie Cane
in all honesty I'm still not seeing what you're saying entirely. 191 was in reply to 190, but I didn't really see it as a seperate argument, I thought 189 implied it.
In post 282, Eddie Cane wrote:in all honesty I'm still not seeing what you're saying entirely. 191 was in reply to 190, but I didn't really see it as a seperate argument, I thought 189 implied it.
i'm not sure how you think "this thing is strange" implies "this thing is scum indicative for this specific reason i am only saying now"
Posted: Mon Feb 27, 2017 5:03 am
by Eddie Cane
the post was directly in reply to you asking why he's a slight scum lean for me.
i wouldn't say transcend made up massive resistance. dog explicitly townreads keyser, fire explicitly townreads keyser, and despite many players townreading me they don't want to sheep the keyser wagon. there's definitely resistance, so you'd only be disagreeing with the word massive
VC fixed
Yes, players have stated their mixed reads on me but I don't view this as a DIRECT attempt to dismantle my wagon or oppose the scum-case on me.
IMO, "Massive resistance" was an excessive/OTT description of what actually happened. To me it sounds like Transcend was saying: 'look, only one other person wants to lynch scum-Keyser, scum are resisting and stopping the wagon from forming!' - this is the narrative Transcend was painting.
In my eyes this was an irrational position to hold - the VC showed there were many players stalled on one or two votes. Just because there's a difference in reads doesn't mean it translates to "massive resistance".
Posted: Mon Feb 27, 2017 5:07 am
by Barleycorn
In post 285, Eddie Cane wrote:the post was directly in reply to you asking why he's a slight scum lean for me.
holy ****
189 was in direct reply. but what was contained in 189 was a bad argument. 190 was my question about that bad argument. 191 is your response. 191 is not a bad argument but it is a different argument.
if you still disagree with this i am going to leave it because, again, i believe you did not make up 191 after i asked 190, and if 284 doesn't get my dissonance across nothing will. if both of these are true this conversation has little point.
overeager in what respect? other than pushing dog (and then relenting a bit) and then a little on eddie i haven't seen mozamis do anything but give his reads
Posted: Mon Feb 27, 2017 5:24 am
by Transcend
VOTE: moz
whatever
Posted: Mon Feb 27, 2017 5:26 am
by Transcend
basically if barley's scum leave me alive til lylo and you've won the game
Posted: Mon Feb 27, 2017 5:26 am
by Barleycorn
? didn't want to pick apart your reads, just wanted to have a discussion. i had no issue with your fire vote.
In post 285, Eddie Cane wrote:the post was directly in reply to you asking why he's a slight scum lean for me.
holy ****
189 was in direct reply. but what was contained in 189 was a bad argument. 190 was my question about that bad argument. 191 is your response. 191 is not a bad argument but it is a different argument.
if you still disagree with this i am going to leave it because, again, i believe you did not make up 191 after i asked 190, and if 284 doesn't get my dissonance across nothing will. if both of these are true this conversation has little point.
bro I can feel your frustration sorry, it's just not clicking for me. maybe someone else could reword it?
"171 is a scum claim btw"
"i don't like reading keyser's posts and get little from them when i do. i also don't like that keyser didn't interact with my 159"
"keyser's interaction with dog was weird."
"i didn't understand your motivations"
"I'm paranoid he's buddying up to me"
"Excellent. Two obv town here. Massive resistance. Scum would love to run up a town!keyser"
"gerryoat - Keyser Söze (L-6). Lol"
Then your recent suggested/hinted scum-feel to add as the cherry on top of the cake:
"keyser feels slimy"
All items that players were trying to suggest were scum-indicative. I'm so "slimy" none of those accusations stuck
[FYI: I refer all scum-feels, observations of suspicion/paranoia/VCA/scum-read reasons as a growing/developing 'scum-case' on a slot]
I think I have answered all allegations on my slot efficiently, with comfortable fluency and articulation
