|
United Kingdom10443 Posts
On June 19 2015 02:00 wherebugsgo wrote:Show nested quote +On June 19 2015 01:37 GlowingBear wrote:On June 19 2015 01:36 KelsierSC wrote:On June 19 2015 01:35 GlowingBear wrote:
My wording is TERRIBLE in my latest post
Tell me if you can understand. In case you can't, I will rewrite it lynching low activity is better than someone scummy. because if scum has a high activity they will give themselves away at some point whereas low activity is always a question. that right? Exactly!!! or, you know, the fact that this is a retarded opinion if you are town and actually incredibly indicative that you are scum Let's break it down. From a GB=town perspective first: it's not at all helpful because you eliminate entire possibilities when scumhunting and you invite scum to be more active by saying, "oh if you're more active we won't lynch you!" Townies, on the other hand, are not going to give a shit because they will continue to play like they will play and they could honestly not give a fuck what a player like you thinks. Indeed this is one of the biggest problems with using surface-level things like activity to attempt to scum hunt because you end up shooting yourself in the foot. You maybe catch the low activity scum if you are lucky or manage to use other clues to find them but it is incredibly rare that you can nail an entire team or even a significant portion of a team that way. It certainly wouldn't have worked in the game we played in together where you were scum, where all 3 scum members were active (AND YOU SHOULD FUCKING KNOW THAT IF YOU ARE TOWN) whereas town almost mislynched into some dude that was going to get modkilled anyway, and all the other lynch candidates would obviously not have flipped town like Shockey and Shining and Tubesock and whoever else was in that game and was scummy. So, if you are town in this game GB you should stop pushing anti town things and pushing like 7 different people with no reasons. On the other hand if you imagine this from a GB=scum perspective this is actually really great for GB scum to say this. If GB scum says we're only lynching inactives, it's easy to get town support because no one likes inactives. Reading active people is hard so it's really easy to fake scum reads on inactive players. Indeed this fits best with GB's style this game because he asserts he is "reaction fishing" when in reality this is just a thin veil to look for town sentiment. Similarly in the previous game where he was scum, GB was more than willing to let LS, his scum teammate, live on day 1 but instead he wanted to push someone like Stutters who wasn't doing shit. Why else would he ask me whether I would lynch VA randomly yet offer none of his own thought process? This in particular is very scummy because he was the one that prodded me for not providing opinions, yet when I do he offers absolutely nothing in return! At no point did GB actually make any sort of reasonable attempt to work with me despite claiming to want to do so. Indeed, he actually undermines what I am doing by saying that I am not attempting to get town to consolidate yet being the biggest offender by far of the very things he is accusing others of doing. Lastly, the whole "we're not going to lynch actives" thing is great for his scum style because as he proved in the last game, he is a very active scum player. When pushing the idea that we shouldn't lynch active players because it's a bad idea, he's masking his own style as scum because he himself is an active scum player. It's merely a stone that he is using to knock out multiple birds at once-it's a play in his own self interest in multiple ways. That coupled with his complete lack of reads and reasons this game pretty much confirms he is scum.
hold on..are you actually town?
|
My son has a doctors appointment at 330 EDT not sure if I will be around at EoD
|
BF's is fucking weird, I'll admit that. He keeps saying he'll be back, he's going to give reads, but nothing comes out other than attacking Holyflare, but it's not enough to make me change my mind on my LS push.
GB is still null for me, still hasn't read my filter and given me a response, if it keeps going ignored, he's just going to keep dropping into my scum lean.
|
On June 19 2015 02:02 KelsierSC wrote:Show nested quote +On June 19 2015 02:00 wherebugsgo wrote:On June 19 2015 01:37 GlowingBear wrote:On June 19 2015 01:36 KelsierSC wrote:On June 19 2015 01:35 GlowingBear wrote:
My wording is TERRIBLE in my latest post
Tell me if you can understand. In case you can't, I will rewrite it lynching low activity is better than someone scummy. because if scum has a high activity they will give themselves away at some point whereas low activity is always a question. that right? Exactly!!! or, you know, the fact that this is a retarded opinion if you are town and actually incredibly indicative that you are scum Let's break it down. From a GB=town perspective first: it's not at all helpful because you eliminate entire possibilities when scumhunting and you invite scum to be more active by saying, "oh if you're more active we won't lynch you!" Townies, on the other hand, are not going to give a shit because they will continue to play like they will play and they could honestly not give a fuck what a player like you thinks. Indeed this is one of the biggest problems with using surface-level things like activity to attempt to scum hunt because you end up shooting yourself in the foot. You maybe catch the low activity scum if you are lucky or manage to use other clues to find them but it is incredibly rare that you can nail an entire team or even a significant portion of a team that way. It certainly wouldn't have worked in the game we played in together where you were scum, where all 3 scum members were active (AND YOU SHOULD FUCKING KNOW THAT IF YOU ARE TOWN) whereas town almost mislynched into some dude that was going to get modkilled anyway, and all the other lynch candidates would obviously not have flipped town like Shockey and Shining and Tubesock and whoever else was in that game and was scummy. So, if you are town in this game GB you should stop pushing anti town things and pushing like 7 different people with no reasons. On the other hand if you imagine this from a GB=scum perspective this is actually really great for GB scum to say this. If GB scum says we're only lynching inactives, it's easy to get town support because no one likes inactives. Reading active people is hard so it's really easy to fake scum reads on inactive players. Indeed this fits best with GB's style this game because he asserts he is "reaction fishing" when in reality this is just a thin veil to look for town sentiment. Similarly in the previous game where he was scum, GB was more than willing to let LS, his scum teammate, live on day 1 but instead he wanted to push someone like Stutters who wasn't doing shit. Why else would he ask me whether I would lynch VA randomly yet offer none of his own thought process? This in particular is very scummy because he was the one that prodded me for not providing opinions, yet when I do he offers absolutely nothing in return! At no point did GB actually make any sort of reasonable attempt to work with me despite claiming to want to do so. Indeed, he actually undermines what I am doing by saying that I am not attempting to get town to consolidate yet being the biggest offender by far of the very things he is accusing others of doing. Lastly, the whole "we're not going to lynch actives" thing is great for his scum style because as he proved in the last game, he is a very active scum player. When pushing the idea that we shouldn't lynch active players because it's a bad idea, he's masking his own style as scum because he himself is an active scum player. It's merely a stone that he is using to knock out multiple birds at once-it's a play in his own self interest in multiple ways. That coupled with his complete lack of reads and reasons this game pretty much confirms he is scum. hold on..are you actually town?
This reaction doesn't feel genuine to me.
|
United Kingdom10443 Posts
On June 19 2015 02:06 NydusHerMain wrote:Show nested quote +On June 19 2015 02:02 KelsierSC wrote:On June 19 2015 02:00 wherebugsgo wrote:On June 19 2015 01:37 GlowingBear wrote:On June 19 2015 01:36 KelsierSC wrote:On June 19 2015 01:35 GlowingBear wrote:
My wording is TERRIBLE in my latest post
Tell me if you can understand. In case you can't, I will rewrite it lynching low activity is better than someone scummy. because if scum has a high activity they will give themselves away at some point whereas low activity is always a question. that right? Exactly!!! or, you know, the fact that this is a retarded opinion if you are town and actually incredibly indicative that you are scum Let's break it down. From a GB=town perspective first: it's not at all helpful because you eliminate entire possibilities when scumhunting and you invite scum to be more active by saying, "oh if you're more active we won't lynch you!" Townies, on the other hand, are not going to give a shit because they will continue to play like they will play and they could honestly not give a fuck what a player like you thinks. Indeed this is one of the biggest problems with using surface-level things like activity to attempt to scum hunt because you end up shooting yourself in the foot. You maybe catch the low activity scum if you are lucky or manage to use other clues to find them but it is incredibly rare that you can nail an entire team or even a significant portion of a team that way. It certainly wouldn't have worked in the game we played in together where you were scum, where all 3 scum members were active (AND YOU SHOULD FUCKING KNOW THAT IF YOU ARE TOWN) whereas town almost mislynched into some dude that was going to get modkilled anyway, and all the other lynch candidates would obviously not have flipped town like Shockey and Shining and Tubesock and whoever else was in that game and was scummy. So, if you are town in this game GB you should stop pushing anti town things and pushing like 7 different people with no reasons. On the other hand if you imagine this from a GB=scum perspective this is actually really great for GB scum to say this. If GB scum says we're only lynching inactives, it's easy to get town support because no one likes inactives. Reading active people is hard so it's really easy to fake scum reads on inactive players. Indeed this fits best with GB's style this game because he asserts he is "reaction fishing" when in reality this is just a thin veil to look for town sentiment. Similarly in the previous game where he was scum, GB was more than willing to let LS, his scum teammate, live on day 1 but instead he wanted to push someone like Stutters who wasn't doing shit. Why else would he ask me whether I would lynch VA randomly yet offer none of his own thought process? This in particular is very scummy because he was the one that prodded me for not providing opinions, yet when I do he offers absolutely nothing in return! At no point did GB actually make any sort of reasonable attempt to work with me despite claiming to want to do so. Indeed, he actually undermines what I am doing by saying that I am not attempting to get town to consolidate yet being the biggest offender by far of the very things he is accusing others of doing. Lastly, the whole "we're not going to lynch actives" thing is great for his scum style because as he proved in the last game, he is a very active scum player. When pushing the idea that we shouldn't lynch active players because it's a bad idea, he's masking his own style as scum because he himself is an active scum player. It's merely a stone that he is using to knock out multiple birds at once-it's a play in his own self interest in multiple ways. That coupled with his complete lack of reads and reasons this game pretty much confirms he is scum. hold on..are you actually town? This reaction doesn't feel genuine to me.
alright then do something
|
On June 19 2015 02:02 KelsierSC wrote:Show nested quote +On June 19 2015 02:00 wherebugsgo wrote:On June 19 2015 01:37 GlowingBear wrote:On June 19 2015 01:36 KelsierSC wrote:On June 19 2015 01:35 GlowingBear wrote:
My wording is TERRIBLE in my latest post
Tell me if you can understand. In case you can't, I will rewrite it lynching low activity is better than someone scummy. because if scum has a high activity they will give themselves away at some point whereas low activity is always a question. that right? Exactly!!! or, you know, the fact that this is a retarded opinion if you are town and actually incredibly indicative that you are scum Let's break it down. From a GB=town perspective first: it's not at all helpful because you eliminate entire possibilities when scumhunting and you invite scum to be more active by saying, "oh if you're more active we won't lynch you!" Townies, on the other hand, are not going to give a shit because they will continue to play like they will play and they could honestly not give a fuck what a player like you thinks. Indeed this is one of the biggest problems with using surface-level things like activity to attempt to scum hunt because you end up shooting yourself in the foot. You maybe catch the low activity scum if you are lucky or manage to use other clues to find them but it is incredibly rare that you can nail an entire team or even a significant portion of a team that way. It certainly wouldn't have worked in the game we played in together where you were scum, where all 3 scum members were active (AND YOU SHOULD FUCKING KNOW THAT IF YOU ARE TOWN) whereas town almost mislynched into some dude that was going to get modkilled anyway, and all the other lynch candidates would obviously not have flipped town like Shockey and Shining and Tubesock and whoever else was in that game and was scummy. So, if you are town in this game GB you should stop pushing anti town things and pushing like 7 different people with no reasons. On the other hand if you imagine this from a GB=scum perspective this is actually really great for GB scum to say this. If GB scum says we're only lynching inactives, it's easy to get town support because no one likes inactives. Reading active people is hard so it's really easy to fake scum reads on inactive players. Indeed this fits best with GB's style this game because he asserts he is "reaction fishing" when in reality this is just a thin veil to look for town sentiment. Similarly in the previous game where he was scum, GB was more than willing to let LS, his scum teammate, live on day 1 but instead he wanted to push someone like Stutters who wasn't doing shit. Why else would he ask me whether I would lynch VA randomly yet offer none of his own thought process? This in particular is very scummy because he was the one that prodded me for not providing opinions, yet when I do he offers absolutely nothing in return! At no point did GB actually make any sort of reasonable attempt to work with me despite claiming to want to do so. Indeed, he actually undermines what I am doing by saying that I am not attempting to get town to consolidate yet being the biggest offender by far of the very things he is accusing others of doing. Lastly, the whole "we're not going to lynch actives" thing is great for his scum style because as he proved in the last game, he is a very active scum player. When pushing the idea that we shouldn't lynch active players because it's a bad idea, he's masking his own style as scum because he himself is an active scum player. It's merely a stone that he is using to knock out multiple birds at once-it's a play in his own self interest in multiple ways. That coupled with his complete lack of reads and reasons this game pretty much confirms he is scum. hold on..are you actually town?
if you are town do you legitimately find these posts useful?
Like, maybe I should just continue ignoring you even though I think you are more likely to be town now, but I would say you are one of the top 3 reasons this thread is so huge and full of useless posts, like, for example this one. Antagonizing people for reactions might be useful but just doing it just to do it is completely pointless if you are town.
I realize this may sound weird coming from me, one of the most aggressive players on the forum, but I'm pretty sure the reason that some of these players in this game aren't posting is because there are so many posts in this game and so many of them from you in particular are hostile.
|
I want to swap this to a bw on onegu but at the same time I'm okay with a bf lynch.
@bugs what's there not to get about what gb said? He's uneasy despite being one of the voters because it's got so many people voting on it whereas no one else is really up for vote consideration in comparison.
Gonna throw this out there and see if it sticks.
##Vote: onegu
If not, I'm fine with bf regardless.
|
On June 19 2015 01:58 GlowingBear wrote:Show nested quote +On June 19 2015 01:50 ShoCkeyy wrote:On June 18 2015 14:27 ShoCkeyy wrote:On June 18 2015 14:22 ritoky wrote:On June 18 2015 14:21 ShoCkeyy wrote:On June 18 2015 14:15 rsoultin wrote:
i'm not asking why you're scumreading lightningstrike shockey
i'm asking you why he is your top scumread...though perhaps the better way to phrase it is if he suddenly dropped dead, who else are you willing to lynch?
your only purpose for quoting those was to say nhm was town...multiple times? okay i guess lol >< In all honesty? You, but you still haven't given me a valid reason to call you scum and my current scum radar is going off on LS. And if you read my post you would see why he's my top scum read. And as mentioned I haven't fully looked into boxerfred yet. I've only read what holyflare has mentioned about him. that's cool. you once made a terrible list post a couple hours into the day and it was terrible. can you do that again but make it less terrible this time? thanks. I will post my list in the morning. Going to let the posts rack up a bit more. I want to see others thoughts before I finalize it for day 1. town: nhm - nhm's posting just reads town motivated, but he probably will drop to town lean due to his inactivity. ritoky - I like your posting style from the start, it probably rubs off the wrong way to certain people, but I found it easy to be able to communicate with you town lean: breshke - He really comes off as my highest town lean atm, his posting is like the game before and he was town with me. damdred - my reasons before. rsoul - her post below put her into the town lean last night. Still wary because she talks about LS as if he can't be scum. scum lean: LS - Read filter, I gave quite a few good points on him. bugs - His case will come afterwards, but his protection of LS just seems weird + Show Spoiler +On June 18 2015 22:55 wherebugsgo wrote:
I see I have been ninjaed.
Re: LS, I didn't defend LS prior to the claim because I myself was unsure of his alignment at that point. To me he seemed townish but my reasons were not very well qualified and it was mostly on the basis of him not acting in a very similar way to how he did in the last game where he was scum and we got him killed day 1. Indeed here his defense is a lot more passioned whereas in the previous game and in all the other scum games I read in which he got lynched he more or less rolled over and died.
The claim however pretty much instantly erased any doubts I had and that's when I chose to defend him because I knee jubjubs and scum would jump all over that shit to call him scum. The two worst responses IMO were yours and GB, and to a lesser extent Onegu whose only listed reason for voting was policy. IMO people who do not view that claim as a townish thing to do are either mafia or bad, and I really prefer not to assume someone is bad town when they have demonstrated some capability of thinking analytically.
GB's reaction to the claim was really terrible. He flipped his read on LS completely which is not what I would expect town to do simply on the basis of a claim. It also appeared very opportunistic because as soon as I showed resistance he backed off, and curiously tried to get my opinion on another low-hanging-fruit of a player, VA.
What's interesting to me here is that the more that I think on kt and write it out the more I find GB scummy than anyone else. Anyone else down to kill him today? I'm down, what's weird is that you talk about GB being weird for jumping off the LS train, but you're pretty much also doing the same thing, but with a lot more content to it... lohen - based on thread and points brought up on him. He's new to the game, but still hasn't really posted much... On June 18 2015 14:37 ritoky wrote:On June 18 2015 14:33 ShoCkeyy wrote:
Alright chops 4, btw what did you think of my push against LS and his responses to me? Also thoughts on rsoul? I agree with your points but not necessarily your conclusion. Because you seem to not regard the fact that he has done stupid claim shit like this as town on day 1 under no lynch pressure before. Your points aren't wrong, those are anti-town things and his responses to you are bleh at best. I learned from a recent Obs game that rsoul is an easy read for me in the late game. The problem is she shoots me as scum early in games and I shoot her as scum early in games so neither one of us ever gets there is we are opposing alignments. She is town for now cuz she seems interested in solving the game; will re-evaluate later. Except I expect after my outburst I am gonna get the HF treatment tonight. But what makes it the same as his previous claims? And I mentioned to him that it's easy to change meta, what are your thoughts on that? On June 18 2015 14:40 GlowingBear wrote:On June 18 2015 14:38 ShoCkeyy wrote:
GB give me your real thoughts on myself and LS, also what did you think of my push against LS? you were one of the few that I quoted. I don't remember it. I'll need to read your filter again. I think you're scum based on imperfect meta. I remember being on your skin last game and you kept being very... how could I say... cool headed? And I'm not actually seeing this here. LS has 8 pages of filter and I'm not lynching anyone like that day1 Did you ever read my filter? And why do you base games on largest filters? I don't get it, I have a small filter and I'm pro town. How does a large filter benefit town when trying to make cases on scum? On June 18 2015 14:32 rsoultin wrote:On June 18 2015 14:21 ShoCkeyy wrote:On June 18 2015 14:15 rsoultin wrote:
i'm not asking why you're scumreading lightningstrike shockey
i'm asking you why he is your top scumread...though perhaps the better way to phrase it is if he suddenly dropped dead, who else are you willing to lynch?
your only purpose for quoting those was to say nhm was town...multiple times? okay i guess lol >< In all honesty? You, but you still haven't given me a valid reason to call you scum and my current scum radar is going off on LS. And if you read my post you would see why he's my top scum read. And as mentioned I haven't fully looked into boxerfred yet. I've only read what holyflare has mentioned about him. oh i actually thought this was directed at rit lol >< dude, you're going to have to get over the fact that i'm ridiculously involved in threads. there's a method to the madness, and maybe it's not the best for town i'll admit but it somehow works best for me and regardless scum kills me frequently enough that apparently they don't like it either not really gonna change just cause people disapprove (especially since i doubt i can xP)if you read my filter, really read it, you will find what everyone finds and namely that is there's a ton more content than meets the eye  if all you've got is me and ls that's bad for you cause you're probably not lynching scum lol Bolded the necessary points so you can start understanding. Haven't read you filter yet I base day1 on biggest filters, not the whole game
What? Why? I based my day 1 on whole thread and the interactions that happen between players. How can you see what's going on if you're only doing the biggest filters.
|
United Kingdom10443 Posts
On June 19 2015 02:09 wherebugsgo wrote:Show nested quote +On June 19 2015 02:02 KelsierSC wrote:On June 19 2015 02:00 wherebugsgo wrote:On June 19 2015 01:37 GlowingBear wrote:On June 19 2015 01:36 KelsierSC wrote:On June 19 2015 01:35 GlowingBear wrote:
My wording is TERRIBLE in my latest post
Tell me if you can understand. In case you can't, I will rewrite it lynching low activity is better than someone scummy. because if scum has a high activity they will give themselves away at some point whereas low activity is always a question. that right? Exactly!!! or, you know, the fact that this is a retarded opinion if you are town and actually incredibly indicative that you are scum Let's break it down. From a GB=town perspective first: it's not at all helpful because you eliminate entire possibilities when scumhunting and you invite scum to be more active by saying, "oh if you're more active we won't lynch you!" Townies, on the other hand, are not going to give a shit because they will continue to play like they will play and they could honestly not give a fuck what a player like you thinks. Indeed this is one of the biggest problems with using surface-level things like activity to attempt to scum hunt because you end up shooting yourself in the foot. You maybe catch the low activity scum if you are lucky or manage to use other clues to find them but it is incredibly rare that you can nail an entire team or even a significant portion of a team that way. It certainly wouldn't have worked in the game we played in together where you were scum, where all 3 scum members were active (AND YOU SHOULD FUCKING KNOW THAT IF YOU ARE TOWN) whereas town almost mislynched into some dude that was going to get modkilled anyway, and all the other lynch candidates would obviously not have flipped town like Shockey and Shining and Tubesock and whoever else was in that game and was scummy. So, if you are town in this game GB you should stop pushing anti town things and pushing like 7 different people with no reasons. On the other hand if you imagine this from a GB=scum perspective this is actually really great for GB scum to say this. If GB scum says we're only lynching inactives, it's easy to get town support because no one likes inactives. Reading active people is hard so it's really easy to fake scum reads on inactive players. Indeed this fits best with GB's style this game because he asserts he is "reaction fishing" when in reality this is just a thin veil to look for town sentiment. Similarly in the previous game where he was scum, GB was more than willing to let LS, his scum teammate, live on day 1 but instead he wanted to push someone like Stutters who wasn't doing shit. Why else would he ask me whether I would lynch VA randomly yet offer none of his own thought process? This in particular is very scummy because he was the one that prodded me for not providing opinions, yet when I do he offers absolutely nothing in return! At no point did GB actually make any sort of reasonable attempt to work with me despite claiming to want to do so. Indeed, he actually undermines what I am doing by saying that I am not attempting to get town to consolidate yet being the biggest offender by far of the very things he is accusing others of doing. Lastly, the whole "we're not going to lynch actives" thing is great for his scum style because as he proved in the last game, he is a very active scum player. When pushing the idea that we shouldn't lynch active players because it's a bad idea, he's masking his own style as scum because he himself is an active scum player. It's merely a stone that he is using to knock out multiple birds at once-it's a play in his own self interest in multiple ways. That coupled with his complete lack of reads and reasons this game pretty much confirms he is scum. hold on..are you actually town? if you are town do you legitimately find these posts useful? Like, maybe I should just continue ignoring you even though I think you are more likely to be town now, but I would say you are one of the top 3 reasons this thread is so huge and full of useless posts, like, for example this one. Antagonizing people for reactions might be useful but just doing it just to do it is completely pointless if you are town. I realize this may sound weird coming from me, one of the most aggressive players on the forum, but I'm pretty sure the reason that some of these players in this game aren't posting is because there are so many posts in this game and so many of them from you in particular are hostile.
ok i will stop posting and everyone can stop crying
|
On June 19 2015 02:09 KelsierSC wrote:Show nested quote +On June 19 2015 02:06 NydusHerMain wrote:On June 19 2015 02:02 KelsierSC wrote:On June 19 2015 02:00 wherebugsgo wrote:On June 19 2015 01:37 GlowingBear wrote:On June 19 2015 01:36 KelsierSC wrote:On June 19 2015 01:35 GlowingBear wrote:
My wording is TERRIBLE in my latest post
Tell me if you can understand. In case you can't, I will rewrite it lynching low activity is better than someone scummy. because if scum has a high activity they will give themselves away at some point whereas low activity is always a question. that right? Exactly!!! or, you know, the fact that this is a retarded opinion if you are town and actually incredibly indicative that you are scum Let's break it down. From a GB=town perspective first: it's not at all helpful because you eliminate entire possibilities when scumhunting and you invite scum to be more active by saying, "oh if you're more active we won't lynch you!" Townies, on the other hand, are not going to give a shit because they will continue to play like they will play and they could honestly not give a fuck what a player like you thinks. Indeed this is one of the biggest problems with using surface-level things like activity to attempt to scum hunt because you end up shooting yourself in the foot. You maybe catch the low activity scum if you are lucky or manage to use other clues to find them but it is incredibly rare that you can nail an entire team or even a significant portion of a team that way. It certainly wouldn't have worked in the game we played in together where you were scum, where all 3 scum members were active (AND YOU SHOULD FUCKING KNOW THAT IF YOU ARE TOWN) whereas town almost mislynched into some dude that was going to get modkilled anyway, and all the other lynch candidates would obviously not have flipped town like Shockey and Shining and Tubesock and whoever else was in that game and was scummy. So, if you are town in this game GB you should stop pushing anti town things and pushing like 7 different people with no reasons. On the other hand if you imagine this from a GB=scum perspective this is actually really great for GB scum to say this. If GB scum says we're only lynching inactives, it's easy to get town support because no one likes inactives. Reading active people is hard so it's really easy to fake scum reads on inactive players. Indeed this fits best with GB's style this game because he asserts he is "reaction fishing" when in reality this is just a thin veil to look for town sentiment. Similarly in the previous game where he was scum, GB was more than willing to let LS, his scum teammate, live on day 1 but instead he wanted to push someone like Stutters who wasn't doing shit. Why else would he ask me whether I would lynch VA randomly yet offer none of his own thought process? This in particular is very scummy because he was the one that prodded me for not providing opinions, yet when I do he offers absolutely nothing in return! At no point did GB actually make any sort of reasonable attempt to work with me despite claiming to want to do so. Indeed, he actually undermines what I am doing by saying that I am not attempting to get town to consolidate yet being the biggest offender by far of the very things he is accusing others of doing. Lastly, the whole "we're not going to lynch actives" thing is great for his scum style because as he proved in the last game, he is a very active scum player. When pushing the idea that we shouldn't lynch active players because it's a bad idea, he's masking his own style as scum because he himself is an active scum player. It's merely a stone that he is using to knock out multiple birds at once-it's a play in his own self interest in multiple ways. That coupled with his complete lack of reads and reasons this game pretty much confirms he is scum. hold on..are you actually town? This reaction doesn't feel genuine to me. alright then do something
I've been a scummy boy and haven't been keeping up with the past 20 pages. I'm doing this shit based on limited information. I have no idea why people swapped from Shockey but I have bigger targets now.
|
where do bugs go when they are trapped?
|
On June 19 2015 02:09 NydusHerMain wrote:
I want to swap this to a bw on onegu but at the same time I'm okay with a bf lynch.
@bugs what's there not to get about what gb said? He's uneasy despite being one of the voters because it's got so many people voting on it whereas no one else is really up for vote consideration in comparison.
Gonna throw this out there and see if it sticks.
##Vote: onegu
If not, I'm fine with bf regardless.
what doesn't make sense is the fact that he is uneasy about the lack of consolidation yet he does exactly what he claims is making him uneasy. He doesn't attempt to consolidate and instead his reads are constantly changing and he's adding new people he thinks are scum all the time.
e.g. why would he bother to say that he's going to write up a case on breshke? I feel if that actually gets posted it's going to derail the thread even further rather than give us any further indication on who is scum. Given that his vote is on BF I would expect him to try to convince the rest of us to consolidate on BF, because that's what he says he expects other people to be doing-consolidating.
It's also nearly impossible to know what he thinks because he refuses to work to flesh out reads despite claiming that it is what he wanted to do with me. He asked me maybe 2-3 one liner questions that ended up going nowhere because when I responded to him he gave nothing in return. That's quite odd for someone who claimed that collaboration is important in getting together a strong town day 1.
If he unvotes BF and ends up voting someone else this will pretty much prove what I'm talking about. He might OMGUS me or maybe he'll go through with his statement on Breshke but even now it doesn't appear that he was genuine about his talk about consolidation and about his talk about collaboration.
|
also it's pretty hilarious that his only response to me saying he is scum is to subtly call me scum back, which is fairly similar to what he did last game when he was scum and I called him out on day 1.
from then on he tried to see if he could undermine my opinion by calling me scum and then eventually had to back off.
|
Sheesh. I should actually reason my opinions.
Bugs you're scum because last game you were very inclined to lynch lurkers or at least tried to put pressure in them.
You start doing that here (voting Mig). Then you completely forget the lurkers. Now I am proposing we should go against lurkers, and you are calling me scum for that, which makes no sense.
More than that, you said Mig was the only one you played together with, which means you have a good grasp of his gameplay. You started the game by voting him. He came back to the thread and I have no idea what you think of him. You didn't push him, you didn't try to work with him. You simply ignored him, which is very contradictory with your opening in this game.
Also, you're one to overestimate meta. You're calling me scum but you didn't even try to read my previous games. I said once: "I do this since Avogadro". I would expect you to go take a look at least into that game. You're not doing it. For someone that says that IDENTITY plays a big part in your reads, you're not caring at all for mine before calling me scum.
In other words, your discourse doesn't match your current gameplay.
|
On June 19 2015 02:32 GlowingBear wrote:
Sheesh. I should actually reason my opinions.
Bugs you're scum because last game you were very inclined to lynch lurkers or at least tried to put pressure in them.
You start doing that here (voting Mig). Then you completely forget the lurkers. Now I am proposing we should go against lurkers, and you are calling me scum for that, which makes no sense.
More than that, you said Mig was the only one you played together with, which means you have a good grasp of his gameplay. You started the game by voting him. He came back to the thread and I have no idea what you think of him. You didn't push him, you didn't try to work with him. You simply ignored him, which is very contradictory with your opening in this game.
Also, you're one to overestimate meta. You're calling me scum but you didn't even try to read my previous games. I said once: "I do this since Avogadro". I would expect you to go take a look at least into that game. You're not doing it. For someone that says that IDENTITY plays a big part in your reads, you're not caring at all for mine before calling me scum.
In other words, your discourse doesn't match your current gameplay.
wat
I didn't try to lynch lurkers last game. This is a complete lie. I DEFENDED stutters, but of course you would not choose to remember that because you are scum.
also lol @ the meta shit, it takes a huge amount of time to read meta properly and I have been calling you scum for maybe two hours now.
If you are really town you wouldn't even consider me scum this game given all that I have done, but of course you aren't seeing reason. Or maybe I'm just wrong and you are so terrible that you can't hold proper reads simply because you don't know what proper reads are-perhaps that's why you smurfed last game, because you are bad and everyone knows how terrible you are. However I don't think anyone with as many games as you can possibly be that bad to call me scum this game.
|
also the thing on Mig is another lie. I didn't want to disclose my read on Mig and I didn't really have an interest in discussing anything with him because there was already so much going on and I needed to catch up. I also didn't ignore him at all which is a huge red flag for GB that he is clearly not reading my posts. Proof in point here:
On June 18 2015 23:24 wherebugsgo wrote:Show nested quote +On June 18 2015 23:13 rsoultin wrote:
God im scattered today sorry.
Also read on mig wbg since you know him better and wanted him to post. I'm a sucker for logic. Can he post like this as scum? Mig is pretty terrible as scum and a couple of his posts are actually pretty decent. They appear to be indicative that he is actually reading, which is a good sign. Mig is one of those players where if it looks like he is not reading he's probably scum. Even though he doesn't post much, as town he tends to make sense whereas when he is scum his reads aren't generally logically sensible. For example he pointed out that GB had no proper scum reads 55 pages in which is actually a pretty astute and subtle point. Like, sure, GB called some people scum but at no point in the game did he actually do anything about them-most of the time he's fishing for sentiment (e.g. asking me about VA) and in the LS case he was like "ok I'm gonna vote him too" and then he backed off at resistance from me. The tone and attitude in this post: Show nested quote +On June 18 2015 08:37 Mig wrote:
Gbs plan is to try and look scummy, contribute nothing and then if you discuss anyone besides him calls you suspicious. Solid.
Do you actually believe any of my posts are coming from a mafia mindset Gb? Or are you just trying to paint me poorly since I actually questioned your posts. also made me feel much better about Mig because as I mentioned his mafia play is pretty shitty and this came off really strongly. I don't think scum Mig would make a post with this kind of bold response.
here I responded to rsoultin's question on Mig. Saying that I've ignored him is wholly disingenuous and another reason GB is scum.
|
On June 19 2015 02:42 wherebugsgo wrote:Show nested quote +On June 19 2015 02:32 GlowingBear wrote:
Sheesh. I should actually reason my opinions.
Bugs you're scum because last game you were very inclined to lynch lurkers or at least tried to put pressure in them.
You start doing that here (voting Mig). Then you completely forget the lurkers. Now I am proposing we should go against lurkers, and you are calling me scum for that, which makes no sense.
More than that, you said Mig was the only one you played together with, which means you have a good grasp of his gameplay. You started the game by voting him. He came back to the thread and I have no idea what you think of him. You didn't push him, you didn't try to work with him. You simply ignored him, which is very contradictory with your opening in this game.
Also, you're one to overestimate meta. You're calling me scum but you didn't even try to read my previous games. I said once: "I do this since Avogadro". I would expect you to go take a look at least into that game. You're not doing it. For someone that says that IDENTITY plays a big part in your reads, you're not caring at all for mine before calling me scum.
In other words, your discourse doesn't match your current gameplay. wat I didn't try to lynch lurkers last game. This is a complete lie. I DEFENDED stutters, but of course you would not choose to remember that because you are scum. also lol @ the meta shit, it takes a huge amount of time to read meta properly and I have been calling you scum for maybe two hours now. If you are really town you wouldn't even consider me scum this game given all that I have done, but of course you aren't seeing reason. Or maybe I'm just wrong and you are so terrible that you can't hold proper reads simply because you don't know what proper reads are-perhaps that's why you smurfed last game, because you are bad and everyone knows how terrible you are. However I don't think anyone with as many games as you can possibly be that bad to call me scum this game.
Well I can be this bad.
And I will lynch you anyway, because you suck
|
On June 19 2015 02:45 wherebugsgo wrote:also the thing on Mig is another lie. I didn't want to disclose my read on Mig and I didn't really have an interest in discussing anything with him because there was already so much going on and I needed to catch up. I also didn't ignore him at all which is a huge red flag for GB that he is clearly not reading my posts. Proof in point here: Show nested quote +On June 18 2015 23:24 wherebugsgo wrote:On June 18 2015 23:13 rsoultin wrote:
God im scattered today sorry.
Also read on mig wbg since you know him better and wanted him to post. I'm a sucker for logic. Can he post like this as scum? Mig is pretty terrible as scum and a couple of his posts are actually pretty decent. They appear to be indicative that he is actually reading, which is a good sign. Mig is one of those players where if it looks like he is not reading he's probably scum. Even though he doesn't post much, as town he tends to make sense whereas when he is scum his reads aren't generally logically sensible. For example he pointed out that GB had no proper scum reads 55 pages in which is actually a pretty astute and subtle point. Like, sure, GB called some people scum but at no point in the game did he actually do anything about them-most of the time he's fishing for sentiment (e.g. asking me about VA) and in the LS case he was like "ok I'm gonna vote him too" and then he backed off at resistance from me. The tone and attitude in this post: On June 18 2015 08:37 Mig wrote:
Gbs plan is to try and look scummy, contribute nothing and then if you discuss anyone besides him calls you suspicious. Solid.
Do you actually believe any of my posts are coming from a mafia mindset Gb? Or are you just trying to paint me poorly since I actually questioned your posts. also made me feel much better about Mig because as I mentioned his mafia play is pretty shitty and this came off really strongly. I don't think scum Mig would make a post with this kind of bold response. here I responded to rsoultin's question on Mig. Saying that I've ignored him is wholly disingenuous and another reason GB is scum.
LOL yeah, you ANSWERED a DIRECTED QUESTION. Congrats, you're totally not ignoring someone you SHOULD be interacting with WITHOUT being needed to being asked for.
Argh, get out
|
ok so just a short explanation on why I'm gone: I'm having my oral exam tomorrow and I currently value learning stuff higher than playing. I do have the time to post but I don't want to spend it on that :/ sorry peeps. I'll tell you if I passed or not in another 24 hours.
|
I get that you might not like that and if you want to lynch me, do so. however if you have better lynches than me, I'd appreciate if you go for those first.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
