On August 18 2013 08:31 Holyflare wrote:Show nested quote +On August 18 2013 08:05 OmniEulogy wrote:On August 18 2013 07:54 Holyflare wrote:
I also find it funny that you jump on everyone voting Xzavier when everyones alternative was squibbles who also would get modkilled, totally legit reasoning... not Squibbles said two things, I have the gift of knowing that he was town and therefore I can tell you he was either a very new, or bored townie. His two posts also indicate that and while I was reading the game before being subbed in for him my read on him was town. Why are you deflecting the subject? Squibbles didn't get voted on, if he had this wouldn't be as bad as it is. At least you could argue Squibbles had said he would contribute but never did. I also thought he was town from what he has posted (if you actually read anything I posted, it seems you haven't). I am also not deflecting, the point you raised was that you shouldn't vote for a 0 poster, squibbles was a 2 poster with a no vote that also got modkilled, the REST of the town was on him right until the final minutes where they bandwagoned iVLosK! and then subsequently Xzavier. There was some suspicious shit there though and I'll leave it till the day before I discuss it. Not making the same mistake as my last game.
you are mistaking me asking you questions for me making a case against you. I don't need to start quoting your filter to bring up how weird your vote was and your logic behind it. However the soft town claim bothers me quite a bit especially with how the game has played out so far.
Why I think Holy is scummy.
+ Show Spoiler + On August 17 2013 03:19 Holyflare wrote:Here's the run down so far, yeh it's early but /care Stuffz going down: + Show Spoiler +On August 16 2013 12:03 Squibbles wrote:
Right? Odd. Backtrackin a bit for Policy, even if you wanted to lynch lurkers, liars, and those who post pointless stuff, should there be a level at which the lynch begins. For example yalls version of Lurking could be completely different from each other, where one might thinking lurking is more than 12 hours another might think a day.... We should establish some context, As far as lying, in any sense what if they are lying because they are unsure about you? Wouldnt that make you both the suspects vs just the person that lied, i think depending on the question there should be a level limit there, and those who post pointless stuff, well if you're dodging a question, you're dodging a question, enough said. Here we have squibbles pointing out what I find to be obvious but what many of us failed to say. He didn't need to backtrack but he did because this is an important point, it isn't beating a dead horse and implies that he'd like further discussion if this arises in the future, I like this guy. Also agrees with not posting bs spam. +++++ Would like to hear more when he's back from work. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Deus started a bit wishy washy but I'm assuming he is being more aprehensive over the last game where he started with full on aggression against reps. + Show Spoiler +On August 16 2013 05:14 DeusXmachina wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2013 04:58 LoneMeow wrote:On August 16 2013 04:54 DeusXmachina wrote:On August 16 2013 04:51 LoneMeow wrote:On August 16 2013 04:46 DeusXmachina wrote:
Liars? Highly unlikely that you would every catch scum lying. Lynch lurkers over liars. But is there any reason for town to lie? So in the unlikely situation that you DO catch someone lying, you'd still rather lynch a lurker? If town is lying why would we want to lynch them? Like I said, you probably won't catch scum lying. Lying won't really tell you much. Lurkers > Liars. Obviously lynching confirmed town because of a lie would be silly, but what about someone most have a weak scum read (or even null) on who's caught lying? Still prefer a lurker lynch over him? While we're on the topic of lurking, do you think there's any real difference between lurking and posting but being useless? Would you (policy) lynch someone who posts but doesn't have any real content? If you have a weak scum read on someone and they lie, well that might be evidence against them. I would try to understand the intentions behind the lie. Not crazy about the lynch liars policy. I don't know how to define lurking, but people who are being useless are equally as bad as lurkers. In fact, in some situations, I think spammers can be more detrimental to town than lurkers. I equate non-contribution to scum. I am glad you brought this up. I was thinking about this a lot in my last game. Show nested quote +On August 16 2013 05:04 iVLosK! wrote:
Yeah lynch all liars and no lurking! And anything else that sounds pro-town! C'mon guys. No fucking duh. I have a policy of lynching people who say stupid, obvious shit. What do you think of them apples, flare, deus, and LM? Well this is a newb game. Hopefully players can read some of the initial policy and learn what not to do. Lynching people who say stupid stuff got me into a lot of shit my last game. That being said, I am all for aggressive play and doing whatever it takes to weed out scum. I'm liking this post, yet, it seems this game he is going all out aggressive on lurkers. Lurkers annoy me yes but he hasn't really added anything yet in terms of proper content other than elaborating his policy when asked which increases my suspicions of people that are rating him as a town player for now ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Not sure about this lonemeow guy, he has the town mentality sure with stuff like this: + Show Spoiler +On August 16 2013 15:26 LoneMeow wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2013 15:16 Alakaslam wrote:On August 16 2013 15:11 LoneMeow wrote:On August 16 2013 14:55 Alakaslam wrote:On August 16 2013 14:49 LoneMeow wrote:On August 16 2013 14:13 Alakaslam wrote:
On iVLosk!- you don't know him, he's like that. He doesn't put up with BS. He is not actually a newb, this is like running into Plexa on some forum he has yet to visit- he looks new but he is an Internet veteran. iVLosk! Is a skilled player and I would hate to lose him as town.
I actually do somewhat know his style, we were both in a game with him earlier, and that's why I said I need to be careful on how I read him, since he's a likely misread for me. Since it seems to be just you and me here, let's talk about something. Your thoughts on Squibbles' first post? Can you be a little more specific? I thought I addressed it right after it, above my Chloe post... You addressed the content itself, but I was more curious of your thoughts of it as a first post. Did it seem like the way a town player would enter the game? http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=424098Check my reads. Why? You are suspicious? Okay, I see your track record on figuring out first posts isn't exactly stellar :D I want to see people talk about each other, because that makes the game much easier to figure out. I consider his first post pretty much null from a completely new player. On that matter, my reads so far: slightly town on DeusXmachina and Alakaslam, null on the rest. however he hasn't had to talk about other people so I cannot give a good read on him whatsoever yet. If you read this lonemeow I want your full impressions on iVLosK! and Slam. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------What I am REALLY quizzical about are why people are riding iVLosK!'s dick so fucking hard, he implies he hate's wishy washy bull shit but has provided absolutely 0 content in his posts so far: + Show Spoiler +On August 17 2013 01:20 iVLosK! wrote:Show nested quote +On August 12 2013 03:15 iVLosK! wrote:
Has this game started?
Shall I begin the rape? No, past iVlosK!. Not yet. But soon... very soon. Show nested quote +On August 16 2013 12:03 Squibbles wrote:
Right? Odd. Backtrackin a bit for Policy, even if you wanted to lynch lurkers, liars, and those who post pointless stuff, should there be a level at which the lynch begins. For example yalls version of Lurking could be completely different from each other, where one might thinking lurking is more than 12 hours another might think a day.... We should establish some context, As far as lying, in any sense what if they are lying because they are unsure about you? Wouldnt that make you both the suspects vs just the person that lied, i think depending on the question there should be a level limit there, and those who post pointless stuff, well if you're dodging a question, you're dodging a question, enough said. This is Squibbles only game post but I like the content on multiple points. I spare thee, and await further posts. This is his only thing that has any merit and it's a line about him agreeing with a post.... like seriously I question the people that lean town on this guy... Stupid obvious shit 1: + Show Spoiler +On August 16 2013 07:41 iVLosK! wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2013 07:16 DeusXmachina wrote:On August 16 2013 06:43 justanothertownie wrote:
Because he makes it look like is very experienced and after playing one game this seems odd to me. I would like to know if he is just a show off or actually not really a newbie because it might influence my read on him later on. If I had to guess I would lean slightly townie on iV because of his aggressive first post (not counting the rap). Although, one post is virtually nothing to go on. Especially the first one. Your guess on iV JAT? I would argue that the rap was very aggressive. Krizz Kaliko does not fuck around. Stupid obvious shit 2: + Show Spoiler +On August 16 2013 09:08 iVLosK! wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2013 08:55 Alakaslam wrote:
So here I am! I'm here off & on for a bit, any questions? I mean, I know it's early but that is kinda my point. Yes. I am a zergling. Your thoughts? Stupid obvious shit 3: + Show Spoiler +On August 17 2013 01:27 iVLosK! wrote:
Anyway, if Xzavier and reps haven't done anything meaningful by the time the Chiefs game ends tonight, I will lower the boom on whichever I deem most worthy. For a guy that states he hates people that talk about "stupid obvious shit" he sure is hypocritical. He's also just devolved into talking about lynching lurkers in his last post, again, no content. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Slam... is slam, but this game he's seemed to get his shit somewhat together: + Show Spoiler +On August 16 2013 12:56 Alakaslam wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2013 05:14 DeusXmachina wrote:On August 16 2013 04:58 LoneMeow wrote:On August 16 2013 04:54 DeusXmachina wrote:On August 16 2013 04:51 LoneMeow wrote:On August 16 2013 04:46 DeusXmachina wrote:
Liars? Highly unlikely that you would every catch scum lying. Lynch lurkers over liars. But is there any reason for town to lie? So in the unlikely situation that you DO catch someone lying, you'd still rather lynch a lurker? If town is lying why would we want to lynch them? Like I said, you probably won't catch scum lying. Lying won't really tell you much. Lurkers > Liars. Obviously lynching confirmed town because of a lie would be silly, but what about someone most have a weak scum read (or even null) on who's caught lying? Still prefer a lurker lynch over him? While we're on the topic of lurking, do you think there's any real difference between lurking and posting but being useless? Would you (policy) lynch someone who posts but doesn't have any real content? If you have a weak scum read on someone and they lie, well that might be evidence against them. I would try to understand the intentions behind the lie. Not crazy about the lynch liars policy. I don't know how to define lurking, but people who are being useless are equally as bad as lurkers. In fact, in some situations, I think spammers can be more detrimental to town than lurkers. I equate non-contribution to scum. I am glad you brought this up. I was thinking about this a lot in my last game. On August 16 2013 05:04 iVLosK! wrote:
Yeah lynch all liars and no lurking! And anything else that sounds pro-town! C'mon guys. No fucking duh. I have a policy of lynching people who say stupid, obvious shit. What do you think of them apples, flare, deus, and LM? Well this is a newb game. Hopefully players can read some of the initial policy and learn what not to do. Lynching people who say stupid stuff got me into a lot of shit my last game. That being said, I am all for aggressive play and doing whatever it takes to weed out scum. Actually it was lynching the spammer- many of the things I said were trying to express my opinions, spamming was me trying to dick around. I promise not to do that anymore except maybe in spoilers if I can't help it. Therefore I am really glad you laid this out. There may be people like me who just get the juices flowing and go nuts, they will disregard you until they are the scummy one tunneling the wrong guy at Lylo- then they will have to fight not to become stimaddict 2.0, (sorry bout that but u know its true  ing one) so like I say- rock and a hard place with "don't spam don't lurk" for me- so gimme a little grace and I will try to help out. For now, I have this: Ivlosk! - town, he is bamcis for lookin so, especially so early, therefore keep an eye out for even more badass scum play later if I am wrong (and I am wrong often...) HolyFlare- kinda early. I'm null, in fact, I'm null on everyone but ivlosk! and myself. It's pretty early guys. "Speak up!" -Seige Tank Driver (selected, Starcraft 2) Fellows, pleeeze!! Confused about his town read on iVLosK obviously and mentioning me over everyone else seems a bit quizzical too as I didn't post much. + Show Spoiler +On August 16 2013 14:02 Alakaslam wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2013 13:05 DeusXmachina wrote:On August 16 2013 12:56 Alakaslam wrote:On August 16 2013 05:14 DeusXmachina wrote:On August 16 2013 04:58 LoneMeow wrote:On August 16 2013 04:54 DeusXmachina wrote:On August 16 2013 04:51 LoneMeow wrote:On August 16 2013 04:46 DeusXmachina wrote:
Liars? Highly unlikely that you would every catch scum lying. Lynch lurkers over liars. But is there any reason for town to lie? So in the unlikely situation that you DO catch someone lying, you'd still rather lynch a lurker? If town is lying why would we want to lynch them? Like I said, you probably won't catch scum lying. Lying won't really tell you much. Lurkers > Liars. Obviously lynching confirmed town because of a lie would be silly, but what about someone most have a weak scum read (or even null) on who's caught lying? Still prefer a lurker lynch over him? While we're on the topic of lurking, do you think there's any real difference between lurking and posting but being useless? Would you (policy) lynch someone who posts but doesn't have any real content? If you have a weak scum read on someone and they lie, well that might be evidence against them. I would try to understand the intentions behind the lie. Not crazy about the lynch liars policy. I don't know how to define lurking, but people who are being useless are equally as bad as lurkers. In fact, in some situations, I think spammers can be more detrimental to town than lurkers. I equate non-contribution to scum. I am glad you brought this up. I was thinking about this a lot in my last game. On August 16 2013 05:04 iVLosK! wrote:
Yeah lynch all liars and no lurking! And anything else that sounds pro-town! C'mon guys. No fucking duh. I have a policy of lynching people who say stupid, obvious shit. What do you think of them apples, flare, deus, and LM? Well this is a newb game. Hopefully players can read some of the initial policy and learn what not to do. Lynching people who say stupid stuff got me into a lot of shit my last game. That being said, I am all for aggressive play and doing whatever it takes to weed out scum. Actually it was lynching the spammer- many of the things I said were trying to express my opinions, spamming was me trying to dick around. I promise not to do that anymore except maybe in spoilers if I can't help it. Therefore I am really glad you laid this out. There may be people like me who just get the juices flowing and go nuts, they will disregard you until they are the scummy one tunneling the wrong guy at Lylo- then they will have to fight not to become stimaddict 2.0, (sorry bout that but u know its true ing one) so like I say- rock and a hard place with "don't spam don't lurk" for me- so gimme a little grace and I will try to help out. For now, I have this: Ivlosk! - town, he is bamcis for lookin so, especially so early, therefore keep an eye out for even more badass scum play later if I am wrong (and I am wrong often...) HolyFlare- kinda early. I'm null, in fact, I'm null on everyone but ivlosk! and myself. It's pretty early guys. "Speak up!" -Seige Tank Driver (selected, Starcraft 2) Fellows, pleeeze!! Okay, sounds good. Biggest scum reads so far, Xzavier and reps. Lol at reps if he becomes a day 1 lynch again. Why am I suspicious? Well, they are lurking, and as I previously mentioned, lurking will not be tolerated. Pretty much neutral on everyone. Although, I am leaning slightly town on JAT. Careful of posting pseudo lurker lists... Look. That is the easies thing for scum to do to try and look town, 1, and 2, if we have vigs, they can shoot into lurkers and we lynch other lurkers till there are none. So it is established that you can't lurk and get by this game. Stating their scumminess other than to explain a vote on them is now irrelevant, lets stick to discussion about actives. Then, before the deadline (close as you can get) vote for a lurker or someone you find scummy- who may have more of a chance turning out to be scum than someone who wanted blue or irl'ed or whatever causes people to do this stuff. I like this post but by this nature he should also assume that ivlosk is now scummy (after reading my post/his filter), he has a habit of being swayed easily by people who are expressing pro town interests which you all need to watch out for too. Obviously the game is early and you can't read too much into what he is saying so press him lots <3 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------JAT hasn't really added anything other than his dislike of fakeclaims, can't read into him at all so would like to hear more from him too, will push him on people when he is around. + Show Spoiler +On August 17 2013 01:30 justanothertownie wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2013 20:37 LoneMeow wrote:On August 16 2013 20:30 justanothertownie wrote:
Because it was mentioned someone did it in one of the last newbie games and because there were 2 townies who fakeclaimed cop in the first game I played. Ok, I see. What do you think of this game so far, any reads? Not really. I didn't like some posts from Deus and the first one of Squibbles that much but this won't tell me anything. I'm just not a fan of this rather pointless policy discussions. People can talk alot about these things without adding any useful content. I won't read to much into early contentless posts though. Bad experience last game. /spoiler] ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I will push people for reads and things if they are around when I post this
First off we have this large post which looks impressive at first, then after reading it you realize it doesn't say a whole lot other than the first few posts of nearly everybody gives him a town vibe. This is behavior of somebody who wants to look like they are contributing without actually putting anything of worth into a very large post very early into the game when there isn't really much information to go on. Tries to get on the good side of multiple people and not disturb things too much.
+ Show Spoiler + On August 17 2013 07:02 Holyflare wrote:JAT what is your opinion so far on ivlosk and also I'd like to hear your thoughts on lonemeow
+ Show Spoiler + On August 17 2013 07:29 Holyflare wrote:Show nested quote +On August 17 2013 07:24 justanothertownie wrote:
Why do you ask me about those 2 specifically?
Ivlosk: I said earlier I liked his first posts. There isn't anything else to say for me right now. No idea about his alignment.
LoneMeow: Sounds reasonable to me. He brought up the policy thing but someone has to start discussion somehow. So you liked his rap and pointless posts about being a zergling? Ok sounds reasonable....... Oh wait not really, i want you to filter dive like i have done and specifically point out what it is you like and why It is irrelevant for now why i picked these 2 people Slam if you are still here what are your thoughts on deus and JAT?
Another scummy move is to constantly keep asking people what they think about the others and not answering or very briefly answering questions directed at yourself. This way again it looks like you are contributing when in reality it is the others doing most of the talking. Also I happen to like LosK's pointless talk as it is part of the reason I have a slight town read on him. He seems very comfortable to talk about nothing in particular which sets most scum on edge and can sometimes make him a target for others to try and attack because of it. Which you later do.
+ Show Spoiler + On August 17 2013 08:42 Holyflare wrote:Show nested quote +On August 17 2013 08:04 iVLosK! wrote:On August 17 2013 08:00 justanothertownie wrote:
Hm? I meant the posts he listed.
Relying on modkills for lurkers is really scummy btw. Good thing you say you would vote them if they keep lurking Holyflare. D' Oh. On August 17 2013 07:51 Holyflare wrote:
All his posts are pretty much non contributory. I genuinely think reps is afk if he hasn't posted yet, no idea about xzavier but it frustrates me, if they don't talk at all it's a double modkill and therefore we should focus on the people who are talking. I swear to god if another bs lurker happens like last game with a post a day I'm voting them off straight anyway
I think this is the post JAT is referencing above. I noticed it too. I like you drawing attention to this, oh it's scummy to avoid lurkers but then say you want to do the anti lurker thing, seriously? I mean what the hell i don't know if you two are trying to set me up but until the lurkers actually do something talking about them is 100% anti town by way of wasting time. Of course we will lynch lurkers if nobody is under any real suspicion do not be stupid.
+ Show Spoiler + On August 17 2013 21:26 Holyflare wrote:
##Vote xzavier for now as a placeholder until something more obvious comes forward
Not a townie vote or mindset to have. As mentioned before No-Lynch is always an option. Town does not look for the "safe" or "easy" votes.
+ Show Spoiler + On August 17 2013 23:48 Holyflare wrote:Show nested quote +On August 17 2013 23:20 LoneMeow wrote:
I'd like to get more reads from almost everyone, please.
My current top scum suspects, in no particular order:
Squibbles - is participating in the game, but hasn't really produced any content nor reads
iVLosK! - it seems to me that his play is different from last time, but that's weak so I'm prepared to watch him for now
reps)squishy - although he finally gave some reads that only happened after being pressured so I'm still suspicious
Had a relatively strong town read on Holyflare, but his useless (and very non-committal) vote on Xzavier makes me a little worried I might be misreading. If he posts at 6.59 he will not be modkilled, hence the placeholder vote, it can be moved anytime I feel like it onto someone more suspicious. It is also madatory to vote for someone otherwise you will also probably be warned/modkilled, if I was to suddenly become inundated with things to do later at least my vote would be on a worthy person. It is more suspicious that people have not voted at all with only 3 hours left to go. This is also a plurality lynch meaning that the person with the most votes, not majority will be voted off. Do you really want to vote off the guy that has at least said something rather than the person that has said nothing?
+ Show Spoiler + On August 18 2013 00:17 Holyflare wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On August 17 2013 08:04 iVLosK! wrote:Show nested quote +On August 17 2013 08:00 justanothertownie wrote:
Hm? I meant the posts he listed.
Relying on modkills for lurkers is really scummy btw. Good thing you say you would vote them if they keep lurking Holyflare. D' Oh. Show nested quote +On August 17 2013 07:51 Holyflare wrote:
All his posts are pretty much non contributory. I genuinely think reps is afk if he hasn't posted yet, no idea about xzavier but it frustrates me, if they don't talk at all it's a double modkill and therefore we should focus on the people who are talking. I swear to god if another bs lurker happens like last game with a post a day I'm voting them off straight anyway
I think this is the post JAT is referencing above. I noticed it too. Wasn't this the post where you said you were using it to build a 'case'? You agreed with JAT that relying on modkills would be bad so why have you gone 180 on squibbles when you originally liked his first post? (here: + Show Spoiler +On August 17 2013 01:20 iVLosK! wrote:Show nested quote +On August 12 2013 03:15 iVLosK! wrote:
Has this game started?
Shall I begin the rape? No, past iVlosK!. Not yet. But soon... very soon. Show nested quote +On August 16 2013 12:03 Squibbles wrote:
Right? Odd. Backtrackin a bit for Policy, even if you wanted to lynch lurkers, liars, and those who post pointless stuff, should there be a level at which the lynch begins. For example yalls version of Lurking could be completely different from each other, where one might thinking lurking is more than 12 hours another might think a day.... We should establish some context, As far as lying, in any sense what if they are lying because they are unsure about you? Wouldnt that make you both the suspects vs just the person that lied, i think depending on the question there should be a level limit there, and those who post pointless stuff, well if you're dodging a question, you're dodging a question, enough said. This is Squibbles only game post but I like the content on multiple points. I spare thee, and await further posts. ) Surely it is better to vote off the lurker and hear from squibbles tomorrow in case something legitimately came up and then we can vote squibbles tomorrow if it is unsatisfactory. + Show Spoiler +On August 17 2013 23:55 iVLosK! wrote:Show nested quote +On August 17 2013 23:48 Holyflare wrote:On August 17 2013 23:20 LoneMeow wrote:
I'd like to get more reads from almost everyone, please.
My current top scum suspects, in no particular order:
Squibbles - is participating in the game, but hasn't really produced any content nor reads
iVLosK! - it seems to me that his play is different from last time, but that's weak so I'm prepared to watch him for now
reps)squishy - although he finally gave some reads that only happened after being pressured so I'm still suspicious
Had a relatively strong town read on Holyflare, but his useless (and very non-committal) vote on Xzavier makes me a little worried I might be misreading. If he posts at 6.59 he will not be modkilled, hence the placeholder vote, it can be moved anytime I feel like it onto someone more suspicious. It is also madatory to vote for someone otherwise you will also probably be warned/modkilled, if I was to suddenly become inundated with things to do later at least my vote would be on a worthy person. It is more suspicious that people have not voted at all with only 3 hours left to go. This is also a plurality lynch meaning that the person with the most votes, not majority will be voted off. Do you really want to vote off the guy that has at least said something rather than the person that has said nothing? A last second vote from Xzavier would be tantamount to admitting he is scum. If he does, we just lynch him D2. I would much prefer to allow him to be modkilled and we can see what his replacement has to say. I much prefer reps or sqibbles for the lynch and will vote squibbles because multiple players have stated that reps is always like this. ##Vote: Squibbles You do NOT want to accidently vote off a town member if they have contributed, even 1 or 2 posts, compared to somebody who has done none for now. --------------------------------------------------------------------- I honestly do not understand how people can think you are acting town when you flip flop all over the place on almost every post you make: + Show Spoiler +On August 17 2013 01:27 iVLosK! wrote:
Anyway, if Xzavier and reps haven't done anything meaningful by the time the Chiefs game ends tonight, I will lower the boom on whichever I deem most worthy. Nothing has been noted in your posts since then that implies you'd even think about modkills or squibbles voting, you just seem to be bandwagoning with no valid reason for the easy lynch.
Clearly you've had a problem with LosK all game, yet you continue to keep your vote on Xzavier, I can only assume it is to be "safe".
Lastly please don't soft claim town with a "I'm not going to post my thoughts at night, cause I might get NK'd!" after playing like shit and tunneling LosK for most of the day for play that I and a few others consider to be town aligned. It's bullshit.
My town reads are still JAT and LosK, I think if Koshi continues to play exactly as he has been I feel pretty comfortable calling him town as well. I think he's right with saying scum was on the Xzavier lynch.
I'm also leaning towards town on Lonemeow as I've really liked some of his posts, in particular these:
+ Show Spoiler +On August 17 2013 17:53 LoneMeow wrote:Show nested quote +On August 17 2013 14:30 reps)squishy wrote:
Squibbles said I run PST and do work so my main times where I will be extremely active will be after 4:30
Which he has not. So do you think he's scum? Why so non-committal? Your filter is worrying, low activity and I get a feel that you're just trying to find a target to latch on rather than trying to find scum.
+ Show Spoiler + On August 18 2013 01:29 LoneMeow wrote:Show nested quote +On August 18 2013 01:17 Alakaslam wrote:
Good morning everyone. I agree with Holyflare's stance first of all
##Vote: Xzavier
As a placeholder.
However the squibbles voting is intriguing. It is a policy lynch based on what may be IRL circumstances. Is there actually something wrong with his posting, other than the lack of it?
If not, may want to reconsider...
... As according to his own deadlines, he will likely be modkilled. It is 9:15 on the west coast.
Any better reasons though? As the same goes for Xzavier... So if squib is preferable guess what When I dropped my vote on Squibbles I was fully expecting him to speak up before the deadline as he had said he's reading the thread during EU daytime. Now that it looks like he might be modkilled/replaced just like Xzavier I'm fully prepared to switch. Show nested quote +On August 18 2013 01:22 Alakaslam wrote:
Indeed, iVLosK! Looks bad after reading up on HolyFlare, but are there enough reasons to voteswitch? Shall he defense hisself? I'm fully prepared to switch to iVLosK! - as I've stated he seems to be suspiciously timid compared to his style in XLII and the point about not bringing much content that Holyflare brings up has merit. Also, now that you're here, can I have a few reads from you?
To me this looks like a town motivated mind set. He's actively watching what people are doing and how they are reacting to things and trying to see the town/scum reasoning behind each action.
Actually by quoting these I realize Slam also voted on Xzavier as a place holder at first. wtf. Sheep placeholder at that, scummy as hell. Add that to how much his vote jumped around and he makes me pretty nervous
I think Deus looks pretty scummy as well and also mentioned he wanted a "safe" place to put his vote. After looking through his filter carefully though I no longer think he's the scummiest out of all three.
|
EPT
![[image loading]](http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-MIpkNHC-mro/T8LqoaWUyDI/AAAAAAAAgfM/uou568iG3LQ/s320/140006538_10_gallery_main.jpg)
