On November 04 2013 23:56 WaveofShadow wrote: Like...I find it pretty ridiculous at this point that anyone could suspect me but that's just self-bias and ego talking right now I suppose. Logically I know I shouldn't be absolved of suspicion unless proven it should be so but I feel pretty damn good about my performance so far, so I just find it weird that I am anyone's #1 scumread considering I have double/triple the filter and content of most people in this game.
You couldn't find anyone better gumshoe?
Why do I have to assume scum is playing bad? In fact this pond has been so shallow insofar, it's not really an accomplishment being the biggest fish. Speaking of accomplishments, I know the game hasnt gone on long enough but so far the biggest thing I've seen out of you is your waffling on Vanesco, and I've addresed that. Everything else you've said has been inconclusive, example
I need to have a close look at hzflank honestly---I need to go look back at how he played his newbies; specifically the scum game I coached. Reading his filter I am not largely satisfied with his defense of the Umasi suspicion and he hasn't done much else, though I can understand being discouraged by all the of unwarranted attacks.
(At least unwarranted in his view. On that note I really don't get your reaction to my perceived slight by hzflank, Onegu. I can definitely take care of myself and you really kinda flew off the handle. Was really bewildering o.O)
There have been very few votes actually placed so far this game, and a minute amount of suspicion on very few targets so it seems to me to be advantageous for scum to simply be satisfied with the status quo thus far and not move suspicion off of the targets who are already under question somewhat, both of whom I believe to be town presently.
Random thought/stream-of-consciousness (since I was reading hzflank's setup analysis which I liked): Would it ever be worth it to simply claim blue roles during the day? Yes we will lose someone immediately I suppose but is that an acceptable risk if it means we can track role usage (assuming no mis-elections I suppose)? It may not be worth it I guess if we fuck up bad and elect multiple scum since they can lie about getting RBed and implicate a towny in a 2scum 1town election scenario---yeah come to think of it I think it all falls apart if we fuck up and elect scum since they can lie about checks as well, and the nature of the checks makes it a hell of a lot easier to lie (regarding something like Blaspheme, for example).
Your all over the place in this particular post, saying you find hz suspicious and then talking about how you liked his setup analysis play later on, also you just sort of acknowledging the stagnation of this thread and let it rest at that...
Nothing in here is really of any use, theres no hard cases or defences, it just feels like your pointing us in a direction you yourself havent even bothered to fully take yet. In general it feels like your spreading suspicion around hoping some one picks up on something.
If my goal was to neuter Vanesco, why did he basically take the entire reasoning for the 'out' I gave him and use it? You'd think if he was a fiercely strong and independent player like you are surmising, that he'd try and fight that notion.
My theory is that hes town and your scum, his actions and responses to yours do not absolve you in any way. Stubborn and independent does not equal attack someone who defends you...
Your play just feels to tip toey for my liking, yes your active but in a cautious way and I dont consider town WOs the most careful of players. Also it's funny you find yourself transparent... I dont get that vibe at all, if you are town your baiting scum hard and while that may be smart and pro town it's certainly not honest, so I dont know where your getting this idea of yourself.
Btw wheres the voting thread.
Alright inconclusivity---I haven't been able to do detailed filter diving/looking into past games until now. What I said about hzflank isn't inconsistent at all. Just because I like one post of his doesn't mean I like his filter on the whole which contains mostly nothing. That's really nitpicky from you gumshoe and I expect better. I fully intend to follow my train of though regarding hzflank once I can dive into his past games, which is exactly what I said in the first bolded section of my post. Not sure why you feel there is a problem there. Would you prefer if I just say nothing to the thread until I can write an essay at a time? Because sadly I'm pretty sure it's evident to you that is not how I play---I prefer stream-of-consciousness and will post whenever and whatever I feel.
And on that note---do you REALLY think my posting is 'tip-toeing?' Why the fuck would I as scum post every single thought that goes through my head for the town to read and obsess over like people have been, draw as much attention to myself as possible, and keep positive discussion going? That makes absolutely no sense, and again gumshoe I would figure you'd pick up on that. This kind of behaviour makes zero sense from a mafia standpoint (unless you wanted to make the argument that I'm attempting to spam up the thread with useless shit, about which I'd be pretty pissed if you called all of my posting useless). The fact that you wouldn't call me honest either is frustrating to me, because even in my one fucking scumgame I'm almost completely honest. Not to mention you have no way of proving that at all so it just amounts to an attack on my character. If there is one thing that can be said about my TL Mafia play, I have NEVER lied as town, and very rarely as even 3P or mafia.
On November 05 2013 00:39 gumshoe wrote: Also hate to spree post... But WOS what do you mean he took your out... Vanesca has had four posts since your defence of him and none of them adress you or your case. They are all concerning his stance on Umasi, your post had nothing to do with that, he ramped up his offence because everyone started poking him on it. This is the exact response of a head strong player, I fail to see your argument... The bigger question is why are you still so dead set on him? Weve established hes new, probally town, what more does pressing him acomplish other than the stifling of discussion? Do you still consider him a viable lynch?
Furthermore I'm not a fan of this stuff right here.
I'm actually surprised you were the only one to mention this so far, even Vanesco himself didn't bother. It has nothing to do with the perceived loss of momentum. I could very easily have kept my vote on him all day if I still believed him to be scummy, but as you can see I wasn't 100% sure of him being scum earlier on
It reads as if you've already thought of all the holes in your play, you argue thats because noobies make for your most difficult reads but you've transfered that hesitance into play that coincidentally matches that of a cautious scum player anticipating every blow that comes their way. This combined with your many wishy washy posts and your aproach to vanesco is more than enough reason for me to suspect you.
Do you actually plan on picking apart everything I do and say? As far as the 'out' I gave Vanesco by means of my analysis of him and my unvoting---in my mind what ET posted and what I did amounts to the same thing.
I redact my earlier scumread on him and (hopefully this doesn't bite me in the ass) he is now noob town. The OMGUS on Umasi, (OMGUS in my experience tends to be used by town way more often than scum) the blatant disregard for what a towny is 'supposed to do' (why call someone out for no reason whatsoever---only serves to draw attention to himself which he has certainly garnered). I would think a newbie scum would at the very least attempt to backtrack due to inherent guilt when being shown that what he has done is considered scummy here.
How is this not related to his aggressive stance on Umasi? Him ramping up his offense in response is exactly what I stated here I don't think a noobie scum would do. How is that unrelated exactly? So in my mind I suppose Vanesco took my out but in his he took ET's, but they are the basically the same thing and the beginning of my analysis to Vanesco was posted even before ET's questions, so we came up with them at similar points in time while thinking similar things---this gives me an incidental townread on ET btw.
As for the quote you mentioned---basically the way you set it up I have no way to not look scummy. You don't see anything towny in that whatsoever. If I leave my vote on him I look scummy because Vanesco is town. If I take it off I was making excuses for myself and setting it up. The fact that you have shown to refuse to see the possibility of ANYTHING towny in my play by the way you have attempted to tear apart everything I say and do leaves me troubled because I know you can be a strong force for town, but you're just not doing town a great service by acting this way.
At this point I'm finished responding to cases by you against me because I don't feel like there will be anything left to say---you'll either take what I have to say and weigh it and decide whether it makes sense from either point of view and come to the right decision, or you will continue to nitpick and further misrepresent what I am doing and saying to fit your read. Either way I don't feel like there is anything to gain by further discussing me.
Onto the subject of hzflank who I will be looking at shortly---Gumshoe what are YOUR thoughts on him? Hell what are your thoughts on anyone aside from me?
Works for me. Onegu, still waiting. Maybe this will motivate you. ##Vote: Onegu
Sn0, you too. You guys are here, let's see something worthwhile.
Rayn, Where you at? Don't like the pokey-pokey. I want your help to lynch some scum. I thought we were supposed to be working together to achieve a greater goal here?
On November 04 2013 23:45 WaveofShadow wrote: Sweet, we're getting the non-lurk gumshoe this game. Alrighty let's see:
It would be fine if he was just absolving Vanesco, what bugs me is that hesitance, or rather how it sounds like Wos wouldn't really be suprised if Vanesco was scum. It reads more to me as posturing rather than reluctance. He placed a vote early in hopes of building some momentum, and when that mometum dropped he got off the train but positioned himself so that if it ever got rolling again, he could hop right back on under the basis that he suspected Vanesco all along. Which is a safe bet when you take into account Vanesco's recklessness (which may yet get him lynched if no better targets present themselves). Also Wos's shambly defence does Vanesco no favours, because it requires us to assume that Vanesco is terrible and should be disregarded if hes town. Sometimes it's enough to just neuter a townie, because as we all know, useless can be just as bad as scummy.
I'm actually surprised you were the only one to mention this so far, even Vanesco himself didn't bother. It has nothing to do with the perceived loss of momentum. I could very easily have kept my vote on him all day if I still believed him to be scummy, but as you can see I wasn't 100% sure of him being scum earlier on; I even mentioned 'nooby or scum' in one of my first few posts about him. It wasn't a bait to get him going, but I wanted him to post more to see his reaction to the pressure; that is whether he reacted in a towny or scummy way (both nooby imo). I got my answer and unvoted accordingly. Call it wishy-washy if you will but I have provided reasoning for everything I have done all day and been completely transparent with my reads and questioning. As far as the 'bite me in the ass' comments, I can't talk about one of those, but I've been systematically wrong on newbie reads a lot, so it is something I am particularly paranoid about. I was wrong about Koshi in the first game I was exposed to him as scum, and I was also wrong about Chairman Ray in a recent game of his. It's not going to stop me from performing analysis but I worry a lot because I know my analysis can be wrong, hence me opening it up for others to comment on it and pick apart, like you are right now.
Other thoughts: If my goal was to neuter Vanesco, why did he basically take the entire reasoning for the 'out' I gave him and use it? You'd think if he was a fiercely strong and independent player like you are surmising, that he'd try and fight that notion.
Also gumshoe, I hate to drop this card but do you honestly think at this point that the most active and engaging person in the thread is scum?
This is completely subjective and not a defense and the only other defense you offer is, do you think the most active person is scum?
On November 04 2013 23:56 WaveofShadow wrote: Like...I find it pretty ridiculous at this point that anyone could suspect me but that's just self-bias and ego talking right now I suppose. Logically I know I shouldn't be absolved of suspicion unless proven it should be so but I feel pretty damn good about my performance so far, so I just find it weird that I am anyone's #1 scumread considering I have double/triple the filter and content of most people in this game.
You couldn't find anyone better gumshoe?
Again subjective with you only saying your play has been good and you have been active. So other then you saying you have been playing well and transparant. Your defense was filter legnth.
On November 05 2013 03:25 Sn0_Man wrote: ET felt transparently scum last game in the later stages of D1. I'm not in a rush to lynch him until I see that stuff again.
Seems to check out plus one other nugget which I will reveal should a case become necessary. Carry on.
Sure OO. Echelon has stated how he disagrees with the strategy by hz and later on agrees on my point about the strategy that hz posted can be used against town. The strategy post he makes later on I am actually fine with (claiming roles when there are no blue able to be voted in) because at this point scum cannot use the vigi shot against the blues. To me it seems like there is no downside which is why I am fine with that type of strategy post. I also like how he just calms down the argument between hz, WoS, Onegu since it seems like scum would want more useless arguments happening in the game and would have just let it continue. He hasn't really offered much of his reads so far in the game but I do think that what he has done so far seems more in favor of town play then scum play.
As I have mentioned before, after Syl's first response to me I didn't really see anything scummy in it and so I put him back in null.
On November 04 2013 19:28 Sylencia wrote: Options 1/2 about strategy are fairly weak, as I mentioned above, there are biggest fish to fry than foiling strategies most of the time when playing scum (honestly, if scum timezones dont match up good luck with getting anywhere on that, but that's outside the scope of our investigations anyways), and I would've thought that discussing strategy would be a good thing since we can actually get an agreement on some things we should(n't) do, since we've already seen (from you nonetheless) that there are problems in the reveal at night X+1 strategy. Had we not discussed this, someone could've followed the train of thought that we've discussed and just gone through with it without thinking about the fact that scum can possibly realise they've been voted for again the following day.
This is what makes me lean from null to slightly town. Even tho I show a clear flaw in the plan he still sticks to it and if I'm understanding him correctly, it seems that had I not pointed out the flaw it would have been a greater benefit for town than for scum. Although I disagree with the idea, he doesn't change his case even after evidence has been shown why it might be a bad idea and isn't afraid to stand by his motion.
Everybody that I have not mentioned I have a null read on.
On November 04 2013 23:45 WaveofShadow wrote: Sweet, we're getting the non-lurk gumshoe this game. Alrighty let's see:
It would be fine if he was just absolving Vanesco, what bugs me is that hesitance, or rather how it sounds like Wos wouldn't really be suprised if Vanesco was scum. It reads more to me as posturing rather than reluctance. He placed a vote early in hopes of building some momentum, and when that mometum dropped he got off the train but positioned himself so that if it ever got rolling again, he could hop right back on under the basis that he suspected Vanesco all along. Which is a safe bet when you take into account Vanesco's recklessness (which may yet get him lynched if no better targets present themselves). Also Wos's shambly defence does Vanesco no favours, because it requires us to assume that Vanesco is terrible and should be disregarded if hes town. Sometimes it's enough to just neuter a townie, because as we all know, useless can be just as bad as scummy.
I'm actually surprised you were the only one to mention this so far, even Vanesco himself didn't bother. It has nothing to do with the perceived loss of momentum. I could very easily have kept my vote on him all day if I still believed him to be scummy, but as you can see I wasn't 100% sure of him being scum earlier on; I even mentioned 'nooby or scum' in one of my first few posts about him. It wasn't a bait to get him going, but I wanted him to post more to see his reaction to the pressure; that is whether he reacted in a towny or scummy way (both nooby imo). I got my answer and unvoted accordingly. Call it wishy-washy if you will but I have provided reasoning for everything I have done all day and been completely transparent with my reads and questioning. As far as the 'bite me in the ass' comments, I can't talk about one of those, but I've been systematically wrong on newbie reads a lot, so it is something I am particularly paranoid about. I was wrong about Koshi in the first game I was exposed to him as scum, and I was also wrong about Chairman Ray in a recent game of his. It's not going to stop me from performing analysis but I worry a lot because I know my analysis can be wrong, hence me opening it up for others to comment on it and pick apart, like you are right now.
Other thoughts: If my goal was to neuter Vanesco, why did he basically take the entire reasoning for the 'out' I gave him and use it? You'd think if he was a fiercely strong and independent player like you are surmising, that he'd try and fight that notion.
Also gumshoe, I hate to drop this card but do you honestly think at this point that the most active and engaging person in the thread is scum?
This is completely subjective and not a defense and the only other defense you offer is, do you think the most active person is scum?
On November 04 2013 23:56 WaveofShadow wrote: Like...I find it pretty ridiculous at this point that anyone could suspect me but that's just self-bias and ego talking right now I suppose. Logically I know I shouldn't be absolved of suspicion unless proven it should be so but I feel pretty damn good about my performance so far, so I just find it weird that I am anyone's #1 scumread considering I have double/triple the filter and content of most people in this game.
You couldn't find anyone better gumshoe?
Again subjective with you only saying your play has been good and you have been active. So other then you saying you have been playing well and transparant. Your defense was filter legnth.
Ok so my own accounts of my own filter are subjective. That's a real eye-opener, thanks for pointing that out! Does it make me scum? No desire to read anything else of what I've written? Or talk about anything else? Jeez I can barely contain myself with all of this original, discussion-promoting and thought provoking content!
On November 05 2013 03:36 WaveofShadow wrote: Jeez I can barely contain myself with all of this original, discussion-promoting and thought provoking content!
Yo I'm supposed to be a brainwashed religious acolyte. Original and thought provoking not really my thing hue
On November 05 2013 01:27 WaveofShadow wrote: lololol the floodgates have opened! Bring it on, hataz. Sn0---my only scumgame was probably the game with the lowest proportional activity in my history, though to be fair I did that calculation last ages ago, and one scumgame does not a meta make.
Onegu - opportunistic as fuck. You're all over me and liking what I do and now that gumshoe posts some walls you turn on me like a rabid dog. Don't make me put you down. Come to think of it, 'rabid dog' is a good example for you turning on hzflank too. You're rubbin' me all sorts of 'the wrong way' all of a sudden.
I'm not surprised no one has called me out, I was surprised no one called me out SPECIFICALLY about the point regarding the 'bite-me-in-the-ass/wishy-washiness' because it's a really easy 'case' to make as town or scum and people do that shit all the time to contribute. Requires very little effort. And please, activity is certainly not my only defense; why is that the only thing you felt was relevant enough to comment on? Let's hear you come up with something this game that someone else hasn't done first, then we can talk, k boyo?
Gumshoe I will address your recent stuff a little later when I have more time; i like discussing with you so it would be nice to get you off of my case so we can go somewhere productive.
Never mind, even if you are scum for whatever reason you seem invested in this game. Dont waste time addressing an argument thats probably not valid (lol you already did nice XD) Besides if your scum you'll trip yourself up eventually if you keep posting like this / : Now,even though I actually did find those things you did fishy... I wasn't entirely honest regarding the intent of that case...
Onegu, ObviusOne, SnO_Man. Meet the peanut gallery. None of them actually agree or disagree with my theory, which is fine because it's mediocre at best, but no doubt at least one of them is scum.
Onegu swooped in and attacked WOS directly while ignoring the bulk of my wall of text and picking out one contradiction in WOs's play. For those without the time to go back and read his post, it looked something like this.
And WoS how can you go on about being so active when we are only 18~ hours into the game and only 6 pages in, your defense makes zero sense. And how can you go from Im suprised no one has called me out, to I cant believe you think I could be scum.
I hate this post for two reasons, 1: It starts with and. 2: It's exceptionally non commital, it doesnt aknoledge the argument present in thread at all, it just feels like Onegu is using my case as a reason to throw shit at WOS, something I cant really imagine a townie doing.
As for his play, it involves alot of whining (sorry Onegu it's true ) : ) abrupt character assassination, and not much valid analysis at all. Hes just hanging around... giving people shit when he can, would not be against lynching him.
Obvius One's play is a little harder to get a grip on
Plus I want people nice and comfortable so they will talk more. Feels like a really slow start. Totes allowed to change my mind later.
The absence of goofing around? Or what?
I am easy to read. Filter length is 100% accurate indicator. Scum OO is still a scaredy-cat. Pants-on-head may also be used as a town indicator in lieu of filter length. That takes a bit more time to assess though.
Theres alot of silliness in his filter from the start. Which is understandable, whats annoying is his actual posting is not obvious at all... these are the only two posts hes made all game with content.
If you put Syl on the defensive by attacking for activity you are creating a self-fulfilling prophecy of his lynch. That's just how it works with Syl. Try seeing what Syl does proactively first before you go all bat-shit with this. If you don't know Syl's MO then I'll make it one sentence for you: both alignments he ends up defending his activity to death and never gets the chance to do actual scum hunting. Therefore by leaving Syl to his devices you will more quickly get a feel for mindset and goals than cornering him.
This is specific to Syl only but you can check out some past games to see what I mean. A scum one was This Town Ain't Big Enough mafia if I recall correctly.
Please don't make it harder than it needs to be to get a read on Syl.
It wasn't like a huge ass town read I got from it, just a leaning away from default null (unless you count my earlier joke about how all'a'y'all be scum). It's an interesting thing to track as the game progresses but most importantly it's day one and I'm establishing base-line reads. That doesn't mean I agree with Umasi's case or your sheeping of it but it's a nugget I extracted from it. It's interesting that you contest me on this, but that idea leads to WIFOM city so I'll not bother you with that.
Whats interesting about these posts is they're both working themselves to standstills. It might be thats because hes playing defensive, but his conclusions and hopes for both of these conversations are alarmingly moderate...as if hes just trying to keep grip of the statues quo on the matters of syl and WOS. You could say hes the anti Vanesco XD.
Also hes recently come out against Sno and has yet to provide his own reasons...
Which brings us to Sno!
He joined the game along side me, and basically has no posts to his name. Despite all that I'm leaning town on him because of his brazen entrance so late in the cycle. It's a gut thing, not much to go on him just yet and I rather he not be on the defensive right away.
Oh and people wanted me to look at Hz! Null, if you wanna lynch a lurker (I consider anyone with under two pages at this moment, myself included, a lurker) hes the top choice because he came into the game with something to prove(hence the game analysis), then backed off when things got rough blaming it on cultural differences. His reads were a solid meh, despite that or perhaps because of it I am reading null on him, and I would rather keep him around at least till tomorrow to see how his play develops. You cant deny there was at least a touch of promise to it.
Right now I feel like lynching into Unegu/ obvius one. They seem to be the most likely culprits based off their shoddy posting and reactions to my wall of text.
On November 05 2013 03:35 Vanesco wrote: Sure OO. Echelon has stated how he disagrees with the strategy by hz and later on agrees on my point about the strategy that hz posted can be used against town. The strategy post he makes later on I am actually fine with (claiming roles when there are no blue able to be voted in) because at this point scum cannot use the vigi shot against the blues. To me it seems like there is no downside which is why I am fine with that type of strategy post. I also like how he just calms down the argument between hz, WoS, Onegu since it seems like scum would want more useless arguments happening in the game and would have just let it continue. He hasn't really offered much of his reads so far in the game but I do think that what he has done so far seems more in favor of town play then scum play.
As I have mentioned before, after Syl's first response to me I didn't really see anything scummy in it and so I put him back in null.
On November 04 2013 19:28 Sylencia wrote: Options 1/2 about strategy are fairly weak, as I mentioned above, there are biggest fish to fry than foiling strategies most of the time when playing scum (honestly, if scum timezones dont match up good luck with getting anywhere on that, but that's outside the scope of our investigations anyways), and I would've thought that discussing strategy would be a good thing since we can actually get an agreement on some things we should(n't) do, since we've already seen (from you nonetheless) that there are problems in the reveal at night X+1 strategy. Had we not discussed this, someone could've followed the train of thought that we've discussed and just gone through with it without thinking about the fact that scum can possibly realise they've been voted for again the following day.
This is what makes me lean from null to slightly town. Even tho I show a clear flaw in the plan he still sticks to it and if I'm understanding him correctly, it seems that had I not pointed out the flaw it would have been a greater benefit for town than for scum. Although I disagree with the idea, he doesn't change his case even after evidence has been shown why it might be a bad idea and isn't afraid to stand by his motion.
Everybody that I have not mentioned I have a null read on.
On November 04 2013 23:45 WaveofShadow wrote: Sweet, we're getting the non-lurk gumshoe this game. Alrighty let's see:
It would be fine if he was just absolving Vanesco, what bugs me is that hesitance, or rather how it sounds like Wos wouldn't really be suprised if Vanesco was scum. It reads more to me as posturing rather than reluctance. He placed a vote early in hopes of building some momentum, and when that mometum dropped he got off the train but positioned himself so that if it ever got rolling again, he could hop right back on under the basis that he suspected Vanesco all along. Which is a safe bet when you take into account Vanesco's recklessness (which may yet get him lynched if no better targets present themselves). Also Wos's shambly defence does Vanesco no favours, because it requires us to assume that Vanesco is terrible and should be disregarded if hes town. Sometimes it's enough to just neuter a townie, because as we all know, useless can be just as bad as scummy.
I'm actually surprised you were the only one to mention this so far, even Vanesco himself didn't bother. It has nothing to do with the perceived loss of momentum. I could very easily have kept my vote on him all day if I still believed him to be scummy, but as you can see I wasn't 100% sure of him being scum earlier on; I even mentioned 'nooby or scum' in one of my first few posts about him. It wasn't a bait to get him going, but I wanted him to post more to see his reaction to the pressure; that is whether he reacted in a towny or scummy way (both nooby imo). I got my answer and unvoted accordingly. Call it wishy-washy if you will but I have provided reasoning for everything I have done all day and been completely transparent with my reads and questioning. As far as the 'bite me in the ass' comments, I can't talk about one of those, but I've been systematically wrong on newbie reads a lot, so it is something I am particularly paranoid about. I was wrong about Koshi in the first game I was exposed to him as scum, and I was also wrong about Chairman Ray in a recent game of his. It's not going to stop me from performing analysis but I worry a lot because I know my analysis can be wrong, hence me opening it up for others to comment on it and pick apart, like you are right now.
Other thoughts: If my goal was to neuter Vanesco, why did he basically take the entire reasoning for the 'out' I gave him and use it? You'd think if he was a fiercely strong and independent player like you are surmising, that he'd try and fight that notion.
Also gumshoe, I hate to drop this card but do you honestly think at this point that the most active and engaging person in the thread is scum?
This is completely subjective and not a defense and the only other defense you offer is, do you think the most active person is scum?
On November 04 2013 23:56 WaveofShadow wrote: Like...I find it pretty ridiculous at this point that anyone could suspect me but that's just self-bias and ego talking right now I suppose. Logically I know I shouldn't be absolved of suspicion unless proven it should be so but I feel pretty damn good about my performance so far, so I just find it weird that I am anyone's #1 scumread considering I have double/triple the filter and content of most people in this game.
You couldn't find anyone better gumshoe?
Again subjective with you only saying your play has been good and you have been active. So other then you saying you have been playing well and transparant. Your defense was filter legnth.
Ok so my own accounts of my own filter are subjective. That's a real eye-opener, thanks for pointing that out! Does it make me scum? No desire to read anything else of what I've written? Or talk about anything else? Jeez I can barely contain myself with all of this original, discussion-promoting and thought provoking content!
First where have I called you scum? I asked you a question. Because we were 18 hours into the game and you were offering defense of a case on you with I cant belive it im so active and transparent. Then you come after me because I asked you the question. Followed by you asking me to respond to your second paragraph which I did, because you said filter legnth wasnt your only defense, but it was at the time. I never discussed the case on you only your reaction to it.
EPT
