This post is worse than the antagonizing post itself.In post 30, Flubbernugget wrote:You attack someone for attacking someone for...posting?
Chainsaw much?
My theory is that Flubber felt like they had to double-down and try and 'convince' others and look like a frustrated townie when their logic wasn't going over well.In post 159, Seanzie wrote:In post 158, Vulture wrote:Meh.
Bad opening, and the few posts that follow feel like he’s trying to put on anoutraged “you guys don’t see this!?”act with everyone.Why is this scummy in your opinion? I often get frustrated when I feel like I see something and others aren't paying attention.
Pretty sure this proves you're not reading my posts in good faith given the fact that I townread almost everyone on your wagon, as seen here. There's not a lot to say when you're scummy and I agree with the people voting you.In post 579, MegAzumarill wrote:Mathblade: new sub in so chalk it up to a null read so far
Lukewarm: likes to move around their vote, clash with Chaos appears to be Town on town Imo, mainly coming from a disparity in approach to votes, slight townread
T3: is T3, slight townread
Titus: doesn’t seem super concerned with exactly who is limmed, which seems townie (as I suspect there are 1 or more scum outside of their townblock) but doesn’t seem to provide a good flow of logic into the game, slight townread
Tris: extremely scummy, lim on sight
Umlaut: mostly talks surrounding flubber, and not adding input on the rest of the game, posts intermittently but not often. Scumread
Vulture: on 2 occasions (me and flubber) added to a large wagon without providing thoughts of said wagon, very few reads given until very recently, Scumread
Honestly it feels like vulture hasn’t received enough pressure after their putting flubber at E-1. Especially after Chaos ended up doing the same before, with a much less meaningful vote.
VOTE: Vulture
Also, I was reading earlier and want to say that this is a very silly team to theorize over. The assumption is that I would bus both of my partners and for... what result?In post 535, Flubbernugget wrote:I'm entertaining a scumteam of Meg/Chaos+1 more (maybe Vulture?) at the moment.
Umalut/Mathblade could also still be a thing? Tough to say because both slots (Umalut/Seanzie at the time) did some badposting and don't have enough activity to say much more on. MathBlade so far looks town, but there's a pocket bias here given they came in off the bat to say my wagon sucks lol
Something feels weird that I'm entertaining scumpools of entirely different people though. Hmmmm
I have input on my thoughts on the wagon in the post quoted. Do you need me to bold that for you too?In post 592, MegAzumarill wrote:In post 589, Vulture wrote:Pretty sure this proves you're not reading my posts in good faith given the fact that I townread almost everyone on your wagon, as seen here. There's not a lot to say when you're scummy and I agree with the people voting you.In post 579, MegAzumarill wrote:Mathblade: new sub in so chalk it up to a null read so far
Lukewarm: likes to move around their vote, clash with Chaos appears to be Town on town Imo, mainly coming from a disparity in approach to votes, slight townread
T3: is T3, slight townread
Titus: doesn’t seem super concerned with exactly who is limmed, which seems townie (as I suspect there are 1 or more scum outside of their townblock) but doesn’t seem to provide a good flow of logic into the game, slight townread
Tris: extremely scummy, lim on sight
Umlaut: mostly talks surrounding flubber, and not adding input on the rest of the game, posts intermittently but not often. Scumread
Vulture: on 2 occasions (me and flubber) added to a large wagon without providing thoughts of said wagon, very few reads given until very recently, Scumread
Honestly it feels like vulture hasn’t received enough pressure after their putting flubber at E-1. Especially after Chaos ended up doing the same before, with a much less meaningful vote.
VOTE: Vulture
Spoiler:
This comes across as an attack because I voted you and because I am the 'easiest' vote on your wagon that you could feasibly swing, and even then you're trying to frame it as 'they need more pressure' in a way that is underhanded. Your tone hasn't improved and I think that I'm probably correct about my previous thoughts on wagons.
Part of my point is that ChaosOmega ended up doing a similar bit to what you are doing (joining the wagon without adding any input to it), and ended up getting pressure for it. Why would that not apply to you, I feel even doubly so for putting Flubber at E-1. I think your spot deserves more looking into.
I also feel that it is incredibly strange that your vote on me you end up discussing just about every other player than the person you are voting.
It's just counter-intuitive to what I expect, I guess. You have these thoughts but keep them to yourself in effort of not overwhelming people when I think people want to be overwhelmed by your thoughts so you can be better sorted. I am hypocritical in this regard and often play only at the prodding of other people wanting to know certain things, but in your position it makes sense to pour everything out sooner rather than later.In post 628, MegAzumarill wrote:I believe I already stated that that initial analysis is more of keynotes than anything else. It helps the discussion to take it piece by piece at a time. If I went through all my elaboration at once its going to 1. probably delay the analysis by an IRL day based on my schedule 2. Be harder to read as town as a block of text 3. still require going over the analysis again if people had questions.In post 623, Vulture wrote:It's NAI. The best I can say as to why it's been recently is "reasons", but I have some energy to think about games coming back.
I don't really know what to think about Meg's response, because it's more in depth than what was originally given and that feels... backwards. Meg might not have had the time beforehand but when asked to catch up and being under some pressure I would think she'd want to be helpful without the nudging of someone else.
However, that doesn't mean the responses weren't good. I'm still in the process of discerning that part.
I can go in depth with any of them and would like to, as long as someone would ask.
No point going into reads that people aren't interested in at this point, I'd like to focus on what people actually want me to clarify right now.
This is the least surprising development and playing lower key is not just about this game. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯In post 634, Prism wrote:Vulture, I'm very curious about your townread on Lukewarm.
To be blunt, I do not like your ISO, which is perhaps to be expected but it is how I feel nonetheless. Scum are heavily incentivized to play lower key Day 1/2 if they can get away with it.
So let’s assume for a moment that I am scum doing this vote.
Gamma, after voting with two people he has suspected/worried about:
I opened this game commenting on Flubber.In post 910, Vulture wrote:So let’s assume for a moment that I am scum doing this vote.
The motivation is that I am trying to get Flubber hammered early, yes? I want people to go for it, and barring anyone lolhammering for the sake of it I have to justify why to the audience of non-voters.
My very first post was attacking Flubber. This works with the above, making Flubber out to be bad.
My question then becomes: “When does Titus’s critical thinking kick in, reading what follows?” However, I actually think Titus didn’t use it and just went off vote counts because she thinks they’re a Bible that will gamesolve for her without effort.
If I am trying to sell Flubber as a good elim in this vote and I presumably have set up, even if it’s a small degree given early game, why do I not bring up my scumread on him until after I was asked and just go “meh, let’s see what happens?” in 154 when 158 is something I can post with the vote instead to make it look even marginally better? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
It’s an attempt to get you to use more than two braincells on my motivations as scum v town and why the scum ones don’t hold weight. Which if you want to call it a defense, sure, but it’s more a commentary on how shortsighted of an analysis you did.In post 929, Titus wrote:I hate if I was scum, why wouldn't I do X arguments? It's a question that's really a way for people to defend themselves without actually being townie. There's so many reasons why people do something. It's not like scum are going to say "yes you got me" to any response anyway.
Check literally any game that I’ve played. This rate of posting is steady across them (and they’re all town games).In post 935, Titus wrote:In post 931, Vulture wrote:It’s an attempt to get you to use more than two braincells on my motivations as scum v town and why the scum ones don’t hold weight. Which if you want to call it a defense, sure, but it’s more a commentary on how shortsighted of an analysis you did.In post 929, Titus wrote:I hate if I was scum, why wouldn't I do X arguments? It's a question that's really a way for people to defend themselves without actually being townie. There's so many reasons why people do something. It's not like scum are going to say "yes you got me" to any response anyway.This is really encouraging me to look elsewhere. [/sarcasm]In post 933, Vulture wrote:But then again I’ve genuinely never seen you apply correct VCA as long as I’ve been around and only seen it used to help scum so my faith is little.
It's fair enough to say that you aren't lockscum based on my VCA alone. You're just my biggest suspect. I'm townreading all but you and Chaos on that wagon. Your ISO lacks content. So does Chaos. Chaos is VLA.
What's your excuse?
If you wanted me to engage more, here you go.In post 939, Prism wrote:I am tilted for several reasons and some are outside this game but others are not.
I am tilted at the Vulture wagon but I am even more tilted by Vulture and I have already started off my morning being nasty.
Aristeia if you're that worried about me pacing the game/controlling the thread you fucking try instead.
1) To reinforce a sense of “look I’m reasonable guys, I can be helpful, don’t get rid of me” should the wagon on me disappear; the worry is that town will recognize me as town as well and then revert to you.In post 1036, MegAzumarill wrote:In post 986, Vulture wrote:Meg, why do you keep pushing on point 1 when you’re not the top wagon?In post 987, Vulture wrote:You’re clearly aware of my wagon existing and have read back so you should be aware that the votes on you have dropped away, yes?In post 988, Vulture wrote:The way I read you doing that right now is:
You are aware I am town -> you see the wagon but assume people will also recognize I am town -> you fear it flipping back onto you.
Feels like pre-emotive damage control.
These posts strikes me as particularly bad of their recent posts. This feels fabricated for a few reasons.
1. They accuse me of preemptive damage control if the wagon. What benefit would this have for me if I am scum?
2. I had already mentioned being eliminated on many circumstances, but they only choose to attack the point when I am the counter wagon against them, why not bring it up sooner if you found it scummy?
3. The posts aren't coherent, the first couple seems to imply confusion of why I would bring that up and that the votes were dissolving off me (Which isn't true VC was 5 on Vulture and 4 on me, still very close) However the third acts as if they are confident I am scum with an agenda of how I expect the conversation to go. Why would they act confused if they already had an idea of a scum motivation behind it? They didn't think of it later, as the posts were posted back to back.
It feels like a desperation attack to me when I go back and reread it.
It does not matter, inherently, the makeup of the people voting me; if I prove myself to not be an option, the assumption is that they will revert to you as you are one of the POE options. Given that most of these people do suspect you, yes, it would be a reversion back from one scumread to another.This is wrong for two reasons, 1. the people ending up on your wagon are for the most part the people that were on the Chaos wagon, not mine, even if they were to "revert" back to their prior vote, it wouldn't be on me. 2. I think I have made it clear I have no intention of surviving past the first few days of this game and being LHF for scum come limlo.
Where did I say it was meaningless? Direct quote, please.You are not answering the accusation. Why do you suddenly find it suspicious to act like this when you yourself said it felt meaningless earlier? Why is it suddenly a scumtell now that you are at risk? I understand yo uhave other suspiscions about me but what made you change your view on my attitude to being limmed.
I've already been over this regarding the first quote. And now it's that it feels weird that I was certain about it despite... pushing you most of today? And no longer about the 'confusion'?Its also that your claim doesn't make sense with the vote lineup. You claim that the votes on me and shifted onto you, which wasn't the situation at all, we both were/are very likely to be a lim today. The main thing that felt weird about the post was the sense of certainty in the accusation, for me addressing one of the most likely outcomes of today.
