Participants willing, I'd say {DragonEater70, DKKoba, Ranger, Save The Dragons} is a solid core of town players largely seeing the same things.
My claim was serious, for the record.In post 929, DragonEater70 wrote:Huh? Ranger said she will stop lying when she's uninspired, which is clearly not now.
Oh, I know. I'm just saying you're not uninspired.In post 1002, Ranger wrote: My claim was serious, for the record.
My playstyle's a mixture of casual tryharding, humor, and if I'm feeling bold, flirting. If I'm not entertaining, I've done something wrong.In post 966, DragonEater70 wrote:Okay I love this post and I know it's probably not alignment indicative to be funny but this is so funny I really wanna TR Ranger.
True enough. If we get my massclaim, you'll see my latest idea.In post 1004, DragonEater70 wrote:Oh, I know. I'm just saying you're not uninspired.In post 1002, Ranger wrote:My claim was serious, for the record.
Ircher becomes more readable as the game progresses. Having read your case, I actually think it's slightly +town, yet too early to tell for sure. If he's scum, it'll become clear with time. Town, ditto. I lean away for now, yet don't wish to comment on what the town markers are, as they're weak.In post 980, DragonEater70 wrote:Ranger, your thoughts on my scumcase on Ircher?
Just read what this was about and I agree with StD - it's true that if you read what they said in a LITERAL way, then they've said two contradicting things. But what StD was CONVEYING is that AniX does not have any ACTUAL reads - all their "reads" are based on mostly invalid mechanical reasoning (which neither me nor StD would count as reads but more as speculations/mechsolve attempts). Therefore they are not reads, is what StD was saying.In post 687, Save The Dragons wrote: I'll paraphrase
Me: anix doesn't have reads
Anix: here are my reads
Me: no those don't count because they are nonsense. You dont have reads.
Anix: you didn't say it in the specific way I require you to say it
W/e I'm disengaging we can continue this stupid argument when I go back to voting you
Oh, that sounds like fun.In post 1006, Ranger wrote:True enough. If we get my massclaim, you'll see my latest idea.In post 1004, DragonEater70 wrote:Oh, I know. I'm just saying you're not uninspired.In post 1002, Ranger wrote:My claim was serious, for the record.
Frustrating scum is an endgoal of every Ranger game.In post 1011, DragonEater70 wrote:Agh I hated it so much when I knew your claim didn't make sense but simultaneously knew you were town. I just couldn't wrap my head around it.
And generally not having reads is scummy but I can see this as stemming from caveman!AniX which is why they're a lower priority lim in my eyes.In post 1008, DragonEater70 wrote: Just read what this was about and I agree with StD - it's true that if you read what they said in a LITERAL way, then they've said two contradicting things. But what StD was CONVEYING is that AniX does not have any ACTUAL reads - all their "reads" are based on mostly invalid mechanical reasoning (which neither me nor StD would count as reads but more as speculations/mechsolve attempts). Therefore they are not reads, is what StD was saying.
You did a good job.In post 1013, Ranger wrote: Frustrating scum is an endgoal of every Ranger game.
i said my pm was red, i just don't want to go into more specifics of it in case it counts as pm quotingIn post 948, Aureal wrote:I'm finding it really sus how a bunch of people are just refusing to talk about the color of their PM on principle like this. This talk been happening since like page two, people! Neither the mod nor our SITE ADMINISTRATOR have said a peep to indicate any issue with describing a color that the mod may or may not have used. Describing the color of a PM is common talk, do you want me to go link someone using 'red PM' as slang for Mafia or something?!In post 925, camelCasedSnivy wrote: im gonna avoid talking about role pms just in case of rules
