Not liking Implosion’s #382.
Implosion:
It feels like it could be an attempt to set up future mislynches.
More so than you posting full scumscales?
Nameless’s #384 is money. Implosion, I asked you about the CASE on Saint, not Saint himself.
@Ice: The reason I found it scummy (or, at least, not town, as my read on you atm isn’t scummy, but neutral) is that in #89, you say you won’t give a comprehensive list and say why—if you found simply posting the list undesirable, why didn’t you say so at first instead of *mostly* defending Nameless? This + your non-reaction to Saint’s entrance are going to be more associative tells than anything else, hence why my read on you is neutral, especially before any flips have occurred, but why I can’t yet read you as town.
@Empking:
Why would scum do that?
Any number of reasons--distancing, bussing, plausible deniability--distracting the town by highlighting an "easy lynch" without actually having your vote on the player, etc.
Yers. Its called optimum town play.
What about the full scumscale makes it optimum town play? Especially when based on gut?
Seriously. You're moaning on one hand about me providing all my reads and on the other about providing no reads. (And of course there aren't slips. Slips are a newbie tell.)
I meant reads, slips, tells, etc as examples of evidence that would be used in a Nameless case that we could then examine—they wouldn’t necessarily be coming from you. I meant that you're not offering a real case w/ your votes.
[quoteMy discussion with King has given me a 100% scum read on him.][/quote]
Then why isn’t your vote on him?
[quoteCan you say the same about me or Implosion?][/quote]
No, because this is Mafia.
And, why would a town PR claim on D1 without any prompting when they are at L-2?
On hiatus from any new mafia commitments.
Jesus loves you. But that doesn't mean you're town.
James 2:13