Amrun wrote:Unless you think we're bussing each other?
Where did I call you both scum? Same deal as before, if you can quote it I can unvote it.
Albert B. Rampage wrote:Who the hell is Soben?
Amrun wrote:gorilla wasn't in that game...
If you're talking about chesskid's mini normal, then I was town in that, too.
Amrun wrote:My interest was sparked, but I've been beating the same horse for awhile now and now my interest is waning. That is the natural progression of such things.
Þç¬ÕêåÒéÆÞ¿▒ÒüòÒü¬ÒüìÒéâõ╗ûÕàÑÒééÞ¿▒ÒüøÒü¬Òüä
BunnyLover wrote:Claim mason from chesskid = WIFOM. If anyone else had hinted at them been mason, I probably would have taken it more seriously, but since its chesskid......can you take a lot of what he says seriously? Basically im not sure if he was serious or not, which it doesn't matter as I probably wouldn't lynch CK3 today regardless if he is a mason or not.
Soben wrote:Post #611 by Dry-Fit - Lets get this right, you believe RBT doesn't look good and that you don't like Snake due to lack of contribution however you: 1) Add no contribution yourself. 2) Don't vote either of them.
CryMeARiver wrote:DryFit wrote:Would really like to hear more from SnakePlissken, not liking his contribution so far.
Laughed. And it was out loud.
Katy wrote:Dry-fit wrote:Would really like to hear more from SnakePlissken, not liking his contribution so far.
This coming from a person who has three posts in the entire game.
Riceballtail wrote:Survey says LMP is the winner for now. Soben still ranks high on my scumdar.
UNVOTE; VOTE:LMP
Riceballtail wrote:
Unacceptable reason to give up on your case. If LMP were dead, I'd vote you. I'll probably end up doing it anyway.
Beefster wrote:I don't think the claim-lynch strategy will work. I really doubt anyone else will claim now that we are sure it's a bad idea. It's just as easy for a townie to fakeclaim as scum. If it also happens to apply to fakeclaims, then we still won't get anywhere and we'll have mislynched way more than necessary.
It's still a cool idea nonetheless- it just doesn't work in practice.
Soben wrote:Post #507 by LMP - Our slot isn't in your reads list, also can you explain your implosion town-read?
Soben wrote:Katy, what do you think of the possibility of Beefster + Amrun both being scum? I know when I decide to bus sometimes I have an unhealthy obsession with winning the bussing battle and getting my partner lynched over me XD That could explain the fishing for support that goes past normal scumhunting in this case. Both Regfan and I have Amrun as one of our top suspects and he is leaning scum on Beef as well, while I am more null on Beef at the moment. Just a theory, haven't looked into it enough to know if this is plausible or likely.
Mana wrote:I agree with Gandalf about his opinion regarding the 'let us use this ability in favor for us'
The only other part that is interesting about these pages is LMP's change of opinion about SGR. SGR later admits that his 'plan' was actually a joke. Does this change your opinion on SGR and why?
WC wrote:
@LMP: Where you being sarcastic when you said that unlimited mislynches is a good thing? When you said SGR's plan was so towny it hurt?
WC wrote:No shit we aren't doing the plan because it's a terribad idea. You are trying to justify forced claiming and countless mislynches. Yeah we lynch scum after one "mislynch"... great, but what about after two or three or four. On top of that your threatening our power roles. And on top of THAT, you don't even know if that's what got Pine killed, so you're going to be pushing a lynch on someone who claims but doesn't get mod-killed probably based on coincidence more than evidence.
Maybe Pine had a posting restriction he violated and was killed because of that instead of his claim.
It was an awful and scummy plan and that's why we should lynch you.
Beefster wrote:Mana_Ku wrote:Also, does nobody find it interesting that Beefster comments about Amrun posting town reads, when that was a request?
I don't like it when people make a post of only town and null reads. C'mon, there's got to be some scum reads to show the rest of the class...
More or less. I'm not so much proud of it as I have simply accepted it as fact and moved on.Albert B. Rampage wrote:Beefster, do you agree with Amrun's assessments of your play?
The way you stated this is reminiscent of the gambler's fallacy. (You suggest that because you were scum in so many games, you couldn'tAmrun wrote:I was definitely town in Open 298.
My scum games are Execution Mafia, New Designers Mafia, and X-Files Mafia, in order of most recent to least recent.
No. It just doesn't work. Keep in mind that we have nightkills, too. Nights will be more productive than wild goose chasing with a plan that may not necessarily work. If you attack the player with the role that enables the claim-kill, then the method won't work anymore.LynchMePls wrote:Beefster wrote:I don't think the claim-lynch strategy will work. I really doubt anyone else will claim now that we are sure it's a bad idea. It's just as easy for a townie to fakeclaim as scum. If it also happens to apply to fakeclaims, then we still won't get anywhere and we'll have mislynched way more than necessary.
It's still a cool idea nonetheless- it just doesn't work in practice.
AKA: Please don't try that plan guys, it's really bad for us scumz.
I like to point out obscure things. You can interpret it however you want; it just gives me peace of mind to bring up obscure things no matter how ridiculous they are.LynchMePls wrote:Beefster wrote:Mana_Ku wrote:Also, does nobody find it interesting that Beefster comments about Amrun posting town reads, when that was a request?
I don't like it when people make a post of only town and null reads. C'mon, there's got to be some scum reads to show the rest of the class...
Beefster is reaching for anything he can to distract from his wagon. And the stretch is SCARY.
Beefster wrote:This is vaguely a scum slip- it's definitely a stretch. Proceed with caution...
For the record: ABR is not technically defending me. He's questioning Amrun because he doesn't like her case on me.LynchMePls wrote:I do not get the ABR defense of Beefster at all. The back and forth with Amrun the last 2 pages is all noise with nothing useful.
Amrun wrote:
I was talking about the time you made the placeholder vote, not now.
Beefster wrote:
his is vaguely a scum slip- it's definitely a stretch. Proceed with caution...
Typically, townies don't read very meticulously because they just need to go with gut reads and the gist of things. Scum tend to be more observant- and they tend to nitpick.
I, for one, have not been reading closely. Take my words with caution. It's not a catch-all rule by any means.
CMAR about WC wrote:
I just read something that makes me think you're town.
Amrun wrote:
I am starting to doubt a little and have Beefster as possibly bad town. I'm not sure yet.