Grape and tom's alliance against Jack combined with tom's pointless overexplanation for why he likes Grape better than the lurkers is buddy-ish. It's a tenuous path that I'm not willing to pursue toDay (it depends on too many things: whether tom's overexplanation is scummy rather than only strange, whether ITF is scum, whether ITF's role is important enough for two scum to buddy up so blatantly to distract away from him, maybe etc.), but it's there.
tom,
1) I'm trying to figure out IF I have an issue with your overexplanations (beyond finding it pointless and strange).
2) You went from being fine with an ITF wagon (544) to liking his response despite it not being "super AI" (742) to listing him among your town reads (748). Can you explain the progression? Also, how much do you find him townie on his own and how much does that read depend on other reads?
shadow scumreading Vaimes because the layout of his readlist was bad, and otherwise townreading him, is strange as well.
I like ITF's tone and I'm fine with his answers in 818.
Im more saying that he isnt higher because of activity like the rest of his group, but because i liked his reentrance from the dlp game with the unami townread.
I'm struggling to find hints of the second quote in the first one, but there must be something since you are "more saying".
Semantics aside, my issue is with the overexplanation, not with his position in your tier-list (it's not relevant yet) or with the number of tiers (who cares).
Grape has played much more than both Shadow and Sloth+7 combined, and unlike them he has actual posts. There is no need to overexplain why he's above the the previous two. Why do you see him as comparable to Shadow and Sloth?
I'm not swayed one way or another by ITF's matter-of-fact explanations, they say nothing about his intent. I was expecting something like this to happen regardless of his alignment (because it often does, with any player) and I expect the wagon-analysis to be a lot more telling.
ITF,
1) Why did you go from "I like that ZDS is scumhunting and am not interested in lynching him today." (#270) to "I think ZDS is town because he is reevaluating his reads. " (#274)? They aren't the same at all.
2) Why not mention the meta basis behind 274 until after you've been pushed, and why not actually explain it until after you've been pushed some more?
3) Why single me out? I understand why you would townclear Whispy and Umami, they are/were controversial figures, but that wasn't the case for me at all. And it's not like you've been liberally throwing town reads all over the place, aside from me (and to a degree your vote on shadow) you have only expressed opinions on a very limited number of then-controversial figures.
ITF's flip will determine my read on axel, we aren't lynching him today it looks like. and itf doesn't have a lot to go off of. it's a good place to start.
1) Why?
2) Any thoughts on #634?
I'm surprised Axel was so easily swayed by ITF's mostly NAI defense. Like Whispy said, it's "partnery". That means if ITF flips scum, it makes Axelrod look worse. I don't understand how Whispy can simultaneously like ITF better and Axelrod worse in light of Axel's unvote.
Fair enough. Poking and testing is most of what you've done so far anyway. I don't particularly care as long as you don't become a distraction, for example by reviving feuds that had already gone on long enough.
To be clear, I wasn't testing for reactions when calling out 665. Getting reads is important but so is avoiding pointless dispersal not far from the deadline.
@ZDS: My questioning of Axel is a direct response to his post.
What do you think of his ITF post?
See 575, third paragraph.
---
I hope tom has a reason for reviving the Rod/Vaimes feud in 665 and isn't just attempting to create a distraction and waste our time.
I like (the explanations for) Jack's reads individually, but the scumpile is nothing to write home about. "ITF, Umani, Tubba and Axel" are litterally the town's most shared scumreads.
It bothers me how Whispy tries to bring several players towards the middle in #603.
What a coincidence that Umami appeared not long after her lurking was called out. I don't mind her posts though, and it may really have been a coincidence.
Axelrod's PBPA in #654 is fair.
Axel, you were mentioned in #138 not for what you said about Whispy but for what Whispy said about you (ie, scumreading you).
---
I'm waiting for ITF to come back and give his defence. Some of my reads *depend* on whether I end up buying it or not.
Lately the active posters haven't been doing anything majorly scummy (biggest ping I got was from 603 and it's not much). Some of them also aren't doing anything majorly townie either but that doesn't matter yet.
I like the ITF wagon (for obvious reasons) even if I don't like everyone (or every vote) on it. I cannot reach any conclusion yet from that mild contradiction (could it be a busjob? Did sharks smell blood in the water? Am I worrying for nothing?).
ITF, what are your opinions on how other players relate to you or your wagon? For example, did anyone ping you for having bad reasons for voting you, or for not voting you, or for looking like they are testing the waters, and so on?
I dislike how Axelrod's PBPA in 532 repeats my own observations re:ITF while presenting them as brand new thoughts, and for that reason I'm also not fond of KJ interrogating Axel for his ITF read that is so similar to mine. For now I'm going to assume I'm only noticing all of this because of my giant ego and none of it is AI.
Grapefruit's posting improved dramatically so I completely believe his out-of-game excuse.
Grape, to clarify, what did you read Umami as in that other game and what did she flip instead?
Anyway I'm putting this game on the backburner for the next 24 hours or so.
That won't make much of a difference.
---
I wonder if maybe Axel is right re:Grape, and whether that should influence my Axel read. I'm not fond of the fruity guy's posts on this page, how he's playing lonesome cowboy of few words.
He wasn't such an hardcore lurker last game and even if he rarely made big posts, they were never this cartoonishly short.
Me next
ZDS is probably town because he's already post more wolf reads then he did in Prisoners /s
No need for sarcasm, that's actually a very astute observation. I hadn't noticed it myself, but you are completely right that I'm a lot more liberal with my scum reads than I was last game.
I tend to dislike those kinds of posts. I consider them scum+ because it's just what some scum like to do - not say anything and promise to post later. This is not a big tell, just a thing I notice.
*COUGH*
---
Current Jackrito reminds me of how he was in the lategame of Prison Block 2, when he was struggling to make his own mind and relying on me and Rodemy to feed him reads (and then it turned out they were both under my spell all along). My bet is he's in a slump.
Speaking of Rodemy, it's weird to see him relatively tame and sane. I liked crazy Rodemy.
Axelrod seems more focused on looking like a slow starter than in actually starting slow (key word starting). There are many players who are struggling to get good reads but at least you see them try, and you don't see them putting most of their energy into telling us what slow starters they are.
Axel, I don't remember you being intentionally obtuse. What about any of the wagons you skipped (Whispy, Umami, Tubba, to a lesser extent me, Shadow)? Is none of that interesting enough to warrant a comment or two? Yet your 2/5 who-cares tier Grape vote is?
Furthermore, you seem well able to post more when it's entirely for self-serving purposes.
ITF town read on me rings like he knows my alignment and is putting the cart before the horse. There is no reason to single me out for changing my mind, other players have done it too and I only did it once so far.
The meta argument is a little better, but easy to fake especially since all he has to do is parrot Rhand while pretending it was his own idea all along. Speaking of which, "I like that ZDS is scumhunting" (270) is not the same as "I think ZDS is town because he is reevaluating his reads" (274 and on), and NEITHER of these hint at an underlying meta read. Ergo I'm calling bull*****.
Umami's last couple posting grapes have been NAI.
@Johnny: The mix of calling out Rhand on his undue confidence then immediately after pointing out how much he doesn't get the Whispy wagon. I interpreted that as "what do you find wrong about this player I know is town?". Not the world's biggest tell but it was good enough for me.
---
Unvote Vote: ITF
I'm giving some breathing room to Umami in case he keeps improving, and to Axelrod in case he makes some amazing catch-up post. I'm still not impressed with Killjoy but I'm fine voting with him. I disagree to varying extents with all other wagons (if you can even call them that).
ITF is making me doubt my Umami read but for the wrong reasons, like when Umami made me doubt my Whispy read. He's not the first to defend the delicious guy, but his arguments read strategic rather than sincere, like they are based on inside knowledge. I don't necessarily get a scum-defending-town vibe though, they could be scum-scum, especially given Day chat.
I also dislike how his catch-up posts are basically summaries of what other more eloquent players have said (270 parrots me, 293 parrots Rhand), but remixed into inoffensive milquetoast versions, with the Umami town read sprinkled on top.
ITF, FYI, I'm amazing at fake scumhunting when I'm scum so your reasons for townreading me are NAI, hence why you got mocked.
Axelrod, is your read on Grape so strong it's worth ignoring current happenings? If so why aren't you pushing it more? Why are you so useless? Do something, anything, to prove your vote is not a placeholder or, like Whispy says, a cop-out. It should be easy now that Grape has actually posted.
I dislike Umami's vote on Tubba, although I find it more opportunistic than bussy (not that the two can't coexist). I'm biased against Umami though.
Grapefruit, can you give your meta defense of Umami?
Grape and tom's alliance against Jack combined with tom's pointless overexplanation for why he likes Grape better than the lurkers is buddy-ish. It's a tenuous path that I'm not willing to pursue toDay (it depends on too many things: whether tom's overexplanation is scummy rather than only strange, whether ITF is scum, whether ITF's role is important enough for two scum to buddy up so blatantly to distract away from him, maybe etc.), but it's there.
tom,
1) I'm trying to figure out IF I have an issue with your overexplanations (beyond finding it pointless and strange).
2) You went from being fine with an ITF wagon (544) to liking his response despite it not being "super AI" (742) to listing him among your town reads (748). Can you explain the progression? Also, how much do you find him townie on his own and how much does that read depend on other reads?
shadow scumreading Vaimes because the layout of his readlist was bad, and otherwise townreading him, is strange as well.
I like ITF's tone and I'm fine with his answers in 818.
There's no mention of that in 735 (the big defense wall)
Seconding Rhand's questions. Also, ITF, can you explain each of your scumreads?
I'm struggling to find hints of the second quote in the first one, but there must be something since you are "more saying".
Semantics aside, my issue is with the overexplanation, not with his position in your tier-list (it's not relevant yet) or with the number of tiers (who cares).
I'm not swayed one way or another by ITF's matter-of-fact explanations, they say nothing about his intent. I was expecting something like this to happen regardless of his alignment (because it often does, with any player) and I expect the wagon-analysis to be a lot more telling.
ITF,
1) Why did you go from "I like that ZDS is scumhunting and am not interested in lynching him today." (#270) to "I think ZDS is town because he is reevaluating his reads. " (#274)? They aren't the same at all.
2) Why not mention the meta basis behind 274 until after you've been pushed, and why not actually explain it until after you've been pushed some more?
3) Why single me out? I understand why you would townclear Whispy and Umami, they are/were controversial figures, but that wasn't the case for me at all. And it's not like you've been liberally throwing town reads all over the place, aside from me (and to a degree your vote on shadow) you have only expressed opinions on a very limited number of then-controversial figures.
---
1) Why?
2) Any thoughts on #634?
I'm surprised Axel was so easily swayed by ITF's mostly NAI defense. Like Whispy said, it's "partnery". That means if ITF flips scum, it makes Axelrod look worse. I don't understand how Whispy can simultaneously like ITF better and Axelrod worse in light of Axel's unvote.
To be clear, I wasn't testing for reactions when calling out 665. Getting reads is important but so is avoiding pointless dispersal not far from the deadline.
Not particularly.
Why the loaded question?
Sorry I meant 609. It was late when I made that post, I was tired.
603 is Rhand's post for that matter.
See 575, third paragraph.
---
I hope tom has a reason for reviving the Rod/Vaimes feud in 665 and isn't just attempting to create a distraction and waste our time.
I like (the explanations for) Jack's reads individually, but the scumpile is nothing to write home about. "ITF, Umani, Tubba and Axel" are litterally the town's most shared scumreads.
---
Hi M+7 (= T), bye M+7.
Mod: Prod/Replacement on ITF? Last post was 3 days ago.
It bothers me how Whispy tries to bring several players towards the middle in #603.
What a coincidence that Umami appeared not long after her lurking was called out. I don't mind her posts though, and it may really have been a coincidence.
Axelrod's PBPA in #654 is fair.
Axel, you were mentioned in #138 not for what you said about Whispy but for what Whispy said about you (ie, scumreading you).
---
I'm waiting for ITF to come back and give his defence. Some of my reads *depend* on whether I end up buying it or not.
Lately the active posters haven't been doing anything majorly scummy (biggest ping I got was from 603 and it's not much). Some of them also aren't doing anything majorly townie either but that doesn't matter yet.
I like the ITF wagon (for obvious reasons) even if I don't like everyone (or every vote) on it. I cannot reach any conclusion yet from that mild contradiction (could it be a busjob? Did sharks smell blood in the water? Am I worrying for nothing?).
ITF, what are your opinions on how other players relate to you or your wagon? For example, did anyone ping you for having bad reasons for voting you, or for not voting you, or for looking like they are testing the waters, and so on?
I dislike how Axelrod's PBPA in 532 repeats my own observations re:ITF while presenting them as brand new thoughts, and for that reason I'm also not fond of KJ interrogating Axel for his ITF read that is so similar to mine. For now I'm going to assume I'm only noticing all of this because of my giant ego and none of it is AI.
Grapefruit's posting improved dramatically so I completely believe his out-of-game excuse.
Grape, to clarify, what did you read Umami as in that other game and what did she flip instead?
Does that imply A) Jack is defending his buddy ITF, or B) Jack is keeping his hands clean of a town-wagon?
That won't make much of a difference.
---
I wonder if maybe Axel is right re:Grape, and whether that should influence my Axel read. I'm not fond of the fruity guy's posts on this page, how he's playing lonesome cowboy of few words.
He wasn't such an hardcore lurker last game and even if he rarely made big posts, they were never this cartoonishly short.
No need for sarcasm, that's actually a very astute observation. I hadn't noticed it myself, but you are completely right that I'm a lot more liberal with my scum reads than I was last game.
*COUGH*
---
Current Jackrito reminds me of how he was in the lategame of Prison Block 2, when he was struggling to make his own mind and relying on me and Rodemy to feed him reads (and then it turned out they were both under my spell all along). My bet is he's in a slump.
Speaking of Rodemy, it's weird to see him relatively tame and sane. I liked crazy Rodemy.
Axelrod seems more focused on looking like a slow starter than in actually starting slow (key word starting). There are many players who are struggling to get good reads but at least you see them try, and you don't see them putting most of their energy into telling us what slow starters they are.
Axel, I don't remember you being intentionally obtuse. What about any of the wagons you skipped (Whispy, Umami, Tubba, to a lesser extent me, Shadow)? Is none of that interesting enough to warrant a comment or two? Yet your 2/5 who-cares tier Grape vote is?
Furthermore, you seem well able to post more when it's entirely for self-serving purposes.
ITF town read on me rings like he knows my alignment and is putting the cart before the horse. There is no reason to single me out for changing my mind, other players have done it too and I only did it once so far.
The meta argument is a little better, but easy to fake especially since all he has to do is parrot Rhand while pretending it was his own idea all along. Speaking of which, "I like that ZDS is scumhunting" (270) is not the same as "I think ZDS is town because he is reevaluating his reads" (274 and on), and NEITHER of these hint at an underlying meta read. Ergo I'm calling bull*****.
Umami's last couple posting grapes have been NAI.
@Johnny: The mix of calling out Rhand on his undue confidence then immediately after pointing out how much he doesn't get the Whispy wagon. I interpreted that as "what do you find wrong about this player I know is town?". Not the world's biggest tell but it was good enough for me.
---
Unvote
Vote: ITF
I'm giving some breathing room to Umami in case he keeps improving, and to Axelrod in case he makes some amazing catch-up post. I'm still not impressed with Killjoy but I'm fine voting with him. I disagree to varying extents with all other wagons (if you can even call them that).
ITF stands for "Is Terribly Fake", vote him.
ITF is making me doubt my Umami read but for the wrong reasons, like when Umami made me doubt my Whispy read. He's not the first to defend the delicious guy, but his arguments read strategic rather than sincere, like they are based on inside knowledge. I don't necessarily get a scum-defending-town vibe though, they could be scum-scum, especially given Day chat.
I also dislike how his catch-up posts are basically summaries of what other more eloquent players have said (270 parrots me, 293 parrots Rhand), but remixed into inoffensive milquetoast versions, with the Umami town read sprinkled on top.
ITF, FYI, I'm amazing at fake scumhunting when I'm scum so your reasons for townreading me are NAI, hence why you got mocked.
Axelrod, is your read on Grape so strong it's worth ignoring current happenings? If so why aren't you pushing it more? Why are you so useless? Do something, anything, to prove your vote is not a placeholder or, like Whispy says, a cop-out. It should be easy now that Grape has actually posted.
I dislike Umami's vote on Tubba, although I find it more opportunistic than bussy (not that the two can't coexist). I'm biased against Umami though.
Grapefruit, can you give your meta defense of Umami?