BBM
-
Posts
2,723 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Everything posted by BBM
-
#whoa #stillathing #IWILLSOMEDAYFINISH Chapter 16x! Now don't expect anything else soon
-
@Elie- Okay, I misread about the voting/voted thing. However, once again, you're saying that you want to establish more of a read on her, but I don't see much of an effort going towards actually doing so. There's 266, but that was before you said you wanted to establish more on her.
-
? IIRC she was voting Kirsche before the cop result on Marth. Elie, your 402 says, in your words, "I actually have a gut scumread on her". I like your backtracking.
-
Elie, why do you think that Scorri is more under the radar than, say, JB? He's only got like two content posts in the whole phase.
-
@Kirsche- wrt the first paragraph, it's not about Breezy's alignment, it's about your's. Breezy is town, but confirming his role doesn't make you town. Also, the second paragraph was directed towards Elie, not you. Should have made that clearer. @Shinori- you know if you'd explained this at ANY POINT during the last 72 hours, we could have saved our extension? ##Unvote, ##Vote: Marth I guess. And you should also have two nights of results- what's your second result? Scorri, it's not the reaction test, it's that he concluded with no results from it, and then more or less parked Darros for the rest of D1 on a case he himself admitted was graspy when he made it. I'm also not really sure about why he's voting Kirsche (would be cool if he could clarify).
-
You being scum doesn't have to make Breezy scum. There are reasons for defending town as scum. I also don't really like the idea of saying "oh I have a gut read on this person but since it's gut I can't push it". Okay, maybe it's not enough for a vote, but if you feel Scorri needs to be evaluated, why aren't you doing it yourself? Just mentioning it and then disqualifying it in the next sentence seems pointless to me.
-
I wouldn't mind the extension. Personally I thought you guys should have used it on D1, because I find you need more time there than during LYLO, due to there being more people and not having had as much time to gather reads.
-
Amnesiac isn't a scummy role so I don't see why Marth should have done that. There's a difference between roles that are common mafia fakes and common mafia roles. Also, Elie asked people to vote one of JB/Marth/Breezy at a time when they were the leading wagons and we needed to consolidate for a lynch. Then when some people voted Darros, he became a viable lynch too, so he was happy to vote him instead, as he was Elie's "top scumread". At least for me, the issue here is that Darros was the top read in the first place, not that he asked people to vote for one of the first three. This Marth wagon is Bad and everyone voting him is doing so for D1 reasons while more or less ignoring anything he's said on D2. Earlier on, Shin looked a bit at D2 and said it wasn't bad but that since it came only after being under pressure, it didn't really matter any. Since when have we decided that someone is so strongly scum after D1 that any further attempts they make at scumhunting are just compensation? All Terra said about his D2 is that he's moving votes a lot- the rest is still D1 and doesn't look at the actual content of D2. And Shinori hasn't given shit. Unless Shinori reveals his reason for wanting us to lynch Marth, and it's a good one, I won't vote here.
-
Sorry, I thought I'd answered that. I agree with you that answering questions on behalf of someone else is bad, but I don't think that it's scummy. There's a reason that you say that if Darros and Terra were buddies, he'd be able to get away from it after Terra flipped by saying "oh ED1 newb defence". It's because "ED1 newb defence" is an okay reason to do it as town. I suppose I can see the possible reasons scum would have for defending a new player regardless of that newbie's alignment, but I still don't see why, in this case, that was more likely than the just as possible reasons town would have for it, and I still don't see how this small act near the beginning of D1 is so bad that it's justification by itself for a lynch. And okay, I don't mind the initial Darros vote. It was graspy, but it was early on and that happens, and you admitted it at the time. But you made like zero effort whatsoever to analyze a single one of the posts Darros made beyond that later on in the phase, and even though you admitted it was graspy at the time you made that initial vote, it was still your top reason for a lynch at the end of D1? That doesn't seem right to me. @Strege- Elie said "I saw it as an attempt to defend a novice player with a completely believable excuse". This told me that he thought that Darros's excuse was believable, but it being so either didn't matter or was part of the scumminess, which doesn't make much sense to me.
-
Also, you should quit comparing all new players to your own experiences being new. You used to do it before too and it's not any better now than it was then. Not everyone acts the same when they're new or does through the same circumstances. PEMN, rite
-
Presumably the target of the RVS vote mattered very little to Darros (it doesn't look like he had any particular ulterior motives behind it), so I don't see what's bad about attacking a vote on someone you were voting during RVS. And I'm not sure I'm understanding you correctly, but Darros's excuse for defending him is believable, so it's scummy? That doesn't make much sense to me.
-
I didn't say it didn't matter at all, I said that I wasn't attempting to make it something it wasn't, and that having one waffly read doesn't automatically equate to scum. Buddying is scummy because it's buddying? srsly? It's entirely possible to think someone else is town, as town yourself, and defend them. You're just expecting me to take all instances of defending someone as having scum intent in them, even though that isn't true. If you want me to accept an instance of barely-out-of-RVS buddying as a valid reason for someone being your top scumread at the end of D1, I'd like you to actually put more effort into that. It looks like you're looking for "scumtells" like buddying and waffling without actually looking into the specific situation any deeper.
-
I never made an attempt to say I wasn't being waffly on Bearclaw. Townies can have waffly reads on someone as well. Your defence of your Darros vote is just "buddying is scummy", which seems really weak and I don't understand how it can be as scummy as giving shitty reads.
-
Obviously it'd be subtler than "I told you so". And you still get indirect cred from not being the one to push a mislynch. I read between the lines and got that, which is why I wasn't pushing you for this as much as just talking generally. Your crumbs about your role don't really say anything about your own alignment though.
-
Yeah, Rapier finds it difficult to keep up with posts in larger games and keep track of things. Due to this, he often becomes demotivated once posts start piling up, and flakes and becomes inactive. His fairly consistent posting D1 was itself a small miracle. I wouldn't say it's a scumtell with him (even if he HAD been online). @Kirsche- Insisting that someone is town without giving solid reasons can have scum intent behind it, yes. Without giving solid reasons, you're unlikely to persuade anyone who thinks they're scummy to stop voting them, so you're not actually doing anything to stop the lynch, but can still say "I told you so" after the flip and get towncred from seemingly defending a wrong wagon.
-
Except your reasons for finding Marth really don't apply anymore, so if you're going to persist in saying he's obvscum, I'd like you to look at his D2 posts.
-
Okay, I thought pretty much the same thing wrt amount of content, but I just didn't feel like you were properly addressing the wagon. @JB- I understand why experienced players would see the futility of pursuing a case on me at that point, but why wouldn't newbscum do it? Why only newbtown? If the answer is that the newbscum's buddies would warn them against it, I don't really think that it's a very good reason, because all four of his posts about me D1 were within the span of twenty minutes, and they might not have been there to tell him to stop talking about it.
-
You're right that you didn't say that it's okay if he doesn't respond because it's busy, but the placement of the statement that he was busy (at the end of the paragraph, after all the attacks) still feels like an attempt to back away from your own argument, especially as in 316, you say that you're choosing not to pursue him solely because of that, despite all the reasons you present. Shinori, I'd really like some opinions from you sometime today. You're just clinging to your D1 Marth vote, which was for him having very little content, but since then he's posted stuff and you've ignored it just to say "lol wat a scum". Something I forgot to mention earlier- Scorri, at the end of D1, you said that you didn't want to lynch Marth solely off having a somewhat common scum fakeclaim, but from what I remember only Kirsche was voting him solely due to that. Anyone else was voting him for having not very much content.
-
224
-
You only get to be a mod if you play in SFMM3.
-
I'm talking about rule 12, which says we need a hammer to lynch anybody. It's possible for everyone to be voting and for there to still not be a hammer.
-
What happens if there are not enough votes on somebody at phase end?
-
I'll join I guess.
-
Kirsche, you voted for Kumaneko in Masquerade so I'm not entirely sure what you're going for there by saying it wasn't worth lynching him in that game. And you said a lot more about Marth than you did about me and still concluded with me being scummier just because my play reminds you of Touhou, which is why I didn't think that you were scumreading Marth very much until you just clarified. If the Kidnapper is town, they should have claimed by now (or not silenced the most active poster playing on N0)
-
My 272 was two lines, the first of which was because I misinterpreted your first post. The quotes in that post didn't have the person's name in them and I assumed they were from Marth because I remembered two of them as being his and one of them as being mine. The second line was because you justified a hard defence of Breezy on gut. And yes, insisting that he is a Tracker IS a hard defence, because you're otherwise implying the possibility of a scum Tracker targeting someone the mafia kidnapped (and therefore hooked). So I don't think I'm blowing anything out of proportion by saying you're defending him. If Breezy is actually a Tracker, the odds of him being mafia are very low. And other than that, on D1, you called for Marth's lynch over Breezy and said that you didn't understand why people were voting him for targeting me when that wasn't it at all. You can't really compare anon games to non-anon games that well either, and Touhou was a different case even for my scumplay, because you were one of the only remaining targets and I had to push for your lynch even if you weren't being particularly scummy. That's not the situation here. @Strege- true enough I suppose, but Bearclaw had just expressed slight suspicion against Shinori a few hours before employing the meta, which is kind of weird. Kirsche's Marth paragraph takes an awful lot of space to come to not much of a conclusion about him. He also attacks him quite a bit and then handwaves it at the end by saying "but he's busy". So?
