- It's that time of the year again! Just kidding, we were late.
Click here to see the awards and nominate people for the rest of the categories.
- We're looking for artists. Direct message Dr. Watson for more info!
- Status
Whicker
Degenerate
You are definitely going way out of bounds of the conversation.
Craig said my read on you felt genuine and then you said "eh, not it's not," and he flipped. Nothing what I said had changed by the time he flipped his stance
Whicker
Degenerate
Both. I know how to play, but I'm newer compared to this player list.
Why do you have whicker as town?
Steam in terms of actual votes.
The bpd town read read as fake. It developed from what you said was null into somehow a stronger town read despite him doing the opposite of what you asked him to do "if you're town drop this argument with fang". Instead he kept arguing and you started calling the exchange TvT more firmly.
That and, unlike recent early games, you are seemingly trying to take a lead role in terms of direction. You're not waiting for the thread to develop as you 'power up', you've been at a higher energy all game.
Dalton
Distinguished
Hmm
In that case I'll give you a soft town lean because the way you're solving kinda aligns with what i'd expect from a townie with that experience level.
Can you quote the posts where im 'shaken' kind sir.
Dalton
Distinguished
Sure, here are a couple:
My experience of town Magic would be no-selling a lot of the early speculation about your alignment, whereas here you seem more focused than usual on actually explaining yourself and convincing others that they're wrong about you.
Your town game usually infuriates me because you play in such an aloof way as if you're better than everyone else. Your hubris is notably missing in posts like these, which makes me suspicious of you.
I’m struggling to place Whicker tonally
Suppose this were true, what’s the problem? What is changing one’s mind indicative of?
Whicker
Degenerate
Obviously changing one’s mind isn’t itself indicative of anything. It was the fact that it doesn’t look like to me like it came from him actually reevaluating. It seems to me he was more keen on setting up to follow on my potential lynch
And how did you make that distinction?
Hard disagree - fang isn’t coachable
Vote Ratchet
Not jiving with fang post, ekko stuff is wallpaper
Not jiving with fang post, ekko stuff is wallpaper
You realise I flipped my read like 2 posts later?
I actually wasn’t (I’ve done the skimmiest of skims) so looking at the post where you reverse, how are you making that distinction into now thinking that was a genuine but if needle?
I'm confused as to what your angle is on my behaviour - I entered with that post, and then when I carried on reading I immediately flipped it around. It just seems very strange to me to pick that up as if it had any effect on anything - if I'm trying to undermine Fang them surely I do it in a way that actually attempts to undermine him?
I'm claiming it's genuine because 1 - I know it is, and 2 - I also know that there is no actual agenda you can ascribe to it.
Whicker
Degenerate
Because I hadn't posted at all and his thought process was allegedly "I don't like his follow up."
Course there is - it’s disingenuous to imply otherwise, given I could quite easily argue -this- was the agenda, for example:
- make a bad observation
- retract it
- claim only innocence makes sense as there’s no possible scum agenda, therefore I can’t be scum
I’m not necessarily married to the idea that that’s what you’re doing, but for you to move to strike that off entirely as a possibility is a bad faith argument. Read stands.
It’s like me demanding you town read me because I hadn’t taken your follow up into account - there’s no scum reason for me to be so careless, therefore I can’t be scum
- Status