It's comments like this that just make me think you're posturing, too. Several players on WS have played for close to a decade now. You've played consistently for about 3 or maybe now 4 years. Do you really believe solving past the immediate lynch is a concept that these players need to learn?
Tempest
Leprous Monarch
nope but it looks like scum play since it allows you to reshash the same arguments and not pursue new leads and genuinely solve since you never let go even when it looks 99.99% likely you're wrong on someone
Tempest
Leprous Monarch
it's a commentary on how wild that EOD2 was
also interesting no lynch and stalling are being brought up
Tempest
Leprous Monarch
I'm antsy for an ultra flip too because depending on what it is I may need to recalibrate hard
also feels like we're going in circles a lot rn
And? At the end of the day, if you're town we win and lose together. I don't think of you as competition, I don't need to pit my speedrun times or whatever against yours.
Day 3 VC 2
yes ofcourse!
because i scum read soulkiller and i think its possible his team rolecopped posyer n1
(I'll try to keep track of this for you if you want)
Dalton ISO:
Dalton's D1 play when looking at his posts can be broken down pretty cleanly into two phases. The first phase being his "policy vote" on T-Pein, and his accusation of Retro:
While he does interact with Poyser here and there, he mostly tunnels Retro for the crime of...joining a wagon that he asked votes be placed on.
Now, while I won't preclude townies calling out bandwagoners on a wagon they started, this feels ingenuine for. T-Peins wagon had not accumulated any other votes, and Dalton wants people to hop on, but explicitly not for a reason?
He also vaguely alludes at taking issue with player's reactions to Fang. This is without
A) Establishing a reason to suspect Fang on his own
B) Not even establishing who those players in question are.
The fixation on one player slot, Retro, is based on an entirely fabricated premise, and one that seems like he's just finding an unconfident townie to tug around.
Now onto his reaction to Fang's claim:
I think I'll mostly let these quotes speaks for himself, there's an obvious motive between all of them, and not one that wavers that much.
For all the shit I've been given over Fang, ironically, Dalton seems to borrow my own reasoning for not-thinking-he's-mafia-but-still-worth-lynching at multiple points (something I had only noticed on reread), while using that justification to strictly not lynch him.
When the discussion of shifting off him comes up:
Dalton can't help but undermine his own credibility by suggesting in a cutesy fashion a policy lynch. Strangely, I don't think T-Pein has taken all that much issue with him this game for it.
To me, this alone warrants suspicion. There's also his Day 2, but I'd say what's incriminating here is more of an absence of typical expected townplay than anything he says explicitly:
Hedges very much on Lethal throughout the day, refuses commitment, cites how he could still be an "info" lynch. Anyone who's seen this type of thing knows how loudly it speaks for itself.
When questioned by X feels compelled to give retroactive reasoning for his stance on Fang and instead of admitting being wrong he comes up with a gauntlet of excuses about how he didn't actually misread him - he has just mostly skimmed! And he would have totally lynched him but Retro!
Retro Retro Retro. Over fixation on a single slot, lack of threadwide solving, he comes across as playing a completely different game from most players in the thread, and that's because he is.
[Vote lynch Dalton]
Get a claim out of this guy, today.
Dalton's D1 play when looking at his posts can be broken down pretty cleanly into two phases. The first phase being his "policy vote" on T-Pein, and his accusation of Retro:
Why did you feel the need to post it in the thread then?
How about
I think not sifting through your posts will help town solve better.
Because your posts suck
As much as I would legit get behind a TPein vote, it isn't based on his play at all.
Find it weird you latched onto what was clearly a policy vote lol.
Also remembered you were one defending aurelion being defensive.
Worrying...
Im sorry pls no
While he does interact with Poyser here and there, he mostly tunnels Retro for the crime of...joining a wagon that he asked votes be placed on.
Now, while I won't preclude townies calling out bandwagoners on a wagon they started, this feels ingenuine for. T-Peins wagon had not accumulated any other votes, and Dalton wants people to hop on, but explicitly not for a reason?
He also vaguely alludes at taking issue with player's reactions to Fang. This is without
A) Establishing a reason to suspect Fang on his own
B) Not even establishing who those players in question are.
The fixation on one player slot, Retro, is based on an entirely fabricated premise, and one that seems like he's just finding an unconfident townie to tug around.
Now onto his reaction to Fang's claim:
I think I'll mostly let these quotes speaks for himself, there's an obvious motive between all of them, and not one that wavers that much.
For all the shit I've been given over Fang, ironically, Dalton seems to borrow my own reasoning for not-thinking-he's-mafia-but-still-worth-lynching at multiple points (something I had only noticed on reread), while using that justification to strictly not lynch him.
When the discussion of shifting off him comes up:
Dalton can't help but undermine his own credibility by suggesting in a cutesy fashion a policy lynch. Strangely, I don't think T-Pein has taken all that much issue with him this game for it.
To me, this alone warrants suspicion. There's also his Day 2, but I'd say what's incriminating here is more of an absence of typical expected townplay than anything he says explicitly:
That's a good point about the weapon giving. We can test whether he gives out weapons or not (negate the bomb theory) and see if they're poisoned etc. Of course, could still be a scum giftgiver but then he's giving us gifts anyway so we're hurting scum.
Hurts me to agree with T-Pein but this is something I noted as ewll.
WS guys tending to defend/agree with WS guys, same for WG guys.
Some of it is down to knowing players' meta etc but I think we need to EXPLORE a bit more than making safe comfort reads.
Finally, Could someone summarise, as simply as possible, the actual case against Lethal? I've seen a lot of back and forth about who thinks hes scummy and who doesn't, who's protecting him and who isn't, etc. But I'm not sure what his scumminess is actually meant to entail.
Is it just the 'woe is me' stuff? Cos that strikes me as Lethal of either alignment so doesn't sell me on the lynch.
[on page 67 of 72 so NEARLY caught up:]
:] Hedges very much on Lethal throughout the day, refuses commitment, cites how he could still be an "info" lynch. Anyone who's seen this type of thing knows how loudly it speaks for itself.
When questioned by X feels compelled to give retroactive reasoning for his stance on Fang and instead of admitting being wrong he comes up with a gauntlet of excuses about how he didn't actually misread him - he has just mostly skimmed! And he would have totally lynched him but Retro!
Retro Retro Retro. Over fixation on a single slot, lack of threadwide solving, he comes across as playing a completely different game from most players in the thread, and that's because he is.
[Vote lynch Dalton]
Get a claim out of this guy, today.
Tempest
Leprous Monarch
it obviously wasn't fake because the character is sus and the "defile" part was literally mod confirmed lol
I still think we'd have been better served to keep him around. would of course suck if he had defiled a townie but think he increases the chance of a town win overall
my reads on u progress with what u post
early day 1 i thought u were towny
day 2 ur hedging posts about lethal were bad i didnt like them
now i think there were genuine attempts from u at discerning ratchet's motives in regarding ultra/lethal
im happy with leaning town on u now
can u ask RDK why he still scum read u and interact with him?
Hans Tweetenberg
Exceptional
Yes of course? So you think Poyser was on point with his scum reads?
It's cool and all that it's POSSIBLE that the scum team rolecopped Poyser but idk why you'd think they did when he claimed indy on d1 and said he'd claim more of his role come d2. They'd get free info straight from the horses mouth anyway so why rolecop him of all people? I also don't know how Soulkiller ties into all of this, please enlighten me.
Tempest
Leprous Monarch
btw I still think my character (Ranni) could be someone's target. She is hiding in the game and there are a number of characters who could be scum who might want her gone, from what I recall of the lore when I played. hopefully I get watched or someone has some other type of protection. I can't JK myself!
Do you really need to keep jumping on posts like this? He *obviously* isn't being fully serious, his post was a joke to demonstrate his lack of faith in how the thread can spin out of control. You said you move off of these tunnels, and yet you keep trying to post these sort of "gotcha" moments that mean nothing.
I'll tell ya, I like your convictions
I'm reading you and Craig as town v town, but those contradictions you pointed out are something I kinda understand where you are going
How do you think these claims tie into his role claim?
Tempest
Leprous Monarch
it's a silly idea, they'd be looking for the cop and other town power roles not wasting a rolecop on a claimed indie. another weird idea from ekko he's generating content off of that doesn't really help us
There are obviously quotes missing from that ISO, I assure you, they aren't that interesting.