The Syndicate

Epignosis wrote: ↑Thu Nov 30, 2017 1:05 am Are people honestly afraid of lynching 3J? If so, why?

I cannot recall a single time that has happened.

It's happened once on this site, in Tree Mafia. Technically I was "lynched" in the 2015 GOC and in GY!BE but survived.

Jackofhearts2005 wrote: ↑Thu Nov 30, 2017 1:10 am I find Epi's case on Jimmy to be intriguing. I don't think I'll follow it today but Epi and Eloh come out looking better than JJJ in all their recent interactions.

When's the last time Jimmy was bad?

JaggedJimmyJay wrote: ↑Mon Nov 27, 2017 12:22 pm
speedchuck wrote: ↑Mon Nov 27, 2017 12:20 pm
JaggedJimmyJay wrote: ↑Mon Nov 27, 2017 12:17 pm Take a stance.
Give me a mafia game with you in it. Otherwise I can't metaread, and 'misrepresentation' or whatever it is you're doing isn't inherently scummy.
Transistor

Currents

Go crazy.

Jackofhearts2005 wrote: ↑Thu Nov 30, 2017 1:10 am I find Epi's case on Jimmy to be intriguing. I don't think I'll follow it today but Epi and Eloh come out looking better than JJJ in all their recent interactions.

Please elaborate.

Epignosis wrote: ↑Thu Nov 30, 2017 1:13 am Do you think Eloh is trying to look like she's trying to solve anything?

Yes. She has compiled quite a few posts to this point, and the content therein in thicker than one might expect without checking. It isn't all confusion and catch-up frustration.

Jackofhearts2005 wrote: ↑Thu Nov 30, 2017 1:23 am I think you're basically describing town Eloh behavior and calling it a case for her badness. Epi calls you out

Can you recall an example of a town Elohcin that fits the general description I provided in my post?

Reminder to self to make a thread in the lounge explaining why GTH reads have value.

[mention]DrWilgy[/mention], why the vote for Lurker B when Lurker A is already solidly in the lead?

linki: k

Wilgy, what is your present read on Jack?

DrWilgy wrote: ↑Thu Nov 30, 2017 1:34 am
JaggedJimmyJay wrote: ↑Thu Nov 30, 2017 1:32 am DrWilgy, why the vote for Lurker B when Lurker A is already solidly in the lead?

linki: k
What does it matter? What line of thinking would an answer lead you down?

Your usage of your voting power matters for the same reasons it would in any day phase of any game. Answer my other question about Jack.

Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Nov 30, 2017 1:37 am
Jackofhearts2005 wrote: ↑Wed Nov 22, 2017 12:21 am Oh!

Re: Jimmy attacking Sig

Not fair to compare early pirates Sig to late pirates Sig and then contrast early pirates Sig with Sig here cause he got real busy irl. I want to hear more from Sig and won't give him a pass all game but still. Not a fair comparison imo.
Jay, thoughts on this post?

Jack's point is fair enough. It is true that sig was busy. My willingness to give people a break for that is limited, because I have seen too many bad guys use that as an excuse to hide from the game thread (including myself in the past). That doesn't have to mean sig was doing that.

DrWilgy wrote: ↑Thu Nov 30, 2017 1:38 am
JaggedJimmyJay wrote: ↑Thu Nov 30, 2017 1:34 am Wilgy, what is your present read on Jack?
He's probably bad, but like I said, I wanted to take a step back and reassess. I have been unable to do so. It's a bit disheartening.

What is the source of your hesitation?

Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Nov 30, 2017 1:40 am
Epignosis wrote: ↑Thu Nov 30, 2017 1:40 am Another issue that bothers me about 3J is that he hasn't placed his vote on anybody.
This is indeed troubling.

Let's lynch Elohcin.

The primary defense I have seen fielded for Elohcin is "that's just how she is". I don't agree with that. I don't make these observations about her in every game. Hell, in many of her recent games she just hasn't made enough posts to facilitate (hi Quin) these observations.

Re: Mountain Mafia [DAY 3] Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Nov 30, 2017 1:48 amwhy? Click

Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Nov 30, 2017 1:48 amwhy?

Click

nutella wrote: ↑Thu Nov 30, 2017 1:49 am Hey sorry I haven't been around for most of the discussion. Been periodically catching up while doing other stuff. I'm cool with the Dom lynch but since there's already a comfortable lead there I'm tempted to put a symbolic vote somewhere, probably Jay at this point tbh.

I have attracted quite a lot of vague suspicion over the last few pages. I know why Epignosis is concerned. Those others who've expressed recent discontent -- why?

DrWilgy wrote: ↑Thu Nov 30, 2017 1:49 am In the quote why did you ignore "what line of thinking would an answer lead you down?" And shift the subject?

I don't know what that question means. What does that question mean?

Epignosis wrote: ↑Thu Nov 30, 2017 1:55 am
JaggedJimmyJay wrote: ↑Thu Nov 30, 2017 1:49 am The primary defense I have seen fielded for Elohcin is "that's just how she is". I don't agree with that. I don't make these observations about her in every game. Hell, in many of her recent games she just hasn't made enough posts to facilitate (hi Quin) these observations.
What does a civilian Elohcin look like?

The first thing that comes to mind is a willingness to throw a vote into a consensus without inserting analytic or intuitive effort into that. She often doesn't even play catch-up, but rather gives the thread the finger (especially when it's a highly-active game), and I think I've seen that from her more than once as a civilian.

This is about a read at face value of her sincerity. Any player, regardless of their "style" or "tendencies" is capable of seeming insincere in a game. I don't always have this perspective of Elohcin.

DrWilgy wrote: ↑Thu Nov 30, 2017 1:55 am
JaggedJimmyJay wrote: ↑Thu Nov 30, 2017 1:53 am
DrWilgy wrote: ↑Thu Nov 30, 2017 1:49 am In the quote why did you ignore "what line of thinking would an answer lead you down?" And shift the subject?
I don't know what that question means. What does that question mean?
If I answered X, what would you think? If I answered Y, what would you think?

I don't typically make that decision before I receive an answer, unless there's some glaring problem that I am deconstructing. I don't know what I'd think. I asked you a question about a curious voting move, and there could be any number of possible ways you'd respond to that.

Quin wrote: ↑Thu Nov 30, 2017 2:07 am why aren't we all lynching Lasagne? For a low poster, she actually looks bad.

What's the worst thing you could say about Lasagne?

Quin wrote: ↑Thu Nov 30, 2017 2:09 am
JaggedJimmyJay wrote: ↑Thu Nov 30, 2017 2:08 am
Quin wrote: ↑Thu Nov 30, 2017 2:07 am why aren't we all lynching Lasagne? For a low poster, she actually looks bad.
What's the worst thing you could say about Lasagne?
She has 24 posts, at least 20 of those say nothing but bolster her presence in the thread.

I saw one decent thing when I reviewed her. It's not the most substantive thing. I would agree that her post count is inflated with respect to the content within it. I could do that lynch.

Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Nov 30, 2017 2:11 am
JaggedJimmyJay wrote: ↑Thu Nov 30, 2017 1:52 am
nutella wrote: ↑Thu Nov 30, 2017 1:49 am Hey sorry I haven't been around for most of the discussion. Been periodically catching up while doing other stuff. I'm cool with the Dom lynch but since there's already a comfortable lead there I'm tempted to put a symbolic vote somewhere, probably Jay at this point tbh.
I have attracted quite a lot of vague suspicion over the last few pages. I know why Epignosis is concerned. Those others who've expressed recent discontent -- why?
I don't believe you.

About what?

Mesk514

Epignosis wrote: ↑Thu Nov 30, 2017 2:15 am This strikes me as you are bad and circumstance is robbing you of people to accuse.

What does a civilian Elohcin look like?

Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Nov 30, 2017 2:15 am Mountain Mafia [DAY 3]

k well there's shit all I can do about that beyond continuing to play the game.

Quin wrote: ↑Thu Nov 30, 2017 2:18 am
JaggedJimmyJay wrote: ↑Thu Nov 30, 2017 2:16 am Mesk514
what about her

I agree with you that the base logic behind a Mesk lynch is similar to that of a Dom lynch, but it's a more substantive option.

"Why did you fail your exam, Jay?"

"West coast Mafia deadline."

"What?"

Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Nov 30, 2017 2:25 am
JaggedJimmyJay wrote: ↑Thu Nov 30, 2017 2:18 am
Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Nov 30, 2017 2:15 am Mountain Mafia [DAY 3]
k well there's shit all I can do about that beyond continuing to play the game.
Elohcin is low-hanging fruit and I didn't find your case against her to be tremendously convincing. She's said a few odd things, but I don't see your case moving in a meaningful direction. Just pointing out a few instances of said oddities. I didn't see you digging deep into her, or anybody else. It was another vomited read.

I'm not going to pretend my case was some home run. This isn't far from being the second week of Day 1. It's the material which has most triggered my suspicion to this point. I don't think any of the cases made in this thread to this point that I have seen have been tremendously convincing. Look at the tally right now. Are we on course to lynch someone based upon a thorough, convincing case?

Lynching me would be dumb. Don't be dumb. I'm doing the best I can to provide insight in this damned game.

Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Nov 30, 2017 2:31 am To what degree do you believe in your case?
why is mesk a better lynch than elohcin and dom?

I believe in my Elohcin case enough to want to lynch her.

Mesk is not a better lynch than Elohcin. Mesk is a better lynch than Dom because the low-poster motivation suits both of them, while only the former's content features tangible reasons for suspicion.

Epignosis wrote: ↑Thu Nov 30, 2017 2:32 am Civilian JJJ wouldn't care what the tally was right now.

You are bad.

What? Caring about the tally is fundamental to any JJJ, or frankly any anyone.

Quin wrote: ↑Thu Nov 30, 2017 2:35 am
nutella wrote: ↑Thu Nov 30, 2017 2:34 am come on LC (or kyle or quin or wilgy) join usss
I don't know the 3J case. I would rather CFD Eloh if my vote is to move.

Elohcin

Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Nov 30, 2017 2:34 am
JaggedJimmyJay wrote: ↑Thu Nov 30, 2017 2:33 am
Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Nov 30, 2017 2:31 am To what degree do you believe in your case?
why is mesk a better lynch than elohcin and dom?
I believe in my Elohcin case enough to want to lynch her.

Mesk is not a better lynch than Elohcin. Mesk is a better lynch than Dom because the low-poster motivation suits both of them, while only the former's content features tangible reasons for suspicion.
what are these tangible reasons

She provided a big post of non-reads which had mafia utility (appearance of contribution) but little civilian utility. She has numerous posts which do not promote a civilian-oriented pursuit of something; they just exist.

Epignosis wrote: ↑Thu Nov 30, 2017 2:37 am
JaggedJimmyJay wrote: ↑Thu Nov 30, 2017 2:33 am
Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Nov 30, 2017 2:31 am To what degree do you believe in your case?
why is mesk a better lynch than elohcin and dom?
I believe in my Elohcin case enough to want to lynch her.

Mesk is not a better lynch than Elohcin. Mesk is a better lynch than Dom because the low-poster motivation suits both of them, while only the former's content features tangible reasons for suspicion.
Bullshit. The latter has no content to compare.

That's the point. -1 is less than 0.

Back to Mesk

Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Nov 30, 2017 2:40 am can you see no town conviction behind mesk's posts?

I referenced earlier the one thing I thought was okay (her handling of Kylemii). I am more moved by the negative than the positive.

Bummer.

It's finally Night 2.

I'm going to goddamn sleep.

I don't have nearly the time or inclination to answer these prods/accusations, and I won't bother -- the utility of that would be limited anyway. Unfortunately this game has to be about my eleventh priority right now. I am going to provide as much as I possibly can in the way of reads and analysis tomorrow, and if I get lynched so be it. Any civilians out there among my accusers: I can't stop you, but I do encourage you to at least begin considering how you'll proceed in the event that you are wrong -- because you are.

I said I was going to put reads in this thread and I will. I do not have time to be Jerry Seinfeld and I don't give a shit about trying to be Jerry Seinfeld. I frankly don't see how there could be any impression that I give a shit about trying to be Jerry Seinfeld or any other generic super-civilian cookie cutter rendition of myself given the posts I have made in this game. This variety of meta read is bogus, as though JJJ suddenly forgets how to make a million posts when he draws a mafia role.

There's a reason I am only here during brief windows right now. That won't change for the foreseeable future in this or ensuing games. I implore the civilians in this thread to engage a broad dialogue whether I am your locked vote or not. Nothing is friendlier to the mafia team right now than a continuing focus on me, especially when I am in no position to engage the discussion.

Kylemii wrote: ↑Fri Dec 01, 2017 5:22 pm What is the reason?

It only gets worse every day.

colonialbob wrote: ↑Fri Dec 01, 2017 5:23 pm
JaggedJimmyJay wrote: ↑Fri Dec 01, 2017 5:16 pm I said I was going to put reads in this thread and I will. I do not have time to be Jerry Seinfeld and I don't give a shit about trying to be Jerry Seinfeld. I frankly don't see how there could be any impression that I give a shit about trying to be Jerry Seinfeld or any other generic super-civilian cookie cutter rendition of myself given the posts I have made in this game. This variety of meta read is bogus, as though JJJ suddenly forgets how to make a million posts when he draws a mafia role.

There's a reason I am only here during brief windows right now. That won't change for the foreseeable future in this or ensuing games. I implore the civilians in this thread to engage a broad dialogue whether I am your locked vote or not. Nothing is friendlier to the mafia team right now than a continuing focus on me, especially when I am in no position to engage the discussion.
I'd really prefer you to give us reasons you're town, rather than "I'm not bad you'll regret voting for me because it's what the mafia wants"

That's not remotely what I said. I don't give a shit about votes.

When I get out of this lab and can actually play this game tonight, it's full legacy. I have to choose between arguing with my accusers to no end and giving actual reads, because there's no way I'll get to both -- and the former is close to useless anyway.

A fresh look at colonialbob

Spoiler: show

I've highlighted a bit in this early exchange with Sloonei. Colonel Bob's vote was portrayed to be of the poop fling variety, which is a fine Day 1 approach for content generation and facilitation. I question though whether Bob had real investment in that vote given the highlighted content -- to be perturbed by Sloonei's question, answer it anyway, and in such a way that it essentially absolves Sloonei of the pressure inherent to the vote. "My vote is here now, but it'll probably move so don't worry bae." When Sloonei reversed the pressure in his direction, he kind of tucked his tail there.

Spoiler: show

I don't know what the value of "consolidating trains" is with numerous hours remaining prior to the deadline.

Spoiler: show

The LC vote is qualified more substantively here, with an inconsistency cited. I don't know that the parallel being drawn here is entirely logical, but that's not necessarily a concern. Logic and civilianhood don't always mesh. There's another example of projected vote mobility here, and I'll note that he is transparent in the repeated examples of this. Transparency is nice -- if his strategy is insincere, he is welcoming players to tell him that. That's perhaps atypical of a Day 1 mafioso.

Spoiler: show

Late Day 1 stances. I appreciate that they are assertive for the most part, and not bogged down with caveats (perhaps apart from the Jack read, but that's rather nitpicky).

There's a string of posts in Bob's N1 content which I think looks off-the-cuff, starting around the point of this link in his ISO. He is interrogative with discernible direction and purpose. Cool beans.

Spoiler: show

Bob couldn't be called stubborn in his reads. I have seen a few examples to this point of assertive reads revisited and reconsidered, and in such a way that I don't think he looks like he is ebbing with the flow of the dialogue -- it looks more like original thinking.

This rainbow represents a turn though, specifically on Jack. I don't follow what has happened with that read in the last handful of posts.

Vote Sloonei and:

Spoiler: show

Soon after labeling Sloonei a dark greenie in his rainbow, Bob goes after him for a specific moment he cited above. This guy doesn't give a shit about being consistent. Good. This developed into a significant exchange between the two of them which lasted through the later portion of Day 2.

Spoiler: show

If bob is a mafioso and Sloonei is a civilian, he was met with a challenging scenario after the Day 2 no lynch. Sloonei's general credit in the thread improved in that period, and then he made a big ISO for Bob himself. In this scenario, mafia Bob saw his attempted lynch target gain a strong foothold and then turn the sword against him in quick succession. I draw this image to facilitate a perspective of the post above wherein Bob assesses Sloonei's case against him -- that it started from a point of bias and wasn't alignment indicative. It strikes me as a necessary condition that for Sloonei to be susceptible to this bias, he must first be a civilian. A mafia Sloonei operates with a deliberate slant, not an pre-biased mindset. I don't care for this response. I described the challenge a mafia Bob would have faced handling Sloonei's ISO, and this response does bear an appearance of "I don't know what to do about this."

Qualified the same dialogue as confirmation bias

Bob's Day 3 content was largely Jack-centric, wherein he was critical of Jack for being "wishy-washy" and "flip-floppy". Example. Eh. I've never cared for that manner of accusation. I've seen plenty of civilians and plenty of mafia members render it. On a tonal level I think he sounds okay.

~~~

I had more positive to say about Colonel Bob than negative. The good stuff is more of an intuited reception of his tone, assertiveness, and candor in the earlier half of the game. My chief concerns come in his handling of Sloonei's case against him.

Leaning town, with reservations.

Nothing pisses me off like losing half of an ISO because of an errant click of the "back" button.

A fresh look at DrWilgy

First substantive post

Quin's little move to generate responses re: his pledge to "vote Epi whenever" got a reply from Wilgy. It's a strategic assertion which doesn't say much of anything about either Epi or Quin. Filler potential. The negative read on Daisy is a loud one. Okay. The question he posed to Sloonei could have some utility if there's follow-up.

Another early multi-quote salad (let's make it a Thing guys)

There are numerous questions here. Questions are neat. I don't know what Wilgy is doing with them though.

Multi-quote salad again

Wilgy is inserting nuggets of chatter into numerous conversations. They don't boast much unique insight though. The sole stance I see taken here is an agreement with Quin's grievance against Kyle.

Spoiler: show

I wouldn't say this is the first time I have seen "normal Wilgy", or at least a Wilgy who involves himself in the game with words and posts. The first example that comes to mind is Talking Heads (he was bad). I don't know why Daisy's fear of his normalcy is a "good thing".

Spoiler: show

The one stance I referenced before was Wilgy's take on Kyle, via Quin. Kyle responded with a contrary description of his behavior. Wilgy's reply is a neutral observation which is no longer interrogative. The only stance taken thus dissipates, leaving this post history a bit bare to this point -- more than it appears at a glance. That's not ideal.

Jack ISO

It's nice that Wilgy's takes in this ISO are multi-directional -- he has both positive and negative things to say about Jack. The negative side wins the day, as the conclusion is a scum read on Jack. Some of the language employed here is a concern:

"Are you buddying or talking with a teammate here?" -- Loaded question

"I feel that JoH has a way of portraying things that either are forced or feel like a forced portrayal." -- Jack has a way of either portraying things that are forced or forcing a portrayal. Eh? What does that mean?

Spoiler: show

Wilgy expressed concern that he might be tunneling on Jack and pledged to broaden his focus.

Spoiler: show

Wilgy joined the Mesk wagon at EOD3. I don't take issue with a decision being made on the fly like this in the heat of EOD nonsense. It does beg expansion now though -- Wilgy, what inspired (hi Quin) your willingness to contribute to this wagon?

Spoiler: show

dunya was critical of Wilgy's lack of hard stances and Wilgy took issue. On this front, I think dunya's assertion is valid. There's really not much in the way of stances in this post history that I can see.

Spoiler: show

The highlighted bit reads awkwardly at face value. First, there's an implied suspicion, or at least "room" for suspicion -- but the assertion of a "tree being shaken" is as applicable (if not moreso) to a civilian as a mafioso. Indeed shaking trees is often half the game.

~~~

I've stated numerous grievances here and less nice to say. Wilgy is a suspect.

I need to step away from the legacy for a short time. I would like to do two more of these before the day nears its end. I'm accepting requests. I will only honor the request if I feel the name is a pertinent one given time constraints.

Stuff about malakim2099

This player slot has been essentially vacant for the whole game. It no longer is, so I think folks should make an immediate effort to sort that read.

Spoiler: show

malakim needed 34 minutes to find something suspicious, in this case in support of an assertion by DDL about Quin. This is rather bizarre, because DDL's suspicion appears contingent upon either me or malakim himself being mafia (and Quin's maneuver to lynch Mesk thus representing a save). malakim: did you view this notion of Quin's voting, regardless of its accuracy relative to the poll voting order, suspicious independent of the connection DDL drew?

Spoiler: show

There's no harm in asking for some time to get through the lengthy game thread. I'd have liked this more though without the appeal to emotion angle shoved into the first bit.

Spoiler: show

I like this one more. I would expect a civilian who has replaced into these conditions and finds himself beset by suspicions emerging from an EOD3 in which he played no part to view his accusers with some concern. This strikes me as a natural result of the circumstances, wherein a civilian Domalakim would be a low-hanging fruit.

Spoiler: show

What does that theory matter with regard to your willingness to vote for me? Do you suspect me more because people think I might be on your mafia team?

Sloonei wrote: ↑Fri Dec 01, 2017 11:10 pm
Kylemii wrote: ↑Fri Dec 01, 2017 11:01 pm
Sloonei wrote: ↑Fri Dec 01, 2017 10:55 pm The only scenario in which I can see Jay being town is if he's completely fatigued from real life duties right now and simply doesn't have the energy to replicate his usual style.
Did you misspeak here? This sentence seems to imply a point countered to the rest of your post.
No. I'm saying it's possible that this is just exhausted Jay, but that I also still note the same differences in his game as I've been pointing out for the last 48 hours and I can't put them out of my mind.

Design a perfect civilian faction

Given my inability to serve in that typical role of content facilitation, which requires a constant thread presence and devotion to staying on top of each dialogue, I have to find other ways to contribute. A good civilian needs to be able to be more than a one-trick pony.

I'm trying to be the detached analyst. It's not my comfort zone. It's not what I'm used to. I think it's what I'm best able to provide to the civilian team dynamic in this game. This game has moved at a torrent pace. The generation of content has never been an issue, and motivators and facilitators are present in my stead, at least most of whom are likely to be trustworthy. Were it not for that, maybe I would have been foolish and spent way more time trying to make this move in typical fashion. Thank goodness it hasn't been necessary for my sake.

Sloonei wrote: ↑Fri Dec 01, 2017 11:01 pm Moved my vote to speedchuck

He's my current ISO in progress. What motivates your vote now?

Sloonei wrote: ↑Fri Dec 01, 2017 11:23 pm why is drwilgy the best lynch option today?

Beefs stated here

speedchuck stuff

Spoiler: show

speedchuck's earliest set of posts follow a sort of stream-of-consciousness thread parallel to his continuing read through the thread. This little progression here is cute. I mean that in a good way. The first two would be a creative means of manufacturing fake poop to throw (the poop isn't stated and merely implied to exist). It's similar to what Quin did with the "why will I vote Epi" thing. It's atypical of mafioso game-entry.

Spoiler: show

While I agree with the logic of speedchuck's assertion here, it's unclear whether this is meant to reflect any particular way on Epignosis (the one who provided the argument being shat on). Logical gripes in a vacuum don't add much.

Spoiler: show

This one seems more inclined toward a stance, sort of. It's defensive of Epi in that it is critical of those who opposed him. The specific read on Epi himself remains unclear -- only that he provided a perceived stupid argument and that Epi doesn't know how to "defend against asininity". I cannot believe "asininity" is a word. I thought for sure there'd be a red squiggly coming. I learned something today!

Spoiler: show

TMI Alert. My initial reception of speedchuck's handling of LC/Epi was a positive one, but I disagree with myself now.

In a scenario where both Epi and LC are civilians, speedchuck has exonerated one and defended the other based on what I perceive to be pretty dubious premises. High-roading both of them, by essentially suggesting both were being dumb instead of being suspicious, may be suggestive of unique information in speedchuck's possession -- information which could only come from a mafia alignment at this point in the game.

Spoiler: show

speedchuck really hates this argument. It's just so dumb. And Epi's handling of it was dumb. So much dumb.

I appreciate that speedchuck made a good effort to remain relevant under the restriction he posted with on Day 2. He did participate less than in prior phases, but I think that's understandable. It can't be easy to find inspiration (hi Quin) for slick new poems over and over. He made the most of the posts he made. Decent look.

Spoiler: show

The green highlighted portion is another example of general criticism to arguments/cases provided -- in this instance it was the Sloonei near-lynch which was super dumb.

The orange portion is rather yuck at face value.

"The lack of defense cbob is getting is kinda disturbing"

I acknowledge speedchuck was answering my own prompt here, but I'm still not sure this content is going somewhere. All possibilities are discussed, and a semi-conclusion is derived -- without being conclusive. The latter post strikes me as pointless.

"blatant misreprentation"

I don't hate this defense he provided against my grievance. I can understand why a civilian speedchuck would be irritated in this circumstance, and why the suspicion would be reflected.

Spoiler: show

He forgave me really fast, based only on this meta stuff from the two past mafia-aligned games I provided.

Night 2 rainbow

At this point in the game, I'd say these reads were pretty much with-the-grain across each tier, excepting only Epignosis. It's surprising to see Epignosis, a player speedchuck has spoken of frequently in this post history, stuck in the yellow pile alongside the guy with zero posts.

Spoiler: show

A lot of people seem to be put off by self-meta like this, but I tend to be a fan -- at least in the right dosage. In this regard I appreciate speedchuck's willingness to shoo at the bad GTH reads he received based on perceived meta misinterpretation. Some baddies don't even try it. Cool beans.

Big ass reads list

It must be said that this is the most substantive full reads list that exists in this game thread, at least to my memory. I think speedchuck is capable of making this post as a bad guy, but that's really the worst thing I can say about it. I think it's a quality contribution and a good look for him. The reads not labeled "EGH" are assertive for the most part and bear an agreeable tone. The reads labeled "EGH" are understandable. Conclusive reads on everyone is a lot to ask. It should also be noted that a more concrete stance on Epi was taken here, specifically in the negative direction. That at least resolves a long-standing void in this post history.

"Screw you mate"

Candid reception of suspicion stated by dunya. That opening statement is rather curt. I'm not sure a mafia speedchuck would reflect suspicion upon dunya, a player who is so likely to engage him in a long argument, with quite the fervor displayed here.

~~~

This was a very mixed bag. I have discussed multiple grievances and positives here. The worst of it is probably the TMI notion I discussed regarding his reception of LC/Epi. The best might be at the very end there, between the reads compilation and his reaction to dunya's accusation. The TMI notion itself is contingent upon other alignments (LC and Epi), and it moves me less. I lean more town than not on speedchuck -- it's a read which I think calls for a lot of dialogue.

Search found 181 matches