What reads do you want me to explain more, and are you actually going to care about them?
I didn’t ask for reads in particular but aorn you have the most votes and like two hours to change that if you wanna live soooooo
I mean, what else can I say, honestly?
People aren’t making cases on me, so how am I supposed to defend myself?
It’s literally just “This could be TMI” or “Don’t like Jane”/“Jane should be the lynch today”.
Well, unless you count Marshal’s posts as a case on me, for whatever reason.
I’m not going to bother asking why, because I doubt I’ll get a coherent explanation from you either.
Honestly, just fuck off.
First off, as I had alluded to earlier, my initial reaction to this exchange was that it’s probably >rand likely to be t/s as opposed to t/t or s/s. Without prior knowledge, it’s kinda hard to tell which one is which alignment
In particular, I still don’t understand the thought process for how this whole thing ended:
You were just voting them yourself before…?
I also really didn’t like this question
because it feels like the way you’ve phrased this is using the question moreso to shade then to actually get any sort of response. Plus, it’s really weird to be bringing up confirmation bias this early in the game - do you normally get so locked on people so soon that you talk yourself into a circle on their slots?
Along those lines, why are you then railing Marshal for being confident when you literally were just talking about confbiasing yourself?
Also, what does scum!Marshal stand to gain from being super confident that Napoleon is scum anyways? You paint that as inherently scummy but I don’t see why you think that is the case.
Am also not a fan of this post at all
It honestly feels like a pseudo-pocket attempt on Napoleon and, like, no scum is gonna quickhammer D1, so calling so much attention to it really feels like grabbing for cred rather than a genuine town fear
This is a notable early non-Marshal read - can I have more of your thoughts on this slot?
Walk me through this because I haven’t seen anything you’ve said thus far lead to this statement
not a fan of this cop out on the slot
I don’t know how you’ve possibly gotten here based on what you’ve seen to this point
And like
Why are we so sure that exactly one of the above is always scum, yet throw in the disclaimer that these reads are bad in a strikethrough?
Like if what you meant was “if Marshal is scum DatBird probably isn’t”
Why not say that
And why are they not a strong scumread for having posts that feel fake while Marshal is lockscum for effectively the same
Why tomorrow?
How does this actually make it into a case? Really?
That’s on you to change
Gonna respond soon, gotta eat dinner first.
At least someone tried to make a case on me for once.
also that’s clear shade/passive agressivity
I spent probably hours of my time casing you but when I did I was told it wasn’t fucking “coherent” lmao
this is going to be a tilting EoD isn’t it
I’m being attacked for trying to discredit someone’s case… which i know is wrong, and I know they aren’t going to change the read.
Yes, I am trying to discredit your case jane! That’s what all my posts have been doing! And i’m not even doing it in a backhanded way, I am outright saying that your case is lacking in logic and that it is a case that does not deserve credit.
I usually think stubbornness is villagery even but when all logic is thrown out the window for a push on me by a semi-experienced player I stuggle to believe it can be genuine
I don’t think like analysis is angleshooting unless it’s like “x is online via likes but not answering my questions” and even then I don’t think it’s that far.
1 Like
I don’t know if it’s because my home forum has more than likes but usually I don’t like reading depending on ratings because it’s playerbased not alignmentbased
I don’t think it’s a good way of reading but I don’t think it’s angleshooting
either way if we see red beanie is going to the pound so that’s a thing.
Postcap lifts soon (in like 3 mins iirc) so i’m not that scared of hitting it