Vaarka

I don't expect people to catch up when they have missed that much. I just want them to read carefully, what they are able to read. If you just read 50 of those posts carefully, you have a leg over anybody just glancing over every single post. My issue is not with anybody who is not caught up, my issue is that he is not able to concentrate on anything. He should've know to check the first post to see who died for example.

The lack of activity is absurd. If you guys are uneilling to engage just voter GP, and let's move the game forward

Since Budda is dead, I think the next likely candidate is either A) GP or B) Aporia.

I scum read those people at first. I think GP is biggest scum fmpov. His wagoning was scummy on my DP1 lynch so I am assuming he will wagon on the next lynch. Ap also followed Budda logic in thinking me scum, wagoning as well when Budda wagoned

VTL GP 

GP is a scum conclusion for most, but my Aporia read is out there and some disagree, so I will focus on the most likely scum than my 2nd scum prediction

I'm also going to assume Supa is not sophisticated enough to fake that town tell, and give him a firm town read.

I'm telling you this, because this inattentiveness is killing me.

If you're trying to sus me for saying "I said on the other hand twice" then wtf are you grabbing at

Ur being hyper-literal again, what about what I've said would lead you to conclude im sus'ing you because you said "on the other hand" twice? Because i specifically quoted that? 

I literally in the first sentence of that post after that quote said, "And you act as if that matters?" 

You are arguing about what you said in the post, I'm sus'ing you over what your posts clearly imply. The two are not one in the same, you know this.

You stated, "your analysis of Supa has been mostly behavioral, why did you unvote him because of a character claim." This question has loads of answers that are self-evident, so why you didn't supply one of those motives, is inconsistent with you applying a motive to dudz that wasnt even in line with his behavior and hingent upon something being true of surrounding posts, that simply was not, and also was antithetical to dudz own posts trying to explain away the original sus for lazy voting.

You realize you just said, "it doesn't mean I thought it waa sus, I could of just been asking it to determine whether it was sus. Which means it was sus to you. 

This is missing the point anyways. You performed straight up mental gymnastics to excuse Supas behavior, yet where were those mental gymnastic in regards to the player you asked a question of to excuse their behavior? 

For someone who likes to point out scumteams, you sure are being obtuse about what you did being a clear indicator of you and supa being scumbuddies. Look at that, another inconssitency. You've been chock full of them this game, you know that?

When did I ever say I sus'd you

You don't need to, asking about my actions alone establishes you viewed those actions as sus. See this is that same selective hyper-literalness I was talking about.

On one hand you just sus'd me for what requires a hyper-literal interpretation of one of my posts in isolation, on the other you are defending Supa for motives he by consequence of his attempt at excusing his percieved lazy voting, refuted? While at the same time 

Ur gonna have to excuse me if i look at that and think it's sus in its inconsistency in scope of intepretation and in how you are affording one very little benefit of the doubt, and the other are giving it, not for anything actually done or said, but rather a stretch of a potential in which you never even examined the very thing that potential is hingent upon? 

Mental gymnastics basically, while you immediately jumped to "that looks sus" in ur questioning of me.  

I don't know if I believe this. The post was like two lines max.

--> @Vaarka

Not to mention, there is no post anywhere between Aporias vote, and Supas post, that at all even hints to me having claimed. 

Secondly, wow

My BS detector didn't go off because I haven't looked at page one since I first read it

Then how are you even holding your theory to be at all accurate, when knowing whether or not there was a post that hinted i had claimed in the space of time between Aporias vote and Supas post, is crucial to that theory even being valid? 

Bruh, are you trying to make yourself look like Supas scumbuddy? 

--> @Vaarka

No, Supa claimed he thought Aporias vote was to Lynch. As to why he VTL'd aporia, and thus he wanted to see his reasoning. 

This requires we assume Supa both hasn't picked up on RVS votes not being for lynch, AND thought the first post of a game was for a lynch

this vote for a lynch as opposed to a claim as Supa is saying he did not realize, was, again as Supa stated himself, because he thought I had claimed previous to Aporias vote. Aporias vote was the first of the game...

His excuse of "I said "where is buddas claim" because I thought he had claimed, wherein he actually links Aporias vote, FROM THE FIRST POST OF THE GAME" and says, "oh I misunderstood "vtl budda for claim" as meaning budda had claimed something, so Aporia was voting him for death. 

On the first post of the game, a post he c/p'd from and responded to twice. To hold Supa as being truthful requires we hold he still doesn't understand the nature of RVS votes(when it has come up in games hes played in, and he specifically has been corrected on this assumption of RVS votes = to lynch. But also that he legitimately thought I had claimed previous to the first post of the game. The first is a stretch, the second is just unbelievable. 

I'm not sure how your bs detector hasn't been set off by this. Are you really that gullible to believe someone legitimately thought a VTL on the first player post of a game was both to lynch, and for something i had claimed? 

Sure, first please explain how tunneling someone I think is prob scum 1 claim into D1 is beneficial? Also, where have I established in my meta that thats what I do?

Unvote

A quick wiki of Lwxanna shows she was only in a handful of episodes. My character is herself specific to season 7 and Lwxanna appeared in season 7, so I'm liable to think she could be a potential character in the game.

Does anybody else's role contain bsh1's personal disposition toward their character or others? It could just be specific to my character because they're one of a line of hosts for a symbiote and its basically along the lines of, "I didn't like you as much as the previous (actress), im bitter she was replaced and it sucked how she left so heres a crappy role 😂. 

The word "oodles" was used unironically 😂, oodles.

Aporia is experienced from what I heard

I mean it is just a character name. It doesn't give too much away

So, to get this straight

-You agree with Aporia its beneficial to pressure experienced players during RVS, but think his logic for voting me is stupid, despite his reasoning being what you agreed with? 

-its also scummy of other players to point out things that appear sus, like idk, saying you thought Aporias vote was to lynch and not get a claim, despite posting

Where is buddas claim?

Which look an awful lot like you knew he wanted my claim. 

-And you it to be held you are still assuming RVS(opening) votes are for lynches, despite it being made clear in previous games thats not the case that you have been a part of where you have made such  observations previously, to even hold your posts are genuine and not contrived.

And because those things aren't being believed, and I think they look suspect, this means I'm scum? 

Nice

it is all caps because i wouldn't know how to spell the name, so i copy and pasted how bsh spelled it

I think your analysis is true and very thought out. However in mafia, bussing is where you try pointing the blame or purposely disagreeing or VTLing each other to try to cause people to think y'all are on different teams when both are scum. It is a rarity, but Budda is experienced enough and Aporia has some experience to execute it perfectly fooling noob players to vote for one or the other causing no suspicion to the other maf 

I don't agree with Budda logic with me agreeing with Aporia. I explained why as well

Aporia voted Budda to get a reaction, not so much to get a claim. At least, that's how I've been reading it.

Scum team is Aporia and Budda confirmed. I honestly am so fucking lost and their logic is insane

Vaarka’s reaction was mildly concerning because of the fact he only called out the fake enthusiasm part, when he should know that the entire thing was fabricated.

 Dont talk shit about Hashirama.

from last 2 games I played with him...something is off.

I was merely saying that (as warren suggested), we assume that parrot is scum then what makes more sense: that he voted with Wyl because Wyl is his teammate or that he voted with him just to start a wagon. 

I said I find the former more likely (from scum perspective) because if he was just voting opportunistically he would have voted against you in his first post since mine was the only vote at the time. He didnt say he disagreed with my reasoning until his second post when he voted against me.

We were talking about my light suspicion regarding Parrot's initial vote on me. I feel like in yer response you were talking about Wyl's vote change from me to you.

What if I expected to get some easy townreads out of it? I feel like there's little to no risk involved, and therefore don't quite understand the willingness to call me town. I don't think it's alignment indicative personally.

Hmm starting to susp buddha now.

Also Vaarka feels contrived at posts 79 and 80 imo.