Recent Posts

what i'm saying is we need to let Sylveon & Rando cook

there seems to have been a misunderstanding: tos and akakakp aren't slots who look scummy with ftf dead, they're slots whose push would be easier if ftf was dead. killing ftf would be the removal of an obstacle, not a step in the intended direction

also i was disregarding myself in that statement so i should probably concede that ftf's death makes my push harder and you're free to take that what you will. the question schia raised was what push scum would find easier with flush out of the picture and unless scum wanted to imply that i killed flush (which in that case would point towards akakakp)

i'd do an iso dive of akakakp myself but sylv was offering and having the isos posted is just generally a good thing for visibility so i'll just sit here and wait

first of all, i'm manually and artificially spoilering this quote to make it easier for the rest of us to digest.and my thoughts? like i know this isn't IIoA but

does anyone else feel like this iso dive is a little... non-committal? it kind of feels like sylv is just reacting individually to lines and talking about how scummy they are. my definition of scumhunting is looking at the posts and trying to find out what the poster is attempting to achieve, and this is not that

feel free to call me out if i'm looking at this wrong, but sylveon comes off to me as someone who either thinks they're scumhunting or is faking scumhunting

but if we're talking about the post itself: the conclusion these points are leading me to is that ccgeek is playing in bad faith and refusing to engage with the game

and while i'm all gung-ho about getting them killed for that alone, i'm really not sold on how these points suggest ccgeek is outright scum

i'm not ashamed to admit that yes! asking everyone to disregard this pool would be kinda good for me since ftf was one of two people pushing me d1

what i am saying is that that sort of argument just defaults into WIFOM most of the time and i don't find that productive. i think this applies more strongly to myan than it does to me, but it absolutely does not apply to ccgeek because there were stronger proponents of the wagon (mainly lindauna) + flush was not committed to pushing ccgeek

myan is dead so i'm really the only one left, aren't i

on reconsideration maybe "ccgeek is playing passive, fire mafia is acting passive so ccgeek must be fire mafia" isn't as strong of a read as i initially thought
i'm staying on mainly because they promised content and i don't like people who promise content until they properly deliver

for now, i'm just going to shuttle off random thoughts and continue discussioni did say it was surface level. generally i think akakakp was calling a lot of attention onto clemens yesterday and the thought that struck me was "would scum actively defend and buddy their partner that blatantly?"

but with the post you pointed out earlier i think it's more likely that akakakp was simping for some inexplicable reason and trying to find that would be severely unproductive
right, but we have no grasp on what fire mafia were playing at by killing ftf and until we do it's just not something i think is worth working out

if we work surface-level and assume that flush's reads (and the general consensus they represent, sans the read on me) were a threat to scum, that's an immediate path to a WIFOM "but flush could've been killed to frame the scumslots!" argument

it just stands out to me that for what it's worth, i think flush's death should be written off as fearkill until we get something that points us in a different direction

but for the sake of engagement let me also address your latter avenue of discussion: if you think fire maf wanted to set up a misvote by killing flush, i'd say the most viable pool of misvote targets is between termsofservice and akakakp. anyone higher in the list is just not getting voted either way and anyone lower doesn't need flush to get the push running.

i'm just a staunch believer that policy kills are the lazy option; we do them when nothing better stands out. i've probably been conditioned to the frequency of policy-viable players in chat mafia and the relatively common trend of scum catching on and policying them in turn

been revisiting the thread a little and i do have a few thoughts about ccgeek that i'm going to just explore as i write:

i think we can all agree that ccgeek is very unlikely to be ice goo considering how fine and dandy clem was with getting on that counterwagon. if you want evidence:
this desperation argument exists

but back to ccgeek: they have one bout of activity and it occurred in pages 5-6 of the forum, where the only thing they really did was... respond to an activity check.



the only notable action they took was TRing schia in what seems to really look like a pocket but otherwise given the one-line posts and constant prodding into other slots' reads i think they're just unquestionably playing on the back foot.



if they are scum they obviously have to be fire maf, and since:
- fire maf shot flush and it does smell like a fearkill to me
- they literally just pulled a textbook "oh no, doc just died" i think it's a slot i'm willing to pursue


VOTE: Shaun-CCGeek

unrelated but here's a surface-level read: akakakp is also not ice goo

there is no illusion greater than fear, my friend

purely for the sake of clarification that pool was not a PoE pool but more slots that i thought warranted attention

maybe i should be playing guilty until confirmed innocent but i'm not

well 3 pages piled on while i was asleep and i'll be reading up on those.

after skimming i do have a few thoughts:

- shaun dispelling the newbie allegations reframes their lack of play as, uh, staggeringly non-commmital. and that worries me. dude is treating the forum like it's chat mafia and i can't even see an ounce of effort

however, i also think that the wagon building up on them is in equal parts unwarranted and poorly thought out. lindauna/ailura is the best player pushing the slot rn but everyone else really just feels like they're on it for the heck of it

okay so what i'm seeing here is that you're thinking there might be a town explanation to clemens's actions and assuming that

- clemens asking if schia was "not looking back" was less wanting to confirm what schia was doing and more wanting to be sure what they were saying. i frankly don't see how clemens would have preferred to say it like that instead of something along the lines of "does that mean you're parked? sorry i don't english" so i'm going to dismiss this point entirely.

then again, this post does exist

- while i do think clemens being on myan for pressure is a valid explanation for their lack of justification behind the read, please look back on what i said in my previous post about how clemens's push on myan seems to also be injected with a fair amount of showboating.

that does not convey an intent to pressure in my eyes

unsolicited cyan mansplaining: most of the players here are new so i'mma need you to try to be as explicit as possible.

like A Levels Biology "the poppies die off, therefore the poppy population decreases" explicit. maybe not that far but You Get Me

do you believe that clemens is intentionally trying to be polarizing, then?

like the push IS bs but re: LAMIST showboating

i do also have a few words for lindauna because i think they're playing in a way that needs coaching:

i'm a little bothered by their read progression because it kind looks like two minds approaching the game differently. here's post 1 of lindauna talking about clemens's push on myan:


what you will now notice is that the gist of the push is "clemens does not explain their read on myan when pressured about it, and this reads scum-aligned" (if i get this wrong please correct me)

the post right after backtracks and instead says "clemens is trying to scumhunt and make reads even though their reasoning is generally poor"



i'm going to set aside the fact that they immediately gunned for CCGeek after looking at posts calling them out, and while their posts sound like sensible arguments in isolation i think it's also fair enough to say that CCGeek is too new to expect any more activity than the bare minimum.

ultimately i want to pose a question: who is scummier? is it clemens, who has been pushing reads and doubling down on them but not explaining them past the original post? or is it CCGeek, who is doing primarily IIoA and low-effort play?

and i do want this considered with the "bad town =/= scum" lens intact because to me one of these behaviors reads as bad town and one of them reads fake town

it is, in fact, both pronunciations (shei is the more common one)

i will return with actual input after my flight lands and if i don't please assume my phone lost itself somewhere in an Indonesian forest (i'm too strong to die)

i need to highlight that last comment because it's like

VERY disingenuous to spin what is clearly a declaration of passivity into "it stops discussion and advance of gamestate"

but on the same token, it's a very low-effort call out because it just looks at one line and uses the bare minimum of processing power