TWG CLVI: The Grand TWGabout - GAME THREAD

[AragakiAyase]

Re: TWG CLVI: The Grand TWGabout - GAME THREAD

Why does it have such a non-towny tone?

you think it's non-towny, how would you have put it? let me guess, you wouldn't have said it at all

[AragakiAyase]

Re: TWG CLVI: The Grand TWGabout - GAME THREAD

But hey...



...is your ego ROLE INDICATIVE???

that's a good question

I'm not sure because aside from turbo 1 it's been a while since I've rolled wolf

[Gradiant]

Re: TWG CLVI: The Grand TWGabout - GAME THREAD

I'd try and see why people were thinking I was scum and then refute it with logic, rather than making a scummy line something along the lines of being unlynchable

[AragakiAyase]

Re: TWG CLVI: The Grand TWGabout - GAME THREAD

It's your "non-lynchable" ego bruh.

also it's not non-lynchable, more like never mislynch

[AragakiAyase]

Re: TWG CLVI: The Grand TWGabout - GAME THREAD

I'd try and see why people were thinking I was scum and then refute it with logic, rather than making a scummy line something along the lines of being unlynchable

well if you read my posts I did

and then since people seemed intent on holding on to their read, I said that there would be plenty of time for me to get myself off the table

[Gradiant]

Re: TWG CLVI: The Grand TWGabout - GAME THREAD

then again, you are arrogant as fuck. I shouldn't expect anything different from you. I still like my vote where it is though

[AragakiAyase]

Re: TWG CLVI: The Grand TWGabout - GAME THREAD

cool

good thing it's a 72 hour day

read my posts

I voted you off one post

I ignored all the memes

and it's very easy to say your posts were all bs after the fact as a cover up, but I believe the post I voted you for was not bs and was what I said it was

requoting

ok, why does it seem fake? A bunch of people were throwing around votes, it's pretty easy to join in and throw a vote on someone that can easily turn into a parked vote. Then someone (yoshl) points the spotlight on you (indheart) and he backs off, then tries to change the topic suddenly.



I did, but the fact is you left your read out in one post "to humor me"? if that's true then lol, seems very unusual of you to actually humor me in a game when your interactions with me are more like they are right now

yep I understand

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

but I'll have myself off the table before these 72 hours are up so it doesn't really matter

I also wouldn't put indheart in there, it just seems like he's "wagoning" along with that reasoning. When he says I've been weird with "oddly serious wagoning", I actually placed a vote based on something that I thought was wolfy. But I'm not the only one to have done that so it seems odd why he's treating that differently from the other instances that it's happened.

..

[benguino]

Re: TWG CLVI: The Grand TWGabout - GAME THREAD

nice hard concrete evidence

Sorry, I couldn't help but get a good laugh from this. I feel like "hard concrete evidence" and "day 0" don't mix well.

I wonder if we're in another game where one of the reds are being really active and one of them is being really inactive. Like that's a little bit of a theme that I feel like has been going on these games


I don't know how valid this train of thought is but imma freestyle this for a minute




So looking at this, there are a number of us who are pretty active in the thread and alot of those who have posted very little. What are the chances that, if I divided this into 2 or three categories, that we would find our wolves within the same ones?

Clearly this doesn't point to the wolves, but I'll be very surprised if, say both AA and Xel where partners, or Charu and Gradiant.

That's an interesting thing to point out; I think a lot of us have noticed that theme as well. However, even if that theory holds up, it's not much use to us during d0 since it's a bit too early to be trying to be guessing possible wolf partners due to the amount of combinations and the information doesn't allow for us to single any one possible wolf out either.

I agree

Source: Me

v

nice hard concrete evidence

[AragakiAyase]

Re: TWG CLVI: The Grand TWGabout - GAME THREAD

then again, you are arrogant as fuck. I shouldn't expect anything different from you. I still like my vote where it is though

bringing in the insults now but then again, I shouldn't expect anything different from you

[AragakiAyase]

Re: TWG CLVI: The Grand TWGabout - GAME THREAD

I wonder if we're in another game where one of the reds are being really active and one of them is being really inactive. Like that's a little bit of a theme that I feel like has been going on these games


I don't know how valid this train of thought is but imma freestyle this for a minute




So looking at this, there are a number of us who are pretty active in the thread and alot of those who have posted very little. What are the chances that, if I divided this into 2 or three categories, that we would find our wolves within the same ones?

Clearly this doesn't point to the wolves, but I'll be very surprised if, say both AA and Xel where partners, or Charu and Gradiant.

missed this until ben quoted it but whey are you pairing me/xel and charu/gradiant? afaik xel has barely posted anything while I've posted a lot more

[AragakiAyase]

Re: TWG CLVI: The Grand TWGabout - GAME THREAD

oh actually xel did post a lot

but I don't remember most of them

[Red Blaster]

Re: TWG CLVI: The Grand TWGabout - GAME THREAD

missed this until ben quoted it but whey are you pairing me/xel and charu/gradiant? afaik xel has barely posted anything while I've posted a lot more

It lines up with his one scum posting more, one scum afk'ing

[AragakiAyase]

Re: TWG CLVI: The Grand TWGabout - GAME THREAD

dabackpack are you really here

[Charu]

Re: TWG CLVI: The Grand TWGabout - GAME THREAD

bringing in the insults now but then again, I shouldn't expect anything different from you

[MixMasterLar]

Re: TWG CLVI: The Grand TWGabout - GAME THREAD

missed this until ben quoted it but whey are you pairing me/xel and charu/gradiant? afaik xel has barely posted anything while I've posted a lot more

To be clear I am not pairing nobody. I am saying that I feel there is a chance one scum is posting alot and one isn't, so if that holds true some pairings wouldn't be possible.

To that extent, I gave two examples pulled fresh from me bumm hole. Even in the context of the example, I am not saying you and Xel are partners.

It lines up with his one scum posting more, one scum afk'ing

If Xel was low in post count, it would...but he is not. It's all good since I was using it as an example of an unlikely pairing within the theory .