player 3

Attention over time

7-day rolling share of analyzed posts/comments mentioning this entity · 90 daily points ending 2026-08-02

Final complete day: 2026-08-02. Attention was 0.2% — this entity appeared in 17 of 9,589 analyzed posts/comments in the seven days ending that day (38 mentions).

Each point is a seven-day rolling window of complete UTC days; a point is comparable only when at least 100 analyzed posts or comments fall inside it. A day with no analyzed records counts as zero; missing coverage is marked and never shown as zero. The series ends at the latest complete analyzed day — it never extends into the current incomplete day. How attention is measured.

Recent mentions

1. 2026-08-01 08:48 UTCComment

   Apologies for not being clearer in my original post, There where 3 rounds of cards drawn, Round 1 Player 1 got a 12, player 2 got a 5, Player 3 got a 13 Round 2 player 1 stayed, player 2 got a steal and stole player 1 12, player 3 got a zero Round 3 player 2 got a 5 so bust player 3 got a -8 and put it in front of player 1( who had no cards in front of them) player 3 them got 5 card on the bounce to get a flip 7 I "think" we played it wrong and player 3 shouldn't have given player 1 the minus 8 card. Hope that makes sense

2. 2026-08-01 08:04 UTCComment

   Apologies for not being clearer in my original post, There where 3 rounds of cards drawn, Round 1 Player 1 got a 12, player 2 got a 5, Player 3 got a 13 Round 2 player 1 stayed, player 2 got a steal and stole player 1 12, player 3 got a zero Round 3 player 2 got a 5 so bust player 3 got a -8 and put it in front of player 1( who had no cards in front of them) player 3 them got 5 card on the bounce to get a flip 7 I "think" we played it wrong and player 3 shouldn't have given player 1 the minus 8 card. Hope that makes sense

3. 2026-07-30 19:49 UTCComment

   Ya well no one expected player 2 to be an unbreakable ally, even player 1 told me they were surprised by it and expected them to betray them once they were winning, player 1 and 2 allied at the start to do a specific task and just never broke it afterwards And due to the board state, I couldn’t check player 1 myself since player 2 was stopping me And player 3 had no chance at beating player 1 or helping me fight player 2 since they just kept losing every battle and in a game like this, winning just snowballs you into winning more and vice versa, usually that’s offset by players ganging up one people but that just didn’t happen this game I played this game a few times and other similar games and almost no one creates an unbreakable alliance since it will always doom one player to losing and almost no one I play with doesn’t care about winning, this time was pretty unique

4. 2026-07-30 12:47 UTCComment

   Apologies for not being clearer in my original post, There where 3 rounds of cards drawn, Round 1 Player 1 got a 12, player 2 got a 5, Player 3 got a 13 Round 2 player 1 stayed, player 2 got a steal and stole player 1 12, player 3 got a zero Round 3 player 2 got a 5 so bust player 3 got a -8 and put it in front of player 1( who had no cards in front of them) player 3 them got 5 card on the bounce to get a flip 7 I "think" we played it wrong and player 3 shouldn't have given player 1 the minus 8 card. Hope that makes sense

5. 2026-07-30 11:52 UTCComment

   Hard to know without all the details, But if I was you I would have attacked player 2 whilst player 1 was laying into player 3 and test how strong this alliance actually was. By the sounds of it Player 1 would not have come to the rescue, maybe even have backstabbed player 2 if they thought it might give them the few points they needed to win. This probably would have ended the game sooner, and teach player 2 a valuable lesson in when they need to break an alliance.