| Nachomamma8 said: 1 prof: I already put in some of my reasons. I'm not convinced by your summaries on players, and I think that more than being helpful, in this environment, it is very much harmful to label players as town or scum unless you have really solid evidence or "feels". Why do you think providing reads is harmful? What harm has it brought so far? 2 prof: For example, as I said earlier, I didn't like how you 180'd on trucks when he said "i don't know what to think". That, in my book, is just a very very poorly informed read. Maybe it's correct, but not for the reasons you say it is. I never 180'd on Trucks, actually. I said that I didn't know what to think of Trucks at first (that's what I meant by a "I don't know what to think" read), then, after he posted the list, called him town for reasons that I've explained a bit more thoroughly in my response to tabaha. 3 prof: However, in this game I feel he's been a bit too meta, and I don't like his discussion with zero which led to a vote, a very defensible vote that really anyone could get behind. What do you mean by "a bit too meta"? And why is it a bad thing to make a vote that anyone could get behind? 4 prof: You current play would suggest that you are town, based on your history of that one game in which you were town. I said then, and I still say now, that I don't think you respect your own analysis enough. I think you're too eager to qualify things based on your own rubric of what town does and what scum does. My method of scumhunting is different than yours. It doesn't mean that it is worse. Intent is based on looking why someone does what they do. When something furthers the mafia win condition, it means they are likely mafia. When something furthers the town win condition, it means they are likely town. It's not so black and white, of course, but it's a good place to start. 5 prof: You said "for one", how about for another? Cut myself off in the middle of my train of thought. The other thing that I really liked from Radish is that he didn't use his no lynch vote as a reason not to scumhunt, which is exactly what Haxton did. Although he hasn't taken a definite position yet, he has questioned, he has provided the reads what he has had so far, and he has searched. |
Answering this before I forget.
1When did I say providing reads is harmful. I said the way you, specifically, have been providing reads is harmful. Doesn't seem to be much 'leaning' or partialalities, or possibles. You write town/scum, and have what, 2 non-reads on ff and someone else, and 1 not sure. Personally, I only say town when Im absolutely convinced. Ie; it will take a lot to change my mind. But you? You flipped on Trucks on one sentence that I'd consider a null read. Not so sure that is healthy for scumhunting. Not that I want you to stop though, you have some really good insights...but you remind me of Linkz a bit too much. Same playstyle. And in my opinion, those peices of evidence thrown around as if fact, along with the meta analysis "x wouldn't do this as scum", is fallible.
For example, your read on ABC. You say, (paraphrased) a scum wouldn't act so aggressive. I disagree. Being that most of his discussion revolves around meta, where there is no real black area, only grey, it's very easy (and smart) to discuss things that in most cases probably won't lead anywhere, and in some cases can send the town down a poorly reasoned path. Along with that bonus, it also allows him to talk and participate while not actually contributing anything (see: active lurking).
2 My mistake, I thought you meant that trucks said he didn't know what to think. Obviously my bad for not going back and checking his comment. Still, I'm certainly not reading him as full-town, again, harkening back to my point about the assurety of your reads.
3 A bit too meta. A bit too concerned with flavor and "what the mod would have done" given the nameclaims. I'm sure you should know the answer to your own question. Scum need to lynch, they do so by prodding people into bad situations. Meanwhile a townie will try not to lie, so say something that may get them into trouble...this is something scum love to capitalize on. Easily defensible votes that other players can get behind and think the mislynched 'played poorly, and deserved to be lynched'.
4 I'm not saying it's worse, and perhaps you have your own reasons for playing the way you do. I for one, can surely understand that because I do a lot of indefensible things to further my own methods. However, like I said, I do believe that your method of play more appropriately works as both scum and town, because it's quite an easy thing to qualify people as town or mafia based on the kinds of evidence youve provided and maintain a town mask. I'm not saying you're scum, but I am saying that you're method leaves me with little insight, or any reason to believe you are town, for that matter. Again, I blame the dispassionate approach.
5 Again, I disagree on Radish, and I'm leaning scum for these reasons:
1: "I'm not seeing the slip here (or actually understanding this conversation in general, despite reading it over many times) - can anyone help me out here and get something into simple English? xD"
He is paying more attention to a slip than by reading the player. If it were me, I'd say "I don't really see any slip here, etc etc". But he seems to be looking for faults.
2:( In response to an accusation by spurge after above post )"If I have no idea what's being said, how am I supposed to properly contribute? "
Well, one contributes by reading the game, not by looking at slips. This is typical jumping on the wagon type play. I have a pessimism against noobish scum who say "I don't know what to say" rather than making mistakes. In my opinion, noob town says crazy shit when they read things, and noob scum pretend to not know what is going on, to buy them respite from actually contributing.
3: "Okay, who's the daytime vigilante?"
More useless chatter. Finding out who the daytime vigilante is of little importance. If such a role exists as town, there really is no reason to out them, and there is definitely no reason to make that your 'contribution' to town for the day. Again, meta.
4: "Okay, just reading through the thread now and posting on what I think is relevant/needs to be discussed. Firstly, I don't see why Pezus wouldn't attach multiple sidekicks to the same hero - it's a large game and Pezus loves to cause a bit of confusion. " - "Mary Jane isn't really a "sidekick" as such, but she would have reason to want to save Spiderman, so I'm not sure about this line of thought"
Flavor and meta. Not to mention that he said he would post on relevance, and only made posts regarding meta and 'oh, i dunno, maybe mario, and maybe spurge seem a bit weird'. Very safe, and he does not post in all of page 4, and page 5 is the "slip" and 'who's the vig'
So yeah. Completely disagree with your read. Nothing there says town. Maybe he's not mafia, but it's 100% not a town read.
