Categories to reading someone

[eyestott]

So, I've recently realised that the many different ways to determine someone's alignment generally fit into 4 or so categories :

Gut:
This one is self explanatory. This is the least objective type, and usefulness varies heavily on the player.
"Something just feels off about that eyestott fellow."
"I cant quite pinpoint what makes me think that mastin is town, but I am almost positive she is."

Meta:
Using past games as examples. Accuracy of meta relies heavily on how much experience a player has with their read, so while 2 best friends will likely be able to meta read other very easily, It's almost useless in the first few games you have with someone. However, an experienced player is often able to manipulate their meta, or play very similar to their town game.
"Ika does this every time he is scum, and never when he is town."
"I know Metal Sonic. This is nothing like any of his scumgames."

Interactions:
This involves what the person say, and how they vote. Unlike other types, it allows for scumreading a pair, but not a single person.
Most players generally regard this as the most important type, as it encompasses voting, slips, and associatives. However, this type doesnt always take a player's playstyle into account, so unconventional players may come under fire from this type even when they are town.
"Hey! AngryPidgeon keeps voting whoever Om votes!"
"Looks like Antihero just made a town-slip!"
"The House/Ffery argument looks to be SvT or TvS."


Setup:
This involves analysing night actions, roleclaims, and flavour (In relevant games).
"Majiffy cant be the Cop, I am!"
"I Watched Nacho the night he died, and he was only visited by Mathdino!"

So, I then realised that different players place different amounts of importance in each of these categories, and while one player may be an expert at metareading people, they might not be able to analyse votes at all.
Personally, I use the Setup category mostly, as I'm a very analytical person. I tend not to trust my gut a whole lot, and I'm not really good at finding scum through how they vote or talk to other people, unless I'm interacting with them myself.
Do people agree wih these four categories? Am I leaving any categories out? What do you tend to place the most emphasis on?

[DeasVail]

I don't tend to focus on categories as much as look at a player and see what I can find that may be indicative of their alignment. It's not uncommon for all four of the categories you mention to play a part in my own reads.

[House]

Motive.

More important than what is done is why it was done. People can do some pretty scummy shit as town, or towny shit as scum... the trick is in determining

why

they're doing what they're doing... what they hope to accomplish.

[mastin2]

Logic, Gut.
Meta, VCA, NKA, motive.
Interactions, roles.

I use them all, because for me, they all weave into one another. Logic and gut are interconnected particularly strong. I'll have gut feelings, and then use logic to sort out

why

I have those feelings (to varying degrees of success). I'll compile evidence together when making a decision, but unless the logic is overwhelmingly in favor of one side, it will be my gut that makes the final call. (E.g. "This looks good. And yet, this mutually exclusive thing also looks good. They're both about equal, in fact. So...which do I choose?" Gut gives the answer.)

Meta is half of each, in that you get a "feeling" for how a player operates. You know what's right and what isn't for them, essentially off of instinct if you're close enough to them. It's the reason why I can instantly read, say, AngryPidgeon as town or as scum when he is town/scum. Not gut, not logic, but a deeper level than what can be defined as traditional "meta".

VCA, NKA, and Interactions are all looking for the same things: patterns. They're meant to find town just as much as to find scum, to figure out the narrative with all the pieces rather than just the individual pieces, off of an individual player's play. In short, they're the bigger picture. Roles get integrated into this, in that what is claimed and used and whatnot gives you a better picture of the gamestate. These mostly fall under the branch of logic, but there's a massive subjective element to them, in that the patterns you find are not absolute; they're simply speculations as to the happenings of the game which can be entirely right, entirely wrong, or anywhere in-between.

And searching for motive is basically one of the final bits. The motive starts as the individual bit, to contrast VCA/NKA/Interactions being the grand picture, best used to find individual towniness/scumminess. Using it, you're getting into someone's head, which is where meta comes in; the better you know a person, the easier it is for you to get into their mind and know their inner workings. So this is where it expands back out into the patterns and bigger-picture, in that by seeing their motives, you're seeing why their interactions make sense, you're seeing why their actions make sense, you're figuring out why the patterns make sense, with them as town/scum.

The best scumhunters use them all, recognizing their interconnectedness. I might not appear to use them all, and to be fair, I don't use all of them all the time (in fact, that can be counter-productive; knowing when

not

to use a scumhunting tool is equally as important as knowing you need to USE that tool), but generally, whether it's visible or not, I run through most of these in an average game to varying extents and success levels.

[fferyllt]

WinCon+Role + (strength and weaknesses and longterm objectives for changing/improving aspects of their game) >> Motivation >> In-thread behavior

It's a reverse engineering process, since all you see is the in-thread behavior. Without meta, some aspects of the algorithm can't be understood at all. But meta isn't enough.

[TierShift]

I agree with ffery.

Your categories are really flawed. Setup has nothing to do with reads; it supersedes reads. Guilty means scum, whatever your read is.
Gut is just a term for when you get a read but can't explain it (yet). It combines meta and play (which you characterised as interactions for some reason).

Every read combines meta and play. I might always scumread a certain behaviour. I might always townread a certain behaviour. But for most behaviour, key is both knowing the player and combining the seen behaviour and meta into a motive, which is very closely related to a read and sometimes the same.

[kuribo]

I don't see my method of picking up reads on here.

[House]

I don't see my method of picking up reads on here.

Just wagon them to L-1 w/ intent on D1.

When they claim a PR, it's obviously fake and they should be hammered ASAP.

[Wisdom]

I approve the above method

[Whatisswag]

Use behavioural scumhunting (which is like gut combined with your own experiences combined with a bit of logic to me)

[TheDudeAbides]

Interact with the player in a variety of means/examine their interactions with others.
Look at their responses.
Find the shit that doesn't make sense.
Figure out if it doesn't make sense because of some innate deficiency in the player or because they are scum.
Repeat.

[Titus]

Motive.

More important than what is done is why it was done. People can do some pretty scummy shit as town, or towny shit as scum... the trick is in determining

why

they're doing what they're doing... what they hope to accomplish.

This.

I tend to start from setup and work backwards to find motive. VCA is also crucial and it has zero discussion here

[Titus]

UNVOTE:

I agree with ffery.

Your categories are really flawed. Setup has nothing to do with reads; it supersedes reads. Guilty means scum, whatever your read is.
Gut is just a term for when you get a read but can't explain it (yet). It combines meta and play (which you characterised as interactions for some reason).

Every read combines meta and play. I might always scumread a certain behaviour. I might always townread a certain behaviour. But for most behaviour, key is both knowing the player and combining the seen behaviour and meta into a motive, which is very closely related to a read and sometimes the same.

Guilty on setup spec doesnot always equal scum. If a setup guilty clashes with your read, it us time to double check the setup. As scum, I love to frame townies in this regard. Ex: Withhold an action and claim scum were rbed in an open setup.

[ZZZX]

Motive.

More important than what is done is why it was done. People can do some pretty scummy shit as town, or towny shit as scum... the trick is in determining

why

they're doing what they're doing... what they hope to accomplish.

Motive is what builda a good gut read.
Usually I use em but I can't deny I'm better at cracking them setuls

[Titus]

Motive.

More important than what is done is why it was done. People can do some pretty scummy shit as town, or towny shit as scum... the trick is in determining

why

they're doing what they're doing... what they hope to accomplish.

Motive is what builda a good gut read.
Usually I use em but I can't deny I'm better at cracking them setuls

That end to Revolution mafia was pretty good.

[ZZZX]

Ik it was one enjoyable game. Lol I remember how I spent so much trying to find what tso actually was.

[callforjudgement]

I think there's another category. Some people, I can read just by looking at what they or other people have posted so far; all your suggestions fit into that. Sometimes, though, I have to really start questioning people in order to get an idea of what's happening. Or do something grandstandy and see if they react, or the like.

There's also the balancing act to take into account, between defending yourself and scumhunting. This is actually harder as town than as scum; as scum, what's important is not whether your scumhunting is effective, but whether it looks effective. Fake scumhunting is often easier than real scumhunting. As town, you have to choose between being 100% open about your thought processes (helps you not get mislynched), or keeping some things back to make it easier to catch scum (helps other people not get mislynched).

[Titus]

Callfor judgment, I find the more open I am, the more like I am to get wagoned.

[PeaceBringer]

This completely misses the "behavioral" and reaction analysis type of play to get a read.