I did answer your question about aggression. it's in the post you quoted.In post 972, Duchess wrote:You didn't answer my question. You have mentioned the Duchess/GC/Italiano debacle several times but haven't provided any conclusions, up to this point. Why did you say "aggression on both sides of that dispute makes me suspicious"?In post 505, VP Baltar wrote:Re: GC - over aggression is way more likely to be a scum trait, imo. Scum are fake scum hunting, so will often push points past an obvious conclusion because that would mean the scum would then have to come up with an entirely new angle to push. That is work when you are scum. Town is way more relaxed because those lines of inquiry emerge naturally as a result of having no actual clue what is true and what is false.In post 491, Duchess wrote:Makes you suspicious of what exactly?In post 329, VP Baltar wrote:GC also felt a bit townie, but the aggression on both sides of that dispute makes me suspicious.
"Absent" is an extremely generous way of describing Elements's thread activity at the time. Were you aware they were dodging my direct questions while continuing to interact with my wagon from the sidelines? There is substance in Elements's absence that you didn't touch on here at all.In post 392, VP Baltar wrote:I think the likelihood they are all town seems quite low actually.In post 376, Reformed Toxic Player wrote:hot take but the top 3 wagons here are TvTvT
Italiano is opportunistic enough to just be bad scum here, but maybe elements has some thoughts to add on that since he caught him before.
Dunn's answers sound like they are coming from a vitamin salesman. "You will FEEEL younger, I swear."
Elements has been pretty absent, but I felt town there early.
I don't like the way you've approached RTP in this post. Rather than caring to understand how they've come to those conclusions, you show up to throw a little one-liner grease on the fire for each wagon and then drop it. What's your current read of RTP?
That, of course, doesn't mean town can't be aggressive. I'm just looking at authenticity vs. manufactured outrage.
Re: "dodging" your questions and elements - I don't know what you want me to say. You think I should be hyped up about some interaction you're having with Elements? I don't remember reading anything of substance there, but maybe I skimmed it or it seemed boring to me. We're other players picking up on this? Or you think there is a reason I, in particular, should have noticed this?
My current read of RTP is lean town. I'm trying to recalibrate to the change in style by Koba. They are a very good player, and I tend to not assign concrete reads early in a game anyhow because I'm often wrong and need to stay flexible until I have a good working theory of the game. I try to especially stay flexible on players who are very good.
My point is you made the assumption that Elements's lack of activity was merely being an "absence" when it was clearly evasion (something to which they themself have admitted), which tells me you haven't exactly been paying attention to the slot in a way that town looking for answers might be. If Elements was not enough on your radar for you to notice the blatant question-dodging and thread-fleeing, why did you choose to comment about them here at all? I find it harder to trust that the statements you make are true and genuine.
This answer doesn't address my concerns about your interaction with RTP. If you think it will be more difficult to read them than other players, or if you're giving special attention to your read of that slot, why didn't you engage further on that point if your reads were so opposite? Did you not care to understand how (or why, if scum) RTP came to those conclusions?
I really can't even follow whatever you are trying to say about Elements. I've read this like 10 times and it is incoherent. Like, you think I should have characterized Elements as "evasive" but instead I chose to use the word "absent." I don't think him being absent from the thread is a positive thing. This feels like you're having a semantics argument and I really don't understand the point or why you think that makes me scummy -- or whatever you're trying to say.
re: why didn't I engage further with RTP's "hot take" - I don't know. I guess I didn't find it that interesting or revealing about their alignment. Felt like them throwing out a comment to gather opinions, and I gave mine. It's not like it was some line of inquiry I started that I was super interested in.
