In post 1196, Dannflor wrote:
Why is there such a large burden of proof assigned to the BlueSnakelet wagon that has not been applied to literally any other wagon in the game up until now?
I vaguely understand why dkkoba doesn't want a wagon there. They are going to be contrarian until they no longer feel attacked by Pooky, Alisae, et all.
But I find the soft defense by slots like HPE to be... icky.
=====================================================
BlueSnakelet is posting to post - he's posting to look town - its posts do not fit the trajectory of a townie who "wants to be right" as Alisae puts it so well. I don't believe he's actually trying to solve the game. Just because it has loaded his posts with "nuance" does not in fact mean that his posts reflect a genuine desire to find scum.
This is a forced conclusion. I don't see this, this is clearly something that comes out of bias because if you assume a town POV its very obvious why. There is "nuance" because they are playing in good faith, and assuming it has to be scum is wild. I don't think their "desire to find scum" is an accurate metric considering you are ignoring other slots who have that quality(giving higher standards to only certain slots is silly play and how you tunnel), and especially can be applied to Alisae who seems to only care about *killing* bluesnek, not solving the slot. You too. You don't want any further clarification for this slot, you just want to kill it. So take that reasoning out unless you want to adjust your approach to it.
In post 631, BlueSnakelet wrote:
This isn't an Ace Attorney game. We can't catch scum by just pointing out contradictions. In fact, scum creating a fake case on someone else would provably be more careful than a townie speaking their honest thoughts.
Koba picking an old game to analyze is at worst NAI.
Koba's reaction to being cornered and outnumbered was to get frustated and argue in circles, which is understandable. Ranger said at some point that Koba looks "argumentative, not frustrated". I disagree with this completely. Koba's side of the argument was heated from really early.
I was going to suspect Ranger, but her flaking out of her suspicion on Koba took me off guard. She was the main driving force of Koba's wagon, and I struggle to find a good reason why she would jump off. If a long time had passed since the start of the argument I could understand, but most of it happened overnight and most people weren't even on.
I doubt Koba and Ranger are scum together. The meta reason was too elaborated to be faked. And they walked out of the debate practically buddies, which is bad theater.
631 immediately pinged me because it's *too* transparent, while not consisting of much content either. At the end of this wall, I cannot tell where BlueSnakelet stands on either Ranger or Kkoba, except for the idea that they aren't buddies. Everything is "understandable," or "NAI." There are no hard opinions in this post. The biggest stance BlueSnakelet takes is that kkoba did not look argumentative.
But really, this post is a whole lot of nothing - and I would expect a townie who just read through the back and forth, who is genuinely thinking about people's alignments, would have some sort of firm opinion on *someone's* alignment. Or, at the very least, they would try to move closer to getting an opinion on someone's alignment if they didn't get anything from that back and forth. Keep in mind, BlueSnakelet hasn't even voted yet at this time. Instead, BlueSnakelet spends their time and effort on this post that says nothing.
What does the post do? It screams "look at me I'm so town!" The phrasing of "I was going to suspect Ranger" feels overly self aware. It wants people to know that it has had a thought process and change of mind about Ranger. I don't think townie's generally phrase posts like this. Townies aren't this self conscious about their thought processes. Wherever they end up on a slot, they are gonna share that. They'd just say, "I'm not suspecting Ranger." But that phrasing, and the post as a whole, feels like BlueSnakelet using a lot of words to show that he is "solving," while not really saying anything substantial at all.
LAMIST isn't a real tell, some people just post with awareness because they have this thing called "insight". Awareness isn't scummy, you should know its a bad wikitell. Like I will never vote snek when I see their ISO looks fine and people are contriving these kinds of noobtrap tells to suspect the slot. The phrasing is fine if you try to think of "what could they have meant". I think its simple, you see X posts, think they're scummy, see Y clarification later, and determine X posts were fine(which is exactly what happened with me and Ranger) Do you know bluesnek enought to say this "using lots of words to show they are solving" is scummy for *them*? I think they said more substantial things than multiple people pushing their slot and mine, so again, another case of Higher Standards for thee, and not for me.
==========
The rest of the ISO from BlueSnakelet just isn't proactive. He isn't any closer to finding a vote, and his questions to Pooky and Drew go nowhere. I don't see the point of them. So, I try to get BlueSnakelet to take a stance on someone by asking him about his vote and what he thinks about one of the top wagons.
The questions for pooky/drew went nowhere because their play was trying to be as anti-town as possible this game, perhaps consider game context as to how that may be? Because literally 95% of both of those players game has been "tunnel koba".
In post 762, BlueSnakelet wrote:
Ok, I paid attention to ofrhz. Mostly the things It's Highness pointed out in
#472.
I read Ranger and ofrhz combined ISOs. From #15 to #91 it's all Ranger (including her readlists). From #97 to #112 it's all ofrhz talking about things other than Ranger. The next post from either of them is ofrhz's "serious" vote on Ranger, which he later explains was because of Ranger's readlists.
I agree, this development makes 0 sense. ofrhz voted without a reason, and then invented a reason when questioned.
VOTE: ofrhz
762 is his response. And, idk man, this just feels like a post made to please me. Like, this reads like BlueSnakelet saw I was on this wagon and in response to me prodding him about it, just made up a reason to also think ofrhz is scum.
Does anyone actually think that naked voting is a scum tell? Because that is basically what this post by BlueSnakelet boils down to. I do not believe that BlueSnakelet actually believes in this case. It, again, smells like trying to look solvey without having any substance behind it.
Like, tbh, this post is one of the best town cases someone has made on ofrhz all game.
No. I do not think naked voting is a scumtell on its own because I dont subscribe to bad "single tell" play that tries to take a shortcut to reach a read. Ignoring alisae, and assuming she may be intentionally bussing to make bluesnek look good or another partner who is also pushing bluesnek(perhaps you!) -> I heavily disagree that this slot is even remotely as scummy as people say, and they need to continue posting to establish their mindset, because I don't play by projecting it. (sometimes I'll accuse someone of one myself, not gonna deny it, but the intent is to see if they have their own explaination thats better) Seeing as bluesnek does have a pretty transparent explaination, however, that isn't necessary here.
and I also resent that as the original orf townreader, my case for orf's mindset being towny is being ignored but whatever lmao.
If bluesnek does flip scum I think there's a good argument that the people pushing the slot as "obvious" are conscious of the tells because they *know* they are mafia and forget that people's scumplay can mimic part of their townplay and it doesn't look that black and white from an uninformed perspective. However, I do mostly doubt this because of the alisae being basically confirmed scum via having robot tone and super shallow worldview.
