In post 558, Thor665 wrote:
Is this really the first time you've experienced this from anyone?
Do you never get "conclusions" before analysis from town?
Conclusions before analysis generally implies some addiional factor. It could be looking for reactions, but that wasn't borne out by egg's following posts. It could be a meta factor, but I've never played with egg before. My scenario fits better than any town motivation, so it's the one I'm going with.
In post 558, Thor665 wrote:
I disagree, so this is a non-starter for me to see his approach as scummy.
Okay, well, I guess we can append that to the list of things Thor's wrong about this game. I still don't believe that if I said to you 'You're scum because you OMGUSsed jason and I didn't like your fen vote and your STD position is the most popular in the thread' the expected response would be you listing all of your reads and positions.
Sure but where you're seeing 'caught scum' I'm seeing 'pissed at Thor'
Even while he's trying not to call you names, he's trying to figure out the other players. Not looking for an easy lynch, but trying to suss out motivations behind the posts. And he's been open with his thought process, even wrt you, and trying to cut the bias out of his reads. He's playing an uninformed game, and that means town. I do hate the boon vote, but I'm pretty solid on this read.
In post 558, Thor665 wrote:
You and your team tend to think very alike then? Or you think you have eough pull to sway the rest of them regardless?
Well TTH speaks all the same languages as me. Our hydra was basically one of us saying something, and the other saying 'yeah that sounds right.' When I hydra with ETL she holds up all the parts of the game that I find terminally boring, then follows my conclusions. And Anti just watched me take apart molliegeddon, so he's pretty trusting of my towngame right now. So both I guess?
There was the active lurking note on me, and I remember someone else getting pushed for 'not doing anything' right now. But you've basically stated that you're not going to contribute today and I don't see you taking any flak for it. I need to dig around and see if activity standards are being unevenly applied and figure out what I think that means if they're not. But I'm tired tonight and I'm working a 12 tomorrow, so it'll be Saturday after I help the boys with homework.
In post 560, Egg wrote:
I don't think the evidence was bad. To be fair, you haven't followed up on ANY of it except in response to me. If I hadn't said anything, I honestly can't say I believe you'd have done anything with it. Therefore, it was apparently a pretty useless post even though it has the appearance of contribution. So I wasn't exactly wrong on it.
I have drawn conclusions and continued developing reads from what I learned there. Those questions were instrumental in developing my townreads on Fen and Boon. I understand why you'd think otherwise since I'm not being super explicit about my process, but that's because my time is being consumed by pushing my primary case.
In post 560, Egg wrote:If this was true, I wouldn't be wavering on my read on you. Are you even reading my posts? The above seems to apply more to your stance on me than the other way around.
And how am I supposed to know that your read is wavering? Am I a mind reader? Also, changing your read after I called you out for having a static read in the face of changing evidence is not particularly impressive.
This is a vote for a low-hanging fruit wagon.
In post 574, Egg wrote:My main concern with Boon is how he first throws out the VI card and then goes all "lol I can be useful" and does nothing. The entire purpose of his game right now is trying to WIFOM votes on him into looking bad.
This is preparing for flip fallout.
@ fen- talk to me about pie. Where's your townread coming from?
@pie- wanna play a question game? You ask me one, I ask you one, repeat until we're satisfied. No agenda, no baiting, just help me figure out where you're coming from.