In post 60, Accountant wrote:
Umlaut is a very weak scumlean, I'll need to see more. Snake is a stronger lean at this point based upon a ridiculous meta push and the whole idea of saying he has reasons without explaining them. There's no town motivation to hide one's thought process in such a way. "Something scum usually does?"
You explained why Umlaut's play is senseless, then why Snake's play is senseless, so why is Snake so much stronger of a read than Umlaut?
Basically what it all boils down to is that Snake acts like he's trying to appear newbtown with things like
26 where he talks about a tell that he "can't fully explain without a bit of effort" (as a way of refusing to do so until further questioned only to offer
43, which is ridiculous, at least in how I interpreted it. I worded my understanding of it poorly (see explanation below) but it makes no sense to me.
In post 61, Ümläüt wrote:ASP has too much experience on this site to genuinely think that being temporarily cagey about one's reasoning is scum-indicative.
I
have too much experience to think that and I've been here less than a year. Then there's this:
In post 43, eagerSnake wrote:Basically it has to do with how scum doesn't know how different town groups feel about what is scummy at the beginning of a game so they like to keep their options open and ask questions about what others think is scummy. Maybe play both sides of a discussion, ask things like "who is scum" "what do you think about X" which is basically asking "am I a suspect" or "did I do anything suspicious"
So basically, asking for reads and asking questions is scummy...?
This is a blatant misrepresentation of what Eager said and I find it hard to credit that ASP really read his point that way.
Experience is in no way alignment indicative. Hiding reasoning behind one's actions is at its basis scummy.
Allow me to rephrase that a bit. Basically what Eager is suggesting that it's suspicious to interrogate about the goings-on of a game, implying in that statement that in doing so the player is forfeiting opinions of their own and/or acting for a purpose other than figuring out how the questioned player thinks/trying to read them. I interpreted it as him saying that it's suspicious to try to figure out the other players' motives and thought processes, which is at its simplest complete bs, and in a more elaborate way, a process by which Eager can push anyone for anything. For example, 0x40's
66 is therefore scummy because he's trying to figure out why L-1 at this stage of the game is a problem.
Re
98: I've got several questions being thrown my way that I'm trying to get to while also dealing with a situation AFK, so... Not immediately, apparently.
