Does this mean we have to lynch you twice?In post 20, Umlaut wrote:The three scum are Persy, me, and me again
Heard my name.In post 172, Persivul wrote:First, hotoc is a null read. Like I said, I'd PL him because even if he's town, he's going to be negative utility. Same as you saying you'd vig him.In post 169, farside22 wrote:So beside Hotoc do you have any scum reads thus far?
People I'm suspicious of:
Ragman, as you are. In fact:
VOTE: Ragman
valon - says he's quarantined and bored, but then doesn't post.
One other person who I don't want to name/give reasons because they could easily change their play based on that. I want to give it some more time to see if it changes without prompting. Ask me again in two calendar days.
Must've missed the link then. But kudos for the heads up.In post 176, Persivul wrote:Yeah, that's called the Betelgeuse scum tell now.In post 174, valoneast wrote: Heard my name.
1. You can ask questions.You guys are absolutely going at breakneck speeds here. I know the newb card will get me more flak, but I've been reading every post so far, trying to follow along. I mean, about 50% of the argument is linked to your prior game(s), which once again, I CAN'T CONTRIBUTE IN.
2. I didn't participate in the lucky/clidd game, but I read it and formed an opinion. They even linked to it.
I take offense to thisIn post 178, valoneast wrote:13. SirCakez - comes in and out of the conversation a couple of times, never posting anything relevant to the conversation.
Stuff like this! Is there something that they're phrasing that's causing you to be thrown off or bothering you? Personally I think they're trying to prod a slightly crazed character.In post 187, SirCakez wrote:Atarashi bothers me a little bit but I don't know how to describe it.
haha, but how else would you interact with Hoctac in this case. Honestly, the sooner we're rid of them the better.In post 195, SirCakez wrote:the Hoctac interaction mainly
Hmm, to me it seems rather neutral. Opening move is the same every time, and keep consistent, as soon as you deviate people will jump.In post 201, Reundo wrote:Admitting to copying his past town game down to the exact post is pretty strange. The only reason it doesn't bother me more is because he claimed he'd reveal the town motivation for that later on, so I'm not too concerned about it atm.In post 198, valoneast wrote:In post 190, Reundo wrote:Lucky's aggression to me did feel pretty towny at first and looked more like it came from town who was pissed at being misrepresented, but the first sentence of this post does ping me the wrong way.
Just wondering why? That first sentence just seems like he's trying to use their logic and he's exasperated that people can't follow it.
Sure, I'll find something to make myself more identifiable, I also feel like I skip my own posts at times.In post 209, Klick wrote:valoneast, I find myself skimming over a lot of your posts and I think it's because you don't have an avatar. I find it difficult to attach a cohesive mindset to several sections of text without a visual icon to tie them together with.
Why is your vote on Umlaut instead of me?
In post 221, Ragman Saul Rima wrote:Scumread: Klick, Luciano
Im not really sure on the theory of mafia, but a quick D1 lynch isn't really town beneficial. I assume that you want to read people, see how wagon forms and such. You mentioned that you wanted a quick D1 lynch on post #14 and #26, so that causes for concern.In post 263, LuckyLuciano wrote:Once again? Where did you say this the first time, in your mafia PT? Something about active lurking screams scum to me.
In post 178, valoneast wrote:
Must've missed the link then. But kudos for the heads up.
Just spitballing:
4. Hoctac - I absolutely hate this personality, claiming random shit. Making light of every situation. Generally, just shit disturbing the entire game.
6. Persivul - +1 for being friendly and slightly helpful? Though I'm not sure if this is out of frustration for my lack of game or not.
10. LuckyLuciano - Less scummy the more the game goes on. We'll see.
11. farside22 - One massive post, painting a picture of town to me, but still too early to tell.
12. Klick - Actually, the biggest scumread in my books. He's been bouncing around votes all day here. Seeing what sticks. Just bounces around in what I perceive as a random manner.
13. SirCakez - comes in and out of the conversation a couple of times, never posting anything relevant to the conversation.
I remember playing here around 7/8 years ago, but the terminolgies and concepts have all left me so most of the time, your posts don't actually make sense. So I've been trying to follow along using the wiki and such
How am I less scummy the more the game goes on if I literally stopped playing for two days? I also don't like the "I don't really know what to say in order to townread the guy calling me out, so I'll just give him a facebook like" townread on Persi.
In post 254, Ragman Saul Rima wrote:A good scum player can pass off as town, so that makes any of my townreads this early meaningless.
I think this is the worry we all have, why bother revealing this idea anyways? Why not just NOT bring of this argument. IMO I think you were trying a new move and are genuinely frustrated that people are fixated on this idea that you had to "copy your town game to seem town" for whatever reason that is. Your past posts have been all about defending that, and you sound genuinely annoyed/frustrated. Breadcrumbing (I think that's what is called) a little less obvious next time, if you're actually breadcrumbing.In post 263, LuckyLuciano wrote:You can take my word for it and keep it in mind later in the game when it's more relevant for me to explain myself, or you can push for my reasoning immediately.
Huh? Im not sure what you mean when you say Meta. But I think you're talking about my "theory"?In post 277, LuckyLuciano wrote:Could you clarify what you meant when you said that you, once again, had to clarify that you couldn't participate in meta discussions? As far as I'm aware, that was your first time mentioning it.
In post 281, LuckyLuciano wrote:I'm also worried that he seemed to have operated under the assumption that I was scum prior to engaging in the reaction test, which doesn't show good faith
Like I said, here, I remember an example of it when I played here 7-8 years ago. There was a post on the wiki dictating how someone pieced so that each of the first letters in their first post so they spelled "I'm the doctor"In post 286, LuckyLuciano wrote:Where did you first hear the term breadcrumbing? And since you seem to think my breadcrumb is obvious, why not share it with the class?In post 279, valoneast wrote:Breadcrumbing (I think that's what is called) a little less obvious next time, if you're actually breadcrumbing.
TBH I realized my previous outburst isn't actually helping anybody at all. I really just forgot how to play this game in the beginning 5 pages or so. Not being lynched isn't the goal, but if I can help out with the reads and leans then awesome.In post 295, SirCakez wrote:valoneast reads really earnest and town. Like he wants to get back into scumhunting.
In post 287, LuckyLuciano wrote:If you are assuming that the person you are testing is scum, you are giving in to confirmation bias. This also ties back to Zulfy's post asking Clidd if there was any reaction I could have given that wouldn't lead him to arguing that I'm town. Clidd didn't seem to have a coherent idea of what sorts of reactions would indicate that I am town, and what sorts of reactions would indicate that I am scum. It felt more like he was scumpainting and he backed off when I called him out on it.
Meh, I know it seemed easier, but I think it's the fact people (and I) see that you had to feel like you NEEDED to bring it up before.In post 285, LuckyLuciano wrote:It seemed easier to indicate that my posts were near-exact copies of my posts from a prior game that Clidd was in to illustrate the bad faith in his push.In post 279, valoneast wrote:I think this is the worry we all have, why bother revealing this idea anyways? Why not just NOT bring of this argument. IMO I think you were trying a new move and are genuinely frustrated that people are fixated on this idea that you had to "copy your town game to seem town" for whatever reason that is. Your past posts have been all about defending that, and you sound genuinely annoyed/frustrated. Breadcrumbing (I think that's what is called) a little less obvious next time, if you're actually breadcrumbing.In post 263, LuckyLuciano wrote:You can take my word for it and keep it in mind later in the game when it's more relevant for me to explain myself, or you can push for my reasoning immediately.
Meta refers to a player's overall tendencies, beyond this particular game. The post I'm talking about is,In post 280, valoneast wrote:Huh? Im not sure what you mean when you say Meta. But I think you're talking about my "theory"?In post 277, LuckyLuciano wrote:Could you clarify what you meant when you said that you, once again, had to clarify that you couldn't participate in meta discussions? As far as I'm aware, that was your first time mentioning it.
When I play mafia in real life, we generally just chat to see how people feel about each other, the idea is that since the mafia does know some information, they might lean heavier to one side or not, and the general public has no reason to lean any side at all.
I remember that playing in my first game here, but that was 7-8 years ago. What I don't understand are the terminologies. So I started this game quite quiet, as I couldn't contribute to people's playstyle, what "Advanced OMGUS" means and such. And I was genuinely confused as to how to even follow the conversation, let alone how to contribute to it. Leading to my little outburst.
Emphasis on the bolded part. You never mentioned that you couldn't contribute to discussions about prior games before, so I'm trying to figure out what you meant when you said, "once again".In post 174, valoneast wrote:Heard my name.
You guys are absolutely going at breakneck speeds here. I know the newb card will get me more flak, but I've been reading every post so far, trying to follow along. I mean, about 50% of the argument is linked to your prior game(s),which once again, I CAN'T CONTRIBUTE IN.
Not sure how you guys play your games, but when I've got something to contribute. I will.
Arghhh! It's stuff like this. By your posts and our interaction, you seem genuine and logical. But then you say something like this and everyone raises their eyebrows and all collectively go "Huh? Why?". Maybe this is some advanced play that I don't understand. Maybe there's a "King in the palace" type of role in this open game.In post 305, LuckyLuciano wrote:Nope, it's not the only reason.
Once again, it's fine to read someone based on their initial scummyness, but have you read what he's been doing afterwards? I had the same thought as you, but from reading his iso and his willingness to admit his frustrations, (coming from a guy who was also frustrated), does it not seem like he is actually, just frustrated? He willingly admits this! That can't be a scum thing to do can it? it's just TOO obvious I feel. His explanations do seem well thought out. Even if a bit defensive.In post 309, clidd wrote:I like your comments, but I don't see anything outside of your scum-rage. The reason I'm townreading you is because of your emotional reaction to my push, especially when Zulfy joined the conversation. So basically from my point of view you are a town with incorrect reads about me and I probably feel that my vote on Ragman intensified your feeling that he would be scum on the Scum!Clidd scenario. In this context, your scumreads start from a distorted perception of the game state, which weakens the accuracy of your general reads on the slots, unless, of course, your evaluation encompasses interpretations outside the speculation that I am scum.
In post 281, LuckyLuciano wrote:@farside, it's slightly more nuanced than that. Clidd attacked my opening under pretenses that he knows to be false. He explained that it was a reaction test, but my experience with him doesn't lead me to believe that he's the reaction test sort of player. The timing in which he switched from pushing me to defending me lines up with when I called him out on knowingly making a false attack. I'm also worried that he seemed to have operated under the assumption that I was scum prior to engaging in the reaction test, which doesn't show good faith, and that he seems to believe that I will be killed N1. I'm pretty sure he's said in another game that he would kill me N1 if he was mafia, so him already thinking about that this game is concerning to me. It also requires him to assume that I am town, which doesn't align with reaction testing me, and his presumption of guilt when engaging in the reaction test.
In post 285, LuckyLuciano wrote:It seemed easier to indicate that my posts were near-exact copies of my posts from a prior game that Clidd was in to illustrate the bad faith in his push.In post 279, valoneast wrote:I think this is the worry we all have, why bother revealing this idea anyways? Why not just NOT bring of this argument. IMO I think you were trying a new move and are genuinely frustrated that people are fixated on this idea that you had to "copy your town game to seem town" for whatever reason that is. Your past posts have been all about defending that, and you sound genuinely annoyed/frustrated. Breadcrumbing (I think that's what is called) a little less obvious next time, if you're actually breadcrumbing.In post 263, LuckyLuciano wrote:You can take my word for it and keep it in mind later in the game when it's more relevant for me to explain myself, or you can push for my reasoning immediately.
Meta refers to a player's overall tendencies, beyond this particular game. The post I'm talking about is,In post 280, valoneast wrote:Huh? Im not sure what you mean when you say Meta. But I think you're talking about my "theory"?In post 277, LuckyLuciano wrote:Could you clarify what you meant when you said that you, once again, had to clarify that you couldn't participate in meta discussions? As far as I'm aware, that was your first time mentioning it.
When I play mafia in real life, we generally just chat to see how people feel about each other, the idea is that since the mafia does know some information, they might lean heavier to one side or not, and the general public has no reason to lean any side at all.
I remember that playing in my first game here, but that was 7-8 years ago. What I don't understand are the terminologies. So I started this game quite quiet, as I couldn't contribute to people's playstyle, what "Advanced OMGUS" means and such. And I was genuinely confused as to how to even follow the conversation, let alone how to contribute to it. Leading to my little outburst.
Emphasis on the bolded part. You never mentioned that you couldn't contribute to discussions about prior games before, so I'm trying to figure out what you meant when you said, "once again".In post 174, valoneast wrote:Heard my name.
You guys are absolutely going at breakneck speeds here. I know the newb card will get me more flak, but I've been reading every post so far, trying to follow along. I mean, about 50% of the argument is linked to your prior game(s),which once again, I CAN'T CONTRIBUTE IN.
Not sure how you guys play your games, but when I've got something to contribute. I will.
In post 287, LuckyLuciano wrote:If you are assuming that the person you are testing is scum, you are giving in to confirmation bias. This also ties back to Zulfy's post asking Clidd if there was any reaction I could have given that wouldn't lead him to arguing that I'm town. Clidd didn't seem to have a coherent idea of what sorts of reactions would indicate that I am town, and what sorts of reactions would indicate that I am scum. It felt more like he was scumpainting and he backed off when I called him out on it.In post 284, valoneast wrote:Why not? Isn't the point to see if any scum alarms get alerted when doing said reaction test? If you don't trigger it, then the assumption goes away? I'm confused about this.In post 281, LuckyLuciano wrote:I'm also worried that he seemed to have operated under the assumption that I was scum prior to engaging in the reaction test, which doesn't show good faith
I actually find this quite obvious, you keep eluding that you have hidden information, and no scum player would be that obvious in hiding that. So that leaves a TPR (I'm assuming Town Power Role).In post 325, LuckyLuciano wrote:What made you think I am TPR? Feel free to discuss it, I think explaining your reasoning is more important than hiding my role.
Also, why did you feel the need to reaction test me in the first place? Was there something I said that indicated that it would be valuable for you to test me?
I know I know, but why ask them this? Seems intuitive enough.In post 327, LuckyLuciano wrote:That was directed at Clidd.
Sure. My bad.In post 328, LuckyLuciano wrote:I'm going to assume that you didn't know that, but please don't answer questions I direct at other players.
Yep, I think his reaction was acceptable, as with all, but he didn't really have a scumread on you, just that he would vote on you due to what you said. I know you think #46 unvote seems weird, but it's not if you read his explanation in 51, 53, 58, he does back it up. He did his probing, and he got some reactions. he doesn't have to immediate dictate you for these actions for the rest of the game, just he came, got some info, and left.In post 334, LuckyLuciano wrote:@/u/fuckswithducks, have you done this yet?
In post 331, Klick wrote:Also, I approve of your avatar choice.
In post 211, Klick wrote:{farside22, clidd}
{Umlaut, Reundo, SirCakez, Zulfy}
{Persivul, LuckyLuciano}
{Atarashi Hajimari, Hoctac, valoneast, Ragman Saul Rima}
VOTE: Ragman Saul Rima
In post 331, Klick wrote:This reads genuine. It came without prompting and looks like something valoneast just... thought, instead of crafted. (farside is also one of the more obvious town so far so it has that going for it)In post 283, valoneast wrote:I find farside more and more towny as the game goes on. Decent questions, always asking for an explanation on why a certain decision was made. I guess scum can replicate this as well, but they mix in their opinions and really try to understand others and what they're saying.
Also, I approve of your avatar choice.
Lucky in this case I was viewing from a frustrated!Lucky standpoint. But he keeps on sticking by his gun and kept the "oh, I have my reasons, but I'm not telling!". To me this seems rather lazy!Scum play then town.In post 377, Umlaut wrote:In post 308, valoneast wrote:
In post 305, LuckyLuciano wrote:
Nope, it's not the only reason.
Arghhh! It's stuff like this. By your posts and our interaction, you seem genuine and logical. But then you say something like this and everyone raises their eyebrows and all collectively go "Huh? Why?". Maybe this is some advanced play that I don't understand. Maybe there's a "King in the palace" type of role in this open game.
... I keep flip flopping on you for reasons like these. XD
Fluffy (and what raised your eyebrows about that post anyway?)
I actually like both reasonings. Personally readlist are handy but only if you provide some reasons slash sum it up. I mean it's great that people can see how you're thinking, but you can't just pop in and out with readlist and not contribute.In post 422, Persivul wrote:They're very useful if town actually uses them, i.e. hold the person accountable for changes in their reads list - why did they change?
They're also useful when a scum who's made them flips, as scum tend not to put their partners very high or very low on the list.
In post 420, Persivul wrote:In post 391, Umlaut wrote:
Or it could be where you offer a read, or a question, or any kind of thought about the game at all?
What's with the shade? Most of my posts are substantive, and I have more posts than you.
2010 King Felix HernandezIn post 426, brassherald wrote:That's wrong and possibly outdated, like using the Win to measure the success of a pitcher. We moved away from the Win with deGrom winning his well deserved Cy Youngs, let's follow suit with mafiascum play.
I actually have the opposite feel to this, I feel like the conversation is TOO one sided. We have a whole half of a village that we haven't heard from a while. It's too easy for scum to pop in and out amongst all this chatter.In post 425, Persivul wrote:Not right now, no. Plenty of content is going up and it's a two-week phase. I don't need to post at the moment. I'm admittedly prodging to an extent.
I just saw the activity manager down there.In post 442, Persivul wrote:Do you know how to view activity and sort by number of posts?In post 438, valoneast wrote:I actually have the opposite feel to this, I feel like the conversation is TOO one sided. We have a whole half of a village that we haven't heard from a while. It's too easy for scum to pop in and out amongst all this chatter.In post 425, Persivul wrote:Not right now, no. Plenty of content is going up and it's a two-week phase. I don't need to post at the moment. I'm admittedly prodging to an extent.
Whoa.In post 482, Persivul wrote:In post 459, Umlaut wrote:See, that's three sentences! Already an improvement, now you just need the "being useful" part.In post 455, Persivul wrote:Fuck you. You don't know me very well. I don't take well to orders.Er...FUCK YOU again.
Mod already warned me on language, so I'm going to be booted, but frankly I don't want to be in a game where sniveling little shits can make snide remarks like that, but I can't call them out for it with strong language.
I'm a novice PR so I didn't want to play TOO obvtown and take the N1 kill, and I got nervous when hoctac made that post showing how townie I had been and so I backed off.
Happy now dipshit?
LOL! How is this actually a thing, I can't believe we're arguing about this xD. He literally just edited the post as a massive joke to get into the game. If you're basing a read on this, I'm not sure what to say.In post 545, brassherald wrote:Okay, I am going to make this extremely clear to everyone for those of you having trouble.In post 544, Quick wrote:Sure, if you think I am a better lynch than Hactoc, by all means, push your scum slip on me....In post 542, brassherald wrote:We can laugh sometimes, you know?
THERE WAS NO SCUM SLIP, I EDITED THE QUOTE.
Notice how we didn't have anyone come onto the wagon after that? Almost like everyone else has a sixth sense. The sense of humor.
This sounds large warning bells for me. The way we play, the Matyr defense is scum! or newb!. Usually only because in RL you're not given as much time to come as something on the spot. But reading his posts up to this point, I find it hard to imagine this being newb!Quick.In post 549, Quick wrote:Okay, flip me. Then you can read all my posts for associations. How does that sound?
So your whole vote scum!tell is that Quilick (I like this!) asked two what seemingly seems random players as to why they shouldn't vote me (the third player). And you think he scumslipped because a scumbuddy of his that's in our neighbourhood let him know that us four are in a neighbourhood?In post 600, Hoctac wrote:Well, here's the thing: Atarashi, valoneast, and I are in a neighbourhood together. Klick is NOT in this neighbourhood. He is asking us because he knows we may have an opinion of valoneast formed from discussion in the hood, but has NO reason to be aware of this fact. Zulfy is also in this hood.
What this means is that Qlick is scum with one of Zulfy, Atarashi, or valoneast, and subconsioulsy let slip that he was aware of this info. The only other explanation is that he's an Informed Townie, that was for some reason aware of the hood, but is that even Normal? Probably not.
Roughly 70% chance that there is indeed scum in the neighbourhood. It's pretty high but it's not 100%. You think that Hoatac outing the neighbourhood makes him scum?In post 645, brassherald wrote:There's at least one of the scum in the neighborhood. I've been trying to engage and literally just pointed out don't out the neighborhood's existence, because we are neighbors, not masons. Talk to me, etc.
I'm not sure if this is relevant but Zulfy has done absolutely nothing in this chat but watch us bicker between ourselves. He actually has not said a single thing and has been lurking in there.In post 649, Hoctac wrote:Zulfy>valon>Atarashi would be my guess on that post alone.
In post 577, Quick wrote:That pocket though.
In post 690, Quick wrote:I would assume so since that is what my role PM says.
Whats your thought process there?In post 728, Umlaut wrote:Okay so this is lock town.
K, I just like to hear people's reasoning when they "clear" me, and I realized that I haven't been doing enough in this game. I've been taught that you can never trust anybody in this game, so it's good to get reasons why people clear you in their heads.In post 731, Umlaut wrote:I mean, I thought you were probably town anywayIn post 730, valoneast wrote:Whats your thought process there?In post 728, Umlaut wrote:Okay so this is lock town.andyou're in a neighborhood with three other people at every one of whom is a better suspect than you are. But if that weren't enough, I just don't see you as scum failing to understand an enemy's power role hard enough to post something like "70% chance there is scum in the neighborhood, not 100%" only to take it back a couple pages later, and I don't see you faking it either.
(I actually thought you were saying there was a 30% chance Quick was just lyingandthere were in fact no scum in the nhood, which I thought was a weirdly high probability to assign to that but whatever)
So what does your role PM say exactly? Like, which piece of the puzzle does it give you?In post 690, Quick wrote:I would assume so since that is what my role PM says.In post 689, clidd wrote:I'm a bit of a layman in mechanical matters, but is your skill similar to what it says on the wiki ?In post 610, Quick wrote:INFORMED TOWNIE
https://wiki.mafiascum.net/index.php?title=Informed
Thumbs up, However I've only got math to lean on, as I don't know much about setups and such on this site.In post 742, Umlaut wrote:Off-topic: this is a bad way of thinking about the odds, because the presence and number of scum in the neighborhood are chosen as part of the setup design and not at random. If you really wanted to reason about the priors here, you'd be better off looking at past Normal games with a neighborhood to get an empirical probability.
Is that from past experiences? When there is a hood, has it historically been more than 70% that at least scum is inside it?In post 742, Umlaut wrote:I just can't see any scenario where there are no scum in the nhood, even if Quick is scum, because it would mean that the 'slip' was a total coincidence and Quick would know that. I don't buy the idea that Quick would see a flawed case on him and lean into it, claiming Informed and effectively confessing to the slip/crumb, if the case is just wrong and he can say as much.
In post 742, Umlaut wrote:I just can't see any scenario where there are no scum in the nhood, even if Quick is scum, because it would mean that the 'slip' was a total coincidence and Quick would know that. I don't buy the idea that Quick would see a flawed case on him and lean into it, claiming Informed and effectively confessing to the slip/crumb, if the case is just wrong and he can say as much.
You think so? At that point there were other wagons were there not?In post 862, Umlaut wrote:You realize Quick had pretty much no alternative but to claim Informed in response to Hoctac's case, right?
Could've put a bit more fight into trying. I kinda thought you were "quick" to just "give up" the information. Especially when it has a chance to become a "solved" game later on with your info. Were you that worried about Hoatac's call on your slot?In post 871, Quick wrote:Because I didn't want to fight with people for 10 pages on why I am not scum by not claiming.
Oh I will, I just want to hear from him first.
No, I'm saying that Quick could be a scum, and when you revealed the hood, he could claim as informed townie to trade himself for four townies, ensuring we mislynch each day. It's an incredible play I just think. It's stuck on my mind last night how advantageous it could've been.In post 882, Hoctac wrote:valon, are you suggesting Quick could be scum who was informed of 4 townies in a hood??
In post 887, Quick wrote:1. Basing reads on "what ifs" is completely purposeless.
2. Okay, so say I fight it for a while... Is that really worth everyone's time to do that?
You are basically making the case that I am Scum because I claimed my role when there was zero way out of me not claiming anyways.
Sure, I mean, I guess I could say anybody defending you are almost certainly scum? Why make a comment like that, it's such "I'm calling out anybody who dares to hop on my wagon" excuse.In post 888, Quick wrote:Seriously, anyone sheeping your reasons for SRing me are almost certainly Scum at this point.
I am! And it makes no sense, why get town to lynch the hood? You'd have a much better chance later on with this information. Your best use of your PR is to wait for scum to "waste" their shot on hood, since they don't know that someone out there knows the fact "There is at least one scum in the hood". Either way, it's either my theory is correct, or hoctac's is at this point.In post 889, Quick wrote:You are not even looking at my play though? Like, my play DEMONSTRATES what I was doing by first going after Hactoc, then Zulfy, then Brass. But you are not even factoring this in...In post 886, valoneast wrote:No, I'm saying that Quick could be a scum, and when you revealed the hood, he could claim as informed townie to trade himself for four townies, ensuring we mislynch each day. It's an incredible play I just think. It's stuck on my mind last night how advantageous it could've been.In post 882, Hoctac wrote:valon, are you suggesting Quick could be scum who was informed of 4 townies in a hood??
And honestly, if you're such a good player, why don't you just dictate how everyone plays? That way you can solve the game yourself. In my mind I have equal chances of you townNonPR!Quick, townPR!Quick and scum!Quick.In post 892, Quick wrote:I meant saying, "What if they were Scum?" in terms of actually SRing them for that. That's honestly poor reasoning. I have thoughts all that time about "If this person was Scum they might be doing X for Y reason" but that is piss poor play to actually base your reads on that. Do you disagree here or what? Maybe you just suck at this game and that is how you play, but personally, I look at what is most likely rather than BASING MY READS ON HYPOTHETICALS.
So that's where you and I differ:In post 893, Quick wrote:First I went after Hactoc and explicitly said I was going after them for UNKNOWN REASONS. Then I pressured Brass to try and get what his read was on Hactoc and he said he wasn't SRing Hactoc at all. So it was because I knew that within the neighborhood that I was going to pressure there. But I decided to then move to Zulfy because that slot hasn't really done much and they are lurking. AND ZULFY IS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD and there is guaranteed to be AT LEAST one Scum in the neighborhood. So I pressured there. THEN Hactoc said he knows I know who is in the neighborhood, which doesn't by itself mean I am Scum. LET ME KNOW IF YOU UNDERSTAND THIS POINT. IF I AM INFORMED TOWNIE, AND I KNOW THERE IS SCUM IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, THEN MY PLAY MAKES SENSE AS TOWN KNOWING THERE IS SCUM IN THERE.
