In post 512, Akarin wrote:My reasoning on Davesaz:
Really thought I was going to get more flak from someone over that naked vote by the way.
post 111 kind of sets up a Lapsa read, gets some agreement from Io, then votes in
post 136 based on another kind of minor post, saying it "deserves a push."
Then basically doesn't look too hard for scum in anyone else and more and more solid on Lapsa based on... what exactly?
In
post 226 he says he's "looking for thought process" in Saudade but doesn't seem to have put any effort in looking at Lapsa's thought process.
In post 207, davesaz wrote:I have asserted that Lapsa is looking for excuses to sheep, and doing nothing proactive.
Like, sure, Lapsa is sheeping, but he's not sheeping every vote. And not much in the way of excuses either.
In post 231, davesaz wrote:Lapsa is scum. Why don't you see that? An answer would be appreciated.
In post 358, davesaz wrote:Not town == scum.
Show me town in Lapsa and I'll consider going somewhere else.
In post 360, davesaz wrote:Not solving -> scum. It's really an easy thing, don't see why we don't just lynch it.
And suddenly he's absolutely certain.
Sometimes he talks like he's looking at why bad play might be scum motivated or town motivated like in
post 222. (He does come around to a scumread on CT based on a secret scumtell rather than anything he can point to so he can sort of agree with it while letting other people do the pushing.)
But with Lapsa, Dave is convinced he's scum based on sheeping. It feels like a lot of these are him doing what I assume must be his usual playstyle, but he's throwing that attitude out when it comes to Lapsa for some reason. Lapsa is "easy" indeed and Davesaz really wants to push that hard for some reason.
It's like he has one default approach for talking about the game, and a different approach when it comes to the wagon he's pushing here.
You know who isn't solving the game? Dave.
