In post 223, Writers Bloque wrote:
This post is really bad. You left your read on Mario up in the air, so it reads like a buddying attempt at JW.
-Narna
I mean yeah I didn't like the fact that mario hadn't addressed the other stuff that happened during those pages, although he's definitely become more involved since. Originally I sided with Jason because I thought mario's argument was mainly directed towards Jason's initial push on him but upon revision saw that he was talking about Jason lying about what his initial push on mario was, so I changed my read.
In post 227, Writers Bloque wrote:What you're arguing and what we're talking about aren't exactly the same though
You said we couldn't convince you our posts aren't faked.
If we can't "convince" you our posts aren't faked when that's a basic tenet of scum play then we're literally incompetent. That's what your stance has to be. Which is fine you just have to make people believe that you believe it
Okay lol then that's my stance. Like idk really what your argument is here. Is it like: 1. If SS caught me on X then that means I'm bad at X 2. I'm not bad at X 3. Therefore, SS didn't catch me on X?
In post 227, Writers Bloque wrote:Not really. Directly implies that scum have to play poorly for scum to be caught early game LOL
Isn't any big case at this point going to rely on scum being caught early game? And doesn't that then mean that any case at this point relies on assuming scum is playing "poorly" (in your definition)? Like again I fail to see your argument here.
In post 227, Writers Bloque wrote:I told you "not at the start". It's what I said and what I meant. This isn't a test. It's valid. Literally my position is that's not how to enter optimally and you're trying to invalidate it.
But that's not really an answer. Like this was basically our interaction:
WB: I don't have a problem with MM4 doing X, I just don't think that he should have done it in Y way
SS: Okay what way should he have done it?
WB: I dunno, weird question, not in Y way I guess?
Can you see why this isn't really answering the question? You're just repeating what you said earlier. And my argument in
55 was pretty simple. If timing was an issue for you then you should have a time when you would have preferred him to bring it up. Since you didn't give me a time I have to conclude that you didn't seriously believe timing was an issue when you said it. Hence my push.
In post 227, Writers Bloque wrote:Who were the other people pushing him? Jason is the only one I recall.
I townread him? so if I were scum I wouldn't care about getting seen pushing MM4 with him
This just doesn't make sense. Scum don't have real reads so claiming that you townread MM4 doesn't really convince me you're not scum. Plus what matters more for scum associating themselves is others reads not their own.
In post 227, Writers Bloque wrote:What do you mean. I gave you an answer and you were clearly expecting a different one or a different type of answer (or you want to present that image)
If you want answers that satisfy you ask better questions? If my answer doesn't satisfy you there's still a thought process to my ideas
I still don't know how "When would be a better time for him to bring it up?" Is a question that indicates anything.
If me saying "not at the start" isn't a good answer I clearly had a thought process behind it... but no we just have to be scum I guess
There are also questions you can ask to sort us that involve anything we haven't commented on yet. Your posts imply you exhausted the options to develop a read on us and I don't think that's true.
I mean most of the questions I've asked you I've asked multiple times. That seems like enough for me.
This doesn't respond to what I was saying.
In post 227, Writers Bloque wrote:So I threaten people I think are town with rope?
I wanted him to post jokingly
The simple issue is you've taken an interaction that's not AI because I know him and made it AI. Worse yet you believe it to be.... a GENUINE contradiction lmao. I think we're both aware that it's not
Wait if that post was a joke why didn't you say that the first time I asked you about it?
In post 227, Writers Bloque wrote:You said "I'm not moving my vote off of Zulfy until he gets replaced or does something"
then did exactly that
who contradicted what?
I mean I've already given my read chronology. I decided after that that you were scummy enough to merit a vote.
In post 227, Writers Bloque wrote: In post 220, Sobolev Space wrote:I mean I don't see why town would keep their vote on somebody they TR when they have another legitimate scumread. What that looks like to me is scum trying to remain flexible. If I went after you hard you could switch your vote to me and 1v1 (as we're doing now) but if I decided to drop the issue you could just let it stay an offhand comment and move on with the game without being tied down to a strong scumread.
yawn more pressing about something that doesn't matter at all this is real exciting
My argument about the vote is pretty simple. 1. I don't see why town would do this. 2. I can see why scum would do this. 3. Therefore, scum probably did it. Like even if you think town doesn't really care about when they throw votes down (they do) you can't deny that there is a strong scum motive to playing in the way that you did there.
In post 227, Writers Bloque wrote: In post 220, Sobolev Space wrote:
Re: the repeated claim that I went from "0 to 1000" on WB. Let me give y'all a brief chronology of my read on WB. Early game: WB posts some stuff I find weird. I question some of it (like the mario timing question or the Zulfy thing) but don't overtly call WB scum. During this time I did mention in both my neighborhoods that I find WB a little scummy (my neighbors can confirm this if necessary) but I'm trying to question them first to sort.
183 I mention I have a scumread on WB but am keeping my vote on Zulfy for now.
187 WB mentions their scumread on me but doesn't vote me.
190 I find their not voting me scummy enough to merit a vote and an overview of why I find them scummy. I question them on why they didn't vote me (spoiler alert: this question goes unanswered until I ask it again. But remember, according to WB I'm scum because I immediately start pressing them instead of questioning their motives).
192 WB poorly responds to my case marking the official start of this 1v1. Anyway thats my read progression. It should be pretty clear that I did not go from "0 to 1000" as WB is claiming.
This is absolutely correct.
0-900
At least we can agree on the facts. I'll leave it up to others to decide how natural it looks.
