already have more posts in this game than in my recent Newbie scum game now btw, which was twice as long
you're so willing to townbin Allo for playing similar to town games, yet can't seem to give me any credit whatsoever when this should really obviously stand apart from my most recent scumgames
"I think I no longer believe in monsters as faces in the floor or feral infants or vampires or whatever. I think at seventeen now I believe the only real monsters might be the type of liar where there's simply no way to tell. The ones who give nothing away"
In post 482, Allomancer wrote:I feel like you're getting a bit townier, but I still scumread you
like WHO ACTUALLY SAYS THIS about SOMEONE THEY'RE VOTING
like sure yes I do owe it to you to go try to read some town!Allo games
but like
come
on
"I think I no longer believe in monsters as faces in the floor or feral infants or vampires or whatever. I think at seventeen now I believe the only real monsters might be the type of liar where there's simply no way to tell. The ones who give nothing away"
I personally don't consider post count as a reliable metric, when I'm confident you're certainly capable of posting high, and especially with the widely different context here.
I don't advocate a lynch on you at all, but if I were the cop I'd assign some extra weight to the die for your slot.
Your attack on Skitter for her 1/0 push seems concerning to me, for example.
We agree 1/0 is town. Anyone who attacks that slot at this point is going to get flak from me, it's not a pro-town move at all and just reads like trying to open up a future lynchpool. And then skitter winds up... townreading 1/0 anyway. Either she's not thinking at all and just messily posting lazy takes or she's scum.
"I think I no longer believe in monsters as faces in the floor or feral infants or vampires or whatever. I think at seventeen now I believe the only real monsters might be the type of liar where there's simply no way to tell. The ones who give nothing away"
In post 630, GuiltyLion wrote:We agree 1/0 is town. Anyone who attacks that slot at this point is going to get flak from me, it's not a pro-town move at all and just reads like trying to open up a future lynchpool. And then skitter winds up... townreading 1/0 anyway. Either she's not thinking at all and just messily posting lazy takes or she's scum.
I think you award her a lot more flak than is deserved for pushing a townread on arguably legitimate reasoning
In post 504, GuiltyLion wrote:honestly I think that I have, that was kinda how the whole discussion started, but I'm willing to acknowledge that to other players who don't know my alignment it may not be that easy to see
i guess ultimately what i'm getting back to is it seems unreasonable to me that you were dinging auro townpoints because he didn't see the difference between your town and scumgames
also on this,
like, sure, I probably am being unreasonable about it. I tend to overreact to people who I expect to townread me not townreading me
but
why do you think I'm scum for that? Isn't this like extremely plausible to come from a town!GL
thinking on it I've noticed this pattern from you before, you seem reactive to ways I try to pull towncred as town and then decide I'm scum because you don't like it, rather than like actually considering whether there's town motivation in doing what I do
if you're town here I realllyyyy need you to engage more with Eve/Allo slots and give me stuff to work with on those fronts
"I think I no longer believe in monsters as faces in the floor or feral infants or vampires or whatever. I think at seventeen now I believe the only real monsters might be the type of liar where there's simply no way to tell. The ones who give nothing away"
whoops, was gonna respond to that Auro post but had decided against it, basically like I kinda disagree but I was able to see where you're coming from, but usually I'm more interested in outcomes and generating info rather than like petty squabbling with people who mutually share your scumreads
"I think I no longer believe in monsters as faces in the floor or feral infants or vampires or whatever. I think at seventeen now I believe the only real monsters might be the type of liar where there's simply no way to tell. The ones who give nothing away"
Allomancer wrote:Am I moving around a lot? Yes. Is that scum indicative? No.
Creature was my favored lynch
, but over time,
he started seeming more towny,
so I think it is in fact good I was staying off his wagon until close to the deadline. Since then, I haven't really been sure of any reads, which is why I've been moving around a lot, pressuring people, hoping to get something to make me more confident.
As late as 513 you were lobbying for a lynch and I see no indication in your ISO you found him more towny. I think I’d buy that more if you were taking my path and saying “whelp I can’t have Creature today” but your read on him apparently correlated with the wagon on him? That’s a red flag.
Maybe "more towny" was the wrong way to phrase it. "less scummy" might be better. Not so much that it was a definite townread, I just wasn't so sure anymore, and I thought it was better to move on and formulate some reads on some other players.
Don't find it crazy to find someone "townier" but still a scumread. Quoted are posts similar to this, in principle.
Allo was town that game. The Great Wall was a hydra I was part of, and we were scum
In post 634, GuiltyLion wrote:whoops, was gonna respond to that Auro post but had decided against it, basically like I kinda disagree but I was able to see where you're coming from, but usually I'm more interested in outcomes and generating info rather than like petty squabbling with people who mutually share your scumreads
Auro that... seems like a rather disingenuous example? In that game, you were accusing Allo for
not
voting Creature and vote hopping around elsewhere. Allo doesn't ever wind up voting Creature, who Allo was waffling on. That's kinda the opposite of the charge here - Allo RVS voted, then unvoted and didn't vote again until pressured to do so. And then keeps its vote on acryon despite saying acryon is appearing townier. That stands in sharp contrast to the ISO in that game you linked, where Allo wagon hops several times as reads fluctuate. Vote hopping is generally fine with me. Having to be nagged to vote, and then saying you're re-evaluating someone that you're still voting when you're the only person voting them, is not.
"I think I no longer believe in monsters as faces in the floor or feral infants or vampires or whatever. I think at seventeen now I believe the only real monsters might be the type of liar where there's simply no way to tell. The ones who give nothing away"
In post 638, Auro wrote:GuiltyLion, you should engage with Karmage about Allo/Eve too.
I agree with this, Karnage is falling off in my reads. But Eve had already beat me to that
"I think I no longer believe in monsters as faces in the floor or feral infants or vampires or whatever. I think at seventeen now I believe the only real monsters might be the type of liar where there's simply no way to tell. The ones who give nothing away"
In post 613, Auro wrote:Yup, and sorry @Lilith but I think Skitter's right here, but further engagement about any of this is fruitless, personally.
So skitter drops the entire push and says "okay I guess hydra is town" as soon as she receives external pressure regarding her push on me, and you're just cool with that? I can concede that her posts reflect thought progression in terms of the change in Sausasaurus read that I didn't see before, but she has repeatedly called us misreppy, contrived, and disingenuous for multiple different posts we made, not just the initial misunderstanding that happened, but she has never once outright called our slot scummy for it and also didn't vote us. Skitter might be satisfied to "drop it" seeing as she couldn't get any traction on us, but I'm not cool with this just being pushed aside.
You know what, let me put my vote where my mouth is: VOTE: skitter
Here I feel like she ignored the main point of my posts to pick apart the pieces that she could call disingenuous. Emphasis mine on sections that she just flat out has not bothered to respond to.
Spoiler: Quote wall #1
In post 577, The Limit Does Not Exist wrote:I don’t see any transparency behind how she started at “Rex’s post is scummy and here’s why” and “Rex’s post is fine and Smarter is disingenuous for having the same reaction to that post that she herself did.” It feels like a contrived progression on us and I think town is more likely to react favorably to someone showing a similar thought process to them instead of attacking said thought process.
On top of that it feels like she’s more interested in telling everyone that we’re misrepping than engaging with us and trying to understand our thought process if in fact she thinks we are being disingenuous, like she’s just decided that we’re scum and yet doesn’t vote us or further engage to solidify that read.
Frankly, I don’t think I was misrepping at all; if you believe I was misrepping, then so was she because she posted the same 3 points that I did; and her calling us disingenuous and misrepping is in fact a misrepresentation itself of my actual progression on Sausasaurus Rex.
It seems to me like the “strawmanning” part was the only reason for calling us disingenuous in the first place and that is the basis for calling me “misreppy.” This is something I’ve already addressed and her continuing to bring it up without addressing my posts that address it is doubtcasting me for something that she should either be fine with based on my prior posts, or bringing up with me directly to sort out. Instead she continues to call us misreppy, again after the strawman situation should have been cleared up, and makes it sound like my entire response to Sausasaurus’s post is misreppy and therefore invalid just because of that one mistake I made.
She’s using the one part of my response that could be construed as misreppy and acting as if that’s my entire argument.
If you put aside that piece, our responses to Sausasaurus’s post are the same yet she doesn’t acknowledge that whatsoever and solely focuses on the one part of my posts that could be vaguely misconstrued and pushes that. I believe that counts as strawmanning too?
You don’t think that’s suspect at all?
- Smarter
See Quote Wall #4 below for all the other places where she shaded us but didn't call us scummy.
------------------------------------------------------
The rest of this post is @skitter
In post 580, The Limit Does Not Exist wrote:She’s using the one part of my response that could be construed as misreppy and acting as if that’s my entire argument.
not really, but ok
i think that once the misrepping thing had been cleared up and that rex's pov regarding how lynches ought to be done should have affected how you were reading his posts, and instead you just doubled down on saying it was scummy that he was wanted to immediately prevent an allo lynch
IIRC you called my entire push disingenuous when in fact 1) I'm trying to draw conclusions about motives based on posts which, as I've said before, I'm fairly sure is called scumhunting; and 2) you yourself said it was scummy that he wanted to immediately prevent an allo lynch. So it seems like you're taking the handy veil of "misrep" and applying it to my entire push even though the remainder of my engagement with Sausasaurus mirrors your own reaction. What about my posts was misreppy?
In post 609, Auro wrote:I don't feel that Lilith is coming from a place of intentional misrepresentation though, I think she just doesn't understand the double standards that others perceive. Skitter, what do you feel about Lilith's continued engagement on this?
i think her engagement back on this is p decent, and the more i'm bickering with her about this, the more i'm feeling we're both very firmly entrenched in believing that 'our side is right' and I've been sniping back because i feel like she isn't really understanding my pov, so i feel like i need to keep repeating myself to get my point across
and i think she's doing the same thing to me, and that she's annoyed with me for the same reasons, and so i'm not entirely sure i can fault her for that
i am willing to acknowledge that she may have misunderstood rex's initial post about eve, and the more i'm bickering about this the more i'm kinda feeling like she sincerely believes what she's arguing
No I'm annoyed because all you've done is call us disingenuous and misreppy as well as doubtcast us, and I'm really fed up with it. I don't feel like you've engaged with us in good faith and have basically taken the approach to our slot as if we are confscum and you responded to every single post we made that way until you got pressure to drop it. Like how fucking easy is it to just call us "disingenuous" at every turn? Then you don't have to engage with us at all because you can just say "oh that post was disingenuous." Your responses when I try to engage with you on pretty much anything have most if not all called us misreppy, disingenuous, contrived, and purposefully taking posts out of context to distort them, but don't actually address my questions and points directly. Here are some of the times you shaded us (I'd like to say "all" but I'm sure I missed some; also I excluded posts that are already quoted in this post elsewhere):
Really? You don't think they could be reading things wrongly, Rex?
You're 100% sure they're being disingenuous and not that there's a miscommunication somewhere?
i think they're being disingenuous, yeah
sauce is fine, i think
i think he seems to be a 'slow and steady' sort of player who wants to utilize the full time as much as possible, which is why he told us to slow our horses on allo and even now he's saying that he isn't advocating a limit lynch right now
his allo push was bad but he exhibited the same mindset in ... all three of his stated lynch/scum options (eve, allo, and limit), so i think that this is just how he approaches the game and how he feels about the best way to use our time
smart is shading your townbloc strategy, and smarter is misrepping people to push them
and smart is also a lot more passive than i'd expect him to be
or at the very least, is repeatedly pontificating about how bad a person's post is and framing things in a negative light in order to get their point across
In post 413, SausasaurusRex wrote:If Smarter did not understand what I meant by the phrase “If not,” then he should have asked for clarification before making conclusions based upon it.
Ironic coming from someone who is jumping to conclusions instead of assuming good faith.
-Smart
i mean, that's kinda what your slot did here too but ok
In post 577, The Limit Does Not Exist wrote:“Rex’s post is scummy and here’s why” and “Rex’s post is fine and Smarter is disingenuous for having the same reaction to that post that she herself did.”
It feels like a contrived progression on us
no, this is a contrived understanding of the progression of my rex read and my issue with your post, but ok
A prime example of you using this "disingenuous" bs to deflect engaging with us directly, is that you have yet to directly respond to my 514 in which my main point was that your initial reaction to Sausasaurus' post aligned almost exactly with my own reaction. Here's your reply:
In post 553, The Limit Does Not Exist wrote:Please read 514 and then tell me your thoughts. She called us disingenuous after making a post that directly agreed with my response to Sausasaurus.
yes, i agree that rex's post was bad
however, my point is that you took his previous post of context to make a point.
and that you've done this in multiple places
and reading more of his posts makes it clear that he strongly believes in taking things slow and not lynching too fast. instead of acknowledging that this is his mindset towards the game and having that influence how you're reading him, you doubled down on calling him scummy for not wanting to immediately lynch allo (437) and said he was arguing in bad faith. (419)
Once again, how was my calling him scummy for wanting to prevent an Allomancer lynch different from you calling him scummy for wanting to prevent an Allomancer lynch? At worst I extrapolated to drawing a conclusion that was more extreme than yours but from my perspective you had exactly the same reaction that I did. By the time you came to the thread, there were more posts to look at, but when I made those posts, there weren't. So I feel like not only are you shading me here for something that you did yourself, but also I didn't have all the context at that point to begin with and you're accusing me of taking the post out of context on purpose. In addition you have yet to explain:
- what about my push was misreppy? because you definitely called it misreppy
- how was I being disingenuous?
In post 514, The Limit Does Not Exist wrote:Yeah I fucking got it, there's no need to beat a dead horse... My reading comprehension isn't the best when I'm burnt out, mentally drained, and attempting to write posts in between work calls. If you caught up on the thread, you should see I already responded to the accusation that I was strawmanning in 417 and 437, and I still believe that I wasn't misrepresenting anything. Actually, I'll just quote them for you:
it's possible that you misunderstood his point, sure
but:
1. the two of you have strawmanned and/or misrepresented people's arguments in other places too, so it's not like this is the only instance or anything
Please show me where this happened
2. rex seems to be the sort of player who is cautious of wagons going too high and of lynching too early; this is a common thread in his post that i pointed out early; he's already done this three times this game. given that ... bashing him on the fact that he wants people to slow down a bit and calling him out on it and getting into a fight with him about it seems a bit silly
Sure but you’re calling me disingenuous for it instead of, I don’t know, just drawing incorrect conclusions
In post 514, The Limit Does Not Exist wrote:How is this different from my response to his post? Sounds like you're saying the same things I did. Who's strawmanning whom now?
you realize that i can think his post is bad but at the same time dislike how you interpreted, right?
How is how you interpreted it different from how I interpreted it?
and that i can change my mind about what i thought about his post once i read more of his posts?
and that his latter posts invalidated what you were calling him out for there
and where did i strawman, pray tell?
See posts above where I just quoted myself
- Smarter
You called us out for taking posts out of context, misrepresenting other people's arguments, and strawmanning multiple other times but have yet to show us where we did that. Instead of engaging directly with us on any of those posts that you believe we've misrepresented, you try to doubtcast us now, presumably way after any of these misreps happened. You jumped immediately to calling our posts disingenuous instead of giving our slot any benefit of the doubt that there was miscommunication or just incorrect analysis happening. Also I have yet to see a convincing reason that your reaction wasn't the same as my reaction to Sausasaurus' post.
- Smarter
p.s. sorry for the wall, nom :/ I tried to spoiler as much as I could
In post 483, skitter30 wrote:what made their last three posts worse than the rest of their iso?
the rest of the iso was nullish so I just wanted to be specific
I really didn't like 312347357, they all just seem like under the radar scum posts
no offense but i don't see what makes these posts any different than the other posts she made; it feels like a convenient way to justify your vote when you decide you want to vote their since it seems like you can say just that about almost any of her posts
if you don't see it than I don't really know how I can make you tbqh
@thesupertriomusical on Instagram, come see it if you’re in LA area, I wrote it!
In post 641, GuiltyLion wrote:Auro that... seems like a rather disingenuous example? In that game, you were accusing Allo for not voting Creature and vote hopping around elsewhere. Allo doesn't ever wind up voting Creature, who Allo was waffling on.
I mean, Allo wanting Creature's lynch the whole day (which is true even if there was no vote there, no reason to believe town him lies) but finding Creature "townier" through the day is similar to here.
And not my attack, but his explanation to my attack where he talks about how he means "less scummier" instead.
I'm citing a specific instance of his scumreading someone while finding someone townier.
In post 643, The Limit Does Not Exist wrote:So skitter drops the entire push and says "okay I guess hydra is town" as soon as she receives external pressure regarding her push on me, and you're just cool with that?
Oh, god, no, she took a step back and reached the correct assessment that this is fruitless and your arguments sound sincere even if wrong.
I think the way you go about this (her attacking you without voting you) lacks nuance.
I'm curious: are you on the same page about Skitter as Smart? Does he agree with your arguments?
