In post 1116, catboi wrote:
the early game questioning of human,
119 and
122, feels like a real enough attempt at solving where they're suspicious of the thing human said but are asking for clarity.
I disagree and would go so far as to call it PR hunting since PR's other than Jailkeeper and Cop would be able to tell there's exactly 2 PR's in the game
In post 1116, catboi wrote:
callout in
136 of black's post as being "look at me i'm so townie" is also fine, i think that's a plausible read to make that can be a sign of actually scumhunting.
I disagree. That sort of short, surface level read is something I'd expect from Elements who was one of our biggest hyperposters and vibereaders. Coming from Weuler though it just reads as lazy
In post 1116, catboi wrote:
I think the progression from
217 to
394 looks like a believable enough re-evaluation, the fact that this happens
after
the pressure on Weuler lowers means it's not being done as a survival tactic.
Very much reads like misdirection to me. I get slightly distracted with Aureal and they immediately switch their vote off of me and onto Aureal to get me to keep my attention there (and they do the same thing later in the game when I start looking at Black)
In post 1116, catboi wrote:
I thought the vote on Black in
487 was one scum would be less likely to make, checking context though I can see it was following in response to Python voicin suspicion on Black so it could be scum sheeping a townie there. Not saying that
is
the case but it's possible. Still it feels a logical enough follow-on from
469. The question to Freedom in
488 also feels like there's a town thought process to it - suddenly he suspects Black, saw the previous player in tat slot had townread them, and asks the replacement about it. I think there's probably a train of thought here of thinking there might be a connection between the two players and trying to draw something out with that question. The fact it's not made explicit makes it more likely to be a genuine thought rather than a manufactured one.
You're misunderstanding the argument being made in
487 when you compare it to
469.
469 specifically talks about taking a neutral stance and asking plenty of questions without commiting to any reads. Weulers problem with Black in
487 as a continuation from my post in
485 isn't that Black isn't committing to any reads and is just staying neutral, but is instead copying the reads of other people as a way to fly under the radar (and which I disagree with since I missed Blacks
304 when writing
485)
In post 1116, catboi wrote:
The thought on Arko in
490 is also not bad, trying to pattern match behavior in a previous game to this one again feels like someone who is actively thinking about the game.
The idea of sussing lurkers is so lazy that I can't believe you're actually presenting this as an example of serious active scumhunting
In post 1116, catboi wrote:
The stuff about exploring if STD and Elements could be scum based on scum doing something similar in his last game (
531 546 549 552) also seems like someone who is
really thinking
about the game - even while voting elsewhere they're exploring different suspicions, you can see where weuler's thoughts are coming from, all of it is pretty believable to me in that I don't get a sense of it being forced or opportunistic.
In post 1117, catboi wrote:
581 is a bit weird, in that he abandons his push on black due to lack of support but says he could be a good vote Day 2.Initially had liked the admission the vote was hoping for pressure and to get a readable response from it because I think that's less likely to come from newbscum, but the whole thing of black being a good candidate day 2 because of "more information" doesn't make a ton of sense.
You're contradicting yourself; if the vote isn't serious but instead just for pressure then it doesn't matter where their vote is while they're responding to direction questions in
531,
549, and
552
In post 1117, catboi wrote:
I do like
582 and
583 - for starters, the urge to consolidate votes in anticipation of the deadline shows active concern for deciding the day's elimination. While scum can fake this it's less likely to come from newbscum and also not hard to say nothing and hope people make a rushed decision due to lack of time.
In post 1117, catboi wrote:
Following that, 583 is probably weuler's towniest post so far - I think the insinuation that save the dragons and elements are scum together and that elements's scumread on std is entirely performative is way more likely to come from town - it's just such a genuine thought, a townie gets ahead of themselves and believes they've solved the game on Day 1. It's not the type of reasoning scum employ very often, amd to me the conviction behind it seems very very genuine.
The urge to consolidate votes is entirely a survival tactic. The closer to the deadline wagons start getting formed the more likely the wagon that actually gets through is a compromise wagon. In this case the compromise wagon would clearly be Weuler because only the following people could even be considered viable elims:
Black - Only Weuler and I would be on it
Python - Only Aureal and Black would be on it
STD - Elements and Weuler would be on it with Elements actively working to get me and others on it
Elements - STD pretty much the only person on it, maybe Black as well?
Weuler - The compromise option: Aureal, Black, Elements, Myself all scumread them at that point
Notice that in
892 they straight up admit they're fine with either an STD or Elements wagon, the two easiest wagons to get going.
A Black wagon is completely unviable because a logical argument wouldn't work and the entire idea of scum!Black was that they were being read as town when they shouldn't have if you ignore
304
A Python wagon could maybe work but it'd also be a hard sell because the only person who
really
wanted me elim'd d1 was Aureal. Even Black was fine with waiting until d2 to flip me
In post 1117, catboi wrote:
The opening Day 2 of vote elements (
927) -> analyze hammer (
931) -> decide reasons aren't that convincing (
934) also looks like real analysis. Talking about not liking Human's behavior and wanting to re-evaluate also looks like a real thought (
937)
You mean the vote that stood for all of 20 minutes before being unvoted again? Without even a response from Elements? That vote?
In post 1117, catboi wrote:
Weuler's posts in response to getting run up, to me, look more like defeated town than defeated scum to me. Especially something like
1045 strikes me as super genuine, weuler isn't really trying to convince anyone to save themselves, he's just convinced on that scumread and trying to give advice to people after he flips (admittedly I'm not sure why he's suddenly strong on elements-scum again). He's way off base because I know I'm town but I don't get the sense it's fake.
Disagree. If it's a town!Weuler game who can very clearly see they're getting voted out today their priority should be to provide exactly one scumteam, and that scumteam should be the one they consider to be the most likely, accompanied by reasons for why that scumteam is the likeliest. Like Weuler pointed out: in 3v2 ELO there's no room for error, you want to be hashing out the votes now while there's still 5 town voices and 2 scum voices instead of later when you're dead and every townie is listening to an even split of scum and town voices
