I still don't really think we should fade him yet. If he's telling the truth then scum have to hit him or risk letting him clear more people. If he's lying then we fade him in ELO, unless I'm missing something
also I don't understand why you're saying we should believe the worst and leave it up to scum to resolve him
this is an open setup, if the worst was actually claiming a PR he is either absolutely town or the actual town PR should claim and we'd be in a 1v1 situation
In post 732, Dannflor wrote:
also I don't understand why you're saying we should believe the worst and leave it up to scum to resolve him
this is an open setup, if the worst was actually claiming a PR he is either absolutely town or the actual town PR should claim and we'd be in a 1v1 situation
In post 733, Dannflor wrote:
what im saying is that the hypoclaim should have no impact on how you're readying the worst
Eh I guess. I'm not good with this stuff. I still think we should trust him for now. Maybe that's incorrect or whatever
In post 719, Dannflor wrote:
689 feels kinda overly conciliatory, i think a townie hammering scum would feel more strongly about this point?
693 im not sure what the point of starting at the beginning of the thought process is, i feel like a townie would have led with the conclusion.
Feel more strongly about what? That I can't be scum? I don't think I'm cleared at all so I disagree
As far as the second post, I'm transparent about my entire thought process very often. This isn't any different
I have trouble reconciling that you believe you’d never hammer a scum buddy in that position and yet you aren’t using it as a strong point in your favor
In post 671, implosion wrote:
We either have a vanilla cop (i.e., a named townie) or a follower (i.e., a cop). Sort of silly how big the power difference is between those two in this exact situation. Obviously if there is a follower who saw someone make the kill, they should out it and we win. Otherwise, this seems like a situation where we ought to hypoclaim, i.e. everyone say "if i'm a follower, then i followed X and they didn't act".
In post 672, the worst wrote:
that makes me sad but cjv's flip made me happy so nice trade-off
if i'm a power role i have an inno on not_mafia
Ok wait my brain finally pieced this together. I was posting in between work stuff and wasn't able to fully grasp it. Now that I'm on my lunch break I understand
Yeah this makes me feel different about tw. I didn't realize at first he was just going along with implo's suggestion. And to be completely honest I didn't even fully read implo's post until Dann just pointed it out
In post 719, Dannflor wrote:
689 feels kinda overly conciliatory, i think a townie hammering scum would feel more strongly about this point?
693 im not sure what the point of starting at the beginning of the thought process is, i feel like a townie would have led with the conclusion.
Feel more strongly about what? That I can't be scum? I don't think I'm cleared at all so I disagree
As far as the second post, I'm transparent about my entire thought process very often. This isn't any different
I have trouble reconciling that you believe you’d never hammer a scum buddy in that position and yet you aren’t using it as a strong point in your favor
I've brought it up twice as a reason why I'm probably not scum but I can't prove it. What more could you possibly want from me?
I feel like even if I was trying harder to clear myself off of that you would probably think that was scummy too so this lose/lose situation kinda sucks coming from you
I guess I have this idea that as scum you’re a little more performative in admitting reasons why you could be scum and claiming that people shouldn’t lock town you
Whereas as town you believe in your towniness a bit more and get more upset when people aren’t correctly reading you
In post 740, Dannflor wrote:
I guess I have this idea that as scum you’re a little more performative in admitting reasons why you could be scum and claiming that people shouldn’t lock town you
Whereas as town you believe in your towniness a bit more and get more upset when people aren’t correctly reading you
Do you disagree with that?
I think the bottom meta read is more accurate than the top one. Whether or not I get upset over being read incorrectly has a multitude of factors not related to my alignment
I agree that I'm not cleared based off the hammer and I can't prove to anyone that I wouldn't do that as scum. So if this is my mindset then why would I be upset that someone isn't clearing me off the hammer?
This kinda feels bad considering implo doesn't talk about ceejay much at all. 561 is pretty hedgy
Given the rest of implo's iso (and posts on this site) is this something that is indicative of him being aligned with ceejay, or something that looks bad?
This kinda feels bad considering implo doesn't talk about ceejay much at all. 561 is pretty hedgy
Given the rest of implo's iso (and posts on this site) is this something that is indicative of him being aligned with ceejay, or something that looks bad?
It feels partnered with ceejay. I think scum do this often where they don't mention their buddy much but eventually expresses support for their fade
In post 517, ceejayvinoya wrote:
implosion I don't really vibe with either. I feel like he's engaging for the sake of engaging and I thought sometimes he goes out a bit of his way to make his posts a bit more vague? Granted this could just also be how he posts but I've been feeling like parsing implosion's posts sort of feels a bit harder than parsing other players
is this scummy? am not sure but its what got my attention
In post 740, Dannflor wrote:
I guess I have this idea that as scum you’re a little more performative in admitting reasons why you could be scum and claiming that people shouldn’t lock town you
Whereas as town you believe in your towniness a bit more and get more upset when people aren’t correctly reading you
