Baldanders 65 wrote:how does your read on matt hold up after his content post
Well, I'm not going to give him a pat on the back for doing what he's supposed to be doing after I called him out on it, but we'll see. I'm not voting him, so take that how you will.
---
Zoro 70 wrote:Why did you immediately write off that comment as something of a fearful comment? It seems you put too much forcefulness on your thought pattern there, in my opinion.
Perhaps. I'm trying to figure out what the man is doing. The idea behind the "withholding comment" just seems off to me. His use of the word anticipating confirms in my mind that it was meant to cover his bases more than anything else.
Zoro 70 wrote:I'm sorry but the stated, in post 54, is completely false. He only asks one question (Isolation Post 4), placed a qft reasoning when it really doesn't look like one in retrospective (Isolation Post 5) and hasn't stated why he suspects Blanders yet. I don't see that he's town at all, frankly.
I just finished a game where rofltown played very similar to this. As of right now, I feel confident in my townread of him. He makes short, quick comments, and he's not afraid to move his vote around if need be. That kind of attitude gives me comfort. It tells me that he's less likely to have an agenda.
Zoro 70 wrote:How is this a town tell though? Couldn't scum act just as bold and affirmative?
Come on. How is anything a town tell? Couldn't scum act townie? Couldn't scum act scummy?
In my experience (and read this comment in the most general sense possible), when players are less cautious and less afraid to take action, they're more likely to be town. That's what I get from username as of right now. You can agree or disagree, but don't try to get overly academic with this. You can "what if?" anything to death.
---
matt 74 wrote:(the whole family joke was also to see how people would react and who would take it seriously, though)
I call bs on this. You've got to be kidding me. Setting aside Michel's cluelessness, what did you think you'd possibly get out of it, reaction-wise?
matt 74 wrote:Zoro's first post rang off as town, considering moving my vote on someone, I'll decide on that tomorrow
I disagree somewhat, but let's leave that. If you got a townread off of that post, why would you need to "consider" moving your vote. This is exactly the kind of overcautiousness that strikes me as scummy. Basically you're saying here that you want to keep your "potential" townread at L-1 (who knows, someone may lynch him!), while you think about moving your vote.
Even a straight unvote without revoting may be better than letting a person you think could be town sit at L-1.
---
Empire 75 wrote:Agreed but I still want to hear his reasoning for voting roflcopter because it's kind of unnerving that his only suspect is the counter-wagon to his own lynch.
I don't like this point either. If you thought that his attack on rofl was opportunistic, then you should call him on it. This sounds like you're pussy footing around the issue. "He seems town, but I'll leave him at L-1 anyways".
---
Zoro 79 wrote:It wasn't intended to hit that way.
It was more for the fact to say that I'm going to awkwardly phrase things so no one knows my identity.
If I said something scummy and you point it out, I'm not going to back and say that I had a disclaimer at the end and that's what happened.
username says this later on, but I just want to add to it. No one cares, bro. Maybe take that to General Discussion and get your attention fix there, but I'm just here to play the game. I'm not here to wonder about your identity or play 20 questions. As far as I'm concerned, I'm playing with someone I've never played with before unless you say otherwise. And that's that.
---
Empire 80 wrote:Going to give the thread another close reread but right now I'm thinking the scum team might be in roflcopter, CDB, Baldanders, and Username by PoE.
I generally despise unvoting without revoting, but, as I said above to matt, at least you are following through.
---
Michel 81 wrote:@pmatt, empire: could you perhaps explain why Zoroasters first post is giving you town feelings? It struck me as mildly scummy. The full PBPA seems overdone and his response to being at L-1 feels a bit off.
I agree with this. I didn't feel particularly moved by Zoro's post. He just seems scummy for different reasons now.
---
CDB 83 wrote:That said, gut still says iamausername is scum.
It's probably time to move off your gut and onto something a bit more meaningful, CDB.
---
username 85 wrote:"i have a hard time remembering what my viewpoint on these players is". WHO SAYS THAT. who actually types those words into a post? fuck me.
Lol, agreed.
username 85 wrote:i mean, this statement is just absolute bullshit; Michel is clearly not using it as an excuse to ignore the rest of the action, because Michel is clearly not ignoring the rest of the action. it's essentially saying "if you continue to attack me, i will go for your jugular" which is horrible scummy intimidation tactics, plain and simple.
I disagree with this though. I guess Zoro gives Michel more reason to keep it up, but I think rofl's playstyle is rubbing you and him both as scummy when it's more just rofl trying to encourage pressure on Verity. You see this as rofl trying to manipulate the conversation; I see it as him scumhunting.
