Turns out I didn't have time to get fully caught up. Starting from where I left off.
In post 278, LoudmouthLee wrote:I'm trying not to make broad, sweeping judgements yet because, well... we're just beginning D1.
Curiously, I remember you being a player that's
very
prone to making broad, sweeping judgements at the beginning of D1 (Fire & Ice Mafia comes to mind: "joking is scummy").
I genuinely believe that waggoning Glork to start the game off is good for the town, for mostly superstitious reasons.
In post 287, Untrod Tripod wrote:eh.
a. the stuff I got off VitR was that.
b. I don't liveblog my reading. most of that happens internally.
c. you know gosh darn well that you can't really do a lot day 1 with real cases.
a. what stuff you got off VitR?
b. please externalize your readings more. "I'm doing all that stuff I love doing as town, but on the inside" is not very convincing.
c. I know the exact opposite to be the case.
In post 292, Porochaz wrote:I struggle to explain things like this. Like I know you explained why you thought it was scummy, but its more you gaining reasons from chambers wording rather than the thought process behind it. It seems too easy.
I actually explicitly mentioned why I thought the thought process behind the wording is potentially suspect so I'm really not sure what you're getting at.
In post 293, Green Crayons wrote:CTD:
Rephrased:
- MafiaSSK said that (1) it "would make sense to blow it off with a joke" when referring to how he responded to Tigris -- that is, it would make sense to respond to Tigris with a joke rather than with his bandwagon theory -- but MafiakSSK (2) never disowned the legitimacy of his Tigris vote, and directed PJ to look at MafiaSSK's earlier posts where he justified his Tigris vote. (Post 124.)
- You conflated those two points to say that MafiaSSK de-legitimized his vote for Tigris by recognizing that his vote should have been kept on the joke level. (Post 129.) As stated above, MafiaSSK acknowledged that maybe he should have responded with a joke instead of a bandwagon theory, but MafiaSSK never said that his vote itself was a joke or not legitimate (which he apparently thought was aligned with his own bandwagon theory).
Do you disagree with what I believe to be your mistake in reading MafiaSSK's posts?
No, I don't. For one thing, I find it hard to believe that his bandwagon theory would lead him to actually, legitimately suspect Tigris (which he reinforced by stating that "[VitR] makes more sense than Tigris-scum at the moment" in Post 124, which to me implies that he needed a stronger case to "convince" him to move on from Tigris).
My issue with him is also not that he de-legitimized the vote, but rather the opposite. That he presented his bandwagon theory to turn what
looked like a joke vote into an actual suspicion.
In post 294, MrBuddyLee wrote:@PJ, Poro, CTD and undo, you have somewhat similar reasons for voting SSK. I haven't read the guy in other games yet--have you? I want to know whether these odd behaviors you've noted are scumtells of his, or as Sotty has alluded to, are hallmarks of his overall loose/"lynchable" play. If you believe that one or more of these behaviors are genuine tells for him in particular, please elaborate.
I don't remember ever playing with MafiaSSK.
In post 294, MrBuddyLee wrote:@CTD, you've placed the burden of profiency upon yourself by alluding to your genius in the last Oldy game. Can you please list MafiaSSK's scumpartners in the order you intend to lynch them?
I don't consider myself a genius for catching UT in the last Oldy game, which is the only thing I've alluded to. You are alluding to the fact that I also caught two of his buddies early on in that game, so I'm pretty sure you're the one BoPing me. I'll humor you with a list once I'm done catching up nevertheless.
In post 304, Tigris wrote:At this point, not very suspicious of mafiassk to be honest, at least partially because of his potential leaps in logic. Partly kept my vote on him since others found/find him suspicious and to garner more reactions supporting/detracting from him, but that is insufficient reason for me right now since I plan on more fully analyzing in the next few days.
That's a lot of words to justify removing a vote. I find myself agreeing with MBL that Tigris seems image conscious. She didn't place a new vote promising further analysis and I don't really get the point of making a scene of unvoting other than an attempt to look pro-town.
In post 331, Sotty7 wrote:It's meta based mostly. My town read on ABR is a lot stronger than the one on DGB but that doesn't really matter (the Farside one is non existent since her replace out). Town reads aren't locked in and I can change my mind at any moment should I want to. I just don't see the need to argue with someones declared town read unless you have a scum read on that and I didn't really get that from your post. You just seemed to be disagreeing to disagree rather than dig any deeper.
I didn't argue with his town reads, I questioned their legitimacy. I don't think he had anything to say about that, so I'll continue thinking that he's just pulling reads out of his ass. I think it's problematic to liberally dish out unwarranted town reads (it's worth noting that DGB is arguably a worse offender, and I'll get to that), precisely because they aren't expected to stick. It's a way for scum to look busy and potentially get some buddy points without much consequence. I don't have a good overview of ABR's play as it currently stands, but at the time I thought it was worth pointing out.
Post-crash catch up will have to come tomorrow.
[i]Mgm laughed nervously, his cheeks flushing in the faintest of blushes. "Patrick... I only wanted to be with you... that's why I put the game to night, so Glork would get killed."[/i] - the heartwarming conclusion of Face to Face Mafia