In post 156, SoraAdvent wrote:
@57: Completely agreed that Vedith didn't see that the IC was confirmed by the mod and was playing otherwise.
Okay this has been going on for a while now and I think it's about time i put in my 2 cents.
I think the main problem here is in semantics (more specifically the word "look"), so I'm going to edit some language in posts here, signified by
this blue
.
It all starts with this post:
In post 50, shaddowez wrote:
It's definitely possible, but don't you think scum would look for
a modpost to tell them that there is
an IC in a game where it's a known possible role?
Then kyndy misinterprets what shaddow means by that "look":
shaddowez wrote:
It's definitely possible, but don't you think scum would look for an IC in a game where it's a known possible role?
But IC are conftown by mod at the beginning of the game, so why would scum need to look for them XD[/quote]
kyndy's "look" here means to hunt for by playing the game, much like the mafia would "look" for a traitor in this setup were they to choose to not recruit.
THAT misunderstanding leads to THIS misunderstanding:
In post 57, Vedith wrote: In post 54, kyndy101 wrote:But IC are conftown by mod at the beginning of the game, so why would scum need to look for them XD
Because voting an IC can draw negative attention which scum don't want.
Here Vedith interpreted kyndy's post as:
In post 57, Vedith wrote: In post 54, kyndy101 wrote:But IC are conftown by mod at the beginning of the game, so why would scum need to look for
them
the modpost telling them that there is an IC
XD
and responded sensibly (under that interpretation)
This whole thing then gets pretty much dropped until kyndy's
137 (the long vedith one)
In post 137, kyndy101 wrote:
In post 57, Vedith wrote: In post 54, kyndy101 wrote:But IC are conftown by mod at the beginning of the game, so why would scum need to look for them XD
Because voting an IC can draw negative attention which scum don't want.
But they don't have to worry about voting an IC anyways because the mod already conftowned them.
In post 58, Vedith wrote: In post 57, Vedith wrote:Because voting an IC can draw negative attention which scum don't want.
Plus, at this stage, only scum know how many roles there are for town.
Finding out that IC is one gives them a lot of information.
But they wouldn't need to vote the IC to know the IC is one because the IC is conftowned by the mod at the beginning of the game! This argument is so elementary, I don't understand why this was even offered up.
Here kyndy seemingly forgets what her interpretation of "look" was in
54 (probably because it was a really long time ago) and, as a result, quite humorously ends up completely agreeing with vedith's argument.
That brings us to sora's response to kyndy's post:
In post 156, SoraAdvent wrote:@57: Completely agreed that Vedith didn't see that the IC was confirmed by the mod and was playing otherwise.
We are in deep here folks. Sora interprets Vedith's
57/
58 to be vedith using kyndy's definition of "look" (when he was actually using the shaddow definition of look), which makes vedith's post look as though he never even saw the IC modpost in the first place (which, in actuality, is not the case{see
23}).
/rabbithole
~~~
ONTO THE ACTUAL IMPORTANT STUFF
In post 156, SoraAdvent wrote:This segues on nicely into why I really don't like Vedith's recent postings. After he goes off on how I'm wrong on kyndy (which is fair enough, argument is always good), what seems to surprise me is that he doesn't go after anyone else.
I like this. Vedith's game seems to have been, as Sora states, focusing on one person at a time. This is reinforced by
23's "who's next" (as if he's going through a person by person checklist) and several other similar townlist posts (
55,
115). His ISO also has a distinct lack of looking at a large amount of people in the same post (think the long sora/kyndy posts/reads lists) which suggests a "reactionary" type of play, as I believe Sora put it.
In post 159, NJAC wrote:
Combine this with the general lack of detail in his posts (
51,
119) and it gives me the feeling that he's flying under the radar despite having the second highest post count. Someone who's that impressionable and makes empty statements (
119 is again a prime example) is not someone I want to have around as town.
If you want me to give more detail or elaborate on something just ask. As I said in 119, I was reading Kindy leaning town, but I didn't want to add details because she was being pushed and I wanted to see her defense instead of defend her myself. WRT the naked vote on Sora in 51 I didn't feel the need to add details, but I gave them later on request.
That's exactly my point.
The fact that you don't see any need to provide your reasoning with a post leads to things like the naked vote or unjustified reads. The problem with these types of things (and what makes them anti-town) is two-fold:
1. There's a risk that nobody will ask you for your reasoning, whether because of forgetfulness or lack of curiosity, meaning less information for town
2. You can change what you choose to say your reasoning was between the time of your post and when you're asked about it. You can really easily manipulate info in this way.
That's why your attitude is anti-town and why I want you lynched.
In post 160, NJAC wrote:@superbowl:
Again WRT 154: You seem to make some arguments against Vedith, and you literally say he's your "prime scumspect", yet you vote me. This seems very silly, why exactly am I "the best lynch option"?
Also, there's already a wagon formed on Vedith. If he's your prime scumspect why don't you support that wagon instead of forming a new one.
Pretty inconsistent
I just clarified why I want you lynched, but you bring up a good point here and I should probably clarify myself. Anti-town=/=scummy. Being anti-town doesn't necessarily mean I think you're scum, it just means I think that the town is better off without you. Being scummy means you're acting like the mafia would act. You can be pro-town and scummy or anti-town and towny (although these cases are admittedly rare).
My scumread on Vedith wasn't very strong when I made my post (it's grown stronger since), so you were the better lynch option, considering I'm not town reading you and you have an anti-town attitude. Even though I was/am slightly scumreading Vedith, as Bastion pointed out he provides content for the town to work with and thus it is better to keep him around. I'm fine with lynching either of you, I just think you need to go first. I'll join Vedith's wagon if it comes to that point where I'm obviously not going to get one on you/the vedith wagon seems like its going to be the actual D1 lynch, but otherwise why would my vote not be on the person I want to lynch most?
In post 163, NJAC wrote: In post 161, SoraAdvent wrote:@NJAC: Can you please give reads of some sort? I'd love to see who you consider to be the prime suspect now, if you don't mind.
Yep, I was going to give my reads after commenting on some recent posts.
.
Leaning scum: Sora, superbowl.
Null: light, kindy, Lycan, everyone else
Leaning town: Bastian, Vedith, shadow
This is why I don't just use my vote to wagon. By placing my vote on you (combined with some other people beginning to scumread you) you provide this reaction, which I can only see as a jumpy/nervous reaction lash-out against sora, along with a naked reads list.
Take a guess as to where the people who pushed/scumread NJAC go in his reads list. Very OMGUS-like, once again indicating nervousness. Maybe if you had some reasoning as to why you're reading people this way I would be able to dismiss this initial impression, but you haven't provided me with anything to say otherwise.
@NJAC are you still nullreading kyndy?
