Por que no los dos?
nn wrote:Also that from 247 - 261 he addresses a significant number of issues, but ignores the ones I've raised with him.
Gamma wrote:Keep the shovel: makes it easier to tunnel.
Zoronos wrote:Gamma strikes me as the kind of person that likes to be 'technically correct'.
Zoronos wrote:This kind of play annoys me, however, I feel that it is less likely to come from scum because it's an inherently antagonistic stance. He didn't call me scum for thinking about Ascetic in terms of being like Miller since they were both negative utility; he just called me wrong and insinuated that I was bad.
boring wrote:Gamma is acting exactly like he did in our last game.
In post 331, implosion wrote:boring wrote:Gamma is acting exactly like he did in our last game.
Can you quantify exactly what you find similar?
In post 332, Gamma Emerald wrote:Yeah implosion is town.
In post 336, Gamma Emerald wrote:The fact that so many people townread me and yet he doesn't makes him Town.
In post 330, implosion wrote:I think the reaction of calling you bad town or scum is relatively unlikely to come from the scumgame that I saw in that game. 3, those posts in addition to contempt show a certain level of him feeling like he's in-the-right (since he's talking about how he was just being honest with his answers) that I think is consistent with town who feels like they've been accused for bs reasons.
In post 330, implosion wrote:Ironic since I can think of at least three counts in this game where he has used terminology (omgus, tunneling, and even literally calling LUV town) to mean things that they don't mean at all.
In post 330, implosion wrote:If anything this is scummier than if he had called you scum for his analysis; by taking the antagonistic stance towards you without actually giving any meaningful commentary on your alignment to go with it, he provides the illusion of content. And I don't think contentiousness is an aspect of personality that scum are likely to consciously mute to a large degree; maybe somewhat but *shrug*
In post 302, Grendel wrote:Oh and, I'm about to get really busy on something, and won't be on tonight.
See you all tomorrow... evening?
In post 329, boring wrote:Gamma is acting exactly like he did in our last game. I tunnelled him for it because he's easy to mislynch. I'm also doubting my scum read on Zoronos. He's just barrelled on without a single adjustment to his behavior. It's not something I'd expect from someone I'm scum-reading for being fake. They're each either cleverer at playing scum than I'm willing to entertain at the moment, or they're not scum.
UNVOTE:
In post 336, Gamma Emerald wrote:
The fact that so many people townread me and yet he doesn't makes him Town.
In post 344, Shadow_step wrote:Especially PP's reply to your comment is terrible. He scum reads you and is okay with you town reading him. He doesn't accuse you or buddying.
In post 263, Shadow_step wrote:
This is a very safe stance
How can you believe him and not town read him even if slightly ?
Like mafia ascetic is very strong modifier for mafia, unless you believe that town would have those many PRs to counter that.
Hence you null read him. But I doubt you would have thought that much.
In post 343, Shadow_step wrote:In post 329, boring wrote:Gamma is acting exactly like he did in our last game. I tunnelled him for it because he's easy to mislynch. I'm also doubting my scum read on Zoronos. He's just barrelled on without a single adjustment to his behavior. It's not something I'd expect from someone I'm scum-reading for being fake. They're each either cleverer at playing scum than I'm willing to entertain at the moment, or they're not scum.
UNVOTE:
Join me on Penguin please.
He nicely ignored my question.