In post 303, Lexa wrote:Yeah yeah wall posts scummy zzz whatever they work for me
(I will preface by saying that the wall contains my thought process as I go through the thread so it might be hard to follow or so I've had that complaint before anyway)
numberq's post
6 piggybacking off of fitz's rvs vote, suggests a preference for building wagons possibly to create content, watch future votes for wagon building vs wagon creating coherence
Havo's disclaimer in
7...hmm. By definition it can't be alignment indicative but could it imply something about his state of mind that he felt the need to post the disclaimer in the first place? Inherently it has to lean town because while both alignments want to notify the game of their intent here, scum can't be as willing to get policy lynched. If future posts hold coherent with a town mindset this slot probably sorts town. The more pressing inference is of his playstyle, the severe disagreement with D1 as a concept and the refusal to give reads suggests that Havo either is unconfident with or doesn't believe in independent behaviour as reliably indicating alignment and prefers either role results or flip associations to sort people. If Havo starts attempting to sort people based on behavioural reads that could be a scum indication.
Riggs at post
26 still feels weird. Yeah it's only page two but to this point the game is already out of RVS with a 3 vote wagon on Havo and two previous votes sitting on mumble, plus a lot of relevant posts related to Havo's principle. Entering by ignoring all of that is...weird...but I'm not certain if it's alignment indicative. Have to imagine it signifies either cautious mafia or busy/unaware town. Could be a relevant marker but it seems more likely that he would have read the 25 posts than not.
Huh then he follows up at
30 by voting Havo after prompting by zito. Seems to support both narratives, either not noticing the wagon or not wanting to join until prompted. Possibly self-conscious? Feeling awkward for not having joined or commented on the existing wagon?
q is feeling gross. His comment to cedrick in #
40 feels tonally different from the rest of his posts so far and his assertion in #
54 of fitz catching me in a contradiction is an extremely generous interpretation if he's town.
fitz
55[/post seems fine on the surface but that's kind of the problem I have with it, very surface level reasoning. Seems more interested in pointing out things to use as ammunition rather than thinking about why that thing exists. Note to check future posts for this degree of thinking.
Hm interesting. NSGs vote on me at [post]67 seemed fine at the time, if weird based on assuming a scum team with cedrick, but in retrospect looks rather manufactured. Seems to imply that a users join date is information that every user should always be aware of and that not factoring that into your posts can be a reason to be scum. Reasoning seems flaky to me at best unless someone is known to specifically consider that information. FoS here.
The piggyback by q at
72 is equally bad, especially given his previous stretch of a situation. Scum lean.
At
76 cedrick hasn't really provided any content thats alignment indicative but I like he way his tone comes off. Every post I've seen him make is clear and direct in its meaning and implication, might be biased because that makes it easy to see where his thought process is at on a specific topic, but it feels very townie.
Ah a case at
79! I liked this by Awoo on numberq the first time let's see if it holds up. 1: tonal reads are pretty subjective so sure, reasonable. 2: can't say I agree with his citation for asking unnecessary questions to look town, requests for info are NAI to me and there's other kinds of questions, like asking someone to clarify an apparent position or easy 1v1 questions that imply "trying to look town" more reliably. 3: for example, calling out 31 for the easy "you said what?" post on an obvious meme is a much better indicator. 4: agree on the volume of useless posts, don't agree it's AI particularly given the volume of discussion Havo's principle caused. 5: hard agree that
74 is the LAMIST post to ever LAM. Overall: very valid reasoning and a strong case to make for page four. That being said, similar to fitz a lot of this is fairly surface level and could be manipulation of qs positions, though I read him fairly similarly so I'm inclined to put this as a town lean.
q's
86 pedit is still hilariously awful
NSG's
110 is something of a follow up to
67 and curiously enough actually makes me think she's town. The assumption that I would have had access to information from a pre-game discussion thread is a pretty large leap of logic to make and one that I would expect her to know wouldn't hold up if she were in fact scum but doubling down on this tack here somewhat suggests that she thinks she's figured out a tell and isn't going to drop it, it's somewhat tunnel vision-y in combo with
67 and suggests a coherent mindset in scumhunting. Solid town lean after this.
Ah. It's mumble. Note to self: probably scum but be careful of bias
But seriously what the fuck is this opening.
119: "Hi I don't feel like reading tell me who to vote".
120: "k I read here's a vote on a main wagon".
122: "Whoa fuck you hahaa I got you you OMGUSer ggggg!!!" Really, really, just want to call this aggro scum and call it a day but I can't discount acerbic town, they get me every friggin time.
Mumble's
125 is kinda confusing though, on the one hand you have massive assumptions creating a justification for voting me, but on the other hand this argument is also extremely self-centered which is typically more town indicative. "You don't care about these people but you care about ME" kinda suggests the same thing as NSG, that they think they might have got someone and they're going to tunnel in on it no matter what.
alex and rb entered in the past 25 posts too with fairly NAI posts but with alex needing follow up for the complete lack of content
Reading Mumble's posts over is pissing me off again :/
Right so Mumble is being a dick while pushing me in
132/
135/
137, sure fine, whatever. It's posts like
140 that really support the aggro scum theory: it's Mumble who comes up with the idea that I'm voting him (and not alex) for thinking that they're scum. Except that at no point did I suggest he was scummy, my vote and follow up was entirely about getting him to post content. It's Mumble who creates my supposed mindset and it's Mumble who uses that creation as a means to attack me for voting him (and not alex). He's manipulated the situation and filled in gaps with his own ideas in order to put me on the defensive and discredit my vote on him. Like there's some behavioural considerations that he might be town but fuck that, this is scum. Looks a lot less obtuse and a lot more manipulative with a clear head looking at it.
VOTE: Mumble
Note to self, 1v1 Luca.
178 suggests that he's having thoughts and engaging in some way but it's all surface level, need to see the thought process.
Note to self, keep an eye on potential buddying from Cedrick (i.e.
179)
Bunch of rb posts through 180s-190s, interesting content but hard to sort, very sparse. The reasonings against me/mumbles seem based in logic if nothing else.
Awoo has a bunch of posts up to and including
201 that are notable but don't engender much in the way of commentary. Nothing specifically alignment indicative but all very positive in terms of tone.
rb's
206 is the first post of his that's specifically notable with his commentary of false positives and that I really like because it suggests he's thinking about alignments at a higher level more likely to be town.
(kinda burnt out and took a break here)
Riggs is back at
227 with a curious vote on mumble, it's now the second time he shows up and makes a relatively empty post onto one of the main wagons. It does seem to provide some light support for the cautious mafia theory since it's impossible to argue he's unaware here. It's also curious to me because it seems like an awkward way to enter into a wagon on your scumbuddy, very low committal when your justification is "has been rubbing me the wrong way". Comfortable putting riggs in my scum pile but I'm also thinking that riggs isn't scum if mumble is and if mumble is town riggs is scum. Don't think town riggs impacts mumble's alignment yet.
Luca's
244 is a good look. Valid arguments and reasoning in response to NSG's case on Cedrick, but doesn't use it as a segue into a vote or case on NSG.
Alexcellent is lock town for me.
276 is a really strong thought process, a very natural read devlopment and a coherent mindset justifying their read on me.
278 is even better, a very high level reasoning trying to get at numberq's mindset when posting. Straightforward, rational, no exaggeration or misdirection, I would be shocked if this flipped scum.
Town
Alexcellent
Awoo
northsidegal
Cedrick
rb
Luca Blight
Havo
Papa Zito
havingfitz
Riggs
numberQ
Mumble
Scum
scum on my wagon are within mumble / q / fitz, alex vote is pure
mumble wagon looks good under the assumption that mumble/riggs aren't scum together, green flip mumble=scum riggs every time
need to see more from luca/havo in particular
