with 14 alive, it takes 8 to lynch.
day one will end in (expired on 2018-07-25 18:30:00)
- skitter30 v/la Fridays & Saturdays
- quack
It's more like I was trying to understand your thought processIn post 421, OkaPoka wrote:Ruru asked me to consider a possibility so I did?
Just to reiterate for everyone what A, B and C are:In post 389, BuJaber wrote:I'm right about this. And you agreeing with me about it doesn't automatically make you scum. Incidentally option C is also a viable option for town because townies are honest and forthcoming. The difference between town and scum is that town don't have to worry about getting suspected too much, so options A and B are less problematic. (Though if a townie picks option A that means that either the guy talking about them is scum for faking the meta read or the guy is clueless about the townie's meta and needs to be corrected).
Yes I am but if you had picked option A or B you'd have even more people attacking you I suspect.
So firstly, you're not right about this, ignoring is by far and away the safest and best option for scum.
You're making out that he scum/town read me based on meta. He said that:In post 432, BuJaber wrote:Let's say 3 games is a good enough sample to make me question my reality. So the next 3 games that someone analyzes your meta, ignore them.
This is a meta read, note I'm explicitly calling him town. Yes, if he ignored me if I'd said scum then he'd be getting some questions. Ignoring something that is not a case and not talking alignment is not going to generate questions.
really? my votes were on you and enigma; both of you had exactly one vote at the time, and I was the first serious vote on enigma. i also scumread okapoka before the oka wagon was a thing. i don't understand how you can have this view of my play.In post 329, BuJaber wrote:@ausuka - just feels like you aren't being controversial and both your votes were on rising wagons.
I was the only person he felt confident giving a read on, but again, he did not say I was scummy or townie, he just said that I don't get a pass. He also references all double-ups/triple-ups.In post 436, BuJaber wrote:Yes but his setup spec was about you specifically and what you would do as scum.
He didn't apply it to all 3 people who picked 4.
Others are telling you exactly what I'm telling you, you don't want to listen to people and would rather double down on a bad argument.In post 440, BuJaber wrote:Believe me I'd love to find out that I'm wrong about what is scummy or not.
In post 423, skitter30 wrote:i don't really think this is a good reason to scumread him and i feel like the reasoning is kinda weak and ignores context
That appears to be accurate. When I sorted you I only looked at your ISO and didn't see how many votes were on either.In post 437, Ausuka wrote:really? my votes were on you and enigma; both of you had exactly one vote at the time, and I was the first serious vote on enigma. i also scumread okapoka before the oka wagon was a thing. i don't understand how you can have this view of my play.In post 329, BuJaber wrote:@ausuka - just feels like you aren't being controversial and both your votes were on rising wagons.
1 person. Who shared an opinion. Who could be wrong.In post 441, Sando wrote:Others are telling you exactly what I'm telling you, you don't want to listen to people and would rather double down on a bad argument.In post 440, BuJaber wrote:Believe me I'd love to find out that I'm wrong about what is scummy or not.
In post 423, skitter30 wrote:i don't really think this is a good reason to scumread him and i feel like the reasoning is kinda weak and ignores context
I didn't think you were scum, I didn't think anyone was scum at the time so I placed a random vote. I voted Enigma when I thought he was scum.In post 442, BuJaber wrote:That appears to be accurate. When I sorted you I only looked at your ISO and didn't see how many votes were on either.In post 437, Ausuka wrote:really? my votes were on you and enigma; both of you had exactly one vote at the time, and I was the first serious vote on enigma. i also scumread okapoka before the oka wagon was a thing. i don't understand how you can have this view of my play.In post 329, BuJaber wrote:@ausuka - just feels like you aren't being controversial and both your votes were on rising wagons.
The naked votes threw me off too I admit.
I'll drop you to a null. Knowing the context of your votes makes the votes NAI instead of scummy while we don't know enigma's alignment.
If enigma flips town your vote looks worse.
But I'd like to know why you unvoted me so quickly if you thought I was scum.
Does this really happen though? Like I don't think mafia ever think "lol i dont care enough to make up a reason so ill just hop on this wagon here lol", unless it would be odd for them specifically I think they'd just try to justify their actions. I don't think it takes much effort to make up a reason to scumread someone, especially if that player is scummy enough to get wagoned.In post 423, skitter30 wrote:really? i kinda got the vibe that he couldn't be bothered to make up a reason and that he hopped on cuz other people are doing it.
Yes, on the merits of Enigma's posting. I may have some doubts but that can wait.In post 446, BuJaber wrote: Do you still like the enigma wagon?
I still feel oka is kinda scummy but can't justify that? My strongest scumread outside Enigma is brassherald. If enigma is town there's scum in {ofr, skitter} IMO.
Yes, both of them multiple times.In post 446, BuJaber wrote: Have you played with brass and/or Sando before?
Uhhh. This confuses me. I don't think Invis did anything along those lines?In post 446, BuJaber wrote: Pedit - I agree with this. But it's weird how he insists on linking his vote with game theory like it makes it more legit.