In post 61, FireScreamer wrote:>MM states they are townreading Radja's effort
>I make a tryhardy attempt to examine the TB read
>I ask to be townread for it
>Initially I get a denial that tryharding is a townread because I "refuted" it
>I tell MM that no I didn't, I refuted the other thing, you by your own logic should still townread tryharding
>MM laughs it off and gives me a townread
MM got multiple chances for the correct response of "of course I don't townread you for that, you just read what I was townreading and became it".
You could say MM's responses are just joking RVS stuff. but the reason they gave for giving the intial two reads in the first place was to get out of RVS.
But you did refute the townread when you meta dove TB?
FS has not responded to this. His logic is bad and still is bad. His whole case revolves around you not townreading when you should be yet it isn't the case at all.
I didn't refute the townread on Banana when I meta dove TB.
In the dark, it's nearly invisible—until it exhales.
You have given me an example that I am wrong with that tho.
I feel so enlightened
This post is making the same mistake you did. Conflating the TB read with the Banana read. It is not about me proving the banana read wrong by tryharding. Because if it was then explain...
I didn't though. I gave you an example of why TB's not trying isn't indicative for exactly TB. I questioned whether Radja was tryharding at all. At no point did I provide an example where townreading tryharding was wrong.
oh shit i got outsmarted
alright firescreamer you can have a townread but I'll get you next time
In which MM accepts the correction and decides to give me a townread.
In the dark, it's nearly invisible—until it exhales.
You have given me an example that I am wrong with that tho.
I feel so enlightened
This post is making the same mistake you did. Conflating the TB read with the Banana read. It is not about me proving the banana read wrong by tryharding. Because if it was then explain...
I didn't though. I gave you an example of why TB's not trying isn't indicative for exactly TB. I questioned whether Radja was tryharding at all. At no point did I provide an example where townreading tryharding was wrong.
oh shit i got outsmarted
alright firescreamer you can have a townread but I'll get you next time
In which MM accepts the correction and decides to give me a townread.
Butchered quote tags
In the dark, it's nearly invisible—until it exhales.
In post 259, Tenshii wrote:Would you have townread him if he didn't refute it?
Nah not really. It was about pressuring the banana read because it didn't make sense to me, I didn't think they were trying particularly hard and I don't assosiate radja with tryhard play.
In the dark, it's nearly invisible—until it exhales.
In post 61, FireScreamer wrote:MM got multiple chances for the correct response of "of course I don't townread you for that, you just read what I was townreading and became it".
What the crispy crunchy Christ is this dreck? You're scumreading Mario for not reading your mind.
This is a blatant misrepresentation of FireScreamer's post. I'll quote FireScreamer's post in full:
In post 61, FireScreamer wrote:>MM states they are townreading Radja's effort
>I make a tryhardy attempt to examine the TB read
>I ask to be townread for it
>Initially I get a denial that tryharding is a townread because I "refuted" it
>I tell MM that no I didn't, I refuted the other thing, you by your own logic should still townread tryharding
>MM laughs it off and gives me a townread
MM got multiple chances for the correct response of "of course I don't townread you for that, you just read what I was townreading and became it".
You could say MM's responses are just joking RVS stuff. but the reason they gave for giving the intial two reads in the first place was to get out of RVS.
I'm not sure where Belarius gets his reasoning from, but here is the more important part,
Belarius never follows up with this post nor does he ever vote FireScreamer.
I don't see your reasoning for this. There is a much more plausible reason. It is more likely that Belisarius simply misunderstood what FireScreamer had said and subsequently did not follow it up because they realised what FireScreamer meant so no longer considered it "expecting MM to read your mind".
In post 69, BTD6_maker wrote:Of course, if MM says that effort was a Towntell, then if someone subsequently tries to put in effort and ask to be Townread it ceases to be a Towntell as scum can easily fake anything once they know what they will be Townread for. I think that is what FireScreamer meant.
*brain explodes*
On a second read, this feels quite opportunistic. Previously he called someone out for a "bad post" and here he votes someone for making a post-RVS fluff post instead.
So far belarius has done little scum hunting and done little to try and solve the game. He appears to be trying to distract us from the FireScreamer/Mario read and derail that conversation.
Pointing out something else is not the same as distracting from the read. I can also understand why a Townie might scumread that post. This is not necessarily scummy.
In post 184, BananaNSFW wrote:I have the feeling we are not going to get along in this game. Again. Do you remember how that ended last time?
A bit late, I know, but I don't like this.
I
really
don't like this.
According to your own link, how that ended last time was lynching town. Remembering that should make you cautious, not confident.
I don't see any town motivation in this post, but there's one thing it does accomplish, if it works: Introducing fear, uncertainty, and doubt.
FUD is one of my favourite tactics as scum. FUD won Open 524 for me. (That's my favourite scumgame ever)
This needs lots and lots and lots of rope.
UNVOTE: VOTE: BananaNSFW
This is a blatant and scummy OMGUS.
I like this wagon. Belarius has done little to try and solve the game, has done no scum hunting and his voting pattern does not make sense from a town POV.
This is not a "blatant and scummy OMGUS". Indeed, Banana was not even voting Belisarius at the time. In fact, Banana's subsequent vote is more of an OMGUS. This is an example of scum hunting and Belisarius trying to solve the game.
Your Belisarius case does hold up to scrutiny. I can see this being either scum or very confbiased. This is currently a weak scumread of mine.
VOTE: ThinkBig
"one of these days i'll read you correctly" - Transcend, Micro 714
