In post 219, BuJaber wrote:@RR - can you tell me what each potential reaction to you "changing things up" would mean? I fail to see the benefit.
It sounds like you're creating an agenda for yourself without clear motive, which by default is nefarious.
For example, just from my experience with y'all in the last game, I am noticing a lot of unnecessary back and forth between your two heads in-thread, when I know that y'all usually converse -quite heavily- on discord. I didn't read your PT but I did scroll through it out of curiosity at how 2 halves of a hydra communicate.
What does someone noticing a change in your behavior tell you about them?
Unnecessary back and forth? You're certainly thinking of the ND39 hydrae, or another hydra. Drixx and I almost never have conversations in thread, or express dissonance in thread, for that exact reason. I believe my little exchange with him right now is the first time I've ever made a post specifically to address a silly, non-game related, thing he said. I've made posts before correcting mistakes, if it's critical and I don't think he'll be around to make the correction that I messaged him about in slack, but it's very rare, and it certainly didn't happen to any notable degree in Overkill 1.
To answer your actual question: It depends on the player, largely? We have different expectations for different individuals. There are some people who I would expect to notice a change without mentioning it, but it would change their behavior and how they react to us. There are others who it would be weird(like Varsoon/Farside) for them to not call us out on something as soon as they saw it. How they react, or fail to react, is not in and of itself a strong enough reason to identify someone as town or scum, but like any reaction test it can be used to supplement other evidence, or help guide where our focus and questioning should be directed towards.
In post 218, BrightEyedFish wrote: In post 216, Reasonably Rational wrote:
So no, you were not acting in RVS with that vote, and it *will* be considered as a significant vote where you failed to provide sufficient reasoning, and apparently lied about your experience with the meta of our slots.
-Cerb
I was still in RVS because I had just started reading the thread. I can't help it you got a 7 hour head start on me and used up your RVS mentality before I had a chance to even dip my toes in.
Also, when did I lie about meta? I said you voted heb
as
scum because it was the first post that came across as scummy to me. I never mentioned anything about meta. I don't where you pulled that from.
In post 220, BuJaber wrote: In post 218, BrightEyedFish wrote: In post 216, Reasonably Rational wrote:
So no, you were not acting in RVS with that vote, and it *will* be considered as a significant vote where you failed to provide sufficient reasoning, and apparently lied about your experience with the meta of our slots.
-Cerb
I was still in RVS because I had just started reading the thread. I can't help it you got a 7 hour head start on me and used up your RVS mentality before I had a chance to even dip my toes in.
Also, when did I lie about meta? I said you voted heb
as
scum because it was the first post that came across as scummy to me. I never mentioned anything about meta. I don't where you pulled that from.
Your wording... "you did x as scum" implies that you saw them do x previously in a game where they were scum.
What Bujaber said. Perhaps this is purely a situation where you phrased things poorly and created unintended implications, but it certainly read as though you were someone who had experience with us and had previously seen us use RNG to determine who scum was on D1, as scum.
-Cerb
