In post 113, midwaybear wrote: In post 103, Dunnstral wrote: In post 102, midwaybear wrote:I was thinking your strong reaction was based on him quickhammering/almost quickhammering me because he does that a lot as scum.
You acknowledging this makes your earlier arguing look weird
So what are you going to do about it? For the record, I am not scumreading you right now. I think you should address Blair's point though. What you did could be perceived as scummy self consciousness.
Translation: If you dare fking scumread me, I'm going to OMGUS the living shit out of you. Now don't look at me!
In post 113, midwaybear wrote:
In post 104, Battle Mage wrote:In any case, by your own admission, this wasn't an important topic anyway, so is your answer being lost a particularly bad thing?
I agree that me not answering is not very important, but I was just answering your question.
I'm not sure how this stacks up against your original attack on me for answering the question for you, where you suggested you were very worried about your answer being lost. Please can you remind me again why you're voting for me?
Why are you lying about this?
In post 113, midwaybear wrote:
In post 104, Battle Mage wrote:It was, from my perspective, a pointless line of questioning, and I wanted to nip it in the bud. To continue to pretend something is AI when it isn't, and wilfully waste time talking about inconsequentials, are more typical scum behaviours.
This is fair and may be an accurate representation of what I did.
In post 104, Battle Mage wrote:Can you explain why that would be scum-indicative here when you know I have done it as town elsewhere?
I don't remember you doing it in our previous game, but I believe you because it's risky to lie about it.
Good answers.
In post 113, midwaybear wrote:
In post 104, Battle Mage wrote:A less generous intepretation would be that you are not appraising me in good faith, and perceive me as an easy target, against whom you can pursue a lazy ill-considered argument.
I do not think you are an easy target and it follows that I would need better arguments to launch you.
On reflection, I believe you don't think I'm an easy target. But if you feel that you need strong arguments to elim me, why are you tickling me with nonsense? Reaction testing?
In post 113, midwaybear wrote:
In post 106, Battle Mage wrote:Why did you not ask, either originally, or subsequently when you realised your mistake, why Blair didn't respond to Innocentvillager's fake hammer? If you thought her reaction to Dunnstral was an over-reaction, did you not also think that her failure to acknowledge innocentvillager was an under-reaction? Surprised you didn't comment on this.
I'm not really sure about this. You have a good point here. I think I remembered Dunnstral more because he also thought Blair's reaction was "over the top".
Maybe she didn't care because she knew it was fake.
Isn't this you doing exactly what you accused me of? Answering a question for Blair. Only in this case, it's a relevant question, and rather than even seek to ask her, you simply give a justification for her.
Ok, we'll see.
In post 113, midwaybear wrote:
In post 110, Battle Mage wrote:This feels like an unusually serious line to take so early, although some players are just like this. This isn't consistent however...
Is this scummy or what?
Is it? Are you asking for a town view before you commit your own? Good to have an explanation on this.
As you know, I have a bit of form using this approach - you don't care for my opinion though? Even though you were quick to ask Mafia Goon for his view on the same earlier?
In post 113, midwaybear wrote:
In post 110, Battle Mage wrote:Very jokey, and not taking the bait of being friendly - which I think is slightly scum-indicative, as town are often more liberal with their allegiances.
Wouldn't it be the opposite where scum would be more inclined to buddy up?
Not in my experience, no. Scum tend to get overly nervous about being buddied - maybe too much attention, maybe they worry it's a PR crumbing, or most likely they see it as an easy route to attack someone. Town on the other hand, often try and form townblocs, and when successful these can be very effective. And fundamentally town have less to lose from doing so, because they arent so worried about how people perceive them.
In post 113, midwaybear wrote:
In post 110, Battle Mage wrote:In the last game I played with Midway, this same approach was used, and the same conversation ensued about why it was done.
Last game I played with you I was town.
...I know. Your alignment in that game isn't relevant, my point was that you had already asked the same question about the exact same thing in another game, and so you asking the question here must not be genuine, as
you already know the answer.
In post 113, midwaybear wrote:
In post 110, Battle Mage wrote:I've already covered the substance of this in some detail, but the vote for me here is really weak, and is likely driven by a perceived self-conciousness about posting frequently but not voting since an original random vote. Probably about the time scum might consider this at risk of looking conspicuous. Midway needs to make another vote and wants to make it sound serious so he looks like he is progressing the game. More marks for presentation than substance.
Regarding needing to make a serious vote, I feel like we were still in the early joking stage of the game. We weren't really transitioning to the more serious part, so I disagree that scum me would be inclined to do so at that time.
Are you claiming your vote on me is an intentional joke? Otherwise, I don't think you can sustain that reasoning, as it would be self-evident that you felt we were transitioning to a more serious part of the game.
In post 113, midwaybear wrote:
Not really sure what to make of Battle Mage yet. Seems quite serious which is different but NAI.
Can you set out your assessment of me, maybe using 2 lists "town" and "scum" and listing points under each?