Then act like it. You've given me very little evidence you aren't just coasting this game.In post 1633, MURDERCAT wrote:No I'm townIn post 1628, mastina wrote:MURDERCAT is near the top of the charts for slots active lurking in a scum-indicative way.
I must've missed this. Do you have a quote where he claims he's never searched his name in a thread before? Edit: Never mind, he said so in 743. Still, I think you should ask the question as to how exactly does this benefit scum!Battle Mage? Like sure, there's plenty of reasons for scum!Battle Mage to do it, but you should weight it against the equally plentiful reasons for town!Battle Mage to do it.In post 1634, mastina wrote:Battle Mage himself admitted it's something he's never done before--and for good reason, because it is very much not in character with his towngame whatsoever.
I think we kinda agree on the premises here, but I would say I'm exercising more caution when reading Creature because his meta change has made him much harder to read. That is to say, yes, he's generally less invested as scum, but it's not a difference I think is significant enough to point to him likely being scum this game.In post 1636, mastina wrote:And which alignment is Creature more likely to be when he's not invested in the game's outcome?
I realize his townplay has atrophied and his scumplay has improved.
But I would still expect the alignment he cares less as, to be scum.
(Referencing Not Known 15's 1446.) I think this is probably a good observation. I cannot say as to its accuracy as I lack the needed experience with both heads of Double. As a side comment not super related to this post, I think Not Known's posting has been pretty lackluster in general, but I cannot decide whether that's because he's scum, because he's overwhelmed by the thread pace, or something else.In post 1636, mastina wrote:I consider this lazy-at-best, scum-at-worst considering that Norwegian is far from spammy; the spammy posts come from Alisae, who is very much not scum for that trait. (If anything, the opposite.)
There's very little fluff in my ISO. In fact,In post 1642, Toogeloo wrote:Ircher's fluff and IioA within the walls of quotes don't really strike me as productive town posting and are more of a post quota filling thing.
@Toogeloo
, I would like you to quote what you think is fluffy about my ISO. As to the IIoA assertion, you may be right to an extent, but I don't think simply throwing out buzzwords helps your case on me. Last note: I think you are in part scumreading my style of posting this game, so I will reiterate that this quote wall style is quite common for me, and you can check my style here to other games I have listed on my wiki.I 100% agree with this.In post 1642, Toogeloo wrote:While you/Pooky are worth regarding, you and your masonry are not infallible, and it's important that we disregard your advice from time to time, and also equally important that we don't hinge the entire game on your say so.
It does provide a certain degree of focus. I think my biggest issue with it was that it was given too soon. Waiting til the midpoint of the day would have been better as there would be more to go off of and everyone would have had a reasonable chance to participate.In post 1644, Double the Trouble wrote:But it does allow focus. Toogelo. And considering how most players seemed disinterested until now, and mainly posting fluff. It’s a good thing that Pooky alerted us to the issue at hand, which is solving. So i’m not seeing anything bad from this, even if our slot was put in there.
I think you can loosely follow along with a thread without necessarily reading it. It is simple enough to scan the current page for votes and stuff in bold, so I wouldn't say the notification is useless.In post 1645, mastina wrote:Asking for a heads up if at L-1, proving that you're reading the thread because what good would this notification do for you if you weren't? (this is important enough of something that I'm going to requote that post to point it out since I missed this implication the first time).
Bad reads are rather subjective based on your own perspective and meta experience. I don't think having contrary reads is by itself an indication of scum. (That being said, I think many of the reads Battle Mage presented were on the thin side, so you may still have a point nonetheless.)In post 1645, mastina wrote:So to reiterate.
Bad reads on 2-5 slots, where you do take back the bad read on one but leave the bad reads on the others.
Good reads on 4, later 5, slots.
Personally, I'm trying to give him the benefit of the doubt. It's a large game, and the beginning of the game has a rather high noise ratio. Having reads on only half the slots in the game after 17 pages is a bit on the low end, but it doesn't seem too unreasonable (to come from town), especially if Battle Mage skimmed to some extent. As to being lazy, I do think I agree with that take, but laziness is not really a scum indicator. (It may be for some people, but I reckon in the vast majority of cases, it isn't.)In post 1645, mastina wrote:Why are people thinking this is in any way Battle Mage as town?
He's being lazy.
This is a valid point and probably the most conclusive of your points in your scum!Battle Mage case.In post 1646, mastina wrote:This post is indicative that Battle Mage is aware that Pooky made a pool of 4 players to eliminate within, containing both Ircher and Double the Trouble. It's a case of TMI given his stated narrative.
Fair, even if I don't necessarily agree. I agree that Creature likes to get his post count high etc., but I do think he also gets annoyed pretty easily by those kinds of things when others do it.In post 1661, mastina wrote:Both of these have much the same answer: different players with different playstyles.
I would expect Dunnstral to make the post he did and it not be a scum indicator for him.
I would expect Creature to be hard-disagreeing with Dunnstral if he were town especially given he himself is among the slots that were guilty of the thing Dunnstral was complaining about.
I said it was an incredibly bad take from Creature--not an incredibly bad take in general.
In post 1680, MURDERCAT wrote:People trying to get info out of me without engaging me are scummyIn post 1675, Ircher wrote:There's like zero reason for you not to share your reads. Stuff like this make me think you are scum, Murder.
This kinda makes me think Bell and MURDERCAT are linked. I'm pretty sure this isn't the first nor the last time that Bell has implicitly defended MURDERCAT like this. (Defend is perhaps not he best word to use here.)In post 1681, Bell wrote:^
Grand Idea GPick is probably a better comparison, but I was more on-top of the game for that one. Jigsaw is quite a bit different because I replaced into a 100+ page game and decided it wasn't worth reading back through extensively.In post 1693, Solstice wrote:[It's maybe slightly worth noting Ircher didn't post like this (with the big quote stripes) in my last game with him, Jigsaw mafia -- he didn't effort too much there. Maybe cause he was a replacement though, and im not familiar with how he plays as scum anyway]
This is a fair point. I will note I forgot about the initial VT claim, so that wasn't factored in at the time. Aside from that, as I said earlier, I'm loosely following the thread, and I think at one point when I was looking at the active page, I didn't like one of your takes, so that's where the twinge came from. Some of your more recent takes have been better, so I'm gonna change my read to a "maybe town" read on your slot.In post 1695, Toogeloo wrote:Expand on your reason for the read change, if you will.
To the bottom of page 68.
