Open 825 - PYP X/Y: HoS_S [game over!]

[Miss Midnight]

As I was saying earlier, it feels lazy and devoid of any further thought.

I mean he specifically referenced the existence of further thought... why not ask about his other reasons, instead of assuming he has none?

This isn't 20 questions, or an interview. I agree that it's good to ask people questions to actually see what they think when sorting them. But what someone doesn't post is just as much evidence for their alignment as what they do post. Sometimes, it's actually a lot more evidence.

[Miss Midnight]

Primarily I think that that post is scummy for the way that it's phrased, and the lack of corresponding evidence.

You think that townies are more likely to give explanations for their reads unprompted? That's, uh, a take I guess.

(It's not a crazy thing to think, but I would have to believe that it's mostly personality indicative.)

Let me be clear. When I say "corresponding evidence", I'm not talking about an explanation paired with the vote. I'm talking about the rest of the content in his ISO corresponding to what he's saying in that specific post.

[House]

I'm not a fan of this statement.

Not that i disagree about not needing an ironclad case on d1, just that the way it's put across as an, "any lim'll do" kinda vibe.

You can disagree with it for sure, but it's probably game-philosophy indicative and not alignment indicative. I say this because this seems consistent with how Titus normally thinks (though I don't remember her saying this specifically), and it also happens to be my philosophy.

Fair point.

[House]

As I was saying earlier, it feels lazy and devoid of any further thought.

I mean he specifically referenced the existence of further thought... why not ask about his other reasons, instead of assuming he has none?

This isn't 20 questions, or an interview. I agree that it's good to ask people questions to actually see what they think when sorting them. But what someone doesn't post is just as much evidence for their alignment as what they do post. Sometimes, it's actually a lot more evidence.

Ew.

This post gives me the icks.

[Something_Smart]

Let me be clear. When I say "corresponding evidence", I'm not talking about an explanation paired with the vote. I'm talking about the rest of the content in his ISO corresponding to what he's saying in that specific post.

Okay? So what, he's scummy for putting a vote down without having explained the read ahead of time? Why is he more likely to do that as scum than town? Don't scum usually go to greater lengths to appear to have a consistent progression?

[Harvey and Haley]

He may have been. Given the circumstances, that alone is not scum indicative.

Sure.
Enchant also goes from "Not much" (344) to "Idk" (1009) to "Why not?" (1037)
Manatee goes from "Don't wanna weaken the wagon" (328) to "Manatee's handling of her wagon seems towny" (344) to "TR starting to wane" (1128).
Neither of these trajectories look any impressive either.

As I was saying earlier, it feels lazy and devoid of any further thought.

I mean he specifically referenced the existence of further thought... why not ask about his other reasons, instead of assuming he has none?

And I acknowledge that in my post. Two things: first, in that sentence, I meant thought regarding other players' suspicions on me; second, I knew he had other reasons for suspecting me - as I pointed out, my problem is that he didn't express them in that post, that addition alone, from his PoV could have strengthened the attack. Instead it just looks like he's lazily voteparking after seeing other people suspect me.

-Harvey

[House]

He may have been. Given the circumstances, that alone is not scum indicative.

Sure.
Enchant also goes from "Not much" (344) to "Idk" (1009) to "Why not?" (1037)
Manatee goes from "Don't wanna weaken the wagon" (328) to "Manatee's handling of her wagon seems towny" (344) to "TR starting to wane" (1128).
Neither of these trajectories look any impressive either.

Enchant read it's waffle-ish, but given that it's d1, that is whatevs.

I truly loathe his progression on Manatee, though. That has bothered me for a long time.

[Miss Midnight]

As I was saying earlier, it feels lazy and devoid of any further thought.

I mean he specifically referenced the existence of further thought... why not ask about his other reasons, instead of assuming he has none?

This isn't 20 questions, or an interview. I agree that it's good to ask people questions to actually see what they think when sorting them. But what someone doesn't post is just as much evidence for their alignment as what they do post. Sometimes, it's actually a lot more evidence.

Ew.

This post gives me the icks.

The basic point is undeniable. You probably agree with me. Obviously it's a good thing to ask people to elaborate on their thoughts. If you're expecting some behavior or content from someone as town and they don't display it, that's a reason to scumread someone. Lack of content is as much evidence as some content is. I don't think any of this is controversial, or contradictory.

Let me be clear. When I say "corresponding evidence", I'm not talking about an explanation paired with the vote. I'm talking about the rest of the content in his ISO corresponding to what he's saying in that specific post.

Okay? So what, he's scummy for putting a vote down without having explained the read ahead of time? Why is he more likely to do that as scum than town? Don't scum usually go to greater lengths to appear to have a consistent progression?

You seem to be making this about "explanations" for some reason. I'm not sure why. You've brought it up twice. It's not about explanations, as I just said. It's about the content missing from his ISO that I would expect, assuming the read on HH were real. Again, that's what I mean by "corresponding evidence".

[Harvey and Haley]

Enchant read it's waffle-ish, but given that it's d1, that is whatevs.

Doesn't it seem like a pattern of him simply piling on popular wagons?
See people suspecting H+H -> Vote them
See people wagoning Enchant -> "idk" progresses to "why not" and then "probably"
See people start to wagon Miss Midnight -> "ngl I feel like miss midnight might be scum"

-Harvey

[Miss Midnight]

Pardon me if I sound offended S_S, but for the level of charitability you seem willing to display in 1197, posts like 1198 and 1204 seem to have a remarkably uncharitable tone. Do you think that I'm scum?

[House]

As I was saying earlier, it feels lazy and devoid of any further thought.

I mean he specifically referenced the existence of further thought... why not ask about his other reasons, instead of assuming he has none?

This isn't 20 questions, or an interview. I agree that it's good to ask people questions to actually see what they think when sorting them. But what someone doesn't post is just as much evidence for their alignment as what they do post. Sometimes, it's actually a lot more evidence.

Ew.

This post gives me the icks.

The basic point is undeniable. You probably agree with me. Obviously it's a good thing to ask people to elaborate on their thoughts. If you're expecting some behavior or content from someone as town and they don't display it, that's a reason to scumread someone. Lack of content is as much evidence as some content is. I don't think any of this is controversial, or contradictory.

The way you put it across makes it sound like it's acceptable to just scumread someone because they're not being transparent with their thought processes, and sometimes there is a protown reason for that.

Seeking clarity is always ideal. A person's words should absolve or condemn them, not their lack of words.

Without their stated opinions/thoughts/beliefs/etc, we're only projecting what we want to believe to be true, and that is not protown.

[Harvey and Haley]

Neat
Also while I kinda jumped at shadows on interpreting what the RQS was doing I think Flea is right that it was pointless filler

Literally the only thing I’ve seen come of it was a shitty “gotcha” scumread on me which feels very easy to fake as scum

Miss Midnight: I'll just point out that this^ seemed to have been important part of his reasoning.
(And this reasoning also sucks, the 'gotcha' seems pretty valid, and easy to fake as scum doesn't imply scum indicative)

-Harvey

[Miss Midnight]

The way you put it across makes it sound like it's acceptable to just scumread someone because they're not being transparent with their thought processes, and sometimes there is a protown reason for that.

There's a difference between not being transparent and not producing content because you're scum. That's the key distinction to keep in mind.

[House]

Enchant read it's waffle-ish, but given that it's d1, that is whatevs.

Doesn't it seem like a pattern of him simply piling on popular wagons?
See people suspecting H+H -> Vote them
See people wagoning Enchant -> "idk" progresses to "why not" and then "probably"
See people start to wagon Miss Midnight -> "ngl I feel like miss midnight might be scum"

-Harvey

Researching the validity of this post will require more time and brainpower than i have to dedicate to it, tonight.

I have to work early in the am, so this bit will have to wait.

[House]

The way you put it across makes it sound like it's acceptable to just scumread someone because they're not being transparent with their thought processes, and sometimes there is a protown reason for that.

There's a difference between not being transparent and not producing content because you're scum. That's the key distinction to keep in mind.

Seeking clarity is always ideal. A person's words should absolve or condemn them, not their lack of words.

Without their stated opinions/thoughts/beliefs/etc, we're only projecting what we want to believe to be true, and that is not protown.

There's the rest of that quote, since you seem to have missed it.

If the player is asked & refuses to answer, that refusal is still content on which to base an opinion. Not even asking and assuming the worst, however, is suboptimal okay at the most generous level (and yes, it's something i do sometimes... but recognizing weaknesses is all part of self-improvement).

[Something_Smart]

You seem to be making this about "explanations" for some reason. I'm not sure why. You've brought it up twice. It's not about explanations, as I just said. It's about the content missing from his ISO that I would expect, assuming the read on HH were real. Again, that's what I mean by "corresponding evidence".

I'm just misunderstanding what you're getting at, I guess. You can't know what's in Gamma's head, you can only know what he's said. So you can't have an issue with what he has or hasn't

thought

, only what he has or hasn't

explained

.

[House]

The way you put it across makes it sound like it's acceptable to just scumread someone because they're not being transparent with their thought processes, and sometimes there is a protown reason for that.

There's a difference between not being transparent and not producing content because you're scum. That's the key distinction to keep in mind.

Seeking clarity is always ideal. A person's words should absolve or condemn them, not their lack of words.

Without their stated opinions/thoughts/beliefs/etc, we're only projecting what we want to believe to be true, and that is not protown.

There's the rest of that quote, since you seem to have missed it.

If the player is asked & refuses to answer, that refusal is still content on which to base an opinion. Not even asking and assuming the worst, however, is suboptimal play* at the most generous level (and yes, it's something i do sometimes... but recognizing weaknesses is all part of self-improvement).

Edit.

[Something_Smart]

Pardon me if I sound offended S_S, but for the level of charitability you seem willing to display in 1197, posts like 1198 and 1204 seem to have a remarkably uncharitable tone. Do you think that I'm scum?

I don't see what's uncharitable about 1204, 1198 I'll give you is uncharitable, but I thought I had (finally) understood you correctly. I don't think you're scum.

[House]

*twitch*

[Cat Scratch Fever]

My unsolicited opinion is- I thought it was a bit odd that out of the two people voting for you, you called out Gamma for having a limited variety of interactions lol. I'm curious to hear what your thoughts on Flea are, since the bulk of their interactions have been at or about you.

Good observation. I have experience playing with Gamma and his lack of overall nuance and meaningful interaction strike me as concerning, and (IIRC) no experience with Flea.

Flea's entire attack also seems genuine

, even if it's incorrect; and without a baseline I don't find it particularly suspicious in a vacuum. Do

you

make something out of Flea's hyperfocus on me?


-Harvey

Genuine as in fae believes in it or fae has made some valid points?

With respect to my opinion on Flea, I'm thinking the tunneling could be chalked up to playstyle. I've been biding my time on this, but I suppose at nearly 50 pages into the game, now is the time to do some cursory legwork and read some of faer past games. Before doing my metacheck, I'd say lean town - posts like 693 strike me as more of post town would make over a scumpost trying to push a miselim. But this read is not without its caveats; specifically, why has fae singled you out? The reasons she's scumreading you for doesn't seem particularly unique to you. I myself have asked a few questions that I have not bothered to follow up on in the thread, but fae seems to have zeroed in on your behavior. I suppose 912 answers some of it but not really in a way that I can grok yet.

I think your tempered reaction is more interesting. It kind of seems like you're continually trying to disengage and are content with letting fae continue this tunnel. You never seemed the type to shy away from an argument in the past, especially when it comes to arguing your own alignment. If you're townreading fae (or at least, not scumreading), why not try to get them to focus elsewhere so they don't loltunnel you all day?

[Cat Scratch Fever]

Primarily I think that that post is scummy for the way that it's phrased, and the lack of corresponding evidence.

You think that townies are more likely to give explanations for their reads unprompted? That's, uh, a take I guess.

(It's not a crazy thing to think, but I would have to believe that it's mostly personality indicative.)

Let me be clear. When I say "corresponding evidence", I'm not talking about an explanation paired with the vote. I'm talking about the rest of the content in his ISO corresponding to what he's saying in that specific post.

What do you think of my vote on you? Or the worst's? Are those materially different from Gamma's vote?

[Auro]

As in fae believes in it. I said I think it's all incorrect anyway, no?

I've noted before that while I'd enjoy walling against Flea's attack, I think it's inefficient (730). I doubt that longer posts justifying my own play would cause fae to get out of the tunnel. I'm not too bothered by it because I lightly townread them anyway, and I think fae is beginning to shift focus anyway (look at recent engagement re: Gamma Emerald).

-Harvey

[Harvey and Haley]

As in fae believes in it. I said I think it's all incorrect anyway, no?

I've noted before that while I'd enjoy walling against Flea's attack, I think it's inefficient (730). I doubt that longer posts justifying my own play would cause fae to get out of the tunnel. I'm not too bothered by it because I lightly townread them anyway, and I think fae is beginning to shift focus anyway (look at recent engagement re: Gamma Emerald).

-Harvey

Whoops.

[Cat Scratch Fever]

I'm not saying you have to wall (in fact, please don't), but I guess I expected you to distill it down to a couple of points and nip it in the bud or something.

[Cat Scratch Fever]

Although looking back, I missed that post where you asked for specific posts to respond to. I'm not sure if that changes how weird I find this entire interaction.