↑ Quilford wrote:Quote wall incoming; I haven't felt this confident in a read in a while.
Okay so I took a cursory glance over the thread whilst breakfasting this morning and vaguely noted Captain Ajax/Trojan Horse's "suspicion" of me. Get home, read up and it turns out he's scum. Jackpot.
↑ Captain Ajax wrote:Vote: Reckoner
Obligatory, given what happened the last time we played together.
Hito: let's keep the judging groups secret. Not sure if it makes a difference, but the less the scum knows, the better.
First post links a previous game where Reck won as mafia over CA/TH, I regard this as a form of buddying. Consciously or not (and I don't think this makes a difference to his proposed alignment), by posting a link to that game and basing a vote off of it, CA/TH is flattering Reck.
OK. I don't think there's any indication that 'Voting X because he pwned me as scum' as a random vote shows any intention to buddy, conscious or unconscious. In fact, on page one it's probably one of the better things to use to justify a random vote.
Quilford wrote:This content is worthless, methinks. A clarification on his identity is harmless enough, but an ineffectual question (which I will nevertheless answer below) and a defence of Hito both strike me the wrong way. Mainly because they really remind me of how I play scum. The question is the perfect one for scum to either mount an attack off of or let drop quietly, depending on the response. The use of 'awfully' particularly reinforces this idea. If he does decide to press the point, players assume that he meant it seriously; if he lets it drop, players assume it was just a bit of harmless hyperbole. I don't like it.
I don't think that asking people who've played with those two players for meta on whether they're acting normally or weirdly is worthless. It's not the worst point in the world, because I think it would have been more town to look for it yourself, but I don't really think it's good either. MOI argued that this looked like scum who were 'uncomfortable with easy town reads.' Again, I just see it as 'Player who sees something odd and is curious about it.' Curiosity, in general, is pro-town.
Quilford wrote: also really don't like the defence of Hito. As I'm sure everyone's aware, scum LOVE to defend -- it gives them yummy brownie points from their defendant and to other players it makes them look like they're doing something.
This is the point of Quilford's which I called one of the worst arguments I've ever seen, which MOI dismissed as fluff. To whit, I don't believe scum 'LOVE' to defend for a second. The clear implication of Quilford's argument is that defending is inherently scummy, and that's just not true. This is how games get rolling - one player attacks another, a third defends the original attacker, another supports the attack - it's what creates issues-based discussion. It's completely absurd to assert that the scum are more often on the defending side. When that's the one thing of content going on, and you disagree with the attack, would it be better to just ignore it and continue with RVS stuff? Of course not. Taking a stand at all is moderately pro-town.
Quilford wrote:Except, DeasVail wasn't referencing "too townie" scum at all.
Here, I think Quilford is at best showing confirmation bias. If you read what Ajax actually wrote, it's clear he's meaning 'too townie' in the sense of 'Makes long posts, appears to be trying to help the town' kind of way, rather than literally saying that Hitogoroshi looks incredibly town and that that makes him suspicious. If I can snip out one particularly pertinent bit:
Quilford wrote:He[Ajax]also brings up irrelevant anecdotal evidence (why mention the player's name if you're not going to even link the game) that shows (as I have demonstrated) that he has failed to comprehend DeasVail's post
1. Lack of comprehension isn't scummy.
2. Quilford is basically complaining about the manner in which CA expresses himself. If you understand what Ajax is saying by 'Too Townie' and have played with Vollkan before, this comparison makes complete sense. Vollkan makes long posts with what seems like decent logic, which can lead to people assuming he's town because he appears to be making 'good' arguments and putting a lot of effort in.
3. It isn't scummy to use 'Too townie' wrong.
The last point Quilford raised (appealing to meta) is decent, since I always find it preferable for players to defend their actions by arguing why they're good for town rather than using meta, but let's face it, everyone uses meta defences when they're called out on things they think are their normal play.
Quilford's unvoting argument seems to me to be largely a matter of playstyle.
ALL THAT SAID:
I am kind of uncomfortable with CA's TheAm vote.
@Captain Ajax
, what exactly was scummy about TheAmatuer by 194 that wasn't scummy about him earlier? Why did you call out Gaoth for lurking, and then in the very next post condemn the lurkerwagon on him? What for you is the difference between the 'too easy' Gaoth wagon, and the Amatuer wagon you support? (Incidentally: I'm not saying there isn't a difference).
