Walls of reads. The man could write a fucking short story in one of those posts.
The guy hates me already. Lol.
↑ kwll wrote:paladin
Why do you think the MP5 quest is flawed? I actually find it insightful on what people are looking for in scum. Some people are biased by either how they perceive scum or how they have seen scum act in other games and defeated them. I did play one game where a guy was jumping on people who acted similar to scum who bested him in his last match.
So yes its WIFOM question but also allows to glimpse at the bias people will be using on their reads.
I thinking of awarding you Scum pts for that answer on it. But maybe you have town reason for it?
↑ serrapaladin wrote:SAD: Why do you like Bitmap's aggression?
↑ serrapaladin wrote:Do you think it makes him look more towny than if he had made the same points in a different manner?
But the question is, did you find this scummy or not?↑ serrapaladin wrote:...
because people could very much be Contributing, but still be Under Suspicion. When MP5 now asks which of these three groups is most likely to contain scum, there is no possible answer, that couldn't be construed as scummy.
I agree with Bitmap's point, that scum could be anywhere from 'overly aggressive' to 'lurking,' and that judging people on that basis is WIFOM. However MP5's formulation, which he allegedly placed to trick people, is wrong.
Your suspicion of awest is based on the assumption that spawn is scum.↑ kwll wrote:awest.
my second top scum read.
Your post makes you look like your bussing your partner there spawn a little much.
Like to see your response to it. I can quote later if need be.
Most of your post have been about spawn so not much to say.
gotta make lunch and head to the grocery store. Will finish my reads off then.
Okay tunneled is a strong word.↑ kwll wrote:I am freaking curious. You believe I tunneled on Spawn? He was the only acting very very suspicious at the time. and the first to go into content. I wanted to see how he would do when being questioned. Especially when one acts defensive. Seeming how you ignored that info when I was talking to him puts scum pts on you. you are my third Scum read.
(P.S.) I am somewhat a defensive player. You will note that in many of my games.
↑ Ser Arthur Dayne wrote:4) How do you react to people attacking you?
Yes I agree that this shouldn't be done. Newbies tend to do this because they don't know this is a flawed way of scum-hunting↑ Ser Arthur Dayne wrote:In post 156, kwll wrote:awest.
my second top scum read.
Your post makes you look like your bussing your partner there spawn a little much.
No no no. You don’t make connections before you have a flip. Otherwise you’ll be way down confirmation bias.
It also looks like suspicious, because if Spawn were to flip scum, you’ll definitely be looking suspicious because you tried to make connections and ties with a known scum (your scumbuddy) with a townie, so as to set up mislynches (a lynch that doesn't hit a scum).
Though I know that placing scum in a category is WIFOM, actually I didn't understand this part Can you rephrase it?
↑ Nekoko wrote:In post 204, serrapaladin wrote:
...
because people could very much be Contributing, but still be Under Suspicion. When MP5 now asks which of these three groups is most likely to contain scum, there is no possible answer, that couldn't be construed as scummy.
I agree with Bitmap's point, that scum could be anywhere from 'overly aggressive' to 'lurking,' and that judging people on that basis is WIFOM. However MP5's formulation, which he allegedly placed to trick people, is wrong.
But the question is, did you find this scummy or not?