In post 75, Shadi1337 wrote:
In post 74, Klazam wrote:
If you were actually town, you'd have NOT felt the need to add that promise to remove your vote. In my experience, your promise feels solidly like fencesitting, where you say "Oh, i want to vote, but don't worry, it means nothing." That's a scum mindset to me.
Of course I feel the need, to just place a vote in open like that does NOT seem suspicious to you? Are we even playing the same game? Of course you try to explain why you place a vote and not necessarily after being questioned (which risks a band-wagon on you and that's not always easy to break).
In post 74, Klazam wrote:
I'd have excepted a townie to defend themselves AFTER the fact, when questioned about it. Instead you anticipate the questioning-meaning you already see it as suspicious- and preemptively defend, neutering the purpose of your vote in the first place. That's a scum mindset to me.
Being proactive is not wrong, if people see that vote being scummy then fine, but expecting to defend the vote after or scum = the most wrong ideology/analysis I've heard so far in this game.
In post 74, Klazam wrote:
OMGUS votes in RVS IS NOT SCUMMY. OMGUS votes where you then say "oh, don't worry, this vote means nothing." IS SCUMMY.
Nonsensical jumble of words, do rephrase although I do not think that'll help as it's pretty invalid.
"over-explaining" when I only explained each thing once, unless questioned.
1) explaining your vote is fine, but what I'm taking issue with is your preemptive defense - the part guaranteeing the removal of your vote. That is the suspicious part, cause: see point 2.
2) Actually, it's you who is wrong: in your case, being proactive is scummy, because in the town mindset, you would never had felt the need to insert that sentence about removal of the vote. the fact you did tells me you were concerned about being suspected on basis of your vote, so you put it in to alleviate all suspicions, something that town wouldn't have been concerned about in the first place.
3) rephrasing: omgus (what you call retitlation vote) in RVS is pretty normal, and hence not scummy, but what you did- place an omgus vote, and say, "this vote will not exist in case of anything happening" is scummy because you hedge your bets, and later on in the game if it turns out the guy who you voted for is town, you can say "oh, my vote wasn't real." that's called fence sitting.
4) I withdraw that statement, now that I realize you may not have known the term omgus. you seemed to draw that explanation out a bit long, but fine.
now, on to more scumminess from this guy:
In post 78, Shadi1337 wrote:^
Decent analysis I'd say
; however, wrong and I will rub it in your face when you realise it's wrong.
buddying with complimenting on what? the possibility of cross voting? I fail to see what "analysis" that is.
more compliments! yay, buddybuddy
------
In post 81, Lazurial wrote:Klazam, what do you have to say about the rest of the town (those present, at least, seeing as how inactive a group we seem to have)?
You came in hard and fast on Shadi and haven't said a thing about anyone else.
I don't see anything from the rest of the town, to push me either one way or the other. Shadi stands out the most to me.
(as an aside, I'm of the opinion scum lists this early in the game is worthless due to the lack of information)
(noted)
