Transcend, what was the intention or point you were trying to made when you wrote this post?In post 18, Transcend wrote:iirc, they got nominated for a scummy by titus b/c they played so well
I like this.As good a vote as any at this stage. I do think overthinking anyone at this stage is more likely to do harm than good. Best to keep our minds open to everyone.
Do you think there was scum motivation behind mentioning that I had received my first vote?In post 32, WeCanSimplyBeOurselves wrote:Nah I'm not confused about anything they said per say... it's mainly more that I dunno why they mentionedabouttheir last game... like, as a general rule I think it's best to not talk about past games without a good reason.
To alert everyone she's a good scum.In post 28, Accountant wrote:Transcend, what was the intention or point you were trying to made when you wrote this post?In post 18, Transcend wrote:iirc, they got nominated for a scummy by titus b/c they played so well
@WeCanSimplyBeOurselves: What do you think about Morning Tweet? Is she someone to be extra paranoid about because she's apparently a really good scum player who got nominated for a scummy on her first game? Or do you think we should treat her like any other player?
I have no idea. Probably not. The chances are that anyone in particular is town because the majority as town.In post 33, Morning Tweet wrote:Do you think there was scum motivation behind mentioning that I had received my first vote?In post 32, WeCanSimplyBeOurselves wrote:Nah I'm not confused about anything they said per say... it's mainly more that I dunno why they mentionedabouttheir last game... like, as a general rule I think it's best to not talk about past games without a good reason.
If she's town alerting everyone that if she were scum she'd be good at being scum doesn't benefit town.In post 34, Transcend wrote:To alert everyone she's a good scum.In post 28, Accountant wrote:Transcend, what was the intention or point you were trying to made when you wrote this post?In post 18, Transcend wrote:iirc, they got nominated for a scummy by titus b/c they played so well
@WeCanSimplyBeOurselves: What do you think about Morning Tweet? Is she someone to be extra paranoid about because she's apparently a really good scum player who got nominated for a scummy on her first game? Or do you think we should treat her like any other player?
I think there's a pill for that.
Mafia is a game about understanding and analyzing people. The aim of the game is to look at someone's posting and reverse-engineer it to figure out what sort of person they are like. From there, we can decide if they would be more likely to act like this as town or scum.Nah I'm not confused about anything they said per say... it's mainly more that I dunno why they mentioned about their last game... like, as a general rule I think it's best to not talk about past games without a good reason.
This post makes two assumptions:
What makes you think Char is probably scum? He's only made two posts, both in the RVS. He has a questionable grasp on evolution, but other than that, he hasn't been any more off-topic or diversionary than anyone else.
I have an issue with this. You are presumably scumreading Charloux off the basis of her two posts(and I think I have an inkling about why). However, you posted after them without any mention of Charloux at all. This signals to me that you read the posts but didn't find them significant. In fact, you didn't mention any reads at all.
I'd love to.In post 44, Accountant wrote:This post makes two assumptions:
What makes you think Char is probably scum? He's only made two posts, both in the RVS. He has a questionable grasp on evolution, but other than that, he hasn't been any more off-topic or diversionary than anyone else.
1) That an RVS post can't be indicative of scumminess.
2) That Transcend's reason for scumreading Charloux is due to Charloux being off-topic or diversionary.
Is it possible to explain why you made these assumptions, and the reasoning behind them?
yeah i made all my reads after rereading, i didn't try to alignment read anyone until now.In post 45, Accountant wrote:I have an issue with this. You are presumably scumreading Charloux off the basis of her two posts(and I think I have an inkling about why). However, you posted after them without any mention of Charloux at all. This signals to me that you read the posts but didn't find them significant. In fact, you didn't mention any reads at all.
However, after a short break in posting, you came back and told us that so-and-so were town, and Charloux were scum. This signals to me that you didnotpick this up as a gut read on a skim, but rather on a re-read.
Can you explain this discrepancy?
I agree that looking at someone's previous play is a good way to do that... but when it's coming directly from the player themselves and all we have is their word to go by then we can only really trust them if they already happen to be town--which kind of makes it redundantly NAI.In post 42, Accountant wrote: Mafia is a game about understanding and analyzing people. The aim of the game is to look at someone's posting and reverse-engineer it to figure out what sort of person they are like. From there, we can decide if they would be more likely to act like this as town or scum.
One good source of information about a person is their past games, so it makes sense to look at someone's previous play to get a better understanding of them as a person, with the knowledge of what their alignment was that game. While we should be careful to avoid slavishly relying on only that information, there's no doubt that it can be a very useful scumhunting tool if used appropriately.