That was my thought too but I really hope he meant something else.
Why do you hope I meant something else (hint: I did not)?
1443
Two people having the exact same reads isn't likely unless the reads are fake. You accused me of having fake reads so I figured you'd understand this.
Posted: Fri Nov 19, 2021 11:16 am
by Bingle
In post 1446, VP Baltar wrote:Do you think you a scum hydra would fake dissonance in thread to appear more townie?
Only the good ones. Weaponized hydra dissonance is a powerful tool in the hands of a decent scum player.
Posted: Fri Nov 19, 2021 11:17 am
by VP Baltar
In post 1449, Datisi wrote:ok ok ok baltar now that you are here i need your professional opinion on something
so i saw this post:
In post 1396, DArby wrote:To answer Penguin’s question earlier, I do have a read on [datisi] now: town. You’re absolutely tunneling me but I think it comes more from not knowing how I play vs actively taking my questions in bad faith.
this post struck me as kinda townie. maybe i'm wrong on that beign townie bc trying to placate your pushers is a thing sometimes but this tone and timing just seemed *too* placate-y it circled around into town
however, this post:
In post 1403, DArby wrote:But shouldn’t that be a d2+ thing? This logic seems weird.
seemed to be hedgy shady bullshit and i don't like it
discuss
I get what you're saying on the placating. I've been trying to determine how I feel about his "well I'm probably the yeet today, oh well" posting. I've been internally debating whether DArby is cunning enough to fake that as scum.
Posted: Fri Nov 19, 2021 11:18 am
by Bingle
In post 1451, Sleepless Assassin wrote:Two people having the exact same reads isn't likely unless the reads are fake. You accused me of having fake reads so I figured you'd understand this.
True enough, although I've seen (been in) hydra's where the dynamic is that one of the players takes lead and the other is functionally a sanity check, which leads to a single reads list and a primary member of the hydra.
That was my thought too but I really hope he meant something else.
Why do you hope I meant something else (hint: I did not)?
1443
Two people having the exact same reads isn't likely unless the reads are fake. You accused me of having fake reads so I figured you'd understand this.
As a hydra, you can have disputes internally, but post with agreed upon reads.
The reason it is scum-helpful is because then in the future if anyone questions them over a read, they can just point to the other hydra head and say "well I didn't agree with that".
I think I've seen Darby in a game recently (although I don't remember which one) and thinking his play was good. I also don't remember what alignment he was. But gth I wouldn't put it past him. I'll update this after I'm caught up and can look to figure out which game that was.
it feels like the purpose of darby's posting is to avoid death and not to actually find bad guys
also the reason skitter/me have different reads on VP baltar is because I'm religiously allergic to reading wall-posts and she loves complete sentences.
In post 1449, Datisi wrote:ok ok ok baltar now that you are here i need your professional opinion on something
so i saw this post:
In post 1396, DArby wrote:To answer Penguin’s question earlier, I do have a read on [datisi] now: town. You’re absolutely tunneling me but I think it comes more from not knowing how I play vs actively taking my questions in bad faith.
this post struck me as kinda townie. maybe i'm wrong on that beign townie bc trying to placate your pushers is a thing sometimes but this tone and timing just seemed *too* placate-y it circled around into town
however, this post:
In post 1403, DArby wrote:But shouldn’t that be a d2+ thing? This logic seems weird.
seemed to be hedgy shady bullshit and i don't like it
discuss
I get what you're saying on the placating. I've been trying to determine how I feel about his "well I'm probably the yeet today, oh well" posting. I've been internally debating whether DArby is cunning enough to fake that as scum.
Bingle wrote:
True enough, although I've seen (been in) hydra's where the dynamic is that one of the players takes lead and the other is functionally a sanity check, which leads to a single reads list and a primary member of the hydra.
True I could see that. I thought VP wanted them to have the same reads though.
VP wrote:
As a hydra, you can have disputes internally, but post with agreed upon reads.
The reason it is scum-helpful is because then in the future if anyone questions them over a read, they can just point to the other hydra head and say "well I didn't agree with that".
But if one fakes a read to match the other, especially if they were asked to do so, couldn't they still do this just without the transparency because we didn't see where they disagreed? Oh, 1455
Posted: Fri Nov 19, 2021 11:45 am
by Bingle
In post 1328, Fun and Games wrote:Its the way he worded it, he seems annoyed at ico ignoring him
~ skitter
:/
How is this towny recall? Not a big fan of this read from you. It seems poorly defined and elusive, like you're trying to justify a townread as opposed to actually thinking SA is towny.
What's your issue with them? With the obvious exception of VP being below Pengy I see nothing egregious there.
In post 1437, Datisi wrote:there is a joke here about mommy and daddy picking favorites between their children but i'm not quite witty enough to make it
I call pooky in the divorce. No offense skitter, but he brings me more interesting setups to review.
Posted: Fri Nov 19, 2021 11:49 am
by Sleepless Assassin
Bingle wrote:
What's your issue with them? With the obvious exception of VP being below Pengy I see nothing egregious there.
i think i am Interested in knowing what that post called for a :/
Posted: Fri Nov 19, 2021 12:17 pm
by Bingle
In post 1466, Datisi wrote:bingle, have you gone over my ico case yet and what is your opinion on that slot at this point in time
I hadn't, but I'm doing so now.
Spoiler: Recent Dats posts about D'Argon slot, spoilered for size
In post 1157, Datisi wrote:things that have pinged me wrong about iconeum the dragon:
- the "i have zero scumpings so far" in 61. it's not unreasonable to not have scumpings, but something about purposefully calling it out made it seem a bit forced - like he thinks town!him *would* be having scumpings by that point so he wants to cover his ass there.
- i think i already talked about it, but the "why are you worried about not having a read on me yet" (93, 509). like, it reminded me of scum!ico who sometimes has the habit of pre-emptively building a push on me, but the issue is if he builds it too early.
- shading vp in 513 but then voting dunn in 519 is kinda ???. now, i don't think it's scummy in of itself, but further through his iso, i'm not sure i get the vibe of him actually trying to sort through dunn/vp.
- also, the way he seemed very certain on dunn being a solid yeet for today just feels... agh, icky. i'm not sure if i'm making things up here, but something about being read to *yeet* dunn already feels kind of off, at least based on the way he presented it.
- this is maybe more within tinfoil territory, but 909 and 928 feel kind of contradictory to one another. specifically the parts where he first says that he's been liking my posts, and then there's the 1v1 we'd been having, and then that i should know i haven't done enough for him to townread me. but, i thnk the "i've been liking your posts" implies that there is material for him to townread me, except that material is "tainted" by the 1v1. to then turn it into "you haven't done enough" feels ???, like he realized he has to defend the weird null read on me so he's turning it into that. and the "if you're honest with yourself, you should know" just feels manipulative. :/
61: The point seems a little tinfoily. Seems to me that if Ico thought he should have scumpings and wanted to head that off he'd, you know, make some up.
93/509: I can see this. Given the assumption of Ico is scared of towntisi, this actually seems like a pretty solid point to push on. Not a lockscum case, but a pretty sheepable one.
Where is Ico showing he's very certain on Dunn? I more got the impression he was disengaged and didn't have strong reads from his posting.
Overall, I think most of this case is adequately explained by Ico just not being around, but the angle of Ico coming after you too early out of fear is one I should look at.
In post 1332, Datisi wrote:i don't know why, but darby's 1188 and 1190 give me a scummy vibe, in a sorta cognitive load way? what i mean is, the answers to those questions seem relatively easy to figure out if you read the post that skitter is literally quoting there. and the fact that he's *still* asking for clarification there strikes me as if he didn't quite get it because way too many other things are on his mind (i.e. he be informed)
someone let me know if i am getting too biased here, but those two just pinged me as Wrong
I think you're over complicating things with that read. He's straight up asking why skits is shading a townread on him, I don't think you need to examine cognitive load to see why that might have a scum motivation.
In post 1449, Datisi wrote:ok ok ok baltar now that you are here i need your professional opinion on something
so i saw this post:
In post 1396, DArby wrote:To answer Penguin’s question earlier, I do have a read on [datisi] now: town. You’re absolutely tunneling me but I think it comes more from not knowing how I play vs actively taking my questions in bad faith.
this post struck me as kinda townie. maybe i'm wrong on that beign townie bc trying to placate your pushers is a thing sometimes but this tone and timing just seemed *too* placate-y it circled around into town
however, this post:
In post 1403, DArby wrote:But shouldn’t that be a d2+ thing? This logic seems weird.
seemed to be hedgy shady bullshit and i don't like it
discuss
I think Darby tr-ing you shows that you're not S/S more than that he individually is town. The latter post seems to be genuine confusion given the context of page 57
Overall, I'm not really impressed by the case. It seems like a lot of what you're concerned about would be a result of Ico just not being in the game as much as Ico being scum in the game.
Posted: Fri Nov 19, 2021 12:20 pm
by Datisi
In post 1473, Bingle wrote:Where is Ico showing he's very certain on Dunn? I more got the impression he was disengaged and didn't have strong reads from his posting.
Overall, I think most of this case is adequately explained by Ico just not being around, but the angle of Ico coming after you too early out of fear is one I should look at.
the overall lack of solving almost everyone else but still pushing for the dunn wagon - like sure maybe he didn't say he's certain on dunn but that's the overall impression i believe his play was giving due to not much sorting of other people or considering other possible yeet targets
and i believe i had experienced scum!ico trying to fake the sorting/paranoia we usually have between each other and building a case on me too early, so, that wasn't really pulled out nowhere
Stop giving me things to do and solve the game already dammit.