Posted: Mon Jun 20, 2016 2:04 am
Cool. Wanna explain?
Page 31 of 40
Posted: Mon Jun 20, 2016 2:29 am
I'm pretty sure you've never been town in a game with me Klingon....
Posted: Mon Jun 20, 2016 2:49 am
@massive
Besides presumably me, who else do you scumread?
Besides presumably me, who else do you scumread?
Posted: Mon Jun 20, 2016 3:04 am
Back.
I need to have a think about RC and Postie, because Postie's defense of RC could easily be seen as going for town cred, but I don't think scum even remotely would defend one of the main drivers of their own lynch. And what's the point of this:
After reading through the weekend I'm townreading Clumsy and, maybe sadly, shotty. I know that's not answering the question, but it is what it is.
I need to have a think about RC and Postie, because Postie's defense of RC could easily be seen as going for town cred, but I don't think scum even remotely would defend one of the main drivers of their own lynch. And what's the point of this:
andIn post 548, RadiantCowbells wrote: I'm not unvoting Postie.
if he just moves his vote to Cakey literally twenty minutes later?In post 686, RadiantCowbells wrote:I will answer that question in twilight if Postie gets lynched.
Posted: Mon Jun 20, 2016 3:12 am
Why?In post 753, massive wrote:I'm townreading Clumsy
Tell me more about this.In post 753, massive wrote:I don't think scum even remotely would defend one of the main drivers of their own lynch.
Posted: Mon Jun 20, 2016 3:14 am
Postie, why should I believe that you're town if I'm scumreading you as hard as I am?
Posted: Mon Jun 20, 2016 3:24 am
Because you should know that when I'm town at times I prioritise doing pro-town things over looking town and that's mainly why I've been superficially scummy this game. You have no idea how much I would have censored the fuck out of most of the scummy shit I've done this game if I were actually scum.In post 755, RadiantCowbells wrote:Postie, why should I believe that you're town if I'm scumreading you as hard as I am?
Posted: Mon Jun 20, 2016 3:28 am
Your not helping your case.....
Posted: Mon Jun 20, 2016 3:33 am
RC can decide for himself if that's a helpful response or not.
Posted: Mon Jun 20, 2016 3:35 am
Being scummy on purpose just to manipulate meta doesn't sound like a reasonable defense.....
Posted: Mon Jun 20, 2016 4:02 am
Good thing that's not what I said.
Posted: Mon Jun 20, 2016 4:21 am
Baaaaaaaaaaaa
VOTE: POSTIE
Posted: Mon Jun 20, 2016 4:21 am
In post 756, Postie wrote:Because you should know that when I'm town at times I prioritise doing pro-town things over looking town and that'sIn post 755, RadiantCowbells wrote:Postie, why should I believe that you're town if I'm scumreading you as hard as I am?mainly why I've been superficially scummy this game.You have no idea how much I would have censored the fuck out of most of the scummy shit I've done this game if I were actually scum.
Posted: Mon Jun 20, 2016 4:50 am
How do you interpret that as "I'm being scummy on purpose to manipulate my meta"? 
Posted: Mon Jun 20, 2016 4:51 am
"I'm being scummy on purpose."
Posted: Mon Jun 20, 2016 4:52 am
I didn't say that anywhere??
Posted: Mon Jun 20, 2016 5:16 am
In post 762, Ircher wrote:In post 756, Postie wrote:Because you should know that when I'm town at times I prioritise doing pro-town things over looking town and that'sIn post 755, RadiantCowbells wrote:Postie, why should I believe that you're town if I'm scumreading you as hard as I am?mainly why I've been superficially scummy this game.You have no idea how much I would have censored the fuck out of most of the scummy shit I've done this game if I were actually scum.
Posted: Mon Jun 20, 2016 5:38 am
Are you interpreting the word "superficial" to mean "on purpose" here? Because...In post 764, Ircher wrote:"I'm being scummy on purpose."
Posted: Mon Jun 20, 2016 6:00 am
Sincerity of tone, similarity of thought process. Why aren't you similarly interested in why I might be townreading shotty?
How does it benefit scum-you to defend RC as town if all he's going to is drive your lynch? Sure, scum-you might try to use it to convince a rational player to back off their push, but RC doesn't work like that, and from what you've been saying about him, it's pretty clear you know that.In post 754, Postie wrote:Tell me more about this.In post 753, massive wrote:I don't think scum even remotely would defend one of the main drivers of their own lynch.
But the flip side is that town-you shouldn't be anywhere near trusting RC at this point -- but in order for me to believe this is what town-you would do, it necessarily MUST accompany a complete belief that RC is also town and will act in the town's best interest, neither of which are proven.
So WTF Postie, I'm confused.
----
So this again is what is so exploitable about Ircher if you're scum, and now so frustrating about Ircher if you're town. This last attempt at blatant misrepping Postie serves no purpose: Postie is already at L-1 and there's plenty to read about and think about without the misrep if one were teetering on whether or not to vote. So is it just really bad town play, tunnelling on his perceived top scum read, or is it really obvious attempt by scum to push through a mislynch?
----
And on top of that, that wagon on Postie looks TERRIBAD.
Posted: Mon Jun 20, 2016 6:35 am
Because I'm townreading shotty but I'm not townreading Clumsy.In post 768, massive wrote:Sincerity of tone, similarity of thought process. Why aren't you similarly interested in why I might be townreading shotty?
That's... a better answer than I was expecting.In post 768, massive wrote:How does it benefit scum-you to defend RC as town if all he's going to is drive your lynch? Sure, scum-you might try to use it to convince a rational player to back off their push, but RC doesn't work like that, and from what you've been saying about him, it's pretty clear you know that.
But the flip side is that town-you shouldn't be anywhere near trusting RC at this point -- but in order for me to believe this is what town-you would do, it necessarily MUST accompany a complete belief that RC is also town and will act in the town's best interest, neither of which are proven.
So WTF Postie, I'm confused.
Not sure why you think I need to be 100% convinced that RC's town to defend him though. The wagon on him is/was terrible and uncalled for regardless of his alignment.
Ftr, I'm like 75-80% sure he's town.In post 184, Postie wrote:something something schrödinger's cat
Posted: Mon Jun 20, 2016 6:38 am
Somewhat.In post 767, Postie wrote:Are you interpreting the word "superficial" to mean "on purpose" here? Because...In post 764, Ircher wrote:"I'm being scummy on purpose."
It's the way you worded it (or at least it appeared) the first time I read.
Posted: Mon Jun 20, 2016 6:44 am
WALK IT BACK BRO
Posted: Mon Jun 20, 2016 6:46 am
Oh yeah, RC unvoted. And I'm at L-1.
Looking forward to the high-pressure conversation that we're likely going to have soon.
I feel like I've just been given the task of defusing a bomb.
Looking forward to the high-pressure conversation that we're likely going to have soon.
I feel like I've just been given the task of defusing a bomb.
Posted: Mon Jun 20, 2016 6:51 am
If you're 75/80% RC is town (but know, knowing him, that he will act in his own best interests rather than the town's best interests) why is pressuring him to answer the question regarding Ircher's claim "uncalled for?"In post 769, Postie wrote:Not sure why you think I need to be 100% convinced that RC's town to defend him though. The wagon on him is/was terrible and uncalled for regardless of his alignment.
Also, this seems to say "even in the off chance RC IS scum, the wagon on him was still uncalled for." Do you believe that all wagons, regardless of target, should be founded completely in solid proof? Why not defend Ircher from his wagon as well? Because your vote there was the opposite of what you seem to be stating here.
I want to townread you, Postie. Help a brother out.
Posted: Mon Jun 20, 2016 7:01 am
I don't know what you mean by this? He's going to act to his perception of town's best interests.In post 773, massive wrote:(but know, knowing him, that he will act in his own best interests rather than the town's best interests)
a) because pressuring him to answer the question is going to make him less likely to want to answer the questionIn post 773, massive wrote:why is pressuring him to answer the question regarding Ircher's claim "uncalled for?"
b) because the question isn't so important it needs a wagon since there's like a 0.1% chance Ircher made his "pregame soft" up
Uhhh, no, they just shouldn't be founded in complete terribleness.In post 773, massive wrote:Also, this seems to say "even in the off chance RC IS scum, the wagon on him was still uncalled for." Do you believe that all wagons, regardless of target, should be founded completely in solid proof?
Ircher was actually kind-of scummy originally though so we had a reason to wagon him.In post 773, massive wrote:Why not defend Ircher from his wagon as well? Because your vote there was the opposite of what you seem to be stating here.