krayz I did respond, my response was "stop thinking 2 or 3 games makes you GOAT, and stop thinking 1 or 2 bad games makes you WOAT"

that was my constructive criticism, I have no idea what you look for now, how can I suggest other things to look for to augment your reads?

Some of this leads to an interesting discussion:

Should a person change the way they play to appease others even if it lessens their enjoyment?

I've said my $.02 about it, not going to discuss it anymore.

I honestly think a lot of this comes down to traz, the ww super*, being revered for making the sickest "tone reads" ever when in reality he was (and is) possibly more reflective than anyone else about meta, posting patterns and incentives of everyone he played with (and in any case he was as reflective and careful, and detail-oriented as anyone).

I'm actually interested in your thoughts on this Hoya

I know some of us get annoyed when some people spam to save the lynch, are FPSy (e.g. Duckburg), or don't post constructive comments besides dropping reads.

Do they have an obligation to change to make the game more enjoyable for others?

As far as tone reads go, I'm always right about Telcontar, and it is almost exclusively tone related, but I don't use tone reads on anyone else.

Hell no. Never. Ever.

No it doesn't. My village game is like 90% tonereads and I always have pretty ill thought processes to share anyway.

The people who are normally opaque are those who suck at articulating their thought processes. Whether we have a catch all label or not, they will still not articulate themselves well and their reads will be opaque, so crusading against tone reads won't change anything.

Other than that you just seem testy about what qualifies as a tone read. I.e. your contention seems to be this: every read you make there's a reason why, so if anything can be backed up with reasoning do tone reads even exist? The answer is yes, they do. I'd love to explain it to you, but you seem too closed minded about it to be receptive so it would prob be a waste of energy for me. I think it suffices to say that they make perfect sense to enough intelligent people itt that you should be willing to scale back your skepticism a bit and see what other people mean.

Pretty much any group activity is a compromise, of varying stability, between the goals of all the participants. Different people react different ways. Some make no concessions to the interests of others; some bend over backwards to fit in. The right answer is probably somewhere in the middle.

I think there's a general obligation to minimize selfish mechanical play, which is why I'll never flip a peeked wolf peek to villager ever again. That one decision lost a game that took five more game days to finish, for example. That's selfish. I was pretty newish and didn't realize it at the time. Now I do.

That basically means minimize game winning / game losing FPS because it's just not worth the opprobrium and one individual should in most scenarios not take over the game in that way.

I view the above as an obligation.

The rest is not an obligation, as far as I'm concerned. That stuff can be fixed by lynching people and should with most people self-correct as they try to improve.

Then there are these theory threads that pop up in which people can try to inform or adjust the greater POG meta (for better or worse).

I think it's mostly self-regulating.

kokiri, stop giving perfect textbook answers to my questions, you're gonna kill the discussion I want

kokiri, you're like the kid that is quiet in class but whenever nobody wants to answer the prof's question, raises their hands and leaves the professor speechless.

OK fine I'll explain it:

Hoya, first read this book



And then tone reads will make sense to you. Yes our subconscious processes information based on real reasons to come to certain conclusions, but it's so powerful and picks up on so many subtleties that it's really impossible to trace the logic behind every gut feeling you ever have. Ergo, sometimes you just have a tone read- there have been situations where I could somewhat explain why somebody is a villager, but not make a tour de force case even though they are painfully obvious to me.

Wrong response, I'd literally love to hear your thoughts on this.

Sigh smart people are arguing about WW - apparently I'm going to have to read this thread