Quote:
Originally Posted by Slendy
Ratchet, the mechanics-talk is stuff like you talking about whether SmartBomb's OP is in general a Scum- or a Towntell, or discussing the mathematical probabilities of actions in the game, stuff like that.
Well, I think that's pretty unfair to be honest. I often will point out scumtells, even when I don't personally think it's that discussion worthy. I find then when scum tells pile up, they become more concrete scum reads, and I think establishing what I find scummy and what I do not find scummy is pretty important for what to expect from me this game.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slendy
While not strictly mechanics-related always, the preference of going for little details and talking about broader concepts than simply whether player X is Scum or not is the tendency I'm talking about. Admittedly, it COULD be just a playingstyle-thing, not denying that.
I think if you would look over previous games of mine, you would find it is definitely a playstlyle thing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slendy
Fair enough wrt bhuber -- I still don't understand why road who had posted way more was less confident for you than Dorian, though? What were the things you agreed with Dorian and fontisiac to include them as Townleans?
It was more that I found their logic made sense. Whether I particularly agreed with the finer points or not, I liked the way they argued their points and I could see it as genuine. Nothing great for a townread, but I have stressed they were only really slight after all.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slendy
There exist playertypes who always post in the manner you do, yes. But I find it more often coming from Scum.
For that to be correct, I would have to play differently as Town, no? Again, if you would look back through previous Town games of mine, which I am happy to link here, you would find that it is a playstyle thing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slendy
The posting style I'm talking about is an active or semi-active one (like you), who is present in the Thread as much as possible. You comment on as many details as possible, but don't (always) seem to follow up on them.
To be fair, I don't particularly have the chance a lot of the time. Like, there are points I've discussed here, like with Doc, where the discussion fettered out because we were at the end of it. Often though, after making the initial point, the first response is what I'm interested in the most, rather than taking up the thread on a relatively small point.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slendy
You go from observation A to observation B in a list-like manner even when posting in real-time, instead of seeming to pursue anything with your actions, or having a definite impression on the 'whole'. Hence, the motif behind the posts can be summed up as 'posting for the sake of posting'.
I don't think that's fair either. Posting for the sake of posting, to me, is posts that have no substance. I'd say observations and opinions are substance enough.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slendy
The compilation posts, then, seem like 'check-points' that are intended to cover all bases. The posting style tells of a player that is very self-aware, in other words. Most players are more self-aware as Scum. Hence, the pings, and stating you are reactionary rather than proactive.
A big part of this is that I spent a good portion of last day phase catching up. When you have 100-200 posts to read up on, even when posting frequently on what I see, I'm going to make one or two large posts that go through the motions discussing what has happened. Aside from that, I don't really have anything to say on this point.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slendy
It was mostly a RVS-vote, but I did find you the likeliest to flip Scum of the handful of people who had thus far posted, so it wasn't completely random. But it definitely wasn't any serious form of pressure YET at that point of the game -- could've evolved into that, had I not been pinged by Dorian soon after.
Well then we define pressure differently. I define a pressure vote as a vote intended to see a reaction from a player, to put a little pressure on them. This is done through jokes, randomly, or even disguised as an argument, early on Day 1. Again, you will see this reflected in the community meta of OPB. In effect, I consider an RVS vote to be pressure, and that is what I was getting at by describing it as such.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slendy
What I mean by the Dorian-vote is that you mentioned more than once that you found it somewhat suspect that I didn't elaborate on it -- once I did elaborate on it, you ignored that. Or did you? Did you accept my reasoning behind it, or did you still hold my handling of the Dorian-vote against me?
I'm pretty sure I have said twice now that if I agree on something, chances are I wont respond to it unless I see the need to do so. So no, I was content with your elaboration and saw no further need to push it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slendy
Expressing surprise isn't alignment-indicative, but that wasn't my point. They way you expressed surprise seemed somewhat 'crafted' to me. As if you were, again, self-aware to the extent that you thought in advance what your response would seem like rather than just responding in the spur of the moment.
This isn't a point I can defend against then. I can hardly argue what you interpreted it as, after all. All I can say is that this is simply how I post. I post this way regardless of alignment, or at least I try to anyway.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slendy
Regardless of whether you were insulted at all or very deeply (not relevant), the point about Scum typically going "wah I'm caught for the wrong reasons" still stands.
Maybe, but I was arguing whether it really applied to me at all. I don't see how I conveying that I was insulted in anyway, which was your point there.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slendy
If you find Cue Scummy OF COURSE IT SHOULD MAKE SENSE TO LYNCH THEM. That's all the reason ever NEEDED for a Lynch!
Disagreed heavily. I think there is far more to consider for the lynch as Town. Mafia are generally content with the mislynch, they'll want a non-vanilla or negative role, but the mislynch is the most important bit. For town, it's the information this lynch gives out, more than the end result itself even. That's how I see it, at least.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slendy
Especially since almost everyone online at the time pointed out to you that Lynching a player who's actually been around is MORE informative than Lynching an inactive, (almost) regardless of the former's style of posting.
Generally speaking, yes. But looking at Cue's play, what did his lynch give us information wise? Very little, because I found his play very hard to interpret. I also had a nagging feeling he was on my scum list for his playstyle.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slendy
Plus you DID end up Voting Bomb for purely self-preservation, did you not?
Partly. I think he dealt with the end of day quite poorly, and I don't think i did particularly great there because, admittedly, I struggled to follow all the developments and defend myself in the tiny window I had. I found I was more posting the first ideas coming into my head than having a chance to roll them about in there for a bit. I don't like doing that. I like to take my time, and not be rushed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slendy
Not saying that it's necessarily a bad thing, but I am curious why not Voting a Player you've found Scummy for a long time should make you, IYO, look great when you clearly (and naturally, regardless of your affiliation) WERE ready to go down the self-preservation-route?
Because I was never willing to vote for self-preservation for the sake of purely saving myself
at the expense of town. Even I offered more information as a lynch than cue, and I believe I offered very little given how relaxed I played for a good part of the day. I never claimed I should look great either, I do think it is a point in my favour though.