EPTOn June 05 2016 03:00 beentheredonethat wrote:
Okay. My purpose in this question was basically to be able to compare a read you've given by voting to a read that cannot be really existing. Your stance on Tictock makes sense.
Still fine with a MoosyDoosy or a policy lynch. I caught some threads here where MoosyDoosy is playing a similar style as he does now.
However, if QT is a detriment to town, why isn't moosy? In your eyes, he should be, right? That's quite the inconsistency.
Show nested quote +
On June 05 2016 02:21 Jealous wrote:
Sorry, forgot to answer your follow-up questions:
1. Tictock, I don't find him to be suspicious. Leaning towards townie but can't be certain.
2. QuickTwist, he's inconsistent, deceitful, and therefore he is either a) a player that is a detriment to the town even if he is a townie or b) scum. I voted to lynch him today.
On June 05 2016 02:08 beentheredonethat wrote:
That plus your EBWOP is a great pick and shows exactly the problem I have with that scumread. My read is a bit too weak to justify a vote.
Well, so according to thekushmountains, MoosyDoosy "always plays like this" if town? Can anyone point me to some games that he played or at least confirm what thekushmountains said? Although, I'm not buying into it yet: while meta reads can be very potent, they are always a bit fragile since it's easily possible to "play for his own meta" to appear as the opposite alignment. Reading MoosyDoosy, no offense, feels like listening to the unordered thoughts of a child: open to distractions, not focusing on anything, whatever. From my experience, players that have such a playstyle mainly want to stay unreadable and are very unstable in terms of activity levels.
Well long story short, if MoosyDoosy is currently indeed playing to his town meta, it renders my arguments obsolete.
Going full circle, back to Jealous:
This is a very good question from Superbia which solidifies my town read on him even further. However Jealous' answer feels really scummy to me, so I want to point that out.
IMHO, the purpose of this question is to be able to get a tone read on the questioned person. If the person admits that he's disappointed in his role or alignment, that information can be used to further analyse the posts that happened until now. So, imagine you're scum, and you're being asked that question. You don't know if there is a "right" (town indicative) or "wrong" answer, do you? Well, I don't. So you cannot answer that question clearly.
Jealous is not answering that question clearly. If I would have been asked that question, I'd have answered "scum" (or, tbh, "neutral"), because I prefer being the one being searched for instead of reading carefully through stuff and identifying/guessing inconsistencies, blatant lies, and busses. The only intention behind Jealous' answer could be to hide that he's actually glad that he rolled scum and that this is the reason of his high activity level.
Jealous, can you answer Superbia's question more clearly? What is your stance on Tictock and QuickTwist (there's a specific reason why I ask for this read which I'll tell after the answer)?
On June 04 2016 19:53 Jealous wrote:
I'm not going to argue with what you've already admitted is highly conditional reasoning, but if your faith in Tumblewood is so great then you should check this post:
In here he says that his suspicion lies on QuickTwist, which somewhat debunks your line of reasoning because your townreads would be only 50% accurate.
On June 04 2016 19:09 beentheredonethat wrote:
Also, following up on Tumblewood's post about QT and Jealous: if I simply follow the reads that I did so far without looking at Jealous' filter (which I haven't done yet), my logical conclusion should be that Jealous is scum. Here is my thought process about that:
1. I townread Tumblewood.
2. Tumblewood thinks that between QT and Jealous, one is scum.
3. I townread QT.
That makes Jealous scum (only if Tumblewood's thought is correct which, of course, is not granted). I am going to look at Jealous more detailed.
Also, following up on Tumblewood's post about QT and Jealous: if I simply follow the reads that I did so far without looking at Jealous' filter (which I haven't done yet), my logical conclusion should be that Jealous is scum. Here is my thought process about that:
1. I townread Tumblewood.
2. Tumblewood thinks that between QT and Jealous, one is scum.
3. I townread QT.
That makes Jealous scum (only if Tumblewood's thought is correct which, of course, is not granted). I am going to look at Jealous more detailed.
I'm not going to argue with what you've already admitted is highly conditional reasoning, but if your faith in Tumblewood is so great then you should check this post:
On June 04 2016 16:18 Tumblewood wrote:
ok yeah as I see it one of QT and Jealous has to be scum. they're both acting independently scummy (eager to read anything as scummy, tryhard tone, making mountains of molehills). I don't believe that they could both be town, although if they were I will mock D1 relentlessly in postgame. I also believe that they could not keep up this stupid bickering for so long as partners. I'm leaning toward QT at this point for refuting everything Jealous says and then townreading him for it (pretty shallow townread IMO, there's more to the game than just how much you write that's semi-productive). Jealous maybe, but I think my dislike of his tone biases my judgment. 6/10 would lynch QT D1 and if he flips town lynch Jealous D2
or we could plynch sqrt and let their alignments become more apparent over time.
ok yeah as I see it one of QT and Jealous has to be scum. they're both acting independently scummy (eager to read anything as scummy, tryhard tone, making mountains of molehills). I don't believe that they could both be town, although if they were I will mock D1 relentlessly in postgame. I also believe that they could not keep up this stupid bickering for so long as partners. I'm leaning toward QT at this point for refuting everything Jealous says and then townreading him for it (pretty shallow townread IMO, there's more to the game than just how much you write that's semi-productive). Jealous maybe, but I think my dislike of his tone biases my judgment. 6/10 would lynch QT D1 and if he flips town lynch Jealous D2
or we could plynch sqrt and let their alignments become more apparent over time.
In here he says that his suspicion lies on QuickTwist, which somewhat debunks your line of reasoning because your townreads would be only 50% accurate.
That plus your EBWOP is a great pick and shows exactly the problem I have with that scumread. My read is a bit too weak to justify a vote.
Well, so according to thekushmountains, MoosyDoosy "always plays like this" if town? Can anyone point me to some games that he played or at least confirm what thekushmountains said? Although, I'm not buying into it yet: while meta reads can be very potent, they are always a bit fragile since it's easily possible to "play for his own meta" to appear as the opposite alignment. Reading MoosyDoosy, no offense, feels like listening to the unordered thoughts of a child: open to distractions, not focusing on anything, whatever. From my experience, players that have such a playstyle mainly want to stay unreadable and are very unstable in terms of activity levels.
Well long story short, if MoosyDoosy is currently indeed playing to his town meta, it renders my arguments obsolete.
Going full circle, back to Jealous:
On June 04 2016 08:25 Jealous wrote:
My expectations were mixed in that I simultaneously did not want to be important because I would then be under a lot of pressure to perform my duties up to a certain standard, but I also did want to have some sway in the outcome of the game beyond just words and analysis. I am satisfied with my role.
How about you?
On June 04 2016 08:21 Superbia wrote:
Jealous what alignment did you hope to get?
Jealous what alignment did you hope to get?
My expectations were mixed in that I simultaneously did not want to be important because I would then be under a lot of pressure to perform my duties up to a certain standard, but I also did want to have some sway in the outcome of the game beyond just words and analysis. I am satisfied with my role.
How about you?
This is a very good question from Superbia which solidifies my town read on him even further. However Jealous' answer feels really scummy to me, so I want to point that out.
IMHO, the purpose of this question is to be able to get a tone read on the questioned person. If the person admits that he's disappointed in his role or alignment, that information can be used to further analyse the posts that happened until now. So, imagine you're scum, and you're being asked that question. You don't know if there is a "right" (town indicative) or "wrong" answer, do you? Well, I don't. So you cannot answer that question clearly.
Jealous is not answering that question clearly. If I would have been asked that question, I'd have answered "scum" (or, tbh, "neutral"), because I prefer being the one being searched for instead of reading carefully through stuff and identifying/guessing inconsistencies, blatant lies, and busses. The only intention behind Jealous' answer could be to hide that he's actually glad that he rolled scum and that this is the reason of his high activity level.
Jealous, can you answer Superbia's question more clearly? What is your stance on Tictock and QuickTwist (there's a specific reason why I ask for this read which I'll tell after the answer)?
Sorry, forgot to answer your follow-up questions:
1. Tictock, I don't find him to be suspicious. Leaning towards townie but can't be certain.
2. QuickTwist, he's inconsistent, deceitful, and therefore he is either a) a player that is a detriment to the town even if he is a townie or b) scum. I voted to lynch him today.
Okay. My purpose in this question was basically to be able to compare a read you've given by voting to a read that cannot be really existing. Your stance on Tictock makes sense.
Still fine with a MoosyDoosy or a policy lynch. I caught some threads here where MoosyDoosy is playing a similar style as he does now.
However, if QT is a detriment to town, why isn't moosy? In your eyes, he should be, right? That's quite the inconsistency.
Props, I was thinking the same thing wrt Jealous' logic for lynching QT.
