Hopefully you have caught up now. What is your opinion on Gamma and how he's been playing so far? Besides Hyper is there anyone else you find scummy?


@everyone It seems the game is starting to drag a little, we need more interaction. Maybe everyone should try to come up with some questions for people to answer. Mine is for everyone.

1. If you had to pick right now who was scum who would it be and why?

I would pick drealmer because he does not seem invested in the game and his reactions to Hyper seem over the top. I don't know if it's real life or scum floundering, but I am leaning toward scum.

Gamma. For behaviour which imho doesn't make much sense for someone who's played through this setup before, and then avoiding questions about it.

I fear I'm tunneling, though, so am deliberately trying to put that read aside, and look at the rest of the field while we still have plenty of time.

But apparently you are now aware of these traits and therefore can correct them. Also someone saying 'I am sooo bad as scum' always seems a bit odd to me. It always has the connotation "I can't possibly be scum, for realz! You would have noticed because I'm so bad at it. Look at me, I'm totally town!"

I can certainly see where you are coming from, but if I could correct my scum game I think I would have by now.
It's more to do with how I am than how I play, and it's basically the reason I don't play any more, being scum is too stressful and not fun. And seeing as my track record has been scum more often than not I just stopped playing as it was easier.

As for trent's question, I would probably have to say drealmer too.
He seems erratic (as usual) but less engaged and less aggressive (I would have expected a detailed account of why I was scummy for voting him and a vote) which makes me wonder if he knows his normal game gets him lynched and is trying to tone it down.

Nah, I'm not saying either of you are definitely scum (or town). But if you find two people scummy and it's impossible (via the picks) for those two players to be scum then that needs to be taken into account.

Similarly, if you find one player very scummy then anyone they cannot be paired with must become a little more townie (though I agree it's dangerous to treat it as black and white like that because we are all fallible and likely to get scum reads wrong)

@adalia: I see. But still such a comment might just as well come from scum. Ah well, you're not my top-pick anyhow, so I'll give it a rest for now.

Talking about top pick: even though I unvoted him, to give him some breathing space and time to participate, which he didn't since, I would say drealmer too. Maybe RL is interfering and stressing and all and he isn't able to catch up. That can happen. But the longer such a 'I'll catch up' statement stands in the room without being followed up upon, the more it looks like scum hiding behind RL problems, because he just doesn't know what to write.

Other scum-reads I discussed before and there wasn't enough written yet to change anything significant. Gamma has written some posts. Some seem solid, some seem strange (like the 'I play stupid but get my mark' remark). So, perhaps a bit less scummy than before, but definitely doesn't seem towny either. Especially keeping information to oneself always looks a bit scummy to me. Sure, town may have reasons to withhold information - but scum has more reasons to play close to the chest.

And about the false dichotomies: sure, such observations are no guarantee. But observing and drawing conclusions are the only way to make progress for town. And for example an observation that two players (like Gamma/RWarehall or HSL/drealmer) are at odds with each other is something to keep in mind. Especially when we know that they can't be scum, putting on a show, together.

Thanks, but I have to wonder why I had to ask you twice to get a reply from you.

While I understand your reasoning to an extend, I fail to see what the value of putting up such a list is, especially when your alignment is unknown, and how scum usually operate when it comes to such lists. I'm of the same mindset as trentonlf, but if one's going to do a reads list, some context is required.

Just one more thing on the matter - since you gave reasons for who you think is scum, wouldn't that help them correct their way to look more town? That is assuming you are town, and an actual scum is among those you listed as such. And if an actual scum is among your town-reads, isn't that a sign, if not confirmation, to them that they're doing a good enough job?



Those two lines were actually more in jest than anything; apparently they failed, and apparently I have to remind myself to use smileys.
The last thing I want, regardless of alignment of either one of us, is to wind him up; I've grown tired of having to deal with that.

But your comment got me thinking - we seem to have reached a point where we need to tiptoe around him because of his record, lest we appear as trying to rattle him, and get him (mis)lynched. Which is a sad state of affairs; I'd rather not play at all, if we're at that point, with drealmer7 or anyone else.

And yes, from your point of view, if he turns out town, which I still think has a good chance of being the case, I'd look bad. But you'd be doing scum's work and wasting a lynch on me, and then you're going to have to look at each other and sort out who among you looks worse for lynching me.


I'm not sure he'd hide behind problems in the physical world, because he doesn't know what to say. He's not that type of scum-player, and with day-chat, he could/would overcome such obstacles. There's plenty of room for WIFOM about this argument, of course, I just can't see him act this way because "he just doesn't know what to write".


Perhaps semantics, but when we're talking about reads from non-PR players, it's not information, it's a matter of being on record as to why one thinks so and so about others.



Which is it of the two? Because it can't be both, can it now?


[emphasis added]

If I'm not terribly mistaken, you are currently voting him.



I've read trentonlf's post #151 and will get to his question, after thinking about it over a very late dinner (it's been a very long day).

Actually, it can. You can respond to a post without answering the question contained within the post. I don't find Gamma's evasive particularly scummy.

I am, I just didn't want to feel left out :P

Anyway, that wasn't trent's question. He asked who we thought was scum, not who we would vote for (you know me, the answer to that question is anyone / everyone).
And I said probably drealmer because there are others I'm suspicious of that might have topped the list instead.

I see what you're saying HSL. I elaborated on certain parts of all reads, not just my scumreads. As for telling scum they're doing well, I've got no clue how to fix that. But I feel keeping them in the dark tends to make them more antsy.

Don't you want them antsy? If someone is antsy they tend to make mistakes. Are you feeling antsy?

You must have read that wrong. By keeping the reasoning hidden, they aren't sure how they earned the read.
What's up with that last question?

What purpose does it serve to respond to a post without answering the question asked, when said question-post is made to get an answer?


So, you do find it scummy, just not particularly, hence that makes him more likely town than scum? As him more likely town, do you think that avoiding to commit and be on record, serves town's best interest? If yes, why and how exactly?


Actually, when the question is [emphasis added] " If you had to pick right now who was scum [...]?" I do read it as who each of us would vote as their top scum pick.

But let's get it clear - @trentonlf, do I read your question wrongly?

Aside from that, the question is "right now", where does "others I'm suspicious of that might have topped the list instead" fit in? If they've topped the list, why didn't you name one of them, instead of going for (the safer) "probably drealmer7"? If they haven't, why the uncertainty when you're already voting drealmer7, and why bring that up as an argument to explain/justify said uncertainty?

Is GammaEmerald's evasiveness contagious? According to his reads list, RWarehall is his top scum, but if he had to pick his top scum right now it would "likely" be RWarehall.



Speaking of RWarehall:

Do these two present the same argument as to why you decided against pairing trentonlf with me, or putting him in a pair in general?

I'd like others to comment as well, especially native English speakers.

And rereading these posts of yours - why did you pair the players you chose the way you did?



[emphasis added]

You did? Let me go check... OK, prior to your post #108 where you gave your reads, you expressed views on players in your post #68 (me), post #80 (RWarehall) and post #107 (drealmer7 and RWarehall). In your post #108 you mentioned me (again), Lifthrasil and adaliabooks.

So, with the exception of adaliabooks, you've given (some?) reasons only for your scum-reads (since Lifthrasil is your null line)..Unless I've missed something. Is there any chance you'd indulge me, and go check your own posts to point out anything that I may have missed?



To answer trentonlf's question, I have to say that GammaEmerald may be present and posting, but he seems to try a bit too hard to avoid committing and being on record with straight answers, and I'm not referring exclusively to his reads. Perhaps it's a difference of play-styles, even cultures, but I've seen this before, and he certainly has my eyebrow raised more than others, though adaliabooks did quite a good job competing with GammaEmerald tonight.

End of day - 3/7/17

Votecount
GammaEmerald (2): RWarehall, Hunter65536
drealmer7 (1): adaliabooks

Not Voting: drealmer7, GammaEmerald, gogtrial34987, HypersomiacLive, Lifthrasil, trentonlf

At L-3, GammaEmerald is closest to being lynched.

Are you serious? Are you really picking on my wording here? I got a little frustrated and said I explained parts of all reads when I didn't. My bad.