I was trying to make that seem as town-minded as possible, but PBPAs are not my strong suit. By pointing out positives from Rodemy's early game, I hoped to sell the point that I was looking at this from as unbiased of a perspective as possible, instead of just trying to repeatedly drive the point that "RODEMY HAS TO BE SCUM." I think the combination of my showing up late and not just saying "I have no reads 60ish posts into this game" put me a tad behind the 8-ball from the get-go. But I had lurkers to hide behind. I don't push wagons enough as scum.
Tom, in the bit you quoted, are you saying that at the time in the game, town v town wasn't possible? Or the time of writing?
Grape, I thought the game was fun! It was a nice change of pace from the games I usually play, and I love neighbors. I really did want to pick Eco, but my goal was to learn more about Bur for the future. Shame about him not really being super active.
So, PBPA then. Is this what ISOs mean now?
#14: RVS. Rodemy is a funny individual.
#15: Setup/theory talk regarding the revealing of neighbors. I don’t have any issue with Rodemy “answering for tom” here, considering it’s a pretty broad question that’s being used to facilitate discussion.
This marks the beginning of the “revealing neighbors are good/bad” saga.
#18 Response to Eco. Tom later comments in #23.
#19: Fluff
#22: Eco points out the difference between “claiming neighbors would be bad” and “claiming neighbors won’t do us any good.” Minute, but functional. First glimpse into Rodemy’s mindset.
24/5: Rodemy expands on his answer regarding neighbor claiming. Surprising here that he didn’t respond to Bur’s point about the reasons people chose their neighbors likely being NAI. It seems like it would support his point.
26-29: First of many small convos between the two of you. Rodemy points out that he didn’t have to think about his choice as town, but I don’t think a confident player would need to do so as scum, either. Regardless, easy line to take considering there’s no pressure to explain why choices were made at this point.
31/32: Eco thinks that Rodemy’s was a nervous reaction, but it didn’t strike me as such. Not really something to get nervous about. More than anything, Rodemy acknowledged that his neighbor told him that the scumteam has daychat. This is a minor townslip. Generally speaking, I’d say that not being aware of the mechanics is normally a scumslip, considering they have less need to be concerned about them with the power to just kill whatever’s in their way. But context.
33: More theory conversation, largely. Rodemy continues to lay it on a bit thick for my taste, but I think this is just his personality coming out in text. He does express suspicion of Tom here. We’ll take note of how this is pursued in the future.
36: Rodemy makes his first really… “wrong” response. Both Tom, Shadow, Bur and myself all chime in on this at various points. Wrong =/= scum.
45-7: Rodemy votes Tom. At the time, this was the best reason anyone had to vote for anyone, given that wrong =/= scum. This seems like scumhunting, and Tom’s deflection in #46 doesn’t really provide any reason to pull off the pedal. But Rodemy unvotes all the same. I’ll call this null, considering the conflicts I have in mindset between the two actions.
52: Acknowledging Eco’s suggestion.
64: Acknowledging my statement. If I were town, I’d want to know what and why I was wrong about here, but letting things unfold is also OK.
65: Querying Eco -> Vezok. Fair question to ask.
69/70/72: Back to should(n’t) we claim something about our neighbors. With each of us having posted at this point, it feels like that’s barking up a dead tree to me as opposed to beginning a new line of discussion. Feels like busywork.
77: This is the first scummy post of Rodemy’s. Screaming appeal to emotion, an overreaction here puts the brakes on Bur’s line of questioning and prompts me to ask for further response from him.
81: Rodemy explains his logic behind the neighbor claim, and why he chose not to pursue it. Also explains why he unvoted Tom in a bit more detail. A bit contradictory in function, but you can argue that the proper mindset is there.
93: Continues to push Tom. There’s a response in the middle here that I feel like I’m missing some context to.
97-110: Provides his early reads. Tom says “no.” Rodemy points out the futility of his efforts, and calls Tom defensive. Tom handwaves. Rodemy pushes further, and after Tom’s explanation of Rodemy’s past efforts, Rodemy backs off.
This is framed as an action that is in the best interest of the town. How? Perhaps this is meta between the two of them I don’t have a full understanding of, but Rodemy clearly has the tenacity to pursue this if he felt so inclined. Instead, a bit of resistance and he put up the white flag.
For other people (read:me) to have caught flak for underdeveloped reads, by comparison this was the most justified read in the game. The two of you clearly had the most interaction in the thread of any two individuals. So why not push it? If this is strictly the product of Rodemy not changing his scumhunting methods over the course of time in this specific role pairing between he and Tom, so be it. But the context around the scumhunting will absolutely change, and that shouldn’t stop him from pursuing something that is a scumtell for him.
111-116: Chatter with Bur about votes on him. I think everyone wanted the answer to this question, but Rodemy got to it first.
122: I would disagree with Rodemy, there is more than enough reason for this question to exist. It shows one’s self-awareness and, by extension, their mindset and perception of how they have impacted the game to that point. In the moment, a bit of chainsawing.
125: Not the first time Rodemy is seeing me as scummy for having a read that disagrees with his own. This is him blowing my reads a bit out of proportion, considering I’ve made no mention of that read developing since Eco initially asked about it.
131: Seemingly waffles on his read of me. First act of following coattails onto the meaningful wagons.
135/40: Holds the status quo regarding Bur/Shadow/Tom, which prompts Tom’s 137. I’m on Rodemy’s side regarding this. Tom is within his rights to ask act how he pleases, and Rodemy is within his to pursue answers. Tom later acknowledges this.
My problem with this interaction is that it’s just further reason that Rodemy should be voting for Tom, by all reason. By comparison, there wasn’t any friction when he later votes for Vezok in 147. It goes without saying that scum are less likely to push wagons that they think will have a hard time gaining traction.
151-169: Random one-line posts about neighbors. 161 does point out that he’s caught Tom in an inconsistency, and 167 claims without Shadow’s(apparent) consent.
171: reads. I like these reads. I used them as comparison against Vezok’s.
188: Calls Vezok wrong. Vezok lobbed that one up.
194-208: Pushes Tom for a further read on Vezok. Multiple of us established that a scum’s pick of another individual likely clears the townmember that was picked.
216: Fluff
218-226: Makes his feelings about Shadow clear. Votes in reaction to the jailer claim. Following the line he has laid out.
229: Begins to make plans with Vezok. I have no issues with the unvote here. What I do have issue with is the interaction afterward. Having done a very similar thing before, this feels like interaction with scum just to say you’ve done it.
239-248: Rodemy votes for Eco, not believing the CC. A few people explain why Rodemy is likely incorrect. Is this him trying to keep his buddy alive to put the town into LyLo tomorrow?
257: I can’t actually tell who this is in response to. Me? Bur? Eco? All three of us could be considered as “throwing shade” here. More importantly, he chose not go into detail as to why the arguments against Eco were more sufficient grounds for lynching. This is also another wagon he has chosen to be the second person on.
258: Observes that Shadow isn’t posting. Fair point.
260/61: Again, drops his argument in the face of a bit of resistance.
266-71: Incorrect theory on multiple levels here. The jailer gets a chance to single-handedly WIN THE GAME. It gives you a flip that allows you to try and find the other scum member based off of alignment-confirmed interactions.
288: Restates his opinion on me
*cue d2 quicklynch*
tl;dr
Creates the line for me very early off of an incorrect assumption and holds to it over the course of the game.
Doesn't persist on any wagons that receive resistance.
Develops a justifiable read against Tom and then doesn't follow through, but immediately 180s onto Vezok when another analyst provides a window of opportunity.
Convenient and minor interactions with Vezok.
Never actually posits any real reason as to why he thinks I'm scum, and simply snowballs the original, faulty complaint.
Rodemy, look, you need to step back and consider the whole picture. There are two possible scenarios here:
FWIW, I see some cognitive dissonance/faulty points here, but I'm not sure it's worth taking up space at this point given that I believe you are the jailer. Postgame, perhaps.
It’s good for scum in that Vezok claiming Vanilla probably gets lynched anyway, at least this way he goes down with the jailer outed and maybe even gets the actual jailer lynched instead.
I’m down for a Vezok lynch, will wait to drop a vote until we’re ready.
100% correct.
My issues with Vezok's claim are as such: He strikes me as defeated scum. Look at the difference in tone between 204 and 214! Maybe it's just frustration about having to claim as the jailkeeper, but compare his T/S list in 179 against Rodemy's just above in 171. Vezok's is briefly dropped in, with no further analysis and a passing answer to one of the questions posed to him. I feel like town under pressure would want to use that opportunity to expand on their reads in further detail.
Rodemy explains all of his reads in further detail (not much, but the intent is what matters here), which is more information than he had to provide given the fairly tongue-in-cheek conversation that largely dealt with neighbors.
---
@Eco: I wanted to wait until I got a chance to hear from Bur to reveal my thoughts. His language implied he wasn't the jailer, so there was no further effort needed to try and keep him from CCing. I also assumed you were missing that word, but wanted to be sure. As to game length, I'm used to having longer to develop my reads, like I mentioned earlier to shadow.
When I said thoughts on Rodemy/Tom, I meant more along the lines of reads.
@Rodemy: You're not crazy, but I tend to go with the CCer, not the CCee. Sure, the Jailer being outed doesn't help if the scum are trading 1:1, but it's better than 1:0, which a vanilla claim is most likely to do.
Your post in 248 implies you have issue with shadow's explanation. Prey tell?
@Tom: do you intend to explain your actions at, like, any point? How about what you've gathered from both chats? Did you figure out your conclusion about how Vezok was treating you? I wouldn't say there were exactly extensive interactions between he and you in the game thread.
@Rodemy: can you provide an example re: Shadow demonstrating his towniness? Could that differ between PR & vanilla, as opposed to just town & scum? Also, do you specifically have thoughts on Tom's about-face from voting with Shadow, to voting against him?
I have thoughts on Vezok that I am currently withholding. Bur knows them. @Bur also will remember to answer my question in the game thread when he makes the extended response he owes us at this point.
---
@Eco: Consider this me acknowledging 144. One thing, though:
I totally accept that your reads we in their infancy, and I respect that they weren't IRONCLAD HARD CLEARS. My overarching point is that I think were giving town reads out for things which didn't deserve town reads to players who scum would pick as people to pick as town reads because that's easier than trying to lynch them and maybe you can pocket them.
snip
I don't mean to say "wow ur reason r bad u suk lol" I mean "I don't think your reasons justify your town reads because they are easily within the scum range of those players specifically, and I think a decent proportion of the playerbase at large". As for what I want? Really just for you to think about your initial reads and make sure you are happy with them.
Emphasis mine. Did you accidentally a word in the bolded section of the first paragraph, or an apostrophe? And as for the second paragraph, do you think that my reads need further developing, or are the foundations shaky to the point where they need reworking? Really hoping it's not the latter, considering my existing concerns about the game length.
Also, what are your thoughts on the extended Rodemy/Tom conversation that is taking up most of our thread?
Not enough time today to suitably post, but I have asked my neighbor for their blessing to reveal our neighborhood. Not that I care, but it's a two way street, right?
This does narrow the field considerably, but it seems pretty narrow already.
@tom you asked about scum picking their partner. Idk. Felt like you could have informed me they had daychat instead.
well aside from "how is that misleading?"...
Why would I ever tell you when I could try to see if it was real instead?
To not come off as disingenuous/manipulating? Loaded questions, etc.
---
Yes, knowing why the votes happened would be nice. My guess is they were intending to do that to garner reactions, and it'll be adequately explained in time. Nothing Bur has done thus far really strikes me one way or the other.
@Vezok Do you think the level of player in that game might have had something to do with how Eco's scumhunting/pushing was perceived? How about the willingness of him to use such a method of scumhunting in the future?
Also, do you not see issue with Eco's main complaint against you?
@Bur To supplement Shadow's 121, WHY do you think it deserved votes?
---
@Eco Can we take a step back here? 1: I don't think that just because your justifications and mine differ, that it makes mine bad. Maybe that's not how you're intending to come across, but that's how I'm taking it. 2: If the semantics were that obvious, why did no one else have objections to it (specifically the semantics) after you? 3: Mass claiming being so obvious is why it doesn't get asked with regularity anymore, no?
It just feels like you're coming across very disparaging over things that, at the time, were infantile in their creation. I've been up front about how this size/timeframe of game is not my strong suit. I answered your questions in what I considered to be suitable depth given the development of my reads. What else would you have me do?
Hey Bur, what factors went into choosing your chat partner?
Do you think you would feel reasonably good about discerning alignment within a private chat? More specifically, do you think you would have a better insight to my alignment had we chatted?
I picked a person I like talking with and who is not likely to make my eyes bleed.
In the end, it came down to you and [the person I picked] and ended up picking the other since [reasons] and I kinda doubted that I'd be able to discern your alignment via neighbour chat.
What makes you think a given player is capable of having their alignment found out in a neighbor chat? If you don't think you can answer this without outing the person you picked, that's an acceptable answer at this point.
@Eco, bit early for that, but if you put a gun to my head, Tom and yourself. Not that Rodemy came out of his interaction with Tom looking worse, but I like Tom's initial mindset. Then again, I generally like his mindset in games, pulls off the nonchalant analyst much better than I ever could.
I think the semantics bit you caught onto, even if it's low-percentage, demonstrates higher-level scumhunting than what a mafioso would need to be doing this early in the game. Starting the conversation as you did, while helpful, seems like the pretty clear line given the setup.
I am tremendously sceptical of these reads. Could you please go into more detail about:
What exactly it is about Tom's initial mindset you like skepticism in Rodemy's early analysis of the setup/scum behavior (28/43), what I interpreted to be topical gifs that were relevant to the game (ex: Seppel), not just *****posting
How you got a town read if the mindset that you like is apparently just Tom meta and presumably therefore not alignment indicative Critical thinking about the setup and challenging Rodemy's base assumptions led me to believe this is town!Tom. I also find that being open to conflict/confrontation early in the game tends to be a more likely town trait than not, which is something Tom's meta tends to exhibit. I feel as though I'm not providing you a sufficient answer to this question.
Why you consider noticing a strict contradiction "high level scum hunting" It wasn't the strict contridiction. It was the semantics involved, which you mentioned in 32. Clearly, he changed his mind here. My observation was not the sentiment of what he way conveying, but his terminology used in doing so ("ultimately be bad" vs "won't do us any good").
What exactly about the conversation I started that seems town, when starting conversations is not a particularly challenging thing to do as any alignment. Generating content > not generating content? Not trying to rewrite the book here. I'm surprised you found more issue with that as opposed to the subject of conversation I pointed out. To answer my own question, however, you posed something open-ended and relevant to the setup that can shed light on people's mindsets on the individuals they chose, which seems potent in such a small setup.
I respect that these are "gun to the head" reads, but I am having real trouble believing that these reads are genuine.
I posted a wine gif because you literally made a post about wine. I have no idea why you saw that as an attack.
I asked you about scum picking their buddy to see if that made sense in your mind. You seemingly not knowing about daychat is a good thing, and yeah its you so im hesitant to accept derp just on principle but I still feel pretty good about the questioning.
And yes my default mode for scumreads against me is dismissal. But yours are especially worthy of it because you should really know better by now.
It's fact I've done nothing scummy. It's also fact I've done nothing towny.
No plans to change that.
And I don't want you to solve the game as if I'm not here I want you to name a scumteam without me on it, because I'm not and that's a copout.
Why should he know better? Why can't his methods for reads on you change from a game-to-game basis?
@Eco: I'm not sure what Town!Dan would've said differently there.
I was trying to make that seem as town-minded as possible, but PBPAs are not my strong suit. By pointing out positives from Rodemy's early game, I hoped to sell the point that I was looking at this from as unbiased of a perspective as possible, instead of just trying to repeatedly drive the point that "RODEMY HAS TO BE SCUM." I think the combination of my showing up late and not just saying "I have no reads 60ish posts into this game" put me a tad behind the 8-ball from the get-go. But I had lurkers to hide behind. I don't push wagons enough as scum.
Tom, in the bit you quoted, are you saying that at the time in the game, town v town wasn't possible? Or the time of writing?
Grape, I thought the game was fun! It was a nice change of pace from the games I usually play, and I love neighbors. I really did want to pick Eco, but my goal was to learn more about Bur for the future. Shame about him not really being super active.
Also, I hate rolling scum.
(no ad hom, just sarcasm)
#14: RVS. Rodemy is a funny individual.
#15: Setup/theory talk regarding the revealing of neighbors. I don’t have any issue with Rodemy “answering for tom” here, considering it’s a pretty broad question that’s being used to facilitate discussion.
This marks the beginning of the “revealing neighbors are good/bad” saga.
#18 Response to Eco. Tom later comments in #23.
#19: Fluff
#22: Eco points out the difference between “claiming neighbors would be bad” and “claiming neighbors won’t do us any good.” Minute, but functional. First glimpse into Rodemy’s mindset.
24/5: Rodemy expands on his answer regarding neighbor claiming. Surprising here that he didn’t respond to Bur’s point about the reasons people chose their neighbors likely being NAI. It seems like it would support his point.
26-29: First of many small convos between the two of you. Rodemy points out that he didn’t have to think about his choice as town, but I don’t think a confident player would need to do so as scum, either. Regardless, easy line to take considering there’s no pressure to explain why choices were made at this point.
31/32: Eco thinks that Rodemy’s was a nervous reaction, but it didn’t strike me as such. Not really something to get nervous about. More than anything, Rodemy acknowledged that his neighbor told him that the scumteam has daychat. This is a minor townslip. Generally speaking, I’d say that not being aware of the mechanics is normally a scumslip, considering they have less need to be concerned about them with the power to just kill whatever’s in their way. But context.
33: More theory conversation, largely. Rodemy continues to lay it on a bit thick for my taste, but I think this is just his personality coming out in text. He does express suspicion of Tom here. We’ll take note of how this is pursued in the future.
36: Rodemy makes his first really… “wrong” response. Both Tom, Shadow, Bur and myself all chime in on this at various points. Wrong =/= scum.
45-7: Rodemy votes Tom. At the time, this was the best reason anyone had to vote for anyone, given that wrong =/= scum. This seems like scumhunting, and Tom’s deflection in #46 doesn’t really provide any reason to pull off the pedal. But Rodemy unvotes all the same. I’ll call this null, considering the conflicts I have in mindset between the two actions.
52: Acknowledging Eco’s suggestion.
64: Acknowledging my statement. If I were town, I’d want to know what and why I was wrong about here, but letting things unfold is also OK.
65: Querying Eco -> Vezok. Fair question to ask.
69/70/72: Back to should(n’t) we claim something about our neighbors. With each of us having posted at this point, it feels like that’s barking up a dead tree to me as opposed to beginning a new line of discussion. Feels like busywork.
77: This is the first scummy post of Rodemy’s. Screaming appeal to emotion, an overreaction here puts the brakes on Bur’s line of questioning and prompts me to ask for further response from him.
81: Rodemy explains his logic behind the neighbor claim, and why he chose not to pursue it. Also explains why he unvoted Tom in a bit more detail. A bit contradictory in function, but you can argue that the proper mindset is there.
93: Continues to push Tom. There’s a response in the middle here that I feel like I’m missing some context to.
97-110: Provides his early reads. Tom says “no.” Rodemy points out the futility of his efforts, and calls Tom defensive. Tom handwaves. Rodemy pushes further, and after Tom’s explanation of Rodemy’s past efforts, Rodemy backs off.
This is framed as an action that is in the best interest of the town. How? Perhaps this is meta between the two of them I don’t have a full understanding of, but Rodemy clearly has the tenacity to pursue this if he felt so inclined. Instead, a bit of resistance and he put up the white flag.
For other people (read:me) to have caught flak for underdeveloped reads, by comparison this was the most justified read in the game. The two of you clearly had the most interaction in the thread of any two individuals. So why not push it? If this is strictly the product of Rodemy not changing his scumhunting methods over the course of time in this specific role pairing between he and Tom, so be it. But the context around the scumhunting will absolutely change, and that shouldn’t stop him from pursuing something that is a scumtell for him.
111-116: Chatter with Bur about votes on him. I think everyone wanted the answer to this question, but Rodemy got to it first.
122: I would disagree with Rodemy, there is more than enough reason for this question to exist. It shows one’s self-awareness and, by extension, their mindset and perception of how they have impacted the game to that point. In the moment, a bit of chainsawing.
125: Not the first time Rodemy is seeing me as scummy for having a read that disagrees with his own. This is him blowing my reads a bit out of proportion, considering I’ve made no mention of that read developing since Eco initially asked about it.
131: Seemingly waffles on his read of me. First act of following coattails onto the meaningful wagons.
135/40: Holds the status quo regarding Bur/Shadow/Tom, which prompts Tom’s 137. I’m on Rodemy’s side regarding this. Tom is within his rights to ask act how he pleases, and Rodemy is within his to pursue answers. Tom later acknowledges this.
My problem with this interaction is that it’s just further reason that Rodemy should be voting for Tom, by all reason. By comparison, there wasn’t any friction when he later votes for Vezok in 147. It goes without saying that scum are less likely to push wagons that they think will have a hard time gaining traction.
151-169: Random one-line posts about neighbors. 161 does point out that he’s caught Tom in an inconsistency, and 167 claims without Shadow’s(apparent) consent.
171: reads. I like these reads. I used them as comparison against Vezok’s.
188: Calls Vezok wrong. Vezok lobbed that one up.
194-208: Pushes Tom for a further read on Vezok. Multiple of us established that a scum’s pick of another individual likely clears the townmember that was picked.
216: Fluff
218-226: Makes his feelings about Shadow clear. Votes in reaction to the jailer claim. Following the line he has laid out.
229: Begins to make plans with Vezok. I have no issues with the unvote here. What I do have issue with is the interaction afterward. Having done a very similar thing before, this feels like interaction with scum just to say you’ve done it.
239-248: Rodemy votes for Eco, not believing the CC. A few people explain why Rodemy is likely incorrect. Is this him trying to keep his buddy alive to put the town into LyLo tomorrow?
257: I can’t actually tell who this is in response to. Me? Bur? Eco? All three of us could be considered as “throwing shade” here. More importantly, he chose not go into detail as to why the arguments against Eco were more sufficient grounds for lynching. This is also another wagon he has chosen to be the second person on.
258: Observes that Shadow isn’t posting. Fair point.
260/61: Again, drops his argument in the face of a bit of resistance.
266-71: Incorrect theory on multiple levels here. The jailer gets a chance to single-handedly WIN THE GAME. It gives you a flip that allows you to try and find the other scum member based off of alignment-confirmed interactions.
288: Restates his opinion on me
*cue d2 quicklynch*
I suppose this is the part where I present a coherent, well-developed case against Rodemy to save the town, right?
I'm gonna need a day to accomplish such things, if you'll give it to me.
I'm gonna guess in the meanwhile, though, that no one has a case of substance against either Bur or myself?
Bur didn't say a word to me last Night
FWIW, I see some cognitive dissonance/faulty points here, but I'm not sure it's worth taking up space at this point given that I believe you are the jailer. Postgame, perhaps.
100% correct.
My issues with Vezok's claim are as such: He strikes me as defeated scum. Look at the difference in tone between 204 and 214! Maybe it's just frustration about having to claim as the jailkeeper, but compare his T/S list in 179 against Rodemy's just above in 171. Vezok's is briefly dropped in, with no further analysis and a passing answer to one of the questions posed to him. I feel like town under pressure would want to use that opportunity to expand on their reads in further detail.
Rodemy explains all of his reads in further detail (not much, but the intent is what matters here), which is more information than he had to provide given the fairly tongue-in-cheek conversation that largely dealt with neighbors.
---
@Eco: I wanted to wait until I got a chance to hear from Bur to reveal my thoughts. His language implied he wasn't the jailer, so there was no further effort needed to try and keep him from CCing. I also assumed you were missing that word, but wanted to be sure. As to game length, I'm used to having longer to develop my reads, like I mentioned earlier to shadow.
When I said thoughts on Rodemy/Tom, I meant more along the lines of reads.
@Rodemy: You're not crazy, but I tend to go with the CCer, not the CCee. Sure, the Jailer being outed doesn't help if the scum are trading 1:1, but it's better than 1:0, which a vanilla claim is most likely to do.
Your post in 248 implies you have issue with shadow's explanation. Prey tell?
Vote: Vezok
@Tom: do you intend to explain your actions at, like, any point? How about what you've gathered from both chats? Did you figure out your conclusion about how Vezok was treating you? I wouldn't say there were exactly extensive interactions between he and you in the game thread.
@Rodemy: can you provide an example re: Shadow demonstrating his towniness? Could that differ between PR & vanilla, as opposed to just town & scum? Also, do you specifically have thoughts on Tom's about-face from voting with Shadow, to voting against him?
I have thoughts on Vezok that I am currently withholding. Bur knows them. @Bur also will remember to answer my question in the game thread when he makes the extended response he owes us at this point.
---
@Eco: Consider this me acknowledging 144. One thing, though:
Emphasis mine. Did you accidentally a word in the bolded section of the first paragraph, or an apostrophe? And as for the second paragraph, do you think that my reads need further developing, or are the foundations shaky to the point where they need reworking? Really hoping it's not the latter, considering my existing concerns about the game length.
Also, what are your thoughts on the extended Rodemy/Tom conversation that is taking up most of our thread?
This does narrow the field considerably, but it seems pretty narrow already.
Yes, knowing why the votes happened would be nice. My guess is they were intending to do that to garner reactions, and it'll be adequately explained in time. Nothing Bur has done thus far really strikes me one way or the other.
@Vezok Do you think the level of player in that game might have had something to do with how Eco's scumhunting/pushing was perceived? How about the willingness of him to use such a method of scumhunting in the future?
Also, do you not see issue with Eco's main complaint against you?
@Bur To supplement Shadow's 121, WHY do you think it deserved votes?
---
@Eco Can we take a step back here? 1: I don't think that just because your justifications and mine differ, that it makes mine bad. Maybe that's not how you're intending to come across, but that's how I'm taking it. 2: If the semantics were that obvious, why did no one else have objections to it (specifically the semantics) after you? 3: Mass claiming being so obvious is why it doesn't get asked with regularity anymore, no?
It just feels like you're coming across very disparaging over things that, at the time, were infantile in their creation. I've been up front about how this size/timeframe of game is not my strong suit. I answered your questions in what I considered to be suitable depth given the development of my reads. What else would you have me do?
What makes you think a given player is capable of having their alignment found out in a neighbor chat? If you don't think you can answer this without outing the person you picked, that's an acceptable answer at this point.
I've bolded my responses in your quote.
Why should he know better? Why can't his methods for reads on you change from a game-to-game basis?