robs progression on coffee just doesnt make sense. First he scumreads him for activity (which is the opposite of basic logic and the phantom memory he had has no grounds in reality, which may or may not mean that its completely made up), then townreads him for it when his memory was jogged (as he puts him in townleans with no other reason given than his initial read being wrong and coffee-activity=good), then claims activity is not a tell for coffee at all, but then keeps his townread on him anyway, while buddying him.
Yes, i still havent gotten over this.
Other rob related things: - his mechanics-talk is fine (pretty good) really, but in case of rob i wouldnt expect anything else really.
as he noted himself, his readlist developed to fit the wagons that were forming. it is indeed too consensy and him wanting to vote with certain other people (oa) further drives this home, passing responsibility for a misslynch to someone else.
My progression is fine. While it may be 'flawed' as in I don't have the answers at the start, but you are somewhat mischaracterizing it. I scumread him suddenly being active and different in a major way from last game wehre he was town (as in, he posted stuff this game... so I thought a variation in playstyle was something to scumlean THAT EARLY IN THE GAME when info is scarce) - and it was based on a faulty memory I had. Yes I corrected and adjusted my read when proper context and history was shown to me. I try to avoid activity tells on ANYONE when there is not a clear and hardline set of evicence to support it which does not exist for coffee - so yeah I rescinded any sort of postcount tell/read on coffee. I am not buddying him - I am finding that I have several times thought very similarly to him while trying to find some to work with a bit that I townread. It isn't foundless and I don't consider it buddying.
The fact that I was willing to try to get reads going so early is towny. The fact I was willing to adjust based on presented evidence and rescinde a scumlean based on facts is towny. Is it WIFOM for me to point this out? Sure, but sheesh kae that's a pretty poor set of reasoning as I see it.
I hate mechanics talk - but in a game so HEAVILY reliant on understanding and discussing roles like this one is I find myself somewhat forced into discussing mechanics. FYI - mafia tend to love discussing mechanics.
My readlist was developing BEFORE they were all wagons - I simply realized it was aligning and thought it was very unlikely I would have them all pegged rightly and that the thread would too - so I commented on it.
I didn't pass any responsibility and it is weird you characterize my voting scumreads of mine as "misslynch" responsibility passing - I see them as good lynches and only once a player flips is it even possible for me to know if right or not.
Kae - your attempt to scumread me is as shaky as I've commented before about some of your reads. I think I asked this before / last game --- do you have a scum-game example to link us to for background / meta? You seem different than last game --- you have a ton of reads that strike me as faked, poor, or misguided in ways that feel forced which I do not remember getting sense of from you at all last game when you were town. I want to try to compare a most recent scum game of yours to last game (you were town) with this game so far. Please / thanks.
Poll
