Self-Meta for Null Tells

AlwaysInnocent · Post Post #10 (isolation #0) » Sun Dec 20, 2015 9:32 pm

The problem is that every context is different, which heavily influences the undertaken actions. There are often subtle (or not so subtle) differences. Every game is different in a way. So when someone says "that is a null tell against me", I will not be convinced right away that I should drop this specific reason for scumreading them. Other than that, sometimes something is a null tell regardless of meta.

It is also better if someone else does the meta-reading for you (if you want to use meta-reads to nullify reads). Self-metas are meh.

AlwaysInnocent · Post Post #12 (isolation #1) » Sun Dec 20, 2015 10:17 pm

In post 11, Plotinus wrote:You don't have to agree with them just because they say something's null for them. It's not a get out of scumreading free card. It's okay to reply with "I still think you're scum". But I don't think it's scummy to say "yeah I do that every game that's just who I am".

They're saying it's null, which means they do it as both alignments, which means they could still be scum or they could be town after all.

Yes, but perhaps they are leaving the context out of consideration. Saying "I do action X all the time regardless of alignment" when they actually meant "I do action X all the time when context C regardless of alignment". However, if this is context C', not context C, then that may not be a null tell after all.

AlwaysInnocent · Post Post #14 (isolation #2) » Sun Dec 20, 2015 10:39 pm

Saying I'm scum because I'm writing too many words will piss me off.

Yeah, that is shitty reasoning regardless of your meta.

AlwaysInnocent · Post Post #19 (isolation #3) » Thu Dec 24, 2015 10:21 am

Rob, you were scum in that game. Perhaps people had a good reason to bring that up against you. You felt that you didn't give anything away, because you felt that you didn't diverge from your town game. I just don't believe that.

This is why you are not "allowed" to talk about your self-meta. You were scum and were using it to stop people from suspecting you. However, they were right to suspect you.

AlwaysInnocent · Post Post #21 (isolation #4) » Thu Dec 24, 2015 12:23 pm

In post 20, Davsto wrote:
In post 19, AlwaysInnocent wrote:Rob, you were scum in that game. Perhaps people had a good reason to bring that up against you. You felt that you didn't give anything away, because you felt that you didn't diverge from your town game. I just don't believe that.

This is why you are not allowed to talk about your self-meta. You were scum and were using it to stop people from suspecting you. However, they were right to suspect you.

Just because the correct conclusion is reached, it doesn't mean the methods used to reach that conclusion are correct.

I feel this applies a lot to Mafia. Quite often people go "well my logic wasn't flawed because [X] was scum" to deflect criticism of flawed arguments, and that is fallacious.

Perhaps it was a certain way of tunneling that caused people to believe that he was scum, that was different from his town game, and they just weren't able to formulate it well enough. There are so many things that can be overlooked.