So, chilledtea comes in and states an opinion that defensiveness over minor things indicates Mafia alignment, but then fails to apply this in a meaningful way to the ongoing discussion (whether Knightmare was being overly defensive and whether this indicated that he was Mafia). On eight assume that he was saying that Knightmare was Mafia (because he had a vote down there), but he immediately moved his vote to Sayaka Maizono (without any intervening posts from Knightmare or Sayaka, and with intervening posts from Boonskiies agreeing with the idea that defensiveness is a Mafia trait).
In post 54, chilledtea wrote:
Bcoz ynot.
Anyway, I think knight is town, you are town, and that Sakura is town. This was indeed useful.
When asked to explain the vote, he immediately backs off (but does not remove his vote or seem overly concerned with finding a better target). Furthermore, he is now reading Knightmare as Town!
In post 66, chilledtea wrote:I am finding you town because of your interaction with knightmare. It town vs town imo.
He then interprets the entire interaction as Town/Town, without giving reasons for it. To me, this looks to be an attempt to opt out of analysis and look busy.
Similarly, this thought doesn't quite make it to the realm of "indicative of alignment" in a way that I can understand. Seemingly it wasn't a strong read, because it changes shortly afterward.
In post 336, chilledtea wrote: In post 334, mhsmith0 wrote:
Smith is scum because ____?
Lowell might be town because ____?
I'm especially curious about the second. You were scum reading Lowell consistently in your posts, but now that the wagon looked like it was nearing L-1 and turning really serious you wanted out and are now town reading Lowell. You give no reason for this, just a flat stated town read (cushioned by a "might" modifier). This just SCREAMS tactical voting. Justify your vote and your reads. Yes, I know. Actual effort and transparency. It's a drag but unfortunately it's what the town needs to see in order to actually evaluate you.
Your post. That is the reason.
The nonsensical reasons you have given make me feel that you don't understand the context under which certain actions took place in this game. It almost felt like you are trying to get reasons for your scum read by going through the thread rather than stating your actual feelings.
Lowell could be town because he said the same thing about you.
This is a good point by mhsmith0 and chilledtea makes nothing like a coherent response to it. He backs off again when challenged.
In post 343, chilledtea wrote: In post 338, mhsmith0 wrote: In post 336, chilledtea wrote:The nonsensical reasons you have given make me feel that you don't understand the context under which certain actions took place in this game. It almost felt like you are trying to get reasons for your scum read by going through the thread rather than stating your actual feelings.
Lowell could be town because he said the same thing about you.
:lol:
1) "The nonsensical reasons". WHICH "nonsensical reasons"? And why are they nonsense?
2) "You are trying to get reasons for your scum read by going through the thread rather than stating your actual feelings." You mean like looking for evidence and holding people accountable for what they say, and being clear on WHY I am reading people as scum, instead of just hand-waving "oh my gut says town", "my gut says scum". How in that world is THAT scum-indicative?
Seriously, why not just go all out and say "MHS is trying to scum hunt, therefore he must be scum"? Or do you think I'm fake scum hunting? And if the latter, where is the EVIDENCE for me fake scum hunting? Note that "my gut says you're fake scum hunting" is NOT something I consider an acceptable answer.
3) Lowell could be town because he agrees with your position? Seriously, that's it? What about all the stuff you scum read him for before? :roll:
They are nonsense because they fail to take context into consideration. Seems like you saw a nice opportunity to jump on the almost50 wagon and decided to find "scummy" things.
For eg, You think vote whipping someone is a scum tell. It is 100% something a townie would consider doing if he thinks the game requires more content from said person.
When almost voted sayaka, in fact before that I voted Sayaka as well. And that was a naked vote registered to make a point.
As far as Lowell is concerned, he had like little reason to consider Knight super scum like he did. So I was suspicious. It is still possible he is scum. My read on you has changed. Does it surprise you that people can have change of read on the basis of what you say or don't say?
I see nothing in here that should persuade someone who thought that mhsmith0 was Mafia before this.
In post 596, chilledtea wrote:It has been 17 hours since she posted in here. The 12 hour period is over. Here goes nothing.
VOTE: Madonna
The D1 hammer was bad (not enough time for a claim in a day that was not short on time, no substantiated reason to read Madonna as Mafia). I also note attempts to diffuse responsibility to others here.
In post 532, chilledtea wrote:I am OK with both madonna or lowell lynch today. At the moment the vote is on Lowell, but
if you decide
I am ok with Madonna. She is objectively scummy.
In post 595, chilledtea wrote:I intend to hammer in the next hour,
unless people can convince me
otherwise.
Obviously with such a short timer, there was no sincerity in the offer to be convinced by others--this was purely an attempt to avoid responsibility.
On D2, he has a weird interaction with Garmr that I'll pick apart after one of them flips. I do also want to highlight his vote on Lowell, which he disavowed as "basically RVS" (here is his response to Lowell pointing that out).
In post 672, chilledtea wrote: In post 671, Lowell wrote:Sure, your basically RVS vote. Which is the "I'm not back down you guys see?" version of backing down. So, worse.
This is just bad. What is your theory regarding texcat anyways?
I mean this is just rich coming from you. You have been naked voting texcat yourself. On day 1 you voted knight on a wagon and then turned your attention to texcat with no explanation. Even now, there seems to be no explanation regarding it other than - "I've a theory guys".
