A few thoughts from me as I head back into the earlier part of the game to catch up.
I notice there is a small consensus forming that it might be best to lynch a player who will not be easy to read as the game progresses, and some names have been put forward to this effect. While ordinarily I'd prefer to lynch someone I am scumreading, I accept that my vote on an outlier wagon may not be best used for town. Therefore if, by end of day, I do not have a scum-read that I can feel I can confidently push enough to have them lynched, then I will give me vote to my strongest town-read to direct as they will.
As of right now that player is @gingerbread
During my early catch-up I mind-melded on several of gingerbread's posts, namely post numbers 204, 261 and 441. I also agreed with something they said whilst I was following along on my phone for an hour or so earlier, and that is that there have not been enough town-players making themselves obviously town, which allows the scum to hide better. And this is very true, because if all the mafia need to do to survive is be more active than the least active towns, and less suspicious than the most suspicious towns, then we are not doing a very good job at forcing them to put out more content and be more active. We need to raise the bar for towniness.
I regret that I may have contributed to this state of affairs, given that I've subbed into a slot that was (seemingly) being fairly town-read and am here doing my own thing which may run contrary to what my predecessor was doing, but I hope that I can increase my fellow towns' confidence in me with time.
@Alexis2282AE - you asked earlier how I might approach my opening post differently if I was "the mafia godfather" - which to me sounds like a strange level of confidence in there being a godfather in this setup. Is it a role you would expect to see in this game? Are you 100% confident that the role is in play?
@Naomi - apologies if I've missed your response, but I'll ask again now in case you haven't answered it yet. After I posted my opening post, you expressed some concern that I apparently had a scum-read within the first 9 pages of the thread. I asked why it's okay for Alexis to have *several* scum-reads at that point, but why I with my single scum-read is worthy of your derision. If you could illuminate your thought process on this point that would be great.
Also, what do you think of my other reads? It feels like you saw me vote Juliet and then went into over-react mode for very little reason that I can see, but do you disagree with the other reads that I made? How do my posts make you feel about the other players I mentioned?
While I do appreciate you trying to understand my point of view here, I wanted to ask why you felt the need to reiterate your stance on this.
Additionally, have you considered that I would be scum attempting to play WIFOM games with my initial entry post? No offence, but I'm used to accruing a considerable amount of paranoia from players who aren't familiar with me. I'm very aware that my way of speaking and providing reads often comes across as calculated, which very often pings players as containing possible scum-agenda, particularly players who are inclined to post more conversationally or engage in stream of consciousness style though process. So while your understanding is not exactly unwelcome, it's a little disturbing to me that somebody would townread me so lightly.
And finally, just to clarify, my initial 'sus' on Juliet had nothing to do with any misunderstanding. It was based on my observation that calling attention to two players butting heads is 1) an easy thing for somebody to do in order to appear contributing, and 2) a good way to keep focus on those players/keep them focusing on each other.
I just want to make sure everybody knows exactly what my thoughts on Juliet were during those opening pages.
I notice there is a small consensus forming that it might be best to lynch a player who will not be easy to read as the game progresses, and some names have been put forward to this effect. While ordinarily I'd prefer to lynch someone I am scumreading, I accept that my vote on an outlier wagon may not be best used for town. Therefore if, by end of day, I do not have a scum-read that I can feel I can confidently push enough to have them lynched, then I will give me vote to my strongest town-read to direct as they will.
As of right now that player is @gingerbread
During my early catch-up I mind-melded on several of gingerbread's posts, namely post numbers 204, 261 and 441. I also agreed with something they said whilst I was following along on my phone for an hour or so earlier, and that is that there have not been enough town-players making themselves obviously town, which allows the scum to hide better. And this is very true, because if all the mafia need to do to survive is be more active than the least active towns, and less suspicious than the most suspicious towns, then we are not doing a very good job at forcing them to put out more content and be more active. We need to raise the bar for towniness.
I regret that I may have contributed to this state of affairs, given that I've subbed into a slot that was (seemingly) being fairly town-read and am here doing my own thing which may run contrary to what my predecessor was doing, but I hope that I can increase my fellow towns' confidence in me with time.
@Alexis2282AE - you asked earlier how I might approach my opening post differently if I was "the mafia godfather" - which to me sounds like a strange level of confidence in there being a godfather in this setup. Is it a role you would expect to see in this game? Are you 100% confident that the role is in play?
@Naomi - apologies if I've missed your response, but I'll ask again now in case you haven't answered it yet. After I posted my opening post, you expressed some concern that I apparently had a scum-read within the first 9 pages of the thread. I asked why it's okay for Alexis to have *several* scum-reads at that point, but why I with my single scum-read is worthy of your derision. If you could illuminate your thought process on this point that would be great.
Also, what do you think of my other reads? It feels like you saw me vote Juliet and then went into over-react mode for very little reason that I can see, but do you disagree with the other reads that I made? How do my posts make you feel about the other players I mentioned?
While I do appreciate you trying to understand my point of view here, I wanted to ask why you felt the need to reiterate your stance on this.
Additionally, have you considered that I would be scum attempting to play WIFOM games with my initial entry post? No offence, but I'm used to accruing a considerable amount of paranoia from players who aren't familiar with me. I'm very aware that my way of speaking and providing reads often comes across as calculated, which very often pings players as containing possible scum-agenda, particularly players who are inclined to post more conversationally or engage in stream of consciousness style though process. So while your understanding is not exactly unwelcome, it's a little disturbing to me that somebody would townread me so lightly.
And finally, just to clarify, my initial 'sus' on Juliet had nothing to do with any misunderstanding. It was based on my observation that calling attention to two players butting heads is 1) an easy thing for somebody to do in order to appear contributing, and 2) a good way to keep focus on those players/keep them focusing on each other.
I just want to make sure everybody knows exactly what my thoughts on Juliet were during those opening pages.
Also I‘m not aware of your range, but I‘m working with what I have and what you‘ve done so far which just seems Townie.
