I am finding myself disagreeing with Space more than usual. @Space, can you say why you had trouble reading mcmc's posts with a town narrative?
Sorry if this gets long, but I want to put the focus on those posts into some kind of context :-)
Rough structure of what went on, from an exceptionally Space-centric perspective:
1. On an early re-read, I thought mcmc was generally too confident in the case he was making. I was actually making that post (
#210) in search of a better place to put my vote than my RVS mcmc vote, but honestly couldn't find anything much I scum-read at that point in the game. So for mcmc to be confident enough to argue against the counters on his own scum-read felt iffy to me. (That's all there is to it in terms of a simple answer to your question, EFHW, but why I brought the posts up again later in the game is where the more complicated bit comes in).
2. MiX actively disagreed with me on that, as is summarised in the upper part of his post at
#233. So we can deduce from that that MiX thought mcmc was being townie in the posts he'd made before #210.
3. On a later re-read, I noticed that Robz had gone from expressing suspicion on mcmc at
#191 and
#193, to voting for me at
#204, to totally unvoting at
#220, without any comment on how his mcmc read had evolved in the meantime. One assumes that mcmc's intervening posts at
#197,
#199, and
#201 may have some bearing on the evolving read, and those are a part of the content MiX and I had discussed.
4. Roughly at the same time as I notice that possible inconsistency, faust makes a sort of wagon-fishing attempt on MiX at
#253. I'm always a bit wary of people asking for wagons without joining them, so I wanted to probe faust a bit at that point. Therefore, I asked faust at
#259 whether Robz would be a better target for the alternative to the mathdude wagon that he claimed he wanted. I was deliberate in not elaborating my Robz thoughts at that point because I wanted faust's take, but annoyingly MiX also then butted into that part of the conversation.
5. I got a super-short and unengaged answer from faust, of course, and eventually posted my Robz-observation at
#277.
6. Immediately at
#288, MiX claims I have a good case on Robz. Which is ironic because a) he shouldn't have thought that, given that he was insistent on mcmc's towniness, b) he's totally oblivious to the fact I'm actually trying to engage with faust here, and just keeps
reacting to everything without any apparent effort at processing.
7. I let my frustration with MiX come out at
#280 where I pointed out that he shouldn't believe my case because he specifically already said those posts were townie.
8. MiX responds to me at
#281 to ask if the content of the posts even matters. That would be the three posts that were made by mcmc, during the time in which Robz apparently loses a scumread on mcmc. In what imaginary MiX-universe
don't the contents of those posts matter? At that point I lost the will to keep engaging with MiX and just left it hanging, because my intended replies were a little too much on the snarky side.
tl;dr I was trying to probe faust because I didn't like his wagon-hunting on MiX, and bringing up mcmc's posts again was mostly due to MiX getting in the way of that, and not actually to do with me being obsessed with three things mcmc said earlier in the game. I realise that for people not inside my own head, that may not have been quite so evident, though :-P
Author
Topic: M134: Conference Call Mafia V 2.0 - Game Over - Skum Wins! (Read 116971 times)