Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[2.71828.....]

While researching for my previous post, I noticed some Eevee stuff from today that I think deserves its own post (and actual quotes):

I agree with Voltaire, and not only because I know myself to be town.

Scum wants nothing more than towncred for lynching scum of the opposite team. I think because of that, it's natural they would be more wagon-happy than townies.

Now that I think of it, I'm also developing suspicions of people who joined the lynched convinced by the scum slip. How many times does this need to happen before people learn? Applies especially to more veteran players - we are building a good pile of evidence to the theory that "only town scumslip, because scum is more careful in their posting".

I don't remember who else but Robz was vocal about the wording making no sense for anyone but scum, but scum points for that. I actually feel bad for not supporting yuma earlier for being the voice of reason yesterday, I was fighting to stay caught up all the time and never really developed a strong read on faust. Hindsight is 20/20 of course.

but then we have

I think it was either a gigantic blunder from yuma to vote for faust or he is scum. I might give a pass for someone else for doing something like this, but i think yuma should know better. Like.. i just dont understand hammering people you dont think will flip scum. i totally understand voltaire's frustration, even if i dont agree with the harsh wording he chose.

yuma's actions were also a gigantic hedge of the scummy kind. of faust flips town, he makes this post. if faust flips scum, he takes the credit for hammering mafia. i agree that true scumslips dont exist / this forum (me included) always attacks dumb wording/thinking errors, but being responsible and accountable for your votes is mafia 101, and hammer votes should be especially heavily scrutinized.

i'm too tired to look back to the vote situation / general mood to see if scumyuma could have something to gain from such a risky play, but i'm honestly thinking the only yuma that could have his wincon advanced by that hammer is scumyuma and townyuma doesnt make mistakes that big or would at least start by apologizing if he out of frustration did.

So Eevee feels bad that he did not help out yuma on D1, but not too bad.  I mean, sounds like Eevee had the same thoughts as yuma about faust and sympathizes with his opinions, but now that yuma has brought out enough rope Eevee is more than happy to help hang him up on it.

[2.71828.....]

Also, forgive me, but I realized just now that my overview post on Eevee has an error. 

However, now we get interesting, when Eevee comes out and gives us his first strong opinion of the game.  Eevee comes out strong against faust, and leads Voltaire into making a strong decision to vote yuma and keep his vote on yuma the rest of the day.

Should be "strong against yuma"

[Eevee]

And now the other thing: My growing suspicion that Eevee is scum.

Reasons:

1). It's a feeling. Eevee usually screams town to me. He always screams town to me. He's almost always town. He feels a lot different here.

2). He's said some jarringly weird or non-Eevee things (like the Star Wars thing).

3). I was not the only one who thought this. Ashersky was very vocal about how odd Eevee was acting.

Eevee's different this game.  Changing up a meta?  Lots of null reads and jokes, no buddying OR scum reads.  Hmmmm...

And ashersky died.

4). His most recent long-ish post stakes out very rational ground, a well thought out and written opinion on yuma... that nonetheless concludes yuma is scum, but leaves himself room for doubt. It's hard to tell whether he's like just townie legitimiately unsure and torn up about why yuma did what he did, or scum positioning for a yuma lynch.

1. Heh, while I obviously can't refute gut reads - they are your feelings, not mine - I feel the exact opposite. I think we've both been on each others throats in almost every game lately! I remember this especially well, because I've more than once though "man, hopefully we don't eventually stop liking each other outside the game because it feels in the game all we ever do is fight and disagree". I feel my suspicions on you, albeit often wrong, have been a little more justified than yours as you've been scum way more, but that's not really relevant for this game here. Anyways, I don't think the premise for this point is true at all.

2. Ok, I actually think that was an extremely Eevee-y thing to say - I don't like to RVS just for the sake of RVS'ing, but I love references, I love Star Wars (or rather what it stands for) and I love to welcome new guys to the game/community. So, that's what that was. Everyone but you seemed to understand that, but I guess it's natural to take votes on yourself a little personally, especially if you get run to L-2 for apparently no reason. I absolutely never ever would have let that wagon on you go through though, I unvoted after I felt the vote had played the "well, RVS does create reactions and helps the game to move" function. Not only do I disagree with this being true, I also don't really see the connection it would have to my alignment even if it was. Why is saying non-Eevee things scummy? The only scum narrative I can think of is me wanting to vote for you to get you lynched so bad I had to resort to bad reasons to get to do that - but my unpressured unvote later is evidence of the contrary, and frankly, you can't really think I'm so bad at the game I couldn't come up with something better (or just drop that plan if I couldn't.. or really even to device such a plan in the first place).

3). I was not the only one who thought this. Ashersky was very vocal about how odd Eevee was acting.

Eevee's different this game.  Changing up a meta?  Lots of null reads and jokes, no buddying OR scum reads.  Hmmmm...

And ashersky died.

4). His most recent long-ish post stakes out very rational ground, a well thought out and written opinion on yuma... that nonetheless concludes yuma is scum, but leaves himself room for doubt. It's hard to tell whether he's like just townie legitimiately unsure and torn up about why yuma did what he did, or scum positioning for a yuma lynch.

Points 1 and 2 I can't really comment on.  I don't have the experience to know Eevee's meta (or anyone's for that matter)
Points 3 and 4 are convincing though.  A good response from Eevee is in order, I think.

3. What is there to respond to here? I didn't kill ashersky, if that's what you are asking! I don't even see a scum read in the post you quoted from ashersky - I see hesitation and laying out things we could discuss to develop a stronger read later. I would agree with him - recently my play or at least the community's perception of my play has been changing gradually. I'm a young fellow, I change all the time! But, even if ashersky did think I was scummy, that was one post, earlyish day 1? He never even voted for me, never tried to rally the townfolk against me. He never even said he suspects me! He had 85 posts, in one of which he expressed hesitation on my alignment. I'd wager if you reread ashersky, you'd find at least half the town had more reason to kill him for his reads than I did - I'm sure the man had some actual scum reads as well, although admittedly I do not remember who they were.

4. E, when I was reading to catch up, reading this was when I said to myself "wow, I'd be surprised if something scummier than this comes across, I'm voting for this guy when I'm done reading". I think all of Robz's points are extremely weak - it looks like he either legitimately has a gut based scumread on me, and reread me to build a case, only finding stuff that's scummy if you come from the predecided mindset "I'm looking for evidence that Eevee is scum so I can get others to agree with me and him lynched", but decided to post it anyways because his mind had gotten a bit tunnely and he didn't realize there really wasn't a case (this is if robz is town), or he for whatever reason thought I'd be a viable mislynch and went to reread me to specifically look for stuff he could spin to scummy to achieve that (if he is scum). You agreeing with the case, especially if you admittedly only can follow the latter half of it, just REEKS of scum that sees someone making an incorrect case that looks pretty on the surface, and jumping on board without really thinking about it's merits to achieve a mislynch. I think you and Robz are unlikely to be partners, because I would assume scum in general and especially newer scum to be wary of such obvious play, but I think sheeping to bad cases is leagues scummier than actually making a bad case.

As to the actual point Robz made, I don't even think it's a point. "He said this about yuma, which  means he is either town, or scum". You build both narratives yourself, without even saying you think the scum version is more likely let alone giving any reasons for that! Funnily enough, I wrote the posts on yuma before taking a break from this game to continue on GoT, and when I came back to reread with fresh eyes, I found myself coming to different conclusions than I did a week ago, but more on that on the post dedicated to the changed yuma read, this is getting a quite long.

[Eevee]

Next up my read on Robz, as I touched the subject in my last post and it's a natural place to continue.

Okay, can't wait to hear the reason you think I'm scum that isn't pure OMGUS.

No, no no no! No! We are playing mafia, not tag! You don't get to invalidate any suspicion someone might have on you just by being the first to post your scum read on the other person! Especially not in a situation where almost half the people are scum, that's just ridiculous.

That being said, having slept on it I'm leaning milder scum on Robz. As I said at the end of my last post, I only just now realized you DO, or at least did, legitimately think I'm scum, so this has nothing to do with omgus, as I explicitly state that I don't doubt you believe in your case. Or, well, maybe you have some of it right. While I have the bigger point I'm getting to next, my initial reaction to seeing you make a case on me I deemed absolutely untrue on all counts was to think "well, this just heightens my suspicion on Robz". So, okay, there was omgus in my scum read on you, but this.. slightly weaker scum read (??) is omgus-free now.

My suspicion stems from your beef with Voltaire. His point of "scumRobz always trying to discredit people who suspect him" resonates with me extremely well - I hadn't thought of it before but it's EXACTLY what you do - you use your quite considerable rhetorical talent and the established authority you have in the community for playing so long and successfully to sweep anyone who criticizes you under the rug. I'm often irritated by this, I felt you were being EXTREMELY unfair to Voltaire in M31 and I remember thinking "man, I'm going to be disappointed if Robz is scum and won't let him get away with that again"* (but obviously I forgot it since Voltaire brought it up now). I don't remember the game number, but it was raerae's glorious debut as an IC, the buffy themed one, where we caught someone, I think it was Lekkit, for trying to discredit raerae as an IC in every twist and turn (because her reads really were so spot on). Now, I understand you actually did have a strong reaction to how Voltaire came against the faust-wagon (and how he strongly he worded those thoughts), but this just feels SO parallel to MC - you are in an argument with Voltaire, I agree with all Voltaire is saying and think your reads are quite misguided, and you keep on arguing how terribly wrong Voltaire is and discrediting him in every turn conceivable. In MC I had a strong town read on Voltaire, here I know him to be town.
* If you actually did feel that strongly that Voltaire is a SK, this isn't as true any more. I thought that part was manufactured as well.

No other reason to think you are scum though, just that one, albeit it's one I believe in quite a bit. But, you aren't my strongest suspicion, even though I the fact you started discrediting me as well the second I voiced suspicion on you by calling it OMGUS before you even knew my reasons (!!) is I think evidence of the case being good.

I hope I'm not offending you, it's not my intention in the slightest to attack your character or anything like that. I like how nicely the argument with Voltaire played out in the end, and I by no means want to pick a fight and revive it. But, this is the reason I have a scum read on you. Not omgus, your actions in the game!

[Eevee]

scum: robz, e, sudgy, archetype

nice.  That means me and my scum partner discussed a brilliant strategy where either

No, it doesn't! I touched on this earlier, but I specifically do NOT think you are likely to be from the same team. I'm not even saying you are both scum of opposing teams!

I'm saying you are both on the scummy end of the spectrum for me. I think once, and only once i my 50 or something game mafia "career" my entire reads list (at a comparable state of the game) has been correct (the game where I nailed jotheonah/Qvist/someone early day 2 and stuck to my guns - my glorious only MVP game I think, it was waay back). I understand my limitations, I'm not claiming the two scum teams consist of these four players. These are the players I think are mostly likely to flip scum, individually and without relation to the other people on the list.

Basically, my reads at this point are:

Myself: Well, the pm I got says town.
Voltaire: Might as well have gotten a pm, the real doctor would have counterclaimed already.


yuma: Should probably explain this in it's own post, especially as I'm blanking on verbalizing the reasons for the 180° right now.





Gweoniz, Jimmmm, liopoil: I'm pretty much totally null for the lack of information (either because they haven't posted enough, because nothing in their posts has stood out to me enough or simply because I can't remember their posts). I think having a null category this size at this point in the game is ok. I could develop meaningful and informed reads on them by putting in more work, and that will become necessary later days, but given I have a healthy pool of scum reads already (so I expect these guys to mostly fill the town read category), I don't feel the effort it would take is necessary (=advances the accuracy of my reads enough compared to the unpleasant effort it would take). Basically, without being on the reread all the time, my brain can hold a meaningul, informed read on only so many players at the time.


Archetype: a slight scum read, for the case E (spoiler: another scum read) made. Now, in this game I don't think it particularly matters if a case on someone is built by your scum read or your town read, especially at this point where a lot of our reads also tend to just be wrong. Sure, if I'm right about E, I'll put less credit to his case after the flip, because scum just has a harder time nailing scum due to there being only half the amount of scum for them to hunt, but for the time being I'm fine with agreeing with a case made by my strongest scumread. I only read the case once and that was from phone when catching up late last night, so I haven't gone back to verify anything (or read archetype's rebuttal yet, as there isn't one). I don't even really remember what there was to the case other than the lurking, I just remember there was a case and I found myself nodding in agreement upon reading it. Again, my brain can only hold so much, and this will become more topical once archetype comes back to answer E. I feel my efforts are better concentrated elsewhere until that happens, so I'll come back to Archetype when he comes back to the game.

Robz: Covered above.
sudgy: His answers to yuma's grilling regarding the faust-vote are very lackluster to me. I see a strong possibility of scum putting down a scummy vote, being called out on it and not being able to explain it. Especially as sudgy's attitude hasn't been "I made a mistake", which is what again I'd think the plausible town narrative would be. He is insisting he had sufficient reasons for the vote, yet is as far as I can see unable to provide them.



E: Well, the timeline, as I see it, for E's day 2 is he does a couple of very scummy things (his arbitrary excluding and including people of different lists and deciding where the scum lies based on his assumptions reeked of scum just wanting to manipulate town towards his desired direction, and I covered how scummy I deemed his sheeping of Robz's case when I answered to that), gets called out on them (by the IC, of all people) and when the general atmosphere clearly starts to turn towards him being thought of as a lynch candidate, he rushes off to do quite extensive rereads, changes his tone of posting completely (I want to say from scummy to more calculated and cautious but that's just my perspective). Now, I do not want to give the impression I don't appreciate the work he put into the rereads and the game in general - I know it tremendously helped me to catch up quickly and more effortlessly. However, I disagree with giving him town cred for that - in fact it builds more towards the narrative of scum aggressively pursuing a mislynch (=lynch of someone not in his team), until he realizes he stepped over the line and then bolting back to his trench to wait out the attack (wait out not by lurking but by posting non-controversial stuff, and so much of it that the earlier stuff would be forgotten or forgiven.. some people react to cases on them by staying silent and hoping the case disappears, to me it seems like e reacted by abandoning his earlier goal of aggressively pushing us towards a lynch and just taking a defensive (albeit a very active) stance). This metaphor is much clearer in my heads, but think of it as a WW2 battle, first he runs from the trenches his guns blazing at his enemies like Rambo, then he gets called out on trying to shoot them and they shoot back, so he retreats to the bunker to wait out until we forget about him.

[Eevee]

Procrastinated starting to write up the change of heart on yuma too much, and now I have to go kick ass at floorball. That's the only thing I have left to type, I think.

[yuma]

vote: 2.7

In lieu of an explanation, I will attempt to form your case against me and respond to it.  I will use your latest post (not the vote).  Tell me how I do.

Well that was a lot of work and so I feel bad to say that my reason for voting you was actually this snippet:

scum: robz, e, sudgy, archetype

nice.  That means me and my scum partner discussed a brilliant strategy where either ...

[yuma]

Also, what's with you forgetting Eevee's part in your group of "those who came out against me"

missed it I guess. I could easily find the ones with votes on me via a "search: v0t3: yuma" (changed so that people wouldn't think I was voting for myself in similar searches) but the others had to be off memory which is prone to error, but thanks for pointing it out and I will be sure to take a look at it.

[Voltaire]

unvote (!)

[Gveoniz]

I am unable to post too much today, I post my read

Town:
Voltaire, Gveoniz

Neutral:
liopoil, Eevee, archetype, robz, Jimmmmm

Slight scum:
yuma, sudgy, 2.71828

I know that didn't not fill out the scum list and lack any clear and solid read, but I am not certain enough to put anyone scum. I will try to explain soon, or tomorrow.

[sudgy]

People are saying that they find me scummy for me not saying my vote was a mistake.  Well guess what people.  I'm not saying that because my vote wasn't a mistake!  If you're going to think I'm scum for not lying, that is one of the weirdest ways to scumhunt ever.

[Gveoniz]

People are saying that they find me scummy for me not saying my vote was a mistake.  Well guess what people.  I'm not saying that because my vote wasn't a mistake!  If you're going to think I'm scum for not lying, that is one of the weirdest ways to scumhunt ever.

In a strict sense your vote (do you mean faust's?) can be regarded as a mistake since that is a mislynch for everyone, but it wasn't a mistake. If it is your D2 vote then I am not sure.

------------------

Starts with simpler one for my explanations:

Voltaire: Certainly town doctor, unless some how the real one decided not to counter claim.

Jimmmmm: no post to read on, we will have to wait for him.

Eevee: active (and helpful?) but not very notable(especially early in the game), I will have to read more thoroughly.

Liopoil: Again, not very notable except the opposition too the doctor claim. I should have paid more attention.

I have to leave it her today, hopfully I can have more time tomorrow and do the rest of them. And hopefully reread the "less notable".

------------------

I feel the being unable to get a clear read on any one is like I am trying to avoid suspicion by putting less suspicion on others. I really need a  thorough reread later.

[sudgy]

I'm talking about when I originally placed my faust vote.  People are saying that it's scummy that I told the truth.

[Eevee]

unvote (!)

IC is sheeping me!

Eevee: active (and helpful?) but not very notable(especially early in the game), I will have to read more thoroughly.

That's probably just because I wasn't very active or helpful day 1.

I'm thinking of cutting back my mafia playing severely. I'm thinking of these games as my last huzzah, trying to go out with a bang and give it all I have. I hope folks are online tonight to post lots with me! No one has commented my long posts at all yet. 

[Eevee]

People are saying that they find me scummy for me not saying my vote was a mistake.  Well guess what people.  I'm not saying that because my vote wasn't a mistake!  If you're going to think I'm scum for not lying, that is one of the weirdest ways to scumhunt ever.

I think people here means Eevee. This is getting very convoluted and confusing, but I think what you are saying is "my explanation for the vote is reasonable, sufficient and the truth, how can it be scummy? should I have lied?". Our disagreement is that I don't think the explanation is reasonable or sufficient (and that if you are town, you would have acknowledged that.. instead you are continuing to insist that the suspicion based on that is unreasonable, which makes me think you as scum chose to stick to your story.

[Jimmmmm]

This thing between Robz and Eevee is interesting. I will take a closer look when I have time.

[sudgy]

People are saying that they find me scummy for me not saying my vote was a mistake.  Well guess what people.  I'm not saying that because my vote wasn't a mistake!  If you're going to think I'm scum for not lying, that is one of the weirdest ways to scumhunt ever.

I think people here means Eevee. This is getting very convoluted and confusing, but I think what you are saying is "my explanation for the vote is reasonable, sufficient and the truth, how can it be scummy? should I have lied?". Our disagreement is that I don't think the explanation is reasonable or sufficient (and that if you are town, you would have acknowledged that.. instead you are continuing to insist that the suspicion based on that is unreasonable, which makes me think you as scum chose to stick to your story.

If I acknowledge that the explanation isn't reasonable or sufficient, as you say, I would be lying.  I don't think that it's unreasonable or insufficient.  If you think my explanation wasn't fine, that's fine by me, but saying that you think I'm scummy because I didn't say my vote was unreasonable or insufficient is stupid as I would be lying if I say that.

[Robz888]

Well, crap. Now I'm behind. Give me a bit...

[Eevee]

People are saying that they find me scummy for me not saying my vote was a mistake.  Well guess what people.  I'm not saying that because my vote wasn't a mistake!  If you're going to think I'm scum for not lying, that is one of the weirdest ways to scumhunt ever.

I think people here means Eevee. This is getting very convoluted and confusing, but I think what you are saying is "my explanation for the vote is reasonable, sufficient and the truth, how can it be scummy? should I have lied?". Our disagreement is that I don't think the explanation is reasonable or sufficient (and that if you are town, you would have acknowledged that.. instead you are continuing to insist that the suspicion based on that is unreasonable, which makes me think you as scum chose to stick to your story.

If I acknowledge that the explanation isn't reasonable or sufficient, as you say, I would be lying.  I don't think that it's unreasonable or insufficient.  If you think my explanation wasn't fine, that's fine by me, but saying that you think I'm scummy because I didn't say my vote was unreasonable or insufficient is stupid as I would be lying if I say that.

This is getting even more confusin.

I'm saying the position you are taking on all this is not one of a town player.

I think town sudgy wouldn't NEED to lie - he'd agree with me. You don't, so I think you are scum that got stuck in his web of lies.

I mean I'm not expecting you to say "I agree! You got me!" so I don't think this argument is going anywhere. I'm not making it to convince you, I'm making it to convince the town (and the other scum team, if I'm right).

[Voltaire]

Point: This is all reminiscent of how town!sudgy was "caught" in LOTR2.

Counterpoint: ?

[sudgy]

People are saying that they find me scummy for me not saying my vote was a mistake.  Well guess what people.  I'm not saying that because my vote wasn't a mistake!  If you're going to think I'm scum for not lying, that is one of the weirdest ways to scumhunt ever.

I think people here means Eevee. This is getting very convoluted and confusing, but I think what you are saying is "my explanation for the vote is reasonable, sufficient and the truth, how can it be scummy? should I have lied?". Our disagreement is that I don't think the explanation is reasonable or sufficient (and that if you are town, you would have acknowledged that.. instead you are continuing to insist that the suspicion based on that is unreasonable, which makes me think you as scum chose to stick to your story.

If I acknowledge that the explanation isn't reasonable or sufficient, as you say, I would be lying.  I don't think that it's unreasonable or insufficient.  If you think my explanation wasn't fine, that's fine by me, but saying that you think I'm scummy because I didn't say my vote was unreasonable or insufficient is stupid as I would be lying if I say that.

This is getting even more confusin.

I'm saying the position you are taking on all this is not one of a town player.

I think town sudgy wouldn't NEED to lie - he'd agree with me. You don't, so I think you are scum that got stuck in his web of lies.

I mean I'm not expecting you to say "I agree! You got me!" so I don't think this argument is going anywhere. I'm not making it to convince you, I'm making it to convince the town (and the other scum team, if I'm right).

I see where you're coming from.  Alright, carry on.

[2.71828.....]

Procrastinated starting to write up the change of heart on yuma too much, and now I have to go kick ass at floorball. That's the only thing I have left to type, I think.

First time I ever heard of floorball.  Looked it up on wikipedia and it looks pretty cool.  Hope you kicked some ass. 

I have some thoughts about your detailed reasoning behind why you find me scummy, but will have to delay my response.  Unfortunately, I actually had some work that needed to get done today, and am only checking in at lunch.  I might get time to respond this afternoon, but otherwise it probably won't be until Friday as I am responsible for making dinner tonight and going over to a friend's for a birthday party after that.

[Robz888]

In response to Eevee's response to my case... yeah, okay. I guess it is a weak case. And you sound more like yourself now.

[Eevee]

In response to Eevee's response to my case... yeah, okay. I guess it is a weak case. And you sound more like yourself now.

Do you have any comments on my very non-omgus case on you?

Robz backing out like this is a nulltell for me. It's the reasonable response, was expecting this to happen.

[yuma]

So some interesting things to observe from Gveo...

18 posts in game:

Vote: 2.71828.....  for being irrational, it is really unhelpful to the town.

Just returned home, it seems that a lots happened during my local day, but on the matter of doctor claiming, it seems good to to me, but I need some more time to think about it, if my opinion in this theory talk is valuable.

btw, Vote: faust

I understand that I =am the one who have the least post apart from NHS, whose is a new player and I can complete understand that. I am trying to catch up with everything right now, although on my first glance it seems that everything I would like to talk about after think for an entire day have already been said, I would try to express what I think and additionally see if I can add any contribution soon.

By the way, here is my thought on the doctor claim:

I think this is a fair trade, I am unable to judge how good it really is though. But since the claim have already happened this don't really matter any more.

unvote, RVS should not interferes with real wagons.

And I don't really understand the sudgy thing, and am also unable to find faust scummy for this. Need to study that further.

I am trying to sort out the sudgy / faust issue right now. I am thinking about B > D > A > C. But I cannot be sure, I will see if I can organize and post my thinking soon.

It is totally possible for it to be a mistake and both would be town.
I don't think of bussing in this situration, but it is probably due to the lack of experience dealing with it, I can't remember reading notable bussing somewhere else either.

(or perhaps I should looked beyond votes, but that will take more time.)

I have a feeling that everything voltaire said is well considered by himself and would be helpful later. (In a currently unsure way for me).

e has rocketed up the scum ladder today.

I was going to do 2.7 reread anyway. I will post what I think here.
He is still notably active and contributing for a new player, but apart form occasional mention of his newness, quite confident. (perhaps it just a difference in style, being a semi-new player myself I find myself unable to express myself in a certain and confident way)

I also for no reason at all feel some manipulativeness, but I would need more time to look into that to make sure that I was not plainly under the influence of this:

So my reasoning above is kind of scummy going by saying I am "merely playing the odds" when it is clear that my target was Archetype in that group.

(By the way, that statement nearly make be want to accuse him for that reason when I didn't looked at the whole post carefully enough.)

On things I think about is the toleration of my inactivity (form robz and 2.7?), I personally of course like to be tolerated and understand and appreciate your understandings. But comparing myself with archetype, who is considered (quite) scummy partially because of inactivity. I do have a concern (although there are reasons like "I have more actual content" and  "I am just a semi-newbie") that one may get some benefits that I cannot perceive yet.

It is possible that I just think a bit too much about this and mistreated your kindnesses, if that is the case, please accept my apology.

I know that didn't not fill out the scum list and lack any clear and solid read, but I am not certain enough to put anyone scum. I will try to explain soon, or tomorrow.

I feel the being unable to get a clear read on any one is like I am trying to avoid suspicion by putting less suspicion on others. I really need a  thorough reread later.

Above is listed 12 different posts where Gveo either uses his newness as an excuse, says he doesn't have strong reads or is very unsure or needs to go back to find more.

I find it very interesting that so many posts contain this sort of language... I do think it would be worth going back to look at the newbie game he was in--or if sudgy or arch who played/modded in it can just remember--to compare this behavior to that game. Cause I am wondering if this is nervous new scum behavior?