2 mafia
1 town vig 7 vts
assuming we always mislynch/misvig and mafia dont kill vig
today is 2v8
tmrw is 2v5
mislynch and mafia kill without vig shot is f5
-shrug-
thereās behaviour that on a minor level i expect from someone as town and itās not there. thereās nothing complicated about that at all.
itās quite easy to say that itās absurd just because āoh haha scumreading a prodgeā but in terms of my reasoning itās not even out of the ordinary. i think youāve made similar reads this game using similar logic.
so if we mislynch, misvig, mislynch then vig shouldnt shoot n2
like i really dont see how youre supposed to believe this is alignment indicative at all
like literally what is the point of indicating youve read the thread
and in context i dont think heās even read the thread when prodging
what???
either you are deliberately misunderstanding what iām saying or you have a serious issue with reading comprehension. this is getting very tiring.
āwhat is the point of indicating that youāve read the thread?ā - completely misses the point of what iām saying. i donāt expect transcend to say āhey guys i read the threadā - i expect him to say something else that has the effect of showing me that he has read the thread. nowhere, nowhere did i say or even imply that he should have deliberately done something to indicate heās read just for the sake of indicating.
even more, yes, i donāt think heās read the thread. thatās my entire point. he doesnāt seem to have read the thread. i think that town him would have read the thread and would have said something that showed that he read. that. is. my. point.
like, seeing you say this honestly baffles me.
am i the problem here? i really donāt feel like i phrase things in a way thatās difficult to understand at all.
im lost lol
so you think he would find time to read the thread if he was town??
ok so tldr you think he didnt read the thread and you think thatās mafia indicative???
if im correct that looks worse lol
yes, slightly.
why?
whether he read the thread or not is nai and attacking him for that is a stretch but you make the assumption that he would indicate that he read the thread to make that attack which makes it worse
no, itās not. i would accept the argument that in this case itās not necessarily scum-indicative, but someone when (presumably) given the chance choosing not to read the thread is not nai.
āattackā
āstretchā
both imply far greater strength in this read than iāve ever once stated, as weāve gone over previously. itās not an āattackā to say that i simply believe that someone not reading the thread could be a minor indication that theyāre scum. youāre consistently overstating my beliefs and, like i said, itās getting pretty tiring.
is it really so unreasonable to expect that someone who has read the thread would say something that showed that they read the thread? is that really unreasonable?
i mean, reading the thread and just having nothing to say and as such just not posting is reasonable. thatās happened to me before plenty of times, even with this very game. however, if someone is going to make a post after reading the thread, i would expect it to at least say something.
even then, if transcend had outright said āi read the thread but i donāt have anything to sayā, i would definitely townread that.
holy shit
wow, i hate this game.
im sry if thatās my fault
hm it looks like my fault
it is.
im sryyyy im trying to interpret ur things correctly