I don’t understand how you could think that considering whether a move is good or not for scum isn’t worth considering.
GTacc couldn’t help but post in a scummy way, he can’t control something like that firmly. Something broader like whether to vote somebody is easily controllable. Trying to compare the two isn’t reasonable.
I’m not trying to pocket anyone, I prefer that you vote randomly on your own to be honest.
I think it’s a fair comparison. Scum make strategic mistakes all the time. (So do town). If scum never made mistakes, they’d never be caught.
but is it likely. it seems that all voting with gtacc did was draw attention to starv. now starv is the type to throw a scum game if he doesn’t think its winnable but should I be assuming that that is likely reality?
I’m not pushing for you to vote StarV. I’m pointing out that my vote on StarV was justified considering how he was, and continues to behave, in a scummy manner.
If I knew who was scum I would be pushing for them to be voted. But the fact of the matter is that I do not. A large factor is due to a majority of players choosing to behave in an anti-town manner in order to conserve their ranking and to sabotage the efforts of fellow town members in identifying the final scum.
By behaving like scum, they make it difficult for remaining town members to correctly identify the last scum, resulting in them losing points. Meanwhile, they too get a shot to vote scum and in lucky, earn points while the others lose points. As town behavior resembles closer and closer to scum, they become more difficult to distinguish.
As far as I can see, only yourself, myself, and Andres are committed to playing with reasonable effort.
im starting to question whether I can keep you in my town core because what you’ve been giving me just seems so easy to fake. It’s been mostly filler, and what isn’t filler is vague and sterile, not really controversial. you seem to be trying to avoid any conflict when you can possibly avoid it and your initial reaction to me suggesting that you talk about your reads? what was that?
I’m going to take the advice that I originally gave you with regard to Nanook, and state that whether you want to “keep me in your town core” is your own choice. I have tried my best. If you feel that that is insufficient for you, it is your prerogative how you want to read me. You do not need my permission in order to scumread me. Making accurate reads is your responsibility. As long as I have played my part and responded to your queries to the best of my ability, my conscience is clear.
Regarding avoiding conflict, that’s a great life philosophy to have, no?
No it’s not. Being too passive is just as bad as being too confrontational.
Would you like to elaborate?
If one of the issues is regarding bullying, I’m blessed to have avoided cases of being a victim of (serious) bullying so far.
Being passive or non-confrontational is often an excuse for people that are too afraid to take decisive action. Conflict is necessary to achieve a positive outcome in any environment in which everybody cannot achieve the desired outcome. For instance maybe one would have to risk endangering one’s relationship with one’s boss to ask for a raise that one feels that one is owed. A person that isn’t willing to be unkind in certain instances to rectify a friendship or partnership out of a desire to avoid confrontation is just going to end up being bitter. Conflict is everywhere and it’s unavoidable and shouldn’t be avoided, it seems that it just takes on more and more abstract forms among people that are more adept. People often urge others to be passive but that just may be because people that are way too aggressive cause more trouble to society than those who are too passive, who may just be easier to be taken advantage of. I would suggest that there is an optimal amount of conflict/aggressiveness to have and that society tends to exert force in pushing people to be more passive even when it isn’t beneficial for the individual.
Thank you for the advice! I’ll be sure to keep that in mind. Society influencing people to be more passive is certainly quite sinister indeed.
What about the case of team sports and team games like mafia, then? Town is supposed to work in a team, shouldn’t they?
in sports games you know your team and the enemy team. in mafia you don’t. thus in being overly passive in general you are also being too passive towards the enemy team.
and as said before, being passive is a common excuse for people that are fearful. Perhaps then being overly passive and nonconfrontional may be indicative of some kind of fear or nervousness which may stem from being of scum alignment.
so no your cooperational schtick doesn’t impress me until you have the scumhunting to back it up and I’m not seeing much of that so far.
should i bother reading the above or no
if one of you could get a non-pink-haired-anime-girl-avatar that’d be nice
Thank you for your advice! I’ll be sure to keep what you’ve said in mind.
Regarding game related content, I believe you’ll find your efforts much better served by interrogating the players who have barely a quarter of the “substantiative” content that you’ve identified in the wall when quoting my posts. I think your paranoia is unhealthy. In the case if I were a more “aggressive” player as you suggest, it would have led to a town implosion. In my opinion, I think you’re asking too much of me when the rest of the players are barely putting any effort. As you suggest, my passivity results in me devoting extra time to answering your queries and engaging with you in conversation than one would normally spend, in order to quell your paranoia.
I shall therefore take your advice, and face this conflict head on, and spend my time doing something more worthwhile, such as watching anime. Once again, I appreciate your lengthy explanation on this matter.
No