I also believe that Max is acting as his scumself. I think I'd characterize it as being ornery. Sure he's usually antisocial but there's a certain kind of antisocial here.
I find it odd with Max's previous outburst that they would vote anybody after being goaded by Jim.
I feel mafia!Max wouldn't be so anti-town, so...it's a towntell. I actually scumread Max in Proc Gen 4 for being extremely selfless on D1 of that game. Later I read in the scumchat that Max himself thought that statement made him very townie, and was amused that I scumread them for it.
I don't believe Max acts extremely selfishly here as mafia, which is what he's been doing in this game.
I take issue with your describing it as
selfish.
I'm town and I want to win with the rest of town, so I don't think I'm being anti-town at all. If I did, I would stop. I do, though, have basically zero confidence in anyone else's scumreads. I guess I'd say that I tend to approach any game where I'm town with the assumption that everyone else will make bad choices. This isn't because I specifically think you are bad at the game, it's just the obvious neutral default to me: everyone else certainly
might make bad choices, so it seems better for me to plan for that than to assume everyone will make good choices and very probably be disappointed at least once.
I was going to write more but then I saw more posts. So I'm just going to move on to those. My wounded amor propre is not the important thing here.
Egan, I don't think your idea about how I play as scum is remotely accurate. Please tell me how any of it applies to the last game in which I was scum playing normally.
I didn't read that game, and I'm not gonna do it now. This is how you played in BBYOR 2.
That was literally the game in which I did the best job acting like my real townself that I have ever done.
Max: Your exploratory D1 vote did not surprise me or even seem noteworthy. What is noteworthy to me is your new take on it, which I quoted at the top of my post.
What, now you're all moving on NQT when nobody would vote for him when I did before.
See, as you just said, your vote on him before was an "exploratory d1 vote" - so why are you saying this?
NQT has been one of the players I trust least so far this game, and the one whose flip I most want to see.
Then where is the case or the serious vote? All I could find was an "exploratory d1 vote"
I think he could absolutely be scum, and, if I'm wrong, I think it would be informative to find out. I didn't want to move my vote off him before, but nobody was going for it then. 
Then where was your case? This entire take just doesn't match with what you were saying and doing.
I feel like voting again will probably backfire again somehow, but I also want to win, which means I want to lynch scum, and I think this is the right way to do it, so. notquitethere.
This does not seem believable to me.
I think we have different definitions of an exploratory vote.
My vote was absolutely serious. I just didn't give a reason. I hardly ever give a reason. I was interested in seeing how other people would react to the vote, which I placed on the target I genuinely wanted to vote for. I do not think this is hard to understand. I
intentionally misleadingly implied that my reason for voting was something silly by juxtaposing my serious vote with an offhand comment, which is something I often do d1 and have done many times before. I feel like I have said at least infinity times "my votes are always serious, especially when it looks like they aren't".
I also don't really care what you find believable.
I think I'm cool with this tie. The only reason mafia would choose to lynch easy scapegoat me over NQT is if NQT actually is scum, so it should be obvious what to do tomorrow. Long ToonyMan post, not reading it yet.
Author
Topic: Webadict's Supernatural - Game Over: Day of the Burning Sun (Read 49993 times)