OrangeP47

I already answered that, basically. But I'm saying two wrongs don't make a right and we shouldn't reward this bad behavior. I mean, good that we have someone acting openly suspicious, but you should be careful about continuing to fish.

IE just because Shade managed to hit the dart board doesn't mean it was wise.

And to head off more argument, yes, ILTS is supicious, but we shouldn't be RESULTS FOCUSED. We should be PROCESS FOCUSED.

I'm going to address the later posts later, but this is the crux of the issue. Shade being town =/= Shade being smart. You equating these things reflects badly upon YOU. Catagorically, at this moment, I'm not suspicious of Shade, however, I'm saying he's not playing optimal. Normally you're smart enough to understand this argument, especially as I make it every damn game, and the fact that you are having so much trouble with it is really making you suspicious.

Maybe we're all just not awake yet... I hope... (though somebody has to be the scum...) Unfortunately I have things I need to do today so I'll be afk for the next few hours. Everyone needs their morning coffee but keep this going in my absense.

Wait.... now you're saying ILTS IS scummy? 0_o

He's fishing and I'm always agro on Shade for Fishing... This is literally every game we have ever played.

I mean, if you're trying to argue to me that Shade is town, you don't need to do that to me at present time. This isn't about Shade. It's about you. Again, I'll reiterate my point. There's town, and then there's town doing stupid things. You can support town, but it's weird if you're potentially supporting town doing stupid things. All it takes from you is to leave it at "I don't think he's really fishing" and I'd be satisfied. Unfortunately, I do think this might be mostly a missing of the nuance.

It really depends on Shade's role probably, and how confident he is, and he's gotten more confident over time the more experience with this game he's gotten, so I'd say the likelyhood of a gambit by Shade increases with each passing game we play.

It's more nuanced than that. "Shade is being shade" does not equal "Shade is doing something good". "Shade is being Shade" is NAI, maybe even town sided, because he *does* act differently when scum (I've been scum with him). However, people supporting Shade when he might not be doing something good is... interesting.

Didn't ILTS do this exact same thing in a recent game, though? Was he a baddy then? (I honestly don't remember, it's been awhile)

Though on Shade: As I implied before in a previous comment somewhere: He's within his meta, so I'm not worried about him for now. He does what he does, that doesn't make him scum, that just potentially makes him a less than optimal player at times.

Yeah, I was so shocked by Shade actually doing something half smart maybe

I mean, that's fine. Originally I wasn't going to tug these strings much but the hmms were my way of not being gotcha'd if I had to gotcha someone else later.

I mean, just because you haven't said it, doesn't mean you don't do it. This IS mafia after all. I mean look at the evolution of my own comments. I originally commended Shade for actually having half a brain, then Mojo pointed out he's kinda just fishing again, and I was like oh yeah, that's bad. The issues are inseparable.

Or rather, let me be a bit more clear (just woke up, so appologizes if thoughts aren't the most coherent). It's not that YOU'RE fishishing. It's that you're being supportive of Shade fishing, which is outside of meta.

It's not the reaction testing, it's the fishing.

Anywho, I'm going to bed, expect less of my witty banter while I regenerate for the night

TBH even if I learn nothing I might still elaborate because the marginal utility of explaining myself will be higher than waiting around.

I'll probably move there eventually, but won't bandwagon at this stage. My preferred alternative is immune, apparently, so...

Please hold your questions until after the refreshments

I'm probably going to be a lot less obstinate D2 and will be able to just out and say things by then, if all goes to plan.

Granted, I'm not going to have a leg to stand on here, but if your smart you might gather my reason without me actually having to say it, but let's just say I have another reason for being suspicious of Irish and it doesn't have anything to do with his behavior, exactly.

I'll just say I think someone should definitely investigate Irish.

(Not saying those posts are related... I'm just highlighting them now, so if I need to call back to them later I have proof I was indeed mildly concerned at the time and I'm not just retroactively making up concern in my arguments against them).