This is Starver's summary of why he thinks I'm scum. In other words, things he thinks I need to defend myself against.
Hector - Seems almost deliberately 'no read' in nature, but still seems intent on stirring up dissent. If not Chara (and real Chara wasn't originally inclined to argue?) then definitely something funny going on there. I'm voting Hector, but everyone else needs to consider their own information (and personal (current) motivations), of course.
To which I respond thus:
Not sure what you mean by "deliberately no read". I've said I'm scum reading both you and FoU, and that given Moonlit's wipe, he's not the Evil role. Seems like reads to me.
Also, what "dissent" am I stirring up?
Moonlit also claimed Chara, post-lynch, so why would there be copies of the same role in the game?
This addresses the three components of his read against me: that I have no reads; I am "stirring up dissent"; that my claim of Chara and subsequent claim of someone else is suspect.
He responds:
Last point first: Originally I thought you were correctly claiming Chara (before retracting), and that was part of my original assessment.
Now I know think your replacement claim is either correct (the character who is notoriously bloodthirsty, a SOUL stealer, teams up with humans, one of whom is known to be Evil, etc, etc, etc) or else it is yet another fakeclaim, in which case whoknows?...
As for 'no read', I've done it myself (for various reasons), and I'll do it again no doubt and your sense of "Oi! I don't like all these questions!" goes far enough to appear to want to suppress all enquiry. Not to a sensible amount1, but in a general refusal to partake in a democratic sharing of information. Given how little information I had given out, myself, and yet had at least tried to join in (external actions aside), your trying to suppress all current/future discussions of this sort looks more like a motive.
But you're the only person allowed to scum-read, naturally, by listening to what information we spill. And I've now spilled far more information than should be necessary.
And I was doing a lot of 'scum-reading', whilst Scum myself, last round. Not everything I thought (or 'thought up') was said out loud, but I had a whole lot of 'reading' on why it was... Moonlit, I think... who I 'thought' was the more likely villain on the Spaceship. And barely anyone read me at all! I even nearly replied to one too-casual mention by yourself that it was possible that I was Evil... I even saved the post I never actually ended up posting...
You also can't (by open game knowledge) say that Moonlit's not Evil because of the lynch-replace. The first lynch-replace created an Evil role. My own best guess, Night 2, was that the second lynch-replace would do something similar. I could be wrong about the non-Evilness - but I know I'm not wrong about this one not being Human...
My response:
Response to Starver
I don't need to explain myself to you @Hector, because it's other people who I need to convince (rightly or wrongly; correctly, incorrectly or even as a diversion), but for the sake of openness I will do anyway.
Indeed, but you owe it to yourself to at least consider that I'm not scum. If you're default position is to not respond to anything I say, how do you expect to be convinced I'm not scum? Nobody else is going to defend me, are they? They're in the same boat as I am: they don't know who is what alignment.
Last point first: Originally I thought you were correctly claiming Chara (before retracting), and that was part of my original assessment.
Now I know think your replacement claim is either correct (the character who is notoriously bloodthirsty, a SOUL stealer, teams up with humans, one of whom is known to be Evil, etc, etc, etc) or else it is yet another fakeclaim, in which case whoknows?...
Asriel is actually convinced by Chara to absorb Chara's soul and then go out to kill 6 more humans to break the barrier to the Underground so... I'm not sure where you're getting notoriously bloodythirsty soul stealer from.
Which one do you think it is? Fakeclaim or genuine?
As for 'no read', I've done it myself (for various reasons), and I'll do it again no doubt and your sense of "Oi! I don't like all these questions!" goes far enough to appear to want to suppress all enquiry. Not to a sensible amount1, but in a general refusal to partake in a democratic sharing of information. Given how little information I had given out, myself, and yet had at least tried to join in (external actions aside), your trying to suppress all current/future discussions of this sort looks more like a motive.
But you're the only person allowed to scum-read, naturally, by listening to what information we spill. And I've now spilled far more information than should be necessary.
And I was doing a lot of 'scum-reading', whilst Scum myself, last round. Not everything I thought (or 'thought up') was said out loud, but I had a whole lot of 'reading' on why it was... Moonlit, I think... who I 'thought' was the more likely villain on the Spaceship. And barely anyone read me at all! I even nearly replied to one too-casual mention by yourself that it was possible that I was Evil... I even saved the post I never actually ended up posting...
So you're scum reading me based off your meta now?
Where have I stated I don't want any discussion in this round? When have I withheld information? It's all well and good telling us this is what I said, but without evidence, it's just some more hot air.
You're the one that doesn't like to share. "Spilled more information than should be necessary" aye? I think everyone else gets to be the judge of when you've shared enough information.
You also can't (by open game knowledge) say that Moonlit's not Evil because of the lynch-replace. The first lynch-replace created an Evil role. My own best guess, Night 2, was that the second lynch-replace would do something similar. I could be wrong about the non-Evilness - but I know I'm not wrong about this one not being Human...
The first lynch-replace created a Neutral role, actually, but you do have a point here. I'm not sure about humans being exclusively evil here, though. Chara is a bad human, while the human you play as during the game can be good, neutral, or evil. Assuming all humans are bad is not a good thing to do, methinks.
Moonlit claimed he was the Evil role prior to the lynch-wipe, so it's not inconceivable that his role was replaced with an Evil one, since the game hasn't ended yet.
He has been quite forthcoming with having been the Evil role prior the the lynch, and it wouldn't be very fair to the town to not be getting flips from lynches and then have an Evil role in the replacement pool, especially with a three day limit, so I'm inclined to think Moonlit is not Evil at this point.
... which he completely ignores, save for quoting parts I clipped out because they don't have anything to do with why he was initially scumreading me. If you want to read the posts in their entirety, the top "Quote from..." links will take you to them.
So, let's go a bit more in-depth.
The first point: Hector has no reads.
In his own words, patently untrue. When I point this out to him, he basically says "yeah, well when I was scum I had reads too!"
I said he was scum-reading me off his own meta, which he ignored. Quite unfair of him to scum read me off someone else's play, but we could also look at this another way.
Have any of you ever had reads when you are town? It's pretty much the entire game of Mafia. This is a nonsense point to bring against
anyone in
any game.
Anyhow, he went from "Hector has no reads" to "having reads is scummy" in two posts. Does this sound like someone who is looking for scum? It looks to me lke someone is trying to force a lynch on someone else.
The second point: "stirring up dissent"
I had no idea initially what this meant, but in the second paragraph of his first response, he says I want to suppress discussion of my play. Except that all we were really doing was discussing my play.
Indeed, from posts
1656 to
1660 and
1663 and
1665 to
1673 that is the crux of the conversation.
Notably, in post 1673, it is Starver who stops this discussion, because he knows his case is going to collapse if we continue to discuss it.
I want to discuss my play. The only way that I'm going to convince you guys I'm not scum is by discussing my play.
Another issue I have with this is he provides exactly *counting* *counting* zero examples of me suppressing discussion and exactly zero examples of me not sharing information with you guys.
His third point: my claim.
I initially fakeclaimed Chara because I have been quite annoyed with TBF and FoU for being so overt with their town weakness roles (TBF with the astigmatism allowing Starver to attack him despite having an auto that identifies him as the evil role to anyone he attacks, FoU announcing he was the driver and that if he died everyone dies) so I was unwilling to share my role on D1. He seems to think that was not a good justification and scum reads me for it.
After I rescind my claim and tell you why I did it, he also scum reads me for being Asriel (but apparently doesn't yet believe I'm Asriel despite someone else confirming it? Not sure about that one yet) citing "BUT THE LORE!" every time I bring it up. So lets look at the lore then, shall we?
This is
Asriel's story, direct from the game. The bit I most want you to take away comes shortly after the three minute mark, but that's the source material, so have at it. Watch it, come to your own conclusions, and then ask yourself if Starver's constant references to the lore - without actually giving us any links or anything to go off - is a good reason to scum read me.
One final thing I'd like to point out is this aspect of one of his quotes:
You also can't (by open game knowledge) say that Moonlit's not Evil because of the lynch-replace. The first lynch-replace created an Evil role. My own best guess, Night 2, was that the second lynch-replace would do something similar. I could be wrong about the non-Evilness - but I know I'm not wrong about this one not being Human...
Which he meant as:
... I meant to say lynch one created a human, with no reason not to assume something similar for the second, not an Evil-one...
Now, I think that this means that Starver thinks that the human roles are evil (perhaps backed up by his claimed ability as Undyne, if Starver finds a human during the night they get killed by him) which, if true, means he shouldn't think I'm scum.
I've played through the game in a neutral, true pacifist and genocide run, and as far as I can tell there are only two named humans, Chara and Frisk. We know Frisk is dead, TBF died and flipped with the role. Moonlit claimed that, before he was wiped after the lynch, he was Chara. This means there are no more human roles left in this game (assuming Moonlit was being honest)
