I was doing this for several years. Now I constantly think everything is potentially confirmation bias. Even when I sounded confident about Casey being scum.last game I kept going back to their posts So I could look for evidencenI was wrong.
I am not asking anybody to waver in confidence or showing confidence in lynches, but they should be practicing dialectical thinking about their reads constantly. (Not to the point of paralysis by analysis only to the point of being open to other possibilities).
In savant's case, I am more pointing it out that he doesn't actually scum read me. He is buying all into austins results. So if he is town then he is literally just having to create reasons to sus me because he knows he is town, which is the same thing he would do as scum with manufacturing reads IE; the confirmation bias. You see him doing that in post
270.
He goes from not scum reading me to "luna must be scum for reasons 1-3" and making a case out of it, as if it should be obvious. That's why if he's town I am gonna be pissed. Depending on whether austin is BS'ing results or not, I have a hard time scum reading this action independently, because we've seen him do it as town. Maybe austin has caught something of a scum tell and knows something we don't, or maybe he really does have results, in which case austin really is scum. But idk, I don't read this action itself as scummy but that's why I was lecturing him for it. I get being wrong about a read but still following through with it like you did with casey. Though in casey's case he also damned himself with that claim. I feel you could have been swayed by a rational argument from him, but he panicked under pressure and made a horrible claim without even discussing it with whiteflame.
