Mafia Debate: Behavioral Analysis On D1

My opponent correctly identifies my argument - that, since there is nothing to go off of, Town will always play essentially randomly on DP1, and, if this is so, there is no way to distinguish between Town and Scum play. He argues that Town's actions aren't baseless because they're capable of choosing to do things intentionally - the problem is that he never shows that these actions are inherently ratonally justifiable. My point is not that Scum act randomly. My point is that there is no way of distinguishing between directed and purposeful Scum actions and Town actions that were random. By definition, if Town acts randomly, it is completely possible that they will act exactly as Scum would. Therefore, as long as Town is forced to act randomly (and they are before there are objective results/flips), they can appear to be just as scummy as Scum, and, if this is so, there is no way to read people to distinguish Town from Scum.My opponent has built his case around the idea that Scum act to further their wincon, and, because of this, all you have to do to find Scum is to find people doing what Scum would do. This completely fails if town does what Scum would do, and, if DP1 Town play is essentially random, Town is likely to do what Scum would. My opponent claims that you can tell Town from Scum because Townies do pro-Town things, while Scum do not. This presupposes that there is a way to tell what actions are pro-Town on DP1, and, since the only way to do this is to read people to judge who is Town and Scum so you can analyze which actions benefit which factions, my opponent is begging the question. What is a pro-Town action if Town has no way of telling Town from Scum? Pro's entire case boils down to this: "Behavioral analysis on DP1 is valuable because we can distinguish Town from Scum. We can distinguish Town from Scum because behavioral analysis on DP1 is valid." Again, this just begs the question - how do you validate behavioral analysis without presupposing that it's useful? My opponent has yet to give a plausible solution.My point wasn't that Town shouldn't read because they're liable to be misread - it's that the fact that Town can be misread shows that Town cannot distinguish between Town and Scum, and, as such, Town should not try. I agree, Town must be active to win the game, but the way to do this is most certainly not by trying to read people on DP1. Intent doesn't matter if Town is unable to determine it. Re: the certainty behind readsIt's irrelevant whether or not Mafia must fake reads in a certain way. What is relevant is if Town is able to tell that the reads are fake, and this can only be done if Town reads are any different. If Town has no basis for reads, they must basically throw them out randomly, and, if this is so, there is no reason to suppose that any particular reads are intentionally misleading instead of just coming from a Townie with nothing better to post. My opponent says that "Townies don't go around calling someone scum unless they have a reason to think that person is scum", but this assumes that Townies are able to have a reason for thinking that players are scum on DP1, which my arguments deny.I do not object to the fact that the Town has some certain knowledge at the start of the game. It's obvious that Town knows that they are Town and that Mafia is not and that each faction must play for themselves. This is totally irrelevant, however, if it cannot be shown that this knowledge helps ground any reads in reality. Like I have already argued, even if Scum must play a certain way to win, if this play is indistinguishable from Town play then there is no way to distinguish Scum from Town. I accept that Scum has to fabricate reads to win the game. What my opponent is missing is that, on DP1, Town also has to fabricate reads. Like my opponent said, "the FIRST vote that someone puts down will probably be random". If this is so, there is no correct way to react. If something is random and arbitrary, any responses to it will also be so. As of yet, my opponent hasn't been able to give a substantial defence of his idea of Townie play and why it is different from Scum play outside of just saying that it is. He has not shown that Town is even able to non-randomly act to fulfill their win-con on DP1.