How so? It sounds like those judgments are based on whether it works or not, which is what I mean by affirming the consequent. Can you actually tell what somebody is thinking just from that?
"Good mashing" and "bad mashing" are terms I'm fine with, because those actually refer to success. But the definitions for those are different from "intelligent mashing" and "mindless mashing". And just for clarification, I'm using literal definitions for all of these terms. BEHOLD:
Good mashing: it worked
Bad mashing: it didn't work
Intelligent mashing (or thoughtful mashing, whichever works): looking for the button best suited to a particular blockstring
Mindless mashing: being pre-occupied with getting a specific reversal out and/or not paying attention to blockstring
The caveat here is that intelligent mashing doesn't necessarily work all the time, i.e. it's not always good mashing. People make mistakes, after all. And conversely, mindless mashing does sometimes work.