[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/ext/alfredoramos/seometadata/event/listener.php on line 114: Undefined array key 8062949 [phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/ext/alfredoramos/seometadata/event/listener.php on line 114: Trying to access array offset on value of type null Newbie 1724 ~ Endgame - Mafiascum.net
For Newbie Games, which have a set format and experienced moderators. Archived during the 2023 queue overhaul.
128 posts
• Page 1 of 1
Thor665
Thor665
Papa Smurf
Thor665
Papa Smurf
Papa Smurf
Posts: 33454
Joined: October 11, 2009
Location: Venice, FL
Post
Post #9 (isolation #0) » Thu Jul 07, 2016 12:39 am
Postby Thor665 »
tl:dr - this entire commentary block is all about introducing myself as the IC, blathering about my duties, and offering a basic idea of some of the strategy of the RVS. If this interests you, please read on (especially if this is your first time playing here) if not, feel free to skip.
I am Thor665 and I am the Inexperienced Challenged (IC) player of this group. What this means is first and foremost - I am here to play this game with you in a way that will show you what it is like to play on Mafiascum.net. I am here to win and should be treated as such.
My goals and the rules governing my actions are covered in this handy article: Being a good IC
That article is part of our amazing MafiaWiki System. I *highly* recommend this system as a good way to get your feet wet and to find out what a lot of the common abbreviations mean. There is a lot of play strategy discussed in there too. A lot of players consider that advice almost all outdated now. I don't recommend trying to run verbatim with anything there, but a lot of the basic advice is very good to at least be aware of as it can help you avoid blatant pitfalls as you become familiar with the game play here.
Now, as an IC I am here as a resource for you to ask questions of concerning game theory. I WILL NOT lie about game theory answers and will answer them to the best of my ability. I will also offer you the following quick pieces of advice;
1. Don't self vote. (there are really no points during a Newbie setup where this is a good idea, please avoid it however logical you may think it is)
2. This site frowns on lying if you are a vanilla town role. I strongly advise against lying if you have this role as usually it will only hurt town in the end.
3. It's a game - have fun.
We are now starting what is known as the RVS (random voting stage). We are in a low information period because scum already know who they are, and even have a rough idea of what power roles may or may not be in the game. It is now town's job to root them out. Because the start of the game leaves us with no information to start with generally the way to start is to begin voting and questioning other people to see if you can catch them doing something scummy (scummy actions being acts that a scum player is more likely to do then a town player).
Post
Post #25 (isolation #5) » Thu Jul 07, 2016 7:52 am
Postby Thor665 »
Well, yes, I understand that I was pressuring your stated logic of "I find Thor scummy but am not voting him" I think we both get that.
But if your next set of logic is "I don't like to vote early until I get a feel for the game" then why didn't you say that to me as the reason you didn't vote instead of voting?
Post
Post #26 (isolation #6) » Thu Jul 07, 2016 7:53 am
Postby Thor665 »
I mean, it's not like I was twisting your arm, but as soon as I pointed out that your logic should have you voting - you voted.
That doesn't jive with the stated concept of not voting for a while until you get a feel for the game - feels like you were trying to appease me/cover up your lack of logic in voting me rather than saying what you actually honestly think.
In post 28, Thor665 wrote:So you no longer believe that the best play is to hold off on early votes?
No.
Just to clarify for myself, since this is a double negative, could you phrase your answer in a complete sentence to make sure I understand your stance.
In post 31, LicketyQuickety wrote:Thor is already taking the lead in this game. I expected this, but didn't expect Thor to be so strong against a single person. Don't know that I like that as it can choke the content people might offer and possibly create a dynamic where no one thinks except Thor and the rest of Town doesn't know what to do so they just follow what seems easy. That said, its still really early in the game.
yeah, how strange that I'm only interacting with the only slot that's posting....yup.
???
In post 33, LicketyQuickety wrote:Great opening post. Like you for Town because of it. I also was thinking GN was a bit Sus. Not enough for a vote, but do like this analysis.
You actually are currently voting GreenNope - fixing a post doesn't prevent a vote from going through methinks.
Did you really not notice that?
Post
Post #40 (isolation #10) » Thu Jul 07, 2016 11:02 pm
Postby Thor665 »
I didn't say it was deliberate - I did say I believed it counted.
There is no rule about votes within failed quotes not counting last time I checked - if you know something I don't feel free to link me to it.
For clarity - since I had to quest for the answer.
Okay, now that we have established that voting early isn't an issue.
Can you explain again why me being intentionally the second vote on someone makes me more likely to be scum?
Post
Post #47 (isolation #12) » Fri Jul 08, 2016 3:04 am
Postby Thor665 »
@GreenNope
Okay - how does that make them more likely to vote second?
For instance, what if PKMSilver is scum? That would make it less likely for him to be voted by scum, yet more likely to be voted by town - making my vote a town tell, not a scum tell.
Also, as an argument, if I am scum, why would I want to do something that grabs attention (as an aggressive second vote always does) which would make it less likely for scum to place a second vote than town. Again, making it a town tell.
Also, let's say I am scum, and you are town, if someone agrees with you that I am scum for placing a second vote, and votes me - would that then make me town and them scum, forcing you to move your vote? Or does your tell only apply for the very first second vote of the game?
I don't feel like you're actually thinking this through - am I missing something?
Post
Post #51 (isolation #13) » Fri Jul 08, 2016 6:29 am
Postby Thor665 »
In post 49, Dewy wrote:I think we should ask the mod for clarification.
That literally doesn't matter except for people who wish to vote him, like me, who can't add pressure right this second.
By the time the mod shows up to answer we'll get a vote count which will also answer the question.
Post
Post #55 (isolation #14) » Fri Jul 08, 2016 6:55 am
Postby Thor665 »
In post 52, Impoetic wrote:It seems pretty unintuitive to me for the mod to count the obvious accidental vote and then refuse to acknowledge the EBWOP as an unvote, so I really doubt it counts. It's probably not listed in the rules because it's such a random scenario.
It is fine if it is unintuitive to you - that said, i assure you there are many mods on this site who would count that vote.
I like to be careful about my vote - I advocate everyone does the same because it cuts down on derp hammers.
Post
Post #56 (isolation #15) » Fri Jul 08, 2016 6:57 am
Postby Thor665 »
In post 54, frog wrote:Nothing you've said here is wrong, but I'm wondering if you can't think of any other explanations for hesitancy and confusion on the first page of a Newbie game?
As a continuation of this line of thought - is there an issue you foresee with the value call he opted to make?
I feel kind of like you're spending every post defending people, is that coincidence or a planned operation?
Post
Post #64 (isolation #16) » Fri Jul 08, 2016 8:03 am
Postby Thor665 »
In post 62, Impoetic wrote:I don't think he has particularly towntold. Also, I still think a new player might not be as quick to deny their own reads as town.
Okay - how does that make them more likely to vote second?
For instance, what if PKMSilver is scum? That would make it less likely for him to be voted by scum, yet more likely to be voted by town - making my vote a town tell, not a scum tell.
Also, as an argument, if I am scum, why would I want to do something that grabs attention (as an aggressive second vote always does) which would make it less likely for scum to place a second vote than town. Again, making it a town tell.
Also, let's say I am scum, and you are town, if someone agrees with you that I am scum for placing a second vote, and votes me - would that then make me town and them scum, forcing you to move your vote? Or does your tell only apply for the very first second vote of the game?
I don't feel like you're actually thinking this through - am I missing something?
@PkmSilver
Do you have any reads currently?
No Town tell about it.. Scum distance each other early, its a pretty common thing. Also, if you are Scum with PKM then there are no more Scum to even vote for them. And lets not forget that your vote on PKM didn't really add any pressure to them at all, but you decided to go after someone else in stead. Don't know that I like you trying to obviously point out your own Town tells. Don't like that at all. Obviously that doesn't matter too much until we get flips, but still.
@LQ - why are you answering a question I asked GreenNope while not actually answering the question I did ask you?
I'll repeat the question to you - Do you have any reads currently?
Please answer both of those.
As to your other thing - there is *nothing* in my post that suggests I'm pointing out my own town tells - where are you getting that conclusion?
Post
Post #66 (isolation #17) » Fri Jul 08, 2016 8:31 am
Postby Thor665 »
Oh, you're right, I was presuming a sloppy read of the post thinking I had asked up not down, that makes it even weirder that he hopped in to field it.
He can move to the scum pool with Green, especially if Green flips scum.
It's about the question I asked you about the accusation you made.
In post 60, LicketyQuickety wrote:Don't know that I like you trying to obviously point out your own Town tells.
Here's your accusation.
And here's my question;
As to your other thing - there is *nothing* in my post that suggests I'm pointing out my own town tells - where are you getting that conclusion?
Can you answer it now? I don't think I can ask it any clearer.
In post 68, LicketyQuickety wrote:I'm not answering a question you asked GreenNope; I am noting an observation I made of your post. There is a difference there.
Felt more like a question answer to me, sounds like you're trying to split hairs here.
In post 68, LicketyQuickety wrote:That would be fine except you fail to see how when you told GN to vote you and then they did and then GN said they usually don't vote people that early that is was a lack of observation just like you saying you didn't see when I pointed out you were pointing out your own Town tells.
Okay, and I admitted to lack of observation immediately and I am having to drag an answer out of him about how his logic process works.
I agree.
I don't see how that makes them the same things at all.
Especially since one was advanced as a scum/town case and the other was a 'oh you answered the wrong question - while being correct about you answering one of the questions, but being wrong about you being asked either of the questions'
SO actually I see those as really different, can you clarify again why they are the same?
In post 36, frog wrote:I think you're overstating the case here. It's Day 1 in a Newbie, so it to be expected that the IC is prominent in some way or other.
What Thor is doing, independent of whether GreenNope is scum, is educating in RVS and when to vote.
For what it's worth, I don't read GreenNope as scum.
didn't like the bold, didn't like that Thor neither confirmed nor denied that statement.
I also have not confirmed or denied that my username is Thor.
I don't get the point here - I am asking him to explain the logic of a scumtell and to justify lack of RVS vote or presence of it. By definition that can be taken as education as I'm asking him to think about the process.
By definition it is also scumhunting, as I'm asking in order to understand what he's thinking.
Neither of these blatant realities should need to be noted.
In post 66, Thor665 wrote:Oh, you're right, I was presuming a sloppy read of the post thinking I had asked up not down, that makes it even weirder that he hopped in to field it.
He can move to the scum pool with Green, especially if Green flips scum.
Why is that?
The logic being he is seeing someone left swinging in the wind, worried that he is looking scummy, and so leaps in to field the questions on the presumption it will prevent his scumbuddy from looking worse.
There is theoretically no town motivation to cut off scumhunting - so unless LQ wants to make the case that what I was doing was not scumhunting, there is no actual justification for his actions.
He has now listed GN as a strong town read, and has claimed he was generically addressing a thought not answering a question, so he is either town who doesn't understand how he's gakking up scumhunting, or scum who is painfully aware of how accurate my raised issue is. Your value call after that. I'm voting GN.
In post 78, frog wrote:I also thought that Thor was laying an abnormally large number of traps that came from at best a selective reading of what the person they quote had been saying - examples include #37 with the phrase 'did you really not notice that?', where he appeared to imply that LicketyQuickety had deliberately left his potentially accidental vote in place
I didn't imply that, I was pretty much outright stating it.
In post 78, frog wrote:I'm a little suspicious of Thor because I feel like his baiting is unlikely to catch scum, being more likely to confuse the rest of us and distract from genuinely scummy behaviour, but at the same time he has been open.
If you have a better method for catching scum on Day 1 than identifying lack of internal logic and lynching that player I would be happy to hear about it.
Post
Post #91 (isolation #20) » Sat Jul 09, 2016 5:19 am
Postby Thor665 »
In post 85, Dewy wrote:I agree with you on the fact that newbs are the easiest players to read because I have a harder time reading more experienced players.
I'm of the opposite opinion - it's harder to delineate scum intent in Newbies because there is less game evidence to figure out if they are making something up, or honestly believe a crazy scumtell they're pushing. Also the derp hammers, all the derp hammers.
In post 89, LicketyQuickety wrote:For clarity's sake I am blocking up conversations by using quotes.
Dear gawd!
As a suggestion, there is an area code;
Also, as an argument, if I am scum, why would I want to do something that grabs attention (as an aggressive second vote always does)
which would make it less likely for scum to place a second vote than town. Again, making it a town tell.
I highlighted the part where you said you were making Town Tells. I said later that This doesn't mean much until after flips as I stated here:
And the fact that I was discussing the theoretical concept of it being a scumtell to vote second, and suggesting that it wasn't because it could equally be argued as a town tell (thus making my point that it wasn't alignment indicative either way) didn't come through?
Like you thought I was legit raising points for me being town that included "evidence" of PkmSilver being scum, and also me being scum?
Like, I feel like there's a specific reason you had to trim down my quote there to make it look like you're talking sense.
In post 68, LicketyQuickety wrote:I'm not answering a question you asked GreenNope; I am noting an observation I made of your post. There is a difference there.
Felt more like a question answer to me, sounds like you're trying to split hairs here.
Because I am Trying to split hairs. If you are Scum, I am going to have to think outside the box a bit. That means trying to catch you on something you might not expect. What do you mean by "question answer?" That is confusing a Smurf.
To answer the second part first - when I am asking you about answering a question, and you say you're not answering a question, and I say it sounds like a question answer - I think "question answer" translates clearly as...it feels like you were answering a question, specifically the one we were talking about. Sorry if that confused you.
First part - so you're splitting hairs to defend yourself in order to catch me being scum?
Unvote: GreenNope
Vote: LicketyQuickety
I don't buy that, not at all.
In post 89, LicketyQuickety wrote:Who are you addressing here? Who are you talking to? Are you talking to me or are you talking to everyone else and telling them I am Scum? I am not Scum, I am Town.
I was talking to you and to everyone - you in specific because I was responding to you, and everyone because everyone reads everything we type. It's a public forum game.
In post 89, LicketyQuickety wrote:You did not admit to lack of understanding right away. You said I was missrepping you first thing, then covered it up with acting like you had no idea what I was talking about. Then asked me to explain where I said you said you were pointing out your own Town tells.
Okay, you are shifting around a lot here.
My understanding is you cited me for misunderstanding that you didn't answer a question I hadn't asked you - which Frogger pointed out and I admitted to right away.
I will agree that I didn't admit to being wrong about the misrep right away, because I didn't understand how you got there, and now that you have just provided an answer I find it a slightly scummy one.
In post 89, LicketyQuickety wrote:You saying GN should vote you because they Scum read you, then you questioning GN when they voted you the next post is the same Smurfing thing because its confusing as Smurf to follow only much less confusing that all this Smurf.
You are answering a valid question with rage.
If you are honestly this peeved off - why? I'm actively *trying* to be clear to you in everything I say and do. I think all the misunderstandings are stemming from you and your responses, and think I am actively trying to avoid you being able to call anything confusing.
If this is fake rage, I don't accept it as showing any logic from you, and am interpreting it as trying to cover up awareness of your logic being shaky.
I currently favor the second option, because I don't think I'm being confusing. But if something is confusing - maybe ask to clear it up?
In post 89, LicketyQuickety wrote:I'm not answering a question you asked GreenNope; I am noting an observation I made of your post. There is a difference there.
I strongly disagree.
There was a question.
You addressed it to deflect/weaken it - in effect, precluding GN's need to answer it.
In post 89, LicketyQuickety wrote:That is entirely missing the point. You threw accusations in GN face and then voted them. So you were Scum hunting them and Scum reading them at the same time. We call that tunneling where I come from. Why is GN Scum? What reactions did they give you that tell you that? You said you were looking for them to share their thought process.. What info did you gather from them sharing their thought process?
So your presumption is that when I placed the second vote on them I was already scum reading them when their entire iso was saying "hey everyone!"
I don't think that's true, and it's assuredly not a tunnel.
I am not sure as to my full response to their thought process because I'm still asking them questions about it and haven't seen them answer yet - so it's an ongoing process. If I had to guess at their alignment I would tend to bounce it to the scum side, because I vaguely dislike non-logical conclusions. But that's including a presumption on my part that they won't have a valid answer.
In post 89, LicketyQuickety wrote:If i was worried about what I looked like I would definitely not be engaging this far down the rabbit hole of clusterSmurf logic.
Well, you actually are actively complaining that I'm forcing you to go down the hole - so, clearly you *don't* wish to be here.
Also, your only other option, as scum, would be to act like I'm not here, which I assure you would end up making you look worse.
Finally, going hard emotion response in your reply tends to cloud up your answers and feels defensive to me.
In post 90, frog wrote:My issue isn't with the method, it's with the way you're going about putting it into practice. Taking the example of LicketyQuickety's misquote, I can't see what you were hoping to gain from that besides the opportunity for casting an unwarranted aspersion on a slot.
I wanted full awareness in the thread that I believed a vote had been placed that people may not have presumed had been placed.
I also wanted to know his reaction in thinking he had messed up the quote but not seeking to clarify an unvote just in case.
In post 90, frog wrote:I am concerned that you are trying to trip people up on things which are in no way alignment-indicative, and then using confusion or inconsistency as the pretext for scumreading or voting them.
That would be a cruel way to describe my Day 1 scumhunting - so it is exactly what I'm doing, though I would describe it as "asking people multiple questions about their logic being used in the game in order to try to spot who is making unsanctioned leaps of logic on the presumption that scum are more likely to make an action on a strategic basis rather than actually thinking out their actions"
I can show many games (really all of them) to show this is how I scumhunt, and also show that I actively consider there to be a difference between bad logic and no logic and tend to vote accordingly.
In post 90, frog wrote: If you had picked people up over inconsistency surrounding votes and reads, we wouldn't be having this discussion; pressure over a lack of knowledge on how to play on the site, formatting mistakes, and not answering questions to which the person wasn't directed deserves being called out.
I actively disagree - the value of what can or cannot be called out shifts througout the game, no more so than Day 1, and no more so then within the first days of the game. If someone isn't willing to call people out over small things, then it is impossible to start calling people out over reads - because otherwise reads don't exist.
I now have reads that can be assessed - because I am calling out small things.
Most players do not, because they have not - that makes my playstyle, to my mind, provably superior because I'm quickening the pace to the part of the game town can actually start using to scumhunt functionally.
Why do you disagree?
In post 90, frog wrote:I'm null-leaning-scum on Thor currently. My uncertainty stems from him conceding more than I think scum would concede, but this can lead into WIFOM. I have suspicions, but I need longer to confirm them. Luckily, it appears the game is going in a direction that will enable precisely that.
I can assure you that is a poor value call on me - my playstyle as scum is (naturally) specifically designed to mirror how I play as town. As such, my town self argues logic on Day 1. Logic tends to be a black/white issue. When you point out something that is provably wrong, I'll naturally concede it because arguing provably wrong things is both dumb as well as being scummy - and I don't like to think of myself as dumb.
My personal advice for reading me is you need to get me deeper into the game for a legit read.
Some people advocate just a quick lynch for yucks.
Others go with the Thor read method.
Take your pick.
But if I wouldn't concede things as scum, I would be required to likewise never concede things as town, and despite some of my reputation, I don't actually even remotely claim to have all the answers or to be unfallible (oh for that to be true)
Can you show me any examples of concessions working as a scumtell for you?
Seems like a playstyle tell and never alignment indicative, but you appear to buy into it as a thing even while pointing out to me issues that you think I'm picking at alignment neutral issues. Just want to see you support your belief.
Okay - how does that make them more likely to vote second?
For instance, what if PKMSilver is scum? That would make it less likely for him to be voted by scum, yet more likely to be voted by town - making my vote a town tell, not a scum tell.
Also, as an argument, if I am scum, why would I want to do something that grabs attention (as an aggressive second vote always does) which would make it less likely for scum to place a second vote than town. Again, making it a town tell.
Also, let's say I am scum, and you are town, if someone agrees with you that I am scum for placing a second vote, and votes me - would that then make me town and them scum, forcing you to move your vote? Or does your tell only apply for the very first second vote of the game?
I don't feel like you're actually thinking this through - am I missing something?
Post
Post #105 (isolation #23) » Sat Jul 09, 2016 8:47 am
Postby Thor665 »
In post 100, LicketyQuickety wrote:Didn't come across like you were saying there was an equal chance of being either Town or Scum, no.
That's not what I said.
In post 100, LicketyQuickety wrote:Nope, didn't see you provide any evidence for why PKM was Scum. I threw out a possibility. You think that's Scummy? You're wrong, but OK.
I will agree that I provided just as much evidence for Pkm to be scum in that quote as I did for me to be town.
Doesn't change that you are straw grasping to present that as Thor presenting a town case on himself for you to call questionable.
In post 100, LicketyQuickety wrote:Go back and look at how you attacking me started.. might shed some light on the subject. In other words, I don't feel like I have been defending myself at all.
You have been defending yourself because I've been attacking you.
I'm not calling that scummy.
I *am* calling the concept that you're scumhunting me by defending yourself via hair split arguments to be scummy, however.
In post 100, LicketyQuickety wrote:Why not? Why don't you buy it? I can tell you right now, you are making the same mistake all super experienced players make when they are not reading me correctly (given you are Town): you are assuming you know the way I play and what I would do as Scum and think I am doing what you expect me to do as Scum. Go 'head, read through a couple of my games. Pretty sure you should be able to figure out you have me wrong.
I know that what you are presenting makes no sense, and I am presuming that you, as town, make some sense.
If you play this way as town, then, worst case, I'm trying to lynch a player who doesn't use any logic in their reads.
But I think that's less likely than you being flailscum.
Do you have any games showing you doing this, or something like it, as town?
I'd be happy to look at them.
If your answer is "all of them" then I refer you to my concept above.
In post 100, LicketyQuickety wrote:Yeah, only problem with that is that it is correct play theory wise is to talk more to the people who you are trying to convince the person you should be talking to is Scum and I believe you were doing this. I also think you hadn't up until that point indicated that you thought I was a Scum read previously to that.
I'm not sure exactly what you're saying here - but I will agree with you that I was presenting issues I had with your slot/suspicions of you being scum to everyone else in the expectation/hope they would agree with me or explain your actions as town.
I will agree that I'm trying to get you lynched.
I will agree that up until I voted you I did not explicitly say you were a scum read.
For the reasons I stated - I believed you were misrepresenting my position in order to attack me, when it seems quite obvious that I was not doing what you were saying I was doing.
I think that is scummy for anyone to do - if it is your town meta, then you should stop doing it immediately.
I note that you aren't arguing that you didn't do it at this point, you're arguing that you do it as town.
Please never do that.
In post 100, LicketyQuickety wrote:I wouldn't call it rage, far from it actually. Frustration hence the colorful language, yes. Rage? No.
Then my scum read holds, please refrain from cursing at me if you're not angry at me, thanks!
In post 100, LicketyQuickety wrote:You strongly disagree doesn't sound like black and white logic to me.. It sounds more like a strong opinion.
You are presenting an opinion that noting an observation is not an answer.
I am noting disagreement and providing reasoning to support my opinion and why I find your answer deflective, and not one I buy.
Since we are each offering opinions, I will agree that it is not a black/white value call - I never said it was.
I did say I had made a value call, and what it was.
In post 100, LicketyQuickety wrote:I can go back and look at the quote and then my answer and give you my interpretation of things since you're not doing a great job of interpreting and questioning my posts so far. Want me to do that?
Sure.
In post 100, LicketyQuickety wrote:No, how does me commenting on something prevent GN from answering a question that in all likelihood hadn't been intruded in the first place?
Well...so far he hasn't answered it, though I will agree that speaks more on him than you.
I will agree it doesn't bar him from answering it for all time.
That said - I think it's pretty clear that it is deflective and defensive for him to have someone else field the question.
In post 100, LicketyQuickety wrote:I haven't said hardly a word on your vote on PKM in any kind of sound way. I don't have a stance on that. I threw out a possibility to see if things could get moving. I'd rather try to get answers out of the IC sooner rather than later. I'm not as concerned about your vote on PKM as much as I am on GN. I think the vote on GN is going to be most telling when GN or yourself flips. In a way I can't blame you for voting me since I know my meta, but I assure you I am not doing anything I wouldn't normally do as Town. I am prepared to link games if need be, but tbh I think you would prolly want to flip me anyways day one since you prolly would rather MY meta not be in the game all game long.
So...basically you agree with me that it is beneficial for town to lynch you today?
Because that's what I'm getting here.
Post
Post #107 (isolation #24) » Sat Jul 09, 2016 8:51 am
Postby Thor665 »
In post 101, LicketyQuickety wrote:What should have been at the end of that post: What's the benefit of voting me as your scum read over your other Scum read?
I feel more confident about you flipping scum.
In post 101, LicketyQuickety wrote:You wont get much from pressure on me, either you lynch me or you don't, I don't cave, even as Scum.
I would submit that as both alignments you are playing it wrong if this is your reaction.
Town should want to lynch scum - and if you are town you know this for a fact, so a lynch of you is not a good play for town.
If you are scum it strongly benefits your team for you to make it deeper into the game even if you are just a goon, as it helps deflect town PR abilities to weaken the team and secure a town win. So, again, you should strive not to be lynched.
Post
Post #112 (isolation #25) » Sat Jul 09, 2016 9:55 am
Postby Thor665 »
In post 108, frog wrote:I made it very clear at the beginning that I was talking about a player you read as
town
, taking the distinction from your reads list, not one you had down as a town
lean
, and from all your subsequent remarks it is clear that you interpreted it in the same way. Giving you the benefit of the doubt for a second, your townlean was GreenNope, whose last post was #44, well before this discussion of how to play was brought up, whereas the bulk of Impoetic's posts came after that point (and these must have informed your read on her, right?). It is still inconceivable you would not be able to recall who I was talking about, unless your reads were not genuine.
I'm buying into this case.
In post 109, Impoetic wrote: I'd like to hear elaboration on Lickety's alleged townread on you(?).
He either null reads me or scum reads me as far as I'm aware - his last official word was null, but then he indicated he thought I was being more scummy.
In post 100, LicketyQuickety wrote:
Nope, didn't see you provide any evidence for why PKM was Scum. I threw out a possibility. You think that's Scummy? You're wrong, but OK.
I will agree that I provided just as much evidence for Pkm to be scum in that quote as I did for me to be town.
Doesn't change that you are straw grasping to present that as Thor presenting a town case on himself for you to call questionable.
That quote appears to support my stance that I was not saying there was an equal chance of being town or scum.
It does appear to suggest that I wasn't using it as an alignment tell because I don't think it was an alignment tell.
In post 117, LicketyQuickety wrote:That whole thing about you pointing out your own town tells would be a blip if you weren't so slow in catching what I was saying the first 5 times.
I caught what you were saying the first time.
WHat I pointed out was there was no evidence to support your stance.
You continue to not provide any.
I mean, yeah, you're showing me saying the words "town" and "scum" and in there, amongst other names, I also mention my own.
But that's kind of like saying that if I said "wood and wind instruments fire me up" is the same as me describing ingredients to make a campfire.
Yeah, words were used...but...
In post 117, LicketyQuickety wrote:And why are you attacking me? Could it be because of a whole misunderstanding about what I said about you pointing out your town tells?
Amongst other things, but I will agree that was the initial point I attacked over - I characterized it as a misrep and have asked you to show me where I'm wrong while I advanced my theory that it was an intentional misrep after seeing your inability to do so.
you think I am flailing. How? Is this really what flailing looks like? Naw, you're making smurf up.
I think flailing looks like someone trying to discuss anything except the points they're being called scummy over. They do this with a number of tools including AtE, deflection, and intentional misunderstanding.
I think you fit the bill quite nicely.
If you prefer we can call it aardvarkingscum - but that is what I mean by flailscum.
So in those I am going to find misreps as town - or something else?
In post 117, LicketyQuickety wrote:post 83 is where you were preaching that I was Scum, and by your own account this was before you were Scum reading me as you said you weren't Scum reading me until the post that you voted me.
Yes. And?
In post 117, LicketyQuickety wrote:Let me tell you how I see it. I see a very competent IC saying that they are doing Town tells within the first very few pages. In what world does an IC who has been playing this game for at least 7 years needs to make an argument that they are Town telling to someone who has prolly played <5 games total? THAT is what I am looking at.
And yet you still are unable to note that what I was actually discussing was how the presented case made no sense as far as I could see, and explicitly asking them to explain their case.
In post 117, LicketyQuickety wrote: Like why would a player who is as experienced as yourself need to every mention that they are doing Town tells by page 3?
I don't think I would. Well...I suppose someone could be crazy dense and call a Mod posted IC note a scumtell or something, but beyond that, no.
In post 117, LicketyQuickety wrote:Let me make this clear: I am simply a player who 90-99% of players don't understand at all. Granted, there are always a few people wherever I go who do actually understand me, but they are few and far in between. I cannot help this, I am just wired differently than other people.
Weren't you accusing me of intentionally misunderstanding you?
These two things do not appear to line up.
Clarify?
I know - that's why I said 'cursing at me' as opposed to 'don't call me a Smurf-face'.
In post 117, LicketyQuickety wrote: Secondly, You try being lynchbait and getting lynched before day 3 in 80% of the games you play and see how you handle is when yet another Super star Mafia player thinks its better that your dead even if you are Town. Yeah, I have every reason to be upset actually.
I never called myself a Super Star - so I feel like you are either faking this, or are getting mad at me for reasons that are more internal.
If you don't like being lynchbait - I would advise that you change your playstyle rather then repeatedly assure me it's good, and that I'm intentionally misunderstanding you on one hand, while also admitting you are massively scumread and constantly misunderstood on the other.
In post 117, LicketyQuickety wrote:yeah, I don't see anything in what I said that would interfere from GN answering what you were asking her. Sorry to break this to you, but just because you ask someone a question doesn't at all mean that that quote is off limits from other people commenting on it.
Other than it being bad town play, good scum play, and hurting scumhunting, I agree.
In post 117, LicketyQuickety wrote:Let me let you in on a secret: when I play as Town, I am completely unhindered to explore whatever I feel I think I can get something on. As Scum, I don't think I contradict myself as much because I have an agenda to work and don't need to actually Scum hunt, I just have to make it look like I am Scum hunting.
Okay.
I didn't call you scummy for contradicting yourself.
I called you scummy for claiming a scumhunting plan that makes no sense.
In post 117, LicketyQuickety wrote:Sorry this took so long to respond to, I haven't slept in over 27 hours.
Post
Post #121 (isolation #28) » Sat Jul 09, 2016 11:01 am
Postby Thor665 »
In post 119, Impoetic wrote:In the meantime, Thor, who do you think Lick's partner might be? Because I'm not sure I like this whole tunnel thing. I get that town can have differing mindsets, but I still think it's potential scum tactic to spend the whole of day 1 tunneling fruitlessly like that so they don't have to make opinions elsewere -- primarily due to something someone said in my first game here.
First off I would like to take a moment to assess the "tunnel" line and to point out that it is awfully silly.
I have moved my vote amongst three different players.
I have only been voting LQ for less than a day.
It is premature, and also pretty silly, to call that a tunnel. It is not a tunnel at all. I, and others, are allowed to express a scumread without it being a tunnel. You can express a scumread for days without it being a tunnel. The only way it becomes a tunnel is if you;
1. Ignore new information.
2. Ignore other cases.
You also, assuredly, don't have the ability to show that I'm not giving opinions on others, indeed, LQ accussed me of tunneling on GreenNope, I do believe. Here's a hint, if a tunnel shifts, especially if it does so repeatedly - it is called 'focus'.
If you can explain how I am even remotely doing a tunnel, I will apologize to you, the rest of the game, and to LQ, and will immediately sheep you for the next 48 hours.
I don't know why I hear the tunnel line so much - it is weird.
To your other question, I have already expressed a thought that GreenNope and LQ make sense as potential scumbuddies.
I haven't seen enough interaction between LQ and anyone else to draw other conclusions.
DO you see anything I'm missing?
Post
Post #125 (isolation #29) » Sat Jul 09, 2016 12:03 pm
Postby Thor665 »
In post 123, Impoetic wrote:Man, this is embarrassing. I guess I'll definitely be trying to reread some tonight. It just seems like a bunch of small thing you guys are getting on each others' cases about, from what I've seen.
I would agree, welcome to Day 1 scumhunting.
In post 123, Impoetic wrote:What do you think of Dewy? it seems like everyone but him has been considered despite his posts all being fairly low-key.
I soft town read him. He's probably in my top two current town reads.
In post 120, Thor665 wrote:@LQ - as I'm looking over your meta I note that you have a number of recently completed games, why did you only link me stuff from back in the day?
In post 123, Impoetic wrote:What do you think of Dewy? it seems like everyone but him has been considered despite his posts all being fairly low-key.
I soft town read him. He's probably in my top two current town reads.
Why?
Also, I'm a she.
Sorry, I'm very bad about personal pronouns - I'll probably keep messing that up.
I don't really see the point of explaining why I townread you, but it's specifically Post #15 and #35.
Why, do you think people should be scum reading you?
I'm not sure I can accept this being a purely playstyle issue. If you could link me a game or two (preferably with the same or similar setup) where you lay the sorts of earlygame traps I'm having a problem with as town, then that would be a help.
Since I don't think I'm laying any traps at all - how about we just go with "look at any of my games".
If it's a playstyle issue then you'll see it.
If not, then you ought to at least explain the traps beyond "traps!" and maybe we can then discuss how it is or isn't scummy.
But I'm guessing I do it consistently (partly because I've had this exact conversation before in multiple games) - because this is how I play, so; http://forum.mafiascum.net/search.php?a ... &sr=topics
Go to.
In post 152, frog wrote:I think the things you were calling people out over were excessively small. Nine players (well, seven until recently) talking and interacting will inevitably produce significant events and meanings without the need for picking up on every little insignificant thing
I disagree.
Just as an example - if we take away things about me and my stances we are left with people going 'ooooh!' over a pretty obvious joke (and now dropping all reads associated with it) and we have your case on LQ which no one (not even him) besides me has commented on.
Now, maybe this is because I'm hyper aggressive.
But I have to say, my personal belief is if I wasn't making noise, we'd all be sitting around doing spit all.
If you look at any game on this site I think the trend becomes apparent.
In post 152, frog wrote:The difficulty I have with your approach is that it allows scum (even if you are not scum) to sow confusion and, yes, to distract over potentially more significant parts of the game.
Bull-hooey.
If some small things confuse and distract from big things then that is the fault of all of the players, not of people discussing small things.
In post 159, frog wrote:Briefly, I thought he was making rather a lot out of confused players (and deliberately trying to confuse them)
I feel I have been actively bending over *not* to cause confusion.
Can you show any point where it looks like I'm trying to confuse someone?
In post 165, Zyf wrote:not sure what thor's reads are as of now, so that's a thing.
Why and how is that a thing?
I've offered multiple reads.
Post
Post #175 (isolation #34) » Sun Jul 10, 2016 7:03 am
Postby Thor665 »
In post 169, Zyf wrote:Because I don't want to read through your wall wars every time I want to see what you think of someone.
If you could please present a condensed read list that I can refer back to
clearly
when I see you contradicting yourself.
I don't do reads walls because I think they're silly.
I've called LQ and GN scum.
Currently I am voting LQ (I would have thought at least that read might have magically carried if you'd read anything I had posted)
I was asked about Dewy and called her town only a page or so ago.
If you aren't reading my posts because they're long, how are you going to ever get a legit read of me?
In post 171, LicketyQuickety wrote:That game happened in December.. thought you wanted more recent games then that. If you want to go back that far, well then here are some more:
Why did you act like I was lying when I asked about them?
Also, thus far with what I've read (albeit none of that SC2 forum because the navigation is the pits) I've seen you be sloppy, but I haven't seen misreps particularly, and I've also seen you repeatedly claim you strive for excellence in your town game while in this game you're repeatedly downplaying yourself and claiming defense because 'lol, I'mma wacky and different' which feels like a markedly different tack.
Am I misreading you?
Post
Post #184 (isolation #37) » Sun Jul 10, 2016 8:15 am
Postby Thor665 »
In post 182, Impoetic wrote:You sure aren't a robot because if you were one you'd have been among the people think I scumread myself xDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
alright done being difficult. I think that was Zyf townslipping rather than scum!zyf picking something stupid to push on. Scum would see it for what it was, and probably wouldn't think it worth pushing on since it's easily confirmable as such; if anything, zyf would have to have been intentionally faking a townslip, but occam's razor and idk that's just how i see it. confbias=me
I don't dislike a Zyf townread, though I am there more for meta reasons and have my own personal twings - but if you think that reaction makes Zyf look like town what makes that slot look more town in their reaction than the Dewy slot?
For the record, since it's not a strong read, and since no one is selling you as scum, I actually see no particular value in the disucssion if and when it becomes allowable,
In post 188, Impoetic wrote:I don't think it's bad, odd, or abnormal of me to create a false read like that, but I do think it's unfortunate that I retracted it so quickly and regret that a bit
I think fake reads need to be handled pretty carefully, myself, and generally don't serve much purpose.
The only time I've seen them make sense is when they are retracted within about 48 hours of happening, in the same phase - or are done near mylo/lylo to try to game scum.
As a general bit of advice, be cautious about doing these. At the end of the day, reads are supposed to be truthful in order to help you express yourself to town - and also scum are lying about reads, and town is theoretically looking to lynch people who are lying about reads. Therefore, though fake reads can have town purpose, they also can cause people to react negatively because you're playing the way scum plays.
In post 189, Impoetic wrote:"Calling the team" and your current overcompensation (better?? it may not be true, sure, but hopefully this term raises no objections as a possible interpretation) for your previous slot being a target (reasonable as town, but read as scum that got a burst of adrenaline to me at first -- not as much now that I reconsider) put trivium somewhere near null to me RN.
i have no idea what this post refers to
also who's trivium
You're claiming scum with Lickety? I think I'll pull a Zif/Dewy and VOTE: GreenNope
As a bit of advice - this mod doesn't have it as an issue, but a lot of mods do, you may want to get in the habit of always having your votes be on separate lines as opposed to at the end of a sentence.
Okay - how does that make them more likely to vote second?
For instance, what if PKMSilver is scum? That would make it less likely for him to be voted by scum, yet more likely to be voted by town - making my vote a town tell, not a scum tell.
Also, as an argument, if I am scum, why would I want to do something that grabs attention (as an aggressive second vote always does) which would make it less likely for scum to place a second vote than town. Again, making it a town tell.
Also, let's say I am scum, and you are town, if someone agrees with you that I am scum for placing a second vote, and votes me - would that then make me town and them scum, forcing you to move your vote? Or does your tell only apply for the very first second vote of the game?
I don't feel like you're actually thinking this through - am I missing something?
This will be the third time I've asked - if you're intentionally not answering could you just say that and spare me the constant repetition?
Post
Post #204 (isolation #42) » Sun Jul 10, 2016 12:48 pm
Postby Thor665 »
In post 203, LicketyQuickety wrote:Yeah, and its not a misrep. IDK about you but I sure as hell am not as quick to say someone is misrepping me.
Yes it was and is a misrep, and I don't see what your chosen timeline to note them has to do with anything.
In post 203, LicketyQuickety wrote:IDK what you are talking about.. I've addressed everything you have thrown at me. I think YOU are the one intentionally misunderstanding, honestly.
Addressing is not the same as answering.
The misunderstanding call on me is an empty and unsupported one.
In post 203, LicketyQuickety wrote:I didn't Smurfing misrep you, my god. I had a perspective on something that you failed to recognise at first and are still trying to say you noticed it right off the bat. If you did notice it right away and you are town we would not be having this conversation. But to answer your question, yes, other people have thought I was misrepping them when I wasn't. and since when was your main point that I was misrepping you?
Since when has the misrep not been a point? I will agree my main point is the 'scumhunt via defense' point, but I've always had the misrep as an issue.
You seem aware that I called you out on it. Don't know why this is a shock to you.
In post 203, LicketyQuickety wrote:It means you were trying to get people to think I was Scum before you were Scum reading me. Do you have rocks in your head or something? Its like you don't understand anything I say.
No, I understand what you're saying, I'm asking why it matters. I don't think it does. You act like it does - why?
I agree that's what you're claiming I did.
I think you will agree I am calling that a misrep.
Clearly we disagree on reality - I think analysis of the post strongly supports my case, and have asked you to support yours and found you unable to do so (while also complaining that you didn't misrep me, and also complaining that I keep bringing it up - even though you can't actually justify how I was 'calling myself town' in a scummy way - and can't even honestly show that I was claling myself town short of crimping the quote and acting like everything I said before and after it had no bearing on my intent.
In post 203, LicketyQuickety wrote:It stems from me having no idea why I am so misunderstood as a player. Like I am in disbelief that someone could be so bad at understanding me. Naturally I think some people are faking it. But then another side of me thinks that it is prolly just me.
If more than three people misunderstand you - then it is likely you.
The fact that you claim this happens all the time - yeah, it's you, that's just common sense.
This doesn't justify the play switch I'm talking about, I haven't seen much of this complaining 'woe is me' style in other games.
Do you agree or disagree with that assessment?
If you agree - why are you different today?
If you disagree - what evidence do you have to supplant my statement?
In post 203, LicketyQuickety wrote:You are basically saying that if you ask someone a question, that anyone commenting on what you said before that person answers is off limits, and I greatly disagree with that.
Why wouldn't you want to allow the scumhunting to go through prior to leaping in and getting in the way of it?
In post 203, LicketyQuickety wrote:Its the only way I know how to Scum hunt when I can barely respond to everything you throw at me. and that is not your actual reason iirc. Its either this or because you think I am misrepping you. So which is it?
It is the former - which is why I cited it when I voted you.
This is clearly not the only way you know how to scumhunt because you haven't done it in any of the games I've looked over so far - why are you lying to me when you know I'm reading your other games?
I have explicitly described the misrep - you even, functionally, expressed awareness of it.
1. You appear to grasp that what I was doing was discussing theory.
2. What LQ accused me of - was making a town case on myself.
That is the misrep.
In post 206, Impoetic wrote:Also I can't follow this argument. at all. ;___;
It's a pretty straight forward argument if you cut out the emotions LQ is tossing.
I dinged him for misrepping me.
I called him scummy because he claimed that he started splitting hairs in defense of himself in order to scumhunt me (and, I'll note - has produced zero reads from doing so)
He claims he didn't misrep me because *Thor said the word town and his own name thus suggesting wanting to connect them!* - serious, that's what he has claimed most recently.
He has defended his splitting hairs thing by claiming he does that elsewhere - and I've claimed I have found no evidence of that in looking over his games and asked him to maybe show me one instance - he has not managed that.
Also, as a tertiary, late thing, I have claimed that his meta here does not match up with his town meta in other games, and is much more AtE loaded here than elsewhere.
That's the argument in a nutshell.
Do you follow it now?
In post 210, Zyf wrote:i'm gonna have to agree with lickety here.
Post
Post #227 (isolation #44) » Mon Jul 11, 2016 1:09 am
Postby Thor665 »
In post 209, LicketyQuickety wrote:So you think its a misrep when I say you are pointing out that you are Town telling... when you are in fact doing that? The fact that that was not your point does not hold any bearing whether you were doing it or not.
Yes it does.
In post 209, LicketyQuickety wrote:How about this: why is it a misrep? I'm not sure I understand that. Feel free to be as detailed with this as possible.
When the entire conversation was 'here is why the tell you are using isn't an alignment tell and here are examples to show it's not a valid alignment tell' and you come back with 'Thor is arguing it's a valid alignment tell that shows him as town' that is the definition of twisting my words and claiming I'm saying the opposite of what I'm saying.
I've said this to you many times before - you keep twisting it however to "hey, words that taken out of context say what I say they say!"
Which is pure misrep gak.
In post 209, LicketyQuickety wrote:I will admit that me saying I am scum hunting by you pressuring me was not a smart move, but it also doesn't make me scum.
Fascinating - what does it make you?
Because I'm pretty certain it doesn't make you town.
Because I'm pretty sure that's a clear lie.
In post 209, LicketyQuickety wrote:
Rundown of events:
you try to convince people I am Scum.
We have a back and forth
You Scum read me.
IDK about you but that looks a little backwards to me. You should be trying to convince people I'm Scum AFTER you scum read me, not before.
It should look like this:
We have a back and forth
You Scum read me and try to convince people I am Scum.
But that's not what happened.
If you change "convince people you're scum" to "present evidence that I consider potential scum activity for consideration" then, oddly, the whole conversation magically makes perfect sense.
Strange that.
In post 209, LicketyQuickety wrote:if you haven't see me talk about the fact that I have a Scummy meta in other games then you clearly are not looking hard enough or at the right games. The reality is, I am getting more and more fed up with being lynchbait so I am talking about it more now.
And I am different today because I was previously really sleep deprived and am not not sleep deprived.
By today I meant this game, here, today, as opposed to past games.
You also didn't address my point - let's try this again.
I do not find any "woe is me and my scummy play" play in your other town games.
I do find it here.
Why?
In post 209, LicketyQuickety wrote:Because what I am looking at is a very experienced player pressure a newb and Scum reading them based on things that are not AI for newbs. It doesn't interfere with scum hunting as that person can still answer if I don't actually answer any question directed to that player, which I didn't.
SO you're saying I'm not allowed to pressure newbs in this game?
That would make it hard for me to do much, wouldn't it.
SO, really we get something that doesn't matter (relative experience) and something that is debatable (whether it was alignment telling) and a lack of awareness that answering other people's questions for them gaks with scumhunting.
Okay - good luck in other games when you do this and get called scummy for it.
Learn to stop doing it eventually.
In post 209, LicketyQuickety wrote:I am not lying. I haven't been in this situation where someone was relentlessly pressuring me with wall post for quite a while - you are not looking at the right games.
You were kinda lying when you acted like I needed to link Micros you had played in to prove they existed.
You should have fully known they existed - so it was a weird response.
In post 209, LicketyQuickety wrote:Here is a game where the same thing happened. Its not exactly the same, but it should be clear that there was a player who was Scum reading me because they didn't understand me. I didn't link this game before because its so old, but its still basically the same thing.
[/quote]
To spare me some time, which was the player scumreading you whose interactions are similar - I'm starting to lose interest in full data mining your games.
In post 209, LicketyQuickety wrote:So you think its a misrep when I say you are pointing out that you are Town telling... when you are in fact doing that? The fact that that was not your point does not hold any bearing whether you were doing it or not.
Yes it does.
For anyone who needs a quick bit of awareness as to where the misrep argument currently stands.
LQ has apparently come to an understanding that what he said I was doing was not the point I was making.
Meaning he is aware I was talking generic theory.
So, as stands, he must be suggesting that - by me talking generic theory I was hoping to subconsciously suggest that I was town.
This idea will totally ignore that in the same generic theory conversation I also presented thoughts wherein I was scum.
So, apparently while trying to present that I was town, I also subconsciously presented that I was scum at the same time...for...reasons...?
This is why it is a misrep.
This is why he is going crazy trying to twist up his answers - because he knows he is wrong.
Post
Post #264 (isolation #46) » Mon Jul 11, 2016 6:16 am
Postby Thor665 »
In post 229, Zyf wrote:Oh. I get it now.
Your problem is he takes an extra leap of logic.
Ok, I see your point now.
Rephrase the middle point to "Rides a flaming motorcycle over a shoddy ramp facing the Grand Canyon of logic flaws" and, yeah, you're at my point.
In post 229, Zyf wrote:I still don't agree that those tells are AI in any regard because WIFOM.
I think what lickety's saying is that the only reason you'd mention those tells is because you use them, which are logically just wrong, meaning that you're using BS to present why you're town.
1. I was presenting the arguement that GN's tell was not a good tell because it is impossible to assign logical alignment through his tell, because there are too many to consider - so...I agree with you, and never said otherwise.
2. I will agree that is sort of what he's saying - except that would require me to be saying things I never said nor implied, and when asked about said that I never said nor implied them (and also requires ignoring that by that logic I was calling myself scum).
So, no, I'm still not okay with his reaction.
Why do you keep feeling like it makes sense?
Am I crazy to find his reaction nonsensical? You appear to be agreeing with it - it makes sense to you?
In post 159, frog wrote:Briefly, I thought he was making rather a lot out of confused players (and deliberately trying to confuse them)
I feel I have been actively bending over *not* to cause confusion.
Can you show any point where it looks like I'm trying to confuse someone?
Yes, it
did
, when you accused LicketyQuickety of deliberately letting a potentially accidental vote stand, and of not answering a question he hadn't actually been asked, and arguably at the beginning of the game with GreenNope (i.e what has formed the basis for our conversation). But I have had a look through your meta, and you are right: you have behaved similarly as town in the past on Day 1, so I'm inclined to give you the benefit of the doubt as to your motivations here.
Okay, so as examples of me potentially *trying* to cause confusion we have;
1. Accusing LQ of deliberately letting an accidental vote stand.
- I agree, I did this...what was confusing about it? It happened, I pointed out that it had happened, and questioned it. People were aware of my issue, aware of the vote, and were aware it might have counted until the mod VC clarified it hadn't. There was no confuson to be had there.
2. The attack ver answering a question he hadn't been asked.
- Well, he *did* do that, my error was thinking he hadn't answered another question that I thought I had asked him, but that I hadn't. This was pointed out to me and I *immediately* admitted the error, stated a clarification of what had happened, and we moved on. I don't think any confusion was caused, and even if it had been it was mostly me being confused, not others.
3. The begining with GreenNope.
- I don't even know what you're talking about. Was it me calling him out for doing stuff he did do? How was that confusing to anyone? I will agree we kind of have the idea that I was towncasing myself - but I find that to be an error utterly existent in other people's (LQ and maaaaybe Zyf) reactions to it. The commentary itself is perfectly clear.
I note that you also don't address *multiple* instances where I ask people to clarify what they mean, or when I explain again (and again, and again) my issues until people claim they understand them.
Seriously - you are reading me as trying to sow confusion?
How?
This appears to be utterly unsupported, yeah?
Post
Post #267 (isolation #47) » Mon Jul 11, 2016 6:50 am
Postby Thor665 »
@Frog - i am aware you are dropping the issue. That said, I could see scum dropping it when they realize they can't support it - so I'm trying to understand how any of that
looked
(past tense!) like I was consciously sowing confusion?
Post
Post #272 (isolation #48) » Mon Jul 11, 2016 10:08 am
Postby Thor665 »
In post 270, Zyf wrote:@thor because walls are a pain in the neck
1) so you're telling me that you said things (ie "a scum is less likely to get voted by scum" and "i wouldn't do something to grab attention as scum) that you don't believe in but you defended yourself with them anyway?
2) except you kinda did? Look up.
3) yes, I do in fact agree with what he's saying because you did do some bs logic to defend yourself with, which you now state you don't believe in? Meaning you deliberately defended yourself incorrectly?
1. No, I said things I believed - because I believe it's possible for a person of either alignment to do the action of being the second vote on any given wagon. That has nothing to do with the belief that what I was actually doing was making a town case on myself.
2. I have looked it up - I didn't say that, how do you think I did? Let's look at the magic post again.
Here I appear to be questiong GN's stance that scum are more likely than town to vote second on a wagon. I wouldn't think that I need to state this clearly - but I don't think that's a valid tell. This is fairly implicit, but just for the record, no I don't find the tell valid
For instance, what if PKMSilver is scum? That would make it less likely for him to be voted by scum, yet more likely to be voted by town - making my vote a town tell, not a scum tell.
This is only a town tell on me if PkmSilver is scum - so, if that *is* me arguing that I'm town, it would require Pkm to be scum - yet I'm not voting him. Almost as though this, and all other thoughts, are theory discussion.
Also, as an argument, if I am scum, why would I want to do something that grabs attention (as an aggressive second vote always does) which would make it less likely for scum to place a second vote than town. Again, making it a town tell.
This - if you squint a LOT - I could almost accept as thinking it's me arguing that I'm town.
Also, let's say I am scum, and you are town, if someone agrees with you that I am scum for placing a second vote, and votes me - would that then make me town and them scum, forcing you to move your vote? Or does your tell only apply for the very first second vote of the game?
That said, if you think the above is an argument that I'm town, then by definition what I'm arguing here is that I'm scum...which...y'know, is the OPPOSITE of what the suggested issue with my actions are. But, yeah, clearly I argued in the above line that I was town, but *didn't* argue here that I was scum, because...y'know, we need to ignore this line to have the raised issue make any sense at all.
I don't feel like you're actually thinking this through - am I missing something?
I know this is a stretch [/sarcasm], but I appear to be suggesting that the entire concept of alignment reading off of this tell is meaningless and not logical (but, y'know, also soooo strongly arguing that I'm obv. town even though I'm suggesting no alignment tell can be made.
Post
Post #275 (isolation #49) » Mon Jul 11, 2016 12:18 pm
Postby Thor665 »
In post 273, Zyf wrote:1/3) alright here
a) first, let's establish that you were explaining that you weren't scum just because you voted second *cough*dejavu*cough*. Yes?
b) next, you acknowledge the fact that you were explaining 2 separate cases in which both cases GN's belief that 2nd vote is an alignment tell would make you townier rather than scummier
c) let us then state that you believe logic you stated in that response is sound.
Do you agree to these three statements?
a) I was explaining that the read was bad, which also would qualify as explaining that it didn't make me scum - yes.
b) Yes, and 1 where I could be scum and it also didn't make sense.
c) Yes.
In post 273, Zyf wrote:Well here's my problem-and this answers #3 as well. None of your points are logical to me.
Let me preface this by saying that I do not expect this from a newbie but I absolutely do from someone experienced enough to be an IC.
A) If PKM is scum-as an experienced player, I fully expect you to be able to determine that doing certain activities that can possibly be taken as towntells can be used to your advantage as scum for free townie points. Regardless of whether or not Pkm is scum, you believe that a person voting scum has a low chance of being scum. But the thing is, in a time such as RVS, voting your scumbuddy is a great way to begin distancing in a way that you can shift later on with no repercussions whatsoever.
Sure - some people do that. It is further evidence that a second vote, by itself is not alignment telling.
In post 273, Zyf wrote:B) Grabbing attention is a town-tell-Well, no, it isn't. Since you obviously didn't believe voting 2nd in RVS is in any way a form of attempting to draw substantial attention, there is no reason not to do it regardless of alignment. Also, grabbing attention occurs all the time when you make a huge wall case on a person, which scum is fully capable of doing, yeah? The point is that first of all you didn't /intentionally/ grab attention meaning that isn't relevant and that second of all scum is fully capable of grabbing attention in an attempt to get town points/not get called out for being behind the scenes/lurking.
Some people do call grabbing an attention a town tell, it's the inverse of the commonly believed "scum lay low" tell.
I, personally, don't consider any attention level tell alignment indicative.
In post 273, Zyf wrote:So while I don't believe that second vote=scum (because hell, someone's gotta do it eventually) the fact that your defense is also illogical and you somehow think it makes sense pings me.
You have not actually shown it not making sense.
In post 273, Zyf wrote:An IC-level scum player is fully capable of abusing WIFOM to get town points.
What? Look, here is the reality;
A Player had advanced a non alignment indicative read.
The way to show it as non-alignment indicative is to explain how it isn't indicative (much like you did with attention above)
In order to do so you have to show how it can be done by either alignment.
That is (as you are describing it, though I disagree with your word choice) WIFOM.
Like, try to explain why both alignment scan do a given act without using your definition of WIFOM - I'll wait.
In post 273, Zyf wrote:2) Ok so instead you're saying that you believe in logic I just debunked^^
that's pretty much worse than where you were before.
I honestly have no idea where you think you're coming from right now.
I have expressed why I don't think you debunked anything. You can't debunk opinions in the first place, and you also aren't saying anything I'm expressing disagreement with *beyond that I'm not agreeing that I was making a town case*.
If you want to say I was introducing uncertainty (WIFOM if you prefer) into a read THAT WASN'T ALIGNMENT INDICATIVE AND NEEDED TO HAVE EXPLAINED WHY IT SHOULD HAVE UNCERTAINTY AS A READ then, yes, I will utterly agree that I did that, I've been saying that for some time.
But that is not even in the ballpark of doing what LQ said I did.
It is also not in the same country as lacking logic.
Post
Post #276 (isolation #50) » Mon Jul 11, 2016 12:21 pm
Postby Thor665 »
Like I feel like your response was "aha! Thor was debunking the validity of GN's read!"
And I'm like - well duh, been saying that forever.
But LQ said I was making a town case on myself.
You're not even saying that - and yet you're acting like what he said makes sense, and what I said is crazy talk *while you agree that GN's read made no sense*.
I feel like I'm going crazy right now - please clarify this.
Post
Post #278 (isolation #51) » Mon Jul 11, 2016 1:27 pm
Postby Thor665 »
In post 277, Zyf wrote:Well, you sort of were. Debunking someone else's read that you're scum is pretty much the same thing as trying to prove you're town.
When what I was saying was 'there is no valid tell here' it's kind of weird to then decide that what I really meant was 'that tell makes me town'.
In post 277, Zyf wrote:And even if you /were/ disproving the read without any intent to prove you were town (do you hear how little sense that makes?), I'm saying your reasons were BS coming from an IC.
I don't care if you like my reasons, I know they're legit game theory, and it's actually against my role as an IC to be lying about game theory so if you think that's what I was doing you need to report me to the site mods - what I care about is the concept of deciding I was town casing myself as a scum strategy, which is what LQ was advancing and which I was disagreeing with and which you are semi-supporting while also not supporting it at all and agreeing with me that the case of GN needed to be noted as not indicating town/scum intent (do you see how crazy it is to claim that I was attacking the town/scum readability of a case while suggesting that I was doing so to make a case that I was town).
Post
Post #288 (isolation #52) » Mon Jul 11, 2016 11:28 pm
Postby Thor665 »
In post 279, Zyf wrote:-GreenNope's logic was bad
-I did not like that you gave absolute statements about scum behavior without acknowledging the possibility for scum to do it deliberately to get town points
-I now know that you get and acknowledge that
-I consider defending oneself against a push with logic (rather than post analysis) to prove one is town to still be a town case, apparently you don't?
-Making a case for yourself as town is something I see as possible as both town and scum-i therefore DISAGREE if lickety's message is to say you /must/ be scum because of it; this is where our accordance ends
Ok. There.
- Yup.
- I did the opposite of this.
- Okay.
- I consider pointing out that there is no logic in a tell to not be a town case on the person the tell is applied against, I consider it a null case if I was forced to call it a a case.
- Okay...?
So, basically you're back to agreeing with me on basically everything.
We also now have LQ admitting he was wrong.
So - wow, shock, everyone is having to admit Thor had valid points and they were arguing dreck.
Glad that only took a few days.
In post 280, Zyf wrote:You just said you can't lie when it comes to game theory! And you said the opposite of this in your post..?
Oh dear gawd - No I didn't.
Please feel free to report me - I don't care about this insanity anymore.
In post 281, Zyf wrote:Thor, what are your 3 most recent scum games?
In post 282, LicketyQuickety wrote:I am going to change my stance on this here. I believe what I said is based on a misconception of what you actually meant, rather than a misrep and if you don't think there is a difference between those two, then I am just going to call you narrow minded.
And here we go. None of the rest of your post matters because of this one.
Yes, I know and knew you were going to do this eventually because there wasn't and isn't any support to your stance.
Basically now your new position is, 'Yeah, Thor is right, but I didn't have any scum intentions in doing what I did'.
I would feel better about that if you hadn't spent multiple days denying that you did what you did first.
In post 209, LicketyQuickety wrote:Here is a game where the same thing happened. Its not exactly the same, but it should be clear that there was a player who was Scum reading me because they didn't understand me. I didn't link this game before because its so old, but its still basically the same thing.
To spare me some time, which was the player scumreading you whose interactions are similar - I'm starting to lose interest in full data mining your games.
convenient.
Okay, sure, it's super convenient...so...can you tell me who the player scumreading you was? Because, seriously, just tell me and spare me about fifteen-thirty minutes of reading?
Post
Post #292 (isolation #53) » Tue Jul 12, 2016 2:05 am
Postby Thor665 »
In post 289, Zyf wrote:thor for the love of god
I know how to search your topics I just wanted the names gdi
The way I would find my most recent scum games is the same way you would - I'd just start random clicking. So - you can also random click.
In post 289, Zyf wrote:Ah well, whatever...we have different definitions of stuff so arguing is pretty much pointless now.
And that for your and LQ's argument to work required ignoring the point where I made a "scum case" on myself and also that LQ has had to come out and agree that maybe he misunderstood me does *nothing* to how you're assessing this?
In post 289, Zyf wrote:Then Thor-what are your thoughts on Pkm?
Townish.
In post 291, Impoetic wrote:Actually idk who i'm voting right now so VOTE: unvote I guess, until a voting log happens
Why don't you want to start a "log" as opposed to waiting for one to happen?
In post 294, Impoetic wrote:Why is PKM townish? Could you give more detail on that?
I find the case on him to be really silly, and I find him listing me as a townread after a fairly aggressive rush from me at him early on to be more likely to come from town who is trying to get reads than scum extending an olive branch to someone they must think scum reads them.
In post 294, Impoetic wrote:Also I'm in no particular hurry to vote and hadn't realized that would be allowed lol
I'm not asking you to be in a hurry to vote - I'm asking why you want to wait for someone else to form a wagon and then toss in support on it rather than leading a wagon on someone you find scummy.
I always try to lead wagons.
Because no matter my alignment, it's better if people lynch whom I decide then lynch someone that someone else decides.
Why do you not agree?
Post
Post #314 (isolation #55) » Tue Jul 12, 2016 2:59 am
Postby Thor665 »
In post 305, frog wrote:I thought Impoetic was pretty clearly talking about a vote count, not a wagon (I don't know how you got wagon from 'log').
Yeah, I figured that out at the top of this page which is why I dropped the line of questioning.
In post 305, frog wrote:With respect to PkmSilver, I don't see your push on them being particularly aggressive. Is it just his reaction to this that marks him down as town for you?
In post 294, Impoetic wrote:Why is PKM townish? Could you give more detail on that?
I find the case on him to be really silly, and I find him listing me as a townread after a fairly aggressive rush from me at him early on to be more likely to come from town who is trying to get reads than scum extending an olive branch to someone they must think scum reads them.
Oh, please that's NAI and you know it.
No, I apparently don't know that.
I also disagree.
Post
Post #346 (isolation #58) » Wed Jul 13, 2016 7:02 am
Postby Thor665 »
In post 343, frog wrote:@everyone: is it seriously possible that PkmSilver still doesn't know what we're asking? I'm considering dropping a vote down at this point.
Doesn't really leap out to me as a brilliant scum strategy - but if you think it does I would point out LQ has been doing the same sort of stuff in addition to other, less debatable, scummy actions.
He did - read the post, here, I'll try to make it easier;
In post 371, PkmSilver wrote:At first the way she was talking looked scummy to me, but after a while her way of talking was more townie-looking. I think that's the mostly way I was scumreading her.
[snip]
I'm trying dude, and I am still fairly new and you guys are having hard time against me, I know this is a wifom but if you must lynch me d1 you can. Anyways like Frog said? I believe I wouldn't last on LYLO.
I am sorry I don't even know how to edit posts. FML
That was what he answered, albeit super sloppily inside of posts.
@PKM - stop quoting things. Seriously, until you can figure out how to do it just try to say things without quotes.
In post 355, Zyf wrote:One of the hardest things to do as scum is be able to go back on your "reads" in order to get a mislynch lined up; if you never gave reads, it's super easy to do.
I also, personally, would suggest it's super easy to do with giving all sorts of reads.
Ask me about it after the game if you'd like a brief breakdown of the process.
Post
Post #374 (isolation #60) » Thu Jul 14, 2016 3:25 am
Postby Thor665 »
On consideration, I think only the second bit was new stuff - I'm pretty sure the first bit was him from a while back.
But the other bit is new barring the last line.