Mini 1782 Game Over
-
-
Froot Loop Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 983
- Joined: October 2, 2011
- Location: Vietnam
-
-
Froot Loop Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 983
- Joined: October 2, 2011
- Location: Vietnam
In post 91, RadiantCowbells wrote:APF's pushes feel really disingenuous and the page 2 declaring people confscum shit is just awful.
If he's town and this is actually his scumhunting then I think town is better off without him anyway.
I really don't think FA's scum atm.
(my bold)
This is super weak. I haven't read APF's posts as close to a push, I agree with Roshar in 44 but that's why I'm basically disregarding what APF's saying. It doesn't seem to be meant to be taken seriously.
I'm more worried about the pushes against APF, particularly RC but also Roshar.-
-
Froot Loop Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 983
- Joined: October 2, 2011
- Location: Vietnam
In post 109, RadiantCowbells wrote:It's not about anypushing, it's about the way he's talking like an idiot suggesting that people are confscum on the second page.
Most games that I've lost as town have been either due to tunnelers who can't reconsider things or to scum disguising themselves as tunnelers and getting away with it.
I'm going to policy lynch anyone who does that shit.
I didn't take his assertion that strongly. I agree with you (not sure about the policy lynching,) I just don't think that's what he's doing in this game.
In post 114, a plain farmer wrote:In post 92, Froot Loop wrote:The confusion between FA and RC is weird. I didn't know what RC was talking about because scum know each other. It's a strange interaction anyway.
Do you think it's weird in any alignment-indicative way?
I guess I think it's unlikely something that would happen if they're both scum.-
-
Froot Loop Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 983
- Joined: October 2, 2011
- Location: Vietnam
In post 135, Roshar wrote:
Did you read it is as genuine or fake excitement when RC thought frozen slipped?
I read it as genuine.
In post 135, Roshar wrote:
In post 124, Froot Loop wrote:
I didn't take his assertion that strongly. I agree with you (not sure about the policy lynching,) I just don't think that's what he's doing in this game.
What do you think he's doing in this game, then? For the record, he still stands by his 'case'. I do find it hard to believe scum would throw themselves this way, but I also cannot come up with a town thought process.
APF hasn't been tunnelling and he has been talking about other things in the game and his later vote references other things smith has done as well.
Maverick came off pretty well from his interaction with RC - it feels like he's genuinely looking for information and not jumping on RC's behaviour which could be done as scum. I'm not saying that scum would definitely do it, but not doing it is a measured move.
RC seems sensitive but I'm not sure what this indicates, while it's definitely not useful to town. I can't really see anything useful to the town in his responses to Maverick.-
-
Froot Loop Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 983
- Joined: October 2, 2011
- Location: Vietnam
-
-
Froot Loop Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 983
- Joined: October 2, 2011
- Location: Vietnam
To share what I thought.
Town should try and be useful to the town, that doesn't mean they always are though. I'm not saying "not useful to town = scum." It can easily be "not useful to town = nothing," especially in the situation of a reaction to questioning from another player. But, "not useful to town" does not equal "useful to town," which for me would be town-indicative.-
-
Froot Loop Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 983
- Joined: October 2, 2011
- Location: Vietnam
In post 225, Frozen Angel wrote:In post 220, Froot Loop wrote:RC seems sensitive but I'm not sure what this indicates, while it's definitely not useful to town. I can't really see anything useful to the town in his responses to Maverick.
you don't know RC at all
That's true but is there something I said in particular?-
-
Froot Loop Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 983
- Joined: October 2, 2011
- Location: Vietnam
It's not impossible to read someone but it's difficult. Regardless of that, there's a lot of people who believe they can read people so that's no indication of anything.
In post 438, RadiantCowbells wrote:VOTE: JFSF
Not dealing with someone with that attitude, regardless of alignment.
I basically agree with this.
In post 372, Maverick1102 wrote:I don't appreciate how Jake is acting, but playing so blatently anti-town just isn't something I can see scum doing so early into D1.
I think this was mentioned somewhere but I didn't see it. Too scummy to be scum isn't a thing. He's done something anti-town, if that's what you think, and it can be left at that.
Why is there a discussion about scum motivation for ignoring the thread? Any reason for changing votes quickly, claiming ignorance or contradiction is in scum's best interest. That's why there's so much overlap between scum and lazy-town play. Jake's play has a second level, where he's asserting that he's doing something anti-town in thread. He's being honest about his anti-town play so he seems town.
In post 417, Jake from State Farm wrote:
5. Who said I'm looking for allegiances? Idk even what that means. I'm looking for scum and I'm perfectly able to do that without reading pregame.
In post 427, Jake from State Farm wrote:
yeah I guess since you don't know me you don't really know any better but that's exactly how I play. It is a one player game where I am like screw you all I do my own thing. I don't look for town, I only look for scum.
There's no indication for me that Jake is looking for scum and to clarify, that's why I'm voting for him.
VOTE: Jake from State Farm-
-
Froot Loop Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 983
- Joined: October 2, 2011
- Location: Vietnam
-
-
Froot Loop Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 983
- Joined: October 2, 2011
- Location: Vietnam
In post 476, Jake from State Farm wrote:vote: mhsmith
and people question my scum hunting techniques
Can you clarify the techniques that you're talking about?
In post 455, Nosferatu wrote:In post 453, Nosferatu wrote:In post 447, Froot Loop wrote:
Why is there a discussion about scum motivation for ignoring the thread? Any reason for changing votes quickly, claiming ignorance or contradiction is in scum's best interest. That's why there's so much overlap between scum and lazy-town play. Jake's play has a second level, where he's asserting that he's doing something anti-town in thread. He's being honest about his anti-town play so he seems town.
In post 417, Jake from State Farm wrote:
5. Who said I'm looking for allegiances? Idk even what that means. I'm looking for scum and I'm perfectly able to do that without reading pregame.
In post 427, Jake from State Farm wrote:
yeah I guess since you don't know me you don't really know any better but that's exactly how I play. It is a one player game where I am like screw you all I do my own thing. I don't look for town, I only look for scum.
I don't see how these two posts are him being deliberately anti-town, explain pls?
whoops
Those two posts were related to his scum-hunting (I commented on them afterwards in my post.) The anti-town bit was not reading the thread, or saying that he's not reading the thread properly.-
-
Froot Loop Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 983
- Joined: October 2, 2011
- Location: Vietnam
I mean, fine. I don't know what you're trying to achieve and I don't see the problem with being open if it is obvious.
If the play was to park on a quasi-random vote to try and lure out scum, I'd ask how legitimate your vote was on RC and whether we're to read that as your feelings or part of the technique. If not, then it's not obvious to me.-
-
Froot Loop Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 983
- Joined: October 2, 2011
- Location: Vietnam
In post 537, Frozen Angel wrote:
I shared my feelings about both already. if you can't see that I'm null townlean on jake and scum lean on RC atm. RC plays seems a bit fake and closed that I'm not sure what is he trying to do and whats his agenda.plus RC is not suggesting policy lynches.he is not just playing open and you need analysing his posts to understand him - which is extremely hard becuase he is basically doing nothing.
and Jake push on RC is becuase he is afraid of RC play as both town and scum and he thinks RC didn't done anything to make him say otherwise.
none of them are policy lynches.
(my bold)
This seems like a policy lynch:
In post 438, RadiantCowbells wrote:VOTE: JFSF
Not dealing with someone with that attitude, regardless of alignment.
Maverick's gone hard on Jake and I don't like this post:
In post 610, Maverick1102 wrote:@Jake: You didn't prove me wrong. You lied about people applying pressure on mhsmithto make the retraction of his vote seem scummy. You're backtracking withpedantic little arguments that anyone ought to be able to see through, you'vehunted for towncredand willingly ignored a large portion of the game. (People were talking in pregame. It's part of the game. Deal with it.) You claim you aren't being defensive yet you've gotten worked up about me thinking you're scum and are appealing to emotion by insinuating that you're angry about being called a liar. Bull.You're angry about being caught out.You claim you're looking for reads elsewhere whilst your vote remains on mhsmith. Well if you're looking for reads, what do you think of me? Of Roshar? Of FA? Of APF? Or are we all still null-reads for you after 25 pages? Because that, too, stinks of lazy scum.
Nos-ja'd: @Nos: I can agree with Lowell's drifting. There's votes and some reads in there.
(all my bold)
I don't like this kind of representation in the thread. I know it's after a long conversation so there's context but it's presenting contentious assertions as fact.
Maverick doesn't know why Jake lied about applying pressure on smith. Maverick's categorisation of Jake's arguments as pedantic is subjective. Similarly, "hunted for towncred" is an interpretation of Jake's actions as scummy, rather than presenting the actions themselves. Maverick quoted the posts he's referring to but it's presented objectively in this post. Maverick doesn't know why Jake is angry.
Jake has presented conflicting motivations in thread. He said pregame was useless (post 198) and that he was busy (post 201) and then when he was called on saying the thread was useless (post 272) he said it was because he's busy and didn't acknowledge the actual foundation for the comment (post 269.)
Similarly, he posted a vote for RC (post 340) and a subsequent explanation (post 427) which doesn't mention any posts in the game. Then (post 460) says that he's also read some things in the game which make him think RC is scum. (I can't see any reference to what those posts are but that's a different thing.) Then, when Nos says it's a policy lynch (post 462, Nosferatu"],) Jake only quotes his post saying that he has read some of RC's content (post 468.)
This is the kind of thing that comes across as lying in the thread.
I don't know what lying Maverick is referring to about smith, maybe I missed it. Maverick, can you confirm?
I'd also still like to know if Jake's vote on RC was serious or if it was part of gambit. It will help me analyse his play.-
-
Froot Loop Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 983
- Joined: October 2, 2011
- Location: Vietnam
In post 662, a plain farmer wrote:
1) Jake said the people pressuring mhsmith were pressuring him so that he'd remove his vote (but Jake didn't say this. He was saying that mhsmith got pressured in general, so then removed his vote in hopes that it would reduce the heat on him).
Just seen this explanation of the lying about pressure. I'm guessing that's what's being talked about.
I like FA's read list. Maybe I'm getting distracted by the pretty pictures, but it's good to see something in thread and about some people who haven't been posting as much as well.
I'm reading up on Nos' posts and the votes against him just now. Jake's still my strongest scum read.-
-
Froot Loop Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 983
- Joined: October 2, 2011
- Location: Vietnam
RC, you're voting for Nos.
This is another of the votes on Nos:
In post 432, Lowell wrote:Jake is town, farmer is town. I'm back up to 'meh' on smith.
VOTE: nos
I like this idea. Fool me once, shame on me. Fool me twice... something something... you DONT GET FOOLED AGAIN.
tbh, FA's is the most reasonable, whether or not it's going to stand after his run through, it looks like he's calling Nos out for changing his read a bit baselessly.-
-
Froot Loop Goon
-
-
Froot Loop Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 983
- Joined: October 2, 2011
- Location: Vietnam
I still think Jake/Max is a scum slot. I'll read through everything again tomorrow but when I was reading it, that's what I was thinking and it's what I'm feeling. The thing about the readlists is another problem for me - it felt like fake-town, theory play rather than anything helpful/investigative.
I think someone asked me about this post before:
In post 447, Froot Loop wrote:
In post 438, RadiantCowbells wrote:VOTE: JFSF
Not dealing with someone with that attitude, regardless of alignment.
I basically agree with this.
I didn't phrase this very well because I don't agree with the policy-lynching side of it but I do agree with the difficulty of interacting with someone who acts the way Jake was acting. It's frustrating and I think it's anti-town so I don't know why it's done.-
-
Froot Loop Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 983
- Joined: October 2, 2011
- Location: Vietnam
Was Jake close to being lynched? That's not the impression I got when I was reading through, people were telling them to take a break and stuff.
Re: Max's post 937 - It's true that scum can hide away during a tunnelly TvT argument but I also think scum could dominate the thread like this. It's way more ballsy but looking at the way things turned out, and the likelihood that people will interpret it as TvT, it could be worth it. I think Jake's pregame play shows a player who isn't afraid of having attention, whether that indicates scum-Jake or town-Jake, I don't know, but I don't think scum will necessarily avoid the argument. I think mhsmith mentioned that Jake seemed to be getting panicky and I agree. I think the aggressive behaviour can be a response to being pushed, as well as backing off. Backing off appears to be more survivalist but they both can be.
In post 760, shaddowez wrote:
Another suggestion for what equates to a policy lynch, which RC never responded to earlier.In post 649, RadiantCowbells wrote:You are more than capable of scumhunting and are not scumhunting.
So either you're scum or you're not making an effort and I'm fine lynching you either way.
I didn't read this as a policy lynch, I thought it was like "You're a good player but you're not playing well, that indicates that you're scum."-
-
Froot Loop Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 983
- Joined: October 2, 2011
- Location: Vietnam
@Shaddowez - ah ok, sorry, I was caught up in the context and missed that part of the post.
About Jake/Max, most of this is repetition but it's what I'm thinking:
1) I think he's presented conflicting information in the thread and then been misleading about it. I linked to the posts I'm talking about in post 663
2) The way Jake was posting at the beginning of the game and the way he reacted to questioning about his pre-game opinion makes me think that he wouldn't back down from being questioned. The argument that he would do this as town isn't applicable, for me.
3) I get a bullying impression from his interaction with FA. I think he was panicking and responded like this to FA's questioning.
4) His discussion of reads lists (post 356, post 446, post 472) is theory-based posting rather than analysis of the game.
5) About Max - I don't think Jake was close to being lynched, so presenting this as a context in which to view Jake's behaviour (post 938) isn't valid IMO.
6) Pointing out the lurkers and Jeanne's vote is pretty null for me.-
-
Froot Loop Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 983
- Joined: October 2, 2011
- Location: Vietnam
I second Roshar's question to Huntress.
I feel good about smith's vote on Clumsy, it's not just for being a lurker. I still think Max is the better choice.
Do you mean to a lynch, or is this a pressure vote?
In post 968, Maxous wrote:In post 958, Roshar wrote:What is town arguing anyway?
it's a bunch of town-aligned players arguing amongst themsleves
-
-
Froot Loop Goon
-
-
Froot Loop Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 983
- Joined: October 2, 2011
- Location: Vietnam
Sorry, just saw this, although a bit more information would be nice:
In post 982, Clumsy wrote:
That post was about Maverick. But now I'm back to on the fence with him. It's almost exclusively gut though. Something is bothering me about him, and I can't figure it out.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In post 977, mhsmith0 wrote:
and he was a lot more aggressive and talkative in each. One was town and one was scum, so it's hardly certain, but the difference here is jarring, and I suspect it's because he's been trying to keep his head down among what's been, let's just say, some aggressive personalities. He hasn't been scum reading anyone, he hasn't been getting into the fray, he's been keeping his head down as much as he can.
If he was chatty as town and scum, he could be posting less as town and scum? Interestingly, I get the impression that he's a bit non-committal in general which conflicts with the aggressive play you saw in his other games.
Also, I've had a read through his ISO and come up with these:
In post 132, Clumsy wrote:
-_- If you would care to look at my game history, I only have 2 completed games here. Both of them Newbie games. 9 players, 2 scum. Haven't been in a 12 person game. I thought there would be 3 scum, but I wanted to make sure so I didn't have any errors in logic. The fact that you think it's a ham handed fake townslip is one of the more egotistical things I've seen in a while. Which is saying something.
I read this as a firm response to Lowell saying he faked a townslip. But APF thinks he missed an opportunity to question Lowell further (post 964)
In post 561, Clumsy wrote:
At first, I had the impression that Maverick was just vote hopping to whatever looked good repeatedly. Going with the flow. After going back and ISOing though, it's not true. Decent vibes from this so far. Lean town.
Town read on Maverick.@APF - you interpreted these as empty words in post 964?
In post 982, Clumsy wrote:
In post 956, pisskop wrote:My eyes are throbbing as I read the frst 8 pages.
RC is kund of floating around, and that indicative of him being scummy. But Titus I feel much better about reading.
APF is kind of naughty too. Didnt like much he did.
He has been kind of quiet, which is odd because from the games I've read, he's usually pretty talkative, right? (Not that I can say much on this. >_<)
Just for clarity, is this saying Titus is a town-lean for you?
[my edit]
As for the ISO, I did look into it, but didn't find as much as I had hoped. I like your side of it more, but I could see a scum team between you with this used as distancing. What is interesting is that while you're pushing him pretty hard, you stay near the middle of his readlist. He looks kind of passive while under pressure for you, which pings me as somewhat scummy from my (limited) experience.
Asking pisskop for a concrete read/clarification. Attempted analysis of Roshar/APF ISO. (Fair enough that this was after being pressured.)
I'm way more convinced by my own argument for lynching Max-
-
Froot Loop Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 983
- Joined: October 2, 2011
- Location: Vietnam
In post 1008, Lowell wrote:Anyone who asks things like "is this a pressure vote, or a lynch vote" is inherently suspicious, IMO.
I was trying to clarify Roshar's comment when she voted. Why is asking that scummy?
I get it with Clumsy but I just think that lack of activity and lack of reads go hand in hand. If he'd been posting loads without reads, I'd be more suspicious.
Thanks for clarifying, APF.-
-
Froot Loop Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 983
- Joined: October 2, 2011
- Location: Vietnam
Max - why are you reading the fights as TvT? Is there anything specific you can point to? Also, can you clarify why you think Jake was close to getting lynched?
In post 983, Clumsy wrote:In post 976, a plain farmer wrote:
And I realize I'm scumreading Clumsy more than shaddow now.
VOTE: Clumsy
Could you explain why exactly? I can understand, because of my inactivity and the fact that others are thinking the same as you, but I'm wary of the runner up wagon jumping onto the leading wagon.
I won't keep harping on about this, but this post from Clumsy shows a total disconnect from the game. APF clearly stated the reasons for his suspicions and I don't see any reason for scum, in this situation, to ignore it. Also, unless my reading of the game is wrong, APF doesn't have any wagon. I would say that Max is the other person being talked about.-
-
Froot Loop Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 983
- Joined: October 2, 2011
- Location: Vietnam
Max, what's your interpretation of the Jake/FA fight?
In post 1023, Froot Loop wrote:Max - why are you reading the fights as TvT? Is there anything specific you can point to?Also, can you clarify why you think Jake was close to getting lynched?
(my bold, on my post! haha)
What about this question?-
-
Froot Loop Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 983
- Joined: October 2, 2011
- Location: Vietnam
-
-
Froot Loop Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 983
- Joined: October 2, 2011
- Location: Vietnam
I literally cheered at Clumsy's post 1037 then I saw the page one and was like "Oh nooooo.." hahaha. That being said, I don't mind it and the spoiler tags are helpful.
I agree about Lowell advocating for something anti-town.
In post 1021, Froot Loop wrote:In post 1008, Lowell wrote:Anyone who asks things like "is this a pressure vote, or a lynch vote" is inherently suspicious, IMO.
I was trying to clarify Roshar's comment when she voted. Why is asking that scummy?
Lowell, can you clarify this? I hadn't thought about devaluing the vote but considering Roshar's comment when she voted, I wanted to know what she meant.-
-
Froot Loop
-
-
Froot Loop Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 983
- Joined: October 2, 2011
- Location: Vietnam
Why Huntress? This is the second time you seem to have scumread someone without giving a reason.
I'm leaning town on Shaddowez. I like his post 950 - I think it's asking for and responding to clarification. I do think it was a bit early for his vote on Clumsy though.-
-
Froot Loop Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 983
- Joined: October 2, 2011
- Location: Vietnam
Clumsy - what is it about my play that you would describe as coasting?
Lowell - some people have asked you some things or commented on your play. Can you respond?
In post 1105, Nosferatu wrote:
2) Well we're discussing me and my opinions right now, and have been nearly this entire game so that's just contradictory, andtown shouldn't aim to be town read, it should be to find scum and let people know when you think you've got one, which is the quintessence of my playstyle. I'm not advocating this playstyle, but it's what works for me.
(my bold)
This is a bit of talk about theory but I disagree with this. Perhaps it's not the main objective but all town players have a responsibility to find scum and not get lynched. Maybe that's what you meant by 'aim.'
@Max - this is the first time I was talking about:
In post 967, Maxous wrote:In post 950, shaddowez wrote:
Why APF?In post 937, Maxous wrote:vote: Clumsy
I would focus on either Clumsy or A Plain Farmer.
...snip...
i feel Clumsy's been overly quiet in general anyway.
The same as Clumsy, just to a lesser extent.
Your vote on APF was baseless and shaddowez had to ask you to clarify.
Max, are there any points in my post 965 that you want to talk about? The reasons are there why I'm scumreading you.-
-
Froot Loop Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 983
- Joined: October 2, 2011
- Location: Vietnam
-
-
Froot Loop Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 983
- Joined: October 2, 2011
- Location: Vietnam
I'm on my phone so I can't quote.
I think there's evidence that that inactivity was legitimate, rather than scum avoiding saying anything in the thread. Voting for clumsy for inactivity is now illegitimate for me.
APF - I think a lot of your reasons for voting for clumsy can be explained by his general inactivity. What do you think?
The jake/Max slot has done provable scummy things in the thread. I've talked about the Jake thing and now Max has been posting badly as well. He hasn't given reasons for multiple votes and his responses to my points on Jake are unsubstantial. I said Jake had posted misleading information in the thread; Max called him obnoxious. I stated that I thought there was evidence that Jake would t back down from an argument as town or scum. He ignored this point. I accept his point 3, although it doesn't invalidate my point. He didn't address my point that Jake presented town-looking theory in order to look town.
We should lynch Max today.-
-
Froot Loop Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 983
- Joined: October 2, 2011
- Location: Vietnam
-
-
Froot Loop Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 983
- Joined: October 2, 2011
- Location: Vietnam
In post 1140, FA_Q2 wrote:In post 1134, Froot Loop wrote:I'm on my phone so I can't quote.
I think there's evidence that that inactivity was legitimate, rather than scum avoiding saying anything in the thread. Voting for clumsy for inactivity is now illegitimate for me.
Is that the only reasoning behind the wagon on clumsy? That would seem rather odd considering they seem to be the only wagon at this point.
Here are what I think are the posts with the main reasons for voting clumsy:
Lowell - post 674
Maverick/FA_Q2 - post 962
APF - post 964
mhsmith - post 977
Shaddowez - post 1003
There's more, particularly Lowell talking about clumsy's (lack of) scumreads and maverick has a previous vote on clumsy, but that's what I've got from seeing where they talked about clumsy in their ISOs.
There's a few reasons but I think a lot of them can be explained by his inactivity, which I think is genuine.
@mhsmith - ok. I've been thinking about how Max plays in general and had a quick look at some of his previous games yesterday. He's a little more quiet in this game and less definitive I think. I also haven't seen a scum game yet. All I need to do is find a game where he's replaced into a scum-slot under a decent amount of pressure and with some questionable play and it'll be fine :/-
-
Froot Loop Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 983
- Joined: October 2, 2011
- Location: Vietnam
In post 1156, a plain farmer wrote:
I was also pinged by Jeanne's vote on Jake. I do believe her when she said she doesn't like tunnelers, but I don't think Jake had really been tunneling at the time. So one way to make sense of that post is to see it as scum pushing through a lynch using one's established preferences as cover. So of courseI also buy Max's scumread of the slot as legitimate.
(my bold)
@APF - can you explain what you mean by 'legitimate'?
In post 1121, Huntress wrote:Second scum read was Froot Loop but I can't remember why at the moment and it isn't clear from her ISO, which means it may have been some interaction or other which looked off when read in context. I'll get back to that later.
Let me know!
I'm having trouble getting reads in this game over and above Max, maybe because of the activity. Lowell hasn't been responding to the questions people have been asking, but I don't think this is AI as yet. Nos seems ok; I don't see anything too scummy in the argument with smith. I'll have a look at Huntress' comments about Roshar next.-
-
Froot Loop Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 983
- Joined: October 2, 2011
- Location: Vietnam
-
-
Froot Loop Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 983
- Joined: October 2, 2011
- Location: Vietnam
OK, change of plans, I'll be here for a couple of hours! If that makes any difference.
Lowell's a strange one. When I look back at his ISO, there's so much dodging and procrastinating, along with the unsubstantiated vote on Nos and he just hasn't participated in discussion. There's a lot of anti-town/scum-looking things but I just get a town vibe from him. I'll compromise on him if necessary and I guess he'd be my second choice.-
-
Froot Loop Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 983
- Joined: October 2, 2011
- Location: Vietnam
-
-
Froot Loop Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 983
- Joined: October 2, 2011
- Location: Vietnam
-
-
Froot Loop Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 983
- Joined: October 2, 2011
- Location: Vietnam
This is what I posted about Max:
In post 965, Froot Loop wrote:@Shaddowez - ah ok, sorry, I was caught up in the context and missed that part of the post.
About Jake/Max, most of this is repetition but it's what I'm thinking:
1) I think he's presented conflicting information in the thread and then been misleading about it. I linked to the posts I'm talking about in post 663
2) The way Jake was posting at the beginning of the game and the way he reacted to questioning about his pre-game opinion makes me think that he wouldn't back down from being questioned. The argument that he would do this as town isn't applicable, for me.
3) I get a bullying impression from his interaction with FA. I think he was panicking and responded like this to FA's questioning.
4) His discussion of reads lists (post 356, post 446, post 472) is theory-based posting rather than analysis of the game.[I want to clarify that this was town-leaning theory posting i.e. posting theory that looked beneficial to town.]
5) About Max - I don't think Jake was close to being lynched, so presenting this as a context in which to view Jake's behaviour (post 938) isn't valid IMO.
6) Pointing out the lurkers and Jeanne's vote is pretty null for me.
(bold added now)
I just read through APF's ISO, he was one of my null reads, and I'm getting a townie vibe from him. There's a good mixture of questioning, analysis and he's changed his manner/tone when dealing with some people (I'm thinking about smith) which I think is hard to fabricate as scum. We obviously disagree on the clumsy/max thing but I don’t think the way that was played is indicative.-
-
Froot Loop Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 983
- Joined: October 2, 2011
- Location: Vietnam
In post 1283, Lowell wrote:@froot, re: questions- either I ignored them because they're dumb or I forgot. remind me what you asked.
Waaaa, Lowell, I don't have time to do this just now. I (and others) mentioned it a few times. Did you notice when we were asking you? Right now I'd be more interested in why you didn't answer at the time than the answers to the questions.
In post 1281, Titus wrote:
The group was presented with two wagons. One took off and the other didn't. Why? Why did the game stall with Maxous's wagon but Clumsy's wagon went through when Maxous has done nothing?
It strongly suggests Maxous is scum as well.Even in the rare event I'm wrong, a lot of the game state reveals itself in a Max flip.
Overall, a Max wagon is an excellent place to be until he proves otherwise.
(my bold)
I think this is a fair interpretation of events although I disagree with the idea of lynching Max for the info. Max didn't respond to my questions until I pushed him on it. Could be that he felt like he didn't need to because he was feeling particularly secure. Although, this is fair enough because it really didn't take hold. If that's because he's scum and the other members were pushing the Clumsy wagon, I don't know.-
-
Froot Loop Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 983
- Joined: October 2, 2011
- Location: Vietnam
@Lowell - here are some questions/comments I found.
In post 1021, Froot Loop wrote:In post 1008, Lowell wrote:Anyone who asks things like "is this a pressure vote, or a lynch vote" is inherently suspicious, IMO.
I was trying to clarify Roshar's comment when she voted. Why is asking that scummy?
In post 1080, Roshar wrote:Aw, man. Maverick's getting replaced too?
Titus (RC) and Huntress (Kain Tepes) are both mysteries to me. Moving on to D2 with so little is so frustrating.
Let's see,Lowell, can I get current reads from you on each slot? I can't help but notice that you keep jumping on every wagon created.
In post 1089, Roshar wrote:In terms of Clumsy's actual content, I don't feel better about it. It's more him feeling bad about being a liability. That parts kinda getting to me. B/c that would be the correct town response to being falsely accused as town. But shouldn't there be some anger and bitterness too? Like 'Screw you guys, I hope it hurts when I flip town?'
Now, on to the actual content. I don't like how his read on me changed. Reading something the first time and thinking it's town, then going back and thinking it's scummy, is a thing. But vice-versa, reading something and finding it scummy the first time, then upon a reread thinking it's town, is just never a thing that has occurred to me. Which makes me think his read on me the first time was empty and going with the flow of things.
He gives lukewarm reads without backing them up and easily retracts them. His read on froot has changed as well, and it's almost making me feel like he gave his original town read on Froot just to appease us.
But his tone is making me hesitate.
Input anyone? Mhs, Apf, replacements maybe?
What do you think Lowell?
(my bold)
In post 1091, Nosferatu wrote:@roshar
In post 432, Lowell wrote:
VOTE: nos
I like this idea. Fool me once, shame on me. Fool me twice... something something... you DONT GET FOOLED AGAIN.
I'd also be up for a lurker hunt, if we have the time for it. Frankly I don't have a lot of bad vibes from anyone yet, so I'm clearly missing something. Either I'm wrong (impossible!) or one or more of the lurkers is scum.
^this is lowell somehow agreeing with some part of FA's case on me (mind you was pretty non-existent)
what part, the world may never know
In post 1094, Nosferatu wrote:In post 126, Lowell wrote:VOTE: roshar
This guy is barely holding it together and we've just started. Come do this with me and watch this poor rube flail. His ISO reeks of careful scum... already, somehow.
Also clumsy's ham-handed "omg how many scum are there guyz" is the worst fake-townslip I've seen in a while. which is saying something.
maverick is town.
In post 365, Lowell wrote:rosh is fine now. done with him.
smith's 351 looks like a try-hard filler post after he got called out for lurking. what i can do in one charismatic and awesome sentence he takes a text-wall to do. except he still does nothing.
VOTE: smith
In post 432, Lowell wrote:Jake is town, farmer is town. I'm back up to 'meh' on smith.
VOTE: nos
I like this idea. Fool me once, shame on me. Fool me twice... something something... you DONT GET FOOLED AGAIN.
I'd also be up for a lurker hunt, if we have the time for it. Frankly I don't have a lot of bad vibes from anyone yet, so I'm clearly missing something. Either I'm wrong (impossible!) or one or more of the lurkers is scum.
Lowell has also been voting every major suspicion of the town
In post 1118, Clumsy wrote:
The only bitterness I have is towards Lowell. I'm finding it increasingly scummy that he's trying so hard to put the nail in my coffin. In fact, I could easily see it as pushing a mislynch, and purposefully leaving himself open for a team bus for towncred. Just a theory though.-
-
Froot Loop Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 983
- Joined: October 2, 2011
- Location: Vietnam
In post 1292, JohnnyFarrar wrote:In post 1272, Froot Loop wrote:I posted a bit about what I thought about Max yesterday.
Lowell - some people asked you questions yesterday but you haven't answered.
This is an annoying response to a call to action.
What do you mean?
In post 1293, Maxous wrote:In post 1292, JohnnyFarrar wrote:I saw you respond once to the idea when I posited it here, but that was hardly a defense from the accusation.
Don't worry about it.
I was tired and being a bit snippy.
Maybe I wasn't clear before but I think it's scummy because she has struggled to come up with content to give. I don't think it's case where she's just lurking,I think suspect shecan'tcome up with much which would indicate a scum struggling with the game.
i'll vote lowell though because i'm really not inclined to just ignore the nos night-kill.
People will argue WIFOM but nos was not an obvious kill nor a universal strong town-read so i'm inclined to think there was a particular reason for it.
Not like Lowell has been a shining beacon of town play regardless
vote: lowell
(my bold/italic)
That's what I understood. There was also the discussion of the flashlynch on Lowell at the end of D1. Lowell's play has been noticed by a few players, I'm not sure NKing Nos would make that pressure disappear.
@max - you did provide analysis of Jake's play when I asked you more directly.
I had a look at the votes on Nos yesterday. In the vote counts, they're Johnny Farrar (voting as FA,) Lowell, Shaddow, Titus (voting as RC) and Rosh. I'd be interested in people's reads on nos yesterday. I had quite a positive reaction to their play.-
-
Froot Loop Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 983
- Joined: October 2, 2011
- Location: Vietnam
In post 1286, Maxous wrote:
I would still say huntress is scummy, she seemed pretty content to let the mislynch go through without getting her hands dirty so to speak.
Can you quote what makes you think this?
In post 1292, JohnnyFarrar wrote:
In post 1286, Maxous wrote:I would still say huntress is scummy, she seemed pretty content to let the mislynch go through without getting her hands dirty so to speak.
Strikes me as one of those 'damned if you do damned if you don't' situations, because I can just as easily imagine you saying something like 'she used deadline as an excuse to vote for that mislynch' had she voted
I get this but it's a bit hypothetical to influence anything.-
-
Froot Loop Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 983
- Joined: October 2, 2011
- Location: Vietnam
@Lowell - ok.
In post 1310, JohnnyFarrar wrote:In post 1309, Froot Loop wrote:I get this but it's a bit hypothetical to influence anything.
I mean that whole point is so nothing
Yep. We'll see what Max says about why he made that comment.-
-
Froot Loop Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 983
- Joined: October 2, 2011
- Location: Vietnam
In post 1293, Maxous wrote:
i'll vote lowell though because i'm really not inclined to just ignore the nos night-kill.
People will argue WIFOM but nos was not an obvious kill nor a universal strong town-read so i'm inclined to think there was a particular reason for it.
Not like Lowell has been a shining beacon of town play regardless
vote: lowell
@max - I posted in 1294 about the implications, re Lowell, of nos' death. What do you think?
In post 1298, JohnnyFarrar wrote:Oh shit fack caught me
@Max had you stated that 3-4 times then before I brought it up or we're you exaggerating to try to make my point seem uninformed? As for your explanationI just can't bring myself to assume scum is lost, well, ever, really.
(my bold)
@Johnny - what do you mean by 'lost'? I understand that Max is saying scum can have difficulty with reads because they're basically all made up. You don't agree with this?
In post 1322, JohnnyFarrar wrote:
In order: fruit I was just annoyed by, Titus take some getting used to, but I'm fine with her for now, the fact is either being scummy or stubbornly obtuse, I'm not sure which is worse. Max's the most skinny person mentioned in that post, but the point being made there are not why I find him scummy it's just me trying to figure him out
I get that my initial post didn't contain much but by the time you said you were annoyed, I'd posted a few more (1276, 1285 and 1287.) Did you think they were annoying also? Or they didn't do anything to make you feel better?
In post 1305, mhsmith0 wrote:In post 1303, Roshar wrote:I'm really curious as to why Nos was NK'd. Did they crumb? Otherwise kinda nonstrategic. I'm not gonna bother with wifom with this (i.e nos voted lowell).
I'm not entirely following this. You say you're curious, but you're not going to worry about the nos voting lowell part.Is there some other insight you think is worth gleaming from her death?
(my bold)
@smith - I'm surprised you didn't get what Roshar was talking about. I think this post is a bit shade-throwy. You're implying (I think) that Roshar's post doesn't have any content.-
-
Froot Loop Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 983
- Joined: October 2, 2011
- Location: Vietnam
I'm guessing the Roshar/Lowell thing is about 1089.
@Roshar - Lowell's saying that you tried to maintain the wagonwithout taking responsibility for it.Not that you were just trying to move the wagon on.
In post 1329, JohnnyFarrar wrote:In post 1328, Froot Loop wrote:@Johnny - what do you mean by 'lost'? I understand that Max is saying scum can have difficulty with reads because they're basically all made up. You don't agree with this?
Oh see I hear that as "scum is bad at Mafia" which is a dangerous thing to assume
This is a good point. What do you think about Max making that argument? He's made a few weak arguments today (Huntress and the lynch avoiding, Lowell as a reason for Nos' NK [I really don't think this is strong enough for a vote, I'd be interested in other people's thoughts.])
In post 1329, JohnnyFarrar wrote:
And I was just annoyed with that response in the moment frooty. You responding to my "where everybody at" post with a "same shit I said yesterday" made it seem like there was nothing new you could be saying.
@JF - I get that and I also get why that post was annoying, it's a bit nothing. But why did you mention one specific post when I'd posted two afterwards and you didn't mention them?-
-
Froot Loop Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 983
- Joined: October 2, 2011
- Location: Vietnam
@Titus - the post I quoted which Lowell responded to initially is 1089
Why would there be suspicion on the neighbour? Because of the possibility that Nos slipped something or claimed in the thread which led to the NK? I don't think that's a very strong reason. I think it's more likely that we would assess the alignment based on play, which is what we're doing anyway. I think the speculation about whether Nos said something in the thread or the neighbour slipped is useless. You're (smith, Titus, Roshar) saying that there would be suspicion on the neighbour, so nothing would be taken for granted and everything would be questioned. We wouldn't get anything definitive from the claim but scum would.
In post 1346, Roshar wrote:@Froot, Lowell is saying I'm trying to get him to move the wagon instead of myself. I.e, I want the wagon to move forward, I just want him to do it instead of me.
The assumption implies that I wanted that wagon moved at all (albeit indirectly). That's what I was addressing in my later posts.After I already pointed my reason for trying to include him and all the people on the clumsy wagon in the conversation.
I see that you asked other people as well and I understand your reasons. If you didn't want to take responsibility for Clumsy, then pushing someone else hard and asking Clumsy to join you are pretty good things to point to the next day as "see how little I wanted to lynch Clumsy?" So those points don't counter the argument for me.
About the hammer - you did start questioning Clumsy and pressuring him. I don't characterise your hammer as a last-minute-before the end of the day-hammer.
In post 1346, Roshar wrote:
@Froot, In terms of the weak arguments from Max, let's try to remain non-biased here. His reason was him saying Huntress was struggling to come up with reads, which is a scum thing to do. And this is end of day 2. I'm starting to see some sense in that.
And in terms of his Lowell vote, did you also see 1286, where he gave another reason why he found Lowell suspicious?
Re Max - I'm trying. I spoke to Johnny about the Huntress comment and his reply (1329) is a good point. I wonder what Johnny thinks about Max using an argument which he (Johnny) thinks to be pretty weak. The other specific argument I was thinking about is his comment about Huntress in 1286 which Max agreed isn't the strongest argument in 1317.
About Lowell, I saw the other post and the comment about the vote at the beginning of D2. I responded to the vote in 1294 and asked what Max thought in 1328. I think it's a weak reason for a vote (1345) but this could be subjective.
In post 1348, JohnnyFarrar wrote:In post 1345, Froot Loop wrote:@JF - I get that and I also get why that post was annoying, it's a bit nothing. But why did you mention one specific post when I'd posted two afterwards and you didn't mention them?
Because I play off the cuff. Saw something, said something. It's easier to see in games where mods don't hide my kpop gifs but I'm actually quite fluffy.
But what did you think about the other posts? It just seems strange - my initial post annoyed you for lack of content, then I posted more content so I would guess that you would be a bit appeased, therefore there'd be no need to say anything at all.
@Huntress - you're not pushing anything at the moment.-
-
Froot Loop Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 983
- Joined: October 2, 2011
- Location: Vietnam
@Titus - you were talking about the "natural suspicion" which would fall on the neighbour but I don't think there would be any, or none with any foundation which would help us.
@Roshar - It's easy for scum to come in and last minute hammer and take no responsibility, that's why I mentioned that I don't think this happened in your case. You did specifically name people who were already on the Clumsy wagon (smith, APF and Lowell.) The new analysis and asking for responses to your reads is the strongest response, IMO, and that seems like a genuine a reason for your question. I also get that asking for responses from people who already think Clumsy is scummy isn't the most helpful, because you kind of know what response you're going to get, especially when your read leaned towards Clumsy being scummy.-
-
Froot Loop Goon
-
-
Froot Loop Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 983
- Joined: October 2, 2011
- Location: Vietnam
In post 1381, Roshar wrote:The possibility that her neighbour being scum is pretty high after her NK, imo.I doubt the neighbour would come out, as either alignment.
(my bold)
Why?-
-
Froot Loop Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 983
- Joined: October 2, 2011
- Location: Vietnam
In post 1400, JohnnyFarrar wrote:In post 1383, Froot Loop wrote:But what did you think about the other posts? It just seems strange - my initial post annoyed you for lack of content, then I posted more content so I would guess that you would be a bit appeased, therefore there'd be no need to say anything at all.
I don't remember them so they were probably fine. You're assuming I've put more thought into my posts than I have. Trust Me, if I found more shit to say about your posts I would have spoke up.
Yeah, it's just that the only thing you did speak up about was something negative which was corrected by subsequent posts. It wasn't a huge comment or anything but that's what I'm trying to get at.
In post 1405, a plain farmer wrote:Faq's 1395 seems rather fabricated to me, and trying to snowball a wagon would be a something I'd expect from scum at this time of day. Lowell was right when he suggested his general unhelpfulness up to this point makes him the easy wagon to jump on, so his would be a good choice for scum looking to make one of the wagons the frontrunner.
What is about FAQ's post which makes you think it was fabricated?
In post 1376, mhsmith0 wrote:
+1. "Wolf neighbor" is actually a plausible reason to NK Nos. Especially if the wolf slipped in neighbor chat post hammer somehow.
In post 1381, Roshar wrote:The possibility that her neighbour being scum is pretty high after her NK, imo. I doubt the neighbour would come out, as either alignment.
In post 1407, Maxous wrote:
edit: the neighbour thing is talked about later. yeah, it's possible scum didn't want to be stuck with a town-neighbour throughout the night. More chances to slip up.
@smith, Roshar and Max:All of these posts are completely empty speculation but suggesting scum scenarios for the neighbour. Why?-
-
Froot Loop Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 983
- Joined: October 2, 2011
- Location: Vietnam
In post 1414, Maxous wrote:why not.
We're speculating why the scum-team decided to kill nos.
dunno why so many people are having a fit over it.
Is there any basis for this speculation? Is it helping you figure out why Nos was NK'd? I don't think it's a good idea to post baseless conjecture in the thread, especially conjecture which scum-reads a player.
In post 1415, Roshar wrote:@Froot, here's my thought process on why the neighbor slot has a big possibility of being scum. Correct me if I'm wrong in my following assumptions.
So, Day 1 a town neighbor was NK'd. One who had multiple scum reads enough to make you wonder why they would have been NK'd.
If scum were their neighbor I can imagine Nos being a pretty good candidate for their NK because 1) The fact that neighbors sometimes have PR 2)The scum neighbor would be under more pressure talking to town one on one.
I would question the assertion that the fact that Nos had multiple scumreads makes you wonder why they would've been NK'd. I don't think there's a lot to be gained by thinking about it.
I'm having a hard time answering this post without succumbing to speculation, so I will, to try to show why I don't think it's helpful:
- If there was suspicion that Nos was a PR, becausesometimesneighbours have a PR, it might be thought useful for scum to have an avenue into the thoughts of that PR.
- I don't think it's true that scum would be under more pressure one on one. PTs can be easier to post in because there's fewer critics, if you want: you're only dealing with one person rather than the whole game.
Because there's not enough information, none of this helps determine the alignment of anyone and it also doesn't help determine why nos was NK'd.
In post 1415, Roshar wrote:Either way, if Nos' neighbor is town, they shouldn't come out. They'll be getting suspicion from town and possible NK from scum.
This rings so disingenuous to me: you have helped create the suspicion the neighbour would be under from town. Why do you think they would be a possible NK target for scum?
I have a problem with the speculation in the thread, but that's one thing. I also have a problem with solely scummy conclusions being posted in the thread. I can't see any evidence for it and posting these possibilities without any foundation is shade-throwing.-
-
Froot Loop Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 983
- Joined: October 2, 2011
- Location: Vietnam
My point is that there's not enough information for this kind of conversation to be useful. I'm not saying one or other is correct, I don't know, but because I don't know, and there's very little use from mentioning it, I wouldn't.
What was your motivation for posting about this? I'd really like to understand it.
There's things on the wiki which I could quote to highlight the town possibilities or positive-scum possibilities of the neighbourhood as well. It's listed as an informative scum role type, for one.
I understand it that the possible reason for Nos' NK is that his neighbour is scum and that you're scum-reading their neighbour. I can also imagine a scenario in which a scum player wouldn't kill Nos if they knew they were a PR. Again, it would depend on the player, the information they had, the state of the game, what the PR is and what roles were on the scum team.
I think the majority of the rest of your post is speculation or subjective, which I'm going to try and avoid. If there's anything specific you want me to respond to, let me know.-
-
Froot Loop Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 983
- Joined: October 2, 2011
- Location: Vietnam
In post 1422, Roshar wrote:To point out that scum/town neighbor wouldn't come out. And if town, they should esp not come out.
I just don't see that motive in this:
In post 1381, Roshar wrote:The possibility that her neighbour being scum is pretty high after her NK, imo. I doubt the neighbour would come out, as either alignment.
I would read this and think that the main objective was to emphasise how likely it is that the neighbour is scum. There's no reasoning given why you think it's unlikely the neighbour would come out, unless it's because they're scum.
What if there was something useful in the thread? This kind of conversation is making it harder for a town player to contribute and I think the probative value of this conversation is nil so it's not worth it. It's creating and cultivating an aura of suspicion which is unnecessary. I think that's something which is often done by scum players.
@Titus - I agree that Max is still scummy. He's voted for Huntress before so this is going back to a previous thought. He seems kind of apathetic and isn't responding much to the suspicion on him. This is subjective, so I don't think it's AI, but it's not doing anything to change my opinion.
In post 1372, mhsmith0 wrote:
on a related note, given that we're talking about Nos (sort of), does anyone want to claim being her neighbor? It's obvious that someone was her neighbor;I haven't played much with neighbor mechanics before, so I don't know if it does or doesn't make sense for anyone to step forward on that front. If you presume she was anSPK, then it seems reasonable that she may have said something interesting or useful in neighbor chat that's worth sharing with the board.
(my bold)
We just came out of a game with like 8 million neighbour mechanics. That didn't give you an idea of how they can be played? What's an SPK?-
-
Froot Loop Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 983
- Joined: October 2, 2011
- Location: Vietnam
Maybe he hasn't played with neighbours in many other games but there were so many neighbourhoods in that game that I came out of it with a feeling of loads of different ways they can be played in different situations. The neighbourhoods were a little bit different than it would be in this game (everyone was in a neighbourhood, some neighbourhoods/PTs which were created were public, so people knew who was going into them.) He was also a mason in that game and had two scum members in his neighbourhood.
(It literally finished today - Micro 600)
He's definitely got an idea of how neighbour mechanics work and how people can play in them. My reaction is that he presented this as an excuse to question or introduce the idea of the neighbour claiming.-
-
Froot Loop Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 983
- Joined: October 2, 2011
- Location: Vietnam
@smith - That's fair enough, there were so many neighbourhoods in that game it is different but what I was getting at is the way different people responded to being in a neighbourhood. I refused to give my colour (each neighbourhood had a colour,) for example, while other players were more open about it. There was also discussion about the implications of the neighbourhoods so I would have thought that would contribute to an understanding of the mechanic.
As far as the PR/scum likelihood, I don't know either.
About the Roshar comment, I understood that she was saying that maybe Nos crumbed.
@Roshar - I'm not questioning your opinion and I'm not questioning that the neighbour could be viewed with suspicion. I'm questioning that this has been mentioned in the thread three times and it's speculation and won't lead anywhere. I don't think speculation is helpful and I'm more worried about it when it fosters suspicion because that's what I think is done by scum players.
In post 1434, Roshar wrote:I didn't consider the value of the conversation, mainly because value to me would mean a PR result. One they wouldn't get at that point. If there's another form of value to be gained, please enlighten me.
Do you mean about the conversation in the neighbourhood? You want me to try and come up with possible valuable things that could have been said?
In post 1434, Roshar wrote:If I was scum and neighbor was town, I'd hope they'd come out to throw shade at them. Not emphasize the fact that I think they'd be considered suspicious.
WIFOM
I really don't want to get bogged down with more speculation because I don't think it's helpful.-
-
Froot Loop Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 983
- Joined: October 2, 2011
- Location: Vietnam
-
-
Froot Loop Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 983
- Joined: October 2, 2011
- Location: Vietnam
In post 1430, Froot Loop wrote:
@Titus - I agree that Max is still scummy. He's voted for Huntress before so this is going back to a previous thought. He seems kind of apathetic and isn't responding much to the suspicion on him. This is subjective, so I don't think it's AI, but it's not doing anything to change my opinion.-
-
Froot Loop Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 983
- Joined: October 2, 2011
- Location: Vietnam
In post 1446, Roshar wrote:In post 1438, Froot Loop wrote:
@Roshar - I'm not questioning your opinion and I'm not questioning that the neighbour could be viewed with suspicion. I'm questioning that this has been mentioned in the thread three times and it's speculation and won't lead anywhere. I don't think speculation is helpful and I'm more worried about it when it fosters suspicion because that's what I think is done by scum players.
I wouldn't call it speculation. I'd call it an association. That's where we disagree.
My point is that there's little value to it. If you can tell me why talking about it is helpful, I can try to understand.
In post 1446, Roshar wrote:In post 1434, Roshar wrote:I didn't consider the value of the conversation, mainly because value to me would mean a PR result. One they wouldn't get at that point. If there's another form of value to be gained, please enlighten me.
Do you mean about the conversation in the neighbourhood? You want me to try and come up with possible valuable things that could have been said?
I want you to back up your idea that there is some value to be had that doesn't involve a PR result. Hypothetical situations. I'm taking into consideration that I've never played a game that involved a neighbor and that there may be value I haven't considered
We don't know how many people are in the neighbourhood so the conversation could be ongoing. Nos could also have said that they were suspicious of another player or interpreted something differently which they mentioned in the PT. I think most comments by confirmed town players have value because you know what their motivation is for posting. Because of the posts I highlighted, it'd be more difficult to come forward with like, an interesting comment, or something Nos might have been thinking. Maybe the value isn't as concrete as a PR result, but it could still be interesting.
In post 1440, Maxous wrote:In post 1430, Froot Loop wrote:@Titus - I agree that Max is still scummy. He's voted for Huntress before so this is going back to a previous thought. He seems kind of apathetic and isn't responding much to the suspicion on him. This is subjective, so I don't think it's AI, but it's not doing anything to change my opinion.
well, what do you want.
I'm trying to explain to people to lynch the lurk-scum but everyone is being a backseat driver nitpickinghowi'm trying to push the read.
Somebody explain why they think she's town then.
I think your play has been a bit reactionary - it seems like you're always responding to something or answering a question or being pushed to answer questions. The vote of Huntress seems a bit easy and there's not much else to go on. This is Johnny's response to your accusation of Huntress, I don't think you've addressed it?
In post 1329, JohnnyFarrar wrote:In post 1328, Froot Loop wrote:@Johnny - what do you mean by 'lost'? I understand that Max is saying scum can have difficulty with reads because they're basically all made up. You don't agree with this?
Oh see I hear that as "scum is bad at Mafia" which is a dangerous thing to assume
In post 1450, Titus wrote:In post 1444, Froot Loop wrote:In post 1430, Froot Loop wrote:
@Titus - I agree that Max is still scummy. He's voted for Huntress before so this is going back to a previous thought. He seems kind of apathetic and isn't responding much to the suspicion on him. This is subjective, so I don't think it's AI, but it's not doing anything to change my opinion.
I think it is AI.
I'm thinking about the implications of it (see above.)-
-
Froot Loop Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 983
- Joined: October 2, 2011
- Location: Vietnam
@smith - Roshar was responding to Lowell's accusation that she hadn't taken responsibility for the Clumsy lynch, or that's what she'd tried to do. That's why she was highlighting the ways that she had taken responsibility.
In post 1466, Titus wrote:Umm Frozen Angel and Jake from State Farm aren't in this game?
@Titus - have you read the earlier parts of the game? Before you replaced in?
@Max - the reads list isn't reactionary play so it's good to see this kind of content from you. Again, there isn't much to go on in the reads list though, so something more in depth or questioning/being more involved with the game will help me sort out your play.-
-
Froot Loop Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 983
- Joined: October 2, 2011
- Location: Vietnam
@Titus - ok, that's fair enough. Just wondering.
Vote: Maxous
I think Max is the most likely to be scum today; I think he's played in the scummiest way.
I'm more suspicious of mhsmith and Roshar today, because of the neighbour thing, but I think that can wait to see how they play tomorrow. I have more things to say about mhsmith's post, by the way, but it's along the same lines. Lest it be said that I'm thinking about it. I also have mixed/lukewarm feelings about a lot of smith's posts.
Lowell/Roshar is an interesting one because I think it's a surprising conclusion from Lowell. He's so inactive. I'd be happy to have more contribution from him or start strongly suspecting that this is more than lazy town play/not being interested.
FAQ/APF - I think APF jumped on something FAQ said and I don't agree with his conclusions/interpretation. But this could be because of active scumhunting attempts.-
-
Froot Loop Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 983
- Joined: October 2, 2011
- Location: Vietnam
-