Newbie 1497 (Game Over)

[Zaicon]

Vote Count 2.6

Tr1ckster (2):

Not_Mafia, theelkspeaks

theelkspeaks (2):

Aquanim, BlueBloodedToffee

BlueBloodedToffee (2):

Tr1ckster, Thor665

Aquanim (1):

Knell

No Vote (0):

With 7 alive, it takes 4 to lynch!

Deadline is Monday, May 19 at 8:30 AM CDT, which is in (expired on 2014-05-19 08:30:00).

[Thor665]

I don't, because I wouldn't post my notes in his situation.

Why not? I mean, what's the pro-town advantage to not doing so if it was asked of you? Because I don't see any. Especially if you're willing to eventually paraphrase them to post them, as Trickster has claimed he is.

Can you explain to me why you don't classify BBT's pressure of Elk throughout today as a "stance" he's taken?

Okay, well, this question already comes from an awkward position. Let's first off clarify my stance, and that is "what actual stance has he taken" you appear to be interpreting that as "he has taken no stances" when what I inteded for it to be taken as is "he has taken no strong stances" which is supported by my commentary about how he clings to the rear of issues - I am admiting he touches and interacts with the issues, but my point is that he appears to do so gingerly. With this in mind, let's look at the stance in question then, shall we?

All of this makes me feel uneasy. You were clearly happy to lynch pretty much anybody for D1. I mean, if you were town you might do this, but would you sheep your votes so easily? I'm not sure, this looks more like scum behaviour to me

Feel uneasy.
If you were town you might do this.
I'm not sure.

Do you really find it strange that I don't find his position here to be loud and proud?

Or why BBT's opinion that your reluctance to give reads at the start of the day is counterproductive to town (post #830, besides others) isn't a "stance"?

Again, a misunderstanding of my issue - to put it in context with my clarified position - note that BBT says nothing about me until two other players have attacked me over the same issue. Then and only then is it an issue for BBT - this is in line with my stated point about clinging to the rear of issues.

As for the claim made by several people that you weren't active towards the end of day 1... I don't know how many posts you made in that time window, I don't know how it compares to earlier in the day, and I don't really care. What I do think is that after the BBT wagon hit L-1 and then receded, I did not detect any interest from you to try to restart the pressure on BBT and get him lynched. Repeatedly denying that isn't going to change it.

Do you even know what you're accussing me of here, if anything? Because I do not.
Also - I have never denied anything about my pressure constants on BBT Day 1 because, up until this very second, I am unaware of anyone asking me to defend any action about it.
What are you talking about?

[Aquanim]

As for the claim made by several people that you weren't active towards the end of day 1... I don't know how many posts you made in that time window, I don't know how it compares to earlier in the day, and I don't really care. What I do think is that after the BBT wagon hit L-1 and then receded, I did not detect any interest from you to try to restart the pressure on BBT and get him lynched. Repeatedly denying that isn't going to change it.

Do you even know what you're accussing me of here, if anything? Because I do not.
Also - I have never denied anything about my pressure constants on BBT Day 1 because, up until this very second, I am unaware of anyone asking me to defend any action about it.
What are you talking about?

What I'm saying is that when I read your ISO from the point at which BBT was no longer at L-1, to the eventual hammer of Belisarius, I see no evidence that you cared about who we lynched or went to any effort to alter the course of the lynch.

Can you show me a post you made in that time window which you made with the intention of trying to persuade people to vote for BlueBloodedToffee over the other wagons which were running?

[Aquanim]

As for the rest of this:

I don't, because I wouldn't post my notes in his situation.

Why not? I mean, what's the pro-town advantage to not doing so if it was asked of you? Because I don't see any. Especially if you're willing to eventually paraphrase them to post them, as Trickster has claimed he is.

Any notes I take are mostly cases, which are either posted to the thread immediately or soon thereafter if it's not immediately appropriate. Any other notes I take are private, possibly offensive to other people, and none of anybody else's business.

I'm of the opinion that anything from Tr1ckster's notes he was willing for us to see is already posted in the thread.

Can you explain to me why you don't classify BBT's pressure of Elk throughout today as a "stance" he's taken?

Okay, well, this question already comes from an awkward position. Let's first off clarify my stance, and that is "what actual stance has he taken" you appear to be interpreting that as "he has taken no stances" when what I inteded for it to be taken as is "he has taken no strong stances" which is supported by my commentary about how he clings to the rear of issues - I am admiting he touches and interacts with the issues, but my point is that he appears to do so gingerly. With this in mind, let's look at the stance in question then, shall we?

All of this makes me feel uneasy. You were clearly happy to lynch pretty much anybody for D1. I mean, if you were town you might do this, but would you sheep your votes so easily? I'm not sure, this looks more like scum behaviour to me

Feel uneasy.
If you were town you might do this.
I'm not sure.

Do you really find it strange that I don't find his position here to be loud and proud?

So BBT has doubts about whether his reads are right. Despite this, he pressured Elk pretty aggressively as the day went on; while his read was cautious ("ginger") his activity in the thread was not. I agree it's not a paragon of towny attitude but I don't think it's definitively scummy, either.

Or why BBT's opinion that your reluctance to give reads at the start of the day is counterproductive to town (post #830, besides others) isn't a "stance"?

Again, a misunderstanding of my issue - to put it in context with my clarified position - note that BBT says nothing about me until two other players have attacked me over the same issue. Then and only then is it an issue for BBT - this is in line with my stated point about clinging to the rear of issues.

Actually, the only other person who had commented on your reluctance to give reads at the time of #830 was Tr1ckster - and he'd been very vague.

[Knell]

Okay. VOTE: not_mafia aqua, have you been spending any time reading people's previous games? What are your thoughts if so? If you don't what do you think of n_m? Just based in this game?

[Knell]

Change that question to being addressed to everyone.

[theelkspeaks]

I haven't looked at any of the players' other games except for what has been provided in thread because I'm not a huge fan of meta. I'm willing to look at it if others bring it up, but I think relying on meta is dangerous and therefore don't seek it out myself, because (at least on sites that have mafia but aren't primarily about mafia, which is the bulk of my playing experience), introducing meta often leads to the game devolving into personal attacks and hostility, sometimes ruining the game for the people involved and at least once resulting in several players asking to be modkilled. I'm willing to accept that meta might be better handled on a site like this, but as of yet at least, I'm unwilling to go digging for it myself.

[Knell]

Then what's your read on n_m just based on his play in this game?

[theelkspeaks]

As for my opinion on NM, he's one of my stronger scumreads, due to both the use of RNG in RVS to distance himself from any responsibility for his vote, luring the town off track into a massive game of WIFOM and away from any actual scumhunting, and his continued brief and useless posts throughout much of the game. He seems like a person trying to lie low and escape notice as much as possible, which is a scummy behavior. That said, I consider Trick's behavior on the Beli wagon yesterday to be scummier than NM, (actively scummy vs. "passively scummy"), so my vote will remain on Trick for the moment be.

[BlueBloodedToffee]

I'm reading N_M as town and I probably will for the rest of the game unless there is some sort of major development on him. This is mostly due to the defence of myself against the majority on D1. I just don't think he would do this as scum, it was a chance for an easy lynch and to move into D2 with town having no real suspects and not a lot of information. I don't think scum would put themselves in the firing line and draw so much attention to themselves in this way.

[Not_Mafia]

@ Knell I won't comment on your meta read of me as you want other people to, but here is my only real scumgame (offsite, same username, different avatar), I do have one scumgame here, but I was lolhammered on page 2 after a single post

[Knell]

Already read it.

[Not_Mafia]

Well aren't you a diligent one

[Not_Mafia]

About this whole notes thing, I understand people not wanting to share their notes for privacy reasons, like Aqua is saying, however this is not what is happening with Tricks and Elk. I don't recall them ever making any sort of comment about privacy, just talk about formatting etc...

[Aquanim]

Okay. aqua, have you been spending any time reading people's previous games? What are your thoughts if so? If you don't what do you think of n_m? Just based in this game?

Only Thor, and that's largely been an exercise in futility so far. I'll go take a look at some N_M games.

[theelkspeaks]

About this whole notes thing, I understand people not wanting to share their notes for privacy reasons, like Aqua is saying, however this is not what is happening with Tricks and Elk. I don't recall them ever making any sort of comment about privacy, just talk about formatting etc...

In my case it was mostly that I didn't think my notes would do much good for the town as they were - I tend to record rather than analyze when taking notes (I like an unbiased recording of actions in notes that I can analyze as necessary later without being colored by my past reads too much), and I hadn't continued taking the same degree of notes since I caught up (I don't tend to be a huge notetaker in general unless I have catching up to do, but it helped me getting a feel for the game given the extent of material I replaced into). When others asked for them, though, I was happy to oblige. Even now, I'm not sure what the town gained from my notes aside from being convinced that I had them.

[Aquanim]

Of Not_Mafia's completed games, I'm a little reluctant to use his newbies since his meta has probably evolved since then, and Open 550 looks like a total mess of a game (I've played with the day1 lynchee from that game offsite and... yeah sometimes he's like that).

That leaves Open 551. The overall style of mostly one-liner posts is consistent with this game, but if it weren't that would be way too easy. My impression is that he was a little more open with his reads in 551 than in this game, though I don't advance that as a solid fact - I find it difficult to get a feel for games that I didn't actually play in. If there's a particular concern you have with his meta, I'd be curious to see it.

As for this game... when I read #275 I thought "town" (because he'd said something I felt needed to be said, but because of the nature of my relationship with BBT at that time could not), but that's blessed little to go on. He wasn't as interested in the day 1 lynch as I'd like, but he did exert at least a little effort to try to push the lynch onto Madonna and then Thor. He also hasn't gone into great depth in explaining his reads, but having read 551 that's not inconsistent with his town meta.

I don't think there's much to be learned about his alignment from his opening gambit, it's the kind of thing I can see someone doing as either alignment on a whim. He didn't overreact to the votes on him and he did have some reads (of whatever strength) to show for it; failing either of those would have been scummy, but overall it leaves me at null on him. He also didn't drag it out to the point where it tainted the entire day, though that's probably got as much to do with the wagon on him as anything else.

I don't think that BBT's reason for townreading him is a particularly strong one; assuming BBT is town, it's a common scum play to "white-knight" a townie who looks like they might be lynched. If scum always did the things which play

most directly

to their wincon, they'd be easy to catch - which is why sometimes, they don't. I also don't think N_M went to a lot of effort to defend BBT, mostly just said "I think the cases on him are bad and I'm not voting for him" without explaining why in detail, or specifically trying to persuade people who were voting for BBT to not do so.

So in summary: Vaguely townie, but with no real evidence and not a whole lot of confidence either. Obviously I'll be working on improving that - but if you have a case I wouldn't mind seeing it.

[Not_Mafia]

I'm not particularly proud of my performance in those games, or this one for that matter, in 550 someone who played in my first game here brought a meta argument on me. that's probably good reference. Newbie 1476 isn't a bad reference, probably better than those opens to an extent, day 1 I felt was okay, day 2 I was a tunnelfuck trainwreck.

Here are some offsite games that are probably better for actually metaing me

Town Loss My first ever game. Pretty standard newbie pwnage by scum.
Town Loss Abysmal performance, out of my depth.
Town Loss Anonymous game, Marchesa is my alias, the post linked to is where I subbed in
Scum win Very lucky win involving some role madness lulz and an endgame policy lynch.
Town Loss My most recent completed game apart from 551 (I think)

[Not_Mafia]

I am curious as to why Knell thinks this game is my scumgame and not my bad town game

[Knell]

You've voted town and my town read. I don't think I've actually seen you push a scum read this whole game without collapsing just as quickly. You've done some thread avoidance. You're primarily shifting between "stream of thought" posts which feel very much like you''re talking to yourself and the other part being acceptably communicative with player's and responsive to their questions and actions, but I don't see anything concrete from you, there's usually a shift in your play around this time that hasn't shown up, mainly a reads list with some sort of push. You've explained this as you've never felt "a game this up in the air before" which might explain the lack of shift. You're not extending yourself in other words. What also sucks is that, as far as I can see, your reads haven't done any moving since 72.

[Not_Mafia]

That's legitimate, I often struggle to generate content until I find something I can latch on to, which you seem to have identified, your comment about everything being so up in the air is basically it, I haven't found anything to 'latch on to'

[Thor665]

What I'm saying is that when I read your ISO from the point at which BBT was no longer at L-1, to the eventual hammer of Belisarius, I see no evidence that you cared about who we lynched or went to any effort to alter the course of the lynch.

Do you think my stance on BBT wasn't clear? Do you think I had failed to push him. There were, literally, two alternate wagons that sprang up in that time. People didn't want to lynch BBT - I don't need to waste my time banging my head against a brick wall for no gain.

Can you show me a post you made in that time window which you made with the intention of trying to persuade people to vote for BlueBloodedToffee over the other wagons which were running?

Can you show me any point in which it seemed there was a point to trying to do so as opposed to the effort I had already put in?

Besides, if you think that's a case worth the pursuing - vote him now.

Any notes I take are mostly cases, which are either posted to the thread immediately or soon thereafter if it's not immediately appropriate. Any other notes I take are private, possibly offensive to other people, and none of anybody else's business.

I'm of the opinion that anything from Tr1ckster's notes he was willing for us to see is already posted in the thread.

I've even had a conversation with him near the start of the game where he said he wasn't necessarily taking notes. Are you serious?

So BBT has doubts about whether his reads are right. Despite this, he pressured Elk pretty aggressively as the day went on; while his read was cautious ("ginger") his activity in the thread was not. I agree it's not a paragon of towny attitude but I don't think it's definitively scummy, either.

I feel like this agrees with my point more than disproves it. I'll admit I've been drinking a lot of moonshine this evening - but...whut? At worst you seem to be suggesting that his inability to take a stance is null. But that doesn't disagree with my base stance that he has an inability to take a stance. Yeah?

Actually, the only other person who had commented on your reluctance to give reads at the time of #830 was Tr1ckster - and he'd been very vague.

That;s not true. Read NM. Two people called me out and then and only then did BBT wade in. I don't think I'm crazy here. Double check and get back to me.

Only Thor, and that's largely been an exercise in futility so far. I'll go take a look at some N_M games.

I should hope so - the point of my scum game is to emulate my town game. Huzzah!

[Aquanim]

What I'm saying is that when I read your ISO from the point at which BBT was no longer at L-1, to the eventual hammer of Belisarius, I see no evidence that you cared about who we lynched or went to any effort to alter the course of the lynch.

Do you think my stance on BBT wasn't clear? Do you think I had failed to push him. There were, literally, two alternate wagons that sprang up in that time. People didn't want to lynch BBT - I don't need to waste my time banging my head against a brick wall for no gain.

Let me get this straight. You're telling me, as an IC, that when other people in the thread don't want to lynch your greatest scumread, the correct and towny response to that is to sit around, do nothing about it, and hope they change their mind? As opposed to improving your case on him, or reading some more to see if the people who disagree with you have a point? Or at least pushing the less bad of the wagons on offer?

Can you show me a post you made in that time window which you made with the intention of trying to persuade people to vote for BlueBloodedToffee over the other wagons which were running?

Can you show me any point in which it seemed there was a point to trying to do so as opposed to the effort I had already put in?

Besides, if you think that's a case worth the pursuing - vote him now.

So that's a no then, I take it. And believe me, I'm considering it.

Any notes I take are mostly cases, which are either posted to the thread immediately or soon thereafter if it's not immediately appropriate. Any other notes I take are private, possibly offensive to other people, and none of anybody else's business.

I'm of the opinion that anything from Tr1ckster's notes he was willing for us to see is already posted in the thread.

I've even had a conversation with him near the start of the game where he said he wasn't necessarily taking notes. Are you serious?

Let me rephrase then. I don't care about whether Tr1ckster takes notes or not. I don't care about whether his notes in this or some other game got mixed up. I think that reads of Tr1ckster based on his thoughts about other players in this game and what he chooses to do about those thoughts will be far more reliable than speculating about his notes. It's a view I hold about this kind of speculation in general.

So BBT has doubts about whether his reads are right. Despite this, he pressured Elk pretty aggressively as the day went on; while his read was cautious ("ginger") his activity in the thread was not. I agree it's not a paragon of towny attitude but I don't think it's definitively scummy, either.

I feel like this agrees with my point more than disproves it. I'll admit I've been drinking a lot of moonshine this evening - but...whut? At worst you seem to be suggesting that his inability to take a stance is null. But that doesn't disagree with my base stance that he has an inability to take a stance. Yeah?

I'm saying that he has taken a firm stance with his approach to Elk, despite the fact that his original read on Elk with which he started the conversation was fairly weak.

Actually, the only other person who had commented on your reluctance to give reads at the time of #830 was Tr1ckster - and he'd been very vague.

That;s not true. Read NM. Two people called me out and then and only then did BBT wade in. I don't think I'm crazy here. Double check and get back to me.

Not_Mafia hadn't said anything about your day 2 play before #830. Why not go look yourself?

[Aquanim]

@Thor

:
It is your oft-stated opinion that a player who does not have their vote on somebody is wasting time/not manly/what have you. I can understand why a townie in your position might choose to wait a little while to see what people are thinking without your input.

What I don't understand is why a townie in your position would choose not to vote for anybody for a whole week, in which the discussion was not particularly productive. As I understand it, you are generally happy if an entire game day is concluded inside a week.

What did you learn by sitting back without voting and watching for a week?

[Thor665]

Let me get this straight. You're telling me, as an IC, that when other people in the thread don't want to lynch your greatest scumread, the correct and towny response to that is to sit around, do nothing about it, and hope they change their mind? As opposed to improving your case on him, or reading some more to see if the people who disagree with you have a point? Or at least pushing the less bad of the wagons on offer?

Let me get this straight, you, as, whatever silly game count title you have, fail to understand that *prior* to this I had aggressively and wholeheartedly been pushing the BBT wagon, and had failed to acheive it - then, I was supposed to, while BBT was lurking and doing nothing new, create, somehow, a better case out of wholecloth and present that to people, and failure to do so makes me a bad player and says nothing about how people were ignoring a perfectly already functional case or that people, for reasons beyond me, prefered to try to lynch Madonna or Belli - nd *on top of that* you're not going to wonder why scum bothered to shift gears if BBT was town? Maybe you should read some more to see if I have a point? Or tell me which wagon was the less bad one on offer? Because as far as I can tell the other offer was Madonna, who I called town and was correct on, so...?

So that's a no then, I take it. And believe me, I'm considering it.

Yes, you have successfully shown that I didn't constantly push a case during a very small window of time. Whoop-de-flip. I never denied that, all I'm denying is that there was 'any point at all in doing so' Even what you're quoting from me has me admitting I didn't...but it ignores that I had already done massive efforts to make that lynch happen and town and scum wandered off. Now - use that info.

Let me rephrase then. I don't care about whether Tr1ckster takes notes or not. I don't care about whether his notes in this or some other game got mixed up. I think that reads of Tr1ckster based on his thoughts about other players in this game and what he chooses to do about those thoughts will be far more reliable than speculating about his notes. It's a view I hold about this kind of speculation in general.

It very much matters if he takes notes, because unless he takes notes there was nothing to get confused over between the two theory sets of notes. And if no theory set of notes were mixed up then he is a proven liar which would (wait for it) confirm him as scum. Therefore, the question of if he has actual notes matters a great deal. Why are you so obstructionist on this point for no apparent reason? (that is an invitation to explain the reasoning more)

I'm saying that he has taken a firm stance with his approach to Elk, despite the fact that his original read on Elk with which he started the conversation was fairly weak.

A firm stance of soft poking with no vote - sure.

Not_Mafia hadn't said anything about your day 2 play before #830. Why not go look yourself?

I did.
I found post 824.
Your move?

What I don't understand is why a townie in your position would choose not to vote for anybody for a whole week, in which the discussion was not particularly productive. As I understand it, you are generally happy if an entire game day is concluded inside a week.

What did you learn by sitting back without voting and watching for a week?

I didn't learn as much as I hoped. What I was hoping to see was a player taking a lead and advancing some tells. What I got was a lot of mush. I have decided the mush implicated BBT a bit in pairing with how the wagons went yesterday - but I was hoping someone would lead a charge on him themselves or do something else interesting.