Mini 1715 - Z - Game over!

[Gimlear]

Ok I just reread from post 100 and I know Woody said Karmic lied (over and over) but I still don't see what the lie was. I believe Karmic asked, but I didnt see the answer. Are you basing your read on Karmic on your own read or Woody's?

I mentioned in my first post when I replaced in that I thought the "Karmic lied" bit was just a misunderstanding. Basically, Woody was saying that Karmic lied about Woody's immediate vote/unvote on page 2. But Woody has since provided other evidence for the case on Karmic.

Also, I'm basing my read on Karmic from a combination of Woody and Garmr's reads. Like I've said a million times already, it's not a solid case, but I think it's better than the case on Ciara.

[Thor665]

Do it Thor

So are you saying you cannot back up your statements that I'm questioning?
Or is this an intentional attempt to dodge having to do so?
If you can't back them up please just state so clearly - that would be swell.

First, I actually said that the reasons for the Karmic wagon are not great either, but they are better than the reasons for the Ciara wagon.

Could you expand on that thought then?
Because I basically 100% summarized her thoughts, and it was a few vague non-supported reads, that didn't really seem to connect to her play.

the flawed arguments could be coming from town, but I think it becomes less and less likely the more flawed arguments he throws out.

Can you describe the most flawed argument Karmic has offered in your opinion?

It's a Smurfing wagon with absolutely no grounds to vote anyone and I feel like strangling the town on it because all of them can't be scum.

It's a Day 1 wagon on a player that *isn't* scumhunting and the raised case is "not scumhunting". You can argue that there is no scumhunting due to lurking - but that in and of itself is a valid case for Day 1.

Meanwhile your favored wagon is a wagon based on "flawed arguments and not using valid tells" which, as far as I can grok, equates to either a case of 'not scumhunting' or 'scumhunting so poorly he must be scum'. So, in my mind both cases are actually about the same core case, one is just pointing to absence of effort and the other is pointing to presence of weak effort.

So, I don't actually have an issue with the case on Karmic, I *am* bewildered that you find the one so pure and the other so anathmic though - it's not reading clear to me. If you're town you have strange blinders on. if you're scum you're selling me a load of hogwash and/or have blinders on due to your awareness of the gamestate.

I feel I am trying to talk to you very honestly and openly about how the game is played and the value of the wagons and feel you are handing me scripted lines - could you try to up the open honesty in your next reply to me? I would be appreciative.

[Thor665]

it's not a solid case, but I think it's better than the case on Ciara.

Could you describe why the Ciara case is so weak to you?
People keep saying this, but I actually see no rational to support it that makes sense.
There is no supporting evidence that Ciara is actually scumhunting outside of two pushes she made off misunderstandings/misreads/lies. That, in and of itself, is a decent ground for a case.
Since then she has lurked - now, you can buy the case as legit lurking, but even if you do it doesn't exactly paint her as town, nor support a town case on her.

So what makes the case weak? Or, at least, weaaker than a case of "this guy is not lying, but is using weak tells that are not scummy" which is what's left of the Karmic case if you don't think there was a lie. I find that to be a valid case, but I don't find it a particulalrly strong case, and certainly not stronger than the Ciara case. As I said to Garmr, I actually think both cases are very similar, except only people supporting Karmic are claiming one case is unsupported - which is weird, and I want people to back that up.

Can you?

[SilverWolf]

Feverish-so probably won't be on much today. Just an FYI.

[davesaz]

I'm finding both cases to be relatively ok for D1 and what is bothering me the most is the vehemence against the wagons on both sides.

[Gimlear]

@Thor:

1. I have already answered most of your questions already. Please reread my ISO (it's not that long) and come back with more specific questions.

2. I never said I townread Ciara, just that the scumcase on her was weaker because the case on her is basically that she hasn't been very active in this game.

That being said, I am not opposed to a Ciara lynch if it means we get some information from it. I just fear that, because she hasn't been very active, we may not get much information if she flips town.

It has, however, been 3 days since Ciara posted, so she's due for a prod.

[Thor665]

I'm finding both cases to be relatively ok for D1 and what is bothering me the most is the vehemence against the wagons on both sides.

Besides Karmic (who, naturally will dislike the wagon on him) who would you describe as vehement against the Karmic wagon? It seems it would have to be, and only consisting of, Nacho - who is defending the Karmic wagon, but isn't exactly barn nurning in the same way that Garmr or Glim are dogging on the Ciara wagon.

Or am I missing something from the inside looking out?

[Thor665]

@Thor:

1. I have already answered most of your questions already. Please reread my ISO (it's not that long) and come back with more specific questions.

Could you answer this one;

Can you describe the most flawed argument Karmic has offered in your opinion?

You have answered it in a very vague sense wherein you actually didn't describe an argument nor a flaw - I want an argument and a flaw explained, this should be easy to do as that is the case on him in your mind.

2. I never said I townread Ciara, just that the scumcase on her was weaker because the case on her is basically that she hasn't been very active in this game.

That is not the case on her - the case is that she is fake/not scumhunting. How do you feel about that case?
To the best of my awareness no one save Karmic has indicated 'not active' an issue with Ciara, and Karmic has restated his case, claiming that it was not what he really meant when he said it - so, even he is not claiming that is the case at this stage.

That being said, I am not opposed to a Ciara lynch if it means we get some information from it. I just fear that, because she hasn't been very active, we may not get much information if she flips town.

What info would we get from a Karmic town flip that we would not get from a Ciara town flip?

[Garmr]

@thor flawed arguments flawed arguments shove that up your *** my arguments are valid and it's you who has the flawed arguments. If ciara flips town your going to be like oh garmr was wking when in fact I'm just not a idiot.

[zakk]

EXPERIMENT NOTES 1.15

Ciara24 and gummmybear have been prodded.

SUBJECTS ASSERTING AGGRESSIVE ACTIVITY:

Ciara24 [6] Thor665, KarmicGuide, Radja, pistachi0n, Nachomamma8, eventi
KarmicGuide [3] gummmybear, Garmr, Gimlear
pistachi0n [1] davesaz
Bellaphant [0]
davesaz [0]
eventi [0]
Garmr [0]
Gimlear [0]
gummmybear [0]
Nachomamma8 [0]
Radja [0]
SilverWolf [0]
Thor665 [0]

SUBJECTS DISPLAYING PASSIVE TENDENCY:

Bellaphant, Ciara24, SilverWolf

[KarmicGuide]

This pretty much summarizes the reasons for the Karmic wagon:

Most of the things [Karmic] pointed to are things that either weren't true, weren't scummy, or weren't alignment indicative.

Ok I just reread from post 100 and I know Woody said Karmic lied (over and over) but I still don't see what the lie was. I believe Karmic asked, but I didnt see the answer. Are you basing your read on Karmic on your own read or Woody's?

Karmic- what are.you expecting to happen at L-2? Some say you should claim at L-1 but I'm not familiar with any protocol for L-2

I've finished my reread, and my reads haven't changed.

VOTE: ciara

ciara is now at L-1

L1 is claim-time now? Huh. I mean, I believe you, I just misremembered it as being L2. It's been a while.

[KarmicGuide]

Ah, figured it out. On MTGS, where I learned mafia back in the day, claim is at L2.

[gummmybear]

this ciara wagon raced awfully fast to L-1 and is giving me weird vibes.

[gummmybear]

Also that was a respond to prod, so I believe Ciara should have been prodded as well. No hammers please before she returns.

[Thor665]

@thor flawed arguments flawed arguments shove that up your *** my arguments are valid and it's you who has the flawed arguments. If ciara flips town your going to be like oh garmr was wking when in fact I'm just not a idiot.

What are you even responding to here?
Because it isn't to what I am asking.

[Thor665]

this ciara wagon raced awfully fast to L-1 and is giving me weird vibes.

Who do you see as theory scum on her wagon if she is town?

[Thor665]

@Nacho - thoughts on Garmr and the WK thought I had.

Intentionally not unvoting Ciara while asking this.

[Gimlear]

Can you describe the most flawed argument Karmic has offered in your opinion?

Why do I feel like this is a loaded question? Regardless, to answer your question, even though I believe the argument of Woody's immediate vote/unvote started as a misunderstanding, Karmic has since been wishy-washy about the whole thing. Karmic stated that it was a misunderstanding in post 93 but then rescinded this statement in post 154 because Woody was making other arguments against him. I feel like this is representative of his whole game so far because it feels like Karmic is just throwing arguments at a wall to see what sticks and rescinding what gets him into trouble.

That is not the case on her - the case is that she is fake/not scumhunting. How do you feel about that case?

This case can easily be explained by the fact that she hasn't been active lately. I feel like her early posts were genuine and that your comment about being obstructionist was intentionally misleading. Just because she started questioning into that doesn't make her scum.

What info would we get from a Karmic town flip that we would not get from a Ciara town flip?

Karmic has been much more active than Ciara, so a Karmic flip would gain us more information about the people he has interacted with. Also, the fact that Ciara still hasn't responded to a prod makes me worried that we may not get a response from her in time, so we should be prepared to switch wagons soon if we're going to get a day 1 lynch.

[Thor665]

Why do I feel like this is a loaded question?

Because you're scum and scared of slipping?

even though I believe the argument of Woody's immediate vote/unvote started as a misunderstanding, Karmic has since been wishy-washy about the whole thing. Karmic stated that it was a misunderstanding in post 93 but then rescinded this statement in post 154 because Woody was making other arguments against him. I feel like this is representative of his whole game so far because it feels like Karmic is just throwing arguments at a wall to see what sticks and rescinding what gets him into trouble.

I'm not sure this answers my question. I will restate your answer, correct me if I'm wrong;

Karmic's most flawed argument is that he was wishy-washy in dealing with Woody's pressing of a case based off a misunderstanding. This is shown because Karmic accepted Woody's answer and then later decided he didn't after 24 hours and more posting by both on the subject - this shows that Karmic uses flawed reasoning because he...changed his mind and announced as such?

Is that right? That's his biggest flawed argument in your mind and/or the best example thereof?

This case can easily be explained by the fact that she hasn't been active lately. I feel like her early posts were genuine and that your comment about being obstructionist was intentionally misleading. Just because she started questioning into that doesn't make her scum.

My comment was only misleading if you, y'know, hadn't read anything I'd posted in the game.
So you think her posts prior to going lurk were showing scumhunting?
I really, really, don't.
I don't even think there's an argument there, like, they are bereft of scumhunting. Literally all she did was poke at me due to me making a misleading comment and then did nothing else and called me a town read, along with Karmic. That comes off as both scumhunting and genuine to you?

Karmic has been much more active than Ciara, so a Karmic flip would gain us more information about the people he has interacted with.

Like what?
If he flipped town all we would know is that he was honest when he was changing his mind and pressing some cases that, I at least, have not been blown away by - it wouldn't actually tell us anything more than that. So whether he posted buckets or posted nothing (like Ciara) I am unsure of the value difference there. In fact, i submit there is no value difference.
Can you offer me one read (just one) that we would gain if Karmic flipped town?
Like, if he was an Innocent Child and declared right now and did nothing else - what info would you then have to draw a new conclusion in this game?

Also, the fact that Ciara still hasn't responded to a prod makes me worried that we may not get a response from her in time, so we should be prepared to switch wagons soon if we're going to get a day 1 lynch.

Why do we need her to respond? Mod will either replace her for flake or we will lynch her sans claim - her flaking/lurking is not actually a valid reason to dismantle a wagon on her.
If it is then I know my new scum strategy
But, you know it isn't.

[Radja]

Apologies for slacking. I will try to catch up tomorrow evening, or if I can find time, this evening, which is less likely.

Is there a deadline for the day end??

[Thor665]

Apologies for slacking. I will try to catch up tomorrow evening, or if I can find time, this evening, which is less likely.

Is there a deadline for the day end??

I think it's classified in the same distant future that your participation is.

[zakk]

pistachi0n has been prodded.

[davesaz]

I'm finding both cases to be relatively ok for D1 and what is bothering me the most is the vehemence against the wagons on both sides.

Besides Karmic (who, naturally will dislike the wagon on him) who would you describe as vehement against the Karmic wagon? It seems it would have to be, and only consisting of, Nacho - who is defending the Karmic wagon, but isn't exactly barn nurning in the same way that Garmr or Glim are dogging on the Ciara wagon.

Or am I missing something from the inside looking out?

Granted, vehement is probably too strong a term. There is opposition, some of which is direct in the form of questioning the wagon(s) and some in the form of pushing the other wagon.

this ciara wagon raced awfully fast to L-1 and is giving me weird vibes.

Also that was a respond to prod, so I believe Ciara should have been prodded as well. No hammers please before she returns.

What do you consider fast? It's not like it popped up out of nowhere and got to L-1 the same day. Also while I agree that we want a reply to the L-1 situation, we can't just wait forever. I think we have a decent chance of catching scum with this wagon. The main reason we would move off it would be if there were a credible PR claim. This late in the day, getting cold feet on the absent player and a mad dash to another is a really bad idea. In fact, I'm comfortable with stating hammer intent at this point.

[Thor665]

Granted, vehement is probably too strong a term. There is opposition, some of which is direct in the form of questioning the wagon(s) and some in the form of pushing the other wagon.

Why would that bother you though - isn't that describing normal competing wagon interaction?

[Nachomamma8]

I'm finding both cases to be relatively ok for D1 and what is bothering me the most is the vehemence against the wagons on both sides.

I disagree with the Karmic wagon. I wouldn't say that I'm "vehemently" against it, especially since the bulk of my effort has been figuring out why the Karmic wagon is a thing (which still isn't clear to me fwiw and would love if someone engaged me on the points there).