Page 8 of 140

PostPosted: Wed Oct 05, 2016 10:50 am
by PenguinPower
In post 172, Gamma Emerald wrote:Legit it was the exact thing he was mislynched for. I'm hoping he'll contribute this time, but I understand if he doesn't.


If he was mislynched for his play before, why do you think he's doing the exact same thing this time around?

PostPosted: Wed Oct 05, 2016 10:54 am
by Gamma Emerald
In post 175, PenguinPower wrote:
In post 172, Gamma Emerald wrote:Legit it was the exact thing he was mislynched for. I'm hoping he'll contribute this time, but I understand if he doesn't.


If he was mislynched for his play before, why do you think he's doing the exact same thing this time around?

He obviously hasn't learned the lesson.

PostPosted: Wed Oct 05, 2016 11:13 am
by Lil Uzi Vert
In post 160, PenguinPower wrote:
In post 158, Lil Uzi Vert wrote:
In post 155, eagerSnake wrote:LUV, they're trying to run you up to L-1 right now, if you could tell me which one of them is scum and which one is mislead town that'd be great.


I don't have any reads right now but I'm a little suspicious of Implosion.


Why?


For the same reason Gamma pointed out and is currently voting him for.

PostPosted: Wed Oct 05, 2016 11:15 am
by Lil Uzi Vert
In post 166, Shadow_step wrote:Looks like LUV has been advised to play dumb and play newb like.
Needs death.

In post 167, Zoronos wrote:
In post 164, Gamma Emerald wrote:Oh just the fact LUV did this last game I played with him.


Playing completely absent annoys me, but something being annoying doesn't make it scum. But it also doesn't make me really want to jump in front of a train and yell "No this is wrong don't lynch it" and I really love doing that, so give me something to work with if this is your sincerely held belief.


Why does it seem like you're implying I'm not paying attention to what's being said or done?

PostPosted: Wed Oct 05, 2016 11:26 am
by MariaR
VOTE: Zoronos

Best vote atm I haven't liked any of his posts to put it in a simple answer.

PostPosted: Wed Oct 05, 2016 11:32 am
by Gamma Emerald
Okay looking back at that no-claim thing mafia did it more it seems. I'm not quite sure what this means for Eager so I'll wait for Grendel's opinions on the matter.

PostPosted: Wed Oct 05, 2016 11:41 am
by Zoronos
In post 178, Lil Uzi Vert wrote:
In post 166, Shadow_step wrote:Looks like LUV has been advised to play dumb and play newb like.
Needs death.

In post 167, Zoronos wrote:
In post 164, Gamma Emerald wrote:Oh just the fact LUV did this last game I played with him.


Playing completely absent annoys me, but something being annoying doesn't make it scum. But it also doesn't make me really want to jump in front of a train and yell "No this is wrong don't lynch it" and I really love doing that, so give me something to work with if this is your sincerely held belief.


Why does it seem like you're implying I'm not paying attention to what's being said or done?


That's not what I said. I said you were absent. And I'd appreciate it if you'd stop; having no opinions or contributions of your own is frustrating.

PostPosted: Wed Oct 05, 2016 11:45 am
by boring
In post 180, Gamma Emerald wrote:Okay looking back at that no-claim thing mafia did it more it seems. I'm not quite sure what this means for Eager so I'll wait for Grendel's opinions on the matter.
This appears to be an insider-only train of thought. Are you planning to share with the rest of the class once you get an answer from Grendel?

PostPosted: Wed Oct 05, 2016 11:47 am
by Gamma Emerald
In post 182, boring wrote:
In post 180, Gamma Emerald wrote:Okay looking back at that no-claim thing mafia did it more it seems. I'm not quite sure what this means for Eager so I'll wait for Grendel's opinions on the matter.
This appears to be an insider-only train of thought. Are you planning to share with the rest of the class once you get an answer from Grendel?

Absolutely.

PostPosted: Wed Oct 05, 2016 11:47 am
by eagerSnake
Zoronos is probably town

PostPosted: Wed Oct 05, 2016 11:49 am
by eagerSnake
Off to class; see you all tomorrow.

PostPosted: Wed Oct 05, 2016 11:53 am
by Lil Uzi Vert
In post 181, Zoronos wrote:
In post 178, Lil Uzi Vert wrote:
In post 166, Shadow_step wrote:Looks like LUV has been advised to play dumb and play newb like.
Needs death.

In post 167, Zoronos wrote:
In post 164, Gamma Emerald wrote:Oh just the fact LUV did this last game I played with him.


Playing completely absent annoys me, but something being annoying doesn't make it scum. But it also doesn't make me really want to jump in front of a train and yell "No this is wrong don't lynch it" and I really love doing that, so give me something to work with if this is your sincerely held belief.


Why does it seem like you're implying I'm not paying attention to what's being said or done?


That's not what I said. I said you were absent. And I'd appreciate it if you'd stop; having no opinions or contributions of your own is frustrating.


That's exactly what absent means last time I checked. You seem upset. Are you having a bad day?

PostPosted: Wed Oct 05, 2016 11:54 am
by nn30
In post 184, eagerSnake wrote:Zoronos is probably town


Why?

PostPosted: Wed Oct 05, 2016 12:03 pm
by boring
In post 179, MariaR wrote:VOTE: Zoronos

Best vote atm I haven't liked any of his posts to put it in a simple answer.


This is a train that I can ride for a while. Have you ever worn a jacket so small that you can't button it up or move your arms properly? That's what he brings to mind.

VOTE: Zoronos

PostPosted: Wed Oct 05, 2016 12:04 pm
by Gamma Emerald
In post 188, boring wrote:
In post 179, MariaR wrote:VOTE: Zoronos

Best vote atm I haven't liked any of his posts to put it in a simple answer.


This is a train that I can ride for a while. Have you ever worn a jacket so small that you can't button it up or move your arms properly? That's what he brings to mind.

VOTE: Zoronos

Mind explaining this metaphor?

PostPosted: Wed Oct 05, 2016 12:06 pm
by Zoronos
In post 186, Lil Uzi Vert wrote:
That's exactly what absent means last time I checked. You seem upset. Are you having a bad day?


Yes. I am having a real bad day.

Also that's not what absent means; for all I know you're reading the thread, stroking a beard and saying "Hmmm... yes, insightful" to each post then taking a puff on your old english pipe and making notes in a leather bound journal. But that's not making its way into the thread, and you're getting a lot of votes lined up on you for what is essentially "I don't like this slot's RVS vote and continued absence".
So, while I find absence annoying (because it means I can't get a useful read on your slot) I am not a fan of simply lynching it down. But I can't make a cogent argument that "Hey, this seems like a not great plan" without some reasoning to back it up beyond simply "Lets not lynch lurkers" because that will convince exactly nobody.

PostPosted: Wed Oct 05, 2016 12:15 pm
by PenguinPower
For me, it's not his RVS vote. It's his RQS answers.

Oh, and the continued absence thing - though that's really more of a continued non-contribution thing.

PostPosted: Wed Oct 05, 2016 12:23 pm
by Zoronos
In post 169, Shadow_step wrote:Actually I wouldn't mind if everyone answers this ^

I personally think Eager could have waited a bit and tried ti develop some reads before outing that he is ascetic. More info to be gained from reactions after that.


a) Ascetic is functionally the same as Miller in terms of being a net negative utility role for town, so claiming it early, just like claiming miller early is important. (Yes I know they work differently, I'm making a broader point about negative town utility)
Waiting to claim it for 'reactions' just opens up an easy scum pushback line of "Why didn't you claim Miller [or whatever] in your first post?!". Not opening easy scum lines is good.
b) I don't see a reason to do anything about it other than nod and go "Yup, certainly a thing he claimed." It tells us very little about the slot. There is a pro-town reason to say it, and a pro-scum reason, and beyond that it's more instructive, imo, to just read the slot for its posts.
c) Fishing for strong reactions to it is a bad plan in my opinion, since the people most disposed to react to a PR-interacting claim are themselves the folks with PR's.

I have the slot leaning slight town, and that's enough for me to look elsewhere.

PostPosted: Wed Oct 05, 2016 12:24 pm
by Zoronos
In post 191, PenguinPower wrote:For me, it's not his RVS vote. It's his RQS answers.

Oh, and the continued absence thing - though that's really more of a continued non-contribution thing.


Tell me more about this, because I've ignored his RQS answers. (I've ignored basically everyone's). Why are they scummy?

My last? (maybe two games ago?) game on these boards, about a year ago, I got burned lynching down someone who was aggressively non-contributory. It felt good but they were town, which was less good. So I am a bit skeptical of running that same play back.

PostPosted: Wed Oct 05, 2016 12:26 pm
by Gamma Emerald
It goes like this: one minute you're lynching a lurker, the next you're out a doctor.

PostPosted: Wed Oct 05, 2016 12:31 pm
by PenguinPower
In post 193, Zoronos wrote:
In post 191, PenguinPower wrote:For me, it's not his RVS vote. It's his RQS answers.

Oh, and the continued absence thing - though that's really more of a continued non-contribution thing.


Tell me more about this, because I've ignored his RQS answers. (I've ignored basically everyone's). Why are they scummy?

My last? (maybe two games ago?) game on these boards, about a year ago, I got burned lynching down someone who was aggressively non-contributory. It felt good but they were town, which was less good. So I am a bit skeptical of running that same play back.


Spoiler: RQS Answers
In post 106, Lil Uzi Vert wrote:Sure, I'll play along.

1.) Third party.

2.) No.

3.) No.

4.) No comment.

5.) Very. I feel like I can learn a lot from everyone here.


"Sure, I'll play along" and then provides nothing. His only post of the game where he could have said anything, and it's "No; No; No comment" but I'm excited to play!

So...he knows that he's being anti-town with his play, yet he continues to do it. I'm not going to give him a pass based on his past behavior or for this crap:

Gamma Emerald wrote:It goes like this: one minute you're lynching a lurker, the next you're out a doctor.


And, it's offputting to me that GE is defending LUV as strongly as he is.

PostPosted: Wed Oct 05, 2016 12:33 pm
by boring
In post 189, Gamma Emerald wrote:
In post 188, boring wrote:
In post 179, MariaR wrote:VOTE: Zoronos

Best vote atm I haven't liked any of his posts to put it in a simple answer.


This is a train that I can ride for a while. Have you ever worn a jacket so small that you can't button it up or move your arms properly? That's what he brings to mind.

VOTE: Zoronos

Mind explaining this metaphor?

Sure. It's like nothing quite fits.

I'll give examples.
1. He said in post #162 "My gut doesn't like his post, but I think that's because a lot of it is talking about himself." But he can't stop talking about himself.
2. He jumped on Grendel for asking questions, and then says in post #97 "This is a decently analytical thought though for this point in the game. ++towniness." because Grendel soft-defended him.
3. Post #65 "Saying an ascetic claim is scummy is foolish; it is strictly non alignment determining. If you are town, you claim it to avoid wasting an NA. If you are scum, you claim it to avoid a cop hit." I'm uncomfortable with how comfortable he was with eagerSnake's [awful]decision.

It's awkward, and it makes me suspect that he's forcing himself to act or be a certain way (like a jacket that's too small).

p-edit: Gamma's weird. You get used to it.

PostPosted: Wed Oct 05, 2016 12:42 pm
by Zoronos
@Penguin
Ah, gotcha. I agree that his play is anti-town. I further agree that it's frustrating.
I'm just hesitant to immediately lynch it down without attempting to draw him into more normal play first.

In post 195, PenguinPower wrote:And, it's offputting to me that GE is defending LUV as strongly as he is.

I have a lot of sympathy for GE's position on this one.
Maybe I am projecting here, but I read GE's argument as "Playing useless is not a tell either way for LUV". 2 of my last 3 games on these boards before I left had people that were aggressively useless (as town). I got burned by lynching them. I'm hesitant to run that play out again without at least attempting to cajole the slot into playing normally.

PostPosted: Wed Oct 05, 2016 12:48 pm
by PenguinPower
In post 197, Zoronos wrote:attempting to cajole the slot into playing normally.


And how do you propose to do that?

PostPosted: Wed Oct 05, 2016 12:49 pm
by Zoronos
In post 196, boring wrote:I'm uncomfortable with how comfortable he was with eagerSnake's [awful]decision.


Claiming early and clearly as negative utility roles is absolutely correct. It is the best line of play as town in that situation.
Throwing 'why did you not wait for reactions?!?!?' stuff, as ShadowStrike did, is not.
It's a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" setup. If a negative utility claims early, it opens "Why didn't you wait for reactions". If they claim late, it opens "He's faking a real [x] would have claimed immediately / claiming miller late is scummy because he was making sure there wasn't a counterclaim." There is no route that doesn't face critique, so you take the one that gives the most clarity.

So yes, I am totally okay with the manner in which EagerSnake claimed. Also, ascetic seems a really off the wall thing to fake claim, I'd expect a much simpler 'miller' or something if he was just scum faking.