LicketyQuickety's Mini Normal - 1847

[nn30]

VOTE: 1 shot wonder

=P

See? Still not out of RVS. Stop bitching about him voting no lynch, that's not scum indicative it's newbie indicative. Not newbie townie, just newbie. That post you quoted, Pine, is a clear joke, and trying to build a serious argument around it is awful. And you can't make an argument against no lynch in Mylo because sometimes it's a good idea and sometimes it's not, that's a game specific situation, there's no blanket answer.

So real vote: VOTE: pine

I could forgive post 50 as being an RVS (which I very clearly think it is).

That said you basically took my reasoning as the gospel in post 70. Not even a question of my motivations - you just use it to attempt to skewer Pine.

[gerryoat]

Gerry!!

hey

[gerryoat]

Okay so the beginning is basically just a bunch of dumb votes like always. good to know

[Dark Horse]

Agreed. "Letting it flow" is a good way to get town to hold off progressing pass the RVS stage

Disagree.

Why

Spoiler tag due to length. Sorry for the wall lol

Spoiler:

So, 1-shot vanilla town said 'let it flow' in regards to getting out of RVS. He made it very clear that his 'no-lynch' vote was just an RVS joke. He could obviously be lying about that since he only made it jokey after he got town's reactions to it, but I don't want to put someone in my scum category for something so flimsy.

Then, TB came back and said 'well yeah man we were obviously out of RVS when you voted no-lynch. Therefore I find you scummy.'

1-shot makes it clear that his vote was an RVS vote.
TB claims, after the fact, that we were out of RVS.

Without trying to get at the truth of whether or not we were out of RVS, it's obvious that the two of them are coming to different conclusions because they are relying on different assumptions. It's like one person said 'I think that coat is red' and another says 'nah, I think it's orange, I hate orange' and then the first guy says 'I'm going to buy you that red coat, red is your favorite color.'

Buying the red coat was based off of an assumption that the second guy would also think it looked red. Obviously this is folly.

In terms of our game, scum reading somebody for making an RVS joke by way of retroactively saying 'nah man, we were out of RVS, you're scum' is also folly.

I disagree because if we have two options 'let it flow' and 'declare when we're out of RVS' let it flow is way better - it allows the town to collectively decide when we're out of RVS rather than giving power to the guy who declares we're out of RVS (TB).






FTR - I don't at all think we were out of RVS when the no-lynch was declared. TB's opinion that we were out of RVS based on his benchmark (first vote count) is just patently false IMO. I put that down here because I don't think I need to be right about this for the above argument to hold water.

Sure we clearly weren't out of RVS at the time, but that's not what I dislike about one shot's post. By questioning him, thinkbig was a attempting to develop reads, and therefore get town out of RVS. 1 shots post about letting it flow feel like him trying to stop thinkbig from making an actual effort to get out of RVS

[Pine]

VOTE: 1 shot wonder

=P

See? Still not out of RVS. Stop bitching about him voting no lynch, that's not scum indicative it's newbie indicative. Not newbie townie, just newbie. That post you quoted, Pine, is a clear joke, and trying to build a serious argument around it is awful. And you can't make an argument against no lynch in Mylo because sometimes it's a good idea and sometimes it's not, that's a game specific situation, there's no blanket answer.

So real vote: VOTE: pine

I could forgive post 50 as being an RVS (which I very clearly think it is).

That said you basically took my reasoning as the gospel in post 70. Not even a question of my motivations - you just use it to attempt to skewer Pine.

OH well spotted. I can choose to let 1SVT go as having made a joke in poor taste, but this blatant cogdis needs rope.

Vote joshz

Keep up this kind of analytical thinking, nn30, and I think we'll get along just fine.

[Dark Horse]

VOTE: penguin

Why'd you change your vote here if we were still in rvs

[Dark Horse]

Okay so the beginning is basically just a bunch of dumb votes like always. good to know

This post sucks

[Pine]

Okay so the beginning is basically just a bunch of dumb votes like always. good to know

This post sucks

That post is fine. I concur with the sentiment. I generally find RVS to be useless, prone to Town vs Town squabbles.

[Dark Horse]

Okay so the beginning is basically just a bunch of dumb votes like always. good to know

This post sucks

That post is fine. I concur with the sentiment. I generally find RVS to be useless, prone to Town vs Town squabbles.

Do you consider your vote or nn's vote on joshz to be a dumb vote

[nn30]

Okay so the beginning is basically just a bunch of dumb votes like always. good to know

This post sucks

That post is fine. I concur with the sentiment. I generally find RVS to be useless, prone to Town vs Town squabbles.

This is exactly why I don't want to scum read 1shot bp for something so flimsy.

[nn30]

Stop trying so hard off the bat, just let it flow and work it from there.

I don't think 1shot was trying to stop the progression of the game.

I think he wanted the game to progress at a rate that actually allows scum reads to develop naturally and more accurately than slamming someone for a single post during RVS.

I looked back at his no vote and following joke post.

Either he's scum who had a response planned in case he got scum read... Or he's just town who knew he was joking to begin with.

Applying Occam's razor makes me think 1shot is just town (or at least null) here.

[nn30]

Missing piece of logic for 85 (sorry my fingers are slower than my brain sometimes):

The no lynch vote and the joke were 2 minutes apart.

[Pine]

I disagree about it being flimsy. My votes are based on an assessment of underlying psychology of actions. 77 is a factual whine about the RVS phase, which I'm no longer in.

[Dark Horse]

What exactly is a rate where scum reads "develop naturally," nn. It seems like this is where our disagreement stems from

Pine, at what point do you think you got out of rvs

[drealmerz7]

ooof, are we still talking about this no-lynch stuffs? well, good I guess, but only because it created content, well done 1SVT!

it's helped me get some reads

1SVT - not serious vote in that he doesn't really want no-lynch, serious in that he did it to get reactions or at least serious RVS (knowing it's a joke), which means nothing (which I don't think scum would do in RVS, this is a case in point as to why, ppl are too touchy about even the mention of it, even in RVS) - townleany for this

30nn - view of situation is similar to mine, I think others are trying to possibly make the NL vote seem more scummy than it was and they are the ppl to look at - very townlean here

PP - bit towny after it

Pine - bit scummy after it

TB - the most scummy after it

are you saying that suggesting No lynch is something that seems more town than scum

No, and I don't like to talk in generalities, if you're still unclear on my position in regards to

this

game, let me know, everything else is theoretical and a distraction.

no-lynch haters love to hate on no-lynch!

all the RVS votes of stupidity and meaninglessness, and ppl just want to KILLLLL the person who has a peaceable approach, even in RVS!!! I generally tend to look for scum in the ppl who are trying to make an issue out of an RVS no-lynch vote -

now, saying that, no-lynch is GENERALLY a bad idea for town on D1 and scum know that and don't draw themselves into attention by doing that, so there is just a ton of WIFOM there anyway and I think the simple "attention draw" about it has me lean town about it rather than scum

I love to throw out a no-lynch vote for reactions on occasion. Or sometimes I do want it because of reasons (no good scum reads and being a cop, for example.)

I'm scum reading you for your '!' and '!!!' in the above post.

Seems like you're trying to pretend to have a reaction here.

*shrug*

Anecdotally, I won my first scum game by suggesting a no-lynch D1 and intentionally playing it off like I was newb town. I knew exactly what I was doing and it worked like a charm so it is a viable strategy if you know how to pull it off.

Town has good reason to denounce the no-lynch suggestion: the only motivations for it are scum or bad town play.

Well, I often use a lot of punctuation, caps, italics, etc, to empassion my words. It's NAI for me, and I'ma not change, of course. Don't know what else to tell you cept it's all genuine. *shrug* (hey, I *shrug* often enough too!)

In your win, did you suggest it in RVS, or later? Anecdotally, in my first game I argued a lot for a no-lynch despite the rigorous explanations of why it wasn't a good idea, and most ppl were definitely aware that I might just be pretending to be noob about it and actual scum. I was an investigative role though and knew I'd get a result and so used that to push the issue (and knew I wouldn't likely get NKed because of the controversy.) It's actually become a whole thing with me on my HS, no-lynch discussion / voting and all that. I sometimes will do no-lynch in RVS to indicate I have an investigative role, but for that reason I also do it when I don't and for other reasons, just randomly really anymore, to keep it all mixed up.

[drealmerz7]

What exactly is a rate where scum reads "develop naturally," nn. It seems like this is where our disagreement stems from

This question is a bit scummy to me, a little reminiscent of the question you asked me about "does that mean you think it's towny to vote no-lynch" which felt a bit like you were trying to twist what I said but I let it go then...

asking for an "exact rate" of something that "develops naturally" is a bit ridiculous

it's like asking how fast the grass grows - you can get an AVERAGE rate, but an exact rate is impossible, because it FLUCTUATES depending on the specifics of the environment/climate

reads develop naturally - case by case basis game by game, it just depends how much the scumness grows and how much that is counteracted by townness

[Dark Horse]

I asked you that question because I legitimately didn't understand what your post meant

My point was that I don't get how this isn't reads "developing naturally." A signifigant portion of mafia games that I've played online usually have inital reads develop early on, which are then explored in depth as the day progresses. I don't see why thinkbig should be criticised for trying to put this game in a position where people can take serious stances on people, therefore taking us out of rvs.

[drealmerz7]

mmm, I think you're blurring some things maybe

or maybe we just view the game differently

I think a lot of time people force their early reads because they want to be able to say they "have something", when they don't and they just like to feel confident where doing so makes no sense. It's best to just let things grow and develop (naturally!) without having to DECIDE what you think it means. It could mean this, it could mean this, different things put it in different light and it grows or dies and multiple things accumulate, dissipate, and it all flows and grows.

[drealmerz7]

taking 1 tiny thing and blowing it out of proportion is what it sounds like you're saying to me

[Dark Horse]

That's a pretty passive way of playing mafia. Why should we sit back and hope that our questions about our reads get answered, instead of pressuring and questioning our reads

[Secret Agent Jin]

I am glad there is actual discussion, some games tend to trail off and lack discussion. Everyone gets a gold star for participation, some might be smaller than others but every star counts.

The only person that sticks out is Josh, i would like to see what other people that of his no-explanation votes (maybe RVS?) and his very lacking word post. I seen some people discuss this, i see what you are saying. I would like to see the others are thinking.

P.S. This is seperate from the Josh thing but in my experience i find that scum tend to have a lot of fence posts. They often write reads that are easily back tracked on which contain words like maybe, possibly, could be.

[Pine]

@Dark Horse: My vote stopped being random when I voted 1SVT. I found. Better place for my vote after the NL discussion, but I tend to try to get out of RVS as quickly as possible.

[drealmerz7]

That's a pretty passive way of playing mafia. Why should we sit back and hope that our questions about our reads get answered, instead of pressuring and questioning our reads

Pressure and question, absolutely, but don't dig at nothing and try to make it something. Let things accumulate. You'd be amazed at what you can actually find if you just kind of "loosen" a bit.

[nn30]

@Dark Horse -

I maintain this - he wasn't trying to lock us in RVS. He wanted us to transition out of it in a way that allowed reads to develop on more substantial evidence than an RVS joke.

I agree with Dreal's stance on 'rate.' I don't need to answer this question.

[drealmerz7]

. They often write reads that are easily back tracked on which contain words like maybe, possibly, could be.

Well then prepare to SR me, because this is a lot of the way I play the game. I play in possibilities and likelihoods of those possibilities.

I will lay 10 possibilities on the table, all of which certainly CAN NOT be true, and weigh them all and want to talk about them all / hear what others have to say about them all, get reads from all of that and let that influence everything and then gauge what I think is most likely to be the case, always with the caveat in mind (and often in my ramblings) that "of course maybe not"

to me it is a healthy way to play, and then from there what you need to do is judge who is just throwing around shit to cause problems and confusion, and who is actually trying to solve the game and figure things out