Likely true, but The Janitor has had a wagon forever and never had a counterwagon to it, making me a bit suspicious. Obviously, I am not voting myself. And tbqh, Lalendra isn't a bad vote considering the game state.In [post]638[/post], Mathdino wrote:Lalendra flaking out is not correlated with her alignment guysIn [post=#10197240]638[/post], Mathdino wrote:
2. The Worst posts a case on Lalendra in 635 --> I support this case.
3. 636 by Mathdino: Quotes a post from Lalendra in another game --> Okay, but how does that counter The Worst case which is basically showing that every post Lalendra has made this game not only doesn't take a side, but also have almost zero value to anyone. (Actually, I find this post a bit on the suspicious side esp. when combined with 621; it feels like an active attempt to derail a wagon without compelling reason (at least imo) why.)
4. 646 are reads by Iconeum --> Lots of townreads, probably leaning a bit more on the town side cuz of that but not much else to comment there.
5. 650: Iconeum asks why The Janitor has stopped being the focus of discussion --> Multiple reasons: 1) I think he did step up his game some since his opening. Not much, but a decent degree to shift focus elsewhere some 2) At its height, Janitor's wagon had no counterwagons; that's not a good sign. 3) Another VC related reason--Janitor's wagon has existed practically the entire game
6. In 655, Iconeum believes we are exaggerating the scumminess of some of Lalendra posts --> Probably true, but when they only have six or so posts (I can't remember the number), there is not much to go by, now is there? I think (see The Worst's case in 635) that the fact that none of Lalendra's posts really had any relevance to solving the game in any way is pretty tell-tale sign. Add to that Mathdino's aggressive attempt to derail the wagon (though this is slippery territory), and I think we have a fairly solid case though it could of course benefit from more evidence.
7. 659: According to Iconeum, all of Lalendra's posts were from Friday --> Were they? I thought they posted some Saturday? Well, I don't look at timestamps too much, so that is probably true. Still, by the time Lalendra entered the thread, there was enough content to (imo) give some kind of read or take some kind of stance.
8. Some stuff about Ausuka in 666 --> Quick question: you did factor in Ausuka's meta experience with me (as well as read accuracy with me) when making that re-evaluation, right?
9. 670: More from Iconeum about Ausuka read --> I mean, I did make that big post in that time frame, and Ausuka did clarify later that the unvote was because she needed to reevaluate after that. Also, I think it is a bit less effort and more of a meta-based read. (Note: Just providing an alternate viewpoint here.)
10. 690 by Mutantdevle paints my wagon 'leap' from The Janitor to Lalendra as scummy --> I think this is a poor representation of the actual progression. First of all, to say I didn't scumread Lalendra isn't exactly true (maybe I was 1% confident they were town in a readslist, but such a low % doesn't matter that much here). And yes, I did acknowledge flaws with the Lalendra wagon; however, I also pointed out some major flaws with The Janitor wagon. Nothing in mafia is black-and-white; you must consider everything as an aggregate. Now, if you were paying attn to those two posts, you would understand my reason for my change and my acknowledgement that while it was perhaps not the ideal change, it was the better direction to head in from my perspective.
, Iconeum, Beefster, mutantdevle