Open 725: Jungle Republic - Day 5

[the worst]

AP is better at it than me but we're on roughly the same page atm I think

[AP]

So both of you (AP+duckling) are confident you can read him but you currently don't have enough info?

Yes.

[Sando]

So both of you (AP+duckling) are confident you can read him but you currently don't have enough info?

Yes.

Copy that. Confident of a D2 read?

For anyone new to NM, he's gonna lolhammer anyone put to L-1, it's fairly amusing despite the predictability.

[ceejayvinoya]

So both of you (AP+duckling) are confident you can read him but you currently don't have enough info?

Yes.

NM has like what? 6 posts? Agree that there's nothing much to sort him with yet.

[ceejayvinoya]

Oh. Happy Birthday YankeeReaper!

[ceejayvinoya]

Um. What if UD and Sando really are ignorant of the fact that mafia can't kill? I glossed over those posts and thought them NAI, because they could go either way.

Neither of us were ignorant of it, we both assumed it due to the role PMs not mentioning it, and we both missed the actual statement in the mechanics part that is totally clear.

Okay I'm gonna assume you're not werewolf then. Possibly could still be scum tho.

Not sure about uglyduck because skitter said that he has a history of dumbtelling.

[AP]

Copy that. Confident of a D2 read?

See, that's the problem. I'd usually peg him off his opening 2-3 posts. He hasn't towntold after 6 posts.

[the worst]

if this day doesn't get spicy and he doesn't town tell we should lynch him d1.
btw if he is town here there's a curse. you can't lynch him after d1 or we die

[skitter30]

@sando:

=> I'm saying that I don't think that not reading it is AI tbh. Lots of people just don't bother reading my posts and I haven't seen a correlation between 'reading complicated posts' and 'alignment'

=> I tried to answer your question as best I can: I don't have a read on him right now. I don't know if your conclusion about scum/bad town is correct or incorrect cuz I don't have a read. Or, more accurately, I don't have a read that I'm confident enough in to actually pick a side (if I *had* to pick, I'd give a *very* slight townlean but it wouldn't be enough to feel confident about that read in singleball, and most certainly not in multiball).

I'm not throwing shade. I'm saying that your original case/read on him was very hedge-y, and didn't come to a firm conclusion. From that post alone, it looked like you were scum-casing him, and I almost expected a vote from you on him after I read it, but you left the conclusion open to being 'lazy town or scum', and didn't commit to one or the other till I pressed you. I don't particularly find your 'bad-town' read on him to be real or convincing; your original post left it ambiguous and when ceejay there voted because of your post, you didn't clarify that you're actually 'bad-town'-casing him in that post and not scum-casing him. ie you didn't really seem to have a problem with ceejay voting someone because of a case you wrote that wasn't actually a scumcase, but rather a bad-towncase

=> It's purely about your reaction to it and

how you framed your case on him to make him look scummy

(ie to the point where people viewed it as a scumcase and voted there because of it) even though you aren't calling him scum.

Unless you actually want to address my points, about his posting being bad, scumhunting and Hanlons razor, my actual reasoning for it being town instead of scum...then this is a totally pointless conversation.

Like I get all of this. I understand why you're telling me you've come to the conclusion of bad town and why his posting is bad, and this isn't what I have a problem with. What I don't get is why you're initial post looks like a scumcase and is framing his half of the convo in a bad/scummy light when your actual argument is that he isn't scum. Or why that post was made at all if you weren't trying to scumcase him. And now that I think about it, how it was even a response to the original question that I asked: why you were speaking for UD.

I'm not waffling: I'm telling you that I think that you were scummy in how you presented your read on MWNN because it looks like you're trying to frame him in a scummy light when you aren't actually calling him scum. Like it looks to me more about trying to discredit MWNN in an attempt to distract from his vote on you / his line of questioning than actually explaining a read on him. And I find it really weird that you didn't have a problem with ceejay voting there becuase of you when you *weren't* scumcasing him.

[skitter30]

Um. What if UD and Sando really are ignorant of the fact that mafia can't kill? I glossed over those posts and thought them NAI, because they could go either way.

Neither of us were ignorant of it, we both assumed it due to the role PMs not mentioning it, and we both missed the actual statement in the mechanics part that is totally clear.

Okay I'm gonna assume you're not werewolf then. Possibly could still be scum tho.

Not sure about uglyduck because skitter said that he has a history of dumbtelling.

Not precisely dumbtelling but more like trying to distance himself from setup specifics in an attempt to indicate that because he doesn't know them he isn't scum.

[Sando]

Like I get all of this. I understand why you're telling me you've come to the conclusion of bad town and why his posting is bad, and this isn't what I have a problem with. What I don't get is why you're initial post looks like a scumcase and is framing his half of the convo in a bad/scummy light when your actual argument is that he isn't scum. Or why that post was made at all if you weren't trying to scumcase him. And now that I think about it, how it was even a response to the original question that I asked: why you were speaking for UD.

I'm not waffling: I'm telling you that I think that you were scummy in how you presented your read on MWNN because it looks like you're trying to frame him in a scummy light when you aren't actually calling him scum. Like it looks to me more about trying to discredit MWNN in an attempt to distract from his vote on you / his line of questioning than actually explaining a read on him. And I find it really weird that you didn't have a problem with ceejay voting there becuase of you when you *weren't* scumcasing him.

So you're saying:
a) You understand my reasoning for bad town vs scum
b) You find it scummy that I made a case and didn't call him scum

...so you're saying I made a big deal about someone and then avoided calling him scum, as scum? Like...why? What would I be gaining there as scum? CJ picked up my case and ran with it and instead of realising I had a good mislynch target (well as scum I'd know he's at least not my faction and presumably CJ isn't buddying me as my scumpartner THAT closely), I decided to wind that back and say "nah, more likely to be town". C'mon, where's the logical scum-play here? What am I, as scum, hoping to achieve here?

I'm not waffling: I'm telling you that I think that you were scummy in how you presented your read on MWNN because it looks like you're trying to frame him in a scummy light when you aren't actually calling him scum.

You're literally doing this to me. You're not making your scumread on me clear, anyone reading our interaction in the last few pages would see that before this latest post you've never outright said I'm scummy. Lot's of "it's almost like" and "my problem is" and "feels like", without coming out and actually giving a scumpinion. And you're not voting me (or anyone, so it's not like you find someone else scummier). By your own logic, you're acting scummy here.

[skitter30]

...so you're saying I made a big deal about someone and then avoided calling him scum, as scum? Like...why? What would I be gaining there as scum?

Yes. I think you were more focused on explaining why his line of questioning shouldn't be listened to than explaining a read. That's my point - I think the goal of that post was more about discrediting him than anything else. I don't know if you were specifically trying to avoid calling him scum so much as you were focusing on why his read on you was bad; my problem is that in doing so, you attributed scummy behavior to him, left it ambiguous as 'lazy town or scum', and then called him bad town when pressed, so I don't get why that whole post looked like a scumcase.

CJ picked up my case and ran with it and instead of realising I had a good mislynch target (well as scum I'd know he's at least not my faction and presumably CJ isn't buddying me as my scumpartner THAT closely), I decided to wind that back and say "nah, more likely to be town". C'mon, where's the logical scum-play here? What am I, as scum, hoping to achieve here?

I don't know why you didn't hop on, or why you didn't cultivate the wagon by proceeding to scumread MWNN when I asked. I also don't know why you didn't protest when someone else started a wagon on someone you're bad-town-reading because of a case you wrote.

You're not making your scumread on me clear, anyone reading our interaction in the last few pages would see that before this latest post you've never outright said I'm scummy.

Lot's of "it's almost like" and "my problem is" and "feels like", without coming out and actually giving a scumpinion.

This a writing/posting style thing and just how I write. Like those are just the phrases I use to describe things in general (and if you don't believe me you can just like ctrl+f my ISO in previous games; if I had to guess, 'feels like' will come up most often). And I like to think that I write clearly enough that people can understand my point without me having to frame my sentences as 'I find player A to be scummy because ...' or 'I townread player B because ...' .

No, I didn't explicitly say 'I think sando is scum because ...', but I made it very clear that I think you're behaving in a scummy fashion. My problem with you is that your post *looks* like it's scumcasing someone but apparently isn't, because when pressed you said you just think he's bad town, and I find that duplicitous.

Honestly forgot to move my vote to you

VOTE: sando

[Sando]

I don't know why you didn't hop on, or why you didn't cultivate the wagon by proceeding to scumread MWNN when I asked. I also don't know why you didn't protest when someone else started a wagon on someone you're bad-town-reading because of a case you wrote.

Rofl, ok, so you can't actually explain a motivation for why I'd do what I'm doing as scum, but you're pretty sure I'm scum...nice scumhunting there...

Also, my very next post after CJs vote was explaining to you that I thought it was most likely town...gee I'm soooooo sorry I didn't directly call out CJ there. I could have done exactly what you've just done, claim "forgetfulness" and drop my vote on him post CJ, instead I responded to you about how I think it's more likely town than not.

[Sando]

For everyone else, this doesn't strike me as TvT here, thoughts as outsiders?

[skitter30]

This is beginning to feel quite a lot like the last iteration of jungle republic ....

Rofl, ok, so you can't actually explain a motivation for why I'd do what I'm doing as scum, but you're pretty sure I'm scum...nice scumhunting there...

Also, my very next post after CJs vote was explaining to you that I thought it was most likely town...gee I'm soooooo sorry I didn't directly call out CJ there. I could have done exactly what you've just done, claim "forgetfulness" and drop my vote on him post CJ, instead I responded to you about how I think it's more likely town than not.

I think you just weren't particularly planning on committing to a read either way cuz that wasn't the motivation of the post; you weren't trying to explain a read but rather discredit MWNN despite 'more likely than not' townreading him.

Like my argument is that you 'wrote up a post that looks like a scumcase but apparently wasn't because you say you're townreading him to some degree, so I find that initial post to be discredit-y of MWNN', not that 'you deliberately avoided commiting to a read on someone you had made a thing about', which isn't quite the same thing, and I don't know why you'd do the latter.

And like, you still haven't protested the fact that ceejay's voting someone you think is more likely town than not based on a case that you wrote.

[Sando]

And like, you still haven't protested the fact that ceejay's voting someone you think is more likely town than not based on a case that you wrote.

Why on earth would I protest it? CJ took what I posted and drew a different conclusion than me, so what? I'm clearly not very sure on my own conclusion, I said 60/40, which also just happens to be pretty much the ratio of town to scum (this was an accident, 60/40 was picked to show I'm really not sure).

I think you just weren't particularly planning on committing to a read either way cuz that wasn't the motivation of the post; you weren't trying to explain a read but rather discredit MWNN despite 'more likely than not' townreading him.

I'm STILL not committing. What about "60/40" is committing? It's the ratio we started with, it's specifically NOT committing. He also just recently didn't make my townlist (which is very short), why on earth are you trying to paint me out to be TRing him? I was putting it out there to draw attention to it for others to compare with their experiences, things like "yeah I've played with him before, he's normally a really logical guy with committed questioning" or "nah man, that's just how he is".

Why aren't you protesting CJs vote? What do you think of it given you think he's sheeping scum?

[pinturicchio]

Ok I'm back. I have an experiment: if you're town, reply saying "I'm town". If you're not town, say "I'm not town". This is a bit risky but it could work

Well, I see my strategy didn't work at all; that means I'll have to read the thread...

The good news is... it's muffin time!

[pinturicchio]

Oh, it's skitter 1v1ing Sando, that will take some time. Is there someone here who I can chat with?

[Sando]

Oh, it's skitter 1v1ing Sando, that will take some time. Is there someone here who I can chat with?

Duckling should be awake if you don't want to chat to a 1v1er

[pinturicchio]

I can talk to you. What do you think about the worst's case on Espeonage

[pinturicchio]

out of sheer respect skitter, I assume you've thought through this at more levels than I have.
humour me with a few answers wrt 73 because it is 120% unadulterated reaching horse shit.
(ily Espe)

alrighty ducky, lets have a chat. bc you have a case of dumbs I'm not used to.

assumption having a case of the dumbs = scum is bad strike 1

Hypothesis: You are ignoring that me being lazy is NAI because of a resounding OMGUS.

I see scum motivation in jumping onto bad reasoning the way he did.
I don't see town motivation in jumping onto bad reasoning the way he did.
how is this NAI?

Supporting Evidence: In a multiball you need to focus on not falling behind and avoiding lynches because it is easier to towntell.
Conclusion: You are jumping on something you don't believe in because you feel it is good scum play day 1 of a multiball.

what am I jumping on that I don't believe?
Espe was either 1) being sarcastic with his vote, which means he was literally doing this... OR
2) his vote was serious in which case I can't see town motivation in it.

I mean this post btw

[the worst]

MUFFINS<3

[the worst]

I think the worst is outstanding tbh

[pinturicchio]

Well I can't ask you about your own case so I'll have to chat with you about something else:

Why are you townreading Draynth? He's going under the radar, exactly like the last game we played were he rolled scum. Me no likey

[pinturicchio]

You flaking aussies come here and talk to me! If you leave me alone you'll regret... You better run, you better take cover