In post 37, Horsewoman wrote:You have spent 2 pages explaining why you initially had a scumread based on 'opportunism' and now ypure like 'lol it isnt even a scumtell'
Let me be more clear, I don't buy this, sell it to me.
In post 45, Datisi wrote:the "that's basic scumhunting." line feels a bit... is mockery the right word? i don't think it's alignemnt indicative, my poor hurt ego just wanted to point that out.
i feel like i'm gonna have a hard time reading kyoko this game because my first instincts are to latch onto what appears to be too logic-y and ramble-y, especially without any hard conclusions, and false-positives from such playstyles did sometimes lose me the game. maybe i'll do a metadive at *some* point if i'm not gonna feel too lazy.
vague +town to horsewoman for 43 because ~mindmeld~, that is where my questions were going to lead up to.
by the way, you said it's your first game here, your posts so far make me think you have prior experience, am i correct?
yes i've played forum mafia before
Like the four horsemen of the apocalypse, not like a woman who is really into horses.
In post 37, Horsewoman wrote:You have spent 2 pages explaining why you initially had a scumread based on 'opportunism' and now ypure like 'lol it isnt even a scumtell'
Let me be more clear, I don't buy this, sell it to me.
She said that she "didn't like" a certain post and defended that position for 2 pages, then said "oh by the way 'didn't like' doesn't mean i scumread him, i just don't like it". I think that's a copout because 'didn't like' does mean a scumread in most people's minds.
But let me personally be clear, my vote isn't on her it's on you, and I'm happy with it where it is in truth.
Like the four horsemen of the apocalypse, not like a woman who is really into horses.
In post 45, Datisi wrote:the "that's basic scumhunting." line feels a bit... is mockery the right word? i don't think it's alignemnt indicative, my poor hurt ego just wanted to point that out.
i feel like i'm gonna have a hard time reading kyoko this game because my first instincts are to latch onto what appears to be too logic-y and ramble-y, especially without any hard conclusions, and false-positives from such playstyles did sometimes lose me the game. maybe i'll do a metadive at *some* point if i'm not gonna feel too lazy.
vague +town to horsewoman for 43 because ~mindmeld~, that is where my questions were going to lead up to.
by the way, you said it's your first game here, your posts so far make me think you have prior experience, am i correct?
yes i've played forum mafia before
Not on this website, let me be clear. On another which is now defunct.
Like the four horsemen of the apocalypse, not like a woman who is really into horses.
In post 37, Horsewoman wrote:You have spent 2 pages explaining why you initially had a scumread based on 'opportunism' and now ypure like 'lol it isnt even a scumtell'
Let me be more clear, I don't buy this, sell it to me.
She said that she "didn't like" a certain post and defended that position for 2 pages, then said "oh by the way 'didn't like' doesn't mean i scumread him, i just don't like it". I think that's a copout because 'didn't like' does mean a scumread in most people's minds.
But let me personally be clear, my vote isn't on her it's on you, and I'm happy with it where it is in truth.
I'm still defending my position of not liking those actions and never said anything in contrast to that.
I also don't like the second part of this post. I don't like how you're saying "my vote isn't on her it's on you" cause it feels like "conditioning". How is your read on them relevant to your read on me?
Can you elaborate on your reads?
"Cooperation is absolutely key at this point. Who you decide to trust or not trust is, of course, up, to you."
hello! do you have any thoughts on the game so far?
pedit: or that i guess.
I will straight up disregard all reason if you have a PR dream again. You can come back and be like, “I dreamt that Locke is a N2 Bulletproof Multitasking Cop and Self-Targeting Doctor,” and I will go, “Okay, Locke kill it is then.”
my read on ythan isn't particularly relevant to my read on you (apart from the fact that there are only 2 scum and it's unlikely it's both of you due to him rushing to defend you so early). i was just trying to pressure him.
Like the four horsemen of the apocalypse, not like a woman who is really into horses.
As to ythan i think he's asking a lot of questions but i don't see the thought process behind them or that they're leading anywhere (as they wouldn't, if he were scum). My read may change if that post changes. I also dislike post 38. It very clearly tries to align him in support of you but it doesn't really accomplish anything or add to the conversation - he's just posturing here.
Like the four horsemen of the apocalypse, not like a woman who is really into horses.
because i didn't know what you meant by conditioning, and i still don't. i thought it would help me understand what you were asking if i understood what you are saying.
Like the four horsemen of the apocalypse, not like a woman who is really into horses.
I have no idea where to go with page 1, although I'm sure it's all very alignment indicative stuff, so let me write this out. At first I really liked #14 from kyoko as a mildly town post, as she is coming right out of the gate with suspicion, but the more I read the post the less I understand where it's coming from. Why is datisi voting ythan not being "random" a bad thing? Of course it's not random as it was a reaction to something posted in the thread. I don't understand where ythan's #13 felt desperate or informed. horsewoman's #16 feels out of place as a defense of datisi's posting and it's a pretty curious thing to be defending something as 'obviously random' when the accusation of not being random doesn't mean anything in itself and the vote was a reaction to something ITT aka not random. In that light I really like #17 from ythan as it mirrors my thoughts on horsewoman's post.
In post 21, Datisi wrote:is this a bad time to butt in and say that my vote was obviously *not* random?
In post 62, Horsewoman wrote:As to ythan i think he's asking a lot of questions but i don't see the thought process behind them or that they're leading anywhere (as they wouldn't, if he were scum). My read may change if that post changes. I also dislike post 38. It very clearly tries to align him in support of you but it doesn't really accomplish anything or add to the conversation - he's just posturing here.
I can actually understand this perspective. Post 38 felt like an extremely pointless post to me too. I can see where you're going with this
about conditioning: It's a situation where someone condition one of their reads on another one of their reads "I'm not voting her cause I'm voting you right now" - This is usually based on some sort of fallacy and makes it harder for everyone else to follow the thought process.
"Cooperation is absolutely key at this point. Who you decide to trust or not trust is, of course, up, to you."
are you purposefully not seeing ythan's post before i voted him where he told people not to vote him?
I can very well see it
But felt like you've been opportunistic about that vote so I mentioned it
weren't you?
so this is the second time in the game up to this post that kyoko asks someone to agree with her suspicion on them. First was #20 with ythan and I had no idea what to make of it, now it's starting to feel like it's a rhetoric tool designed to make her throw suspicion at people while cushioning their response, if that makes sense.
is it scum? probably not, it's a mildly town thing to do to get the game out of RVS and create content, even if that content is very dumb
this feels made up and informed. It's like horsewoman is defending people she knows are town, so her arguments are all gross assumptions. #28 isn't a better explanation.
I just started the game with 2 things that stood out for me - and could lead to an alignment indicative argument. I tried to explain why they stood out for me.
The vote was not random - that early in-game - and was on the person who was voting him (randomly though) and it happened when someone else created the base for it - which makes it opportunistic so I mentioned it.
Being opportunistic can also be a sign of trying to end RVS though. But that doesn't make it not opportunistic.
"Cooperation is absolutely key at this point. Who you decide to trust or not trust is, of course, up, to you."
is it scum? probably not, it's a mildly town thing to do to get the game out of RVS and create content, even if that content is very dumb
In post 28, Horsewoman wrote:i apologise if that looked like a personal attack. i don't even think your posts came from a place of being dumb, i think you were just grasping for something to move out of RVS with. which as i said is a good and mildly town thing to do.
If horsewoman doesn't think kyoko's posting is even dumb to begin with, then she has no reason to say 'yeah kyoko's posting is very dumb'. the wording doesn't help a different interpretation other than she is making up things on the fly to sound solvey.
I can't grasp anything out of kyoko's arguments on page 2 that's AI either way and datisi's #45 resonate with me in that aspect.
Whats up gamma! Whats up bugspray! Whats up everyone else!
I would like to add a supporting voice to kyoko’s general view on the game, reading the first 3 pages i think we have similar mindsets. Im gonna fos horsewoman until someone tells me i can vote because im too lazy to count
