Micro 1041: Geriatric F11 [Postgame]

[mc esther]

VOTE: joqiza[/bote]

[mc esther]

VOTE: dwlee99

i like this wagon more, andante's kinda idk flashed up

[mc esther]

This on the other hand is bad

no it's not

UNVOTE:
VOTE: three

fourth on the andante wagon, third on me

[mc esther]

actually he was just third on both wagons, that's not anywhere near as bad.

UNVOTE:
VOTE: dwlee

burning through my postcount with trivial errors gogogo

[mc esther]

actually he was just third on both wagons, that's not anywhere near as bad.

To put what I said into practice... I'm assuming bad means wolfy here, but why is 4th, 3rd... wolfier than 3rd, 3rd?

my thinking at 4/3 was "he's been late to both the wagons he's on, it's maybe kinda opportunist". i guess the same argument could also be made at 3/3, but 3 wouldnt feel late to me if it were 3/2, yknow?

[mc esther]

I doubt the speed of the wagon indicates anything at all

faster wagons tend to have maf on them (or at least, that's popular knowledge i absorbed at some point), but on reflection im not sure that necessarily holds true in rvs (again, if it even holds true at all). i'll admit, i couldnt actually look at that wagon and pick out a vote that makes me go "this is the suspicious one".

Going against the grain on Dwlee here, I don't think they're hard definite town or anything like that but 38 seems like a difficult post for scum to make since it basically says "as town I'm likely to do [the opposite of what I'm doing here]"

i like this read

i was going to sheep the joqiza vote but actually i dont really agree with any of the points made.

UNVOTE:
VOTE: wh4t

[mc esther]

i should really start pausing and thinking a little before ending these posts.

I just want to see her engage with the game a bit more.

is there any, uh, "thing" (post? iso? event? idk lol) specifically that you'd like me to weigh in on? i'll give it a shot, but there's a good chance that i havent weighed in on it because i dont have thoughts.

[mc esther]

wh4t gave "reads" there is NOTHING of that sort in joqiza's ISO, joqiza probably maf

oh okay then

UNVOTE:
VOTE: joqiza

[mc esther]

i like wh4t's unvote and reads. the readslist looks almost completely arbitrary lmao, i like to think maf would post something a little less controversial than that, or maybe with explanations. i very much dont believe in just unvoting (especially at this point in the game) but i think a lot of players do, and i think this is where they'd usually do it as town.

[mc esther]

Does this imply you found andante's posts convincing

i mean, i did quote it, yeah. on a reread, i couldve (perhaps, shouldve) got that same point out of umlaut's summary; but i didnt, seeing it stated directly and plainly is what made it click for me.

[mc esther]

? you seemed really damning on joqiza and put him at the bottom of your readslist, im surprised he's not your automatic vote? what's the hesitation, like, im assuming you have some reason to believe he might be town after all?

[mc esther]

im not sure it's clear that im replying to andante's post there. i am.

[mc esther]

do you usually pbp someone so comprehensively just for scumreading you? idk, "comprehensively" is the wrong word because you no-commented about half of it, but the point is that you quoted (all of? a huge portion of?) a scumread just to say "no im not" and then omgus (okay, "omgus" is kinda uncharitable here, but i think your case is overall very unconvincing). i'll admit that i want to see an answer to "why did she evaluate a question she got information from as non-useful?"; overall though, your posts seem, idk, kinda overblown as a response to an [imo] thoroughly ordinary (if a little long and questionably-structured) scumread.

[mc esther]

i'd read andante more closely if she linked yeah, but i'll be real, i dont even read umlaut's posts that closely. and anything with multiquotes gets the barest skim unless it's very cleanly structured and the quotes are snipped for relevance.

I am encountering a sort of resistance that, in my experience, has not signalled d1 wolf flip.

i dont think i understand what this means. the most obvious reading is that town tends not to eliminate maf d1 when the thread disagrees with you, but im almost certain that's not the intent. am i understanding the meaning of "resistance"? is there something specific about andante or her playstyle that's relevant to your meaning?

[mc esther]

I'm almost entirely certain Looker intentionally tries to rep into scum slots, so I'm not against a policy lim here if we near EoD and can't reach a consensus.

i dont get the policy elimination angle. assuming he scumread the slot before replacing in: why would we at deadline go "okay better sheep pre-replacement looker's hypothetical scumread" over sheeping any other player's actual stated in-thread read? and if you do believe there's a compelling reason to take his hypothetical pre-replacement read seriously over everyone else, why would you wait until end-of-day to act on that belief?

p-edit: i dont think this is the same question that looker asked, but yeah we're approaching this from a similar angle and i intuitively like that even if i shouldnt.

[mc esther]

imma wait for an answer, because imo he clearly believes the "looker tries to rep into scum slots" part (like, factual-meta statements like that always get questioned, even as maf he probably feels he can back that part up). i can imagine there's a thought process from there, even if it's not one i'd consider cogent; i'd like to see what it is before making a call.

[mc esther]

two other people didnt get the joke ("joke"?); claiming it was so obvious that i could only take it seriously as maf is, no, fuck off lol (and you obviously dont even believe that, given that umlaut asked similar questions over it). i also dont get the "responding to a bad push" thing, when three literally isnt pushing looker, and i explicitly asked why he isn't pushing looker.

the thing that really sucks is, i actually agree with andante on looker's replacement behaviour as maf (another 12 hours with no comment from him, yeah lol, it's not exactly looking better is it?). im really not happy about voting with her but.

UNVOTE:
VOTE: looker

three isnt off the hook though, i want clarification on the joke thing and answers if it wasnt. also looking forward to his next vote.

[mc esther]

im just lowkey mad at her take on me

[mc esther]

yes looker, we were maf in cop killer. but you didnt have to lurk there, and i warned in pt that there were potential downsides to lurking so hard (and, im not criticizing you in raising this; i was incorrect to worry that lurking would make you too obviously icemaf, you read the gamestate better than i did and it paid off at a tactical level, i was somewhat impressed).

i think that's what's happening here too. i dont think you always lurk replacing in as maf (i havent seen you replace in often enough to know this). i do think, coming into a relatively townread slot, a little close to deadline, in a very slow game, you lurk here as maf and not as town.

i also dont believe looker when he says he has nothing to fear from andante. in coalition (the game he references as evidence that lurking is andante's scum meta), he said that he said of andante that he was "terrified from your accuracy".

mc esther was content to follow behind a very loud, obnoxious (sorry.) voice in andante until andante decided to turn her wrath onto mc

im still following behind her lmao, so, no? but sure, i never answered the question about why i voted wh4t, it somehow slipped my mind (and also just, didnt seem worth answering? like, you can read the post where i do it, i state my desire to sheep umlaut and quote his limpool, i thought it was pretty self-explanatory!)

[mc esther]

i think that first paragraph of mine is super fucking garbled, but the point is that "yes i think you have a tendency towards tactical lurking as scum even when it's not the literal only option available, where ive not seen you lurk as town (but, to be fair, have also not seen you replace in as town)"

[mc esther]

joqiza, and im not accusing you of anything because ik ive fucked this up in other gamethreads, but: "them" for dwlee, not "him".

this is perhaps a strategically unwise use for my postcount lmao but it's not like ive been posting a ton anyway. im really just waiting for umlaut to get in so we can maybe get some consensus and avoid a compromise deadline elim, and for three to get in so i can actually sort him beyond "idk lol vaguely weird". im not expecting andante to come back i have a hunch her inactivity's going to continue all the way to replacement (and i dont think that's ever alignment-indicative).

[mc esther]

I'm almost entirely certain Looker intentionally tries to rep into scum slots, so I'm not against a policy lim here if we near EoD and can't reach a consensus.

i dont get the policy elimination angle. assuming he scumread the slot before replacing in: why would we at deadline go "okay better sheep pre-replacement looker's hypothetical scumread" over sheeping any other player's actual stated in-thread read? and if you do believe there's a compelling reason to take his hypothetical pre-replacement read seriously over everyone else, why would you wait until end-of-day to act on that belief?

Not really sure what you're asking here. If you're saying "why would we settle for a policy lim instead of our scum reads," the answer is that we shouldn't. I'm saying if we're near EoD and we can't agree on a vote, Looker is a good choice since I'm pretty sure the slot isn't being town read.

im very much struggling to get that latter statement out of what you initially said. i suppose the claim here is that "looker intentionally tries to rep into scum slots" can hold true in this case because nobody townread wh4t (except me -- i earlier implied that other players shared my townread, this is actually incorrect, and weakens the case for lurking maf!looker), but that's just such an odd way of phrasing the sentiment imo.

UNVOTE:
VOTE: three

[mc esther]

im having a hard time believing that's what you meant, it looks like a retrofitted meaning for statement you hadnt fully thought through because youre not town. it "works" if you squint, like, you can totally claim that "looker intentionally tries to rep into scum slots" actually meant "nobody's townreading wh4t, which makes me believe looker's intentionally repped into a scumslot, which i also believe is something he attempts to do". but i think what you wouldve said if you meant that wouldve been more along the lines of "wh4t and now looker have been lurking hardcore, so im not against a policy lim here. strengthening this, i also think looker tries to replace into scum slots", like, i think that first sentence is how people usually call for policy eliminations on lurkers.

[mc esther]

dont worry, i wont use post limit as an excuse to stop contributing so close to end of day, i'll dip into reserve if need be. you werent talking about lurking, you were talking about a lack of townreads, my bad; but my overall point remains the same, that i think youd emphasize the thing that actually made you want the policy elim (the lack of townreads on that slot, not lurking, my bad, though the two are related), rather than speculation on looker's replacement habits.

[mc esther]

Why is your current stance on me "idk lol vaguely weird"?

so like, right now, it's not; it's "probably mafia". but at the time i made that comment: i didnt (still dont) recall many of your posts, i think joqiza's/umlaut's observations on you arent damingly alignment-indicative, are, yeah, weird; and at the time, i felt your comment about looker's replacement habits was not necessarily alignment-indicative but was very odd, it's only your subsequent explanation of the comment that has me going "i dont think this stacks up!".

looker, i know that you volunteered to replace pregame, but three didnt know that at the time he made his comment, and the reason for which he made that comment (which, you must agree, was a little odd!) is relevant to puzzling out his alignment. and, yes, lurking gets you killed in some gamestates but not others, there's no contradiction here.

[mc esther]

i was gonna wait for more posts to come in just so i could cover multiple in one, but im heading to bed now so:

did you quote umlaut because you think he's a potential roadkill buddy, or for, some other reason?

[mc esther]

i was right about three though. like, literally, the sole basis for your read was that three was "obviously" joking. he, by his own admission, wasnt.

[mc esther]

the only thing that makes me antsy about three is. okay. he says he actually meant "nobody townreads wh4t" when he said "looker intentionally tries to replace into scumslots". surely maf dont do this, surely maf just takes the out that andante offered ("it's a joke") rather than trying to retrofit such a far-removed meaning here, why do maf post this in a million years, right?

but i dont like the other side of this either. "why would maf ever try to backtrack so implausibly? clearly he's town and just mangled his meaning"; okay, i usually love this sort of reasoning. but i expect town to be more up-front in this scenario? i often mangle my own posts, ive done it this game. surely town here says "yeah sorry lol that post just wasnt an accurate representation of my thoughts", rather than acting like im being unreasonable for expecting words to mean things.

i think in this dichotomy, i lean maf over town, it's the "acting like im being unreasonable for expecting words to mean things" (#172, for reference) part that really starts to ping me, but fuck the whole exchange is so weird.

[mc esther]

i can do three or looker. idk about dwlee, i'll need to read again.

[mc esther]

yeah, im not voting dwlee; i probably would if both three and looker seemed impossible, but i think either could easily have support. i heavily prefer three to looker, but either is fine. i dont think andante is a realistic elimination at all, joqiza should move his vote.

[mc esther]

myself, andante, umlaut, and looker have all said that dwlee isnt happening. im guessing dwlee wont self-vote. this wagon isnt happening.

looker seems to reject every viable wagon though, which, um. i dont think i have such a strong preference on three over looker any more.

myself, three, and looker all still appear to be viable.

[mc esther]

e-1 and i can imagine that someone (maf or town) might decide/"decide" that there's no time for intent. im cop.

[mc esther]

i think sleepless had a hunch of my prness and was trying to get a confirmation when he asked whether i'd rather self-hammer than vote dwlee (as in, i think he's maf pr-hunting). imo, most vanilla townies just answer "yes" there, where most prs very much wouldnt. i considered just, lying, but that seemed like a great way to have my wagon build further; not that it ultimately mattered. sleepless/three and sleepless/looker are both very coherent teams imo, so this is very much my top scumread after those two. sleepless/looker kinda seem to collectively be trying to frustrate compromise options, ive already mentioned that looker supports exclusively nonviable wagons; sleepless is less overt in this, but he stuck on the dwlee wagon a while after it was made very clear that it's simply nonviable.

ik a few people have andante down as hard-town, im very mixed on this. joqiza is entirely correct to note that her reads just, dont bear much relationship to the thread in full context. i already said earlier that she kept a vote on me long after her primary reason ("three was obviously joking") was explicitly disproven. she also kept saying i was scum with looker because i wouldnt vote him -- after sleepless had explicitly said that he wouldnt vote looker, while i had previously voted looker and stated i was okay with the deadline looker wagon. if she's town, she is not living up to looker's positive assessment of her. this doesnt make her maf, and i'll admit, towards the beginning of the day, i had a moderate townread on her because she's a long way removed from her coalition scumgame -- not just in that she's more active, but also in that her reads are a lot more reasoned (well, "reasoned") through. obviously on some level im just mad here, and eh i shouldnt be, i made questionable play decisions to dodge the night kill, those decisions got me wagoned. but fuck im mad.

umlaut kinda seems like he's trying to pocket me in a few places, but i think im just paranoid. hard to say.

joqiza and dwlee are both in this weird "theyre kinda null but i think theyre town?" space for me. hard to describe. i think a lot of people have the null-town "hasnt said much but i guess e-1 was townie" read on roadkill, i very much echo that.

looker and three have been discussed ad nauseum.

[mc esther]

The fact that there's intent to policy lim me when I've hyperlinked my town utility in previous games should be alarming.

does this make three suspicious to you?

[mc esther]

The fact that there's intent to policy lim me when I've hyperlinked my town utility in previous games should be alarming.

does this make three suspicious to you?

i guess i cant go asking questions like that without answering some.

Why are my suggestions not viable

because four people had weighed in on who theyre willing to vote and none of them had named anyone you'd named. even though i heavily scumread sleepless, i dont see sleepless happening from zero votes in twenty-four hours.

im having a hard time believing that's what you meant, it looks like a retrofitted meaning for statement you hadnt fully thought through because youre not town. it "works" if you squint, like, you can totally claim that "looker intentionally tries to rep into scum slots" actually meant "nobody's townreading wh4t, which makes me believe looker's intentionally repped into a scumslot, which i also believe is something he attempts to do". but i think what you wouldve said if you meant that wouldve been more along the lines of "wh4t and now looker have been lurking hardcore, so im not against a policy lim here. strengthening this, i also think looker tries to replace into scum slots", like, i think that first sentence is how people usually call for policy eliminations on lurkers.

This doesn't make any logical sense to me. How can I accuse Looker of lurking if he had literally just repped in at the time and was actually posting? Also claiming I'm trying to retrofit the meaning of what I said is just silly.

You're genuinely trying to claim that, as scum, I made such an apparently bizarre statement without not only thinking it through, I also said it for literally no reason? Like what do I gain out of it as scum? To needlessly get suspicion thrown at me? It's like you saw a weird statement and just took it at face value as scummy, but didn't think through any of the logistics or reasoning for

why

scum would do that.

dont worry, i wont use post limit as an excuse to stop contributing so close to end of day, i'll dip into reserve if need be. you werent talking about lurking, you were talking about a lack of townreads, my bad; but my overall point remains the same, that i think youd emphasize the thing that actually made you want the policy elim (the lack of townreads on that slot, not lurking, my bad, though the two are related), rather than speculation on looker's replacement habits.

Why would I? This is again just a shallow/face value take on what I said.

so like, here three literally quotes the post where i clarify that "lurking" was an incorrect summary of his claim, but doesnt think to alter his earlier question about lurking.

as for "why", because it's hard to pretend to scumhunt? because you thought you saw an angle but didnt feel the need to think it through because youre not town? and like, i dont think i took it at face value as scummy -- umlaut did that, i parked my vote on looker while i waited for you to explain. idk, maybe you think my "waiting for an answer" was fake? it wasnt, if that makes you feel better.

p-edit: at first i was like "omg now dwlee's advocating nonviables too", but i forgot that wh4t is looker.

i dont think sleepless' e-1 is alignment-indicative, i think plenty of people do that as town with such a recent votecount at the top of the page.

[mc esther]

the votecount wasnt at the top of the page, but i still generally believe everyone's keeping pretty close track of the votes so close to deadline.

[mc esther]

andante/umlaut/me/dwlee/joqiza is looker.

sleepless/umlaut/me/joqiza is most of the way to three, but i cant find a fifth. three wont, andante wont. dwlee looks like they wont; roadkill is unclear; looker might now that he's aware there's support for his wagon.

[mc esther]

is anyone interested in voting dwlee...?

myself, andante, umlaut, and looker have all said that dwlee isnt happening. im guessing dwlee wont self-vote. this wagon isnt happening.

I think I've already resigned myself to it, though, because I'm burning through my reserve posts

p-edit: wtf, that's another player willing to go for my 'non-viable' (non-groupthink) suggestions

okay, sure. roadkill/looker/umlaut/me is most of the way to sleepless. sleepless wont, dwlee [probably?] wont, andante wont. joqiza hasnt weighed in, but seems to strongly townread sleepless in iso, so im pretty sure it cant happen.

fwiw, sure, "non-groupthink" is an entirely accurate (if perhaps uncharitable) assessment of what makes a deadline elimination practical. deadlines suck lmao, you must know this!

[mc esther]

i dont trust that three necessarily happens, i think joqiza and umlaut are more likely to be on when needed than dwlee

UNVOTE:
VOTE: looker

[mc esther]

oh wait we're relying on dwlee either way nevermind then lol

UNVOTE:
VOTE: three

[mc esther]

ya, im heading back to uni soon and have always struggled to juggle mafia with irl responsibilities, i'd love to have geriatric available as a regular option.