Micro 102: Mainstream Mini-Mafia [END, CULT WIN]

[FourTrouble]

@Majiffy

Orci asked you - "So do you actually have any reads at this point?" - and you replied: "Not particularly, no."

Jacob Savage asked - "Who other than Siv do you think is scum?" - and you responded with the defensive: "I never said I thought Siv was scum."

I asked - "How come you still don't have any reads after posting more than double anyone else?" - and your response - "How do I get reads if players aren't posting?" - implied yet again that you have no reads.

Are you saying that NOW you have reads? What has changed?

[orcinus_theoriginal]

Post 81/83

I'm on the phone but there's your evidence

Also: what happened to the whole OMG GUYS A FLIP IS NOT A LYNCH I NEVER SAID I WANTED TO LYNCH SIV line of excuse?

You're flailing, majiffy.

[Majiffy]

Orci asked you - "So do you actually have any reads at this point?" - and you replied: "Not particularly, no."

Explain how this is a refusal.

Jacob Savage asked - "Who other than Siv do you think is scum?" - and you responded with the defensive: "I never said I thought Siv was scum."

Explain how this is a refusal.

I asked - "How come you still don't have any reads after posting more than double anyone else?" - and your response - "How do I get reads if players aren't posting?" - implied yet again that you have no reads.

Explain how this is a refusal.

Are you saying that NOW you have reads? What has changed?

Got a few. People other than myself, Orci, and yourself have posted a bit.

[Majiffy]

Post 81/83

I'm on the phone but there's your evidence

Evidence of what? I'm confused.

Also: what happened to the whole OMG GUYS A FLIP IS NOT A LYNCH I NEVER SAID I WANTED TO LYNCH SIV line of excuse?

God you are retarded. I've explained this several times now, I never said this.

[pappums rat]

Oh God I hate quote-strip wars...

With that said, there are some things that need addressing:

There are no flips to analyze, meaning no concrete associative tells could be made.

1.

This does not mean players should not be looking for associative tells. There is something called CONDITIONAL reasoning.

2.

I myself will not lynch a player unless I can pin down who I think his partners are. It actually works quite effectively, especially for developing town-reads and using process of elimination.

3.

Your vote on Jacob is honestly pretty bad.

4.

I'm calling it now, Pappums-Majiffy.

1. Looking for associative tells is all fine and good, storing what you see for later cases ONCE FLIPS HAVE OCCURRED. Building cases on people solely because of interactions with others BEFORE A FLIP is bad.
2. That is a horrible strategy. Can you link to games where you have done this and lynched scum?
3. Would you like to explain why? What about my reasoning for voting him was in error?
4. LOL. See #1.

[FourTrouble]

No one has asked. How can I refuse something if I've not been asked yet?

The examples I provided were in direct response to this post. You said no one asked. I am proving that you were asked. You did not answer Jacob's question or my question. When you answered Orci's question, you did not commit to any reads.

[Majiffy]

Ah but your original statement was that I refused. And I'm still asking you to explain how any of those responses were refusals.

Continue dancing around the issues, it's cute.

[FourTrouble]

@Majiffy

You are dancing around the issue. You said no one asked you. I showed that you were asked. Your responses gave no answers so they were refusals. I'm not getting into a semantic argument with you. You were WRONG about the fact that no one asked you. You are not dodging that bullet. If you have any reads, now is the time to articulate them.

[FourTrouble]

1. Looking for associative tells is all fine and good, storing what you see for later cases ONCE FLIPS HAVE OCCURRED. Building cases on people solely because of interactions with others BEFORE A FLIP is bad.
2. That is a horrible strategy. Can you link to games where you have done this and lynched scum?
3. Would you like to explain why? What about my reasoning for voting him was in error?
4. LOL. See #1.

1. I never said I build cases SOLELY because of interactions. I said I don't lynch someone UNLESS there are also associations. It is a necessary condition for lynching someone, not a sufficient one. That said, I would like to know why you are changing your story:

Looking for scumbuddies 5 pages into Day 1 is terribad.

So is it fine to look for scumbuddies or is it scummy?
2. Since you misrepresented my strategy in (1), I will assume your request here is moot.
3. I don't like your vote on Jacob because it faults him for wanting to understand Majiffy's meta better (the question regarding Thor) and seeking knowledge regarding Majiffy and Ocri's reads. There ain't nothing scummy about any of that, but there is for voting someone on that basis.

[Majiffy]

You are dancing around the issue. You said no one asked you. I showed that you were asked. Your responses gave no answers so they were refusals. I'm not getting into a semantic argument with you. You were WRONG about the fact that no one asked you. You are not dodging that bullet. If you have any reads, now is the time to articulate them.

You keep saying I'm the one dancing around issues and how you don't want to get into semantics, but lets get some REALTALK^TM here for a minute.

The conversation progressed as follows;

Third, he's refusing to commit to any positions.

I haven't refused to commit to any positions. Name one position I've refused to commit to.

3) You have not committed to any reads yet. You don't find anyone scummy or towny.

No one has asked. How can I refuse something if I've not been asked yet?

So you first said I was refusing to commit to a position. I asked you to name them. You then said I have not committed to any reads. I've asked you where I've been asked. And the questions you have posted thus far of me being asked, I have answered to. You cannot change "not having reads" to "refusing to give reads", these are not logically congruent.

Good day, sir.

[Voidedmafia]

This does not mean players should not be looking for associative tells. There is something called CONDITIONAL reasoning. I myself will not lynch a player unless I can pin down who I think his partners are. It actually works quite effectively, especially for developing town-reads and using process of elimination.
So you won't lynch obvscum immediately and instead try to dick around for associative tells that you can do during the night?

I'm calling it now, Pappums-Majiffy.

I can agree to a Savage lycnh, but I like my orcinus spot.

1. I never said I build cases SOLELY because of interactions. I said I don't lynch someone UNLESS there are also associations. It is a necessary condition for lynching someone, not a sufficient one. That said, I would like to know why you are changing your story:

...No it shouldn't (not all the time, at least). If you go by that logic, even obvscum has to be let go if no one has any obvious associative tells with him/her at the time.

So you first said I was refusing to commit to a position. I asked you to name them. You then said I have not committed to any reads. I've asked you where I've been asked. And the questions you have posted thus far of me being asked, I have answered to. You cannot change "not having reads" to "refusing to give reads", these are not logically congruent.

To be fair, though, it's still a good idea to articulate your reads out loud for everyone else.

@Majiffy

You are dancing around the issue. You said no one asked you. I showed that you were asked. Your responses gave no answers so they were refusals. I'm not getting into a semantic argument with you. You were WRONG about the fact that no one asked you. You are not dodging that bullet. If you have any reads, now is the time to articulate them.

He has a point here, though.

[Majiffy]

I'll give you reads in-between Marathons but atm I'm going WTFSHITGODDAMNITSLOWDOWN

[Majiffy]

orcinus_theoriginal - Noob town.
Voidedmafia - Dunno, mostly because I haven't really bothered reading you much.
pirate mollie - Probably town unless she's trying to buddy me.
Melmond - Dunno. Where the hell is he?
Siveure DtTrikyp - Dunno, need more posts.
JacobSavage - Dunno, need more posts
FourTrouble - Possibly scum that is having issues getting off the failure that is a Majiffy wagon.
pappums rat - Probably town because he has like damn near the same reads as me.

I don't remember who voted Jacob but the vote itself was stupid. However, I think it struck me as a townish post.

[pirate mollie]

orcinus_theoriginal - Noob town.
Voidedmafia - Dunno, mostly because I haven't really bothered reading you much.
pirate mollie - Probably town unless she's trying to buddy me.
Melmond - Dunno. Where the hell is he?
Siveure DtTrikyp - Dunno, need more posts.
JacobSavage - Dunno, need more posts
FourTrouble - Possibly scum that is having issues getting off the failure that is a Majiffy wagon.
pappums rat - Probably town because he has like damn near the same reads as me.

I don't remember who voted Jacob but the vote itself was stupid. However, I think it struck me as a townish post.

this post reads like full of hedge so I wonder why you are bother posting it

[Majiffy]

Because otherwise the pissants won't stop begging me for my reads.

[pirate mollie]

it doesn't change the fact that it is full of hedge

[Majiffy]

Well we're on page 6 with half the playerlist posting less than a paragraph of content. What more do you really want from me?

[pirate mollie]

more than what you have given, obviously

[pirate mollie]

the "unless she is trying to buddy me" I find kind of weird

[Majiffy]

You'd understand if you know what part of your meta I'm applying to you.

[pirate mollie]

I thought you were all "fuck meta" and all of that

[Majiffy]

For the most part.

[pirate mollie]

lol ^ hedge

[Majiffy]

Whatevz.

[pirate mollie]

okay