Micro 214 -- Chosen Mafia (Game Over)

[Narrow]

Vote: runnerman

Let's get this wagon going! Chop, chop.

[Narrow]

Unvote, Vote: OhGodMyLife

[Narrow]

Why?

Personal amusement.

[Narrow]

Amrun conveniently wagoning is noted.

How did you miss that I was blatantly wagoning OhGodMyLife?

Superior wagon, choo choo!

Unvote, Vote: runnerman

[Narrow]

Oh hey, my primary scum read is implying I should move my vote onto someone and put them at L-1 with a big chance of early hammer! What to do...

An actual villager wouldn't be so lax in his opinion. What villager would need to think about this? ^

My wagon formed so fast and enthousiastically, it has to have attracted scum. I think we got one here.

Oh hey, my primary scum read is implying I should move my vote onto someone and put them at L-1 with a big chance of early hammer! What to do...

I would understand this mindset more if we were in a newbie game. It’s a small chance at best, and if someone quickhammers and runnerman flips town then we’ll probably know who the scum is.

[Narrow]

That wasn't supposed to happen.

runnerman, an actual villager wouldn't be so lax about the formation of his wagon. For instance, yours. It wasn't as though your wagon formed without a reason, yet you ignored the reasons people gave as they ignored you, and you're

still

on what is apparently an RVS vote.

Alexcellent, you're gambling a whole lot on this "probably" qualifier.

[Narrow]

Are you joking or something? What reasons did people give? I didn't see anything. From my pov it seemed ridiculous and I felt like, whatever, I'm a villager so if you want to waste a lynch on me go ahead.

Also what is RVS? And V/LA I keep seeing mentioned?

RVS is "random voting stage." That's a misnomer, but it's a phase in the early game where people throw out votes, for silly reasons or otherwise, as an icebreaker. V/LA is "vacation/limited access"; if one expects to be away from the game for 48 hours or more, one can say that one is V/LA until whatever day and one's absence would be noted.

I thought Amrun had attached a reason, and apparently she didn't. Welp. I gave one, though, and you didn't answer it -- you'd accused Amrun of "conveniently wagoning" in post 47, but you hadn't batted an eye when I did the same thing to OhGodMyLife in post 11.

[Narrow]

Maybe I’m tunnelling you without reason, but your play so far has come across as different.

You haven't elaborated on this, so could you talk about what you know of JKMatthews's play and what's giving you the impression that he's been different?

Also, you haven't yet answered this:

I would understand this mindset more if we were in a newbie game. It’s a small chance at best, and if someone quickhammers and runnerman flips town then we’ll probably know who the scum is.

Alexcellent, you're gambling a whole lot on this "probably" qualifier.

Admittedly, it wasn't phrased as a question, but I'm really interested in why you thought this given that the game had

just

started.

But I think one of them is a good possibility, simple statistics and the fact that my wagon caught steam so quickly that it is very likely at least one scum is involved.

Why have you so far only focused on people who were actively engaging the game? I jumped on your wagon and vanished soon afterward.

---

Unvote

JKMatthews seems fairly obviously town. I don't like some of the things runnerman has done, like his F-16_Fighting_Falcon vote earlier or how he piggybacked F-16_Fighting_Falcon's Amrun case, but his recent interaction with JKMatthews actually feels genuine and sort of town-ish and I get the impression he's suffering from culture shock. Alexcellent had some good posts before when he was questioned about his interaction with me regarding my OhGodMyLife vote in that they read like he truly thought that not questioning me further was the right thing to do, but I don't like how he's been responding to JKMatthews and runnerman so far.

Anyway, I need to sleep on this game and mull stuff over. If the half of the game that hasn't posted substance yet could post (yes, I'm a hypocrite), that'd be sweet.

[Narrow]

Amrun, F-16_Fighting_Falcon hasn't made very many posts, so his case shouldn't be too hard to find. He promised more but has since vanished, but saying that you've been posting fluff is pretty much a case.

I'm not voting because I haven't decided where I want it, and there are some cards I'm keeping facedown for the moment.

[Narrow]

Prod received. Sorry for the poor activity; I'll catch up in the morning.

[Narrow]

This game. I regret promising to catch up so soon. I'm on a mobile, so more substantial things will have to wait until it's not an ungodly hour and I'm on a computer. First impressions for now, though.

I'm probably not chosen because apparently I have gotten away with lurking without anyone ever mentioning it, so hooray!

runnerman, y u ignore me?

Out of the Jake from State Farm and hohum spat, I'm comfortable calling them both town. Jake from State Farm came into the argument with a force that I like and he's been contributing since even if what he says is disagreeable at times. I like that hohum openly admitted to sheeping Amrun and not having much more; it was easy for him to add more if he was running up runnerman.

Out of the Amrun and JKMatthews spat... I start having problems. I hate that a lot of it was semantics. JKMatthews started out strong (see F-16_Fighting_Falcon's post on the matter, as that was basically what I was thinking), had a couple of bad posts, and then boom. Amrun I have no idea how to read, but I thought she came out of that argument better. In any case, I absolutely need to reread this to cross-reference Amrun's allegations of there being a pattern in JKMatthews's behavior, so that is happening some hours later (I swear by everything).

Amrun is likely town for forgetting that Jake from State Farm is a replacement, though; she would have been aware of it as scum and her mistake felt natural/genuine.

[Narrow]

EBWOP: JKMatthews started out strong

in the overall game

, had a couple of bad posts, and then boom.

The couple of bad posts are posts 161 and 166, addressed to Jake from State Farm. JKMatthews cited a "lack of town motivation" (paraphrased), but what Jake from State Farm was doing did not have scum motivation, either; that was just him being him.

[Narrow]

What game was it, Jake from State Farm?

[Narrow]

Vote: JKMatthews

[Narrow]

Good, I love discussion...

So do I! Discussion makes the world go 'round.

[Narrow]

So do it! Care to explain the vote?

No.

[Narrow]

Righto. What took you so long to vote after post 253?

That post is not why I'm voting you.

Why did you pick on that post specifically?

[Narrow]

Probably should've been 252... first post you mentioned any suspicion of me. Then you questioned Jake, then you voted me.

Okay. I thought it was obvious I was still debating about my read of you in those two posts, but it probably wasn't.

Back to your original question, I'm voting you because your hohum vote pinged my gut, so that and the things I mentioned in post 253 led to the vote. So, what were you hoping to get by asking me to explain my vote?

[Narrow]

I'm an alt.

[Narrow]

I am here and reading along, just not much to add as I still hold the same opinion. I am getting conflicting reads from Alex though. There seems to be some villager motives behind his posts such as #287. Not the post in isolation but as part of what he has been saying. I'll need to think about it more.

While you're out reading the thread looking for villager motivations, can you please answer the question you've been ignoring?

But I think one of them is a good possibility, simple statistics and the fact that my wagon caught steam so quickly that it is very likely at least one scum is involved.

Why have you so far only focused on people who were actively engaging the game? I jumped on your wagon and vanished soon afterward.

runnerman, y u ignore me?

[Narrow]

Vote: Falcon

Do you think F-16_Fighting_Falcon faked his Day opening post there?

I'm going to have severely limited time until Sunday morning, but I'll try to pop in once and while; anything requiring substantial work will have to wait until I get back, though.

Vote: runnerman

[Narrow]

Do you think there was scum on the JKMatthews wagon?

Haven't decided yet.

[Narrow]

Unvote, Vote: Narrow

You asked me if I thought there was scum on the wagon. I don't know if there's scum on the wagon because I haven't properly examined it yet, and I'd rather not make shit up when I don't even remember what the context of the votes/unvotes were.

[Narrow]

The question "Do you think scum was on the wagon?" is not the same as "Were your scum reads on the wagon?" The answer may be the same, but the approach is entirely different. The former asks for a vote count analysis. The latter is a question about reads. The former requires a significant amount of time commitment to answer because I haven't yet done the analysis. The latter is the one that doesn't require any time to answer. You asked the former; I answered the former. Now, if your question was actually meant to be the latter, my answer is no with a whole list of caveats that can easily be summed up as "I don't have any real scum reads at this moment."

Examples from day one of Narrow avoiding taking positions on things. Once is acceptable. Thrice is a pattern that I find scummy.

To clarify a bit, there is a reason I gave the answer I did in post 133; I had a question I was asking someone -- it might have been runnerman, but I'm not checking right now -- and I didn't want to slap down a vote because I wanted him to react

without

feeling pressured by a vote. At the time, I wasn't interested in voting anyone else. The first one was definitely me fence-sitting, though.

Here's the problem with Today: I have no fucking clue what I'm doing. I have havingfitz's slot as town. I have hohum as likely town but someone I need to read in isolation given that my read is based mostly on one post of his where he was responding to Jake from State Farm, and everything else I'm seen from him barring the vote Today has been mostly personality. Alexcellent is in a weird spot where his move onto the JKMatthews makes sense on paper -- he'd been suspicious of JKMatthews for a while, JKMatthews did some things even I thought was scummy, and there's the vote -- but I don't know where I actually stand on it because I keep wanting to probe him about the vote except it makes sense when I think about it logically; thus, Alexcellent

also

needs a reread. As for runnerman, I'm voting him Today because I want to see how he reacts to it given things I've said about him Yesterday. You I don't have a read on. I could say I have a mild town read of you for your current attack of me given

sekrit meta reasons

, but that's really only meaningful to me. F-16_Fighting_Falcon I don't have a read of, either; I kind of like that he mentioned the same tell I had on JKMatthews back when I thought JKMatthews was strong town, but other than that it's nothing. Despite asking you if you thought he'd faked his Amrun vote Today, I'm not sure if I read it as genuine, either. I haven't read the end of Day 1 too closely, so I'm not fully aware of what the context behind F-16_Fighting_Falcon's vote was; however, the gist I got from skimming it was that people thought it was opportunistic, and I don't know if I agree with that necessarily given that deadline was 2 days away at the time he placed it. I need to read F-16_Fighting_Falcon, too.

JKMatthews was a strong town read of mine as of middle of Day 1; he'd had a strong start, kicking the game out of RVS and asking Alexcellent and runnerman thoughtful questions. That went downhill starting from his suspicion of Jake from State Farm (might have been post 166 or thereabouts; the quotes are in my iso). I put a bare vote on him to see how he'd react, and he reacted by asking for a case "for discussion," at which point I decided that he was probably scum.

And that's where I stand with regards to this game. You're right; doing a write-up about reads was answerable in one go. As actual stances go, though, no, I don't have any real scum reads, and I'm supposed to be reading a bunch of people to see if I can rectify that.

[Narrow]

Belated EBWOP: Just realized "sekrit meta reasons" might be taken the wrong way; they don't refer to ongoing games in any fashion.

[Narrow]

While I appreciate the effort your wallpost took it still seems like just a bunch more words dedicated to hemming and hawing.

Not sure what you expected when I quite clearly said I didn't have reads? :shrug:

That said, promised reading is probably not occurring tonight because lol holiday.

[Narrow]

correction:

VOTE: OhGodMyLife

Why?

[Narrow]

I'm sorry. I thought I would catch up after the holiday, and then after I was done with a paper, and now I'm looking at limited access due to long days back-to-back and then being gone for the weekend. There's no way I'm going to be caught up here.

Mod: Please replace me. Sorry.

[Narrow]

Sorry for flaking out like that. Honestly, though, I don't know if it would've been better had I stayed at all.

Anyway, congratulations to the scum. Thanks for the game, RedCoyote.