In post 1696, AxleGreaser wrote:and no I want to talk to PereV first, I have a question I want to ask, and rather clearly I
want
to ask them while he doesn't know the answers to your questions.
You should ask it then - that way next time he shows up he can answer it.
yeah ok I screwed up the
tense
, 1711 (had) & (wanted)?
I suspect, in my mind it wasnt asked yet as he appeared not to have seen it yet. So for me I still have the question.
I still have the question, I want TSO to answer as well.
What are at least some of the plenty of scummy things Aneninen has posted which are the basis for TSOś vote.
For me the lack of answer is about the scummiest thing I have seen.. on this forum.
In post 1630, Egg wrote:So you think that without you being here to guide us, we'd all make the mistake of assuming neighbors are the same thing as masons or...?
yes
In post 1620, The Fonz wrote:is that Nero was the first person to make an assumption about multiball
no, I really didn't.
In post 1630, Egg wrote:Why so sure that he'd town read someone who nearly half the game is scumreading?
ummmm? guys walks into the game, is not caught up, votes the biggest bandwagon, and doesn't find anything else worth commenting on in 20 pages. I don't know why you think I should not be suspicious of that or why you aren't. So talk to me about the Fonz slot.
@GM-Why is Foz scum?
Of all tyrannies,a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end they do so with the approval of their own conscience.
given that I just asked someone else that question 1711
when I get an answer to my question, then I will answer yours. FIFO
although I may take 1710 as an implicit answer to the (how sure) question in 1711.
(and give (still to be decided) for seeing the problem coming)
Ill think about that as I Drive home
Pretty sure several people want answers to this. So don't read this as specifically at @Garmr its @ReaderOfThePost
At least some people are not going to like it. meh.
I also presume you would like me not to lie to you as I am town and LAL.
If however you(the reader of this post) are the kind that likes lies to children well, you are going to be sad.
Here is the fist part of the read it defines the basis of expected error margins.
Here is a list of players
Spoiler: post 1 list
In post 0, Aegor wrote:1. SlandaarAeronaut
2. AxleGreaserAlina
3. Aneninen
4. Boonskiies
5. WBOCampire1104Cho
6. GrayFoxxxx*Csareo
7. davesaz
8. Egg
9. Garmr
10. goodmorning
11. flubbernuggetGoofyd00d
12. hephaestus**
13. Izariael
14. Muffin
15. Nero Cain
16. PeregrineV
17. Scripten
18. T S O
19. Thor665
20. TierShift**
21. The FonzTobyLoby
Of that list exactly one player is IMO capable of regularly and reliably determining Thors alignment on D1 of a game. (and unfortunately we cant believe him
on that
question as he is Thor himself)
Here is an expert guide to reading Thor
I admit it is a day 2 guide to how to read Thor, but only little extrapolation will indicate how silly a claimed accurate D1 read is.
Risk benefit analysis is fine concept and generalises well to all decision making situations. What is the risk of lynching town Thor? Well you lynched town Thor you idiot.
What's the benefit? Well you lynched scum same as always.
Does that mean I would never lynch Thor D1. No that would be silly and i am pretty sure that Thor, who has the opinion (I believe) that having a policy of never ending D1 early or hammering early D1 is a truely daft plan as it gives scum way too much leeway too look towny by laughing off pressure knowing no one will hammer early on D1. So yeah i am thoroughly prepared to lynch Thor D1, all I need is good reason.
Does Thor look flakey. Can I point finger at something and make up an excuse to lynch him? yeah sure, but I am not scum.
Do I still have several original observations I can contribute to prove I am playing and thinking? Sure. (but my pet one(observation) is lame, but I love it anyway)
Here is one I very very specifically did not put in the thread when I saw it.
Spoiler: Now known to be untrue town compatible reason for Thors MB post.
assumption?
I am pretty sure if I go back and look I can find where i verified that Thor meant statistically likely.
A (possibly) more sophisticated approach to game theory would however consider that depending whether or not changes to a town players strategies are
safe
.
What are the risks of
1 assuming MB and being wrong
2 assuming SB and being wrong
I believe any changes in strategy I make as town in a MB game are not very detrimental at all to a SB game. (or SB/SK)
however there is the potential for assuming SB when its actually MB to be unsafe, in that your decisions are now bad.
I believe Thor is now well committed to the safe means statistically likely interpretation.
Reasons for some of my keeping mum.
I really really don't like explaining my town reads on people who still might be scum, as I do sometimes have towny explanation for their scummy behaviour that they don't seem to think of.
IIRC have an example of PereV adopting something I said as part of his defence. (if hes scum ooops)(but I had reasons for the risk)
Also if the game is MB as opposed to SB, then each scum team doesn't have as one sided information advantage as in standard SB.
They too must search for the anti town faction, at the very least they benefit from knowing which of their scum suspects are unlynchable or hard to lynch, and so they must shoot them.
Although you didn't ask someone else did recently. A similar proposition is true about PereV.
Both players post quite bit, even though they are both good players if they are scum Id really rather lynch a different less interesting scum D1.
If they are town, then us lynching someone scum really ought kill early in the game (unless they have lead and are blue sniping into the muck) is playing against my towny win con, unless i have a really really good read.
How blindly serious am I about that?
Spoiler: hypothetical scenario
Imagine that the following real was real plausible role. Town:(N0 1 shot cop + I day haunt (means i get to post all the next day after dying by any means.))
Imagine I also had a N0 red check on Thor or PereV for that matter.
Will I win more _large_ 21P games if I claim and lynch them D1 or do it D2?
I claim that letting D1 play out as normal, (when they don't know they are dead) letting them post everything they normally do, then lynching them later D2 is a better strategy. As there will be way way more info in the thread.
Not only that playing for two days where the game is an asymmetric info game where I know stuff scum doesn't swings it in my favour.
I'm not completely sure that's right, but it is seriously arguable, given how much their meta compels them to post. and I believe it.
A N0 red check on say TSO, that can seemingly get away with saying (aka some people think that is his town meta)
the only thing I did/felt like doing was mildly ripping the piss out of you.
Is not something I would delay lynching until D2.
So one firm read I have on Thor on this D1 is I don't want to lynch him.
At the end of the day the list of people I wont hammer, if it is hammer or no Lynch is rather small.
Thread: Ah fuck Axle wimped out of taking firm stance again. He is being conciliatory.
Well actually no I think I just tried to explain how to suck eggs (game theory) to large part of the thread. ( I am not expecting an easy time)
The fact that I think you guys voting either (Thor PereV) are all game theoretically nuts, is hardly conciliatory.
Of those voting PereV or Thor, the least nuts is Thor,
If Thor is town, he probably TBMK truthfully believes the risk benefit of him getting scum PereV lynched D1, vs not following his best read is Lynch pereV. He probably believes that in the basis of reasonable evidence.
I however, at this time adhere to what I said in the hypothetical, as I know I am not good enough to get reliable read on either D1. I am also confident the majority of those that claim they are that good are wrong (their D1 lynch good players flipped scum, stats suck).
I don't want to lynch either with the evidence I have seen or found (and not yet mentioned).
I am also against lynching either today, especially seeing as TSO is such a fine and seriously scummy alternative.
In post 675, Aneninen wrote:@Garmmr: I've already checked but apart from the part that "I'm the close 2nd" and the part where I questioned your Boonskiies vote I have found nothing.
Tomorrow I may have more time. I'll check the posts between Thor and PeregrineV again because it's possible that I missed things because of the sheer size and amount of the posts.
@Cho: WTF? Yet another vote with no additional content?
At this point I must tell you the following: If I got lynched Today you all should examine these votes. It's strongly possible that the scums are between these votes because they want to build a counter-wagon quickly.
In other words: compare the PeregrineV wagon and my one. On PeregrineV there were much content written. On me, almost nothing.
In post 533, Garmr wrote: finally I don't like the way Aneninen handled the way I pushed on boonskies by trying to disprove my points yet being unable to, ending up saying I don't agree with you. It just felt like a failed chainsaw attempt for boon.
Basically What I'm saying is you tried to defend against my points with out having a valid counter points in fact you actually strengthened my points in some parts and that comes off as scummy.
can you explain how him strengthening your argument has scum motivation?
In post 675, Aneninen wrote:@Garmmr: I've already checked but apart from the part that "I'm the close 2nd" and the part where I questioned your Boonskiies vote I have found nothing.
Tomorrow I may have more time. I'll check the posts between Thor and PeregrineV again because it's possible that I missed things because of the sheer size and amount of the posts.
@Cho: WTF? Yet another vote with no additional content?
At this point I must tell you the following: If I got lynched Today you all should examine these votes. It's strongly possible that the scums are between these votes because they want to build a counter-wagon quickly.
In other words: compare the PeregrineV wagon and my one. On PeregrineV there were much content written. On me, almost nothing.
In post 533, Garmr wrote: finally I don't like the way Aneninen handled the way I pushed on boonskies by trying to disprove my points yet being unable to, ending up saying I don't agree with you. It just felt like a failed chainsaw attempt for boon.
Basically What I'm saying is you tried to defend against my points with out having a valid counter points in fact you actually strengthened my points in some parts and that comes off as scummy.
can you explain how him strengthening your argument has scum motivation?
Sure if his arguing against my points and someone strengthens my points instead it shows he/she didn't think it through and was saying it on a whim and most likley in this case to try and dismantle the case I made. I would would of been fine if it was legit critismn but none of it was.
In post 675, Aneninen wrote:@Garmmr: I've already checked but apart from the part that "I'm the close 2nd" and the part where I questioned your Boonskiies vote I have found nothing.
Tomorrow I may have more time. I'll check the posts between Thor and PeregrineV again because it's possible that I missed things because of the sheer size and amount of the posts.
@Cho: WTF? Yet another vote with no additional content?
At this point I must tell you the following: If I got lynched Today you all should examine these votes. It's strongly possible that the scums are between these votes because they want to build a counter-wagon quickly.
In other words: compare the PeregrineV wagon and my one. On PeregrineV there were much content written. On me, almost nothing.
In post 533, Garmr wrote: finally I don't like the way Aneninen handled the way I pushed on boonskies by trying to disprove my points yet being unable to, ending up saying I don't agree with you. It just felt like a failed chainsaw attempt for boon.
Basically What I'm saying is you tried to defend against my points with out having a valid counter points in fact you actually strengthened my points in some parts and that comes off as scummy.
can you explain how him strengthening your argument has scum motivation?
Sure if his arguing against my points and someone strengthens my points instead it shows he/she didn't think it through and was saying it on a whim and most likley in this case to try and dismantle the case I made. I would would of been fine if it was legit critismn but none of it was.
So your original post claimed Aneninen chainsawed for Boonskies without really thinking it through on a whim?
In my experience scum don't act on a whim.
I am fairly sure it (I am referring to 420 please check i am talking about the same criticism you are)
was all legit criticism from Aneninens point of view.
Garrmrrmr wrote:Boonskies was the fact he needed to clarify that those were rvs votes.1 No one really asked him for it and it seems odd as town why you feel the need to say hey this is a rvs vote. He really hasn't done anything to strike me as town either.2 Also he dodged the csereo subject and didn't give his thoughts on it which made me feel uncomfortable.3
(1) Boonskiies was just being Boonskiies. I can tell you I've seen that. Even if you haven't come across with him, why is it a scumtell?
(2) So? Hasn't done anything to strike me as town either? This description fits quite a lot of people here.
(3) He has dodged almost every subject so far.
I'm not saying that he's town. He may be scum. But, NOT because of your reasons, Gammrnmhrm.
Point 2
is quite valid criticism. he is no more scummy than anyone else due to that.
Point 1
as i have argued several times you need to judge people against their own meta, capabilities, etc.
The argument Boonskies is boonskies is potentially valid. True you need to counter or question whether or not that is typical of town boonskies, but its not claim you can reject out of hand.
(I have less experience reading games that boonskie played than i think Aneninen has, but as said to reject it you need to show that is scum.Boonskies and that town.Boonskies is not usually that bad.)
Point 3
Same as above. Boonskies indeed plays VI. As I believe Thor (932937) has pointed out (I think implied) that is sufficient reason to lynch him D1, if you have no better options.
In post 1086, AxleGreaser wrote:Later 848 you asserted a number of things about his play, I don't find them convincing.
I feel confident I would find more towny intention in PereV's than in TSO's respective ISOs
I would
love to see this
.
Thor me looking for towny intention in TSO, ISO is hard as i think rather lot he is scum.
@Thor
As you'd
love to see it
, how about you see if you can find TSO doing towny stuff, and I will see if I can find PereV doing towny stuff?
neither of us want to chase/drive a mis-lynch by being tunnelled do we.
To avoid any difficulties TSO has evaluated his own intentions interacting with Csaero as
I'm not responding to you asking for Aneninen's scummy shit because I'd be wasting my time with you
When you're asked for my scummy shit you literally jump right over it and try to change the question
"i have the sickest grossest feeling that even if it's my lynch today, my townflip still won't lead to a tso lynch, and then he'll find some bullshit way to reason either shooting or lynching gm tomorrow because if there's anyone who can strongarm a mislynch despite his reads or cases being proved wrong time and again it's tso"
you're not derptown - I thought you were, but you're not.
"i have the sickest grossest feeling that even if it's my lynch today, my townflip still won't lead to a tso lynch, and then he'll find some bullshit way to reason either shooting or lynching gm tomorrow because if there's anyone who can strongarm a mislynch despite his reads or cases being proved wrong time and again it's tso"
hey remember fe awakening where you were so shit we had to policy vig you as town! lol
hey remember completely ridiculous where you were so shit you got ran up d1? lol
hey remember the majority of your games where you were awful? lol
"i have the sickest grossest feeling that even if it's my lynch today, my townflip still won't lead to a tso lynch, and then he'll find some bullshit way to reason either shooting or lynching gm tomorrow because if there's anyone who can strongarm a mislynch despite his reads or cases being proved wrong time and again it's tso"
it's really funny how you're also trying to call me scum because I'm insulting you - why don't you go ahead and back it up?
"i have the sickest grossest feeling that even if it's my lynch today, my townflip still won't lead to a tso lynch, and then he'll find some bullshit way to reason either shooting or lynching gm tomorrow because if there's anyone who can strongarm a mislynch despite his reads or cases being proved wrong time and again it's tso"
Also, I kinda apologise to everyone for my vitriol but not really - Nero is and always has been a special case.
"i have the sickest grossest feeling that even if it's my lynch today, my townflip still won't lead to a tso lynch, and then he'll find some bullshit way to reason either shooting or lynching gm tomorrow because if there's anyone who can strongarm a mislynch despite his reads or cases being proved wrong time and again it's tso"
I'm not responding to you asking for Aneninen's scummy shit because I'd be wasting my time with you
When you're asked for my scummy shit you literally jump right over it and try to change the question
PKB.
Me asking you for the reasons for your vote, (backed up by where they specifically are in the thread).... is according to you "scummy shit"
is that what you are saying?
@Thread.
Does anyone at all have a reason they are not voting this guy now?
if that's the conclusion - I am voting you for being a rank hypocrite on the most important issue you should have.
You are solely scumreading me for not giving my Aneninen scum-reasons to you.
When you're asked for TSO scum-reasons, you completely dodge around it and try to make Thor analyse me instead.
From your point of view as town, you'd see the disconnect between doing it and calling it scum as well. You didn't.
"i have the sickest grossest feeling that even if it's my lynch today, my townflip still won't lead to a tso lynch, and then he'll find some bullshit way to reason either shooting or lynching gm tomorrow because if there's anyone who can strongarm a mislynch despite his reads or cases being proved wrong time and again it's tso"
In post 1761, AxleGreaser wrote:
To avoid any difficulties TSO has evaluated his own intentions interacting with Csaero as
In post 152, T S O wrote:"A more productive wagon."
There were no productive wagons at the time - the only thing I did/felt like doing was mildly ripping the piss out of you.
pretty sure ripping the piss is not towny, so please don't suggest any of the TSO/Csaero interactions were towny.
I mean this is a gross, horrendous misrep - you've taken my post #152 when Csareo's final posts were far, far beyond that - he'd made
over 25 more posts
before he got replaced.
That's not a mistaken misrep - you would actually have to choose to go to the middle of my ISO, have a look around to see if there were any Csareo interactions after,
then see there were, then post this anyway.
"i have the sickest grossest feeling that even if it's my lynch today, my townflip still won't lead to a tso lynch, and then he'll find some bullshit way to reason either shooting or lynching gm tomorrow because if there's anyone who can strongarm a mislynch despite his reads or cases being proved wrong time and again it's tso"
if that's the conclusion - I am voting you for being a rank hypocrite on the most important issue you should have.
You are solely scumreading me for not giving my Aneninen scum-reasons to you.
When you're asked for TSO scum-reasons, you completely dodge around it and try to make Thor analyse me instead.
From your point of view as town, you'd see the disconnect between doing it and calling it scum as well. You didn't.
No I asked Thor to look for any reason you are town as I frankly cant see any of any significance.
That lack of towny motivated posts, is a reason for scum reading you.
That you point blank refuse to justify the person you are voting and the wagon you are supposedly trying to get lynched, is a really good reason to scum read you.
In post 1769, T S O wrote:That's not a mistaken misrep - you would actually have to choose to go to the middle of my ISO, have a look around to see if there were any Csareo interactions after, then see there were, then post this anyway.
and immediately after that is the exchnage where CSaero got mod killed.
It neither looks towny nor ought in my view be discussed at length.
if you want to dig around in those later interactions with Csaero, and show you doing towny things be my guest.
In post 176, T S O wrote:I somehow end up in a large pissing fest with -someone- in every goddamn Large I participate in d1 and it makes it really fucking unfun.
That is not my intention. I'm trying to be respectful and understanding while asking you questions.
It isn't me who's blowing things out of proportion.
I am curious, on why you think we're in some sort of fight?
This is completely correct. If it happens every game then it is obviously because of
hey remember fe awakening where you were so shit we had to policy vig you as town! lol
hey remember completely ridiculous where you were so shit you got ran up d1? lol
hey remember the majority of your games where you were awful? lol
as he is Thor himself)
