Micro 745: Beyond Death [Endgame]

[CheekyTeeky]

BTD would you be so kind as to link me to your favourite scum game?

Pedit an explanation for what?

[Micc]

the things she pushes you for in post 694.

[CheekyTeeky]

She's not pushing, she's presenting a case, otherwise it would be directed at me instead of to the rest of you. I'm terrible at caring about cases on me, especially when I think they're coming from scum intent...but I will refute it because you asked Micc.

[northsidegal]

I don't know what there is to explain. I quoted a bunch of posts and gave the reasoning behind why I think they point to you being scum with Chip. I've given my burden of proof. Now it's up to you explain why you disagree.

northsidegal, can you respond this please?

i think my point from 647 still stands. i don't think there's really a lot i can say regarding how you read my day one posts, except that you put a lot of grand strategy behind what i do that isn't really there. yeah, i voted chip and then unvoted him. it wasn't me bussing, it was me trying to move out of rvs. yeah, i answered your question to him - it wasn't interference with your push, it was me trying to clarify something that i thought you were misunderstanding. and again, i'm not alright with the reasons you've given as to how my reads weren't backed up by anything. every single one of the posts you quoted that show my reads have multiple posts referenced as support of the point i'm making. your "burden of proof" lacks proof - you didn't make any sort of argument as to how my reads lack evidence, you just stated it.

[northsidegal]

Lol just joking. Seriously wtf people get off Chip. The whole case is bad and I know Cabd better be reaction testing when he helped build the wagon or else he doesn't actually read the thread and needs to be ignored. NSG spotted the gaping logical flaws in Papa's case and she fell into the background.

This is the strongest proof to me so far that she's either town or scum distancing

, but we won't know until Papa flips. For now I'm going to say she's town.

Please can we have some more unvotes. Chip you neglected my slot in your updated reads.

UNVOTE:

There is scum on this wagon, I can smell it.

hey cheeky, comments on this post? i'm not really a fan of the hedge, where you say that my points give you a really strong read but then that read could go in either direction - it doesn't really mean a lot. if you look at this post from the perspective of a scum cheeky, it makes a lot of sense to make - it's pretty much a win/win. try to get the wagon on your partner dissolved, but if that doesn't work out then you've hedged a scumread on the mislynch you've been pushing for a while and nobody notices that you were doing the exact same thing.

[CheekyTeeky]

You know I'm glad I just put myself in isolation with Chip because I can now say that NorthSideGal is scum doubt = zero.

All the points she's pushing as scum on me also apply to her. But the biggest giveaway is when Chip kept saying he would ISO NSG but didn't update his read on her and when I pushed him on it for clarification he didn't respond at all but started discussing other reads. I think NSG is trying pretty hard to divert the wagon away from herself right now. Her timing of the push on me is laughably scum-like. I will be presenting a ddtailed case on her when I get to my laptop.

Pedit if you stop cherry picking my posts NSG you'll see that I can't be scum because of my reaction to Chip's wagon. And you'll see that I do want to townread you but have always thought you were scummy. I'm not one to hedge my bets scum or not. That is town objectivity and paranoia that you're misrepping.

[CheekyTeeky]

Also where is Hopkirk?

[northsidegal]

You know I'm glad I just put myself in isolation with Chip because I can now say that NorthSideGal is scum doubt = zero.

All the points she's pushing as scum on me also apply to her. But the biggest giveaway is when Chip kept saying he would ISO NSG but didn't update his read on her and when I pushed him on it for clarification he didn't respond at all but started discussing other reads. I think NSG is trying pretty hard to divert the wagon away from herself right now. Her timing of the push on me is laughably scum-like. I will be presenting a ddtailed case on her when I get to my laptop.

Pedit if you stop cherry picking my posts NSG you'll see that I can't be scum because of my reaction to Chip's wagon. And you'll see that I do want to townread you but have always thought you were scummy. I'm not one to hedge my bets scum or not. That is town objectivity and paranoia that you're misrepping.

interested to hear your response, also interested in the rationale as to how you can't be scum just because of your reaction. i'll concede that it's possible i'm misreading your 597, but why say i'm misrepping it? is there some specific reason or are you just saying that in the larger context of your argument that i'm scum?

[northsidegal]

anyways, i'm not interested in tunneling or turning this day into a de facto gladiate. btd6, you need to say more. 672 is pretty much entirely talking about yesterday's lynch and a bit of general meta about bad town. any thoughts at all on

today's

content? now that chip has flipped scum, what are your reads as to who could be his partner?

[Micc]

She's not pushing, she's presenting a case, otherwise it would be directed at me instead of to the rest of you. I'm terrible at caring about cases on me, especially when I think they're coming from scum intent...but I will refute it because you asked Micc.

Well, was more talking about your posts 682 and 688 that she picked out as they relate to your playstyle that she doesn't "get". If you want to refute the case in 693 ill read it but I wasn't asking you to do that.

northsidegal, can you respond this please?

i think my point from 647 still stands. i don't think there's really a lot i can say regarding how you read my day one posts, except that you put a lot of grand strategy behind what i do that isn't really there. yeah, i voted chip and then unvoted him. it wasn't me bussing, it was me trying to move out of rvs. yeah, i answered your question to him - it wasn't interference with your push, it was me trying to clarify something that i thought you were misunderstanding. and again, i'm not alright with the reasons you've given as to how my reads weren't backed up by anything. every single one of the posts you quoted that show my reads have multiple posts referenced as support of the point i'm making. your "burden of proof" lacks proof - you didn't make any sort of argument as to how my reads lack evidence, you just stated it.

Yeah. I don't know where I thought this line of questioning was gunna go but I can see now that it's not going to be productive.

[Cabd]

^ i don't get it

http://www.sirlin.net/ptw-book/7-spies-of-the-mind

[Micc]

Ahh. Every time I find myself reading about gaming theory I find it fascinating but never actually get around to reading more about it.

Are you ready to talk about this wagon or are you waiting a bit yet?

[Hopkirk]

That really would have looked scummy coming from anyone, but CheekyTeeky! In fact. It honestly makes me town read her!

Based on your reads today it sounds like you still agree with this. Could you explain why, especially in light of the lynch/flip?

Micc was more likely than Zito to be bussing imo. But his posts this day phase look obv. town.

I disagree with this. I don't think either was bussing, but Micc's long interactions with Chip looks like TvS. What do you think of the interactions?

a lot of your reasoning on how my posts make me chip's partner come off as if you already started with the perspective of me being chip's partner and then used that to explain how my posts made sense in that context, rather than starting from a neutral context.

This isn't true in the least.

If you want to live past today I'd suggest you start actually doing some work instead of trying to pick fights with Extremely Likely Townies.

Thirding this. I don't like it when people handwave away valid points.

l-1! please dont hammer. i mean. this goes with out saying, but it is always good to Say it when you put some one at l-1

This sounds overly concerned. If you were concerned why didn't you unvote? Especially since you unvote North a bit after, saying you misread something. It sounds like you were putting him on (what you thought was at least L1?) without actually rereading anything.

I will look at his case and see if there is anything other than the fact he didn't vote chip that would point him to being scum!

This sounds like a good way to get confirmation bias.

@UC: 673 In regard to the fourth point, what do you mean neither of them had a good mislynch? North had 2 votes and BTD had 3 at that point, there’s a clear counterwagon there that neither of them were on. This strikes me as town points for BTD, not scum points.

@BTD: I still want you to answer the questions I asked you/responses from earlier. This is the third time you haven't responded.

[Hopkirk]

Papa Zito made a lot of good points. I think he had a solid case.

Can you please quote his case and break down how it made sense to you?

The stuff PZ pointed out is a large part of why Chip moved to the top of my scumpile. It was strong.

Saying words and criticising is not equal to a case. If you had actually paid attention to the interaction you'd know that all of zito's points weren't true. Chip was actually doing the things Zito said he should be doing as town.

You not seeing the hypocrisy makes me feel like you're not reading the game properly because you know people's alignments. Also you attacking BTD feels like a cheap push. Your hesitation to vote NSG makes me believe she could be town. One of you two are scum and it could very well be you.

VOTE: UCV

My cheap push? Did you read what I said. Did you even look at the chip defending BTD6, BTD6 defending chip? They seemed to support each other a lot. Didn't ever question each Other.
If I were scum, my best move would to support the NSG case. It is a way easier wagon than BTD6!

I never like hearing 'If I were scum I would x'.

Currently my thoughts (most likely scum) are BTD>UC>Cheeky, but I haven't looked at interactions yet. Also just realized I could have done these over the night in this setup.

VOTE: BTD for now

[Micc]

UNVOTE:
For now. I haven't hit the aha moment that makes me think this is right yet and I'm getting cold feet. I don't want to do anything without talking it through with cabd/Zito/Hopkirk but it's not going to happen today because I'm kinda busy.

[BTD6_maker]

Not much point leaving my vote where it is when it’s waiting for a replacement.
VOTE: BTD6

383 – Gives light scumread on Cheeky, doesn’t follow it with a vote, and promises more content later.
421 - Two days later. No further catch up. Follows up slightly on Cheeky but no vote. Complains about activity (kind of ironically).

Don’t really like the entrance. Both those posts look longish, but have no significant content in them. I could very easily see the Cheeky vote as a bus.

Why do you think my entrance is more likely to come from scum than Town?

Also, what makes my scumread on Cheeky more likely to be a bus than any other scumread?

Because scum benefits more from a no lynch/low activity. Also because hedging is opportunistic, but that's been covered.

The low activity was due to V/LA and is therefore completely null. I have already explained why what you call "hedging" was the Townish thing to do.

I don't understand your second question. I scumread Cheeky (at this point, haven't caught up with their posts since they decided not to sub out), so that would make it a bus if you're scum. It looks like a bus because it's hedging significantly.

There are two parts to this. Firstly, what would make it more likely to be a bus than someone else scumreading Cheeky? What about you yourself scumreading Cheeky? Of course, you know you are Town, but others don't. Secondly, the point about hedging has again been answered by me. You need to either rebut my reasoning or find some other reason.

Of course, this point is now moot because I cannot possibly be scum with CheekyTeeky any more.

Not much point leaving my vote where it is when it’s waiting for a replacement.
VOTE: BTD6

383 – Gives light scumread on Cheeky, doesn’t follow it with a vote, and promises more content later.
421 - Two days later. No further catch up. Follows up slightly on Cheeky but no vote. Complains about activity (kind of ironically).

Don’t really like the entrance. Both those posts look longish, but have no significant content in them. I could very easily see the Cheeky vote as a bus.

I would say that this is slightly scummy. It looks a bit like contradiction hunting, which I mentioned before. If someone's case has contradictions, it is more likely that they are simply confused than actively deceiving, but if scum can expose contradictions their case may look solid, as if they have discovered something that reveals the holes in a player's case. Of course, this is very weak. Town can easily do this as well and genuinely think that they have exposed scum. Hopkirk probably isn't intending on actual contradiction hunting. It's a possibility, though, and if Hopkirk is scum they can do this to try to "expose" me.

Like I said, I do not know if this is actually the case. It's just a possibility. This makes Hopkirk slightly more likely to be scum, but not much, which is why I would say that I have a very weak scumread on Hopkirk.

I am analysing these posts (that are voting me) a lot because I find it easier to read people from their interactions and reads on me, and in particular their reasons.

1.) I don't see how I'm contradiction hunting there. The way you describe it sounds like it's an unnecessary focus on trivial things. My comments are based on parts of your play that don't make sense (implicitly inviting an explination of them), or that seem scum motivated. The main difference is a focus on words vs a focus on motivation, and the fact that I'm not looking at any contradictions in words.

I can get your point. I read it at first as contradiction hunting, though. Also, I have explained why the points you made don't add up.

2.) If you think i'm 'contradiction hunting' in the way you described then it makes more sense for you to try and clarify what my thought processes are first, to try and work out if it's scum going hard on nothing, or town who've gotten fixated on something minor. I don't see why you'd attack it for being contradiction hunting before actually trying to question the intent, unless you're usually 'contradiction hunting' as an attack/defence/discredit instead of trying to make a better read.

Fair point. I had indeed explained why I view contradiction hunting in general as slightly scummy. Of course, I had also stated why it could come from Town, hence why I read it as being very weakly scum. I did think that warning people about contradiction hunting would reduce it in Town. Of course, from what you said you were not intending to contradiction hunt in that post at all so this point is moot.

3.) Given my points were in response to an entrance post, you seem to have read them as though I'm laying out a significantly strongest scumread on you than I am. Especially since I implied Cheeky was still a bigger scumread, and I'm still suspicious of North. It seems odd you'd go with the response you did, rather than explaining your thoughts (as your first reaction).

I read it as such because you voted me in that post. You did imply that Cheeky is a bigger scumread, which would mean that you were not voting your strongest scumread, which makes your point about me not voting my scumread seem hollow.

I moved my vote because your wagon is the biggest wagon of players who I have in my lynch pool and this game desperately needs a meaningful wagon.

Can you explain how Hopkirk's post is contradiction hunting? He didn't use the word contradiction or even compare anything as far as I can tell.

There were two main things I saw as possibly being contradiction hunting. (Of course, the word "contradiction" does not need to be used). Both were very weak, as is normally the nature with this.

The first was essentially that Hopkirk made the point that I expressed a scumread for CheekyTeeky but did not vote. It's not inherently a contradiction (I would rather wait until I had more solid reads before voting) but it did seem as though Hopkirk is trying to make it look like one. Of course, this is weak.

The other was that Hopkirk made the point that I was complaining about inactivity. My post did complain about the inactivity in Open 642, but with regard to this game it was more about the number of replacements.

These are only possibilities, and rather unlikely ones at that. That is why I regard them as being so weak.

@Micc: Do you have any opinion on 424 then? I was wondering whether that contributed to your scumread.

1.) I agree it's pretty weak, but it seemed pretty odd. Generally, I'd expect someone with a scumread to vote that person (unless there were lots of votes on them already, which doesn't apply here).

That certainly does not mean that everyone does indeed vote someone they have a weak scumread on, nor that not voting a weak scumread is scummy. If you want to show that, you need data showing that people who hold off on voting are indeed more likely to be scum. I highly doubt this is the case.

2.) The point about you complaining about inactivity wasn't an attack, it was something that made me laugh when I read it since it was ironic/funny. The points made after the numbers were a summary of your posts content- not specifically just the bad things.

You're acting far too much like my suspicion was major, as opposed to a lean based on an off opening- which i find more suspicious than the opening itself since that's an odd/self-focused reaction.

I have explained that it seemed a lot more major because you voted me above a clear scumread of yours, while also implying that everyone should vote their strongest scumread, which naturally led me to think that I was your stongest scumread worth voting at that point.

[northsidegal]

btd6 why are you still responding to yesterday's back and forths instead of talking about things going on today? unless you're trying to make some case on hopkirk with those posts as evidence, the game state has changed and your posts should too. i can understand if you feel like something critical had gone unsaid but i don't get that feeling from your posts.

[Papa Zito]

also of note is how both chip and cheeky had eachother solidly in the highest tier of both of their readslists, just below the conftown for chip. i honestly believe people are giving cheeky far too little scrutiny today, especially her reaction to the chip wagon as compared to mine.

Yep, cheeky is a distant 2nd in the 2017 Most Likely Scumpartner Pageant.

That said, I still think they are bad Town.

If I'm bad town what are you, Captain Not-On-The-Scum-Lynch?

Also I'm not a they.

For now. I haven't hit the aha moment that makes me think this is right yet and I'm getting cold feet. I don't want to do anything without talking it through with cabd/Zito/Hopkirk but it's not going to happen today because I'm kinda busy.

What do you wanna talk over?

[UC Voyager]

That said, I still think they are bad Town.

If I'm bad town what are you, Captain Not-On-The-Scum-Lynch?

Also I'm not a they.

They is a gender-universal term. It can be used to refer to a guy or girl.....or group of people....

[Cabd]

Yomi level -1

[BTD6_maker]

@BTD: I still want you to answer the questions I asked you/responses from earlier. This is the third time you haven't responded.

btd6 why are you still responding to yesterday's back and forths instead of talking about things going on today? unless you're trying to make some case on hopkirk with those posts as evidence, the game state has changed and your posts should too. i can understand if you feel like something critical had gone unsaid but i don't get that feeling from your posts.

This is why I responded. I am assuming Hopkirk referred to that post as "responses from earlier".

That said, I still think they are bad Town.

If I'm bad town what are you, Captain Not-On-The-Scum-Lynch?

Also I'm not a they.

Whether you are on a lynch that flips scum is at least to some extent a matter of luck. Town does not know who scum are. However, I can evaluate their reasoning to see whether it holds up. If you are bad Town in your reasoning, you can still get lucky. If you are not bad Town, that does not mean you have to be a perfect scumhunting god.

My point about bad Town was that they are much more confident in their reads than the actual probability. For example, I think it's likely that if you take every time a Townie claims to be 80% certain of a read, a lot less than 80% of those reads will be on actual scum.

Unless I am certain of a preferred pronoun, I tend to just use the singular they.

[Micc]

What do you wanna talk over?

I want to all be in agreement here, not just me pushing a lynch and everybody following which is kinda what it felt like. You seem to agree about northsidegal, Hopkirk didn't even seem to have her in his bottom 3 and Cabd is understandably keeping his cards close to his chest. The combination of UC's post on BTD and this northsidegal wagon not feeling right make want to slow down and reconsider. I just don't have time to read back until late tonight.

[CheekyTeeky]

Hey guys I'm sorry but I'm replacing out of all my games. GL hopefully the replacements are more useful. xx

@Mod please replace me.

[Hopkirk]

Might not be able to do a solid read through for a few days. Might be able to do it today.

BTD’s stuff makes more sense given the context that he missed Cheeky’s initial replace out/replace back in (in regard to me voting him over Cheeky).

North feels like new town (which I too frequently misread as scum) who’s actually trying.

UNVOTE: BTD
VOTE: UC

btd6 why are you still responding to yesterday's back and forths instead of talking about things going on today? unless you're trying to make some case on hopkirk with those posts as evidence, the game state has changed and your posts should too. i can understand if you feel like something critical had gone unsaid but i don't get that feeling from your posts.

Did you miss me asking (as BTD has quoted), or did you have another reason for asking this?

[UC Voyager]

cum) w

this is naked as hell