Micro 745: Beyond Death [Endgame]

Micro Games (9 players or fewer). Archived during the 2023 queue overhaul.
Locked
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #6 (isolation #0) » Sun Oct 08, 2017 3:18 pm

Post by northsidegal »

second!

VOTE: cheeky for playing in so games even though you joined after me!
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #7 (isolation #1) » Sun Oct 08, 2017 3:19 pm

Post by northsidegal »

so many games, i mean.
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #30 (isolation #2) » Mon Oct 09, 2017 2:19 am

Post by northsidegal »

In post 29, Micc wrote:I'm trying to discourage votes that don't help us get out of RSV. RVS voting an empty slot is explicitly not helping the game leave RVS and I'd like to wagon you for doing it.
if you're saying that rvs voting an empty slot doesn't help leave rvs because it doesn't draw reactions the same way that rvsing a player who's in the game does, shouldn't your own reaction to that prove that wrong?
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #31 (isolation #3) » Mon Oct 09, 2017 2:21 am

Post by northsidegal »

i think if you want to get out of rvs so bad, this is the way to do it!

UNVOTE:
VOTE: chip l-2
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #32 (isolation #4) » Mon Oct 09, 2017 2:26 am

Post by northsidegal »

In post 24, Micc wrote:Its purpose is to end as quickly as possible. Building cases seems like a much better way to find scum than cracking witty jokes.
its purpose is to end as quickly as possible but for it to end people have to have something to go off of! if someone voting an empty slot is enough for you to go off of to make the first serious vote then that's fine, but for most people i'd imagine they're still waiting for everyone's entrance. jumping straight out of rvs isn't always valuable - scum sometimes find it hard to naturally insert themselves into the thread, whereas if we get out of rvs too soon they can just lurk a bit before sheeping someone or going straight to reads.
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #44 (isolation #5) » Mon Oct 09, 2017 6:11 am

Post by northsidegal »

hi cabd!

people always say that during rvs scum will either sheep someone else's vote to try to blend in or will not put a vote at all to avoid drawing attention to themselves, but i don't think that's the case here with cabd. not reading the whole game as an excuse is a bit weird when it's only two pages but i still wouldn't say that not voting is suspicious.

by the way, i haven't played or read a game with this setup yet. anything important i should know beyond the basics of what the roles do?
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #48 (isolation #6) » Mon Oct 09, 2017 6:15 am

Post by northsidegal »

are you concerned about the amount of votes on you?
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #53 (isolation #7) » Mon Oct 09, 2017 6:24 am

Post by northsidegal »

Hopkirk wrote:
In post 23, Chip Butty wrote:micc, why do you feel the need to jump out of RVS before half the players have even checked in? And what's your take on the purpose of RVS?
What gave you the impression she was 'jumping out' of RVS? It's a weak reason, so I'd classify that as RVS. Your comment feels overly strong given that.
i think micc made it pretty clear that he wants to get out of rvs as soon as possible.
In post 50, Cabd wrote:The setup isn't anything too complex, I will note we will NOT get flips night one; and no-lynching in this setup is almost always the wrong move.


The two "self-docs" here should be treated somewhat like you would bulletproofs in the matrix 6 setup, with the note that them claiming early like the matrix 6 BP strat is a bad idea.
isn't there only one doctor / firefighter?
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #57 (isolation #8) » Mon Oct 09, 2017 6:44 am

Post by northsidegal »

for what it's worth i don't care about the rc thing, i was just looking for some kind of reaction. i didn't really get a lot out of it but i suspect scum would probably care more about being near-lynch in the first 3 pages, so i guess that's some credit towards you.
UNVOTE:
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #78 (isolation #9) » Mon Oct 09, 2017 1:47 pm

Post by northsidegal »

In post 65, Micc wrote:So who of Cheekyteeky, Micc, and nothsidegal is most likely to be scum on your wagon?
although that's a valid question on its own i think he was talking more generally about the idea that he'd be lynched just for the placement of his rvs vote and how scum would have to be on that wagon if it went trhough. i don't think specifically he was calling any of those three scum.
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #80 (isolation #10) » Mon Oct 09, 2017 1:57 pm

Post by northsidegal »

In post 58, BTD6_maker wrote: Cabd raises some interesting points. It is certainly true that scum generally want to look useful but stay under the radar. This could indeed be accomplished by sheeping, or by posting without votes (as Northsidegal mentioned). However, one thing that is not conducive to that is to make a point about not voting, which draws attention to it.
but it wasn't really that cabd made a specific point of not voting, it was only after being questioned by ss that he specifically mentioned not wanting to vote. i think at that point it would've been more suspicious to place an rvs vote than to double down on not voting. i guess my whole point here is that it's nai. for what it's worth i think most of the pressure against cabd feels artificial, like people are trying to find reasons to pressure or vote him.
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #83 (isolation #11) » Mon Oct 09, 2017 2:16 pm

Post by northsidegal »

so this is what i mean when i say that pressure on cabd feels artificial. i feel like i have a good enough idea of scumhunting (in general, if not for cheeky's playstyle in particular) to say that the reasoning here feels forced. i'm not sure why a scum cheeky would specifically want a cabd wagon so i don't know if this is necessarily indicitive of scum but i feel like it's still strange enough to warrant pointing out.

whole post for reference:
Spoiler:
In post 59, CheekyTeeky wrote:Cool, everyone has checked in. I disagree with BTD6 (did you really make that game?), I think Cabd not voting is NAI, based on one game I've played with him. In the game he was town, but we see he is aware that he's played with me from his newbie comment earlier ITT. Cabd, being a meta genius, probably knows to not RVS vote again to have me assume a town read on him. So, the potential self-awareness of his opening move nullifies me reading him as a town lean, based on that one point alone. I feel there are other points that raise my suspicion on Cabd. First off he enters without providing any indication of early reads, when there's only one page to go off, so it wouldn't be hard to skim and then enter announcing any thoughts to help progress the game. Second, his "loaded gun" response to being questionned about not RVS voting, feels dramatic and out of place, like the emphasis is on being reasonable about voting, but we're not out of the RVS woods yet. Third, he comments on his own replacement slot by saying that rc doesn't like town, thats probably why he replaced, but that the point is also null. I'm not sure what the point of this comment is, if not to subtly put in our minds that his slot is town.

Overall I'd say I have an early scum lean on Cabd.
VOTE: Cabd
I think Cabd not voting is NAI, based on one game I've played with him. In the game he was town, but we see he is aware that he's played with me from his newbie comment earlier ITT. Cabd, being a meta genius, probably knows to not RVS vote again to have me assume a town read on him. So, the potential self-awareness of his opening move nullifies me reading him as a town lean, based on that one point alone.
i only know cabd as a mod but it doesn't seem realistic that he specifically thought of his rvs behavior in his last game with cheeky and made the conscious decision to do the same thing to attempt to bait cheeky. maybe cabd really is a meta genius and thought through this all but it just doesn't make sense to me. i know cheeky's conclusion here was that it's null, but why even mention all this? this is what i mean when i say artificial.
First off he enters without providing any indication of early reads, when there's only one page to go off, so it wouldn't be hard to skim and then enter announcing any thoughts to help progress the game. Second, his "loaded gun" response to being questionned about not RVS voting, feels dramatic and out of place, like the emphasis is on being reasonable about voting, but we're not out of the RVS woods yet.
this is kind of a reasonable point but it still seems odd to be specifically directed towards cabd. there are other people at this point who have contributed less. as for the second point i'd repeat what a lot of people have already said that being more careful with your vote isn't necessarily scummy.
Third, he comments on his own replacement slot by saying that rc doesn't like town, thats probably why he replaced, but that the point is also null. I'm not sure what the point of this comment is, if not to subtly put in our minds that his slot is town.
you misread what he was saying. he didn't say that rc probably replaced because he doesn't like town, he said that in normal circumstances it would indicate that the slot is scum but due to rc leaving all of the games ( :( ) it doesn't mean anything.

also i guess you could say that what ss was saying about the pressure disappearing quickly is artificial, but i'm not really making that point and i'm not really sure about it.
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #84 (isolation #12) » Mon Oct 09, 2017 2:18 pm

Post by northsidegal »

In post 82, Micc wrote:
In post 76, Cabd wrote:Oh are we done. Okay. Let's talk about how micc just skipped over my entrence entirely?
You haven't really done anything interesting at this point so that's where I'm at.
In post 78, northsidegal wrote:
In post 65, Micc wrote:So who of Cheekyteeky, Micc, and nothsidegal is most likely to be scum on your wagon?
although that's a valid question on its own i think he was talking more generally about the idea that he'd be lynched just for the placement of his rvs vote and how scum would have to be on that wagon if it went trhough. i don't think specifically he was calling any of those three scum.
I guess we will just have to wait and see what Chip says Chip meant instead of what northsidegal thinks Chip meant.
rude!! we're still sort of in rvs so i don't feel bad about this!
VOTE: micc
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #88 (isolation #13) » Mon Oct 09, 2017 2:41 pm

Post by northsidegal »

In post 86, CheekyTeeky wrote:
In post 83, northsidegal wrote:i know cheeky's conclusion here was that it's null, but why even mention all this? this is what i mean when i say artificial.
I started off with the premise that Cabd not RVSing is NAI futher to BTD's town read of this point, that's why I felt the need to elaborate on a null point. I prefaced the whole post with "I disagree with BTD blah blah blah" and outlined my points on cabd in contrast to BTD. I think you're fishing for something that isn't there with my push on Cabd and that you're intentionally ignoring my strat spec post, where I indirectly point out why my first push is Cabd.

What is it that you think you know about my town playstyle in RVS, that you're not seeing here? I'd also like to make the point that I don't have enough meta for there to be consistency in my play yet, but that's my subjective opinion. I don't like that you've spent the time to make me your biggest announced scum lean, yet you don't vote me. Instead you place another RVS vote on someone...why?
which one is your strat spec post?

on the second point, two things. first, it was just that everything about the post i was quoting felt forced. it didn't feel like natural reasoning, it felt like you were inventing reasons to suspect cabd. next, you're not my biggest announced scum lean. like i said, i don't see any sort of anti-town motivation for what you did, it's just that the reasoning seems off. one could make the argument that scum would want to manufacture a wagon on someone they know to be town, but i think standard practice there would just be to further someone else's wagon with the knowledge that that person is town, so that point doesn't hold up.
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #90 (isolation #14) » Mon Oct 09, 2017 2:48 pm

Post by northsidegal »

In post 89, Cabd wrote:@NSG; you may find this relevant: viewtopic.php?f=11&t=73237
believe it or not i've already been in the process of reading that game and i've gotten a bit through day one, i just haven't had the time to read through it all. i guess i should prioritize it more, it'd be useful for this game.
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #95 (isolation #15) » Mon Oct 09, 2017 3:20 pm

Post by northsidegal »

In post 93, CheekyTeeky wrote:
In post 63, CheekyTeeky wrote:It might be a good strat to sort experienced/high contributing players first, and if there is enough consensus that the player is likely scum, they would be an ideal first lynch.
Here NSG.

Ok so it feels forced, but breaking out of RVS requires discussion (not just complaining about it eh Micc), I bring up thoughts and opinions to stimulate such and make reads based on the points. Sometimes the points are useless or feel forced because I have almost nothing to work wot to try and make something. I don't believe my itention looked like a way to create a Cabd wagon, particularly when I announced the intention to move my vote after some back and forth. And also after the discussion with sobo where I said I use my vote to get info rather than as an accusation at this stage... so I don't know why everyone is getting so precious about Cabd?
okay, that's reasonable on both the explanation and the plan (although i suspect we might be biased being newbies). sorry about missing the strategy post. also, i hope it doesn't come off like i'm hard defending cabd, it's just to me a lot of the pressure on cabd doesn't make sense, so i feel like it's useful to point that out.
In post 92, Cabd wrote:Also, re "meta master" my title is a thing because at one point i kept a literal binder full of meta tells for every user, and read every single game that took place in a two year period to tally it.

I'm married and have a job now, so lolnope.jpg anymore.
hmm, sounds like a good idea. maybe i should take some notes whenever i'm reading through a game.
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #100 (isolation #16) » Mon Oct 09, 2017 5:45 pm

Post by northsidegal »

pagetop!

micc, it was a mostly random vote but now it's a serious one. what do you think about that?
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #103 (isolation #17) » Mon Oct 09, 2017 6:32 pm

Post by northsidegal »

In post 102, Micc wrote:I think if youre serious about your vote you should be stating a case to convince the other players in the game to join you in forming a wagon.
i think you feel mechanical in your responses when you say something like this and i think you reacted poorly to my vote. i took a really quick look through your posts in another game where you were town and it seemed like you were talking a lot more naturally. i mean, your only response to me saying my vote on you is serious is gameplay advice? nothing questioning why it's serious now, nothing pressing me for making a strangely timed rvs vote? even if you believed i was reaction testing you i think this is still a strange response.

my random vote on you was actually random. when i said it was serious it was just a reaction test, but now it's seriously serious (seriously!).

do you have a scum game of yours that you'd like to point me towards?
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #113 (isolation #18) » Tue Oct 10, 2017 7:09 am

Post by northsidegal »

In post 111, Hopkirk wrote:This is an overly strong defense of Cabd given the lack of real pressure that I can see.
like i said in some other post, it wasn't really meant to be a defense of cabd so much as pointing out strange behavior. i don't know if it's just me, but it seems like people are acting very odd this game and i'm having a hard time interpreting it.
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #114 (isolation #19) » Tue Oct 10, 2017 7:12 am

Post by northsidegal »

In post 108, CheekyTeeky wrote:
In post 107, Kawso wrote:UNVOTE: Hopkirk

VOTE: north

I'm afraid the random vote - reaction test - serious vote just seems scrambling almost
I think you may have unvoted scum, to vote scum.
what about me this game seems to you to show an anti-town motivation or a playstyle difference that would indicate i'm scum?
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #116 (isolation #20) » Tue Oct 10, 2017 7:25 am

Post by northsidegal »

In post 115, Hopkirk wrote:
In post 113, northsidegal wrote:
In post 111, Hopkirk wrote:This is an overly strong defense of Cabd given the lack of real pressure that I can see.
like i said in some other post, it wasn't really meant to be a defense of cabd so much as pointing out strange behavior. i don't know if it's just me, but it seems like people are acting very odd this game and i'm having a hard time interpreting it.
It doesn't read like that since you don't really mention who you're talking about, so it's going to get lost rather than developed if bringing them to light is your intent.
Also people don't seem 'very odd' moreso than usual at this stage to me.
i tried to make it clear that the whole post was in response to cheeky's one post. that's why i put the "whole post for reference" in a spoiler. if other people don't see it (the strange behavior) then it's possible it's just me.
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #123 (isolation #21) » Tue Oct 10, 2017 8:10 am

Post by northsidegal »

In post 117, Sobolev Space wrote:
In post 83, northsidegal wrote:so this is what i mean when i say that pressure on cabd feels artificial. i feel like i have a good enough idea of scumhunting (in general, if not for cheeky's playstyle in particular) to say that the reasoning here feels forced. i'm not sure why a scum cheeky would specifically want a cabd wagon so i don't know if this is necessarily indicitive of scum but i feel like it's still strange enough to warrant pointing out.
why do you think scum!cheeky would drum up this big phony post about how cabd could be scum only to backtrack on it 4 posts later? it didn't seem to me like cheeky's intent there was to start a wagon
that's exactly what i was saying there - i don't see the scum purpose in forcing suspicion onto cabd so i wasn't saying it was scummy, but it just seemed strange enough that i felt i should point it out.
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #126 (isolation #22) » Tue Oct 10, 2017 8:22 am

Post by northsidegal »

In post 124, Sobolev Space wrote:what do you think about the pressure on you from kawso + hopkirk + cheeky, north?
i'm interested in cheeky's reasoning, kawso's vote seemed questionable and that slot hasn't contributed much and hopkirk might have misunderstood my point but still might be voting me anyways. i'll admit that it was poor play to vote micc like i did but i'm not sure the other reactions are warranted. of course, that could just be my failure to see things from other people's point of view.
In post 125, Cabd wrote:I will say that given the setup; claims don't mean almost anything, in that the "doctor" role should probably be rolling a dice between their townreads including themselves to protect; if outed.


Everyone except the doc will claim VT regardless. If scum trades one for one it becomes a bit harder but it's still not a high-EV play imo.
is this responding to a speficic post?
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #131 (isolation #23) » Tue Oct 10, 2017 8:47 am

Post by northsidegal »

In post 129, Sobolev Space wrote:so setup wise one of the things that i noticed is that even if the firefighter stops a priming it'll be impossible for them to know who they stopped unless scum ignites on n2. with this in mind do you think it would even be advisable for the firefighter to claim who they protected if a kill is blocked or no?
even if scum ignites night two, the firefighter would still have no idea if they saved someone or not, because the night action would still be "nobody died" whether they primed or ignited night two, right?
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #132 (isolation #24) » Tue Oct 10, 2017 8:50 am

Post by northsidegal »

i mean the night "flip" or information reveal when i say night action.
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #143 (isolation #25) » Tue Oct 10, 2017 10:27 am

Post by northsidegal »

In post 136, Micc wrote:
In post 128, Cabd wrote:I realize the creator of this setup is here, but my itch to try and break setups will never truly go away.
sup. For what its worth I wrote the set up with no self protect, but according to the role pm's it is allowed in this game. That might affect possible breaking strategies. I'll have to think on it as well. I remember being pretty confident there were none in the original setup but I don't have or remember any of that analysis.

VOTE: northsidegal
you don't get to admit that you made a bad vote and then still leave it on all while ignoring the posts I made that showed how bad of a vote it was. Also, where's that meta analysis?
l-2
sorry, i wasn't clear again. me voting you initially wasn't entirely serious. my vote as it stands now is where i want it to be. let's look at the sum total of your contributions this game: you threw a little fit over someone's rvs vote and then you threw a little fit again over my vote on you. i hope i'm not making the mistake of letting how much i dislike you cloud my judgment, but i don't think i am.

as for the meta analysis, it's hard to display in quotes how natural you sound in one game as opposed to the other, but here's some awkward confrontations from your scum games:

(post 14 of the thread)
Micc wrote:Why are you apologizing for being a bad player and being inherently scummy at this point? Are you scum trying to coast through the game by underscoring your skill so that less is expected of you?
Spoiler:
TierShift wrote:You strangely enough don't seem to group yourself with the town here.
Micc wrote:How is it strange that I don't group myself with the town when you set up a hypothetical situation where is was scum with BM? Like really? Dont make me break out the all caps
TierShift wrote:Your language assumes a distance from town. That's what I'm saying. It has nothing to do with you being scum together with BM or not.
Micc wrote:IT HAS EVERYTHING TO DO WITH ME BEING SCUM WITH BM. YOU SET UP THAT HYPOTHETICAL SITUATION AND I RESPONDED TO IT!

I'm closing mafia scum for the night. hopefully when I get back we will have a replacement or a mod or both. I see that you and Yiley made more posts. Im not reading them. Ill see you all tomorrow.
TierShift wrote:Eh micc I see it now nvm, I read wrongly.

You sound like scum caught for the wrong reasons <3
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #144 (isolation #26) » Tue Oct 10, 2017 10:35 am

Post by northsidegal »

In post 140, CheekyTeeky wrote:You were very awkward breaking out of RVS. Your RVS vote on micc was straight up bad, don't care if it was a reaction test. You presented a scum interpretation of my Cabd push, but denied you thought I was scummy. Being pro-town != not scum. You seem to be playing it safe, you tried to stick your neck out with me but quickly withdrew when you saw your points were defeated by logic. I'd have to assume that you hadn't read the entire thread before your push on me, for the illogical arguments to make sense. I don't believe that to be true as I've assumed an attentive, thoughtul player image of you.

I do want to vote you but I don't like how quickly your wagon is building up so I'll reassess shortly.
i think i need to change my playstyle because something similar to this happened in my first game. again, i didn't present a scum interpretation of your cabd push. i thought i had made it clear that it doesn't make sense for scum to do what you did but it was strange nonetheless, which is why i pointed it out. in the future i don't think i'll bother making posts like that, it's obviously not productive. second, were my arguments really "defeated by logic"? you fully admitted yourself that i was right!
In post 93, CheekyTeeky wrote:
Ok so it feels forced
, but breaking out of RVS requires discussion (not just complaining about it eh Micc), I bring up thoughts and opinions to stimulate such and make reads based on the points.
Sometimes the points are useless or feel forced
because I have almost nothing to work wot to try and make something. I don't believe my itention looked like a way to create a Cabd wagon, particularly when I announced the intention to move my vote after some back and forth. And also after the discussion with sobo where I said I use my vote to get info rather than as an accusation at this stage... so I don't know why everyone is getting so precious about Cabd?
you admitted that i was right about your points being forced! i "withdrew" because there was really nothing left to press you on further, you had admitted that i was right!
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #226 (isolation #27) » Wed Oct 11, 2017 6:01 pm

Post by northsidegal »

i've been a little but busy but i've also been thinking a lot about this game. the more thought i give to the issue the more i think it's possible i'm reading through the thread with the goal of trying to make you scum in my mind to fit some narrative rather than objectively looking at things. for the sake of both the town and myself i think it's counterproductive for me to keep going with it, so for now i think what i'm going to do is just try to focus on other people.

as for what's happened with cheeky and cabd's claim, it's the same adjective i seem to be saying a lot this game - strange. i really couldn't understand what the slip was meant to be and when cheeky revealed it i didn't think it meant anything. i mean, i knew that arsonists couldn't prime and ignite on the same night before i signed up, so for someone of cabd's experience i would figure he'd have to know. with that in mind i find it really weird how cabd claimed. it didn't seem like anyone except cheeky was really pressuring him so i didn't think it was necessary, and if it was supposed to be obvious by that point then i didn't pick up on it. as with every time i make a post calling something strange, i have to explicitly say that i'm not trying to build a scum case here - obviously if nobody counterclaims then we should believe cabd. at this point i'd say i'm waiting to see where cheeky goes from here.
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #262 (isolation #28) » Thu Oct 12, 2017 1:20 pm

Post by northsidegal »

okay, i should have some time here. anything specifically people would like me to respond to?
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #264 (isolation #29) » Thu Oct 12, 2017 1:29 pm

Post by northsidegal »

in case it wasn't clear, i don't cc.
In post 241, Hopkirk wrote:I'm not happy with this response. I was talking primarily about Cabd, and you don't really mention him, then later say i'm probably misunderstanding. I don't know how you'd clear up the misunderstanding without adressing the core bit.
i'm having a hard time understanding what your point is supposed to be. my original post wasn't really about cabd, it was meant to focus more on cheeky. you say that i didn't mention who i was talking about, but the whole post was in response to cheeky.
In post 253, CheekyTeeky wrote:
In post 248, Chip Butty wrote:I liked this, because it shows [NSG] is reading carefully, and i think scum would have let Micc's misreading slide through.
I don't agree with this. Scum are more likely to pick up on anything to build a case/cast shade with. I noticed micc's overstatement but gave that room to see where it would go. I thought NSG jumping in prematurely cut off the push as micc complained about earlier. The interaction feels like SvT, I'm just not 100% on which one is S yet although I'm leaning towards NSG.
i see your point now about cutting off a potential push, but at the time i was just trying to provide some clarification. do you think that interaction has anything to do with building a case or casting shade?
In post 258, Sobolev Space wrote:idk if i agree with this although i do want nsg to add more actual contet. like when scum is being hesitant its usually to make it look like they're scumhunting etc. without having to take strong stances ppl can tie them to but if we look at nsg's recent post:
i'll be honest and say that i don't really have any strong scumreads as of yet. it could be failure on my part to distinguish town from scum, it could be that scum are blending in well this game or it could be that scum are lurking through. of the three i think the last is most likely.

UNVOTE:
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #265 (isolation #30) » Thu Oct 12, 2017 1:30 pm

Post by northsidegal »

In post 263, CheekyTeeky wrote:
In post 228, CheekyTeeky wrote:NSG do you have a readslist?
no, nothing that would be useful, sorry.
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #268 (isolation #31) » Thu Oct 12, 2017 1:40 pm

Post by northsidegal »

In post 266, Sobolev Space wrote:even if you don't have any strong scumreads do you have any townreads nsg?
oh yeah, that would be useful! obviously cabd, you and chip. as for things people could expand on, cheeky never responded to . it seems like cabd was cooking up some kind of breaking strategy so that would be interesting to hear, unless it's the kind of thing best left unsaid. it feels like hopkirk hasn't really done much except respond to things people have said to him or give small comments on things, so it would be nice to see something new from him, some kind of casebuilding perhaps.
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #270 (isolation #32) » Thu Oct 12, 2017 1:44 pm

Post by northsidegal »

maybe i should do a bit more proofreading. the "obvious" there was just meant to apply to cabd.
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #272 (isolation #33) » Thu Oct 12, 2017 1:58 pm

Post by northsidegal »

for you, your iso is pretty solidly filled with scumhunting. sorting people is what you've been doing since your first post in the thread, and it's always felt both reasonable and town-motivated. things like making sure people can't counterclaim later, no matter how obvious, i would think to come from town. in addition, you've been pressuring kawso's slot for inactivity which i see as town-motivated.

i guess you could call my read on chip more of a "tonal" read. especially from the early game interactions i get the sense that chip isn't actively trying to come off as being town, which is townie in my eyes. as of more recently posts like and seem to be geniuine efforts to examine the game from the perspective of determining the best move for town, which i would almost put above scumhunting on the "townie activities" list. any good scum player can probably fake a push on someone, but posts that step back, look at the whole situation and try to figure out the best path to take seem both harder to fake and less likely to be faked.
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #276 (isolation #34) » Thu Oct 12, 2017 2:22 pm

Post by northsidegal »

i think most people are scumreading me either directly because of my voting micc for his rudeness or because of the events surrounding thatm and i can see how would be reasonable. cheeky's explanation for her scumread on me in didn't really make sense to me, though. i responded to most of the points in but one thing i didn't add was breaking out of rvs. i can't really be the judge of whether or not i was awkward in rvs but it didn't feel that way to me, and if i was then nobody else mentioned it.

she also makes the point in that i'm pointing out oddities but not really making a push. this is more reasonable i think - if you start from the premise that scum don't want to draw too much attention to themselves then someone doing what i'm doing would look scummy, but i think applying that idea to every time someone points something out without making a push is a bad idea. i would say more on this point but no game i've been in is finished yet.
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #278 (isolation #35) » Thu Oct 12, 2017 2:59 pm

Post by northsidegal »

i tried to respond to that in . it wasn't meant as a defense of cabd, it was me pointing out weird logic in a post that just happened to be attacking cabd. besides, we now know (at least, we're confident) cabd is the firefighter. even if you don't believe that my post wasn't really about cabd, i don't see a potential scum motivation for defending someone like that.
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #288 (isolation #36) » Fri Oct 13, 2017 10:28 am

Post by northsidegal »

In post 281, Hopkirk wrote:If it was intended to focus on Cheeky then I'd expect to see something at the end mentioning Cheeky, instead of a brief comment at the start. The focus of what you said was defending Cabd, whether that was your intent or not.
a brief comment? listen - the entire post was responding to cheeky! it was a direct response to one of her posts! i'm not sure what you want me to say. every single quote there was from the one post that cheeky made.
Hopkirk wrote: The 'you're not my biggest scumread' doesn't match up with the explination that it was a post about him, not Cabd. I wouldn't find this very significant is you hadn't said you were voting Micc as RVS, and I can't see why you'd do that.

Secondly, you explicitly imply you have scumreads with the phrase that cheeky isn't your biggest scumlean.
If Micc/Cheeky are not these scumreads then it's very unclear who is, I don't know why you'd hide it based on your desire to move things on, and your vote makes no sense.
This is the most significant point on a reread.
cheeky was the one to use the phrase "biggest announced scumlean", i was just echoing what she had said. any implications there came from her, not from me. furthermore, as i've said multiple times before, i was saying that i thought cheeky's behavior was strange, not that it was scummy. if this is the most significant point you have to make then the case on me as a whole looks pretty weak.
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #348 (isolation #37) » Sun Oct 15, 2017 8:57 am

Post by northsidegal »

i'm not responding to part one. i've already said everything there is to be said regarding that. if you read it one way that's fine, my intent was something else. what's your point?
In post 343, Hopkirk wrote:Part 2

4.) Doesn't adress why Cheeky wasn't a scumlean, and especially why he wasn't worth a vote given you claimed your next vote why RVS.
In post 288, northsidegal wrote:furthermore, as i've said multiple times before, i was saying that i thought cheeky's behavior was strange, not that it was scummy.
In post 343, Hopkirk wrote: 5.) You didn't mention your Micc vote at all in this response. I said that was the most significant point.
6.) It reflects badly on you in my eyes that you say my case is weak because my 'most significant point' is bad when you didn't address what I said was my most significant point (see 5).
i'm sorry, given the run on sentence right before "this is the most significant point" it was a little difficult to determine what you were referring to. what exactly is your question regarding the micc vote?
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #354 (isolation #38) » Sun Oct 15, 2017 12:02 pm

Post by northsidegal »

In post 351, Hopkirk wrote:Primarily why it was made, in light of the other stuff you were saying.
i was mad at micc for how rude he was being and i felt the game was still early enough that voting him wouldn't really matter that much. that's the entire reason.
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #367 (isolation #39) » Sun Oct 15, 2017 3:35 pm

Post by northsidegal »

dang, i didn't get to say "what's shaking?" before he did!
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #400 (isolation #40) » Tue Oct 17, 2017 11:23 am

Post by northsidegal »

alright then! i've been meaning to get around to this for a while but i've been putting it off. here it is.
VOTE: cheeky
In post 289, CheekyTeeky wrote:
In post 268, northsidegal wrote:cheeky never responded to 144.
I didn't see anything specific you wanted me to respond to, and understood that you were just providing your perspective. You said that I admitted that my case was forced, which I didn't. I said OK it seems forced to summarise your key point in the previous post. I then went on to explain why it could possibly seem forced to others looking in, during the breaking out of RVS stage. I think it would make sense for scum to point out strange things without really scumhunting. I don't see you scum hunting. I just see a 180 on your RVS stance of voting people to get reads to now just pointing out things that seem strange...but not scummy...and you can't even form an opinion on each player when everyone has provided content. How hard is it to rank players from scummy to least scummy? It's probably difficult for you because you're not actually scum hunting or coming up with helpful lines of enquiry against others. Pushes help town gather info. Providing a wishy washy opinion (x seems strange) of others scum hunting does not help us sort slots imo.
basically, this post seems disingenuous to me. i'm not cheeky so i can't know what she was thinking when she wrote , but what she said in 93 and what she explained in just don't match up. here's 93 for reference (bolding is me):
In post 93, CheekyTeeky wrote:
Ok so it feels forced
, but breaking out of RVS requires discussion (not just complaining about it eh Micc), I bring up thoughts and opinions to stimulate such and make reads based on the points.
Sometimes the points are useless or feel forced
because I have almost nothing to work wot to try and make something. I don't believe my itention looked like a way to create a Cabd wagon, particularly when I announced the intention to move my vote after some back and forth. And also after the discussion with sobo where I said I use my vote to get info rather than as an accusation at this stage... so I don't know why everyone is getting so precious about Cabd?
in 289 cheeky claims that "ok so it feels forced" was simply a summary of the points i was making in , but it doesn't read that way at all. there's no "so you think it feels forced" or "so i could see how it looks forced" - it's just plain and simple "it feels forced". in 289 she says that she explained how it could feel forced to someone else, but again it doesn't read that way at all. it's simply "sometimes the points are useless or feel forced" with the admission that she's sometimes cerating something from nothing.

if you'll look back again at 289, you'll notice that, in a post meant to be responding to , immediately after the three sentences that deal with what i said in 144, cheeky completely changes track to an accusation against me. there's nothing inherently scummy about this, but i believe that viewed in the context of what that post was meant to be it's revealing of ulterior motives. this brings me to my next point, which is that i can plausibly read cheeky's posts as scum searching for false reasons and lying in order to keep a wagon going on me and keep pressure off of herself.

take a look back at , what originally started this line of conversation:
Spoiler:
In post 140, CheekyTeeky wrote:You were very awkward breaking out of RVS. Your RVS vote on micc was straight up bad, don't care if it was a reaction test. You presented a scum interpretation of my Cabd push, but denied you thought I was scummy. Being pro-town != not scum. You seem to be playing it safe, you tried to stick your neck out with me but quickly withdrew when you saw your points were defeated by logic. I'd have to assume that you hadn't read the entire thread before your push on me, for the illogical arguments to make sense. I don't believe that to be true as I've assumed an attentive, thoughtul player image of you.

I do want to vote you but I don't like how quickly your wagon is building up so I'll reassess shortly.

i simply don't believe the reasons in this post are genuine. not only are they somewhat generic or general "you're scum" arguments to make (being awkward in rvs and hedging bets with regards to reads), they're just not true. i can't be the judge of how i looked during rvs but certainly compared to the conversation had about voting empty slots, anyone would look less awkward. additionally, i addressed the "being illogical" argument in 144 but i'll say it again. this:
You seem to be playing it safe, you tried to stick your neck out with me but quickly withdrew when you saw your points were defeated by logic. I'd have to assume that you hadn't read the entire thread before your push on me, for the illogical arguments to make sense.
is patently false. nowhere when pointing out what i viewed as strange behavior did i make an illogical argument and nowhere was it defeated by logic.

going back to post 289 and what i was saying at the beginning of this point, cheeky transitions straight from responding to me to making accusations about my lack of scumhunting. they doesn't feel genuine, and that's mostly because of the context in which they were made - strange that in a post meant to be responding to another specific post, cheeky starts making general arguments about my scumminess. i think it's plausible to read that as a nervous cheeky trying to deflect attention back onto me.

i think that's everything i was thinking of for now but i'll be around for a while. interested to hear other people's thoughts on this.
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #404 (isolation #41) » Tue Oct 17, 2017 12:12 pm

Post by northsidegal »

okay, here's about the gist of it:
cheeky is lying and coming up with false / disingenuous reasons to further suspicion on me. i think it's likely she's doing this to deflect attention away from herself and to achieve a mislynch. the reasons she cites as to my scumminess are forced and don't make sense upon deeper inspection.
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #416 (isolation #42) » Wed Oct 18, 2017 3:14 am

Post by northsidegal »

oh man, why did this have to happen now?

:cry:
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #450 (isolation #43) » Fri Oct 20, 2017 10:52 am

Post by northsidegal »

i'd like to add that i entirely agree with btd6 here, at least regarding the idea of "hedging". i don't see the point in lying about the strength of your reads and i don't think it would be good game practice to force your reads to be stronger than they are. having weak reads by itself isn't scummy, i think you would have to look at the context surrounding that read ie do you believe it's disingenuous, is it only to push a mislynch or to hop on a wagon, does it wildly contract previous behavior, etc.
How can you be avoiding confbias regarding reads you don't even have yet. Like as far as I can tell you havent read a single post made my northsidegal or Chip bitty or Sobeov/Zito slot. Can you say something about your read on them so far.
this i agree with, though. you should probably read the thread - it's not very long.

also, welcome back i suppose to cheeky.
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #451 (isolation #44) » Fri Oct 20, 2017 11:00 am

Post by northsidegal »

In post 449, CheekyTeeky wrote: The truly useful reaction I got was from NSG which pretty much solidifies my scum read on her. The timing of her push on me is very likely to come from scum. After I presented my points on her she didn't respond until Hopkirk voted me and pushed for my wagon. I believe it is typical of scum to feel safer going for a push under the cover of someone else leading in order to diffuse suspicion after my flip. E.g. Hopkirk should be more suspicious as he started the wagon... I've recently encountered this same "get em while they're down" tactic from scum on me. Waiting for a spot to vote me shows scum self-consciousness which is not common coming from town.
this entire arguement is countered by the real life fact that i was just kinda busy and didn't have too much time to type up that massive post. truthfully, i haven't really been able to follow hopkirk's scumread on you. it didn't play any role in the timing of my post.
And then we have this:
In post 404, northsidegal wrote:okay, here's about the gist of it:
cheeky is lying and coming up with false / disingenuous reasons to further suspicion on me. i think it's likely she's doing this to deflect attention away from herself and to achieve a mislynch. the reasons she cites as to my scumminess are forced and don't make sense upon deeper inspection.
Where am I lying in my case on you NSG? To date, essentially, all you've done is call me scum for scum hunting. When you got a spot to vote me you call me a liar knowing that those reading my Hopkirk case will assume it's true. Call it forced or disingenuous but I have made no errors in my responses to you.

So far I only have NSG in my lynch pool. I need to relook at Chip, SS and BTD.
i'm fairly confident i pointed out a few cases where you're lying in the big post i made. there comes a point in someone else's interpretation of something where it goes beyond simply being mistaken or forced reasoning and starts becoming lying. i believe that's the case with some of your posts regarding me.

by the way, this game is going to be pretty awkward if we're both town. luckily, i don't think that's the case.
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #453 (isolation #45) » Fri Oct 20, 2017 11:11 am

Post by northsidegal »

In post 452, CheekyTeeky wrote:
In post 451, northsidegal wrote:i'm fairly confident i pointed out a few cases where you're lying in the big post i made. there comes a point in someone else's interpretation of something where it goes beyond simply being mistaken or forced reasoning and starts becoming lying. i believe that's the case with some of your posts regarding me.

by the way, this game is going to be pretty awkward if we're both town. luckily, i don't think that's the case.
Sorry to be a pain, could you please quote specifically where I'm lying? Why are you AtEing my push on you? I'm not afraid to be wrong and am still on good terms with people I play with/scumread.
sure! it wasn't meant to be an appeal to emotion, i was just imagining the scenario where both of us get lynched and we both flip town. in this setup specifically i would think it'd be awkward because we'd both still be there to talk as stumps. i wasn't trying to say that we'd be enemies or anything afterwards.

quotes:
Spoiler:
In post 400, northsidegal wrote:
In post 93, CheekyTeeky wrote:
Ok so it feels forced
, but breaking out of RVS requires discussion (not just complaining about it eh Micc), I bring up thoughts and opinions to stimulate such and make reads based on the points.
Sometimes the points are useless or feel forced
because I have almost nothing to work wot to try and make something. I don't believe my itention looked like a way to create a Cabd wagon, particularly when I announced the intention to move my vote after some back and forth. And also after the discussion with sobo where I said I use my vote to get info rather than as an accusation at this stage... so I don't know why everyone is getting so precious about Cabd?
in 289 cheeky claims that "ok so it feels forced" was simply a summary of the points i was making in , but it doesn't read that way at all. there's no "so you think it feels forced" or "so i could see how it looks forced" - it's just plain and simple "it feels forced". in 289 she says that she explained how it could feel forced to someone else, but again it doesn't read that way at all. it's simply "sometimes the points are useless or feel forced" with the admission that she's sometimes cerating something from nothing.
In post 140, CheekyTeeky wrote:You were very awkward breaking out of RVS. Your RVS vote on micc was straight up bad, don't care if it was a reaction test. You presented a scum interpretation of my Cabd push, but denied you thought I was scummy. Being pro-town != not scum. You seem to be playing it safe, you tried to stick your neck out with me but quickly withdrew when you saw your points were defeated by logic. I'd have to assume that you hadn't read the entire thread before your push on me, for the illogical arguments to make sense. I don't believe that to be true as I've assumed an attentive, thoughtul player image of you.

I do want to vote you but I don't like how quickly your wagon is building up so I'll reassess shortly.
i simply don't believe the reasons in this post are genuine. not only are they somewhat generic or general "you're scum" arguments to make (being awkward in rvs and hedging bets with regards to reads), they're just not true. i can't be the judge of how i looked during rvs but certainly compared to the conversation had about voting empty slots, anyone would look less awkward. additionally, i addressed the "being illogical" argument in 144 but i'll say it again. this:
You seem to be playing it safe, you tried to stick your neck out with me but quickly withdrew when you saw your points were defeated by logic. I'd have to assume that you hadn't read the entire thread before your push on me, for the illogical arguments to make sense.
is patently false. nowhere when pointing out what i viewed as strange behavior did i make an illogical argument and nowhere was it defeated by logic.
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #456 (isolation #46) » Fri Oct 20, 2017 1:03 pm

Post by northsidegal »

In post 455, CheekyTeeky wrote:
In post 451, northsidegal wrote:this entire arguement is countered by the real life fact that i was just kinda busy and didn't have too much time to type up that massive post. truthfully, i haven't really been able to follow hopkirk's scumread on you. it didn't play any role in the timing of my post.
I can buy this but it doesn't explain why you didn't vote me earlier. As you proved with Micc, you were happy to cast votes without a wall post, so why not just cast one on me without the elaborate justification? I'm pretty sure people were assuming you were scum reading me so it's not like you had to worry about just voting me earlier as the justification was implied.
i was waning on how to interpret you this game, and it was only after your that i made up my mind on voting you. i wanted to vote you at the same time that i gave my whole explanation because i didn't want to be one of those people that promises explanation later and never gives it. in the meantime between that i was a little bit busy in real life, but also chip, hopkirk and micc all had their conversation and luv replaced in. i didn't want to distract from the discussion there because i thought there was more valuable or revealing information that was being posted that could have been stopped short if i came in with my post, and also i was waiting to see what luv would make of the game. i don't feel the need for any sort of "justificaton" for the timing of the vote, just the justification on why the vote.
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #458 (isolation #47) » Fri Oct 20, 2017 1:48 pm

Post by northsidegal »

chip i'm still confident is town, not really understanding where others are coming from when they scumread him (as opposed to times where i can understand someone's argument about someone else being scum but not agree with them). perhaps i'm biased because i find myself agreeing with him often, however. my opinion in him is largely unchanged from .

micc i think is nulltown, if only because i find him kinda hard to read. i don't think i would be willing to lynch him today.

thoughts on btd6 and zito's entrances and the votes on btd6?
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #476 (isolation #48) » Sat Oct 21, 2017 4:40 pm

Post by northsidegal »

In post 473, Papa Zito wrote:
In post 464, CheekyTeeky wrote:Like you read things but what do you think about it all? Did you get any reads? Why are you voting BTD6_MAKER? What made him scummy to you?
yeah see this is a much better post than complaining

I do have reads yes and unlike Friend BTD6 I had no trouble getting strong reads.

I'm voting him for reasons I don't want to get into at this time.
so what are those strong reads zito? any townreads? who do you think is scummy? your predecessor (you replaced kawso, right?) thought i was scum, do you agree?

your slot has left us mostly content starved this game and i get the feeling that scum is in one of the two lurkers this game. so far i'm leaning towards you moreso than btd6, but perhaps you could change my mind.
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #477 (isolation #49) » Sat Oct 21, 2017 4:49 pm

Post by northsidegal »

@hopkirk, cheeky is back in the game and you haven't moved your vote back. is this intentional, as in you believe that btd6 is more likely to be scum or a better lynch today than cheeky, or did you simply forget? or is there some other reason? by the way, you've yet to say anything about zito's entrance. thoughts on zito and that slot as a whole?
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #486 (isolation #50) » Sun Oct 22, 2017 5:00 am

Post by northsidegal »

er, yeah. made the mistake of thinking zito was kawso's replacement. my bad! some of the questions still stand though, i townread sobolov but it'd be nice to hear a new take on things.

so does that really mean the kawso slot has basically been out of the game for nearly two weeks?
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #529 (isolation #51) » Mon Oct 23, 2017 6:43 am

Post by northsidegal »

not really agreeing here. chip actually
has
done some of the things you're describing! as for pressuring you to answer questions, what do you call and ? you say that he's not examining your iso in detail, but that's pretty much what he does in . you could make the argument that he didn't analyze it in detail, but i would say that there wasn't really a whole lot to analyze. it doesn't make a lot of sense for chip to just suddenly start voting you and pushing your wagon just because he believes you've been scummier than ss was - the townread on ss still exists.
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #601 (isolation #52) » Tue Oct 24, 2017 6:44 am

Post by northsidegal »

i find myself agreeing with cheeky here. this entire interaction just seems to me like zito being intentionally obtuse when it comes to chip's attempts to have a conversation, and then scumreading chip for getting frustrated. there's been an obvious uptick in the frequency of chip's posts and you can call it scum panicing, but i think it's more likely that chip is actually just getting frustrated.
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #608 (isolation #53) » Tue Oct 24, 2017 10:08 am

Post by northsidegal »

i thought it was another fake hammer because i've been seeing a few of those lately, but that's a real one.
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #609 (isolation #54) » Tue Oct 24, 2017 10:10 am

Post by northsidegal »

you know, thinking about it it's not actually that big of a deal. well, it's kind of a big deal, but not as much as in a regular game. it's not like anybody is going to die tonight and chip will still be around to talk and scumhunt assuming that he's town, it's just that he won't have a vote.
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #616 (isolation #55) » Tue Oct 24, 2017 10:21 am

Post by northsidegal »

it's a hammer. cabd unvoted so that ucv would have the l-1 vote and cabd could be the one to hammer.
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #634 (isolation #56) » Thu Oct 26, 2017 12:21 pm

Post by northsidegal »

In post 624, UC Voyager wrote:1 down 2 to go.

I think the scum didn't vote his buddy

Limiting it to NSG, and BTD6. I don't think NSG would have freaked out about hammering if she were scum, so my best guess is BTD6.
freak out about hammering? is that what i did?
In post 631, CheekyTeeky wrote:
In post 623, Cabd wrote:Still upset at my lolhammer?
Yep. Zitos case made no sense. I'm glad we got scum but it should have been because of something that made sense. I respect Zitos gut reads now, I'll just ignore his logic lol. Also mad that you did nothing to discuss anyone D1 Cabd; and that you hammered without discussion.

What are the chances of scum bussing D1? I'm feeling like that's pretty low but it would explain why Papas case made no sense.
i share this sentiment regarding how much sense the case made but i'm not upset about the hammer. perhaps it's a reflection of my skill in scumhunting but i really didn't get the case on chip or see him as scum.
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #637 (isolation #57) » Thu Oct 26, 2017 2:01 pm

Post by northsidegal »

micc, most everything you're pointing out i'm confident is you confbiasing yourself, but i take specific issue with you saying my reads weren't backed up. if you'd like to make an argument about how those reads were fabricated i'd like to hear it but they were entirely genuine, and i would say well reasoned. i'm not backing down on this - he flipped scum but i truly never scumread him. like i said, probably a reflection on myself.

i'd also like to point out at this point that people seem to be giving the ucv slot too little scrutiny. he basically made it out of day one without any real content, and without any associatives. also, don't think of as a townslip - i know for a fact that the exact same conversation (ucv expresses confusion over how many scum there are in an open setup) has happened before.
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #640 (isolation #58) » Thu Oct 26, 2017 2:03 pm

Post by northsidegal »

oh yeah, i agree with the townblock assessment - hopkirk and micc are most likely conftown, zito is probably town. i'm fairly confident if we lynch in cheeky, ucv and btd6 we just win.
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #645 (isolation #59) » Thu Oct 26, 2017 2:22 pm

Post by northsidegal »

so what's your case on me cheeky? if you're voting me based on not agreeing with the chip wagon, consider that you did the same thing.
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #647 (isolation #60) » Thu Oct 26, 2017 2:27 pm

Post by northsidegal »

In post 644, Micc wrote:northsidegal, what is there to conf bias? I spent 30 minutes looking back at the game after seeing the flip and concluded that your interactions looked like you were Chips partner. That's a pretty decent turn around from not having you in my lynch pool at the end of Day 1 so I don't know how you can think its confirmation bias. I'm not going to argue with you about how genuine your reads were on a player who has already flipped scum.

Lets talk about that Cheeky, UC voyager, BTD6 group. Who is the scum in that group in your opinion?
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. what does chip having already flipped have to do with it? you're making the point that my reads come across as fabricated, and i don't think that argument is valid at all. given what chip posted day one i think all of my reads were entirely reasonable.

i'd like to take this day to sort out my scumreads and hear more from the two lurker slots.
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #649 (isolation #61) » Thu Oct 26, 2017 2:32 pm

Post by northsidegal »

In post 457, CheekyTeeky wrote:Ok I understand your response, if this is your scum game I'm impressed. I still have my reservations and will keep my vote where it is but I'm going to focus on sorting others now.

NSG what are your thoughts on Chip and micc?
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #652 (isolation #62) » Thu Oct 26, 2017 4:18 pm

Post by northsidegal »

In post 650, Papa Zito wrote:
In post 647, northsidegal wrote: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.
why does it matter to you, don't you think i'm scum anyways? i'm not trying to pick a fight with micc, i'm asking him to explain his reasoning on something i disagree on.

if you'd like me to make an analysis on chip's day one interactions i planned to anyways, maybe just give me a bit more time than a couple hours after the start of the day.
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #659 (isolation #63) » Thu Oct 26, 2017 5:07 pm

Post by northsidegal »

In post 654, Papa Zito wrote:
In post 652, northsidegal wrote:
In post 650, Papa Zito wrote:why does it matter to you, don't you think i'm scum anyways?
I want you to prove me wrong. And Micc is the last person you should be worrying about.
i think it makes sense that i should try to make sure that the people that i townread read me correctly. i'll do the chip iso tomorrow, when i have more time.
In post 655, UC Voyager wrote:VOTE: NSG

ya. her reaction to the hamer was scummy as hell plus the fact she wasn't voting for Chip....
explain this - how was my reaction to the hammer scummy? i echoed the same sentiment that our conftown did, that in this setup lynches are less punishing to town because of the stump mechanic and the lack of an immediate nightkill.
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #679 (isolation #64) » Fri Oct 27, 2017 12:44 pm

Post by northsidegal »

okay, i'm here. will start the chip iso shortly.
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #693 (isolation #65) » Fri Oct 27, 2017 1:33 pm

Post by northsidegal »

In post 242, Chip Butty wrote:We've got Cabd as doc, BTD6 as v/la, and Hopkirk and Kawso in need of a prod. I also don't really want to lynch a lurker but I'm not yet getting any super scummy vibes among Micc, SS, CT, and NSG.

Of those four I'm finding Micc to be townest mainly because he refused to be fobbed off when burrowing on 56, even though i didn't give the answer he wanted right away. I think scum would probably have pretended to be satisfied and moved on more easily. However, of he is operating at the level of designing setups, we are probably screwed if he is scum.
the beginning of chip's "not getting scummy vibes from anyone" idea. although i agreed with this day one, i think if we think about this from the perspective of scum saying it, it gives weight to the idea of scum being within the people he mentioned. the rationale is this - chip probably intended to introduce the subtle, unconscious idea of an "active player townblock", where it would be the active players vs the lurkers, with scum being within the lurkers because "everyone participating is too towny". given this idea, i don't think it makes sense if chip's scumpartner is within the group of lurkers - the benefit of him placing himself in a townblock is balanced out by the possibility that he gets his partner lynched. with that in mind and given that i'm townreading micc and the ss slot, this gives more weight to cheeky as scum. i'll look at that more later.

Spoiler:
In post 162, Chip Butty wrote:Okay one last comment before i go. I don't think the wagon on NSG is sound. Don't know if it is scummy or not. More later.
In post 248, Chip Butty wrote:
In post 78, northsidegal wrote:
In post 65, Micc wrote:So who of Cheekyteeky, Micc, and nothsidegal is most likely to be scum on your wagon?
although that's a valid question on its own i think he was talking more generally about the idea that he'd be lynched just for the placement of his rvs vote and how scum would have to be on that wagon if it went trhough. i don't think specifically he was calling any of those three scum.
I liked this, because it shows Cabd is reading carefully, and i think scum would have let Micc's misreading slide through.
In post 250, Chip Butty wrote:^^shows NSG is reading carefully
In post 249, Chip Butty wrote:@Hopkirk: yeah I've been wanting to get back to that and im ISOing NSG right now. I'm split between 5 games and also am intermittently busy irl so just doing what i can. It's not like the game is moving quickly anyway, and most of my recent efforts have been responding to Micc's queries.
In post 256, Chip Butty wrote:NSG cont.

and defends Cabd against CT. Seems thoughtful and reading carefully.

The vote on Micc at is...not good.
this could be me being paranoid, but i wonder if chip was subtly trying to frame me or pocket me in a lot of his posts. he mentions going through people's isos often, but i seemed to be the only one for whom he pointed out posts that made me towny. for most other people he seemed to just say that he had read their iso and then give a read on them.
In post 368, Chip Butty wrote:I've read through Hopkirk's ISO a few more times but I'm left with the same impression of 'meh'. He's written quite a bit and i don't see anything overtly scummy but it all just seems like minor stuff and he has a slightly unhealthy focus on NSG, who i still lean town despite that unfortunate vote on Micc.
It's as if he is doing the same to NSG as i half-suspect Micc is doing to me: just choosing someone to more or less nitpick at, to look busy. At no point reading through Hopkirk's ISO do i get the feeling of aha! yeah he's onto something there'.
Of course, this is slightly unfair if me, since none of us has been able to come up with anything much, at least not publicly. However i don't get the same slightly troubled feeling when i read the NSG and CT ISOs, so i guess put it down to gut. I think I'll keep him at scumlean for now. It's kind of a negative, impressionistic case in a way, with no specific posts i can point at. That's why it is just a lean.
In post 370, Chip Butty wrote:Just read NSG's ISO again. Need to read CT and Hopkirk again. So many interactions already - Cabd, Micc, and SS as well.
In a way, NSG has been at the centre of things so far. Will read through again later and post comments
.
In post 490, Chip Butty wrote:Fwiw, I just re-read the SS ISO, and i still think it is solid, so that carries over to Papa Zito.


going through chip's iso, i noticed something strange. i put cheeky's iso in there too, and it hit me - for the two most active players in the game, cheeky and chip had really only interacted about 20 times. i really quoted every interaction that the two had and it comes out to exactly 20, by my count, and that's between the both of them. i can post all of them, quoted, if any of you would like. i'm not doing it here for space reasons - even spoilered it's still 20 posts. chip even recognized this in in either a moment of self-reflection or a slight hint to a scumbuddy.
In post 374, Chip Butty wrote:
In post 371, CheekyTeeky wrote:Oh no are you scum chip? :(
No, but we haven't interacted much in this game, so we probably should do that for a bit. What's on your mind?
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.
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #694 (isolation #66) » Fri Oct 27, 2017 1:36 pm

Post by northsidegal »

In post 682, CheekyTeeky wrote: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
In post 687, Micc wrote:
In post 682, CheekyTeeky wrote: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
So you're saying you do want to debate the merit of the Chip lynch?


Why's UC getting the vote over northsidegal here?
In post 688, CheekyTeeky wrote:
In post 686, UC Voyager wrote:If I were scum, my best move would to support the NSG case. It is a way easier wagon than BTD6!
That is the obvious move not the best move. In your case your intent feels pretty townie.

VOTE: NSG
i mean, do i even need to say anything here? i'm sure you all get my point just by looking at these.
In post 689, CheekyTeeky wrote:Micc I like playing with you, hopefully you get how I work one day.
and here's the excuse / backpedaling.
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #703 (isolation #67) » Fri Oct 27, 2017 2:06 pm

Post by northsidegal »

In post 698, Micc wrote:
In post 660, Micc wrote: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 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.
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #704 (isolation #68) » Fri Oct 27, 2017 2:13 pm

Post by northsidegal »

In post 597, CheekyTeeky wrote: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.
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #707 (isolation #69) » Fri Oct 27, 2017 2:51 pm

Post by northsidegal »

In post 705, CheekyTeeky wrote: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 , 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?
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #708 (isolation #70) » Fri Oct 27, 2017 3:00 pm

Post by northsidegal »

anyways, i'm not interested in tunneling or turning this day into a de facto gladiate. btd6, you need to say more. 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?
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #716 (isolation #71) » Sat Oct 28, 2017 11:28 am

Post by 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.
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #728 (isolation #72) » Mon Oct 30, 2017 6:11 am

Post by northsidegal »

In post 726, Papa Zito wrote:@Hopkirk did you read the multiple posts where northsidegal was defending our flipped scum? You really think those come from town?
i'm not defending flipped scum, i'm defending my read on him as being justifiable, even if proven wrong. yes, quite obviously my read was incorrect but i don't think it's fair to say that it had no basis in any sort of reasoning or that it was fabricated, which is what micc was arguing. you can arrive to an incorrect conclusion through entirely reasonable thinking, especially in a game like mafia.
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #731 (isolation #73) » Mon Oct 30, 2017 10:46 am

Post by northsidegal »

In post 729, Papa Zito wrote:You argued hard against his wagon. End of.

Q: Should we, under no circumstances, lynch you today (y/n)?
oh,
was
defending. yeah, i misread him. are you really going to lynch me because i read someone as town and then tried to stop my townread from getting lynched on a case i thought was weak? just because i made a mistake? i think you should give me a little bit more credit that if i were scum i could do something a bit more subtle or with a bit more nuance than hard defending my partner, yeah?

as for the question, it depends on what exactly you're asking. i know that i'm town so i know for a fact that a lynch on me would be a mislynch, but if i did something ridiculous like counterclaim cabd or scumclaim or something then i could see how it would be reasonable for people to want to lynch me. i don't plan on doing anything like that, so yeah, a lynch on me is a bad idea.
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #733 (isolation #74) » Mon Oct 30, 2017 11:22 am

Post by northsidegal »

In post 732, Papa Zito wrote:
In post 731, northsidegal wrote:are you really going to lynch me
Yes.

The question is p simple, I'll ask a different way. Are you planning on fighting against your lynch tooth and nail all day today?
yes, of course. do you expect me to not? i care about this game and i care about town winning, so if people think the best lynch is on someone that i have a mod-confirmed innocent on (myself), of course i would fight against that.

if you're asking if that's all i plan on doing, then no. i plan on scumhunting, but right now i suppose we're waiting on cheeky's replacement (hope everything's alright, cheeky!) and for btd6 to post more.
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #735 (isolation #75) » Mon Oct 30, 2017 12:20 pm

Post by northsidegal »

there's not a lot of point in asking cheeky's replacement about the thought process behind cheeky's posts and i'm still waiting on btd6 to make some real comments on this day. it's not that i couldn't do something before those things happen, it's that i'd prefer to do things after they happen. i think it'll probably be more productive.
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #737 (isolation #76) » Mon Oct 30, 2017 12:31 pm

Post by northsidegal »

everyone else except for ucv i am treating as town.

what are you trying to get out of this line of questioning?
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #739 (isolation #77) » Mon Oct 30, 2017 12:38 pm

Post by northsidegal »

i guess i should clarify - i am treating everyone except ucv, cheeky and btd6 as town. consider my lynchpool as within those three slots.
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #743 (isolation #78) » Mon Oct 30, 2017 12:58 pm

Post by northsidegal »

[line][/line]
In post 740, Micc wrote:
In post 737, northsidegal wrote:everyone else except for ucv i am treating as town.

what are you trying to get out of this line of questioning?
just putting content in the thread that I can go back and make reads off of later. nothing different than I'm ever doing.

Walk me through UC. What makes you think he could be scum?
it's more of a question of "what would lead me to believe that he's town?", and the answer to that is not much. his slot made it out of day one with barely any content, so he's not a part of the townblock that i've formed in my mind.
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #746 (isolation #79) » Mon Oct 30, 2017 2:08 pm

Post by northsidegal »

yeah, i thought you might say that. listen, i'd rather wait until everyone's actually in the game to begin gamesolving, even if ucv is right here. i could have just not said anything in the thread today but i felt like in the interest of transparency i would answer everything. i don't see a whole lot of point in going really in-depth right now when it's likely that the gamestate will change once someone replaces in, and i'll have more information to work with then. it's not that i'm not trying to sort ucv, it's that i'd rather do it later. you know, a part of it is even real life stuff. i'm not entirely up to the task of making a case today, so i didn't want to force myself to do anything because i knew it would be weaker than it could have been, even though i knew that was clearly what you were looking for.

it's really frustrating to me that i'm getting scumread for these really weak reasons (at least to me). i would be more understanding of this if someone came up with a really good case on me, because we would just go to tomorrow with me confirmed. as it is now, though, i feel like this is all a big waste of time.
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #749 (isolation #80) » Mon Oct 30, 2017 3:02 pm

Post by northsidegal »

In post 748, UC Voyager wrote:Wait. You don't want us to scum hunt until there is a replacment. If I wasn't so confidant in BTD6, I would say NSG was scummy...
i'm not trying to direct the actions of other people. i'm saying that i, personally, will be waiting to see how the replacement enters the thread.
you
can do whatever you want, ucv.
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #759 (isolation #81) » Tue Oct 31, 2017 10:15 am

Post by northsidegal »

VOTE: northsidegal, l-1
it's not playing against wincon, it's me taking my mod-confirm on my innocent child. maybe afterwards we can do something useful.
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #761 (isolation #82) » Tue Oct 31, 2017 10:20 am

Post by northsidegal »

normally i'd agree, but the mechanics of this game make it so that it's not as much of an issue. like i said, taking my mod-confirm innocent.

why would self-voting be better as scum?
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #763 (isolation #83) » Tue Oct 31, 2017 10:30 am

Post by northsidegal »

just go ahead with the case, don't let me stop you. there's no pressing need to hammer.
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #765 (isolation #84) » Tue Oct 31, 2017 10:32 am

Post by northsidegal »

perhaps ask lycan if we could do the thing where we all pm to approve of ending the night phase?
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #769 (isolation #85) » Tue Oct 31, 2017 10:42 am

Post by northsidegal »

please don't let me stop you from doing something productive.
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #771 (isolation #86) » Tue Oct 31, 2017 10:47 am

Post by northsidegal »

In post 770, Micc wrote:im gunna take the self vote as a concession. You can all do your things and hammer when ready but don't wait for me.
will you lynch yourself tomorrow for being wrong, just like me?
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #774 (isolation #87) » Tue Oct 31, 2017 10:51 am

Post by northsidegal »

-still town-
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #778 (isolation #88) » Tue Oct 31, 2017 10:57 am

Post by northsidegal »

In post 777, UC Voyager wrote:
In post 774, northsidegal wrote:-still town-
that sucks. hopefully we get good uimput from you tomorroww




User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #784 (isolation #89) » Tue Oct 31, 2017 11:12 am

Post by northsidegal »

by the way, in the interest of full transparency - the self-vote was equal parts appeal to emotion / theatrics and the stated reasons ie taking the confirm. i figured that if it didn't work out one way it'd work out the other. i guess i need to work on really selling it, or maybe i've just got a tough crowd. maybe it just doesn't work at all on some people.
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #802 (isolation #90) » Tue Oct 31, 2017 4:20 pm

Post by northsidegal »

yes, i'm still playing to win this scumgame after i've been lynched.
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #827 (isolation #91) » Fri Nov 03, 2017 4:03 pm

Post by northsidegal »

In post 825, Cabd wrote:How shitty.

I don't like any of this at all.

But unfortunately, the timings match up for cheekyteeky's entire leaving the site thing.
yeah, i feel the same way. also, i hope it's only a temporary thing and that cheeky comes back one day - i enjoyed playing with her a lot.

i don't have much to say regarding the nightkill business except that it seems to only make sense if it's cheeky. this seems unsatisfying all around.

i guess one thing to note is that this means scum primed ucv night one, which i find suprising.
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #832 (isolation #92) » Sat Nov 04, 2017 6:54 am

Post by northsidegal »

In post 831, Cabd wrote:Is it at L-1?

Can we all prevote for early night and stuff?


VOTE: night ends as soon as all actions are in

Can we get y'all to do that?
will this do anything, given cheeky's empty slot? doesn't it have to be everybody?

you can count my vote for it anyways, even if i'm not sure it's useful.
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #837 (isolation #93) » Sun Nov 05, 2017 4:30 pm

Post by northsidegal »

VOTE: cheeky

oh wait!
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #866 (isolation #94) » Thu Nov 09, 2017 6:08 pm

Post by northsidegal »

to play devil's advocate here - why does btd6 make a play that basically leaves him as the only viable lynch option for yesterday? assuming that btd6's is genuine, why would he place himself in that position?
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #868 (isolation #95) » Thu Nov 09, 2017 6:27 pm

Post by northsidegal »

In post 867, Micc wrote:If he's genuinely clearing cheeky there then the game's solved from his point of view and I can't see him not noticing that.
could you elaborate on that?
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #906 (isolation #96) » Sun Nov 12, 2017 4:22 pm

Post by northsidegal »

so do we believe that there's scum possible anywhere else other than within btd6 or maybe micc? certainly if btd6 isn't scum then it would necessitate rereading and starting fresh (ie considering previously strongly townread players), but am i correct in that we have two lynches before the game is over, at the very worst?
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #945 (isolation #97) » Fri Nov 17, 2017 5:38 pm

Post by northsidegal »

i'll try to be a more active part of the conversation today.
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #949 (isolation #98) » Sun Nov 19, 2017 8:23 am

Post by northsidegal »

i don't think we should discard the possibility of bussing day one from zito. i know i'm bringing up the merits of the chip wagon again which you all seem to be annoyed by, but it can't be ignored now. just from numbers and looking at the end of day wagon we know that scum were among the first three on the chip wagon - probably the most useful part of the game to look back on will be the interactions starting from about page 20, and especially the four votes all in a row starting from .
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #959 (isolation #99) » Sun Nov 19, 2017 5:47 pm

Post by northsidegal »

i think i'll probably be online around then - i'll try to join in on the treestump party!
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #963 (isolation #100) » Sun Nov 19, 2017 5:58 pm

Post by northsidegal »

given that you'll probably be a frequent topic of discussion it might be in your own interest to show up - it's up to you.
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #1028 (isolation #101) » Tue Nov 21, 2017 6:56 am

Post by northsidegal »

i'm not flaking on the treestump party - i thought it was today!
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #1038 (isolation #102) » Tue Nov 21, 2017 4:38 pm

Post by northsidegal »

just on intuition i think that hopkirk is town here. obviously i'm going to review but unlike with micc or with pz where looking back i can see some of their actions in the context of scum, i have a hard time imagining any scenario where hopkirk was scum this game.

when it comes to micc and pz, someone has already gone through the main points that i had with regard to the pz/chip interactions. chip seems to approach pz's attempts to start a conversation not as a townie pointing out that they're scum, but as a scumpartner starting some theater. i think it's only after the four votes pile on in quick succession that chip gears it up and realizes that he's being hard bussed - he goes from approaching the conversation attempting to get both of them townread more to more of a panic mode where it seems like he's actually going to get lynched.

the nightkill is an entirely different bottle of wifom. what we know is that scum primed ucv night one and ignit night two. initially, we thought that the seemingly nonsensical action of igniting would indicate that cheeky's empty slot had just taken the random action, but that was proven wrong. from there, now it seems like the prevailing theory is that scum did it as an intentional act of confusion, but i'm not so sure. what i think we should all consider is going back to the possibility that scum just weren't around to submit an action, even though it wasn't cheeky's empty slot. with that in mind the only relevant piece of information that we would have to discuss would be the ucv priming night one. disregarding the extranous night two action saves us from wasting our time and chasing ideas that go nowhere on the wifom that is the ignition, and lets us focus on the actions that we can more probably presume to be relevant (the motivations behind the priming).
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #1135 (isolation #103) » Sun Nov 26, 2017 1:45 pm

Post by northsidegal »

In post 1134, Regfan wrote:@NSG & BTD - Where's your head at right now?
sorry, i don't think i've been giving this game the attention that it probably deserves given my play. i'm liking pz for scum a lot more than the other options.
User avatar
northsidegal
northsidegal
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
northsidegal
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 11587
Joined: August 23, 2017

Post Post #1231 (isolation #104) » Fri Dec 01, 2017 11:57 am

Post by northsidegal »

good game and well played to everyone. thanks to lycan for moderating.

this was probably among my worst performances in a game so far - apologies if i let people down.
Locked

Return to “Mayfair Club [Micro Games]”