Micro 1077 | True Love at Grandpa's House | Game Over!

[Umlaut]

Quiet game.


I like Andante for town, she's being proactive and provocative. Though I also don't understand 72.

Chad posts are reasonable and solvey, townlean for now.


My vote on bianco is not actually random, it's based on 23 which bugged me because I don't think it's reasonable to just immediately sheep "I think my partner is scum" from Andante when she doesn't even believe it enough to be voting there herself at the time, and it seems like a way to put down a vote down for an ostensibly defensible reason.

[Bub Bidderskins]

The problem with these nondescript chat townreads is that you guys are basically asking us to just trust your read with nothing for us to judge, which is not something I'm going to do.

This.

I think it's a move to try and control the narrative in an unverifiable way.

[GrandpaMo]

Official Vote Count 1.04

With 8 votes in play, it takes 5 to eliminate.

Bub Bidderskins

(2): chad thunder, Not Known 15

Andante

(2): Bub Bidderskins, biancospino

biancospino

(1): Umlaut

chad thunder

(1): Vanderscamp

Not Voting

(2): Enchant, Andante

Deadline:

(expired on 2023-04-18 21:20:41)

Mod notes:

• If you see any mistakes in the VC, please pm or @mod me in bold.

• I will be most likely V/LA from the 16th-18th of April so expect Firebringer to take over while I am gone.

[Vanderscamp]

The problem with these nondescript chat townreads is that you guys are basically asking us to just trust your read with nothing for us to judge, which is not something I'm going to do.

This.

I think it's a move to try and control the narrative in an unverifiable way.

I don't, and it's a bit weird that you're saying this, I just think it's useless and unproductive.

[Bub Bidderskins]

But look at the impact of Andante "town confirming" her lover -- it's an attempt to (unverifiably) shift all suspicion off her and her lover and limit the universe of suspects in a way that could lead us to mislim. It's not just unproductive, it's actively trying to move the game in a certain direction away from considering Andante or her lover as scum. Keep in mind, scum have a vested interest in producting their lover in a way that town don't because an elimination on a scum's lover is just as good as limming them.

[Enchant]

Do you know who andante lover is

[Andante]

I know!!!

[Andante]

sooo my week of stress is over, I’m just exhausted so not doing a whole lot here tonight, tomorrow I need to sit down and figure out who scum is here, and then sunday is half marathon day so probably won’t do much here… i’m gonna try my best to figure stuff out tomorrow!!

[Andante]

cause deadline is very soon lol

[chad thunder]

The problem with these nondescript chat townreads is that you guys are basically asking us to just trust your read with nothing for us to judge, which is not something I'm going to do.

This.

I think it's a move to try and control the narrative in an unverifiable way.

counterpoint #1: There is literally another person in the lover's topic that knows what I'm referring to. If I were scum trying to control the narrative, then my lover would have to be town due to the setup. They could, in turn, point out if I'm throwing them an unearned townread or saying something publicly that doesn't align with our private topic. That's not quite "unverifiable."

counterpoint #2

: I was going to say that if I were scum trying to control the narrative then my partner would have to be town and painting a townie as townie isn't exactly peak "narrative controlling." But I just realized that since this is a lovers game, scum will want their lovers surviving alongside them of course.

counterpoint #3: Made you look!

---

To clarify for transparency (because I think Vanderscamp's quote in the Bub Bidderskins post is actually a valid point), essentially my partner popped in and said something along the lines of "I'm not going to be utilizing this thread until I have a strong townread because solving should go into the main thread."

Which shows to me that: 1) They don't want to be potentially manipulated in the private topic; and 2) They have no interest in trying to manipulate me. These are both town traits.

---

I think Vanderscamp approaches that dilemma with a town mindset ("I can't incorporate your vague info into my solve because I don't have the actual evidence in front of me to judge it") whereas Bub Bidderskins approaches it with a potentially scum mindset (casting doubt on peoples' solves). Still happy with my vote (sorry Vanderscamp !!).

[chad thunder]

sooo my week of stress is over, I’m just exhausted so not doing a whole lot here tonight, tomorrow I need to sit down and figure out who scum is here, and then sunday is half marathon day so probably won’t do much here… i’m gonna try my best to figure stuff out tomorrow!!

Congrats on getting out of the stress week I just got to the beach myself and I'm excited for some R&R

[chad thunder]

on another note, I hate the chad/vander stuff... like, go interrogate your lover in your pt or something, it takes 5 to lim sure, but this isn't exactly a normal game in terms of RVS. if you're town, you need to be CONFIDENT your lover is town

Andante, this has been bugging me for some reason (it's probably nothing to be honest). Do you remember why you assumed myself and Vanderscamp were lovers?

[chad thunder]

I also had a recent game where my scum neighbor pocketed me hard so I appreciate and can get behind my lover's approach to the private topic here.

[Umlaut]

Heads up I'll be out socializing IRL all day today and not really have time to check in.

We should consider whether to claim lovers before end of day. Optimal play is to eliminate the scummiest pair, not just the scummiest individual, so that's useful for town to know.

[Enchant]

cause deadline is very soon lol

Will you vote bob

[Vanderscamp]

But look at the impact of Andante "town confirming" her lover -- it's an attempt to (unverifiably) shift all suspicion off her and her lover and limit the universe of suspects in a way that could lead us to mislim. It's not just unproductive, it's actively trying to move the game in a certain direction away from considering Andante or her lover as scum. Keep in mind, scum have a vested interest in producting their lover in a way that town don't because an elimination on a scum's lover is just as good as limming them.

Sure, possibly, but it could also be just townAndante having a real townread, right?

[Vanderscamp]

The problem with these nondescript chat townreads is that you guys are basically asking us to just trust your read with nothing for us to judge, which is not something I'm going to do.

This.

I think it's a move to try and control the narrative in an unverifiable way.

counterpoint #1: There is literally another person in the lover's topic that knows what I'm referring to. If I were scum trying to control the narrative, then my lover would have to be town due to the setup. They could, in turn, point out if I'm throwing them an unearned townread or saying something publicly that doesn't align with our private topic. That's not quite "unverifiable."

counterpoint #2

: I was going to say that if I were scum trying to control the narrative then my partner would have to be town and painting a townie as townie isn't exactly peak "narrative controlling." But I just realized that since this is a lovers game, scum will want their lovers surviving alongside them of course.

counterpoint #3: Made you look!

---

To clarify for transparency (because I think Vanderscamp's quote in the Bub Bidderskins post is actually a valid point), essentially my partner popped in and said something along the lines of "I'm not going to be utilizing this thread until I have a strong townread because solving should go into the main thread."

Which shows to me that: 1) They don't want to be potentially manipulated in the private topic; and 2) They have no interest in trying to manipulate me. These are both town traits.

---

I think Vanderscamp approaches that dilemma with a town mindset ("I can't incorporate your vague info into my solve because I don't have the actual evidence in front of me to judge it") whereas Bub Bidderskins approaches it with a potentially scum mindset (casting doubt on peoples' solves). Still happy with my vote (sorry Vanderscamp !!).

Yeah, don't worry, I get it!

I think this is a towny response fwiw

[Vanderscamp]

Heads up I'll be out socializing IRL all day today and not really have time to check in.

We should consider whether to claim lovers before end of day. Optimal play is to eliminate the scummiest pair, not just the scummiest individual, so that's useful for town to know.

Why wouldn't we claim lovers?
What's the point of not doing it?

[Vanderscamp]

VOTE: Andante

[Andante]

VOTE: Andante

this makes me laugh cause just last night I told my lover I don’t think I wanna vote out you/bub

[Andante]

cause deadline is very soon lol

Will you vote bob

i kinda don’t want to, like, a part of me thinks bub is town

[Enchant]

cause deadline is very soon lol

Will you vote bob

i kinda don’t want to, like, a part of me thinks bub is town

Who you scumread

[biancospino]

VOTE: Andante

this makes me laugh cause just last night I told my lover I don’t think I wanna vote out you/bub

why thou. If you're town and actually confident about your lover, you're essentially saying you've solved the game already. Wrongly may I add, I'm also confident about my lover's towniness you see.

[Andante]

cause deadline is very soon lol

Will you vote bob

i kinda don’t want to, like, a part of me thinks bub is town

Who you scumread

I’d say Bianco/NK15 has at least 1 scum in them tbh

[Andante]

and actually, I’ll vote the one im confident in
VOTE: NK15