Mini Normal 1954: Iambic Tetramafia: Endgame

[Jingle]

I know, and I commented on it at that time.

Since you're apparently summoned by saying your name, and you've declined thus far to comment on the Flubber situation (you're clearly following the thread though), what do you think about Flubber/dunk/ETL?

Wait, UCV is beetlejuicing?

This bears investigation.

Furthermore, 619 is exactly how a sane person reacts to this. Note: Sane =/= town. Insane =/= scum.

Also, ETL, get your head out of your ass. Why does flubbs fakeclaim not a hard guilty with almost no pressure on him. He’s 90% town 10% insane. And in either case he lives at least one more dayphase

this post tells me that not only do you

know

i'm town, but that you are indeed flubs partner.

No, it tells you that you’re moonlogicing. Which is specifically not a towntell for you. More when I’m not actively supposed to not be on my phone.

First:

You're looking for reasons to scumread Flubber instead of taking a step back and reevaluating his play based on his claim. Look at flubb's D1 through the PR lens:

Flubbs wasn't taking center stage. Far from it. He was making reads, but he was content to let the game drift along where it would. There was absolutely no paranoia about 2's role being stronger than claimed, and he really wanted the day to be over, which is completely in character for someone with a strong PR. He's textbook PR.

Second:

We leave flubber alive today. Night falls. There's three options:

1. Flubber is town with a result on DD, in which case scum shoot him (Yay, we lost a PR and lynch a scum: great trade), scum let him live (Yay, we get another result out of Flubbs), or a protective saves his life (Yay, we pretty much instantly win on clears).

2. Flubber is scum with a fake on DD, in which case scum don't shoot him but do shoot someone else. There are a few gambits scum could try, but all of them would probably blow up in their faces.

3. Flubber is town fakeclaiming, in which case I punch him in the face in the postgame (And scum probably still shoot him tonight).

None of those potential situations justify turbo lynching him over scumhunting today, even if we outright disregard the potential for there to be a lynch of a different scum player.

[Jingle]

Flubber not taking into consideration that Dunk could be a commuter or a miller, has an ascetic modifier, or that he could’ve been role blocked is really bad.

:Thorface:



What the fuck even is this? This is 10x worse than ETL's reaction. This is reaching for a reason to disbelieve Flubber without even considering his claim.

Flubber: I have a result on DD.
DD: I think Flubber is a loyal cop.
Flubber: I'm not going to fullclaim.
ETL: This isn't how loyal town responds.
LUV: The fact that flubbs isn't even considering alternatives to the guilty is really bad.

First, both ETL and LUV have just jumped onto the explanation that Flubbs is a loyal cop and are discrediting his claim solely on that basis, WHEN HE DIDN'T EVEN BRING THAT UP IN THE FIRST PLACE.

DD's rolefishing is terribad. ETL jumping onto it is either scum or a bad case of confbiasing. LUV dropping a legitimate (if mediocre) line of questioning to pile on is the scummiest piece of shitposting in the thread.

Second, there are a plethora of roles that are both explicitly normal and have a reason for which there might be a false positive. Pouncing on one and then claiming Flubber is scum for not considering why it might be a false positive is presupposing information, which is decidedly not a town trait, especially from someone who was not even scumreading Flubbs prior to this AFAICT.

Third, LUV's argument is in itself a strawman. Flubber IS provably looking for cases why he would have a fake guilty. It's pretty much the cornerstone of the gambit he's running.

VOTE: Lil Uzi Vert

And, furthermore, the correct response to this is not "Flubber I demand your fullclaim right now" but "Dunkerdoodles, why would anyone reasonably get a false positive investigation on you".

If DD fails to answer, I'll post a list of roles for which flubbs play is not only acceptable, but arguably optimal.

[skitter30]

Wait, UCV is beetlejuicing?

This bears investigation.

Look at the timestamps (in my time):

11:24 - I make an offhand reference to him in a post about someone else
11:25 - he appears and comments on his ETL vote
11:28 - I ask him about Flubber/ETL/Dunker, and note that he seems to have been summoned when I mentioned him.

I'll also note that he was listed as being an active user on the main page for at least a few minutes after I posted that before I left, and is currently listed as one while I type this.

Also, your post about LUV was pretty much the one I wanted to make, and was planning on doing so when I got back from class just now.

Flubber never said he was a loyal cop and instead strongly indicated he wasn't one; Dunk came up with that. Both ETL and LUV are acting *as if* he claimed loyal cop with a hard guilty on Dunk (and are implying that he must be lying since loyal cops don't work like that), when it is quite apparent that he *does not* have a hard guilty on Dunk. He's very obviously considering alternate explanations for his result, and part of that was seeing how Dunk responded to it.

[Awoo]

This is NAI. Both alignments can put thought into their entrance because of self-awareness. Both can also do it in order to garner specific reactions. I don’t like it how feels like you’re clinging desperately to your very weak Taiho read.

More like trying to make a read instead of just sitting around with a weak one. But I guess that won't be happening anytime soon.



I think flub is town. The fakeclaim day 2 universe just doesn't make any sense to me, and what jingle said about him playing like a PR day 1 is right on, in hindsight. ETL do you still think this?

DD, do you think flub is fakeclaiming scum or misc. town? You're voting him based off some bolded text, what do you actually think of his role though?

[Flubbernugget]

Jingle

Of all three :thorface: players, they're all pretty much equally off their rocker. What makes your vote land on LUV out of them?

[Jingle]

DD- His reaction to my question/Fullclaim should pretty much confirm his alignment one way or another after you bite the bullet. Him reacting oddly to the person with a result on him is also not impossible

ETL- At least she was strongly suspicious of you pre-D2 so this could just be a confbias / I don't want to lynch her unless I have to.

LUV- Literally no mention of you prior to this confbias. Further, he's being :thorface: in a way where he's not the primary face pushing the lynch. Say we lynch you, most of the blowback hits ETL and DD. LUV is comparitively blameless because he wasn't the original crusader, just sheeping a movement. Of all the players, he's the one in the best position to be pushing this angle as scum. And it is most certainly an angle scum would want to push.

[Dunkerdoodles]

This is NAI. Both alignments can put thought into their entrance because of self-awareness. Both can also do it in order to garner specific reactions. I don’t like it how feels like you’re clinging desperately to your very weak Taiho read.

More like trying to make a read instead of just sitting around with a weak one. But I guess that won't be happening anytime soon.



I think flub is town. The fakeclaim day 2 universe just doesn't make any sense to me, and what jingle said about him playing like a PR day 1 is right on, in hindsight. ETL do you still think this?

DD, do you think flub is fakeclaiming scum or misc. town? You're voting him based off some bolded text, what do you actually think of his role though?

tbh probably town with a fake guilty
i don't know why scum would gambit this early but i guess i could see it if let's say LUV was om their team. (i do sr luv)
really don't know, i'm not a miller/ascetic/commuter/anything like that though

[Dunkerdoodles]

jingle said it already but i really don't like LUV's responses to the situation

[Jingle]

really don't know, i'm not a miller/ascetic/commuter/anything like that though

Vanilla/PR

and in the latter case

Night action/Non Night Action

Go.

[Jingle]

Actually, skip the first half.

[Dunkerdoodles]

i'm not claiming now lol

[Dunkerdoodles]

why do i have to claim before the guy that has a "result" hasn't even claimed the result

[Jingle]

Because he has far less reason to lie than you do?

[Dunkerdoodles]

i don't think he's lying, i just think he has a false guilty

[Dunkerdoodles]

i will say if he's loyal something with a no result on me something fishy's going on.

[skitter30]

Dunk, your reaction to this is also pretty weird.

1. I don't know why you keep on proposing that he has a loyal modifier

2. You are explicitly denying having a role that would mess with results like ascetic/miller/commuter etc

3. You seem unconcerned that there's a maybe-guilty on you, and aren't trying to say that Flubber is lying or whatever.

Like, it feels like you accept the veracity of the maybe-guilty and aren't doing anything about it besides say that a loyal modifier shouldn't be giving a false positive when Flubber never said nor implied nor indicated that he has a loyal modifier. You're specifically protesting a result that 'loyal-modifier-Flubber' could have, when he never claimed that, and you're kinda ignoring the larger issue of the fact that he claims a maybe-guilty.

I feel like you're taking refuge in the idea that he might have a fake-guilty from a loyal modifier, even while saying that you don't have a role that would correspond with such a result.

I dunno how well I expressed this; I'm having trouble figuring out how to articulate what I'm seeing from Dunker.

Also, I won't be around till tomorrow night.

[Lil Uzi Vert]

Flubber not taking into consideration that Dunk could be a commuter or a miller, has an ascetic modifier, or that he could’ve been role blocked is really bad.

:Thorface:



What the fuck even is this? This is 10x worse than ETL's reaction. This is reaching for a reason to disbelieve Flubber without even considering his claim.

Flubber: I have a result on DD.
DD: I think Flubber is a loyal cop.
Flubber: I'm not going to fullclaim.
ETL: This isn't how loyal town responds.
LUV: The fact that flubbs isn't even considering alternatives to the guilty is really bad.

First, both ETL and LUV have just jumped onto the explanation that Flubbs is a loyal cop and are discrediting his claim solely on that basis, WHEN HE DIDN'T EVEN BRING THAT UP IN THE FIRST PLACE.

DD's rolefishing is terribad. ETL jumping onto it is either scum or a bad case of confbiasing. LUV dropping a legitimate (if mediocre) line of questioning to pile on is the scummiest piece of shitposting in the thread.

Second, there are a plethora of roles that are both explicitly normal and have a reason for which there might be a false positive. Pouncing on one and then claiming Flubber is scum for not considering why it might be a false positive is presupposing information, which is decidedly not a town trait, especially from someone who was not even scumreading Flubbs prior to this AFAICT.

Third, LUV's argument is in itself a strawman. Flubber IS provably looking for cases why he would have a fake guilty. It's pretty much the cornerstone of the gambit he's running.

VOTE: Lil Uzi Vert

And, furthermore, the correct response to this is not "Flubber I demand your fullclaim right now" but "Dunkerdoodles, why would anyone reasonably get a false positive investigation on you".

If DD fails to answer, I'll post a list of roles for which flubbs play is not only acceptable, but arguably optimal.

I could ask you the same thing in regards to you voting for me Jingle

I assumed he’s a cop with a modifier based on 582 due to him previously being hounded by Skitter on whether he’s loyal or not. I didn’t consider a vanilla cop or a neapolitan. Or even something really non-standard like a private thread cop but I think my current gripe still applies no matter how you slice it.

So as well know, Flubber appeared to go into today voting someone he believes to be guilty based on him immediately voting Dunk and then stating he has a result on him. I later find out he was not taking his result as a hard guilty but was considering how he could’ve gotten a false guilty and was trying to sort Dunk by reaction testing. My gripe before was that he voted assuming it was a guilty which is why I brought up a few ways in which it could’ve been a false guilty. I wasn’t discrediting him. I was giving my opinion on the information that I had processed. I felt it was bad play to come off the way he did.

My gripe now is that he cannot or won’t tell me what reaction was he looking for. He also seems to expect that someone wouldn’t react in the way Dunk has to someone voting them, claiming they may have a guilty on them, and being vague about how they reached such conclusion. That to me reads like hiding behind gambits and reaction testing in order to get away with scummy behavior. I don’t see how town handles the result the way he did but I don’t see why scum runs the gambit. So I guess I’m confused as to why it feels like he’s being read as likely town by you when I feel he should be null.

[Flubbernugget]

Your first and second sentences in your third paragraph are in direct contradiction to each other

[Lil Uzi Vert]

I don’t get it. If you didn’t know what you were looking for, why can’t Dunk’s reaction come from town?

[Lil Uzi Vert]

I can understand if you provided town and scum reactions to how you handled your result but you didn’t which leads me to believe your reaction testing had no purpose.

[Dunkerdoodles]

i know i'm town so i'm trying to figure out why he has a maybe-guilty on me
and loyal something makes the most sense here based on flubber's reaction

this being said the longer flubber stalls with posts that aren't a result claim i'm thinking it's a scum gambit

[taiho]

Flubb sorta denied being loyal in one of his posts though.

[ironstove]

uhhh why does anyone believe flubber is scum? LOL.

That makes no sense, read through the interactions/iso flubber joins the lock town wagon. dunkerdoodles has had his locktown wagon suspended pending further investigation.

suspicious reactions lies -> uzi both strange

I'm not going to vote anyone because... i have a tendency to vote for the wrong person. someone guide me and pick the right door that leads to scum behind [dunk, lies, uzi]

tyty

[Awoo]

which also means two of skitter, jingle and ironstove are the partners.

Did you ever explain this?

[Awoo]

UZI -- I'm going to ask you the same thing I asked DD. Do you think flub is scum faking, or town?