Mindreaver:
RVS vote sounds forced
#27 is ok, looks like he does have fun in RVS.
#58 has a bad push on tom (the math was already established as RVS). The @KJ might be a chainsaw. The question to me about my Vaimes vote is too soft. The way it is phrased triggers all my alarms.
#61 looks like a threat to tom. I’m not sure what he meant here.
#66: He calls himself bloodthirsty, but his posts don’t show that.
#110: dismisses my read on him as terrible, “almost” deliberately so. The almost shows that he knows I’m not deliberately making a terrible analysis there, ergo he knows I’m town.
#111: sees Vaimes and KJ as aligned. After what could’ve been a chainsaw on KJ, this looks like he wants to set up KJ when Vaimes flips scum.
#113: He thinks Vaimes and KJ are aligned, but votes me?? He misinterprets what I’m saying about him and Vaimes and bases the vote on that. (To rephrase that: at that point I thought you and Vaimes are both independently scum. I wasn’t looking for relations. Reading back now, you being scum together does make a lot of sense, but that was not what I was looking at back then)
#125: He thinks Vaimes and KJ are aligned but is null on Vaimes? Strange. About the tone change thing: I was talking about all your posts, not just the one aimed at me.
This sentence irks me: “I'm wondering who this exchange benefits the most. You have managed to siphon two previously-RVS votes away from the other wagons.”
Why think in this way? Isn’t it good that RVS votes get replaced by serious votes?
#128: Looks like he forgot that he said Vaimes and KJ are aligned, as he now says scumteam is KJ and me.
First, I don't know what analysis you can get out of RVS, so I'll leave those "points" alone.
I merely said I didn't like the phrasing KJ used. He's right that it's a loaded question, and he "answered" it in #67 (not really addressing the phrasing I found troubling). I never followed up, because frankly it was thin to begin with, and his response was fine. I'm not sure that's much of an attack.
As far as the Tom "push". The rhyming is fun, and I don't really want to be a pain about it. But the thing pinging me MOST about Tom, is that he isn't dropping this at all. In other games, when he's had alter egos, he's broken out to say important points. He's not doing that here. Since there have been a couple people now who have brought up certain phrases chosen, certain words used ("bloodthristy", "almost terrible"), or just general tone; how can you not share this opinion Rhand? If I had just rhymed all of my posts instead, would you have thought them "soft"? Would you even be able to tell? It's a fair criticism, and the reason I am not townreading Tom. Note: I don't know that Tom is scum either. His opinions thus far seem in line with what I've seen before from town!tom.
I did clarify the "bloodthirsty" comment, when Mal asked about it (bold for emphasis):
To clarify a few things:
1) The beginning part is written that way because it's in response to GJ's semi-attack on Vaimes where he's saying "You should KNOW the reason why a no-lynch is bad". As if it was obvious. I legitimately didn't understand why it'd be bad from a setup perspective, and was a little self conscious that I should have (turns out though, that other more experienced players were also confused so I didn't really need to feel that way). GJ's explanation was much appreciated in that regard (I hadn't considered that no investigative roles were possible).
2) "I like the info it gives on day two". I meant the lynch gives us information for day two. Having somebody flip after lots of interaction is the info I'm talking about. That wasn't clear on a re-read.
3) "I'm also pretty bloodthirsty day 1 apparently" and "just because we're 12 days away". I'm going to be against a no-lynch in 99% of situations, hence the bloodthirsty comment. In this setup, where we have to explicitly vote no-lynch (instead of other setups where we might default to no-lynch if the threshold isn't reached), I might be in favor if we were up against a deadline, and the lynch target was only at 3 votes OR was being selected as "the first person to get to that total". The 12 days away thing is just that the deadline for those conditions is pretty far off. If this was 48 hour phases, we'd reach those conditions quickly.
I definitely don't "know" that you are town. You're scum.
The Vaimes/KJ aligned thing and also the uncommitted-votes comment:
This is more involved, and I had actually typed up reasoning earlier. I wanted to see what you'd respond with first though, and I dropped a breadcrumb instead with “I'm wondering who this exchange benefits the most. You have managed to siphon two previously-RVS votes away from the other wagons.”.
The reason for my switch is this:
At the time you started with the "Mind is scum, Mind and Vaimes, at least Mind" retoric (#100), KillJoy was at L-2.
Has just gotten there in fact from Mat's vote (#73).
Mal had just asked the 4 people still with RVS votes to weigh in (#94) (and that was GJ, Tom, Me, and KJ).
Who benefits from you making this accusation and getting the un-committed to vote either me or you? KJ.
This was the reason I changed my read from KJ/Vaimes being aligned to a Rhand/KJ scumteam. Your timing might have very well saved KJ, because without your push, it's very possible that it's curtains for KJ. You single-handedly saved him. Reverse-Chainsaw!
If you don't want to vote for the person you think is the scummiest, you could also try:
-voting for the person that needs/deserves more pressure
-voting for the person your strongest townread thinks is the scummiest
-voting for the person with the cleanest wagon
-voting for or starting the counterwagon when you think the main wagon is on town
any of those is acceptable. Not voting is not because not voting is not playing. Votes are the most real thing you can do in this game, everything else is just words.
Lol Mindreaver. So you really think it would've been fine for KJ to have been strung up with a RVS vote in there from someone who doesn't even think he's scum?
About tom: his rhymes have a lot more power than your early posts did.
Lol Mindreaver. So you really think it would've been fine for KJ to have been strung up with a RVS vote in there from someone who doesn't even think he's scum?
About tom: his rhymes have a lot more power than your early posts did.
I never said it would be alright to have lynched him. I said, he was at L-2, and under pressure. That's still valid.
How do we gauge a post's power exactly? And how does that address my point that you seem to be 100% convinced about me, based on my word choice, tone, and phrasing; while Tom obfuscates all of those with his Rhymes?
Rhand my dear fellow, your goose is in the pot,
We're gonna a roast you, believe it or not
From that, did I choose "believe it or not" because it rhymed or because I wanted to use that phrase deliberately?
So now you're saying I should ignore the tone of your posts because tom uses rhymes?
If you don't want to get caught on tonechanges, then by all means rhyme in all your next games. I promise you that you can also be caught on content when tone is gone.
And tom was giving real opinions in his rhymes. You didn't do that until I called you out on it.
These are all your posts before I said I thought your posts were soft. Your questions lack deepness and there's no real opinions on players at all. "Soft" is really the best word to describe this.
@Tom - That math doesn't help us catch scum. In fact it's only useful if we want to know the odds of randomly lynching. Which we won't be doing... So what was the thought process there?
@Killjoy - "Saying a vote is mostly not serious reads as saying "you can't really use this against me in the future because it wasn't serious", hence 'cop out'." Are you looking for things to use against people later on? That phrasing bothers me.
In the beginning this rhyming wasn't bad
But obfuscation of arguments makes town sad
Your meanings are loose, so lets pause for a truce
Before your neck ends up in a noose
It's not something I usually think about. I don't actually know the specific reason, nor did I really expect there to be one.
I am not a person to screw around. I realize I am that guy (and likely corrupted tom), but there are town and scum games I bring it up, and town and scum games I don't. Weren't you a little curious what my motives are?
*raises hand* I'm curious what the motivation is. I also don't quite understand why it's rationally a good or bad idea in this setup. I'm not in favor of a no lynch, but that's just because we're 12 days or something from the actual deadline, and I'd like to think we'd have a good guess at that point. I'm also pretty bloodthirsty day 1 apparently. I like the info it gives on day two, especially if we have lots of interaction day 1.
And then when I do say that I think you're soft, we get this:
@KJ: naked votes invoke reactions. Look at Mindreaver's extremely soft reaction to my Vaimes vote and you know why he's scum. And then look at Vaimes's soft reaction to my Mindreaver vote. He's scum too.
Town react like you and tom did if they react at all.
This analysis seems terrible. Almost deliberately so. So I spared you one line to ask what your thought process is, because I was curious why you voted that way, which makes me scum? That's quite a leap.
Also, are these naked votes just random? Or was there more thought to them. Right now, you're voting me because:
1) You voted for vaimes without explanation
2) I had the nerve to ask what you were thinking
3) You vote me, not explaining your thought process, only stating that you were fishing for reactions
How about this. Why'd you pick Vaimes to "naked vote". You made this decision before anyone "reacted". Why?
So now you're saying I should ignore the tone of your posts because tom uses rhymes?
If you don't want to get caught on tonechanges, then by all means rhyme in all your next games. I promise you that you can also be caught on content when tone is gone.
And tom was giving real opinions in his rhymes. You didn't do that until I called you out on it.
Again, I never said you "should ignore the tone of your posts because tom uses rhymes". That's twice you've put words in my mouth. I said that my criticism of Tom is a legitimate point. I also said that if your entire argument on me is based on tone, why are you also saying I shouldn't be critical of Tom's obfuscation of tone. That's inconsistent, however you try to spin it.
Do you think maybe that my tone changed when I had something to actually respond to? All these "soft" posts are in the first ~70 posts of the game. I'd look for your posts in the same period, but there is only this:
Which tells me nothing. If I was to make the same argument for you, I'd say that your post 100 was a remarkable change of tone for you. It's just as valid.
Mato: What do you think of my Vaimes post at 179? Rhand: What do you think of my Vaimes post at 179? Mallorean: What does Mind's 66 look like if you consider he's claimed null on him?
How prone to tunnelling are you? An example of it is helpful.
Can you explain in more detail what made you move your vote to Mata in 174?
Because.
Because I wanted to ensure you both acknowledge and specifically answer it (aka why do you not have your votes placed at that time), as opposed to not mention it beyond placing a vote somewhere
You have a long list of questions/thoughts, including relative reads on people, but no conclusions - just questions for players at the end. Including asking some players what their reads are! What are your current reads?? How has this post changed or solidified your reads? Like I don't even really see the point of that post. You didn't even place a vote by the end of it. Do you know what votal analysis is?
It just occured to me that the answer to "Why is Rhand scum" is 'because'. Do better than that please.
If you don't want to vote for the person you think is the scummiest, you could also try:
-voting for the person that needs/deserves more pressure
-voting for the person your strongest townread thinks is the scummiest
-voting for the person with the cleanest wagon
-voting for or starting the counterwagon when you think the main wagon is on town
any of those is acceptable. Not voting is not because not voting is not playing. Votes are the most real thing you can do in this game, everything else is just words.
I'm actually pretty close to voting. Answer my questions though.
KoolKoal: Feel free to take this with a grain of salt since self meta isn't particularly helpful, but I think I get scumread mostly for style over substance, but also for a certain lack of substance over style. It's not so much what I AM posting most of the time (though sometimes that can seem bad) but what I'm NOT posting. I've been told I come to non-obvious conclusions a lot, so when I post, quite a bit of the time there's jumps in logic that people can't follow and they think that's scummy. I get that accusation about a lot of questions I ask specifically. People call them "busy work" when the questions are legit etc.
As far as things to ignore, I can't think of anything. I would suggest you focus less on what I'm doing and more on how I'm doing it. That's probably more likely to be accurate. Like I've just said, what I do tends to come off a little weird, but if you look for how I do it, mindset comes into play and maybe you figure out something useful.
You didrespond to stuff in thise posts.
And you brought the argument up about tom?
I never said I didn't respond to your posts. It's CLEAR I responded to your posts.
Also, I didn't bring up the Tom argument. You brought it up in #195: "#58 has a bad push on tom (the math was already established as RVS)." Followed by "#61 looks like a threat to tom. I’m not sure what he meant here."
I guess you might have just meant the math part of that. Which would be odd since we dropped that topic literally 3 pages ago. I assumed this was a natural progression from Mal's #145 where he wanted to know why I was "trying to chase down Tom for his rhyming thing". Especially since you've engaged on that topic.
Dude you're talking besides the point the whole time. I've had enough of this conversation.
YOU brought up tom's rhymes as defense vs your own tone and what I'm saying is that you DID respond to stuff in those posts I quoted in a very different tone than you are responding now, which you cannot compare to my 2 posts.
I'm done engaging. Dieplxthx.
@KJ: The only real pro-town point for Vaimes you're making that I haven't touched on before in your Vaimes case is his self-meta. Which i don't see as a tell of anything at all. I still think he's most likely scum.
That other post where he doesn't want to clutter the thread is why I prefer lynching Mindreaver over him. It's the one point that I saw in my reread that made me less sure.
KoolKoal: Feel free to take this with a grain of salt since self meta isn't particularly helpful, but I think I get scumread mostly for style over substance, but also for a certain lack of substance over style. It's not so much what I AM posting most of the time (though sometimes that can seem bad) but what I'm NOT posting. I've been told I come to non-obvious conclusions a lot, so when I post, quite a bit of the time there's jumps in logic that people can't follow and they think that's scummy. I get that accusation about a lot of questions I ask specifically. People call them "busy work" when the questions are legit etc.
As far as things to ignore, I can't think of anything. I would suggest you focus less on what I'm doing and more on how I'm doing it. That's probably more likely to be accurate. Like I've just said, what I do tends to come off a little weird, but if you look for how I do it, mindset comes into play and maybe you figure out something useful.
@Killjoy:
Doesn't matter because null isn't an alignment. Should be considering both then.
Based on what you're calling tunneling, very prone. I feel like tunneling involves more being focused on one person and being resistant to new evidence than what I'm doing here. Feel free to browse fantasystrike yourself, I can link examples later.
Half considering my conversation with Tom, half wanted to advance the game state, half disliking Matowar's entrance back into the thread.
I'll expand on these later around my normal time when I'm not phoneposting from work.
@everyone else:
I dislike Killjoy's big post. Very Information instead of Analysis. Will reread to point out what else is bothering me about it.
I like Rhand's catchup. He's probably wrong about Vaimes though. Please don't let that part make you ignore what he's saying about Mindreaver.
Invitation is still open to people for joining my Matowar wagon.
KoolKoal: Feel free to take this with a grain of salt since self meta isn't particularly helpful, but I think I get scumread mostly for style over substance, but also for a certain lack of substance over style. It's not so much what I AM posting most of the time (though sometimes that can seem bad) but what I'm NOT posting. I've been told I come to non-obvious conclusions a lot, so when I post, quite a bit of the time there's jumps in logic that people can't follow and they think that's scummy. I get that accusation about a lot of questions I ask specifically. People call them "busy work" when the questions are legit etc.
As far as things to ignore, I can't think of anything. I would suggest you focus less on what I'm doing and more on how I'm doing it. That's probably more likely to be accurate. Like I've just said, what I do tends to come off a little weird, but if you look for how I do it, mindset comes into play and maybe you figure out something useful.
Dude you're talking besides the point the whole time. I've had enough of this conversation.
YOU brought up tom's rhymes as defense vs your own tone and what I'm saying is that you DID respond to stuff in those posts I quoted in a very different tone than you are responding now, which you cannot compare to my 2 posts.
I'm done engaging. Dieplxthx.
Maybe quote the part where I bring up tom's rhymes as a defense of anything I've said. Go ahead. Anyone.
I'm also done.
@Everyone else: Am I completely without merit here? I really cannot see how each time my words get twisted like this, and nobody has an issue? No questions for Rhand?
I actually think my poems are quite clear
You just have to read them closely, my dear
My case on rhand was my very best one
Post 120 is when it was done
The rhyme is impressive, but so was the read
I can't see townrhand doing that deed
Two reads like that, the whole damn solution
But he doesn't even look for signs of collusion
I am not saying I don't understand what you are posting. I am saying it is an unnecessary pain in the ass to read through it and get your meanings. If you are enjoying yourself, don't let me stop you, but don't be surprised if I decide to tune you out.
Quote from MT »
I didn't think that letting it play out would do anything useful. I /did/ think that calling you out would do something useful. Alas, your quantity of posts hasn't made it the most productive thing, but I still think it was worth doing.
You accused it of being a snap trap, even before I snapped it. You jumped the gun, before any other players even reacted to it. I wasn't expecting to catch scum off the bat (I have never expected this). This was a late game play that helps me get reads come later game. Calling me out before I tried to play my hand (like, for instance, snap voting Vaimes) might have helped you along the line) or perhaps someone might have reacted differently in a bad way.
You're aware that this isn't a novel setup, right? Like, other sites have run tons of games like this, some with this exact grid. I'm surprised you're wasting time trying to reinvent the wheel.
And if I cared enough to play on other sites, I might have been aware of that. This is the first time I have seen this set-up here in three-fourish years.
Why not? I'm fine if you refuse, but only if you actually do something with your vote yourself. Continuing to abstain is anti-town.
0
You probably should avoid most of my meta, as I am stingy with my vote regardless of alignment. However, I am pointing to my facts with matowar. Your 182 responses to matowar are not inspiring of a good scumhunt. I am not going to pretend mato's posts are a grand slam, but do you really think scum, even newbie scum plays it that naively?
Quote from tom »
If he really thought, that we two were scum
He'd be asking questions, not sucking his thumb
I have been playing for years, and in Ace Attorney, it can be tough when under pressure to fully scumhunt/search. Hell, the only reason I eventually caught Rhand was because he was not asking me questions unless I poked him first.
Process of elimination.
Now talking more to GJ/Killjoy,
Quote from MT »
If you don't want to vote for the person you think is the scummiest, you could also try:
-voting for the person that needs/deserves more pressure
-voting for the person your strongest townread thinks is the scummiest
-voting for the person with the cleanest wagon
-voting for or starting the counterwagon when you think the main wagon is on town
any of those is acceptable. Not voting is not because not voting is not playing. Votes are the most real thing you can do in this game, everything else is just words.
Votes are the most real thing to manipulate from a scum perspective.
Quote from Mindreaver »
@Everyone else: Am I completely without merit here? I really cannot see how each time my words get twisted like this, and nobody has an issue? No questions for Rhand?
Why don't you have questions for Rhand? He can choose to ignore you, I suppose, but I doubt he will.
Good fight. Well fought. We can possibly resume this day3 if we're both still alive and the game isn't over.
What do you think about Killjoy misunderstanding your intentions in his big post?
I am a little wary of it. He has played in Animal, where I first started this trend, and I think he was the one the caught on to the trend really quickly (it was an all power game, and I was an investigative role that couldn't be roleblocked). For him to say "GJ doesn't actually mention that he wasn't trying to trap scum for some reason. " seems like a slight smear, or push of suspicion. I think the point that makes me dislike the post the most is:
Maybe MT is tunneling on GJ?
At this point, you had moved your vote to matowar. You are certainly clashing with me, but I would hardly call it a tunnel.
@Killjoy:
Doesn't matter because null isn't an alignment. Should be considering both then.
Based on what you're calling tunneling, very prone. I feel like tunneling involves more being focused on one person and being resistant to new evidence than what I'm doing here. Feel free to browse fantasystrike yourself, I can link examples later.
Half considering my conversation with Tom, half wanted to advance the game state, half disliking Matowar's entrance back into the thread.
I'll expand on these later around my normal time when I'm not phoneposting from work.
@everyone else:
I dislike Killjoy's big post. Very Information instead of Analysis. Will reread to point out what else is bothering me about it.
I like Rhand's catchup. He's probably wrong about Vaimes though. Please don't let that part make you ignore what he's saying about Mindreaver.
Invitation is still open to people for joining my Matowar wagon.
It's relevent, because how Mindreaver is reading him is relevent to your case.
I agree with Rhand (or rather, he agreed with me) on mindreaver's #58 being "soft". But more than that, it seems "reasonable". It looks investigative, but doesn't actually reveal anything about the gamestate, or advance scumhunting. Like, let's look at the two possibilities from mindreaver's POV:
Rhand is scum: In this case, mindreaver just threw the softest of softballs to him. He isn't putting any pressure on Rhand for the naked vote, and he isn't making him assume responsibility either.
Rhand is town: Here, mindreaver isn't giving him the benefit of the doubt. Would town!Rhand really need a specific request to provide reasoning? Maybe there's a good reason to not show his hand at that point.
So, not really advancing the cause for either case.
You say it doesn't reveal anything about the gamestate, but it reveals what Rhand (an unknown) thinks about the person who he naked-voted. You're twisting logic here. You're literally attempting to say that Mindreaver is scum regardless of Rhand's alingment and regardless of what Mindreaver's actually thoughts are. Mindreaver asking that accomplishes this: Trying to get a read on Rhand. Trying to twist it into anything else is bad.
Its also "soft" in that its non-combative. Getting in fights early can hurt scum because it puts the spotlight on them, and starts to generate anti-alignments. Very hard for their partner to win after they go down if they spew half the game clear on their way out.
And this part just seems like you're trying to force scum out of nothing. He asked ONE question early in the game. You and Rhand are reading WAY too much into it.
There are circumstances where this can be the correct play. I may have made a micro that made this optimal, and it also offers opportunity to address how people react to abnormal stimulus. For instance, most scum players know how to react to say...a day 1 massclaim, for instance.
In this particular instance, there is a specific reason why no lynching would be a bad idea. I am curious why you didn't mention it?
Are you saying that you WERE trying to trap scum with this series of posts then? MT was saying you were, and was throwing suspicion onto you for it. Why are you ok with that?
Here's the post for reference.
There are circumstances where this can be the correct play. I may have made a micro that made this optimal, and it also offers opportunity to address how people react to abnormal stimulus. For instance, most scum players know how to react to say...a day 1 massclaim, for instance.
In this particular instance, there is a specific reason why no lynching would be a bad idea. I am curious why you didn't mention it?
So, GJ has made it pretty clear that his first post wasn't what he actually believed, and he was fishing for responses. Which is fine by itself, that can be a towny thing to do . . . except that the way he sprung his trap doesn't strike me as towny at all.
He didn't leave the hook out for very long (about 40 minutes) and only one person had mentioned it while only 3 people had posted without mentioning it. That feels a lot less like trying to catch scum, and more like trying to trip up the first person to stumble into it.
He was looking for a specific mechanical reason from anybody questioning him, but its not clear that you'd actually need that specific reason /to/ question him. "There are circumstances where this can be the correct play" implies that its the incorrect play in the general case. As such, questioning GJ here is normal, regardless of whether you know the reason he's looking for or not. Requiring the reason for a response to pass muster is a little overboard.
If youre joking around that seems more youat this point i believe, my icy friend
scum sees this coming. theyve noticed the trend
says that I might just be clashing valuation here. Tom, feel free to chime in, but if you could wait until after GJ has responded, I think that would be best.
KoolKoal: Feel free to take this with a grain of salt since self meta isn't particularly helpful, but I think I get scumread mostly for style over substance, but also for a certain lack of substance over style. It's not so much what I AM posting most of the time (though sometimes that can seem bad) but what I'm NOT posting. I've been told I come to non-obvious conclusions a lot, so when I post, quite a bit of the time there's jumps in logic that people can't follow and they think that's scummy. I get that accusation about a lot of questions I ask specifically. People call them "busy work" when the questions are legit etc.
As far as things to ignore, I can't think of anything. I would suggest you focus less on what I'm doing and more on how I'm doing it. That's probably more likely to be accurate. Like I've just said, what I do tends to come off a little weird, but if you look for how I do it, mindset comes into play and maybe you figure out something useful.
So Rhand, your case on Mindreaver is less that those posts where soft, but just that he got defensive when you suspected him. Right? Am I reading that correctly?
Mindreaver is disturbingly less calm under pressure this game. This frustrates me.
KoolKoal: Feel free to take this with a grain of salt since self meta isn't particularly helpful, but I think I get scumread mostly for style over substance, but also for a certain lack of substance over style. It's not so much what I AM posting most of the time (though sometimes that can seem bad) but what I'm NOT posting. I've been told I come to non-obvious conclusions a lot, so when I post, quite a bit of the time there's jumps in logic that people can't follow and they think that's scummy. I get that accusation about a lot of questions I ask specifically. People call them "busy work" when the questions are legit etc.
As far as things to ignore, I can't think of anything. I would suggest you focus less on what I'm doing and more on how I'm doing it. That's probably more likely to be accurate. Like I've just said, what I do tends to come off a little weird, but if you look for how I do it, mindset comes into play and maybe you figure out something useful.
KoolKoal: Feel free to take this with a grain of salt since self meta isn't particularly helpful, but I think I get scumread mostly for style over substance, but also for a certain lack of substance over style. It's not so much what I AM posting most of the time (though sometimes that can seem bad) but what I'm NOT posting. I've been told I come to non-obvious conclusions a lot, so when I post, quite a bit of the time there's jumps in logic that people can't follow and they think that's scummy. I get that accusation about a lot of questions I ask specifically. People call them "busy work" when the questions are legit etc.
As far as things to ignore, I can't think of anything. I would suggest you focus less on what I'm doing and more on how I'm doing it. That's probably more likely to be accurate. Like I've just said, what I do tends to come off a little weird, but if you look for how I do it, mindset comes into play and maybe you figure out something useful.
OOG: I'll probably be posting less this weekend, it's not vacation or anything, just some time off with the family, and I'll be posting once or twice at night, and that's probably it. I figured I'd mention it, because my frequency will change
AND WE'RE BACK...
@GJ, fair enough, I do have questions. I don't know how much of this is a re-hash of the last few posts, but here we go.
Here are the ways in which I think I've specifically had my argument twisted by Rhand.
Here is what I want to know, Rhand: How does somebody who is town, misquote and misunderstand somebody in this manner?
Follow up is, if you had legitimate concerns about me, why not just quote the specific parts of my post that you had a problem with, instead of coming up with your own interpretations each time?
This sentence irks me: “I'm wondering who this exchange benefits the most. You have managed to siphon two previously-RVS votes away from the other wagons.”
Why think in this way? Isn’t it good that RVS votes get replaced by serious votes?
I've already explained why I wrote what I did. However, even taking that aside. My question is, who benefits from two RVS votes moving away from the established wagons? I never once implied that RVS votes shouldn't be replaced by serious ones.
Lol Mindreaver. So you really think it would've been fine for KJ to have been strung up with a RVS vote in there from someone who doesn't even think he's scum?
The reason for my switch is this:
At the time you started with the "Mind is scum, Mind and Vaimes, at least Mind" retoric (#100), KillJoy was at L-2.
Has just gotten there in fact from Mat's vote (#73).
Mal had just asked the 4 people still with RVS votes to weigh in (#94) (and that was GJ, Tom, Me, and KJ).
Who benefits from you making this accusation and getting the un-committed to vote either me or you? KJ.
This was the reason I changed my read from KJ/Vaimes being aligned to a Rhand/KJ scumteam. Your timing might have very well saved KJ, because without your push, it's very possible that it's curtains for KJ. You single-handedly saved him. Reverse-Chainsaw!
I didn't say, nor imply, that I wanted KJ lynched in this scenario. My argument was that he was under pressure, and 3 others were asked to vote a serious vote. It's not unreasonable to think they would take a look at KJ. To say I would have voted him, or that I would have been fine to lynch him, isn't anywhere in that.
How do we gauge a post's power exactly? And how does that address my point that you seem to be 100% convinced about me, based on my word choice, tone, and phrasing; while Tom obfuscates all of those with his Rhymes?
Rhand my dear fellow, your goose is in the pot,
We're gonna a roast you, believe it or not
From that, did I choose "believe it or not" because it rhymed or because I wanted to use that phrase deliberately?
This one, is a little closer to the mark, except for what I am responding to is: "About tom: his rhymes have a lot more power than your early posts did." Rhand is clearly saying I shouldn't bring Tom into this. But HE's the one who made the comparison here. I'm saying that if he's going to judge me by tone, and then compare that tone directly to Tom, then we should have a discussion about exactly how that is done. I think my point about how Tom's posts are tough to distinguish tone, is a valid point in this context.
However, to say "you're saying I should ignore..." is hyperbole. I didn't tell you how to think, nor how to investigate. My problem is purely in your reasoning, and your conclusions.
Finally, and thank you all for staying with me here, 213
Why chose these specific quotes, and why stop there? I'm pretty sure Mal and KJ have both mentioned that even though they thought there was a tone shift from ~66 to ~101, they see me as more consistent since then. Since they are two of your "townreads" (204), why are you so resistent to re-evaluation? It seems to me, at least, that you'd be willing to consider the last hundred posts of the game as well as the first.
Which leads to my last question for your Rhand. What scum-slips have I made in this entire exchange that you can point to? Let's both assume that I'm not "soft" posting anymore. What else?
You're not going to convince Rhand that he's scum. There's some types of questions you could be asking him, but they aren't the ones you're directing towards him at the moment. If you'd like to continue your current line of logic, please direct it towards Vaimes, myself, or any other player that you believe is currently NOT scumreading Rhand. It would be the most useful to me, and maybe the rest of the game, if that person is Vaimes, but if its me, that's fine too.
I'm going to address some other stuff before I get back to you on anything else.
Mallorean: What does Mind's 66 look like if you consider he's claimed null on him?
How prone to tunnelling are you? An example of it is helpful.
Can you explain in more detail what made you move your vote to Mata in 174?
@Killjoy:
Doesn't matter because null isn't an alignment. Should be considering both then.
Based on what you're calling tunneling, very prone. I feel like tunneling involves more being focused on one person and being resistant to new evidence than what I'm doing here. Feel free to browse fantasystrike yourself, I can link examples later.
Half considering my conversation with Tom, half wanted to advance the game state, half disliking Matowar's entrance back into the thread.
It's relevent, because how Mindreaver is reading him is relevent to your case.
You say it doesn't reveal anything about the gamestate, but it reveals what Rhand (an unknown) thinks about the person who he naked-voted. You're twisting logic here. You're literally attempting to say that Mindreaver is scum regardless of Rhand's alingment and regardless of what Mindreaver's actually thoughts are. Mindreaver asking that accomplishes this: Trying to get a read on Rhand. Trying to twist it into anything else is bad.
And this part just seems like you're trying to force scum out of nothing. He asked ONE question early in the game. You and Rhand are reading WAY too much into it.
You're almost there. How mindreaver is reading him /is/ relevant to my case. And my case is that Mindreaver's question didn't show evidence of having an opinion -OR- evidence of trying to form an opinion. If you think that somebody is null, you think that they could be town or scum. You interact with them to figure out which. You don't want to come out of the interaction still thinking they're null, because then you haven't made any progress.
That's what I mean by "soft". And, as you pointed out, that didn't just apply to his question to Rhand, it also applied to his questions to Tom and you. The Rhand one is just the clearest.
The question to Tom had a mismatch of intentions. His statement about the math "That math doesn't help us catch scum. In fact it's only useful if we want to know the odds of randomly lynching. Which we won't be doing..." reads like a reason to vote Tom, because he says that the math is useless (scummy) UNLESS Tom was going to suggest a random lynch (also scummy). But then he completely moderates his tone to "So what was the thought process there?", which is the kind of question I'd expect to be asked of a townread, because it gives Tom too much room to slip out of it if he's scum. And Mindreaver doesn't follow it up.
The question to you isn't even a question. " Are you looking for things to use against people later on?". That's an accusation, not something that gets answered. But again, he moderates it to "That phrasing bothers me.". If you're not going to vote your scumleans, you want to at least ask them something that they'll feel obligated to answer to pretend to be town. You never felt obligated to answer this, and didn't IIRC.
And then the question to Rhand. "What are your thoughts on Vaimes?" I think this has been covered enough. If Mindreaver is town, I'd expect something closer to one of "Explain your vote" or "Bussing already?" or "I don't see that, explain please?" or "I can see that, *votes himself*" (in order, scum/town,scum/scum,town/town, town/scum reactions). It feels designed to see which way the wind is blowing, not figure out who's scum.
You /are/ correct that this was just one short question wall early game though. And instead of being scum, Mindreaver could just be new and not know how to ask good questions or apply pressure because he's trying too hard to not anger anybody. I just think that "trying too hard to not anger anybody" is scummy.
One post does not make a case. The other part is that he was present in the thread, but not inquisitive, despite specifically talking about how having lots of interactions on Day1 was important. And his "no fun allowed" thing to Tom is something I've seen more from scum than from town.
As far as previous examples of me tunneling, the last time I hard core tunneled a town as town was Cathunt Day2 starting here, the last time I tunneled a town on Day1 and got them lynched was WH11 starting here.
GJ- Also hasn't posted a lot. I recall him not liking D1s for the reason that there's not much info, but the setup is semi-open so I would figure that's not the case this game? Is his lack of doing stuff for another reason?
I always like threatening to lynch lurkers so that they delurk. We have 1.5 weeks left, so this statement feels incredibly premature.
Which, to all you people that should be on the matowar wagon atm, is why you should be voting. 1 person saying "I'll have your head if you don't post and help me read you" is far less convincing than 3 or 4 people saying the same thing.
Mindreaver- There's a fairly stark contrast between this game and Twinborn. His anger seemed genuine in 113 and I'm not sure if that means he's town, and he's been fairly consistant. However I feel like he's holding back. Rhand-Rhand has been acting odd this game. He's been very tunnelly but I don't recall him ever being tunnelly. He also has spent a lot of time not posting reasons for anything really. That could be a time thing though.
While I try to focus more on who is individually more scummy on Day1, I think that anybody with this pair of reads needs to take a moment to think about scumteams. Do you think that Rhand and Mindreaver are on the same team?
If you don't, which one is scummier? Who's likely to be partners with that one?
mal already answered, but he absolutely tunneled the ***** out of dC in the game he linked (CatHunt). Uh. My overall experience with mal isn't so much that he tunnels, but he tries to have his vote on the most useful wagon he can, while keeping up interactions with as many people as possible and prodding the lurkers/abstainers every now and again to do things and establish connections between people for later analysis. I wouldn't have said he tunnels, really. But this is me going off of memory and not paging through our past games together.
@CitricBase
My mal read that you asked about a long time ago is: probably my most confident townread. I'm working against the background of WH14, where he was bit of an awkward mess. So far he seems incredibly natural and has probably put in the most effort to solve the game thus far. He's making five-posts-in-a-row, which suggests a certain confidence, like "hi hello yes I am not scum therefore I am never in any danger of slipping, these are my thoughts and you will take all of them into consideration, tia."
@mal
I had a paranoia!scumread on Citrus earlier because I know he was excited to get into another mafia game but was lurking a bit at the beginning of this one. I also had a conflicting "he forgot the game started and I think that's more likely to come from town" read, the same one I gave to LTH (??) I think, in whatever recent WH it was where he got replaced by Proph. I think I'm okay with him now, I did just list him in my towncircle, but I need to go back and check out his posts again to be sure I wasn't just happy seeing him have more posts.
Before looking back,
Vaimes
mallorean_thug
Rhand
tomsloger
CitricBase
Gentleman Johnny
Matowar77
Mindreaver
Killjoy
Bottom four aren't really in order. I can't remember any of GJ's posts after his No Lynch thing; Killjoy I have to see what he's been doing since I stopped interacting with him; Mindreaver I thought started out okay but obviously warrants another look. A lot of his posts seem to be solely defending himself against Rhand. And Mato, I dunno. He's new-ish, I suck at reading new people. I'll sort them eventually. Coming around to scum!Mindreaver based on mal's points, and I know Rhand's gonna "lolbussing" at me but I'll let him have the tiny victory it's no doubt going to inspire in him (which I will then heartlessly crush at some point either via NK or the game ending, because I have a town role PM).
KoolKoal: Feel free to take this with a grain of salt since self meta isn't particularly helpful, but I think I get scumread mostly for style over substance, but also for a certain lack of substance over style. It's not so much what I AM posting most of the time (though sometimes that can seem bad) but what I'm NOT posting. I've been told I come to non-obvious conclusions a lot, so when I post, quite a bit of the time there's jumps in logic that people can't follow and they think that's scummy. I get that accusation about a lot of questions I ask specifically. People call them "busy work" when the questions are legit etc.
As far as things to ignore, I can't think of anything. I would suggest you focus less on what I'm doing and more on how I'm doing it. That's probably more likely to be accurate. Like I've just said, what I do tends to come off a little weird, but if you look for how I do it, mindset comes into play and maybe you figure out something useful.
Apologies for the mix-up, votecount should be accurate now.
Can I please ask that Votes and Unvotes be placed on a separate line in posts. When skimming through looking for bold text it's easy to miss something stuck in the middle of a paragraph. Thanks
I've got the feeling that KJ's scumread on me is faked. I'm pretty sure he would be pushing me to claim if he were town so that the game can progress.
I'm getting cold feet on Vaimes. I think I might be wrong on that one.
Mindreaver continues to make no sense in his arguments :/
I'm starting to think it's not necessarily scum motivation I'm seeing but just inexperience and an inability to grasp the bigger picture of things.
He seems to simply miss the whole concept of the softness and tone change I'm accusing him of. And the omgussy way he's pushing back at me instead of just adressing the points I am making can come from newb!town and newb!scum alike.
I'm not saying he's town, but I'm not so sure that he's scum anymore either. He can swing either way.
I guess I need a fresh view on this game. Let's start with moving my vote.
unvote, vote KillJoy
Mallorean has a good case with the catch-up being iioa, his Vaimes white knighting while Vaimes has no votes on him seems out of place busywork (but they are unaligned), and his "I want to lynch Rhand toDay" feels fake.
First of all, I'm currently v/la
But I still feel I've had much to say
Now let's pretend you are town, just for fun
And look back over what you have done
You had two hard reads, poorly explained
And did not even look at the interactions contained
Now you've backpedaled both while leaving them open
What is the lynch for which you are hopin?
Kj, matowar, vaimes or mindreaver
In all of these scum, you've been a believer
What is your town block, as big as you'd like?
Who can you win with and drop the mic?
Because it seems to me, from what you have said
That you would be happy to see us all dead
Have you read my catch up post tom? I doubt you did. Your answers are all in there, apart from KJ because the feeling I'm getting from him is more recent.
Scum should be in KJ, mindreaver, matowar with outside chances of Vaimes and you.
I think Citric and mallorean are town and am leaning town on GJ.
But I'm repeating myself here.
Have you read my catch up post tom? I doubt you did. Your answers are all in there, apart from KJ because the feeling I'm getting from him is more recent.
Scum should be in KJ, mindreaver, matowar with outside chances of Vaimes and you.
I think Citric and mallorean are town and am leaning town on GJ.
But I'm repeating myself here.
I did read that post, and just did again
Am i supposed to think that they are good men?
Quote from Rhand talking about his townreads »
GJ:
No lynch doesn’t make sense this game, but he usually opens like that so ok.
I like his reaction to Vaimes in #34
#132 is probably a town vs town head-butt with Mallorean
Citric:
#71 looks like he read the game, but he doesn’t give real input.
Not much body to his next posts (which are very few)
Mallorean:
#86: I think Vaimes’s answer was way too serious there, but mallorean takes the opposite conclusion. Strange.
#87: I think he’s looking too deep into GJ’s motives. But seems like he realizes that himself as well, so ok.
#145: Rhand thanks this post.
Note that he never asked for a reason and was town reading me prior to this. He even unequivocally said in his catch up post "this is town kj". No doubt whatsoever.
The reason, btw is your fake tunnelling, and the catch up post did two things. It used scum rhetoric, and stopped just before you got to my town clear of Vaimes. It reminds me a lot of winterfell where you stopped your reread just before your mate claimed your role.
Here, you stopped reading before that so you could decide if you needed to back down from Vaimes.
Id love for you to claim. We all know you are claiming vanilla though. Feel free though. Then we can lunch you.
You>mato.
Thug: how do you feel about the reasons Rhand is voting for me? Especially note that part where part of the reason is your case on my catch up post, which isn't a case but you trying to get me to expand my thoughts.
KoolKoal: Feel free to take this with a grain of salt since self meta isn't particularly helpful, but I think I get scumread mostly for style over substance, but also for a certain lack of substance over style. It's not so much what I AM posting most of the time (though sometimes that can seem bad) but what I'm NOT posting. I've been told I come to non-obvious conclusions a lot, so when I post, quite a bit of the time there's jumps in logic that people can't follow and they think that's scummy. I get that accusation about a lot of questions I ask specifically. People call them "busy work" when the questions are legit etc.
As far as things to ignore, I can't think of anything. I would suggest you focus less on what I'm doing and more on how I'm doing it. That's probably more likely to be accurate. Like I've just said, what I do tends to come off a little weird, but if you look for how I do it, mindset comes into play and maybe you figure out something useful.
KoolKoal: Feel free to take this with a grain of salt since self meta isn't particularly helpful, but I think I get scumread mostly for style over substance, but also for a certain lack of substance over style. It's not so much what I AM posting most of the time (though sometimes that can seem bad) but what I'm NOT posting. I've been told I come to non-obvious conclusions a lot, so when I post, quite a bit of the time there's jumps in logic that people can't follow and they think that's scummy. I get that accusation about a lot of questions I ask specifically. People call them "busy work" when the questions are legit etc.
As far as things to ignore, I can't think of anything. I would suggest you focus less on what I'm doing and more on how I'm doing it. That's probably more likely to be accurate. Like I've just said, what I do tends to come off a little weird, but if you look for how I do it, mindset comes into play and maybe you figure out something useful.
KoolKoal: Feel free to take this with a grain of salt since self meta isn't particularly helpful, but I think I get scumread mostly for style over substance, but also for a certain lack of substance over style. It's not so much what I AM posting most of the time (though sometimes that can seem bad) but what I'm NOT posting. I've been told I come to non-obvious conclusions a lot, so when I post, quite a bit of the time there's jumps in logic that people can't follow and they think that's scummy. I get that accusation about a lot of questions I ask specifically. People call them "busy work" when the questions are legit etc.
As far as things to ignore, I can't think of anything. I would suggest you focus less on what I'm doing and more on how I'm doing it. That's probably more likely to be accurate. Like I've just said, what I do tends to come off a little weird, but if you look for how I do it, mindset comes into play and maybe you figure out something useful.
Thug: how do you feel about the reasons Rhand is voting for me? Especially note that part where part of the reason is your case on my catch up post, which isn't a case but you trying to get me to expand my thoughts.
/That/ post wasn't a case because I wanted you to expand your thoughts first.
Which I still want you to do.
We're definitely not ending toDay anywhere near this early. I still have a bunch of things I want to do.
My next post will explain why I'm townreading Rhand.
KoolKoal: Feel free to take this with a grain of salt since self meta isn't particularly helpful, but I think I get scumread mostly for style over substance, but also for a certain lack of substance over style. It's not so much what I AM posting most of the time (though sometimes that can seem bad) but what I'm NOT posting. I've been told I come to non-obvious conclusions a lot, so when I post, quite a bit of the time there's jumps in logic that people can't follow and they think that's scummy. I get that accusation about a lot of questions I ask specifically. People call them "busy work" when the questions are legit etc.
As far as things to ignore, I can't think of anything. I would suggest you focus less on what I'm doing and more on how I'm doing it. That's probably more likely to be accurate. Like I've just said, what I do tends to come off a little weird, but if you look for how I do it, mindset comes into play and maybe you figure out something useful.
First, I don't know what analysis you can get out of RVS, so I'll leave those "points" alone.
So, @KJ is a chainsaw, which you're saying is:
I merely said I didn't like the phrasing KJ used. He's right that it's a loaded question, and he "answered" it in #67 (not really addressing the phrasing I found troubling). I never followed up, because frankly it was thin to begin with, and his response was fine. I'm not sure that's much of an attack.
As far as the Tom "push". The rhyming is fun, and I don't really want to be a pain about it. But the thing pinging me MOST about Tom, is that he isn't dropping this at all. In other games, when he's had alter egos, he's broken out to say important points. He's not doing that here. Since there have been a couple people now who have brought up certain phrases chosen, certain words used ("bloodthristy", "almost terrible"), or just general tone; how can you not share this opinion Rhand? If I had just rhymed all of my posts instead, would you have thought them "soft"? Would you even be able to tell? It's a fair criticism, and the reason I am not townreading Tom. Note: I don't know that Tom is scum either. His opinions thus far seem in line with what I've seen before from town!tom.
I did clarify the "bloodthirsty" comment, when Mal asked about it (bold for emphasis):
I definitely don't "know" that you are town. You're scum.
The Vaimes/KJ aligned thing and also the uncommitted-votes comment:
This is more involved, and I had actually typed up reasoning earlier. I wanted to see what you'd respond with first though, and I dropped a breadcrumb instead with “I'm wondering who this exchange benefits the most. You have managed to siphon two previously-RVS votes away from the other wagons.”.
The reason for my switch is this:
At the time you started with the "Mind is scum, Mind and Vaimes, at least Mind" retoric (#100), KillJoy was at L-2.
Has just gotten there in fact from Mat's vote (#73).
Mal had just asked the 4 people still with RVS votes to weigh in (#94) (and that was GJ, Tom, Me, and KJ).
Who benefits from you making this accusation and getting the un-committed to vote either me or you? KJ.
This was the reason I changed my read from KJ/Vaimes being aligned to a Rhand/KJ scumteam. Your timing might have very well saved KJ, because without your push, it's very possible that it's curtains for KJ. You single-handedly saved him. Reverse-Chainsaw!
Now talking more to GJ/Killjoy,
If you don't want to vote for the person you think is the scummiest, you could also try:
-voting for the person that needs/deserves more pressure
-voting for the person your strongest townread thinks is the scummiest
-voting for the person with the cleanest wagon
-voting for or starting the counterwagon when you think the main wagon is on town
any of those is acceptable. Not voting is not because not voting is not playing. Votes are the most real thing you can do in this game, everything else is just words.
About tom: his rhymes have a lot more power than your early posts did.
I never said it would be alright to have lynched him. I said, he was at L-2, and under pressure. That's still valid.
How do we gauge a post's power exactly? And how does that address my point that you seem to be 100% convinced about me, based on my word choice, tone, and phrasing; while Tom obfuscates all of those with his Rhymes?
Rhand my dear fellow, your goose is in the pot,
We're gonna a roast you, believe it or not
From that, did I choose "believe it or not" because it rhymed or because I wanted to use that phrase deliberately?
If you don't want to get caught on tonechanges, then by all means rhyme in all your next games. I promise you that you can also be caught on content when tone is gone.
And tom was giving real opinions in his rhymes. You didn't do that until I called you out on it.
And then when I do say that I think you're soft, we get this:
Notice the tone change there?
Again, I never said you "should ignore the tone of your posts because tom uses rhymes". That's twice you've put words in my mouth. I said that my criticism of Tom is a legitimate point. I also said that if your entire argument on me is based on tone, why are you also saying I shouldn't be critical of Tom's obfuscation of tone. That's inconsistent, however you try to spin it.
Do you think maybe that my tone changed when I had something to actually respond to? All these "soft" posts are in the first ~70 posts of the game. I'd look for your posts in the same period, but there is only this:
Which tells me nothing. If I was to make the same argument for you, I'd say that your post 100 was a remarkable change of tone for you. It's just as valid.
And you brought the argument up about tom?
Rhand: What do you think of my Vaimes post at 179?
Mallorean: What does Mind's 66 look like if you consider he's claimed null on him?
How prone to tunnelling are you? An example of it is helpful.
Can you explain in more detail what made you move your vote to Mata in 174?
It just occured to me that the answer to "Why is Rhand scum" is 'because'. Do better than that please.
I'm actually pretty close to voting. Answer my questions though.
I never said I didn't respond to your posts. It's CLEAR I responded to your posts.
Also, I didn't bring up the Tom argument. You brought it up in #195: "#58 has a bad push on tom (the math was already established as RVS)." Followed by "#61 looks like a threat to tom. I’m not sure what he meant here."
I guess you might have just meant the math part of that. Which would be odd since we dropped that topic literally 3 pages ago. I assumed this was a natural progression from Mal's #145 where he wanted to know why I was "trying to chase down Tom for his rhyming thing". Especially since you've engaged on that topic.
YOU brought up tom's rhymes as defense vs your own tone and what I'm saying is that you DID respond to stuff in those posts I quoted in a very different tone than you are responding now, which you cannot compare to my 2 posts.
I'm done engaging. Dieplxthx.
@KJ: The only real pro-town point for Vaimes you're making that I haven't touched on before in your Vaimes case is his self-meta. Which i don't see as a tell of anything at all. I still think he's most likely scum.
That other post where he doesn't want to clutter the thread is why I prefer lynching Mindreaver over him. It's the one point that I saw in my reread that made me less sure.
I'll catch up late tonight or something. Had a day out with friends.
Me, mal, Rhand, Citrus, tom? is my towncircle right now, I think.
Doesn't matter because null isn't an alignment. Should be considering both then.
Based on what you're calling tunneling, very prone. I feel like tunneling involves more being focused on one person and being resistant to new evidence than what I'm doing here. Feel free to browse fantasystrike yourself, I can link examples later.
Half considering my conversation with Tom, half wanted to advance the game state, half disliking Matowar's entrance back into the thread.
I'll expand on these later around my normal time when I'm not phoneposting from work.
@everyone else:
I dislike Killjoy's big post. Very Information instead of Analysis. Will reread to point out what else is bothering me about it.
I like Rhand's catchup. He's probably wrong about Vaimes though. Please don't let that part make you ignore what he's saying about Mindreaver.
Invitation is still open to people for joining my Matowar wagon.
Maybe quote the part where I bring up tom's rhymes as a defense of anything I've said. Go ahead. Anyone.
I'm also done.
@Everyone else: Am I completely without merit here? I really cannot see how each time my words get twisted like this, and nobody has an issue? No questions for Rhand?
I am not saying I don't understand what you are posting. I am saying it is an unnecessary pain in the ass to read through it and get your meanings. If you are enjoying yourself, don't let me stop you, but don't be surprised if I decide to tune you out.
You accused it of being a snap trap, even before I snapped it. You jumped the gun, before any other players even reacted to it. I wasn't expecting to catch scum off the bat (I have never expected this). This was a late game play that helps me get reads come later game. Calling me out before I tried to play my hand (like, for instance, snap voting Vaimes) might have helped you along the line) or perhaps someone might have reacted differently in a bad way.
And if I cared enough to play on other sites, I might have been aware of that. This is the first time I have seen this set-up here in three-fourish years.
You probably should avoid most of my meta, as I am stingy with my vote regardless of alignment. However, I am pointing to my facts with matowar. Your 182 responses to matowar are not inspiring of a good scumhunt. I am not going to pretend mato's posts are a grand slam, but do you really think scum, even newbie scum plays it that naively?
I have been playing for years, and in Ace Attorney, it can be tough when under pressure to fully scumhunt/search. Hell, the only reason I eventually caught Rhand was because he was not asking me questions unless I poked him first.
Process of elimination.
Now talking more to GJ/Killjoy,
Votes are the most real thing to manipulate from a scum perspective.
Why don't you have questions for Rhand? He can choose to ignore you, I suppose, but I doubt he will.
The GJ way path to no lynching:
Good fight. Well fought. We can possibly resume this day3 if we're both still alive and the game isn't over.
What do you think about Killjoy misunderstanding your intentions in his big post?
I am a little wary of it. He has played in Animal, where I first started this trend, and I think he was the one the caught on to the trend really quickly (it was an all power game, and I was an investigative role that couldn't be roleblocked). For him to say "GJ doesn't actually mention that he wasn't trying to trap scum for some reason. " seems like a slight smear, or push of suspicion. I think the point that makes me dislike the post the most is:
At this point, you had moved your vote to matowar. You are certainly clashing with me, but I would hardly call it a tunnel.
The GJ way path to no lynching:
You say it doesn't reveal anything about the gamestate, but it reveals what Rhand (an unknown) thinks about the person who he naked-voted. You're twisting logic here. You're literally attempting to say that Mindreaver is scum regardless of Rhand's alingment and regardless of what Mindreaver's actually thoughts are. Mindreaver asking that accomplishes this: Trying to get a read on Rhand. Trying to twist it into anything else is bad.
And this part just seems like you're trying to force scum out of nothing. He asked ONE question early in the game. You and Rhand are reading WAY too much into it.
@GJ
Are you saying that you WERE trying to trap scum with this series of posts then? MT was saying you were, and was throwing suspicion onto you for it. Why are you ok with that?
Here's the post for reference.
Mindreaver is disturbingly less calm under pressure this game. This frustrates me.
AND WE'RE BACK...
@GJ, fair enough, I do have questions. I don't know how much of this is a re-hash of the last few posts, but here we go.
Here are the ways in which I think I've specifically had my argument twisted by Rhand.
Here is what I want to know, Rhand: How does somebody who is town, misquote and misunderstand somebody in this manner?
Follow up is, if you had legitimate concerns about me, why not just quote the specific parts of my post that you had a problem with, instead of coming up with your own interpretations each time?
I've already explained why I wrote what I did. However, even taking that aside. My question is, who benefits from two RVS votes moving away from the established wagons? I never once implied that RVS votes shouldn't be replaced by serious ones.
Here is the real quote:
I didn't say, nor imply, that I wanted KJ lynched in this scenario. My argument was that he was under pressure, and 3 others were asked to vote a serious vote. It's not unreasonable to think they would take a look at KJ. To say I would have voted him, or that I would have been fine to lynch him, isn't anywhere in that.
Again, lets take a look at the post prior:
This one, is a little closer to the mark, except for what I am responding to is: "About tom: his rhymes have a lot more power than your early posts did." Rhand is clearly saying I shouldn't bring Tom into this. But HE's the one who made the comparison here. I'm saying that if he's going to judge me by tone, and then compare that tone directly to Tom, then we should have a discussion about exactly how that is done. I think my point about how Tom's posts are tough to distinguish tone, is a valid point in this context.
However, to say "you're saying I should ignore..." is hyperbole. I didn't tell you how to think, nor how to investigate. My problem is purely in your reasoning, and your conclusions.
Finally, and thank you all for staying with me here, 213
Why chose these specific quotes, and why stop there? I'm pretty sure Mal and KJ have both mentioned that even though they thought there was a tone shift from ~66 to ~101, they see me as more consistent since then. Since they are two of your "townreads" (204), why are you so resistent to re-evaluation? It seems to me, at least, that you'd be willing to consider the last hundred posts of the game as well as the first.
Which leads to my last question for your Rhand. What scum-slips have I made in this entire exchange that you can point to? Let's both assume that I'm not "soft" posting anymore. What else?
You're not going to convince Rhand that he's scum. There's some types of questions you could be asking him, but they aren't the ones you're directing towards him at the moment. If you'd like to continue your current line of logic, please direct it towards Vaimes, myself, or any other player that you believe is currently NOT scumreading Rhand. It would be the most useful to me, and maybe the rest of the game, if that person is Vaimes, but if its me, that's fine too.
I'm going to address some other stuff before I get back to you on anything else.
I just noticed that this was incorrect when you posted it. /I/ was the one on Matowar, and Mindreaver was still on Rhand.
Current votal is
You're almost there. How mindreaver is reading him /is/ relevant to my case. And my case is that Mindreaver's question didn't show evidence of having an opinion -OR- evidence of trying to form an opinion. If you think that somebody is null, you think that they could be town or scum. You interact with them to figure out which. You don't want to come out of the interaction still thinking they're null, because then you haven't made any progress.
That's what I mean by "soft". And, as you pointed out, that didn't just apply to his question to Rhand, it also applied to his questions to Tom and you. The Rhand one is just the clearest.
The question to Tom had a mismatch of intentions. His statement about the math "That math doesn't help us catch scum. In fact it's only useful if we want to know the odds of randomly lynching. Which we won't be doing..." reads like a reason to vote Tom, because he says that the math is useless (scummy) UNLESS Tom was going to suggest a random lynch (also scummy). But then he completely moderates his tone to "So what was the thought process there?", which is the kind of question I'd expect to be asked of a townread, because it gives Tom too much room to slip out of it if he's scum. And Mindreaver doesn't follow it up.
The question to you isn't even a question. " Are you looking for things to use against people later on?". That's an accusation, not something that gets answered. But again, he moderates it to "That phrasing bothers me.". If you're not going to vote your scumleans, you want to at least ask them something that they'll feel obligated to answer to pretend to be town. You never felt obligated to answer this, and didn't IIRC.
And then the question to Rhand. "What are your thoughts on Vaimes?" I think this has been covered enough. If Mindreaver is town, I'd expect something closer to one of "Explain your vote" or "Bussing already?" or "I don't see that, explain please?" or "I can see that, *votes himself*" (in order, scum/town,scum/scum,town/town, town/scum reactions). It feels designed to see which way the wind is blowing, not figure out who's scum.
You /are/ correct that this was just one short question wall early game though. And instead of being scum, Mindreaver could just be new and not know how to ask good questions or apply pressure because he's trying too hard to not anger anybody. I just think that "trying too hard to not anger anybody" is scummy.
One post does not make a case. The other part is that he was present in the thread, but not inquisitive, despite specifically talking about how having lots of interactions on Day1 was important. And his "no fun allowed" thing to Tom is something I've seen more from scum than from town.
As far as previous examples of me tunneling, the last time I hard core tunneled a town as town was Cathunt Day2 starting here, the last time I tunneled a town on Day1 and got them lynched was WH11 starting here.
Tell me what you think it means. If you're not sure, list the possibilities.
This is what I mean when I say "Information instead of analysis". It can stand in for all the other examples from this post.
Uh, you tell me?
Same thing going on in his reads post.
When do you like lynching lurkers then, at LYLO?
I always like threatening to lynch lurkers so that they delurk. We have 1.5 weeks left, so this statement feels incredibly premature.
Which, to all you people that should be on the matowar wagon atm, is why you should be voting. 1 person saying "I'll have your head if you don't post and help me read you" is far less convincing than 3 or 4 people saying the same thing.
While I try to focus more on who is individually more scummy on Day1, I think that anybody with this pair of reads needs to take a moment to think about scumteams. Do you think that Rhand and Mindreaver are on the same team?
If you don't, which one is scummier? Who's likely to be partners with that one?
Actually, that votal was kind of wrong too. Mantowar unvoted in 205.
It's:
[quote="Votal"]
Killjoy (1): Vaimes (#29)
Mindreaver (1): Rhand (#100)
Matowar77 (1): mallorean_thug (#174)
Rhand (3): Mindreaver (#113), tomsloger (#117), CitricBase (#140), !fake!Mantowar77 (#207)
Abstaining (3): GentlemanJohnny, Killjoy, Matowar77
@Killjoy
mal already answered, but he absolutely tunneled the ***** out of dC in the game he linked (CatHunt). Uh. My overall experience with mal isn't so much that he tunnels, but he tries to have his vote on the most useful wagon he can, while keeping up interactions with as many people as possible and prodding the lurkers/abstainers every now and again to do things and establish connections between people for later analysis. I wouldn't have said he tunnels, really. But this is me going off of memory and not paging through our past games together.
@CitricBase
My mal read that you asked about a long time ago is: probably my most confident townread. I'm working against the background of WH14, where he was bit of an awkward mess. So far he seems incredibly natural and has probably put in the most effort to solve the game thus far. He's making five-posts-in-a-row, which suggests a certain confidence, like "hi hello yes I am not scum therefore I am never in any danger of slipping, these are my thoughts and you will take all of them into consideration, tia."
@mal
I had a paranoia!scumread on Citrus earlier because I know he was excited to get into another mafia game but was lurking a bit at the beginning of this one. I also had a conflicting "he forgot the game started and I think that's more likely to come from town" read, the same one I gave to LTH (??) I think, in whatever recent WH it was where he got replaced by Proph. I think I'm okay with him now, I did just list him in my towncircle, but I need to go back and check out his posts again to be sure I wasn't just happy seeing him have more posts.
Before looking back,
Vaimes
mallorean_thug
Rhand
tomsloger
CitricBase
Gentleman Johnny
Matowar77
Mindreaver
Killjoy
Bottom four aren't really in order. I can't remember any of GJ's posts after his No Lynch thing; Killjoy I have to see what he's been doing since I stopped interacting with him; Mindreaver I thought started out okay but obviously warrants another look. A lot of his posts seem to be solely defending himself against Rhand. And Mato, I dunno. He's new-ish, I suck at reading new people. I'll sort them eventually. Coming around to scum!Mindreaver based on mal's points, and I know Rhand's gonna "lolbussing" at me but I'll let him have the tiny victory it's no doubt going to inspire in him (which I will then heartlessly crush at some point either via NK or the game ending, because I have a town role PM).
Unvote
Vote Matowar77
2. Why?
is all I can really say to that right now.
Can I please ask that Votes and Unvotes be placed on a separate line in posts. When skimming through looking for bold text it's easy to miss something stuck in the middle of a paragraph. Thanks
Votecount:
Mindreaver: Rhand
Rhand: Mindreaver, tomsloger, CitricBase
Matowar77: mallorean_thug, Vaimes
Not Voting:
Gentleman Johnny, Killjoy
With 9 alive, it's 5 to lynch.
Deadline is June 7, 2016
I'm getting cold feet on Vaimes. I think I might be wrong on that one.
Mindreaver continues to make no sense in his arguments :/
I'm starting to think it's not necessarily scum motivation I'm seeing but just inexperience and an inability to grasp the bigger picture of things.
He seems to simply miss the whole concept of the softness and tone change I'm accusing him of. And the omgussy way he's pushing back at me instead of just adressing the points I am making can come from newb!town and newb!scum alike.
I'm not saying he's town, but I'm not so sure that he's scum anymore either. He can swing either way.
I guess I need a fresh view on this game. Let's start with moving my vote.
unvote, vote KillJoy
Mallorean has a good case with the catch-up being iioa, his Vaimes white knighting while Vaimes has no votes on him seems out of place busywork (but they are unaligned), and his "I want to lynch Rhand toDay" feels fake.
@KJ: why should we not lynch matowar toDay?
He can't even keep his crappy reads steady
But I still feel I've had much to say
Now let's pretend you are town, just for fun
And look back over what you have done
You had two hard reads, poorly explained
And did not even look at the interactions contained
Now you've backpedaled both while leaving them open
What is the lynch for which you are hopin?
Kj, matowar, vaimes or mindreaver
In all of these scum, you've been a believer
What is your town block, as big as you'd like?
Who can you win with and drop the mic?
Because it seems to me, from what you have said
That you would be happy to see us all dead
Scum should be in KJ, mindreaver, matowar with outside chances of Vaimes and you.
I think Citric and mallorean are town and am leaning town on GJ.
But I'm repeating myself here.
Am i supposed to think that they are good men?
Citric's bulk of good posts were after my catchup.
Note that he never asked for a reason and was town reading me prior to this. He even unequivocally said in his catch up post "this is town kj". No doubt whatsoever.
The reason, btw is your fake tunnelling, and the catch up post did two things. It used scum rhetoric, and stopped just before you got to my town clear of Vaimes. It reminds me a lot of winterfell where you stopped your reread just before your mate claimed your role.
Here, you stopped reading before that so you could decide if you needed to back down from Vaimes.
Id love for you to claim. We all know you are claiming vanilla though. Feel free though. Then we can lunch you.
You>mato.
Thug: how do you feel about the reasons Rhand is voting for me? Especially note that part where part of the reason is your case on my catch up post, which isn't a case but you trying to get me to expand my thoughts.
I love how you spin me changing my mind against me tho.
Anyways, guess i better claim.
I am town vanilla. No name, no flavor.
/That/ post wasn't a case because I wanted you to expand your thoughts first.
Which I still want you to do.
We're definitely not ending toDay anywhere near this early. I still have a bunch of things I want to do.
My next post will explain why I'm townreading Rhand.