I know you haven't voted me yet. But you also said I could be scum, so I invited you to vote for me.
It was still 90% an RVS-ish vote. The 10% was because I find joking about the mod being scum to be a suuuper light scumtell, since it completely avoids potentially talking about other players. I made a vote that was both silly and also had the potential to be serious, depending on what happened next. I thought your reaction to the first (and only) vote on you was weird, and it looked like you were asking tom to elaborate on his math that doesn't actually accomplish anything.
20% is probably better than your 0% vote on Rhand! Also I don't know why we're acting like these numbers are concrete.
RVS is a binary thing. Either you're 100% voting for a reason not relelvent the the game or you're voting for a serious reason. 90% RVS is a cop out.
And yes, I asked Tom to elaborate on his math because it doesn't make sense. What else should it be accomplishing?
Can you show me a recent town game by yourself, please?
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.
Thats... kinda the point of random voting is it is 0% serious. When we break out of RVS, you start doing things at least generally seriously and people can use that to help figure out your alignment. 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'.
IDK, that's why I asked him. I don't see a use for it but maybe there is because I never actually did the math. The math still makes no sense so I'm ignoring it.
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.
There is no cop out, because I'm not going to argue against anyone using the vote to analyze in the future. My mindset when placing that vote was "eh, this is a teeny thing I don't like, but it's probably not worth completely breaking out of RVS over."
But okay. I won't try to have it both ways. For the purposes of preventing us from arguing over this and cluttering the thread, it can be treated as a serious vote.
I get what tom's math was trying to accomplish, because each value is prefaced with its intention (i.e. chances of hitting scum Day 1 in this setup). My question is, what does knowing those values do for us? What does knowing the likelihood of lynching scum Day 1 do to help us lynch scum?
Which is why I don't get why you asked him to elaborate on the math, or explain the values.
@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.
do you dislike math, dear killer of joys?
a degree i got, with honor and poise
facts and figures are my fav'rite of toys
though in this case, it was but background noise
i'd have to do more, to make it worthwhile
but it just won't work in a game this style
tombot tried, but hes off to the junk pile
and i will go back to looking for guile
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.
at this point i believe, my icy friend
scum sees this coming. theyve noticed the trend
...you voted me for saying the mod was scum with Rhand. You took it too seriously. And you'll notice I didn't vote you yet.
I find it funny how you're almost threateningly challenging me to vote you on 20% when you happily voted at 10.
i dont like that "yet." it seems out of place
do you expect vaimes, to fall out of grace?
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?
Quote from MT »
Day1 Vote Gentleman Johnny
Mmm. Not feeling the friendship here...
Quote from Vaimes »
I know you haven't voted me yet. But you also said I could be scum, so I invited you to vote for me.
It was still 90% an RVS-ish vote. The 10% was because I find joking about the mod being scum to be a suuuper light scumtell, since it completely avoids potentially talking about other players. I made a vote that was both silly and also had the potential to be serious, depending on what happened next. I thought your reaction to the first (and only) vote on you was weird, and it looked like you were asking tom to elaborate on his math that doesn't actually accomplish anything.
20% is probably better than your 0% vote on Rhand! Also I don't know why we're acting like these numbers are concrete.
I can't tell if this post is a joke or not. Your last line leans joke, but I assume you are more serious towards KJ.
Quote from tom »
at this point i believe, my icy friend
scum sees this coming. theyve noticed the trend
I believe that behavior can still be found whether true or rational.
Don't dismiss my logic, you filthy casual.
I tried to stay away but I can't. Post, dammit. This is my only active game right now.
@tom
I've never said "impossibru" ever in my life. And this time doesn't count.
@GJ
I mean, I know it's something you do a lot because it's in your sig. If you want to explain your specific motives this game or something, be my guest. Never once in a game of mafia have I weighed the pros and cons of intentionally No Lynching Day 1 because it almost never happens.
That entire post is serious. The last line is tongue-in-cheek a bit.
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.
There is no cop out, because I'm not going to argue against anyone using the vote to analyze in the future. My mindset when placing that vote was "eh, this is a teeny thing I don't like, but it's probably not worth completely breaking out of RVS over."
But okay. I won't try to have it both ways. For the purposes of preventing us from arguing over this and cluttering the thread, it can be treated as a serious vote.
Yeah, you're not going to use that argument anymore. That was the point of calling it out.
I get what tom's math was trying to accomplish, because each value is prefaced with its intention (i.e. chances of hitting scum Day 1 in this setup). My question is, what does knowing those values do for us? What does knowing the likelihood of lynching scum Day 1 do to help us lynch scum?
Which is why I don't get why you asked him to elaborate on the math, or explain the values.
IDK what they do. Like, I'm not sure how he arrived at those numbers. I asked him to expand. Still not sure why that's a problem. Why is that a problem?
@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.
It's got to do with his initial lack of commitment to the vote. He claimed to only have 10% commitment to the vote because it was 10% serious. Therefore, if anyone thought that that vote was bad, Vaimes could deflect it by saying "Oh, it wasn't really serious", which I saw and preempted.
do you dislike math, dear killer of joys?
a degree i got, with honor and poise
facts and figures are my fav'rite of toys
though in this case, it was but background noise
i'd have to do more, to make it worthwhile
but it just won't work in a game this style
tombot tried, but hes off to the junk pile
and i will go back to looking for guile
No, I have no problem with math. But there are good reasons to do the math in a semi-open setup. For *****s and giggles is not one of them.
i dont like that "yet." it seems out of place
do you expect vaimes, to fall out of grace?
After Twinborn, I noticed that I have a strong tendency to tunnel. I feel the urge with Vaimes already, so I'm holding back. I'm taking a step back and trying to analyze from a wider perspective instead of getting in my head in this manor.
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.
I was never going to call it out, ever. You're assuming I was going to try and call the vote completely non-serious later on. I understand that nobody can really take my word for it when I say "actually, I had no plans on doing that," so it's whatever.
It's a problem because it's pointless. Whether the numbers are correct or not means nothing. Zero. You were asking him to elaborate on something that had absolutely 0 value whatsoever. It's busywork. I can't think of any other way to say that more clearly.
Anyway, you say you're getting the urge to tunnel and I'm probably talking to you too much and it'll cloud my read of you as things progress. Let's maybe interact with other people for a bit.
You can respond to my last post, if you want, but I probably won't if you do.
I was never going to call it out, ever. You're assuming I was going to try and call the vote completely non-serious later on. I understand that nobody can really take my word for it when I say "actually, I had no plans on doing that," so it's whatever.
It's a problem because it's pointless. Whether the numbers are correct or not means nothing. Zero. You were asking him to elaborate on something that had absolutely 0 value whatsoever. It's busywork. I can't think of any other way to say that more clearly.
The numbers have no value in YOUR opinion. Unless you can prove that those numbers are obviously pointless (in that its just common sense that waht you're saying is true) then your push based on that argument is crap.I don't see it as pointless.
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.
The numbers have no value in YOUR opinion. Unless you can prove that those numbers are obviously pointless (in that its just common sense that waht you're saying is true) then your push based on that argument is crap.I don't see it as pointless.
@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?
Okay so I'm caving and responding, sue me.
The numbers are pointless, and here "pointless" means "does not help us catch scum in any way whatsoever." I don't get how you don't seem to understand this.
In conclusion, and unsurprisingly: my push is not crap.
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.
I was never going to call it out, ever. You're assuming I was going to try and call the vote completely non-serious later on. I understand that nobody can really take my word for it when I say "actually, I had no plans on doing that," so it's whatever.
It's a problem because it's pointless. Whether the numbers are correct or not means nothing. Zero. You were asking him to elaborate on something that had absolutely 0 value whatsoever. It's busywork. I can't think of any other way to say that more clearly.
The numbers have no value in YOUR opinion. Unless you can prove that those numbers are obviously pointless (in that its just common sense that waht you're saying is true) then your push based on that argument is crap.I don't see it as pointless.
Thanks Vaimes. That's actually exactly what I was looking for.
To the rest of the thread:
In my mental model of Vaimes, town!Vaimes sees my "bestest friend" question as fluff and fluffs back about himself. While scum!Vaimes gets paranoid about it and sees it as a real question about the rest of the playerbase. And then the followup makes it even more likely that scum!Vaimes gets paranoid and tries to answer it as a real question.
So I lightly think that this is town!Vaimes. Though you could possibly see #82 as scum!Vaimes saying "Is this a trap? I don't like traps." instead.
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.
So, I see 3 real topics so far that people can weigh in on and break out of RVS (GJ, tom, mindreaver, and Killjoy need real votes)
1. the NoLynch/GJ/Vaimes thing I explained above.
2. tom's math / the reaction to tom's math.
3. is Vaime's 10% vote on Killjoy / the reaction to that.
My opinions on the two topics I didn't touch myself yet:
I saw tom's math thing as trying to get ahead of a possible discussion about Nolynch, because its not worthwhile otherwise. The fact that he said it was worthless himself, instead of trying it back to the context he posted it in and despite clearly paying attention to what GJ was doing, confuses me. Killjoy's insistence that it could be worthwhile, despite not having a reason why that would be the case himself is also ????. That's putting a strange amount of trust in tom, but its also a baffling hill for scum to choose to die on when it would be really easy to just say "Sure, its worthless, now I want tom to explain himself, rather than the math" like several other people said.
I think Vaimes' vote was good and his prod to get Killjoy out of RVS was good. I like when people vote for their best guess at the time, even if they don't have strong reasons yet. Holding back votes holds back analysis. BUT . . . I also like Killjoy forcing Vaimes to take back the "10% serious" statement and amend it to "100% serious, NOT RVS". So, to me, this seems like a productive early v/v slap fight. More people should be slap fighting right now, instead of just throwing shade towards the only people posting.
Reading the thread again, I think the next most independently scummy poster after Gentleman Johnny is Mindreaver. If I could choose two wagons to pursue for the next couple IRL days, it would be those two.
So topic of interest #4 can be why I think that / am saying that.
an unaligned pair, from this post right here
i cannot see vaimes with that little fear
as for vaimes and killjoy, thats harder to parse
it could be town/town, or could be a farce
ive never done this before, but its a great time to start
theyre an ALIGNED pair, they cant be apart
matowar seems a little bit stilted
towards scum my thoughts on him tilted
our thuggish pink lady is probably town
my reasoning here is quite upside down
he scumread johnny for springing a trap
but if he was scum, his mouth wouldnt flap
just be content, to not get caught
not share his theory, silly or not
citric, i think, is townie as well
but i am not ready, to share this tell
Could they be used to help determine Tom's alignment?
????? Likely not.
I actually forgot he said he would bring out tombot in the Signups. I was acting on the assumption that this was something he was spontaniously doing, so I'll give you that it's probably not alignment indicative.
Thanks Vaimes. That's actually exactly what I was looking for.
To the rest of the thread:
In my mental model of Vaimes, town!Vaimes sees my "bestest friend" question as fluff and fluffs back about himself. While scum!Vaimes gets paranoid about it and sees it as a real question about the rest of the playerbase. And then the followup makes it even more likely that scum!Vaimes gets paranoid and tries to answer it as a real question.
So I lightly think that this is town!Vaimes. Though you could possibly see #82 as scum!Vaimes saying "Is this a trap? I don't like traps." instead.
Agree? Y/N
How well do you know Vaimes? How much mafia experience do you have with him?
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.
This is actually an astute observation. I like where your head is at.
So, I see 3 real topics so far that people can weigh in on and break out of RVS (GJ, tom, mindreaver, and Killjoy need real votes)
Right. I'm still voting Rhand. Unvote.
I saw tom's math thing as trying to get ahead of a possible discussion about Nolynch, because its not worthwhile otherwise. The fact that he said it was worthless himself, instead of trying it back to the context he posted it in and despite clearly paying attention to what GJ was doing, confuses me. Killjoy's insistence that it could be worthwhile, despite not having a reason why that would be the case himself is also ????. That's putting a strange amount of trust in tom, but its also a baffling hill for scum to choose to die on when it would be really easy to just say "Sure, its worthless, now I want tom to explain himself, rather than the math" like several other people said.
You seem to think I'm asking tom to delve more into the math becasue I think it'll help the game end. IDK if I just didn't use enough words, but I want tom to explain where he got the numbers. I don't feel like trying to figure out if a number is the decimal version of 7/9. I had tohught it might help us figure out tom's alignment, but I realized that tom had said he would do something like this in the Signups, so that makes it not alignment indicative.
an unaligned pair, from this post right here
i cannot see vaimes with that little fear
as for vaimes and killjoy, thats harder to parse
it could be town/town, or could be a farce
ive never done this before, but its a great time to start
theyre an ALIGNED pair, they cant be apart
These two paragraphs literally contridict each other. You say Vaimes and I are unaligned, then you say maybe we're scum together?
Mallorean is town. Mindreaver is probably scum. KJ and Vaimes are unaligned. unvote, vote Mindreaver
See, this is why I constantly scumread you. Both of your posts this game were a blind vote on Vaimes, and some unreasoned reads and a blind vote on Mindreaver. Why is Mind more scum than Vaimes?
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.
And yes, I asked Tom to elaborate on his math because it doesn't make sense. What else should it be accomplishing?
Can you show me a recent town game by yourself, please?
What is the math going to do for anyone?
Last towngame (VT, made it to endgame!) > http://www.mtgsalvation.com/forums/forum-games/mafia/652374-stargate-sg-1-the-system-lord-summit-mafia-endgame
IDK, that's why I asked him. I don't see a use for it but maybe there is because I never actually did the math. The math still makes no sense so I'm ignoring it.
But okay. I won't try to have it both ways. For the purposes of preventing us from arguing over this and cluttering the thread, it can be treated as a serious vote.
Which is why I don't get why you asked him to elaborate on the math, or explain the values.
Think I'm gonna take a step back and let other people do things for a bit.
Later.
@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.
@Rhand - What are your thoughts on Vaimes?
a degree i got, with honor and poise
facts and figures are my fav'rite of toys
though in this case, it was but background noise
i'd have to do more, to make it worthwhile
but it just won't work in a game this style
tombot tried, but hes off to the junk pile
and i will go back to looking for guile
If youre joking around that seems more you at this point i believe, my icy friend
scum sees this coming. theyve noticed the trend i dont like that "yet." it seems out of place
do you expect vaimes, to fall out of grace?
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
i may have to drop it when it is time
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?
Mmm. Not feeling the friendship here...
I can't tell if this post is a joke or not. Your last line leans joke, but I assume you are more serious towards KJ.
I believe that behavior can still be found whether true or rational.
Don't dismiss my logic, you filthy casual.
The GJ way path to no lynching:
@tom
I've never said "impossibru" ever in my life. And this time doesn't count.
@GJ
I mean, I know it's something you do a lot because it's in your sig. If you want to explain your specific motives this game or something, be my guest. Never once in a game of mafia have I weighed the pros and cons of intentionally No Lynching Day 1 because it almost never happens.
That entire post is serious. The last line is tongue-in-cheek a bit.
*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.
IDK what they do. Like, I'm not sure how he arrived at those numbers. I asked him to expand. Still not sure why that's a problem. Why is that a problem?
It's got to do with his initial lack of commitment to the vote. He claimed to only have 10% commitment to the vote because it was 10% serious. Therefore, if anyone thought that that vote was bad, Vaimes could deflect it by saying "Oh, it wasn't really serious", which I saw and preempted.
No, I have no problem with math. But there are good reasons to do the math in a semi-open setup. For *****s and giggles is not one of them.
After Twinborn, I noticed that I have a strong tendency to tunnel. I feel the urge with Vaimes already, so I'm holding back. I'm taking a step back and trying to analyze from a wider perspective instead of getting in my head in this manor.
What do you think of Vaimes, btw?
It's a problem because it's pointless. Whether the numbers are correct or not means nothing. Zero. You were asking him to elaborate on something that had absolutely 0 value whatsoever. It's busywork. I can't think of any other way to say that more clearly.
You can respond to my last post, if you want, but I probably won't if you do.
Vote: Killjoy
Hey it's Citric. What are your reads on people so far? Vaimes and I have talked a bunch.
I think Tom's the only one who's done any math. Who are you referring to?
Matowar, are those both RVS votes?
Okay so I'm caving and responding, sue me.
The numbers are pointless, and here "pointless" means "does not help us catch scum in any way whatsoever." I don't get how you don't seem to understand this.
In conclusion, and unsurprisingly: my push is not crap.
????? Likely not.
It is me indeed!
My reads are all contained in this sentence: .
By math I was referring to all the random percentages that are being thrown around
Is this before or after you actually tried reading everything? Serious question.
Do you think this is the kind of response I was looking for?
Would you like to try again?
I don't actually know what you're looking for, and I'm not sure if you can reasonably expect me to.
its forcing me to yammer and post fluff
starting with this line
those first two are fine
ive been spending my time with fancy phrases
instead of hunting for scum to vanquish
ill return later on, with something to say
without just getting in my own god damn way
>vanquish
*language
(still wasnt that great of a rhyme)
To the rest of the thread:
In my mental model of Vaimes, town!Vaimes sees my "bestest friend" question as fluff and fluffs back about himself. While scum!Vaimes gets paranoid about it and sees it as a real question about the rest of the playerbase. And then the followup makes it even more likely that scum!Vaimes gets paranoid and tries to answer it as a real question.
So I lightly think that this is town!Vaimes. Though you could possibly see #82 as scum!Vaimes saying "Is this a trap? I don't like traps." instead.
Agree? Y/N
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.
So,
I am curious about your motives, because currently to me, it looks like you were looking to entangle the first player to engage you.
and
Yeah that was a real vote, not an RVS vote. (My votes are always 100% serious)
That said, this:
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.
Thanks for keeping me from triple posting though.
Hmm . . .
So, I see 3 real topics so far that people can weigh in on and break out of RVS (GJ, tom, mindreaver, and Killjoy need real votes)
1. the NoLynch/GJ/Vaimes thing I explained above.
2. tom's math / the reaction to tom's math.
3. is Vaime's 10% vote on Killjoy / the reaction to that.
My opinions on the two topics I didn't touch myself yet:
I saw tom's math thing as trying to get ahead of a possible discussion about Nolynch, because its not worthwhile otherwise. The fact that he said it was worthless himself, instead of trying it back to the context he posted it in and despite clearly paying attention to what GJ was doing, confuses me. Killjoy's insistence that it could be worthwhile, despite not having a reason why that would be the case himself is also ????. That's putting a strange amount of trust in tom, but its also a baffling hill for scum to choose to die on when it would be really easy to just say "Sure, its worthless, now I want tom to explain himself, rather than the math" like several other people said.
I think Vaimes' vote was good and his prod to get Killjoy out of RVS was good. I like when people vote for their best guess at the time, even if they don't have strong reasons yet. Holding back votes holds back analysis. BUT . . . I also like Killjoy forcing Vaimes to take back the "10% serious" statement and amend it to "100% serious, NOT RVS". So, to me, this seems like a productive early v/v slap fight. More people should be slap fighting right now, instead of just throwing shade towards the only people posting.
I've been enjoying the Thunder > Warriors game. I did read everything though.
So topic of interest #4 can be why I think that / am saying that.
Rhand: Killjoy
Vaimes: tomsloger, Rhand
tomsloger: Mindreaver
No Lynch: Gentleman Johnny
Killjoy: Vaimes, CitricBase, Matowar77
Gentleman Johnny: mallorean_thug
Not Voting:
With 9 alive, it's 5 to lynch.
Deadline is June 7, 2016
i cannot see vaimes with that little fear
as for vaimes and killjoy, thats harder to parse
it could be town/town, or could be a farce
ive never done this before, but its a great time to start
theyre an ALIGNED pair, they cant be apart
matowar seems a little bit stilted
towards scum my thoughts on him tilted
our thuggish pink lady is probably town
my reasoning here is quite upside down
he scumread johnny for springing a trap
but if he was scum, his mouth wouldnt flap
just be content, to not get caught
not share his theory, silly or not
citric, i think, is townie as well
but i am not ready, to share this tell
unvote, vote Mindreaver
tom, is your vote on me serious? Commit, or you know gimme some space.
Cases when I'm on a pc.
How well do you know Vaimes? How much mafia experience do you have with him?
This is actually an astute observation. I like where your head is at.
I'd imagine you're easier to read when people have played with you before. Curious: Are you aware of any scumtells you have? If so, what are they?
Right. I'm still voting Rhand. Unvote.
You seem to think I'm asking tom to delve more into the math becasue I think it'll help the game end. IDK if I just didn't use enough words, but I want tom to explain where he got the numbers. I don't feel like trying to figure out if a number is the decimal version of 7/9. I had tohught it might help us figure out tom's alignment, but I realized that tom had said he would do something like this in the Signups, so that makes it not alignment indicative.
These two paragraphs literally contridict each other. You say Vaimes and I are unaligned, then you say maybe we're scum together?
See, this is why I constantly scumread you. Both of your posts this game were a blind vote on Vaimes, and some unreasoned reads and a blind vote on Mindreaver. Why is Mind more scum than Vaimes?
I look forward to it.