@Sloth was playing games and seeing close family. So what thoughts do you have on your proposal?
Happy Easter y’all.
happy happy. Also that's really nice!
Meaning you/me/vaimes? Considering it. Not proposing anything just yet.
@all what are each of your thoughts on shadow's idea.
@grape do I have a deadline?
No, not meaning you/me/Vaimes. I’m specifically asking your thoughts. Kinda miffed you’re calling that “my idea” the whole point of taking you was to force you to make an actual decision.
Ahhh. Sorry, my brain somehow omitted skipped over "your proposal" and read it as "my proposal" - i.e. your plan to go down the line.
Working on it, will let you know when caught up.
I reread and tried to order my notes into more cohesive thoughts:
GJ’s #130, I dislike this mission beyond no just being my default and me not being on it. I read through again and I really like sloth’s posting—it makes sense, seems genuine, and there’s no hesitation to engage while still being open-minded. Overall, GJ’s game seems off to me/the most suspicious.
#24 Don’t like GJ’s secret hitler reference—don’t think it’s a 1:1 comparison; potential attempt to appear thoughtful without actually helping (maybe I still don’t understand the reference?)
GJ #32 jumping to give Vaimes sole credit in direction to me reads a little weird since I was also clearly saying we shouldn’t force a false dichotomy…
GJ #35 saying “take me” after Rhand has already said “anyone who volunteers to go on a mission is town” doesn’t ring genuine to me especially when only 2 people go on the mission. Easy potential fake vs. genuinely don’t know the rules. With 7-player Avalon, first mission is always 2 and then 4th mission requires a double fail so if someone were to make a mistake about a game set-up I would expect it to be on the 4th mission, not on the number of people on the 1st. Might be a stretch though—sounds like you guys don’t like Avalon/resistance that much
Both Rhand and Sloth both feeling good about Vaimes makes me think Vaimes is a good guy
I actually like Sloth's discussion in general but especially #52
Shadow seems to be actively thinking #54
Killjoy’s #74 and #76 stands in sharp contrast to his assessment of me trying to get information from a rock through nomination patterns in #142
Separate topic:
Also, Rhand, in my #30 I clearly indicate the assumption that we’re going all the way to Vaimes’s mission selection (#5) for mission 1. I didn’t even really comprehend that in #54#55#56 shadow, GJ, and sloth were just clearing the first nomination. I’m an idiot. I mean sloth and shadow make sense because if the other is bold scum and fails they get 100% confirmation on a scum player. But I didn’t comprehend that GJ was voting yes. Rhand, why would you vote yes when you have sloth as one of your spy reads? (#58 and a later post with me included too)
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.
@Umami: I actually changed my vote 3 times.
In the end I decided that the mission was a good test for Shadow’s alignment. With all the heat on Sloth, Sloth wouldn’t fail the mission. But I figured that if I was wrong on Sloth and Shadow is a spy, Shadow could fail and make us think it’s Sloth who did that.
So a fail would’ve outed Shadow.
Somewhat disappointed Sloth didn’t be include a real “why” for this proposal. Still, I have varying degrees of trust for this group so might a well see what happens.
Somewhat disappointed Sloth didn’t be include a real “why” for this proposal. Still, I have varying degrees of trust for this group so might a well see what happens.
I feel like we had a simple misunderstanding, 'cause I'm still not sure what you mean on 'real why' and proposal.
Somewhat disappointed Sloth didn’t be include a real “why” for this proposal. Still, I have varying degrees of trust for this group so might a well see what happens.
I still have no hard info, but...
I don't think Sloth+Vaimes are both bad, from interactions? I kinda wanna reject for that reason actually.
If we need to pick blindly among 3 people, having two of them being Spies is actually better than only having one, and is debatably better than having zero. Having zero is only good if we also have zero on the next one as well. If we don't, then we don't have enough info in later Missions to solve the game.
Basically, just keep Vaimes+Sloth out of it is my point.
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 still have no hard info, but...
I don't think Sloth+Vaimes are both bad, from interactions? I kinda wanna reject for that reason actually.
If we need to pick blindly among 3 people, having two of them being Spies is actually better than only having one, and is debatably better than having zero. Having zero is only good if we also have zero on the next one as well. If we don't, then we don't have enough info in later Missions to solve the game.
Basically, just keep Vaimes+Sloth out of it is my point.
Are you saying Vaimes and I shouldn't be part of the group on account of you not thinking we're scum?
I still have no hard info, but...
I don't think Sloth+Vaimes are both bad, from interactions? I kinda wanna reject for that reason actually.
If we need to pick blindly among 3 people, having two of them being Spies is actually better than only having one, and is debatably better than having zero. Having zero is only good if we also have zero on the next one as well. If we don't, then we don't have enough info in later Missions to solve the game.
Basically, just keep Vaimes+Sloth out of it is my point.
Are you saying Vaimes and I shouldn't be part of the group on account of you not thinking we're scum?
Yes. I don't think you're buddies so for this mission you shouldn't go together.
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.
I think two spies is potentially good for rebels, but there's always the chance that it ends up looking like there was only one spy on the mission, which is a big headache.
I still have no hard info, but...
I don't think Sloth+Vaimes are both bad, from interactions? I kinda wanna reject for that reason actually.
If we need to pick blindly among 3 people, having two of them being Spies is actually better than only having one, and is debatably better than having zero. Having zero is only good if we also have zero on the next one as well. If we don't, then we don't have enough info in later Missions to solve the game.
Basically, just keep Vaimes+Sloth out of it is my point.
Are you saying Vaimes and I shouldn't be part of the group on account of you not thinking we're scum?
Yes. I don't think you're buddies so for this mission you shouldn't go together.
Technically three Spies mission two is optimal, but two is more likely.
What it does is says "there's two scum in this group" which increases our likelihood of winning. You seem to understand this.
So why are you arguing against 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.
I still have no hard info, but...
I don't think Sloth+Vaimes are both bad, from interactions? I kinda wanna reject for that reason actually.
If we need to pick blindly among 3 people, having two of them being Spies is actually better than only having one, and is debatably better than having zero. Having zero is only good if we also have zero on the next one as well. If we don't, then we don't have enough info in later Missions to solve the game.
Basically, just keep Vaimes+Sloth out of it is my point.
Are you saying Vaimes and I shouldn't be part of the group on account of you not thinking we're scum?
Yes. I don't think you're buddies so for this mission you shouldn't go together.
I'm...still not sure on the why?
Increases chances for two spies. If no iteration of the group are unlikely both spies, then there are more chances for two plus spies.
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.
Technically three Spies mission two is optimal, but two is more likely.
What it does is says "there's two scum in this group" which increases our likelihood of winning. You seem to understand this.
So why are you arguing against it?
Are you assuming [all] spies are required to fail every mission they go on, or what?
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 mean, this is my ideal mission--I think it has best shot of passing, but if everyone voted it through, I would have been majorly concerned. Plus, I knew I had next nomination so wanted to see the voting pattern and vaimes has the mission after GJ.
That said, shadow I know you said you were going to vote to approve, but why would you ever approve a 3 person mission you're not on that's not the 4th or 5th nomination?
No but they can't coordinate who fails and who doesn't.
Scum only want one person to fail each mission to limit information available to town, but still advance their wincon.
But like, if we have zero bad guys on our 2nd mission then we win...so we don't even need to figure out who all 4 bad guys are. So, yes, having zero bad guys is a huge advantage...
No but they can't coordinate who fails and who doesn't.
Scum only want one person to fail each mission to limit information available to town, but still advance their wincon.
But like, if we have zero bad guys on our 2nd mission then we win...so we don't even need to figure out who all 4 bad guys are. So, yes, having zero bad guys is a huge advantage...
Also, sorry, jumped right to the bold results
*3 bad guys
wow, I'm like really sucking at typing tonight. I should sleep
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
The GJ way path to no lynching:
Working on it, will let you know when caught up.
GJ’s #130, I dislike this mission beyond no just being my default and me not being on it. I read through again and I really like sloth’s posting—it makes sense, seems genuine, and there’s no hesitation to engage while still being open-minded. Overall, GJ’s game seems off to me/the most suspicious.
#24 Don’t like GJ’s secret hitler reference—don’t think it’s a 1:1 comparison; potential attempt to appear thoughtful without actually helping (maybe I still don’t understand the reference?)
GJ #32 jumping to give Vaimes sole credit in direction to me reads a little weird since I was also clearly saying we shouldn’t force a false dichotomy…
GJ #35 saying “take me” after Rhand has already said “anyone who volunteers to go on a mission is town” doesn’t ring genuine to me especially when only 2 people go on the mission. Easy potential fake vs. genuinely don’t know the rules. With 7-player Avalon, first mission is always 2 and then 4th mission requires a double fail so if someone were to make a mistake about a game set-up I would expect it to be on the 4th mission, not on the number of people on the 1st. Might be a stretch though—sounds like you guys don’t like Avalon/resistance that much
Both Rhand and Sloth both feeling good about Vaimes makes me think Vaimes is a good guy
I actually like Sloth's discussion in general but especially #52
Shadow seems to be actively thinking #54
Killjoy’s #74 and #76 stands in sharp contrast to his assessment of me trying to get information from a rock through nomination patterns in #142
Separate topic:
Also, Rhand, in my #30 I clearly indicate the assumption that we’re going all the way to Vaimes’s mission selection (#5) for mission 1. I didn’t even really comprehend that in #54#55#56 shadow, GJ, and sloth were just clearing the first nomination. I’m an idiot. I mean sloth and shadow make sense because if the other is bold scum and fails they get 100% confirmation on a scum player. But I didn’t comprehend that GJ was voting yes. Rhand, why would you vote yes when you have sloth as one of your spy reads? (#58 and a later post with me included too)
Ohohohohohoh. What is Sloth up to these days, eh?
Sorry, RL is too busy for e to spend a lot of time explaining.
But I'm interested in this.
Let's.
3 spies, think I am narrowing it down.
I think this is what you were trying to do?
Shiny.
Sloth has nominated Sloth, Umami, and Vaimes
You have ~24 hours to vote on this proposal via PM.
yes, very unsuccessfully, thanks
Voted
Also, sloth, look at you, being a good with technology. Keep defying stereotypes
I'll check the game out before work tomorrow because tired.
In the end I decided that the mission was a good test for Shadow’s alignment. With all the heat on Sloth, Sloth wouldn’t fail the mission. But I figured that if I was wrong on Sloth and Shadow is a spy, Shadow could fail and make us think it’s Sloth who did that.
So a fail would’ve outed Shadow.
Anyhow, not accepting this one.
This mission is exciting. Take me Mr Sloth.
The GJ way path to no lynching:
I feel like we had a simple misunderstanding, 'cause I'm still not sure what you mean on 'real why' and proposal.
@vaimes
Have you voted yet?
Wait, what?
I don't think Sloth+Vaimes are both bad, from interactions? I kinda wanna reject for that reason actually.
If we need to pick blindly among 3 people, having two of them being Spies is actually better than only having one, and is debatably better than having zero. Having zero is only good if we also have zero on the next one as well. If we don't, then we don't have enough info in later Missions to solve the game.
Basically, just keep Vaimes+Sloth out of it is my point.
GIVES ME MISSION
The GJ way path to no lynching:
Having two spies on a mission wouldn't be great [for anybody], but it does have the potential to be ******* hilarious.
Except I don't really think Umami is a spy, like at all. I guess I could troll Sloth while tunneling him...
GJ's turn next cause he's a good, patient lad.
Nice fearmongering.
Followed by a pocket.
I smell a spy
[[/i]
I think two spies is potentially good for rebels, but there's always the chance that it ends up looking like there was only one spy on the mission, which is a big headache.
If this mission fails, you're TMI'ing, and also toast.
I'm too pretty to be a spy, rhand. You know this.
What it does is says "there's two scum in this group" which increases our likelihood of winning. You seem to understand this.
So why are you arguing against it?
Scum only want one person to fail each mission to limit information available to town, but still advance their wincon.
Yes: Shadow, Sloth, Vaimes
No: KJ, Rhand, Umami
Did not vote and has received a prod: GJ
The mission did no pass. It is now Umami's turn to nominate. Umami has ~72 hours from now to propose a team.
The OP has been updated to have links to nominations and votes. Please prod me if there are any issues with it going forward.
Umami, unless you have a very good reason, hit it again, same grouping.
I mean, this is my ideal mission--I think it has best shot of passing, but if everyone voted it through, I would have been majorly concerned. Plus, I knew I had next nomination so wanted to see the voting pattern and vaimes has the mission after GJ.
Let's run it!
I nominate myself, sloth, and vaimes
But like, if we have zero bad guys on our 2nd mission then we win...so we don't even need to figure out who all 4 bad guys are. So, yes, having zero bad guys is a huge advantage...
Also, sorry, jumped right to the bold results
*3 bad guys
wow, I'm like really sucking at typing tonight. I should sleep