1) GL votes dwlee
2) I accuse GL of being partners with dwlee
3) GL says "I can't possibly be partners with dwlee, I voted him one time!"
4) GL
VOTE: GuiltyLion
this is assuming that I'm scum first and writing a narrative secondIn post 223, goats wrote:You never outed a really strong scumread of him it was more like a "oh I can't find any other palatable options, guess I'll kick dwlee's ass in gear". All he has to do is show up and post and you have an excuse to shift the vote off him.
This is not at all what I said, actuallyIn post 225, goats wrote:3) GL says "I can't possibly be partners with dwlee, I voted him one time!"
yes it is man you said the setup discourages bussing so you can't be partners with dwlee because you're voting him.In post 227, GuiltyLion wrote:This is not at all what I said, actuallyIn post 225, goats wrote:3) GL says "I can't possibly be partners with dwlee, I voted him one time!"
This is exactly what scum!Koba just pulled in Coalition when I started arguing back at him after he tried to bullshit a fake early game scumread on meIn post 232, goats wrote:I'm not engaging w/ you any more.
Gamma talks about how the info gleaned from it can be used later for associatives and to get people a core group to discuss things with.In post 219, goats wrote:What solving did Gamma do with his opening exercise? I didn't see him make many reads off it, he moved on really quick.In post 215, Dwlee99 wrote:Gamma wants to actually do something with his opening and use it to solve. It wasn't just the entrance specifically but also how he built off of it and showed how he wanted to use it to solve in a genuine way
Yeah this was what I figured would be saidIn post 236, Dwlee99 wrote:Gamma talks about how the info gleaned from it can be used later for associatives and to get people a core group to discuss things with.In post 219, goats wrote:What solving did Gamma do with his opening exercise? I didn't see him make many reads off it, he moved on really quick.In post 215, Dwlee99 wrote:Gamma wants to actually do something with his opening and use it to solve. It wasn't just the entrance specifically but also how he built off of it and showed how he wanted to use it to solve in a genuine way
I agree I thinkIn post 159, Infinity 324 wrote:do i really have to explain why implo is town
:/In post 230, GuiltyLion wrote:Instead what I am pushing on is your thought process, what I am saying is that it's really hard for me to grok town in your shoes seeing a scumread voting another scumread and using that as evidence to reinforce their scumread on both players, particularly in a white flag game. You're starting with a conclusion you want to push ("GL is scum") and then arguing from that position in the face of what should have been relatively decent-to-strong evidence immediately to the contrary.
like this vote was pretty much a "play the game" poke, which is really really not difficult to move away from, especially if nobody bites and joins you.In post 132, GuiltyLion wrote:VOTE: Dwlee
are you still scumreading implosion and what are your other reads
also i wanted to go back to this for a second. this is pretty much correct, if scum!me thought i saw a difference between two town!guiltylions, then realized i was wrong, i would still write that out to simulate solving.In post 148, implosion wrote:...why not? He'd just be doing it to emulate a town thought process. But etc.GL wrote:But why would scum!Datisi go through with posting that regardless afterwards once he confirmed it wasn't indicative and I was consistent across the two games?
In post 220, GuiltyLion wrote:and especially how would my vote on Dwlee make sense as a partner vote when this is explicitly a setup that punishes bussing more than usual? Like if I were scum the last thing I would be doing right now is voting a partner when I could probably come up with an excuse to vote almost anyone
This is very one-dimensional. "The last thing I would be doing right now is voting a partner" when we're in the first day or two of the game, and Datisi wasn't really a wagon with steam, is a vapid take. A setup that disincentivizes bussing necessarily incentivizes effective distancing; if you think you can distance from a buddy by voting as scum here, you will. Your vote isn't gonna make it that likely that they'll be eliminated at this point. How is it the last thing scum would do? I don't even think it's really disincentivized at this point. It's certainly disincentivized for scum to bus a partner that has a likely chance of going down soon but at this point I'm skeptical that you'd really be suspicious of someone for saying something might be a partner vote.In post 222, GuiltyLion wrote:thinking about it more I'm having a hard time seeing how us being partners is a genuine read or thought
VOTE: goats
This in turn feels remarkably like reasoning about someone else's posts not in good faith.GL wrote:I didn't have any strong scumreads and Dwlee hadn't done anything to read him off of, that makes him a good vote. The issue is your thought process, apparently "scum who has no other viable options voting his partner on early D1" is somehow more likely than "town with a handful of townreads on active players pushing an inactive slot to participate"? I can't see that coming from someone reasoning about my posts in good faith
This also seems like trying to have your cake and eat it too. You're saying that goats's logic is wrong because scum wouldn't want to bus right now because the setup disincentivizes it, *but also* scum wouldn't bus right now because they won't get anti-associative credit from it if they can move it. Doesn't the second logic invalidate the first? I know you're saying "using your own logic" but the same trick can be flipped on you here. Using your own logic, if your vote on dwlee should be interpreted as evidence that you're not scumbuddies, then you have incentive to make that vote as scumbuddies. Conversely, your vote is so half baked and easy to move that you no longer have any reason *not* to vote them; you might not be getting anti-associative credit but you also aren't putting them at risk. This isn't logic, it's just a choose-your-own-adventure masquerading as logic.GL wrote:Like even using your own logic, if the vote is so half baked or easily moved that I get no anti-associative credit from it, then what would be the benefit to scum!me for doing it? Again, why vote my partner over anyone else if I'm just locking myself into needing to back off of it later?