Mini 2273: Science Diagrams That Look Like Shitposts 2 [END]

[Corwinoid]

@Eiralox if you thought it was a going nowhere question maybe you should pay attention more.

VOTE: geraintm

I dislike the not-so-subtle hint at not trusting D1 reads. I've seen people have some very good intuition in games very early on. The rest of your posts bother me also.

[Eiralox]

This seems like someone who I want the opinion of quickly.

Sure sign of wisdom.

Secret 1/?: I think my vote is decent.

what's ur fascination with blob? other than voting, its only peep u've mentioned.


imma log off now have fun y'all

[Eiralox]

This seems like someone who I want the opinion of quickly.

Sure sign of wisdom.

Secret 1/?: I think my vote is decent.

sorry i meant to say what's ur fascination with gibus? other than voting, its only peep u've mentioned.

brain sperged to most recent game i played lol

[Corwinoid]

So to analyze more: Alex's vote on Elsa feels awkward but doesn't particularly come off as scummy. Seems like a "put up or shut up" kind of vote when scum in that situation could've made a much easier vote and gone a lot more under the radar. Unless that's Alex's game it seems like something that just pulls attention.

Alex/Elsa can be T/T but something about the exchange between felt really off.

[Corwinoid]

between them*

[clidd]

Spoiler:

Right, I'm waiting for you Gera.

VOTE: geraintm

I'm curious how you notice something is performative so early in the game.

In our last experience, town!you took a bit longer to develop reads. Maybe you know something else that I don't?

it wasnt a read, it was me just saying i didn't like what someone else was doing. i'd given someone else a naughty point too, i just like to try and keep arecord of when people do something that makes me sit up, so i can note them for later. if they d a bunch of weird stuff....it can mean something

Not voting (7): geraintm, GoldfishFromTheMoon, Vivax, Elsa Jay, Eiralox, Crescent, Corwinoid

Scum is in here somewhere

games over boys, we can all go home. sherlock here has solved it.....

There is one player in particular that I'd consider voting for but the reason is so moonlogic that the chance of the read being right would be as accurate as voting randomly, so not helpful at all.

Anyways, I have two questions:


@Geraint
Which part of the description of why Vivax was voting George struck you as performative? why?

@Geraint --- u are yet to answer this question.

chill the f out. i can sleep

The rest of the discussion that goes on didn't suggest much in the AI ​​sense. Feels like almost everyone who posted so far is literally dancing in null variations tbh.

I need to read more to be able to infer something more expressive, which implies the need for more posts, interactions and etc.

VOTE: clidd

The rest of the discussion that goes on didn't suggest much in the AI ​​sense. Feels like almost everyone who posted so far is literally dancing in null variations tbh.

I need to read more to be able to infer something more expressive, which implies the need for more posts, interactions and etc.

VOTE: clidd

Whats wrong with that post? I thought it made sense.

Well, you would....



I'm going to have fun with this

The rest of the discussion that goes on didn't suggest much in the AI ​​sense. Feels like almost everyone who posted so far is literally dancing in null variations tbh.

I need to read more to be able to infer something more expressive, which implies the need for more posts, interactions and etc.

VOTE: clidd

Whats wrong with that post? I thought it made sense.

it contributes nothing and draws no one out, basically stating the intent to lurk until others do the work yet in a flowery and overly-convulated manner.

That said, @geraintm has offered no qualifier to the vote, other than the fact that @clidd has voted fro them(which they did not explicitly state). Their reply to @clidd's vote in itself was a defense of their method, so where does the decision to vote clidd come in? Is the above post decisive enough a motivation?

You get a naughty point for defending me

The rest of the discussion that goes on didn't suggest much in the AI ​​sense. Feels like almost everyone who posted so far is literally dancing in null variations tbh.

I need to read more to be able to infer something more expressive, which implies the need for more posts, interactions and etc.

VOTE: clidd

Whats wrong with that post? I thought it made sense.

it contributes nothing and draws no one out, basically stating the intent to lurk until others do the work yet in a flowery and overly-convulated manner.

That said, @geraintm has offered no qualifier to the vote, other than the fact that @clidd has voted fro them(which they did not explicitly state). Their reply to @clidd's vote in itself was a defense of their method, so where does the decision to vote clidd come in? Is the above post decisive enough a motivation?

You get a naughty point for defending me

that's funny i don't see it that way, my post reads pretty neutral? thinking ur just fishing for shade to throw atm lol.

it felt like you were coming up with a reason for my vote, when there wasnt one. so i gave you anaughty point because it felt like you were trying to buddy up to me for some reason

it felt like you were coming up with a reason for my vote, when there wasnt one. so i gave you anaughty point because it felt like you were trying to buddy up to me for some reason

"@geraintm has offered no qualifier to the vote, other than the fact that @clidd has voted fro them(which they did not explicitly state). "

again, i explicitly state that you offered no reason for your vote. my analysis of clidd's post is wholly on me, and even if it is my inferred interpretation of why you quoted it, it was pretty clear that Goldfish and I had no idea as to why you voted.

So after the vote you rejoin me with one-liners, Goldfish you answer with an insinuation and the non-sequitur of 'having fun'.

So we're some way into this, Clidd votes for u, u vote for Clidd, and your entire motivation is that you have no reason, after quoting a specific post, again for nos specific reason other than replying to Goldfish as you did. Instead of weighing in on Alex/Elsa wagons you go an tangent with clidd and an eventual vote which you state has no meaning, after which you throw some very flimsy shade on me and to a lesser extent Goldfish.

I don't see where you're going with this, there's scummier activity than Clidd's atm tbh

my vote for clidd

was purely random

[Vivax]

@Eiralox if you thought it was a going nowhere question maybe you should pay attention more.

VOTE: geraintm

I dislike the not-so-subtle hint at not trusting D1 reads. I've seen people have some very good intuition in games very early on. The rest of your posts bother me also.

I don't think it's a good reason and it seems nitpicky. Overall geraintm doesn't give me the impression that his posts shy away from provoking a negative response, quite the opposite.

Thoughts on clidd?

[Corwinoid]

Nothing that raises red flags for me, and I think he's trying to solve. I don't find 155 helpful, but meh.

[clidd]

Ok, I'm trying to understand if for some reason Gera is trying to provoke a reaction or something for ''?'' reasons.

Feeling that something is scummy/towny using guts is normal, but assigning a ''performative'' value to something you're not even sure is meaningful feels more like he's making things up.

Not that I think it makes a lot sense for scum!Gera to play this way, but I don't find the motivation for town!Gera either.

[clidd]

I have a question.
I missed this post the first time, so kinda late. But is "moonlogic" supposed to be crumbing that that person is me? If so why, if not I still wanna hear your moonlogic and which player you were considering voting.

No, it's someone else, but the theory has kind of become obsolete. It has to do with activity and game time (in general).

[clidd]

Well, on a second look, I'm fine with my vote.

If I were to draw my reads in real time, they'd look like this:

[

GoldfishFromTheMoon

] [

Crescent

] [

Eiralox

] [

Vivax

]
=
[

Elsa Jay

] [

Alexcellent

]
[

Corwinoidhis

]
[

Not_Mafia

] [

gibus

] [

UNOwen

] [

GeorgeBailey

]
=
[

geraintm

]

[UNOwen]

sorry i meant to say what's ur fascination with gibus? other than voting, its only peep u've mentioned.

gibus is null and non-fascinating, that he got town read anyway is interesting. Crescents explanation makes sense, she seemed to miss that he was copying Elsa with his post. Not sure where Goldfish is coming from.

[UNOwen]

@Eiralox if you thought it was a going nowhere question maybe you should pay attention more.

What did you get from Elsa's answer?

[GoldfishFromTheMoon]

my vote for clidd was purely random

You say this, but the fact that you voted in a reply to a post clidd made seemed to indicate you found something particularly scummy there that you didn't like. The fact thag clidd was already voting for you also suggests otherwise.

[Corwinoid]

@Eiralox if you thought it was a going nowhere question maybe you should pay attention more.

What did you get from Elsa's answer?

I wasn't sure if the tone shift and Alex vote were organic or manufactured hostility. Her response satisfied me for now that it was probably the former. I still don't like that exchange at all, but I'm a little more town!Elsa than I was at 87

[Elsa Jay]

Alrighty. Making my own tentative list of townies and scum.

People who are probs good

Crescent
Vivax
Umlaut
Alex
Eiralox
Clidd

Peeps who need more analysis

Corwin
Goldfish
George
Owen
Gera

If they die I wouldn't mind

NotMaf
Gibus

[Crescent]

sorry i meant to say what's ur fascination with gibus? other than voting, its only peep u've mentioned.

gibus is null and non-fascinating, that he got town read anyway is interesting. Crescents explanation makes sense, she seemed to miss that he was copying Elsa with his post. Not sure where Goldfish is coming from.

Who was copying what now?

[Crescent]

Also NM has 0 content and hasn't posted in 38 hours.

Unleash the prod.

[Not_Mafia]

Also NM has 0 content and hasn't posted in 38 hours.

Unleash the prod.

You have 0 avatar

[Corwinoid]

You responding to that immediately after your activity level so far is hella sus.

[GoldfishFromTheMoon]

You responding to that immediately after your activity level so far is hella sus.

Yes

Also NM has 0 content and hasn't posted in 38 hours.

Unleash the prod.

You have 0 avatar

But also like get an avatar pls it helps me follow the game.

[Not_Mafia]

You responding to that immediately after your activity level so far is hella sus.

Nah it's not honestly

[Elsa Jay]

Also NM has 0 content and hasn't posted in 38 hours.

Unleash the prod.

You have 0 avatar

NotMaf is like a demon. You summoned him.

But yeah NotMaf that can be considered a prod dodge in a certain light. Real content plz.

Also yeah on the Crescent getting a pfp thing.

[Crescent]

That's absolutely a prod dodge, but technically since he still has no game advancing content a prod is still warranted.

[Umlaut]

...