Hi, toolenduso!
VOTE: Robert2424
In post 22, Dunnstral wrote:VOTE: iraonavp
Voting someone who hasn't even talked
like the mafia
This isn't an rvs vote, this is an actual read and its' not changing for the rest of the day
In post 13, Jaack wrote:In post 12, Robert2424 wrote:I'm here, just barely. I'd vote for Jake, cause I don't trust him, but I'm leaving town in a few hours.....
Not a fan of this post at all. Hesitant to vote on the first page? With literally the vaguest reason ever?
UNVOTE:
VOTE: Robert2424
In post 66, Jaack wrote:Retrospectively, don't really like ira's 29. He seems to be taking an issue with my phrasing as opposed to my assertion. Furthermore, he had voted for Robert right after I had.
UNVOTE:
VOTE: iraonavp
What was the purpose of post 29? And could you explain your Robert vote in 21?
In post 82, Dunnstral wrote:I have a sneaking suspicion that Keyser is mafia but don't have anything to back that up
In post 88, Jaack wrote:In post 80, Keyser Söze wrote:
OK - I can understand your reasoning about scum being over-cautious or self-conscience in early D1 play, but I am not seeing that fear/over-concern in Robert2424's opening post. I saw it as a RVS reply to Jake from State Farm's RVS vote.
"offering an opinion without justification or commitment"? - I have never seen this on Page 1 of a game.
I like playing aggressively at the beginning of D1. At the very least, it gets discussion going, and sometimes you'll get lucky and catch scum.
And I still don't think that Robert's post was an RVS post. I mean you may be right, but it seems serious to me. Not that it really matters because when Robert comes back he can write it off as RVS either way.
In post 119, toolenduso wrote:This game is basically contradicting my expectations of how town usually gets out of RVS. I feel like it usually goes like this:
RVS votes -> player A says something mildly scummy -> people wagon player A, and in the process player B says something weird -> people wagon player B
By this time in the game I feel like there's usually been a legit wagon. Since there hasn't been one yet in this game, I feel like scum is either disjointed or timid.
The main thing was that I really expected at least a small wagon on Robert for his first post. As soon as I saw it I thought it looked very surface-level scummy. Exactly the sort of thing you can make a shallow case on. Good place to look for scum trying to go for something easy/look like they're scumhunting.
Then jaack was the only person to do anything about it. After that:
ira kinda joke-criticized jaack about it in #29, Tyler townread jaack in #54 for it, Keyser voted jaack for it in #55 and Dunn votes and makes a case on jaack in #91.
It just kinda makes sense to me that jaack could be scum and his partners didn't support the robert wagon but are also not really dealing with the fallout on jaack either. He's a good place to start, I think.
VOTE: jaack
In other news, re-reading gave me a townlean on Tyler. Not entirely for the way he's playing, though he is doing work (a surface-level towny-looking thing), but more the way that people started townreading him almost in kind of snowball fashion. It's striking me as the kind of thing where town say he looks town, impressionable town agree and scum hop onto the townreading wagon in an effort to have genuine-looking reads.
In post 157, xyzzy wrote:In post 97, iraonavp wrote:In post 88, Jaack wrote:In post 80, Keyser Söze wrote:
OK - I can understand your reasoning about scum being over-cautious or self-conscience in early D1 play, but I am not seeing that fear/over-concern in Robert2424's opening post. I saw it as a RVS reply to Jake from State Farm's RVS vote.
"offering an opinion without justification or commitment"? - I have never seen this on Page 1 of a game.
I like playing aggressively at the beginning of D1. At the very least, it gets discussion going, and sometimes you'll get lucky and catch scum.
And I still don't think that Robert's post was an RVS post. I mean you may be right, but it seems serious to me. Not that it really matters because when Robert comes back he can write it off as RVS either way.
Why does it matter whether or not his post is RVS?
why on earth would itnotmatter?
In post 158, xyzzy wrote:In post 103, iraonavp wrote:I think that voting the largest wagon is a good way to conduct RVS.
I voted Keyser because I found him suspicious? I don't see what's comical about that.
what about voting the largest wagon do you find helpful? I don't necessarily disagree entirely, but it seems like something vastly more variable than that.
In post 176, Bins wrote:XY, I'm trying to figure out who I'm going to switch my vote to. I just haven't read as in depth as I had liked. I pretty much skimmed and looked at the early stuff before I had to go to work.
My feelings have changed. If Dunn was mafia I feel like he would have dropped this "hey look how into this game I am" (I'm really trying to explain this as best I can) tone after being called out on it by 3 people. I'm curious about how he's actually going to push this "case" on me.
In post 199, Dunnstral wrote:In post 198, iraonavp wrote:
I don't think that is a good reason to think that Dunnstral is town-aligned. If I was using that metric to read Dunnstral I would invert it and call him scum-aligned for it, but I think the best thing to do is ignore it.
Huh? Why would I be scum-aligned and why would you be ignoring that?
In post 198, iraonavp wrote:
I think you are focusing excessively on this non-alignment-indicative aspect of Dunnstral's play because you are scum-aligned and your attempts to read players are fake.
VOTE: Bins
Something about this seems off to me, I think it's the fact that you voted keyser when I said I had a feeling he was maf earlier and are now following me again
Can be coincidence but it seems weird since you also seem to be focused on me for some reason
In post 205, Keyser Söze wrote:In post 96, iraonavp wrote:In post 82, Dunnstral wrote:I have a sneaking suspicion that Keyser is mafia but don't have anything to back that up
Same.
VOTE: Keyser Söze
The WIFOM that pours through my veins is telling meThat votetoo-bad-to-be-scum(i.e scum would at least sheep something meaty).
In post 216, Jaack wrote:Yeah, definitely not joining the bins wagon now... while I think dunn's argument has merit, I'm NOT joining a wagon with ira and tool on it.
In post 217, Bins wrote:Just the way he tries to continuously dismantle suspicion on himself by explaining himself very "Yep. This is how it is. Lmfao, back off now." (as you can see I have a Ph.D. in explaining)
In post 27, iraonavp wrote:In post 22, Dunnstral wrote:VOTE: iraonavp
Voting someone who hasn't even talked
like the mafia
This isn't an rvs vote, this is an actual read and its' not changing for the rest of the day
Robert2424 has talked, though.
This is so null but so not null at the same time if u kno what i mean
In post 29, iraonavp wrote:In post 13, Jaack wrote:In post 12, Robert2424 wrote:I'm here, just barely. I'd vote for Jake, cause I don't trust him, but I'm leaving town in a few hours.....
Not a fan of this post at all. Hesitant to vote on the first page? With literally the vaguest reason ever?
UNVOTE:
VOTE: Robert2424
More vague could be just saying that he's voting for "reasons", so that isn't true.
Like I mentioned b4 pointless dismantle
Like this is how you just ruin a point by mentioned something that isn't really relevant
"Like hey but he could have been MORE VAGUE so.............. ur wrong lets discount your post."
In post 96, iraonavp wrote:In post 82, Dunnstral wrote:I have a sneaking suspicion that Keyser is mafia but don't have anything to back that up
Same.
VOTE: Keyser Söze
This is an aweful vote
this is what I was saying as my first point
In post 212, Tyler the Creator wrote:ill bite, though, why's ira town?
and if it has anything to do with too scum to be scum then that's fine ive heard that before
and why vote a lurker? this game's slow enough as is.
In post 33, Bins wrote:In post 29, iraonavp wrote:In post 13, Jaack wrote:In post 12, Robert2424 wrote:I'm here, just barely. I'd vote for Jake, cause I don't trust him, but I'm leaving town in a few hours.....
Not a fan of this post at all. Hesitant to vote on the first page? With literally the vaguest reason ever?
UNVOTE:
VOTE: Robert2424
More vague could be just saying that he's voting for "reasons", so that isn't true.
I get you're trying to be cheeky, but I don't understand why you're derailing his point.
In post 263, Jaack wrote:In post 258, iraonavp wrote:
That's poor logic, you will end up with fragile and distant reads if you think like this.
How is this bad logic at all? If I think 2/3 players on a wagon are scum, why would I support that wagon?
Why to you keep saying that you're town? How is that going to convince anyone?
Why do you always nitpick about minor wordings and other junk as opposed to arguing against, you know, the meaning of the post?
Why are you so obviously scum?
In post 302, Tyler the Creator wrote:i think you elaborated just fine, like to the point where it was over justifiedIn post 257, iraonavp wrote:I shouldn't have moved my vote away, I also think my reasoning for voting Bins was poorly elaborated and possibly partially imaginary.
please explain what about your reasoning now seems imaginary
In post 198, iraonavp wrote:In post 176, Bins wrote:XY, I'm trying to figure out who I'm going to switch my vote to. I just haven't read as in depth as I had liked. I pretty much skimmed and looked at the early stuff before I had to go to work.
My feelings have changed. If Dunn was mafia I feel like he would have dropped this "hey look how into this game I am" (I'm really trying to explain this as best I can) tone after being called out on it by 3 people. I'm curious about how he's actually going to push this "case" on me.
I don't think that is a good reason to think that Dunnstral is town-aligned. If I was using that metric to read Dunnstral I would invert it and call him scum-aligned for it, but I think the best thing to do is ignore it.
I think you are focusing excessively on this non-alignment-indicative aspect of Dunnstral's play because you are scum-aligned and your attempts to read players are fake.
VOTE: Bins
In post 334, Keyser Söze wrote:In post 333, iraonavp wrote:Keyser Söze has puked by far the most rhetoric and emotes at me, yet he is voting heuristically_alone. Why is this?
This is a strange reaction. Why can't I vote heuristically_alone? You keep looking inwardly (i.e how my vote on heuristically_alone affects other people's view of you - this is short-sighted) - my reads of players are based on individuals.
In post 257, iraonavp wrote:I expect you to vote me later.In post 333, iraonavp wrote:Additionally, it may be because he wants to avoid OMGUS.
Please stop deflecting with your'OMGUS-vote-for-me'plea, it is poor play and defensive and tells me nothing but that you are uncomfortable with the spot light on you and extra-conscious of your wagon
Please answer my earlier questions:
Spoiler:
In post 376, Floof wrote:In post 375, Jake from State Farm wrote:In post 373, Floof wrote:He was dodging the game and his only post was a vote on my town read. I think he was just following bandwagons at the time which is scummy. I am pretty confident he will flip scum at this point to be honest.
How could he be following bandwagons when he didn't really join a bandwagon?
The consensus at the time was Jake was scum/null I thought
In post 373, Floof wrote:In post 372, Dunnstral wrote:In post 369, Floof wrote:I'd be willing to vote H_A or Iran I am going to wait though before I vote again.
But why are you willing to vote H_A?
Also Jake what do you think about H_A?
He was dodging the game and his only post was a vote on my town read. I think he was just following bandwagons at the time which is scummy. I am pretty confident he will flip scum at this point to be honest.
VOTE: H_A
In post 347, Tyler the Creator wrote:yea but i asked you why you've moved on from that read - not to elaborate on it more lolIn post 327, iraonavp wrote:Bins says that if Dunn was scum-aligned, he would've dropped the joking front and became more serious after he was called out for it. I don't think this is true.
I think that this kind of WIFOM logic is used by scum-aligned players to justify their reads on players who are acting oddly, because they know what their alignment really is.
In this example, I was accusing Bins of knowing that Dunnstal was town-aligned, and using his erratic behavior as evidence to support this when it could support any justification, so Bins' inner bias and scum-aligned knowledge is showing.
i just think there's a bit of a jump in your thought process here that doesn't feel town
within your elaboration here even if you don't agree with a certain methodology (how bins was going about approaching how to read dunn) i think that you're forcing scum motive into something that seems like an okay thought process to have
like im following the scum probably stop being loud after getting ridden by multiple people very early on thing well enough and ive taken similar approaches before so you capping it off with a declaration of "i disagree!" and then saying it's a scum thing doesn't sit right
and you going into what you thought was imaginary about it in detail should be a thing you do pretty soon here or else im gonna have to assume that you backed down from your reasoning just because you were getting scumread for it and that ends badly for you
In post 192, heuristically_alone wrote:VOTE: Zachstralkita
Your first post and post 122 have been the 2 worst posts of the entire game. And in general you got more talk than game.
In post 281, heuristically_alone wrote:Finally, my reads so far
Spoiler: Jack
Spoiler: Robert
Spoiler: Bins
Spoiler: xyzzy
Spoiler: tyler
Spoiler: Toolenduso
Spoiler: Zach
Spoiler: Floof
Spoiler: Jake
In post 366, Floof wrote:UNVOTE: Jaack
Ok so I have no idea what is going on right now
On the bright side me and Jaack have very similar reads so I am going to unvote him.
In post 373, Floof wrote:In post 372, Dunnstral wrote:In post 369, Floof wrote:I'd be willing to vote H_A or Iran I am going to wait though before I vote again.
But why are you willing to vote H_A?
Also Jake what do you think about H_A?
He was dodging the game and his only post was a vote on my town read. I think he was just following bandwagons at the time which is scummy. I am pretty confident he will flip scum at this point to be honest.
VOTE: H_A
In post 466, Jake from State Farm wrote:Meh scum could easily make a post like 192. It certainly isn't a "strongly town aligned post"
In post 523, Tyler the Creator wrote:i guess maybe im still getting back into where the gamestate is at but the ira wagon felt easy to push to a point but then harder at about 3, 4 votes so maybe you've got a pointIn post 513, Jaack wrote:I disagree with this. After h_a's claim, ira was the most likely lynch by a decent margin. Claiming now would buy scum-ira a day (and in the very unlikely event they're scumbuddies, 2+ days)
but on the other hand ira + ha means ira outwardly hard townread a buddy day 1 and you don't really see that very often
plus that means we don't have a protective role
In post 547, Tyler the Creator wrote:ira how do you feel about xyzzy's read progression on you?
In post 552, heuristically_alone wrote:IfIra were mafia, it would actually be an interesting move to fake claim a town role just to get me out. Ira knew that it might be him if not me hence the fake claim to really ensure they get rid of the town PR and thus having to sacrifice himself to the town lynch on next day after having mislynched a PR.
In post 657, Tyler the Creator wrote:...and which one of his caught-scum troll posts he's posted since you counterclaimed him caused you to change your mind?In post 653, iraonavp wrote:I feel like heuristically_alone is more likely to be town-aligned than not
In post 658, Dunnstral wrote:...But why Keyser? You never really gave any reasoning for that
In post 667, toolenduso wrote:The amount and structure of resistance to lynching HA makes me continually comfortable with the lynch. And regardless of his flip, we will have a lot more evidence to look at tomorrow than we've had for most of today.
Were you in fact Tyler the Creator?In post 2705, Robbnva wrote:Policy lynches happen sometimes.