Mini Normal 1839 - Game Over!

[Foxbird]

Votecount 2.12

karnos

(1) - Thor665

Saru

(2) - aronagrundy, ironstove

Thor665

(3) - karnos, Fire Assassin, bji

LmkGuy

(1) - Lowell

Lowell

(2) - Saru, LmkGuy

Not Voting

(2) - Nero Cain, PenguinPower

With

11

players eligible to vote, it’s

6

to lynch!

Day 2 will end in

(expired on 2016-11-11 12:47:28).

Mod Notes:

None!

[PenguinPower]

@Nero: Show me

constant

buddying of iron and I'll lynch myself.

[PenguinPower]

Hell, show me buddying of iron.

[Nero Cain]

Because I don't think you ever credibly established that Mal was scum, so I wouldn't characterize your actions that way.

it is really really really easy to pooh-pooh a mislynch wagon in hindsight. I think it was pretty clear that I had a scumread on him, you even post several of my posts that clearly state that I'm scumreading the Mal slot so I'm not understandng how you can say that I didn't "credibly establish" that. If you calling the reason for the vote into question then we run back into how easy it is to pooh-pooh in hindsight.

[Nero Cain]

@PP That wasn't the right word. I mean I do think BJ is buddyng him but for you I kinda of hate

Then lynch that. If he's scum, good lynch. If he's town, he hurts town. Lynch it. Seriously, dude got me a scum win based off a rage vote. If he's not going to play - and not going to be replaced - lynch it.

like its really goading me into trying to lynch Iron regardless of alignment.

but you can help me remove doubt by voting for scum.

vote:BJ

[PenguinPower]

Hey...Nero. Nero. Do you understand the word "context?" If so, please start to use it.

[PenguinPower]

Also, I'm going to mark you up for one misrep.

1.

[Thor665]

No, FA has taken fairly agressive action from time to time in this game. Please don't ask me to give you examples, they're in the game, and I'm tired of doing your homework.

I must be misunderstanding the question. If town does the thing that I am saying seems towny, then doesn't that make my evaluation that the actions are towny correct? Because it's being done by town?

No - I'm saying that town does what you're saying Iron doesn't - which is why you're calling him town, even though town blatantly does the thing. Also, frankly, scum do what Iron is doing. Like, when your case is 'he's voting lots of peeps (but I presume fake doing so for pressure)" I don't think it takes much to look like that's an iffy case.

Not really. I prefer to try to deduce motives from what I can read from people's actions when they are not aware of my interest. Because they can posture for me any way they want to if they think I am looking for something; but if I'm looking when they don't know that I am doing so, then I feel that I will be less likely to be fooled by a charade meant to specifically fool me. I am satisfied with what I saw iron do earlier in the thread that I understand his motivations; I don't need him to tell me, and in fact I trust my own observations more than I would his answer to a direct question from me anyway. That being said, sometimes I will ask questions, when I don't feel that I can gather evidence elsewhere. Not necessary in this case though.

So...'gut'.
Ooookay. I'll be ignoring you a lot, unless I decide to lynch you now.

I avoid all meta. I never read older games for anybody and will not do so even when asked to. It's just a personal position I take. It feels too much like homework to have to read other games, and I also prefer to play this game making my own discoveries in the game thread rather than being directed to cherrypicked "evidence" from other games. The ironic thing is ... you'll know this is how I play if you look at my meta (full disclosure - I may have looked at prior games once or twice in the past before I decided to hold myself to a strict no-meta policy, but certainly in the most recent three or four games, which would be half or more than half of the games I've ever played, I have refused to look at meta when asked).

Yeah, meta would be a bother to justify your weak case with, so better ignore it because...well, meta *in one game* is readable, but meta in *more than one game* can't be trusted.
I want to slap whoever started teaching newbs this dreck as sense.

Agreeing with someone and following up with clarifying questions is hardly the same thing as sheeping a bad mislynch vote. Even suggesting that they're the same feels like desperation to find some justification for the bad vote. Yeah I'll keep my vote on you.

Okay, so the goalposts moved to a mislynch vote.
Well...I've only case votes on two players this game, and one hasn't flipped - so by your limitation of the criteria, yes, I will agree there is no counter evidence on votes in this game and this game only that shows I am comfortable sheeping.

Simple: 1. I never scum read Karnos, that's your interpretation of what I wrote. When I post that I don't like what people did, that doesn't mean that I am scum reading them, it means that I don't like what they did and will consider it in the overall body of evidence I use when analyzing that person.

@PP - read just the last quote in this wall and give me your thoughts.
Because I have a second scumread now.
Maybe Karnos will bus?

[Thor665]

@PP That wasn't the right word. I mean I do think BJ is buddyng him but for you I kinda of hate

Then lynch that. If he's scum, good lynch. If he's town, he hurts town. Lynch it. Seriously, dude got me a scum win based off a rage vote. If he's not going to play - and not going to be replaced - lynch it.

like its really goading me into trying to lynch Iron regardless of alignment.

but you can help me remove doubt by voting for scum.

vote:BJ

Unvote: Karnos
Vote: bjj

I'mma sheep this without logic

[Nero Cain]

ok what was the point of your 1002?

[PenguinPower]

ok what was the point of your 1002?

It's like you don't read anything that I've said...

[PenguinPower]

Ah, damnit.

VOTE: bji

Please expound upon your read on karnos read for me. Also, elucidate your town!iron read.

[Nero Cain]

ok what was the point of your 1002?

It's like you don't read anything that I've said...

Sometimes I need things spelled out to me. Like I know you were voting Iron b/c you were scumreading him at the time so yes your 1002 was you wanting me to vote him so I'm not understanding why you were against my categorizing that your 1002 was trying to get me to vote him unless you are objecting solely to suggestion that you could do that as scum.

[PenguinPower]

That entire exchange was explained a few posts after. It had nothing to do with wanting you to do anything.

[Nero Cain]

fine I'll reread

[Nero Cain]

yeah...I'm not really seeing any sort of explanation. There's 1008 but that doesn't really sound right. But this whole exchange is weird and I'm not really sure why you are being vague and annoyed.

[ironstove]

@PP That wasn't the right word. I mean I do think BJ is buddyng him but for you I kinda of hate

Then lynch that. If he's scum, good lynch. If he's town, he hurts town. Lynch it. Seriously, dude got me a scum win based off a rage vote. If he's not going to play - and not going to be replaced - lynch it.

like its really goading me into trying to lynch Iron regardless of alignment.

but you can help me remove doubt by voting for scum.

vote:BJ

Both of you (PP/NERO) are really suggesting a PL because you have no strong scum reads on anyone D2? Sounds awful.

Explain why this isn't awful.

[Nero Cain]

I don't think policy lynch means what you think it means

[PenguinPower]

yeah...I'm not really seeing any sort of explanation. There's 1008 but that doesn't really sound right. But this whole exchange is weird and I'm not really sure why you are being vague and annoyed.

Because that was obviously a reaction test for Iron, after which I read him town based on previous interactions with him. I'm so annoyed at this point.

[Nero Cain]

See? If you just used your words alot of this back and forth would have been uneeded.

[PenguinPower]

Something something...used your brain...something something. Meh.

[bji]

Spoiler: Response to Nero Cain

there was no appears, he was 100% posting elsewhere while generally ignoring this game. Even your top town read (iron) noted this.

I never really bought into the Tracers case and I don't understand why

ANYONE

considers a "Tracer is lurking so it must be scum!" as a good case.

I do not understand why Mal lurking is scummy but Tracer lurking is not. Is the difference to you the fact that some kind of site info indicated that Mal was playing other games but not this one, but the same source of data showed that Tracer was not playing other games? That's weak sauce if so. Did you consider that Tracer could have an alt and be playing other games constantly here while ignoring this game too? And did you really think that this is the behavior that scum would use - blatant and obviously fact-checkable lurking? Attributing the dumbest possible play to someone so that you can lynch them doesn't sound like good town strategy to me.

Spoiler: Second response to Nero Cain

Because I don't think you ever credibly established that Mal was scum, so I wouldn't characterize your actions that way.

it is really really really easy to pooh-pooh a mislynch wagon in hindsight. I think it was pretty clear that I had a scumread on him, you even post several of my posts that clearly state that I'm scumreading the Mal slot so I'm not understandng how you can say that I didn't "credibly establish" that. If you calling the reason for the vote into question then we run back into how easy it is to pooh-pooh in hindsight.

You made one reference to Mal before voting him:

and Mal posting everywhere but here is prob scum.

This reasoning is patently and obviously false, and is much less evidence than you ever presented against iron prior to this, so I don't see why you're trying to start a new wagon at this point.

The only other thing I see that gives any justification prior to the hammer is:

vote:Mal

since we have a extension

Why does having an extension make you want to vote a V/LA lurker?

he's a scummy lurker and with the extension we have time to get r done

Here you are not just saying he's a lurker, you're saying he's a

scummy

lurker. I didn't see A SINGLE THING in his ISO that could be read either way. So I'd call this a misrep.

Spoiler: Summary of points

So please just confirm these points so that there is no uncertainty about it:

1. malpascp had approximately ZERO useful interaction with any player in this game
2. You started a wagon against malpascp based solely on the fact that he had posted sparingly in this game while apparently being site active elsewhere
3. None of the reasoning that karnos or GreyICE used to try to deter the wagon had any effect on your vote
4. You never expressed any suspicion of karnos or GreyICE and thus had no specific reason to disclude their arguments out of distrust
5. Your only other consistent scumread, ironstove, joined the Mal wagon, but you made no comment about it
6. The end result was that the least useful lynch was achieved by town, from a wagon that you started and supported.

The above is the reason that I have a scum lean on you. All of these facts indicate a strong preference on your part for lynching a town player with poor justification and whose mislynch would provide minimal benefit to town, and in the face of rational deterrence that you ignored.

Please explain to me why I should

not

be suspicious of you for that. Do you expect me to just give you a free pass because ... ????

[bji]

I must be misunderstanding the question. If town does the thing that I am saying seems towny, then doesn't that make my evaluation that the actions are towny correct? Because it's being done by town?

No - I'm saying that town does what you're saying Iron doesn't - which is why you're calling him town, even though town blatantly does the thing. Also, frankly, scum do what Iron is doing. Like, when your case is 'he's voting lots of peeps (but I presume fake doing so for pressure)" I don't think it takes much to look like that's an iffy case.

It is tiring arguing with you because you act like any evaluation that anyone

else

makes has to have perfectly airtight justification, but you are free to sheep votes

for awful reasons

and we're all just supposed to accept that as great play.

You also tend to ask questions that feel like the whole purpose is to tire/wear the other player out. I have been observing this from you all game; find the question that takes the minimal effort for you to ask, but the maximal effort for anyone else to respond to. Seems like a strategy designed to exert your will by wearing opponents out.

Not really. I prefer to try to deduce motives from what I can read from people's actions when they are not aware of my interest. Because they can posture for me any way they want to if they think I am looking for something; but if I'm looking when they don't know that I am doing so, then I feel that I will be less likely to be fooled by a charade meant to specifically fool me. I am satisfied with what I saw iron do earlier in the thread that I understand his motivations; I don't need him to tell me, and in fact I trust my own observations more than I would his answer to a direct question from me anyway. That being said, sometimes I will ask questions, when I don't feel that I can gather evidence elsewhere. Not necessary in this case though.

So...'gut'.
Ooookay. I'll be ignoring you a lot, unless I decide to lynch you now.

Nothing about the strategy I described is about gut reaction. I described a metric for evaluating players that is based on looking at the evidence in situ instead of trying to gather evidence through questioning. What about that approach deserves being called making reads by gut reaction?

Yeah, meta would be a bother to justify your weak case with, so better ignore it because...well, meta *in one game* is readable, but meta in *more than one game* can't be trusted.
I want to slap whoever started teaching newbs this dreck as sense.

Sorry it's just a personal policy of mine not to read external games. If you think that makes my play weaker, oh well. I come to this site to enjoy myself, and slogging through prior games to look for circumstantial evidence is not my idea of fun and I'm not going to do it. And if you point some cherrypicked content from another game out to me, I could only trust that evidence if I could confirm that it is not contradicted by other evidence from other games. And since like I just said I'm not doing that slogging, I simply cannot rely on anything from exterior games at all.

I also do not play alts because I can't be bothered, I never play more than one game at a time, and I always replace into every other game and start from the outset on every other game. It's just the way I roll, dog.

[bji]

Sorry I meant to put that in spoiler tag to reduce the wall effect, mea culpa.

[bji]

Ah, damnit.

VOTE: bji

Please expound upon your read on karnos read for me. Also, elucidate your town!iron read.

Karnos - I didn't like his tiff with Sanu and I didn't like how he voted Sanu in post 427 when it was clear that Sanu and he were just in a tit-for-tat argument and nothing from that stupid argument should have been used for any voting purposes period. However, emotion can get the better of anyone so that could explain the vote too ...

I liked his attempt to derail the mislynch. If I were in the game at that point I would have been making the same points. I cannot find any scum motivation in trying to stop a mislynch. I see lots of town motivation in trying to stop a lynch that had no credible likelihood of being a scum lynch and that had no value except as a scum lynch because it would provide nearly zero information as a town lynch.

Didn't I just argue with Thor about my iron read? Did you read it? Do you really want me to repeat it?

Oh fine. In short, I don't see scum fake hammering for reactions, starting wagons for reactions, making votes for reactions. In my experience not many scum want to work that hard or try to take a leadership role like that. I could of course be wrong, and his Mal vote is very troubling to me. He's explained it in a way that is at at least palatable though, and he never to my knowledge claimed that Mal was scum, just that he was a lurker and that it was mostly a policy lynch. Nero Cain may not find that to be significant, but I do.

So in short, he seems townie to me, except for the Mal vote, which I feel he explained adequately. That yields a town lean in my rough evaluation.