Mini Normal 1854: Game Over

[Nachomamma8]

This was weird, because it came AFTER fitz was lynched, but before the flip. This is basically targeting out Twoface, who did get a serious case of cold feet vs Fitz but did argue it the majority of the way into existence to begin with. Ari really hadn't been this loose since far earlier in the game, too, and was late to the Fitz wagon. But ODDLY ENOUGH he's got this assuredness that fitz is scum now, after saying he can't remember why fitz was scum earlier.

And, surprise surprise, AJ is ignoring context to push a bullshit narrative.

TwoFace posted that case as a reason for Mathblade to be scum.
Aristophanes countered by posting his case back at him (and putting the conclusion as he was scum). The ":o" should have tipped you off that it wasn't a completely serious case. It's also interesting that you ignore Aristophanes showing doubt about Fitz flipping scum around this point, which also would have been a decent tip off that the post you're referring to wasn't completely serious.

[Nachomamma8]

If you thought he was town, why didn't you state specifically why and try to drill that into those who were pushing him consistently?

Not everyone has the same play style.
Some players are aggressive. Other players aren't aggressive. Aristophanes typically isn't aggressive.

[Nachomamma8]

I told you is the same as I told y'all or everyone. Okay

I mean, it is...

That's like saying tweeting my political opinions to my followers on Twitter is the same as telling you my political opnions in real life.

You is an acceptable alternative for "y'all" for areas not in the Regional South. Alternatives are "you guys and you people" which are awkward/too informal for many situations; I have no idea how denying grammar rules became a part of your case on Aristo but it's certainly a first for me.

[Nachomamma8]

Vedith was exactly like TF was with Creeps when it came to Hiraki, just went about it the wrong way as he was unable to explain the town read he had on him due to the fact that he could potential violate site rules. It doesn't make sense for scum Vedith to defend a townie this hard considering the game state and how much attention not explaining the read could've gotten him. We have had two confirmed masons since Day 1. I see scum more likely to try to buddy one of us than opposed to Hiraki who doesn't strike me as a guy who would be easy to manipulate.

Vedith's defense of Hiraki was "he's town! why? ongoing games!". There is a town narrative for being unable to explain his town read on Hiraki, but it's not like he couldn't have attempted to defend him for other reasons, meaning that he could have possibly been scum defending Hiraki and hiding behind "ongoing games" so he didn't have to worry about derailing the wagon.

[xSoniaNevermindx]

i certainly didn't.
i didn't have inside information.
does that mean that you think that i might be scummy again?

You had inside info with your mason claim.
That's inside info

[Joshz]

how is it inside info if he pub claimed ?????

[xSoniaNevermindx]

Like If I had a sr on fliz me as a VT sees a Jailkeeper claim I would've unvoted and been like "okay wait a second"

This could just be because the site I come from this normally happens a lot but the fact people keep going ALL STEAM AHEAD makes me think it's scum bus who know it's not true or you're a pr who thinks the jailkeepr claim doesn't fit

[xSoniaNevermindx]

how is it inside info if he pub claimed ?????

Inside info is info you know that others don't as in if you're a power role that's info you know.
I forgot the masons claimed at that point so that kinda weakens my reason cause I understand how people can be like "masons and jailkeeper?"
The bodyguards should've (and I hope they did) go right for fliz's head when he claimed

[xSoniaNevermindx]

Okay so a better example is

Say you're a bodyguard claim and the person near L-1 claims doctor that'd prob make you raise eyebrows cause there another protective right? As in want to vote them

Now if a VT sees a doctor claim they'll prob (at least most) back off at least a little bit cause it's a fucking doctor claim

see what I'm saying?

[Nachomamma8]

This game. In a hydra, 5 posts.

This game. 50 posts.

This game. 35 posts.

To Josh's point, I realize that Aristophanes hasn't done a ton a ton this game but this would be the game where Aristo somehow cracked his lurky scum meta in a huge way (his posts here also look nothing like his posts in other games).

[xSoniaNevermindx]

Btw I don't think Masons should out reasons why they tr someone unless said person is getting votes/someone getting lynched like nac just did with ari because others can simply sheep said reasons for there tr from a mason
I assume masons have a pt and putting there reasons there would be good so when 1 dies you can basically say "my partner thought ___ was town because of ____"

[Nachomamma8]

Okay so a better example is

Say you're a bodyguard claim and the person near L-1 claims doctor that'd prob make you raise eyebrows cause there another protective right? As in want to vote them

Now if a VT sees a doctor claim they'll prob (at least most) back off at least a little bit cause it's a fucking doctor claim

see what I'm saying?

Sure, usually. With two claimed masons, JK claim doesn't mesh quite so well.

[xSoniaNevermindx]

Okay so a better example is

Say you're a bodyguard claim and the person near L-1 claims doctor that'd prob make you raise eyebrows cause there another protective right? As in want to vote them

Now if a VT sees a doctor claim they'll prob (at least most) back off at least a little bit cause it's a fucking doctor claim

see what I'm saying?

Sure, usually. With two claimed masons, JK claim doesn't mesh quite so well.

yeah that kinda makes my point semi moot.

[Joshz]

Btw I don't think Masons should out reasons why they tr someone unless said person is getting votes/someone getting lynched like nac just did with ari because others can simply sheep said reasons for there tr from a mason
I assume masons have a pt and putting there reasons there would be good so when 1 dies you can basically say "my partner thought ___ was town because of ____"

the issue with this is the masons have had vastly different reads pretty much all game

[xSoniaNevermindx]

Btw I don't think Masons should out reasons why they tr someone unless said person is getting votes/someone getting lynched like nac just did with ari because others can simply sheep said reasons for there tr from a mason
I assume masons have a pt and putting there reasons there would be good so when 1 dies you can basically say "my partner thought ___ was town because of ____"

the issue with this is the masons have had vastly different reads pretty much all game

Yeah but it's not like the masons are gonna hide their partners reads right?

[Nachomamma8]

The bigger issue is that just because either of us say something doesn't mean it should instantly be sheeped.

[xSoniaNevermindx]

No I agree I think you're not getting what I'm saying or trying to say

I'm saying that the reasons shouldn't be outted so others can use those reasons themselves for there own tr

[Nachomamma8]

No I agree I think you're not getting what I'm saying or trying to say

I'm saying that the reasons shouldn't be outted so others can use those reasons themselves for there own tr

Which doesn't make any sense to me.
You seem to be arguing that no one should give reasons for townreads so that people can townread people for their own reasons.

[xSoniaNevermindx]

No I agree I think you're not getting what I'm saying or trying to say

I'm saying that the reasons shouldn't be outted so others can use those reasons themselves for there own tr

Which doesn't make any sense to me.
You seem to be arguing that no one should give reasons for townreads so that people can townread people for their own reasons.

For the masons yes I think they should keep quiet and just say who they tr and give reasons in a PT
I think it'd be easier to tell if reads are more genuine or not them simply just stating "I agree" or "I think this is right"

[xSoniaNevermindx]

What's hard to understand? o-o

[Nachomamma8]

What's hard to understand? o-o

Why does Masons giving reads weaken towns reads as a whole?

[Aj The Epic]

The concerning part that remains is that "Nothing town" doesn't mean "scum" and as short as that bridge is between the two, Ari does nothing to build it. There's no conviction to this wagon that is now entering a range that was about to guarantee creeps' lynch.

And really, looking back we can almost assume that Creep's wagon was a COUNTERWAGON to Fitz, a scum lynch. The one who perpetuates the force of this counterwagon is actually Ari, who basically swung the top two wagons by switching from a scum read to a Gamma-admitted (and not Ari-argued) PL.

"Nothing town" can mean scum or else the PoE line of play wouldn't exist at all.
Creeps wasn't a counter wagon to Fitz; Fitz was a counter wagon to Creeps. The reason why I'm pointing this out is because the Fitz wagon was dead in the water when the Creeps wagon started; it wasn't until I started pushing Fitz and getting support on Fitz that he became a legitimate wagon again.

I don't like you trying to build the narrative that Ari swung Creeps to save Fitz when that's nowhere near what actually happened.

I'm not saying he swung his vote to 'save fitz', nor did I suggest that. My suggestion was that he went from a vote he called scum to a vote he wasn't sure of/didn't have conviction written to yet that had the same amount of 'pressure' with his vote. And he also didn't do the groundwork to say "This is scum, not just anti-town". I don't like the idea of lynching someone for anti-town play unless that's literally the only scummy play that exists, so being content with not explaining how it was scum for me isn't enough

This was weird, because it came AFTER fitz was lynched, but before the flip. This is basically targeting out Twoface, who did get a serious case of cold feet vs Fitz but did argue it the majority of the way into existence to begin with. Ari really hadn't been this loose since far earlier in the game, too, and was late to the Fitz wagon. But ODDLY ENOUGH he's got this assuredness that fitz is scum now, after saying he can't remember why fitz was scum earlier.

And, surprise surprise, AJ is ignoring context to push a bullshit narrative.

TwoFace posted that case as a reason for Mathblade to be scum.
Aristophanes countered by posting his case back at him (and putting the conclusion as he was scum). The ":o" should have tipped you off that it wasn't a completely serious case. It's also interesting that you ignore Aristophanes showing doubt about Fitz flipping scum around this point, which also would have been a decent tip off that the post you're referring to wasn't completely serious.

"Bullshit narrative" where Ari suddenly goes from uptight and having his own scumteam to convinced Fitz is scum and loose about the lynch? He more or less (actually, he DOES) compromise on a Fitz lynch because a 'no lynch would be bad', and keeps his scumteam as Gamma/Creeps/TwoFace. So no, the conclusion wasn't drawn that TwoFace was scum from that, Ari already believed that. What I'm looking at is before/after hammer vote and I DID notice the difference there. That's why it pinged me in the first place.

Would you call Ari town and make this case if you didn't know his meta.

[xSoniaNevermindx]

What's hard to understand? o-o

Why does Masons giving reads weaken towns reads as a whole?

It doesn't it just makes non masons giving reads easier to tell if there fake or real I don't see a downside to masons keeping their reasons for themselves when they can give all the reads in the world in the mason thread

[xSoniaNevermindx]

Like am I stupid cause this seems pretty good to me

[Aj The Epic]

People piggyback masons harder and can more easily justify their reads. I would like Nacho to do so at the end of the day around the hammer but it's understandable why he wouldn't earlier.