The first one looks like speculation of the roles involved without really much anything else to say about it. As I said, it's a whole lot of nothing.
As for the second one, I'm aware. That's why I quoted that one specific section out of context instead of quoting the whole post, and why I'm (slowly) replying to the other arguments as I see them.
The first one looks like speculation of the roles involved without really much anything else to say about it. As I said, it's a whole lot of nothing.
As for the second one, I'm aware. That's why I quoted that one specific section out of context instead of quoting the whole post, and why I'm (slowly) replying to the other arguments as I see them.
Except it's not speculation. If I just went in and said "so we have a 75%+ chance of having a roleblocker, what do you guys think?", THAT'S useless role speculation.
I instead showed why I thought that was significant: when you take in that very likely scenario, Kawl's plan as I thought of it was really faulty. We were discussing kawl's plan, and his plan as I understood it had a 75%+ chance of being crap
Speaking of roleblockers, Kawl, how does your peek system account for the night where the cop is blocked?
Hadn't realized everyone was supposed to peek, as you had asked for ordinaries to do it earlier.
Right, and that was an evolution over the course of the discussion so I don't hold that against you at all.
Yet you still seem to want to throw shade by mentioning this, even though you noted yourself that this was an addendum
Actually at this point I was just going pretty much line by line over your posts but decided to abandon that approach as it would have taken far too long.
Simple, I didn't understand that everyone in this scenario is supposed to peek, otherwise I wouldn't have even brought up a 4 players peeking scenario earlier
My issue is that your earlier complaint about making the doctors job harder doesn't make sense, and is in fact pretty much incorrect in this other 4 player peek scenario. It increases the chance of a successful block not lowers. That inconsistent internal logic is what bothered me.
I brought up my issues with the 1-shot cop claim later and then realized why it worked, that's just another case of me suddenly understanding something.
Throwing shade is not saying "of course that will happen" with regards to the cop getting found near the late game. "Of course that will happen" is sort of meant to tell everyone, HEY, cop will get found near the end anyways
The answer to the one shot cop issue had already been brought up though.
I also don't recall you phrasing it that way but more of a late game peeking becomes problematic but it's a bit of a pain for me to see the quote of you inside my quote so eh. Mobile sucks.
A. I brought up the two examples of myself because they come to mind pretty quickly. If it helps soothe your worries over everyone suddenly thinking you're scum, I was trying to play for town's benefit in Bar, and actively trying to keep town engaged.
B. Am I supposed to just assume you're town now, and that the reason you've been acting this way is because you are only working for town's benefit? Players trying to control the conversation as scum is NOTHING new.
C. My slam on Terra for that post was because although the question of you being scum or not is there, and it brings up a WIFOM possibility, he has, or had not shown, any real evidence to give reason why he thinks you would be scum. So yes, you may very well be scum, he just doesn't have the proof to act on it. Same thing with me in HP and Bar.
In fact, say for example at Bar, the main reason I actually thought Gorlak was full of shit (even knowing he was right about me not being town) is because his reason was asinine, and everything beyond that was "I FEEL his reactions are scummy", even though at that point he probably would've taken any reaction of mine to be scummy
Same in HP. I leave, making a split second decision where there was something really wrong in Crab's claim and bus him, and come back to see myself lynched over a reason that really didn't make alot of sense.
So yeah, shoot me if I think you think I should just assume you're town. If you've been attempting to control the conversation as scum, you've done a pretty great job so far
Nah I don't think you should assume I'm town. In fact I've said I'm trying to strongly not town read people without justification. At this point in the ISO I already hadn't liked what I saw and so was looking at this from the perspective of scum hyper. But I mean this whole spiel is something though.
Again, was confused to how things would work. The idea of organizing it all was brought up as an absurd possibility to counter it, meant to weaken the idea, not be taken seriously.
Yeah, this is bullshit. Tried to find the easiest to read example.
That's MGS MAfia. I was town. Want to read through the posts (pages 3 and 4 will probably help the most), look for that same sort of "I'm putting my entire thought process into the thread sort of style?
And I've done this as scum too. And as a neutral. And every game I've been reasonably active.
I don't even know how you fake a style. Is your idea that I don't actually believe what I'm saying, that I'm secretly exaggerating my wish-washiness?
Eh, okay sure.
Wow, it's almost like people's feeling and thoughts change, and like I suddenly thought up something, sat on it for a bit, and decided I wasn't so sure
The amount of times you went back and forth seemed abnormal to me. It's what jumped out in just 13 posts.
Yeah, that's exactly what I did, and was doing. No sarcasm there btw. Most GAFIA cops typically survive until reveal, until they get to the late game. I was trying to think of example of cops breadcrumbing, didn't see too many.
I think saying "so what can the harm possibly be" is exaggerating what was intended in that statement. I was saying that I don't think the threat of scum catching onto breadcrumbs is as high as you think, based on total anecdotal evidence. I never meant to use it as some sort of definitive proof that breadcrumbing works, otherwise I wouldn't go on to weaken my point.
Or you did that to set up this move to show that you had never planned to set up.... Yea I guess if that's your style of doing thought vomit onto the page and going back and forth it makes more sense. The lack of internal consistency in some instances still feels like scum forgetting the case they are arguing to me though.
Sorry Lord Kawl for not immediatley agreeing to your strategy because I'm fairly certain one of scum or the SK (if we have one notice I said if this time, not discounting the 50% chance that we don't and also somewhat underestimating the chance that we do) have probably done a good job disguising themselves as people's top town based on previous experiences and because the whole point of the plan is to keep cops safe and we might just be helping scum in that way. Sorry for not immediately taking a side, and instead waiting for the chance someone comes by and brings up something that changes my mind towards being pro-peeking, even though that's exactly how I became pro-peeking the first time. Your plan is flawless, all that disagree are scum.
This is cute though. I said I'd find it scummy if they didn't have a good argument for why it was bad. Your argument had failed to even convince yourself several times so it surely wasn't strong enough for me.
Ok.
So Kawl, quick question, if this is such standard fare from other communities, why is it ever not used? Or is it literally in every single game of mafia in every community, and its been unanimously decided to go through with peeking at all times?
Responses to everything but the last in the quote. Sorry would take forever to label and make it clear what was responding to what otherwise. Mobile ftl.
For the last part, peekings use I feel is maximized when the set up skews basic and a cop is likely. Unlike matrix games scum doesn't have too much additional knowledge on town power roles over vanilla towns, so I think peeking is better in this set up than a standard one. I can't speak for other communities but I know seeing the idea it carries a lot of logic I like and I wanted to take this game as an example to push it on to the gafia meta hard.
Go to top right corner, hit search icon, select post created by, time in my username, and go to pages 3 or 4 of my posts (did a quick skim, has best example I could find of what I'm talking about)
Responses to everything but the last in the quote. Sorry would take forever to label and make it clear what was responding to what otherwise. Mobile ftl.
For the last part, peekings use I feel is maximized when the set up skews basic and a cop is likely. Unlike matrix games scum doesn't have too much additional knowledge on town power roles over vanilla towns, so I think peeking is better in this set up than a standard one. I can't speak for other communities but I know seeing the idea it carries a lot of logic I like and I wanted to take this game as an example to push it on to the gafia meta hard.
A. What is a basic set up?
B. How do you know, or have an idea of whether the setup has skewed basic? You don't, so you're gambling on the probability of it all.
Disagree with Ty4on's case against melon. He thinks she is scum based on being more cautious than a previous game. I was slightly scum reading her until I realised she is playing exactly as previously (IMO). Lean town on her for now.
Agree with someone's (Catvoca?) case against Ty4on. He's been blender than usual. Not much in it but slight scum read for now. Think Kawl's super-agressive defense of him was even shadier.
Sticking with Kawl, his case against Hyper was extremely inflated. Crazy word count without saying much, I would have gone with "Hyper not keen on peeking, changed mind a bit" but that's just me. Also felt he misrepresented Hyper somewhere but I'd have to go back and find it (was waiting for Hyper's response first. He might have addressed it but I'll be damned if I'm reading two posts of that length today).
Null read on hyper. I don't think his grappling with the Peek conundrum was as damning as Kawl made it out to be, but he hasn't done much else either. Could go either way.
Generally been agreeing with Cabot, still think he's town.
My stance on Ynnny softened but I don't remember why, will do some re-reading.
Uhh that's everything I remember reading about. Lone Prodigy has some stuff on me but seems to have answered himself? Good work.
My defense consisted of, I really don't think Ty's been a blender in my mind. That reason strikes me as kind of bullshit, I need someone to vote now that Cabot has checked in and is participating from my initial vote. Let's vote Catvoca and see how things go. Hardly a super Aggro defense.
As for the post length, yea that's isos for you. Take it or leave it. You'll have 24 hour night phase to review at least so hopefully you can get back to both my and hypers posts. Since you know that is the game.
One thing to note is that by bringing up peeking, Kawl has found himself a really convenient place to focus on discussing the mechanics of his plan, and easily cast reads based on whether people are fine or not fine with it.
It's an easy place to be if you're the scum or SK for day 1
A. What is a basic set up?
B. How do you know, or have an idea of whether the setup has skewed basic? You don't, so you're gambling on the probability of it all.
Seriously everyone, make note of that. We have two very lengthy posts late in the day phase, one an accusation of someone being scum, the other a defense.... and Splinter has admitted that he's apparently not going to read either one? (That, or he's talking about Hyperactivity's two defenses. Either way...)
Don't be silly. I've read one post (Kawl's, which I even referred to earlier in that post) and am "unwilling" to read a second.
"Unwilling" being a joke. With 1 hour left and me being busy this evening I'd rather keep up with the thread than read through what appears to be a point by point rebuttal of a case I don't agree with. I'll go through it in the night if Hyper survives.
You said the word skews, in the context of a setup where the number of power roles differs, and a powerful town matches a powerful scum. Of course I'm going to take it to mean in the context of this setup
[...]
Null read on hyper. I don't think his grappling with the Peek conundrum was as damning as Kawl made it out to be, but he hasn't done much else either. Could go either way.
Generally been agreeing with Cabot, still think he's town.
[...]
Thatd be pretty miserable bad luck, but is a fair criticism. Would depend on how the real cop wanted to play it. Throw out a fake peek on your top town to try to throw scum off your case, depending on the day come forward, or some other action.
Go to top right corner, hit search icon, select post created by, time in my username, and go to pages 3 or 4 of my posts (did a quick skim, has best example I could find of what I'm talking about)
I can't seem to get that to work.... and I have to ask, what relevance does MGS have to this game?
I'm interested in hearing your arguments, not your "style" or alignment in another game entirely. I understand that the statement that Kawl brought up is hard to refute, but surely there's something in this game you can use instead...?
Don't be silly. I've read one post (Kawl's, which I even referred to earlier in that post) and am "unwilling" to read a second.
"Unwilling" being a joke. With 1 hour left and me being busy this evening I'd rather keep up with the thread than read through what appears to be a point by point rebuttal of a case I don't agree with. I'll go through it in the night if Hyper survives.
Then skim through it and offer your opinions on it. It doesn't take particularly long but it does raise eyebrows when you're just outright saying you're not gonna read it. : \
I mean, seriously. You yourself said, and I quote, " Also felt he misrepresented Hyper somewhere." If you feel that way, then back it up. If not, why say it?
One thing to note is that by bringing up peeking, Kawl has found himself a really convenient place to focus on discussing the mechanics of his plan, and easily cast reads based on whether people are fine or not fine with it.
It's an easy place to be if you're the scum or SK for day 1
Cabot's (feel like there's something strange, but it's not much till I actually check on it), melonrabbit's, skyodin's, L_P's, stanleypalmtree's, and terra's post. Asides from cabot, all of those were on the lower end of posts. Terra hasn't even hit the 10 post requirement yet, although we are heading to end of day so it might still happen
Sophia, are you planning on making a vote? I have noticed that you have not been voting on people, despite calling them out as scummy. You did have a vote on YesNOnoNoYes earlier, but you removed it without much explanation. We are short on time, so it might be time to make your final vote.
You said the word skews, in the context of a setup where the number of power roles differs, and a powerful town matches a powerful scum. Of course I'm going to take it to mean in the context of this setup
it's 6.15 am here so i havent really gone back to read everything since i went to bed last night yet. still trying to wake up.
*yawns*
but i did skim through and saw that the vote tally still had kristoffer and catvoca so i'll post mine shortly to recapture where the tally is (if it doesnt offend batsiaisis)
I can't seem to get that to work.... and I have to ask, what relevance does MGS have to this game?
I'm interested in hearing your arguments, not your "style" or alignment in another game entirely. I understand that the statement that Kawl brought up is hard to refute, but surely there's something in this game you can use instead...?
Kawl said I was faking a transparent, hmm I'm putting my thought process into words in the thread, I'm going for an artificial indecisive look
I pointed out I've done that in every single game I've been in, regardless of alignment. MGS was useful because it's easy to find my posts all lined up next to each other, and that's an example of me doing it while I'm town. Had Cthulhu or Harry Potter been on OG, I would've chosen those examples
It doesn't really say I'm town, but trying to use it and say I'm scum is bs
I feel like he's not particularly making a strong argument for his actions in this game, on top of seemingly misunderstanding what Kawl's saying. Admittedly the later issue is Kawl's fault for not being clear from the get go, but as I said before that's hardly worth holding against Kawl.
Sophia, are you planning on making a vote? I have noticed that you have not been voting on people, despite calling them out as scummy. You did have a vote on YesNOnoNoYes earlier, but you removed it without much explanation. We are short on time, so it might be time to make your final vote.
Correct, I keep forgetting this is not majority lynch where I'm used to waiting to the last second. Sorry about that.
Vote: Hyperactivity
I'm very skeptical of Splinter's halfassed defense of Hyperactivity there too, as well as his justification for not actually doing the work in representing what he's saying. I could be persuaded for voting for him or LP too. But right now I think Hyperactivity is scum.
Cabot's (feel like there's something strange, but it's not much till I actually check on it), melonrabbit's, skyodin's, L_P's, stanleypalmtree's, and terra's post. Asides from cabot, all of those were on the lower end of posts. Terra hasn't even hit the 10 post requirement yet, although we are heading to end of day so it might still happen
I have noticed that Cabot's kind of been here and there. He has however offered some opinions on stuff tho, and justified previous actions against him.
There's also Lone_prodigy too. I'd be okay with a vote on him due to his lack of activity, general scum hunting, and such. Especially if we don't want to lynch a more active poster like Hyper.
Generally agreeing, Hyper being an exception. And it's obvious when those 2 posts are quoted side by side, but that's not how they appeared in the thread.
Regarding melonrabbit: no I don't have specific examples, it's not like I'm reading both threads in tandem. I started scum reading her but when writing up my reasons I got deja vu, now I think she is either playing very similarly to last game or doing a damn good job of imitating it. Can you give examples of her NOT being consistent?
Sophia: like I said, I'm busy this evening. If I get a minute I'll go back to Kawl's post, but if not it's a minor point that will still be there tomorrow.
So... since we are getting pretty close to the deadline I think my main suspicions are on L_P and Hyper. Both are very gut driven, but not entirely. Hyper's posts aren't entirely bad but something about them just don't click with me. I would feel stronger about voting him if it weren't for the nagging feeling in the back of my mind that it's a false positive.
L_P feels to me that he's doubling down a little too much on his reads. It feels uncomfortable, like trying to set a narrative early on. But a part of me wonders if some of my thoughts on him is OMGUS due to him scum reading me.
Generally agreeing, Hyper being an exception. And it's obvious when those 2 posts are quoted side by side, but that's not how they appeared in the thread.
Regarding melonrabbit: no I don't have specific examples, it's not like I'm reading both threads in tandem. I started scum reading her but when writing up my reasons I got deja vu, now I think she is either playing very similarly to last game or doing a damn good job of imitating it. Can you give examples of her NOT being consistent?
Sophia: like I said, I'm busy this evening. If I get a minute I'll go back to Kawl's post, but if not it's a minor point that will still be there tomorrow.
You say that about melon, but how do you feel about Terra. He has played pretty cnsistently to how he normally plays, yet at the moment he seems like he might be one of our better candidates for getting lynched.
I feel like he's not particularly making a strong argument for his actions in this game, on top of seemingly misunderstanding what Kawl's saying. Admittedly the later issue is Kawl's fault for not being clear from the get go, but as I said before that's hardly worth holding against Kawl.
Correct, I keep forgetting this is not majority lynch where I'm used to waiting to the last second. Sorry about that.
Vote: Hyperactivity
I'm very skeptical of Splinter's halfassed defense of Hyperactivity there too, as well as his justification for not actually doing the work in representing what he's saying. I could be persuaded for voting for him or LP too. But right now I think Hyperactivity is scum.
I have noticed that Cabot's kind of been here and there. He has however offered some opinions on stuff tho, and justified previous actions against him.
I've already addressed the reasons Kawl gave, which if anything seem more half-assed
*Splinter not reading both posts doesn't surprise me, we've had posters before that don't like long posts, and it might get somewhat frustrating at times. I was expecting a more kingkitty style "fuk long posts" sort of response, and his reason was surprisingly good: we have less than an hour, the thread moves fast, and he already though Kawl's post was bs.
You seem to only really have addressed why I posted that MGS Mafia link and whether Kawl brought up anyone voting, so yeah, tbh, this vote surprises me. Seems sort of forced, what's your exact reasoning for it again?
You expressed some concerns about YNNNY, then said that non-scum would play less conservatively, because that's what you'd do. You then tried to show that you're not playing conservatively by dropping a vote, in case we felt you were playing scum-like or something.
By the way, any reads? General feelings on the people with votes?
You say that about melon, but how do you feel about Terra. He has played pretty cnsistently to how he normally plays, yet at the moment he seems like he might be one of our better candidates for getting lynched.
Despite agreeing that associating myself with melon is probably a bad idea, I think I'm sticking with L_P. He couldn't come up with great reasons to justify the 3 "most scummy" players in his list, which retroactively made it seem rather forced. His "not a good look" deflection to my own post also seemed vague and typical of someone trying to intimidate - you don't get to invalidate a point by pointing at who's making it and then trying to apply it to them. Also, making a vote is hardly indicative or conservative/non-conservative play. It's just... play.
So... since we are getting pretty close to the deadline I think my main suspicions are on L_P and Hyper. Both are very gut driven, but not entirely. Hyper's posts aren't entirely bad but something about them just don't click with me. I would feel stronger about voting him if it weren't for the nagging feeling in the back of my mind that it's a false positive.
L_P feels to me that he's doubling down a little too much on his reads. It feels uncomfortable, like trying to set a narrative early on. But a part of me wonders if some of my thoughts on him is OMGUS due to him scum reading me.
You seem to only really have addressed why I posted that MGS Mafia link and whether Kawl brought up anyone voting, so yeah, tbh, this vote surprises me. Seems sort of forced, what's your exact reasoning for it again?
I think you're scum. I agree with a lot of what Kawl has said about your posting style. That being said, you're active, and I'm suddenly getting cold feet about that vote.
Hyper - null
Melon - leaning town
LP - I don't remember much from him, but nothing has stood out as bad except maybe for bringing me up and then dropping it in the same post. He did at least elaborate on that though (when questioned by Sophia)
Terra - hmm, another null
For now, something for people to complain about:
VOTE: Terrabyte20xx
Scum terra was in GAFIA 1. He played basically the same as town terra, asides from the one gambit he and Swamped brought up.
He hasn't posted much, what he has has been mostly gut reads, and I think (without having had the opportunity to check his posts due to needing to defend myself) he would be one of the better lynches for today.
*Splinter defended melon over consistency, yet other players have also been "consistent", and I'm not sure if that's really a good defense to begin with
sophsoph, i said it was to break the tie? i can't reread that much posts in a few minutes before the bell is rung sorrryyyyyy (i saw huge walls of texts)
my reads are mostly on melon but i have faith that kawl has done proper legwork so i am giving him the benefit of doubt for the hyper detectiving
its 6.36 am here and i just woke up at 6.15, miss robot
give a spider some understandingu
(I will read those walls of texts, but not sure if i have the time to parse through them and make coherent opinions within the timeframe available before the day ends, is all)
