Spoiler: Oh christ did I really just spend all of that time responding to a single page (77)
In post 1929, Shoshin wrote:I really don't like the worst's response to BV.
___
In post 1902, Momrangal wrote:Yesterday, bernie hammered gamma and i thought i saw the reason for it being something about me being flash lynched while V/LA yesterday.
Today, knowing im V/LA he makes a push for it before i even come back from said V/LA
Well we were no longer 24 hours from deadline, so...In post 1906, Momrangal wrote:Yeah here.In post 1739, Bernie Sanders wrote:though towards the end, it was partially a matter that he was claimed VT and I was slightly worried of an certain outside risk of deadline flash wagon momrangal VLA even if I scumread her more).
I dont understand why he would be worried if he scum read me.
Further more, this proves he's aware of my V/La and the fact that he pushed be knowing i couldnt respond.
Also, if he was worried of the flash wagon, why wouldnt he be still worried of it considering i was still V/LA
___
Was this a joke about scumreading Not Mafia or did I miss somethingIn post 1910, Irrelephant11 wrote: Not_Mafia who did you try to shoot last night?
___
Like I said in that post though: being aware of placebo affect doesn't affect placebo affect. I don't think that he could change his style enough even if I called it out. But I mostly post because I tend to be ultra transparent with my reaction/catch up posts and don't consider this kind of game theory.In post 1913, BlackVoid wrote:Why reveal this before you have a chance to see what he's like under pressure? Even if he's not pressured immediately, there's a chance he would be at some point. Edit: Just read 675 where you call it a placebo effect. Why can't he act serious if he's scum and gets pressured if he knows that's what you're expecting?In post 666, Nauci wrote:My rule of thumb that I absolutely don't vouch for is that, when heavily pressured, scum!tw becomes exponentially more dodgy/bullshitter, and slightly more serious as town. (based on one game w/ him and skimming a couple of others)
In post 1913, BlackVoid wrote:Would you mind linking me to places where you've said this as scum.In post 671, Nauci wrote:578, 583 I post this kind of crap when I'm unmotivated scum so it's hard not to read it this way
One game is from a private forum elsewhere but in Newbie 1863 I did it several times. At first I fell behind because I was in the hospital again but after I got better something like posts #44 onward in my ISO were dodging or otherwise excuses for not reading the game closely. I've linked it somewhere in my ISO here.
Okay thank you this gives me room for clarifications what I mean when I keep saying that I don't care how I'm read.In post 1913, BlackVoid wrote:This pinged. This is a game of perceptions and to do well as town, you need to read people correctly and be read correctly. "I give zero fucks about how I'm perceived" feels like bravado/putting up a front. The most content you've written about anyone in your readslist is yourself (tied with Irrelephant) which is also odd for someone who doesn't care about how they are perceived.In post 674, Nauci wrote:I generally gives 0 fucks about how I'm perceived in the game. If I am challenged on a specific thing or if someone has misinterpreted something I said, I'll address that. Otherwise, I just endeavor to town harder.
I actually don't like anything you've written under the heading of yourself. Why give bullet-points when you don't like self-meta?
I specifically mean that:
-How I am read does not impact the way I think about others and read the game on a personal level. I'm not going to scramble and panic trying to think of ways to look more town to appease people. I'm not going to scumread people for scumreading me.
I will evaluate people's reads of me as if they were reads of anyone else: does their train of thought make sense from their perspective. I have a history of demonstrating this so my votes for people voting me don't need to be taken with as big a grain of salt as some others on the site.
I don't like self-meta as in I don't like when I read people's self meta, because it's super unreliable. But since not everyone shares that opinion, I provided some on myself, and with as many links as possible so it's something they can discover for themselves (made logistically easier) instead of taking my word for it.
See above.In post 1913, BlackVoid wrote:What's the point of saying this?In post 674, Nauci wrote:I'm extremely capable of separating someone's read of me with my evaluation of the circumstances of how they read me as if it was any other player and their content.
In the Mafia Tiebreaker game, Sky_Paladin repeatedly made statements that I thought were unbelievably wrong. He was the other loudest poster and driving much of the momentum of the game so I thought it was very important to correct his misreads. But pages and pages of correcting him later I still thought he was town, and just very wrong and very stubborn. I think it's critical that town operates on a shared set of facts before we draw opinions, and it ended up making the difference between lynching scum and lynching the person he was misreading.In post 1913, BlackVoid wrote:It's well within your control to not argue with people for 9 pages if you don't think it's alignment-indicative so I don't see the point of this either. Obviously if do think it's alignment-indicative, then it's a good lead and not just being pedantic.In post 674, Nauci wrote:I will get exhaustibly pedantic to correct a misconception so try not to make any or I will be here arguing w/ you on it for 9 pages.
Sheeping = taking someone's word for it and assuming their stanceIn post 1913, BlackVoid wrote: How do you reconcile your stance of not sheeping with using TheWorst's vouch of Bernie as part of your reason to townread Bernie?
I took TW's read as a data point (among other data points).
___
Man, TW"s reactions to BV posts are truly heinous.
___
@BV
: TW on Gemini
