Newbie 1881 - Game Over

[TrinityNZ]

@nancy what are the point of these questions, especially question number 3

Now that nancy's responded, I want to know: What was the point of

this

question? You don't seem to have a problem with them, given you answered them (in post 18, although with less detail than basically everyone else). It also seems fairly obvious that at least one of the ways nancy uses them is for hunting, given how she'd already started sorting people based on their answers (12, 15). Plus, it seems a little off to me how it took you so long to wonder about them.

because some people like to play RQS over RVS and usually RQS ends up with a stalled game with no where to go because game quickly devolves into asking questions about NAI things.

Hey, @FF @stan @Trinity, does this feel like a scum-scum interaction to you? Feel free to punt on it.

The question from OkaPoka seems a bit odd to me, but I don’t see why it would be a scum interaction.

[TrinityNZ]

What are Pregame Readscales lmao

nancy ~ )) ---- )) ---- stan - FF, Trinity - [Iceman, Eragon] % )) - > SA, OkaPoka - Flicker )) ~

Can you explain what this means?

[nancy]

@nancy what are the point of these questions, especially question number 3

Now that nancy's responded, I want to know: What was the point of

this

question? You don't seem to have a problem with them, given you answered them (in post 18, although with less detail than basically everyone else). It also seems fairly obvious that at least one of the ways nancy uses them is for hunting, given how she'd already started sorting people based on their answers (12, 15). Plus, it seems a little off to me how it took you so long to wonder about them.

because some people like to play RQS over RVS and usually RQS ends up with a stalled game with no where to go because game quickly devolves into asking questions about NAI things.

Hey, @FF @stan @Trinity, does this feel like a scum-scum interaction to you? Feel free to punt on it.

The question from OkaPoka seems a bit odd to me, but I don’t see why it would be a scum interaction.

Okay, why not? Do you have any hints of a read on either of them separately?

[nancy]

What are Pregame Readscales lmao

nancy ~ )) ---- )) ---- stan - FF, Trinity - [Iceman, Eragon] % )) - > SA, OkaPoka - Flicker )) ~

Can you explain what this means?

It's a sliding scale, townreads spread left, scumreads spread right. The % marks rand, which is 75%. (Everyone in the game has a 75% chance of being town.) Each dash is equivalent to about 2.5% off rand, and commas mean there's no difference.

Uhmm, other little details are that each double bracket is a hard grouping, each single bracket (not yet appearing) is a soft grouping, names surrounded by square brackets are slots that are either null or I don't want to lynch them even if they're in my PoE (for example, it's bad from a process standpoint to lynch an empty slot, because it can't claim), slots right of the arrow are in my lynch pool, the tilde separates lock townreads from mechanically confirmed town, ditto lock scumreads (lol yeah right) from mechanically confirmed scum.

So, it means that you and FF are like, a smidge above rand for me (say like, ~78% confidence you're town), stan is a smidge above you both (~80%), and SA, Poka and Flicker are smidges below rand (~70%). Iceman and Eragon are null.

Does that make sense?

If it's too complex I can just use a simpler tiered list, but using the readscale really helps me to get a feel for exactly where I want to place people in terms of confidence and how my reads all fit with each other. Hard and soft groupings are particularly helpful for me because it lets me put certain players together who I have similar-ish strength reads on but maybe have something about them that makes them a little distinct that I want to notate. I wouldn't expect you to do anything like this don't worry lmao, it's more for my own benefit than anything.

[nancy]

@nancy what are the point of these questions, especially question number 3

Now that nancy's responded, I want to know: What was the point of

this

question? You don't seem to have a problem with them, given you answered them (in post 18, although with less detail than basically everyone else). It also seems fairly obvious that at least one of the ways nancy uses them is for hunting, given how she'd already started sorting people based on their answers (12, 15). Plus, it seems a little off to me how it took you so long to wonder about them.

because some people like to play RQS over RVS and usually RQS ends up with a stalled game with no where to go because game quickly devolves into asking questions about NAI things.

Hey, @FF @stan @Trinity, does this feel like a scum-scum interaction to you? Feel free to punt on it.

The question from OkaPoka seems a bit odd to me, but I don’t see why it would be a scum interaction.

Also um, what do you mean the question seems a bit odd to you sorry? Explains?

[stan1ey]

Hey, @FF @stan @Trinity, does this feel like a scum-scum interaction to you? Feel free to punt on it.

The question from OkaPoka seems a bit odd to me, but I don’t see why it would be a scum interaction.

Oka's question doesnt seem odd to me. But with Flicker's question I don't see the point at all. I also don't understand why she would feel the need to mention that he didn't answer them as well as other people. (also i checked - Oka actually put in roughly the same amount of effort I did when answering them).

I guess the point of a scum-scum interaction is to make it seem like they are trying to sort eachother without going too hard as hard bussing is a scumtell. Maybe, but i don't think so. Oka had a reasonable answer and i see nothing wrong with his original question. so i don't think it's scum-scum

Here is what i think happened - Oka actually made a question to Flicker in #47 and then in #49 criticized her response. Flicker did not respond to this but instead wrote post #80. So instead of responding to the fair criticism by Oka, Flicker threw some criticism straight back at OKa. I think this is scummy, especially because there was nothing really substantial in what she was saying, its like it was pulled from thin air because she thought she needed to give something back as a way to turn people against Oka instead of herself

VOTE: Flicker

[nancy]

You townread Oka?

[nancy]

@stan talk with me about this tidbit?

Also like, I'm pretty obviously not trying to derail the game into non-scumhunting mode I think, lmao, so yeah actually that's a pretty detached thought to have and from that perspective it doesn't really feel genuine, hm. You can join the poopoo list.

[nancy]

Omg I just skimmed your completed games and I think I might love you lmao.

[Eragon]

Ummm I think I can post now...


I'll read the thread once I'm off mobile, sorry.


AMA about my history of FM

[Micc]

All players have now confirmed. The deadline for Day 1 is now unpaused.

Votecount 1.04

Formerfish (3) -

OkaPoka, IcemanCh, TrinityNZ

Flicker (2) -

nancy, Stan1ey

IcemanCh (1) -

Formerfish

stan1ey (1) -

SargeAlpha

Not Voting (2) -

Eragon, Flicker

With 9 players alive it takes 5 votes to lynch.

The deadline for Day 1 is in (expired on 2018-07-23 11:49:57).

[Eragon]

First order of business, do not communicate with anyone in this game or not in this game about this game. That means don't send any other player in the game a PM, don't talk to anyone else who plays mafia about the game on Discord, don't talk about the game on sitechat, don't mention the game in other games, and so on. Read the board announcement about this, thoroughly, please.

https://forum.mafiascum.net/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=30909

Please read the game rules post before you start playing. If you have any questions about the rules, or about your role, ask the moderator. Don't say what your role is or post your role PM or any other mod communication in the game thread. I am here to answer game mechanics- or theory-related questions and I will answer them truthfully regardless of my alignment, you can trust me on that because it's part of the rules of being an IC.

To start off I'd appreciate it if everyone answered a few questions:

1) What sort of activity can we expect from you this game?
2) Have you played forum mafia before, and if so, where, and how has that informed your play?
3) Do you prefer hunting mafia or manipulating town, and why?

I'll start off.

1) normally depends on my WIM and availability, so id say expect a fair amount of activity but not overboard.
maybe like 5-10 posts every RL day.

2. I've played FM on my homesite, ToS Forums, and a couple games on MU, along with 2 ongoing games here. if you want me to show you my top town game and top scum game just lmk.

3. I really like playing town because I feel more relaxed and comfortable and it just, feels better to me.

[Eragon]

Oops sorry for it being in the quote, my responses are the bottom 3


Also I gtg for a few hours expect me to come back in about 7 hours

[OkaPoka]

Fuck. I meant to not answer that until they said something, but I just smoked a bowl on the shitter and forgot.

UNVOTE: maggie

VOTE: FormerFish

Not a fan of drug references

Fuck. I meant to not answer that until they said something, but I just smoked a bowl on the shitter and forgot.

UNVOTE: maggie

VOTE: FormerFish

Not a fan of drug references

Um. Why are you voting him? Do you think it's scummy that he made a drug reference? I feel like I'm missing something.

I thought we were still in RVS, and as Maggie is being replaced, and isn’t around, thought I’d switch my vote. So I didn’t think the drug reference was scummy, but just the reason for my random vote.

It's scummy because they are making it seem like they don't want to vote because we may be out of rvs already, not very likely when we are barely on page 2. They answer their own question by mentioning that nothing scummy has really come up, which would mean that most likely we are still in rvs.

So if they were concerned about being out of rvs as a reason to have not voted, their own reasoning is negated by their own observation of the game, and should have felt comfortable voting freely.

For some reason they didn't.

*She/her, thanks.

It's possible to be out of RVS on page 2, just as it's possible for scummy things to happen during RVS, so I think your logic here is wrong. From my perspective, it seemed like there might be enough substantive talk, especially based on/around nancy's questions, that we might be out of RVS, but I wasn't positive because I'm still pretty new and I'm not 100% sure when RVS ends (other than everybody agreeing that it's over). So, I could either risk making a random vote and getting scrutinized for that, or I could be wrong about the RVS status and risk being scrutinized for not voting at all. I went with "don't vote, explain why, and assume people will understand," but that failed, and here we are.

Speaking of vote scrutiny...

UNVOTE: maggie

VOTE: FormerFish

Not a fan of drug references

My understanding of RVS is that it only involves one random vote, and then the next vote should be serious. So, why this second non-serious vote?

Oops. I didn’t realise there was a restriction on how many random votes you could do. Sorry. Should I unvote?

@trinityNZ

1) did you know you were rvs'ing and putting FF L-2 this early into the game?
2) is 64 sarcasm?

[OkaPoka]

UNVOTE:

[Flicker]

because some people like to play RQS over RVS and usually RQS ends up with a stalled game with no where to go because game quickly devolves into asking questions about NAI things.

Nancy's questions are hardly random, though. As the IC, it makes sense to ask that kind of stuff.

I sorta don't believe that these are things that bother you?

Feels a little more like you're looking for ways to dumpster him for not looking sexy than having legitimate concerns with what his motivations are. Particularly the way that you're kind of passive aggressively painting what he's doing as scummy without actually committing to a scumread. I'd expect that kind of approach when you've maybe had a scumread for a while and been stewing over it and there's just nothing about the person that you like, not in a super early game situation where first impressions are still being made pretty much.

So, uh, why is it scummy to you that he didn't ask me about the RQS thing right away? Why is it a bad thing that he asked me about something that you felt should be obvious? I don't necessarily agree that it should have been obvious and I don't think there's anything super harmful in asking that kind of question, so please help me see why you do?

I don't understand your approach here and I'd like to understand it so if you could talk more about what you're thinking / doing that would be super helpful.

Vote: Flicker

Funny you think I'm subtly shading Oka, because I felt like I was pretty explicitly scumreading him, based on him subtly shading

you

. I just don't see, with the timing of the question and how many people (including Oka) who had answered it, why to ask that. And if it was a question of RVS vs RQS (which isn't even the case here, your questions aren't random), that's just a playstyle difference that Oka must already be aware of; so why not just mention that, instead of just a general question with some subtle shade (at Q3 in particular)?

I think this question coming from a newbie would have been okay, but Oka's a pretty experienced SE so that kind of "method" question doesn't feel so innocent. And I agree with you that his further thoughts in 93 feel off, too.

(also i checked - Oka actually put in roughly the same amount of effort I did when answering them).

The difference between your responses and his, though, is that even with a similar amount of effort, your answers still have more detail/substance. I mean, your "This my third game so far. I think the most important thing i've learnt is to always think about motivations behind posts." is better than his "yes and still suck, turns out people are good at lying." Maybe that's not enough of a difference to you, but it is to me.

Here is what i think happened - Oka actually made a question to Flicker in #47 and then in #49 criticized her response. Flicker did not respond to this but instead wrote post #80. So instead of responding to the fair criticism by Oka, Flicker threw some criticism straight back at OKa.

I disagree that 49 is a criticism of my response. It just felt like Oka explaining himself, and I didn't have a reply to that other than to reiterate my remarks from 48. Also, in general, if my reply would only be something like "you're wrong," I just don't bother replying.

@trinityNZ

1) did you know you were rvs'ing and putting FF L-2 this early into the game?
2) is 64 sarcasm?

Meanwhile, here's another example of unnecessary/subtly shading questions from Oka. Trinity mentions RVS in the second quoted post, and Q2 is just a little silly, no? These feel more like busywork than honest/useful questions.

VOTE: OkaPoka

[OkaPoka]

@flicker i mean sure draw conclusions before the q&a session with trinity is over

[TrinityNZ]

@nancy what are the point of these questions, especially question number 3

Now that nancy's responded, I want to know: What was the point of

this

question? You don't seem to have a problem with them, given you answered them (in post 18, although with less detail than basically everyone else). It also seems fairly obvious that at least one of the ways nancy uses them is for hunting, given how she'd already started sorting people based on their answers (12, 15). Plus, it seems a little off to me how it took you so long to wonder about them.

because some people like to play RQS over RVS and usually RQS ends up with a stalled game with no where to go because game quickly devolves into asking questions about NAI things.

Hey, @FF @stan @Trinity, does this feel like a scum-scum interaction to you? Feel free to punt on it.

The question from OkaPoka seems a bit odd to me, but I don’t see why it would be a scum interaction.

Okay, why not? Do you have any hints of a read on either of them separately?

I don’t have any scum reads on them ATM, but maybe today I will have a look through the ISOs and do some more investigating.

[TrinityNZ]

What are Pregame Readscales lmao

nancy ~ )) ---- )) ---- stan - FF, Trinity - [Iceman, Eragon] % )) - > SA, OkaPoka - Flicker )) ~

Can you explain what this means?

It's a sliding scale, townreads spread left, scumreads spread right. The % marks rand, which is 75%. (Everyone in the game has a 75% chance of being town.) Each dash is equivalent to about 2.5% off rand, and commas mean there's no difference.

Uhmm, other little details are that each double bracket is a hard grouping, each single bracket (not yet appearing) is a soft grouping, names surrounded by square brackets are slots that are either null or I don't want to lynch them even if they're in my PoE (for example, it's bad from a process standpoint to lynch an empty slot, because it can't claim), slots right of the arrow are in my lynch pool, the tilde separates lock townreads from mechanically confirmed town, ditto lock scumreads (lol yeah right) from mechanically confirmed scum.

So, it means that you and FF are like, a smidge above rand for me (say like, ~78% confidence you're town), stan is a smidge above you both (~80%), and SA, Poka and Flicker are smidges below rand (~70%). Iceman and Eragon are null.

Does that make sense?

If it's too complex I can just use a simpler tiered list, but using the readscale really helps me to get a feel for exactly where I want to place people in terms of confidence and how my reads all fit with each other. Hard and soft groupings are particularly helpful for me because it lets me put certain players together who I have similar-ish strength reads on but maybe have something about them that makes them a little distinct that I want to notate. I wouldn't expect you to do anything like this don't worry lmao, it's more for my own benefit than anything.

Thanks for the explanation. I like it

[TrinityNZ]

@nancy what are the point of these questions, especially question number 3

Now that nancy's responded, I want to know: What was the point of

this

question? You don't seem to have a problem with them, given you answered them (in post 18, although with less detail than basically everyone else). It also seems fairly obvious that at least one of the ways nancy uses them is for hunting, given how she'd already started sorting people based on their answers (12, 15). Plus, it seems a little off to me how it took you so long to wonder about them.

because some people like to play RQS over RVS and usually RQS ends up with a stalled game with no where to go because game quickly devolves into asking questions about NAI things.

Hey, @FF @stan @Trinity, does this feel like a scum-scum interaction to you? Feel free to punt on it.

The question from OkaPoka seems a bit odd to me, but I don’t see why it would be a scum interaction.

Also um, what do you mean the question seems a bit odd to you sorry? Explains?

Well it seemed obvious to me that you were doing your thing as IC in getting us talking, and getting some conversations going. Also a good way for us to know a little about each other, to make the game feel a bit more social and not like we are all complete strangers. And nobody else queried them. So it felt a bit off when OkaPoka did. Not necessarily scum though.

[OkaPoka]

Fuck. I meant to not answer that until they said something, but I just smoked a bowl on the shitter and forgot.

UNVOTE: maggie

VOTE: FormerFish

Not a fan of drug references

Fuck. I meant to not answer that until they said something, but I just smoked a bowl on the shitter and forgot.

UNVOTE: maggie

VOTE: FormerFish

Not a fan of drug references

Um. Why are you voting him? Do you think it's scummy that he made a drug reference? I feel like I'm missing something.

I thought we were still in RVS, and as Maggie is being replaced, and isn’t around, thought I’d switch my vote. So I didn’t think the drug reference was scummy, but just the reason for my random vote.

It's scummy because they are making it seem like they don't want to vote because we may be out of rvs already, not very likely when we are barely on page 2. They answer their own question by mentioning that nothing scummy has really come up, which would mean that most likely we are still in rvs.

So if they were concerned about being out of rvs as a reason to have not voted, their own reasoning is negated by their own observation of the game, and should have felt comfortable voting freely.

For some reason they didn't.

*She/her, thanks.

It's possible to be out of RVS on page 2, just as it's possible for scummy things to happen during RVS, so I think your logic here is wrong. From my perspective, it seemed like there might be enough substantive talk, especially based on/around nancy's questions, that we might be out of RVS, but I wasn't positive because I'm still pretty new and I'm not 100% sure when RVS ends (other than everybody agreeing that it's over). So, I could either risk making a random vote and getting scrutinized for that, or I could be wrong about the RVS status and risk being scrutinized for not voting at all. I went with "don't vote, explain why, and assume people will understand," but that failed, and here we are.

Speaking of vote scrutiny...

UNVOTE: maggie

VOTE: FormerFish

Not a fan of drug references

My understanding of RVS is that it only involves one random vote, and then the next vote should be serious. So, why this second non-serious vote?

Oops. I didn’t realise there was a restriction on how many random votes you could do. Sorry. Should I unvote?

@trinityNZ

1) did you know you were rvs'ing and putting FF L-2 this early into the game?
2) is 64 sarcasm?

[TrinityNZ]

UNVOTE: maggie

VOTE: FormerFish

Not a fan of drug references

My understanding of RVS is that it only involves one random vote, and then the next vote should be serious. So, why this second non-serious vote?

Oops. I didn’t realise there was a restriction on how many random votes you could do. Sorry. Should I unvote?

@trinityNZ

1) did you know you were rvs'ing and putting FF L-2 this early into the game?
2) is 64 sarcasm?[/quote]

1. Yes I was RVSing, no I didn’t know it was L-2
2. No

[OkaPoka]

okay trinity, nancy, and stanley are town

[OkaPoka]

im having a hard time really scumreading anyone rn tho

thought i had a direction with trinity but meh

im not really seeing flicker scum rn

pretty sure former is town

[Eragon]

off mobile catching up now