Mini Normal 2149 | Philosophers | Over

[osuka]

Glitch played an excellent game

[osuka]

@truth please don’t take any of what I said personally, I have nothing against you. You’re just super clueless I guess

Only one way to learn though. Keep playing the game and you’ll fit in with the rest of us idiots just fine

[Truth]

@truth please don’t take any of what I said personally, I have nothing against you. You’re just super clueless I guess

Only one way to learn though. Keep playing the game and you’ll fit in with the rest of us idiots just fine

Okay!

If anyone has tips or tricks for me to play better next time, I would be really thankful. What sort of fake role claims are normally good? I won't be doing mason miller ever again.

[Dunnstral]

What sort of fake role claims are normally good?

As town? You usually don't want to fake claim

[midwaybear]

wow dunnstral did it again

[mavsfan41]

Hey all! I’ve been following when I can. I really apologize for having to sub out especially as scum. I wanted to see this game in full, but alas, outside forces got in the way. I felt awful signing up only to request a sub shortly afterwards. Sorry mod and the participants.

Nice work scum team!

Sorry Dunn for putting having you sub in and take my spot, but you played it better than I ever could’ve!

@Deimos27: sorry again for subbing out of your game. But thanks for finding a replacement so quickly!

[Blair]

Nauci whyyyy

GG scum!

Truth, please never do that again.

Do what?

Don't lie about your role, as a vanilla townie, on Day 1, when any role claim at all was completely uncalled for.

[mavsfan41]

Of course one or both were scum PR

Ugh I am dumb for incorrectly interpreting Looker's post I'm sorry town, as the last sane person in the game

Also have I really only seen scumstral? How do you always replace into scum?

Well played, Mavs

Thanks Nauci!

Glad to see my early pocket attempt worked so well and you survived long enough

Day 1 reads can last the WHOLE game and can be absolutely brutal to challenge later if you get a solid town read early on. Glad to know I’m not the only one to fall victim to one of my misguided town reads.

[Nauci]

I feel like I should just retire after this game

What's even the point if I can't be undefeated as town ಥ_ಥ

[Blair]

Just lie about your record like everyone else does. It's easy! Here, watch:

"I never roll scum." - Blair, June 2020, while scum

[Glitch]

I have a question, particularly for Blair. You said multiple times that I was arguing in bad faith and maybe this is just me being uneducated but could you elaborate on what you mean by that and explain how I did so?

I'm asking genuinely to find out, not to say I didn't do it. Just trying to figure out how I argued "in bad faith."

I ask because I am wondering if if is something that is scummy but acceptable, or if it is actually like unethical playing regardless of alignment? Cause if it's the latter I want to identify it and fix it, and if it's the former I want to identify it and change my playing to strengthen my scum game. TIA

ALSO: MAD props to GL for nailing the scum team right away. I would love tips, review, and pointers from others on how I can improve.

Looker and others, interestingly enough when I posted my first wall someone called it out as IIoA and I had never heard of it. I searched it on the wiki and was like, "oh shit, he's right and he nailed me!" (I don't remember who it was but someone nailed it.) So at that point I started reading up on How to Town. I read Rampage's article and immediately started implementing it with my push on Cat Scratch and then NDmath and both seemed to get me town read better so I was really excited and stuck it out. Then when referencing Rampage people told me it wasn't the best advice so now I'm just learning as I go.

[Glitch]

Ebwop

I got the feeling that arguing in bad faith is considered unethical play regardless of what alignment you are, but I dont know and understand enough to first of all 1) know what is meant by that statement and 2) know if it's just like lying: a moral compromise necessary due to the nature of the game.

Is it like that? An acceptable moral compromise? Or is it classified with using personal life excuses and "fake unavailability" to further your wincon?

[Glitch]

Glitch played an excellent game

This makes me really happy. There were a lot of moments I felt like I was playing great, and a lot where i felt like I had royally crashed and burned. Ha

[Glitch]

VOTE: Dunnstral

who's seeing what I'm seeing

Nauci, was this post you realizing me and Dunnstral were a scum team? That's how I read it but I've been curious.

[GuiltyLion]

hey gg all! Well played by the scum team, especially in 7p that was pretty tight for a while there, and there were some quality players in this PL. Thanks to Deimos for modding, was a smooth and enjoyable game!

Glitch if I have time later this week I might give ya some pointers. You had a really solid post or two at one point that pushed me off of you for D1 I'll go back and find it. I can't speak for others and I haven't gone and reread any of the 'bad faith' posts but usually I don't think that means you're playing unethically or anything, at least when I use it, moreso that you're assuming the worst / intentionally misinterpreting someone else's posts/arguments, and that's usually a scum behavior.

[GuiltyLion]

sorry EBWOP instead of some* quality players, I should say *numerous quality players! Would love to play with any of you all again sometime

[Blair]

I have a question, particularly for Blair. You said multiple times that I was arguing in bad faith and maybe this is just me being uneducated but could you elaborate on what you mean by that and explain how I did so?

I'm asking genuinely to find out, not to say I didn't do it. Just trying to figure out how I argued "in bad faith."

Arguing in bad faith, in this context, meant you were predicating an argument on a logical foundation that you did not genuinely believe, or that you had intentionally neglected to carefully examine before putting it forward to the thread.

tl;dr - "I'm not actually trying to understand what you meant in that post, I'm going to quote it and misinterpret it because I know the argument will sound persuasive."

I ask because I am wondering if if is something that is scummy but acceptable, or if it is actually like unethical playing regardless of alignment?

It's actually neither. It's not inherently scummy, because it's very difficult to tell the difference between a bad-faith scum argument, and townie confirmation bias. When I called you on it, it was a judgment call on my part - I interpreted it to be a bad-faith argument rather than confirmation bias. (I was right - you can't have confirmation bias about a Townie as scum, because you know they're innocent - but I couldn't have really been 100% sure at the time)

It's definitely not unethical play, either. It's pretty good scum play - you almost have to engage in this to some degree as scum if you ever want to convincingly push a mislynch. The art of perfecting it boils down to either A) being so subtle and persuasive that no one notices it's bad faith, or B) making it look like confirmation bias.

I believe the first time I accused you of it I singled out a single sentence that tipped me off - you might refer back to that if you want to develop this skill more. There was something in that post that tipped me off that you were fully aware that your case was stretching the facts.

You played well, and while some will say you didn't because *they* suspected you, the truth is you maintained about the perfect ratio of suspicion - you were far enough down the scum pile to avoid being lynched, while still suspected by enough people that no one was surprised you survived to endgame.

[Dunnstral]

It's always awkward when you're set up as this big townread on like day 1 and then everyone dies around you and you're still there

[Blair]

Town usually succumbs to paranoia.

I think you may have benefitted a degree from the Gambler's Fallacy with Nauci and I, Dunnstral.

[NorwegianboyEE]

Well played scum. That was a smooth victory. Town fell into shambles.

[NorwegianboyEE]

Truth, that was an awful play. Just claim your true role next time.

[Nauci]

VOTE: Dunnstral

who's seeing what I'm seeing

Nauci, was this post you realizing me and Dunnstral were a scum team? That's how I read it but I've been curious.

Dunnstral was posting in the classic Dunnstral scum style at the time—shallow thoughts, quick, opportunistic bandwagoning on other players' suspicions, never really holding any view for more than a few pages

Unfortunately this is one of the few games where I tunneled HARD on someone because I just couldn't mentally process the concept that Truth would have post everything in his ISO as a VT (...and I still can't).

[Nauci]

Town usually succumbs to paranoia.

I think you may have benefitted a degree from the Gambler's Fallacy with Nauci and I, Dunnstral.

Honestly what are the statistics of Dunnstral reliably replacing into scum slots every time, even though way town slots request replacement than scum in the same games?

Dunn, are you straight up requesting scum slots at this point

Going to have to just PL you in the future

Also my early game is always way better than my late game. I don't make it to late game often. I was like 1-3 or so as scum and at least 13-1 as town before this QQ

[NorwegianboyEE]

10/10 would lynch/policy vig/tunnel the miller mason claim again.

[LicketyQuickety]

Don't know why you viged me Blair, but it's not like I can do anything about it now.