Mini Normal 2262: NbITGBSMoD [game over]

[Frozen Angel]

I have like 4-5 played fourm games(so really not that much)

so have you ever played as mafia

[Frozen Angel]

why is nero finding it scummy giving you scum vibes on nero but you didn't get same vibes from andante?

again, it was the sheeping, frozen, the sheeping. and not just in isolation, it is in the context of the rest of his play. this game it all seems lazy

How is having the same idea about some post scum indicative?

[Scorpious]

@Scorpuis, has your read on wave changed(esp since they've started to give content(355/360)

I''ve moved Wave from town lean to null

indeed

[wavemode]

and he clearly gave a read on the interaction in 255 even though its not a certain read (there is no such thing as a certain read without role actions btw) which is opposite to hookie calling it directly not AI at all.

I already mentioned all the issues I had with it, namely that he himself recognizes that there are many different possibilities for his motivations, and the fact that several other people besides hockeyfan also considered it NAI

and if its a gut read just insist that its a gut read. why would you wanna force reasons for your read?

uuh because it's not purely a gut read? I don't understand this question

How is having the same idea about some post scum indicative?

is this whole back and forth going to be a constant "I think grass is good because it's green" and then you respond "why do you think grass is good just because it's red?"

as I already said, it's not the read, it's the *lazy play*

[HockeyFan]

I have like 4-5 played fourm games(so really not that much)

so have you ever played as mafia

I can not for the life of me figure out how to ISO(sorry!), so you can just have the link(this is the site i played on) -> https://mafiascum-closedgame.freeforums ... waterfalls

@Scorpuis, has your read on wave changed(esp since they've started to give content(355/360)

I''ve moved Wave from town lean to null

indeed

So, you town read them for thier "syntax", but you are putting them back into null once they start making content? It certainly can't about the misrepping since you said you didnt find that scummy, so waht is it?

[wavemode]

I've never faced such strong defense for someone I'm not voting before

if only eyes without a face had such an advocate

[Frozen Angel]

and he clearly gave a read on the interaction in 255 even though its not a certain read (there is no such thing as a certain read without role actions btw) which is opposite to hookie calling it directly not AI at all.

I already mentioned all the issues I had with it, namely that he himself recognizes that there are many different possibilities for his motivations, and the fact that several other people besides hockeyfan also considered it NAI

and if its a gut read just insist that its a gut read. why would you wanna force reasons for your read?

uuh because it's not purely a gut read? I don't understand this question

How is having the same idea about some post scum indicative?

is this whole back and forth going to be a constant "I think grass is good because it's green" and then you respond "why do you think grass is good just because it's red?"

as I already said, it's not the read, it's the *lazy play*

considering several different possibilities is

solving

. calling something NAI is different. So you having the same idea as others about that conversation being NAI, is by your logic lazy play/sheeping and a scummy act?

about the second part, Why would you say that about gut reads then? I don't understand why you had to explain

how you don't have to explain gut reads

in detail right after giving logic about the read (and saying that it wasn't pure gut read). Seems like a contradictory pov.

and no I'm just trying to put you in a conversation to see how consistent you are and if you can explain the contradiction in your thought process or not. How do you read our back and forth right now?

[Frozen Angel]

I've never faced such strong defense for someone I'm not voting before

if only eyes without a face had such an advocate

Just to clarify

I'm not defending nero in slightest

I have no developed read on nero

I just find your logic about him "with issues" and am using it to understand you better

[Frozen Angel]

I can not for the life of me figure out how to ISO(sorry!), so you can just have the link(this is the site i played on) -> https://mafiascum-closedgame.freeforums ... waterfalls

How can someone who played as mafia and lived till later phases, not know that scum can fake their town play and to look as aggressive and pushy to gain town read, even after it was directly mentioned in the thread as the reason by someone believing that could have been the fake play in response to the same post?

and I mean this post:

stephen looks a lot worse off that than dwlee does to me. pushing a pointless point and acting like you caught someone in something? hmm. i can see a certain type of scum player doing that, whether because he really thinks he has a point (he doesn't, dwlee is right here) or because he knows that dumb extended fights like that a lot of times will make others skim and assume both are town

I need you to expand on this. Why would Steven do this as scum? He spent 2 pages trying to get an answer for a mostly "mild" sus from Dwlee. If stephen is mafia, he can really just ignore dwlee's read(or play it off), what is the benefit of doing what stephen did as scum there?

[Scorpious]

I have like 4-5 played fourm games(so really not that much)

so have you ever played as mafia

I can not for the life of me figure out how to ISO(sorry!), so you can just have the link(this is the site i played on) -> https://mafiascum-closedgame.freeforums ... waterfalls

@Scorpuis, has your read on wave changed(esp since they've started to give content(355/360)

I''ve moved Wave from town lean to null

indeed

So, you town read them for thier "syntax", but you are putting them back into null once they start making content? It certainly can't about the misrepping since you said you didnt find that scummy, so waht is it?

You’re twisting what i wrote, Just because I said I look at different variables doesn’t mean I ignore the more common things, I never said mis repping wasn’t scummy, either.

[wavemode]

considering several different possibilities is solving. calling something NAI is different. So you having the same idea as others about that conversation being NAI, is by your logic lazy play/sheeping and a scummy act?

I think the meaning of what I'm saying is still just not coming across here.

NAI = it would not be out of the ordinary for either alignment to do it. right? so there's two completely separate possibilities. that's what I mean by possibilities.

And so if someone is not leaning more in favor of one possibility or the other, like several people in this game currently, then what they are saying is that the action was NAI. it did not, in isolation, indicate alignment, and so can only be considered in the context of further (or past) observation

about the second part, Why would you say that about gut reads then? I don't understand why you had to explain how you don't have to explain gut reads in detail right after giving logic about the read (and saying that it wasn't pure gut read). Seems like a contradictory pov.

I still don't really understand the question. Why can't I make two separate statements in a single post?

[wavemode]

How do you read our back and forth right now?

I read what you're doing, yes, but you're ignoring large swathes of each of my sentences in order to do it

[Frozen Angel]

Nearly no action in isolation can indicate alignment. Alignments become more probable (turn to actual valuable reads) when you observe a pattern of behavior and make links between them.

Being alignment indicative means it's relevant to game solving when it's observed alongside the other clues to produce reads.

anyways that discussion is going nowhere. Your point is coming across, you're saying Nero called it not NAI but then said contradictory reads about the interaction. My point was him solving based on the actual thing, even if he has contradictory ideas about the incident means he considers it alignment indicative.

Guess I'm satisfied with your consistency there with your point of view, however.

about the second question I don't know how to rephrase lmao,
The read was a semi gut read but had a reason behind it right? So what was your point in adding that part about how gut reads don't need reason after giving (I still think forced) reasons about it?

[Frozen Angel]

How do you read our back and forth right now?

I read what you're doing, yes, but you're ignoring large swathes of each of my sentences in order to do it

which parts did I ignore

[wavemode]

which parts did I ignore

lol well let's use the latest example:

The read was a semi gut read but had a reason behind it right? So what was your point in adding that part about how gut reads don't need reason after giving (I still think forced) reasons about it?

your question here is ignoring the very fundamental question I was asking fire, namely:

I will probably have gut reads

in the future

, do you believe they should not be shared?

[Scorpious]

So, you town read them for thier "syntax", but you are putting them back into null once they start making content? It certainly can't about the misrepping since you said you didnt find that scummy, so waht is it?

I can already tell you I've noticed differences tbh,just know my use of the words "lean" and "null" are way different then when I commit. I just like people knowing how,when,and what I'm thinking.

[Frozen Angel]

which parts did I ignore

lol well let's use the latest example:

The read was a semi gut read but had a reason behind it right? So what was your point in adding that part about how gut reads don't need reason after giving (I still think forced) reasons about it?

your question here is ignoring the very fundamental question I was asking fire, namely:

I will probably have gut reads

in the future

, do you believe they should not be shared?

How is that response about not providing reasons for gut reads is relevant to that question?

[Scorpious]

Wave,thoughts on 358?

[wavemode]

How is that response about not providing reasons for gut reads is relevant to that question?

I was simply asking fire a question. If you dislike the question, good news! it wasn't to you, it was to fire

if what you dislike is *where* I put the question, I apologize profusely for the offense and in the future I promise to separate my questions from my statements whenever feasible

[fireisredsir]

How can someone who played as mafia and lived till later phases, not know that scum can fake their town play and to look as aggressive and pushy to gain town read, even after it was directly mentioned in the thread as the reason by someone believing that could have been the fake play in response to the same post?

this reminded me of something, thought it was kinda funny and relevant:

You ever play with the one and only DkKoba?

i haven't seen a hockey town game yet but ive been town vs scum him and also coached him while being scum with him - and I get different vibes from both those games rn.

so he has played as mafia partners with someone who is apparently a prime example of an aggressive scumplayer

[Scorpious]

So, you town read them for thier "syntax", but you are putting them back into null once they start making content? It certainly can't about the misrepping since you said you didnt find that scummy, so waht is it?

again, just would like to know where I said this.. I'm dealing with 2 mis reps at the same time and neither of you will acknowledge it.

[wavemode]

Wave,thoughts on 358?

uhm okay you *participated* in the ending of RVS, even though technically a non-RVS vote had already been cast a few minutes beforehand. would that be more accurate?

[Scorpious]

Wave,thoughts on 358?

uhm okay you *participated* in the ending of RVS, even though technically a non-RVS vote had already been cast a few minutes beforehand. would that be more accurate?

\

I would say so,... Thats a far cry from saying I "literally ended RVS" and using it as an argument as well.

Now I'm wondering if you would have ever corrected it, had I not called you out on it.

[Frozen Angel]

@wave I didn't say I didn't like the question. I didn't understand what the point of posting that paragraph about how gut reads doesn't need reason was relevant to your question about having or not having gut reads in the future. as they seem completely irrelevant, or am I not getting something?

Anyways I gotta sleep,

I would vote hockey overall slots right now but he would be 2 votes away from a yeet and I still have work to do before I commit to a read.

Am really interested to see how the rest of the slots react to recent developments as for most parts today I felt the town was leading the game in directions, so it feels that either scum is very smart and hidden or good at acting like inexperienced players or scum is inactive. That's my first take on this in the few hours that I caught up and interacted with few people here.

Have a good night/morning/evening everyone

pedit: yeah, I just find a bunch of his posts out of place. like the most inconsistent thought process so far is seen in hockey and it just doesn't fit. So I kinda approve that wagon. Just want to do more ground work first though.

[wavemode]

again, just would like to know where I said this.. I'm dealing with 2 mis reps at the same time and neither of you will acknowledge it.

this is weird, tonally. I struggle to see how this particular statement was of any pain to you. is participating in RVS ending somehow damaging to your reputation?

you participating in ending RVS has nothing to do with me scumreading you (how could it?), I simply said that in the context of the fact that eyes didn't mention it in his townreads

so why is this such a problem you're "dealing with"?

I would say so,... Thats a far cry from saying I "literally ended RVS" and using it as an argument as well.

Now I'm wondering if you would have ever corrected it, had I not called you out on it.

Well, no, I wouldn't have. I thought you ended RVS. So thank you for pointing that out to me.

But it doesn't really change the argument. I think eyes could still probably mention the player who said "oops did I end RVS" on page 1 of the game, if he's on a spree of townreading people who like to end RVS. right? is that unreasonable? or at least mention why you were the exception?