Mini 1543--Natirasha's On Parole!(Game Over)

[FourTrouble]

Ross, just because I asked others what they thought of you doesn't mean I threw your name out at random. You're making way too many assumptions about my intent.

[RossWilliam]

Do you have a reason why you're voting me yet or do you still need time?

[Idiotking]

Responding to a prod, will catch up tonight.

[Aronis]

Out of the people I'm developing reads on, Aronis and FourTrouble, for what I just said. Aronis for monkeying a confident player, and FourTrouble for waiting for other people to give him the reason for his vote.

I can't ever do anything right, can I?

[Natirasha]

Vote Count 1.14

(aka the "Yeah I'm Mostly On Mobile Access Now" Vote Count)

MafiaSSK(1):

Idiotking

Cabd(0):

Selkies(2):

zMuffinman, Katsuki

zMuffinMan(2):

Selkies, MafiaSSK

FourTrouble(1):

Bert

King Kenny(0):

The Goodfather(0):

kabooooom(0):

Bert(0):

RossWilliam(1):

FourTrouble

Aronis(1):

Cabd

Idiotking(0):

Katsuki(0):

No Lynch(0):

Not Voting(5):

King Kenny, The Goodfather, kabooooom, RossWilliam, Aronis

With thirteen alive, it takes seven to lynch.

Deadline:

(expired on 2014-02-04 21:00:00)

Proded IdiotKing and kabooooom.

[kabooooom]

Haven't detailed in anyone yet! But quick iso gives me a feeling that cabd or selkies are not town!
for now,

vote:selkies

i don't like hydras anyway!

[Selkies]

Haven't detailed in anyone yet! But quick iso gives me a feeling that cabd or selkies are not town!
for now,

vote:selkies

i don't like hydras anyway!

This nonsense, no-reason voting from you, katsuki, and muffin is getting really,

really

old.

Out of the people I'm developing reads on, Aronis and FourTrouble, for what I just said. Aronis for monkeying a confident player, and

FourTrouble for waiting for other people to give him the reason for his vote

.

Oh lordy lord.

Dat omgus.

I am interested in hearing FT's reasoning though.

[Selkies]

Out of the people I'm developing reads on, Aronis and FourTrouble, for what I just said. Aronis for monkeying a confident player, and FourTrouble for waiting for other people to give him the reason for his vote.

I can't ever do anything right, can I?

What's this about?

[Bert]

talk to me about why

ft whats your opinion about muffin

and why ross

Muffin is just gut, but I retract what I said about muffin because you're right, one past game does not a meta make. <3

Ross's #347 on the outside looks like a good effort and genuine, but I'm not sure if it's his 2007 style that makes his paragraphs so long-winded, or if he's trying to make it look like he's saying a lot when he's not.

I'd love to hear what others think of Ross though.

This doesn't feel sincere!

[Idiotking]

So this is going to be a big post, but that's just because I actively hate all of you.

I think you are so ridiculously stuck in the basic conceptions of mafia theory that you shouldn't even be in this game.

Oh, you

wound

me. My apologies if you guys are too advanced for me, but I've grown fond of training wheels.

But that's not what I'm doing here, nor would I have any need to. Not only had multiple people had me as solid town reads, but it's also early enough that it truly doesn't matter.

So what are you doing when you are going "yup, uh-huh" then? Also, why does it matter that multiple people had you as solid town reads? Does the fact that several people thought you were town make it true, or that you shouldn't be attacked for scummy behavior? Also, wouldn't the fact that people could have "valid" town reads on you counter your argument that it was too early to matter that you were sheeping? I'm confused, because you seem to be thinking that 1. it was too early to matter that you were sheeping, and 2. it was late enough for people to have valid town reads on you. Those conflict, don't they?

Let's explore that first sentence though. How the agreeing is useless, and how I'm just accepting it wholesale. I will gladly accept it wholesale that I am accepting those arguments wholesale. That is why I agreed to them without adding any questions or analysis that is true. But I think to address your point of how an "oh, sure" is totally useless, I'll have to put it into a more familiar perspective.
On occasion there will be political facebook statuses. Then almost undoubtedly there will be a controversial response. Then the original author will respond with another controversial response from the other side. However, both comments will get a certain amount of "likes" from people who agree with their statement. Whoever has the most likes is seen as winning.
So what I'm doing by giving a wholesale agree to a statement, is I'm "liking" that comment and giving it more credit in relation to other wagons. It is not anti-town. It is not as pro-town as giving a whole other reason, but it is not anti-town and you are wrong to say that.

Town needs information to win.
Explaining votes gives more information to town (via the thought process) than just voting.
Withholding reasoning intentionally limits information to town.
Therefore, it is anti-town.
Now, maybe I'm some old fogey bastard who doesn't get all this new-fangled "not explaining stuff, don't worry guys, it'll be fine" business, but unless you actually have a good reason for just going along with someone's votes, all I see is someone sheeping and providing a hell of a lot less info than they could. If you have a good reason for withholding info, then fine, you should be able to stomach my complaints/attacks until you put your master plan in action. Until then all I see is anti-town behavior and I will attack it as such.

The only real situations that I can think of where it would be as solidly and truly scummy as I think you're seeing it as is if a person were to copy/paste or give a wholesale agreement to a wagon late in the wagon or dare I say even at the hammer.

I think you're acting scummy. I don't think you're completely retarded. Of course it would be obviously scummy

then

. But why excuse poor behavior

now?

Following your line of reasoning I could see someone thinking they could get away with it early in the day, just because it's less obviously scummy. Now that opens up a big can of WIFOM, but the point is, poor play is poor play whenever it happens.

And that is definitely widely seen and is almost surely going to be called out upon especially by players as talented as say Cabd or Ffery or orcinus. But they didn't. You know why? Because this situation is different.

Why do you think I care whether or not those people would go after you? I think you did something scummy, so I will go after you. I don't care if others don't. Maybe they're wrong. Maybe (probably) I'm wrong. But it's better for somebody to go after the reach arguments than nobody, and who better than some rusty idiot?

Quantity may not mean quality but it sure as hell means content. I am responding to players as their posts come in. It is not just me posting to myself about cheese for over 100 posts. I am making connections with players and if you cannot see that, then you should learn it. All interactions with players are connections that you can analyze when others flip.
It's not fluff. It's me analyzing the situations around me. If the situations around me are fluff, then sure, I'll put in a little bit of humor, but it sure as hell is going to have content.

I need more than just chatter. Connections are good to follow. Connections + reasoning allows one to try to determine which reasons are fabricated. I don't understand why this is a hard concept.

As for what I think was directly "not unique", it's your votes. The votes I referenced were completely aping other people's arguments when you had no prior analysis. Especially considering the #202 switch (which was pro-muffin) to #231 (which was a vote for muffin). That's an awful fast turnaround, don't you think?

But then you say this, that my votes aren't unique. And let's note here that you said my votes, not some of my votes but my votes. So right away, no matter how you look at it, you can see that my vote on Selkies was unique and this tremendously breaks your theory for not only did I give unique reasoning once but I did it twice when I voted them on the two different occasions.

I specified that it was the votes I was referencing (the Muffin and Katsuki votes), not all of them. My apologies if my wording was poor, but I figured that "the votes I referenced" was pretty self-explanatory.

But then you reference my opinion switch. This is one of those places where I think your opinion becomes too entrenched in the basics of scumtells. Normally, when a person would switch votes very rapidly it could be seen as scummy. That holds value from the fact that they have no true opinion in the first place and are willing to vote whomever, whenever.

Yup.

There's a couple of problems with this in this circumstance. First, my opnions were never that strong. Ffs, I went back to Selkies on a gut vote. I had no strong opinions on anybody.

And this is something that's supposed to make me

not

want to vote for you?

So when I see logical cases, that I'm willing to put my vote behind, I'm willing to switch my opinion. So that addresses the whomever standpoint. The whenever standpoint is also wrong. For you see, it's still the very beginning of the game, within the first few hours, and there's always a lot of vote-shifting from everyone. People react very strongly and give out tons of different posts, especially in a game as active as this one.
So no, that's not a fast turnaround.

My problem wasn't so much that it was vote hopping. I get that vote hopping happens a lot early in the game. It's the fact that you just wholesale took someone else's argument for granted. It's that

you did not make the logical cases yourself.

From what I saw, you weren't even honestly

trying

, and you yourself admit that you were just bouncing around based on gut. What use are you if you can't think for yourself?

I hope you realize, Idiotking, that was 828 words directed right at you. Coming from me, the lurker. So you bet your ass you're wrong.

As you could probably guess from my prod, I'm incredibly lurky too. I get the feeling that this is going to be a very slow conversation.


As for the other players:

Selkies: Leaning town. Shares my irritation in unexplained votes, rightly probing Bert on his weak "analysis" of the day thusfar (being inexplicably pro-Muffin while also not giving an alternative target).

Bert: Null-leaning anti-town. Not necessarily scummy, but his posts seem to be lighthearted to the point of being useless (#324 is a prime example). #327 doesn't explain reads, but there's not much point in me even bringing that up anymore, since it's all the rage.

King Kenny:

I'm liking the look of Berts posts so far. They don't seem forced like others. In my opinion I can say he is town.

What does this even mean?

FourTrouble: Going to ISO when I have time. Thinking scum. Reason being: #336 (the Ross vote). Where the hell is that coming from? In #341 he says Ross is "scummier", but just asks for everyone else's opinions. Why? Is this just fishing for reasons? Isn't that too obvious?

I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT'S GOING ON.

Ross: I'm

specifically not

going to give my read on Ross, just because FourTrouble asked for it. Not that I have one to begin with, but I'm not even going to mention the lack of one. So THERE.

Other players: Will do when it's not 1:51 in the morning.

[zMuffinMan]

Are you intentionally tweaking my scum-zmuffin model?

maybe your model sucks

Can anyone confirm that this is how muffin man plays?

i've seen this muffin guy play before, and i can tell you this is how he normally plays. i think he's town here.

Selkies seems like town

why?

Shares my irritation in unexplained votes

uh huh. you realise they're only irritated the votes on their slot, they don't seem to care about unexplained votes from anyone else (like cabd's vote on aronis, or fourtrouble's vote on ross, or any of the other votes that weren't explained)

[Idiotking]

I know. I also know people have a tendency to notice crap votes when they're on them. Doesn't mean it's not nice to see someone irritated by it, though, even if it's self-serving. Lets me pretend I'm not the only one bothered by it, at least. It would be nice if it was more toward the town as a whole, but then I'd be holding out an idiot's hope.

[Natirasha]

I have gotten a couple PMs about this, so I guess I'm clearing this up.

When I posted the ruleset in the sign up thread, I accidentally posted an unrevised version of my ruleset which included the following rule.

18. This game consists of ten town players and exactly three mafia players. There are no third parties.

This was an accident and i edited it out quickly--but some of you have pmed me asking about it, so I'm clearing this up.

This was the only thing edited out of my ruleset. Carry on.

[King Kenny]

@idiotking:

I don't know what you don't get about my post or what I mean. Bert seems to be posting naturally without it looking forced, or containing fluff or nonsense.

[zMuffinMan]

or containing fluff or nonsense

link me to this magical game you speak of where bert's posts could be described as not containing fluff or nonsense

[Katsuki]

prpddodge

[Selkies]

uh huh. you realise they're only irritated the votes on their slot, they don't seem to care about unexplained votes from anyone else (like cabd's vote on aronis, or fourtrouble's vote on ross, or any of the other votes that weren't explained)

Interesting

Firstly, I think it's fair to say that we treat cabd differently than we treat the rest of you. Or at least I do.

Secondly, I did ask FT where his ross read came from. But since I have a townread on him, I see no reason to pressure him on it since he did say that he was getting to it some posts back

Thirdly, where the fuck do you get off asking other people to explain shit when you don't do so yourself?

[Selkies]

And no fucking shit I'm irritated on the votes on our slot.

The votes on the only person in this game I know to be town. At least one of which that comes from town because scum wouldn't pile on us like this so openly.

Holy fuck.

[Cabd]

Oh hey. It's 4am and I'm awake and why am I getting special treatment again?

[zMuffinMan]

At least one of which that comes from town because scum wouldn't pile on us like this so openly

i'm guessing this isn't the ffery head. if it is, i'm happy with my vote.

[Selkies]

I know. I also know people have a tendency to notice crap votes when they're on them. Doesn't mean it's not nice to see someone irritated by it, though, even if it's self-serving. Lets me pretend I'm not the only one bothered by it, at least. It would be nice if it was more toward the town as a whole, but then I'd be holding out an idiot's hope.

Oh hi, you said this already. I should read the entire page before I post and etc.

Arguing with SSK isn't a good track to follow. Mostly because SSK isn't one of those players where if you prove he's being illogical you can associate that with being scum.

Do you have meta with anybody here?

Pedit: because you're a special little flower

[Selkies]

At least one of which that comes from town because scum wouldn't pile on us like this so openly

i'm guessing this isn't the ffery head. if it is, i'm happy with my vote.

this isn't the fery head, how do you feel about your vote

[zMuffinMan]

still scum

you apparently think i'm scum, though, so i don't know why you care how i feel about it

[Selkies]

Oh I care about what you think up until the point where I'm convinced beyond doubt that you're scum

Don't worry, I'm getting there.

[Selkies]

still scum

you apparently think i'm scum, though, so i don't know why you care how i feel about it

Actually I think you're going to be the Svenskt of this game. It may be a while before we come to a consensus read on you.

UNVOTE

Oh hey. It's 4am and I'm awake and why am I getting special treatment again?

Orcinus is approaching you today pretty much the way he approached forming a read on me in NY 165.