Mini Normal 1983: Winter Wonderland [Endgame!]

[humaneatingmonkey]

UC is completely null for me you know right?

what. why is that relevant

[Hopkirk]

lol. if sergtacos is town, you would have gotten something more visceral than a gut read. that's what im saying.

Have you played any games with him other than 1804?

UC is completely null for me you know right?

what. why is that relevant

I was kind of getting the impression Kat thought otherwise.

[sheepsaysmeep]

Katyusha is right UNVOTE:

VOTE: Hopkirk

If Flubb is town, Hopkirk is scum, probably. "how?" Whiteknighting players without second guessing when most could see that UC and Flubb were sus. And also I'm sheeping Kat.

UC is completely null for me you know right?

UC is completely null for me you know right?

what. why is that relevant

reading through that conversation later @kat

[humaneatingmonkey]

in the future, i'm not gonna answer any more questions from anyone that could be answered by looking for the answer themselves. because it's sad to spend a post saying "yes" to something that could be answered by looking for the answer themselves.

but im gonna answer this now.

yes

[Hopkirk]

That was actually @Kat, but applies to HEM too actually. I don't see why anyone could suspect UC, or that HEM could think I did given half my argument with Kat was about scumreading someone based on that content being impossible.

[Katyusha]

I was kind of getting the impression Kat thought otherwise.

No, I didn't really take your UCV read into consideration bc something still feels off about the whole thing regardless

in the future, i'm not gonna answer any more questions from anyone that could be answered by looking for the answer themselves. because it's sad to spend a post saying "yes" to something that could be answered by looking for the answer themselves.

but im gonna answer this now.

yes

i think the unspoken expectation would be to specify which games but i can understand why you'd also not opt to do that

That was actually @Kat, but applies to HEM too actually. I don't see why anyone could suspect UC, or that HEM could think I did given half my argument with Kat was about scumreading someone based on that content being impossible.

thats not what the conversation is about and thats why im annoyed at this whole thing

[humaneatingmonkey]

huh

what the fuck is going on are we on different talk points or something

let me join in later when i actually understand whats happening

[Katyusha]

different talk points or something

yes but theres no contradiction between them

i kind of wanted to see if seph sees it though so im not going to explain that well until he gets back

[Hopkirk]

@Kat: No it's not what the conversation was about, it's something you can infer from the conversation as objectively true.
Given I didn't believe UC would seriously vote/form a read based on that content, an equal offering from UC wouldn't be enough for me to form a read on them.

[Katyusha]

er seeing as though that inference doesnt really make sense from both how i remember the conversation as it happened and how i'm reading it, no, the formation of any alignment read on based on UCV's vote is mostly irrelevant to the conversation.

what do you mean by an equal offering? like if he explained the vote?

[sheepsaysmeep]

tbh it would be efficient if ucv just came us and told him abt the vote lol
the two possibilities, regardless of alignment, are that a) he acknowledges that rvs exists and participates in it, but he wants to keep it short
b) he picked someone who participated in rvs and voted him for doing smth he sees as scummy
i think i see where you two are both coming from
i might have zoomed over this, but

@hop

if ucv's vote is serious, what do you think of his alignment
also, if the vote was serious, i think he would have said smth about the other two rvs voters?
to 146 i dont think kat is treating it as more than it really is, it's scummy if it's a serious vote and kat seems to think it might be one
i dont think either of you are scum atm

[sheepsaysmeep]

actually, see this game
ucv is town who still participates in rvs and then states this

[humaneatingmonkey]

let's stop talking about ucv because it doesn't mean anything

i got confused with hopkirk because he insinuated that I disliked UC. then I said that even if I liked UC it's not grounds to vote elsewhere. then he said he thought I liked UC. and then he's back saying i dislike UC. then he says UC is null for him (he said this is for me too) and that he said I thought he disliked UC.

this is 100% eric andre level non sequitur that derailed the actual event happening here: Hopkirk has been constantly misrepresenting events, in addition to my vote reason. And then sheep defending him with little cause for it. this is noteworthy and that we should be taking this more seriously.

[sheepsaysmeep]

where's he misrepping events
this wasnt your original reason
im defending him bc i tr him and it's an ugly wagon

[humaneatingmonkey]

EBWOP: "then I said that even if I DISLIKED UC, it's not grounds to see me vote elsewhere as something dislikeable"

something is off with this whole dialogue it doesn't feel town talking to town at all. someone between hop, sheep, and kat is scum. i dont think it's kat.

[sheepsaysmeep]

i would bet on you being the scum in that dialogue if i thought there was scum in there rn
youre a tough read :/

[Katyusha]

this is 100% eric andre level non sequitur that derailed the actual event happening here: Hopkirk has been constantly misrepresenting events, in addition to my vote reason. And then sheep defending him with little cause for it. this is noteworthy and that we should be taking this more seriously.

theres no point in trying to hide it because hme just hit the nail on the head lmfao

i think sheep is just misguided though, the rest of his play is obvtown

also the ucv game he linked is a good example of what i meant to flubber about him forcing town out of rvs

Town

UCV

Toto
Whymafia

Scum

Screenplay
Sheep

[humaneatingmonkey]

For starters

That was actually @Kat, but applies to HEM too actually. I don't see why anyone could suspect UC, or that

HEM could think I did

given half my argument with Kat was about scumreading someone based on that content being impossible.

I didn't

Consistently cautious. Pattern, not just here.
I thought you liked UC so voted Flubber, might be wrong about the consistently part then. Why do you dislike UC?

Why didn't you respond to my other points.

Nothing about my pattern is consistently cautious nor do I said I dislike UC

You're suggesting I'm 100% sure about the read, despite my agreement on overstating reads.
'20/20' and 'if you know' and 'you can't be wrong' imply a lot more than I've said.

the phrases has been taken wildly out of context

Don't like that you're asking instead of voting me here. You seem a bit too cautious/sheepy with your votes given you disliked UC.

I didn't

It strikes me as someone generating drama where there's none

also, he seems to be asking questions that went nowhere. just fluffing. maybe. let's see where he takes them then.

[humaneatingmonkey]

so hi Hopkirk. it's great to play with you again. check if there's a gasleak on your building. or go to bed and come back here in the morning. otherwise, this is some smelly dialogue.

[Katyusha]

like this is how i'm seeing the chain of events i spoilered:

• me: hey theres reason to think ucv might have been serious here, let's clarify if he sees scum motivation in intern. i also dont think theres any inconsistency between ucv's thought process and his actions
  
  hopkirk: why do we need scum motivation here? the discussion here is about ucv's inconsistency. i dont like the way you're going about this
  
  me: i want to hear ucv's thought process so i can read it. also ucv isnt being inconsistent
  
  hopkirk: he obviously doesn't think that rvs'ing is scummy - why would he be serious?
  
  me: can you take a second look at that vote and try to see where i'm coming from?
  
  hopkirk: everyone would have to agree with ucv for that to be the case - he also only referenced one person. the point of this is that we're wagonning ucv for reactions (note this clearly does not reference the vote i was talking about and seems to be discussing the ucv wagon? which is irrelevant)

like eric andre really hit the nail on the head here for how? off hopkirk seems to be interacting with everything and further discussion only made it worse

it feels like he thought i was pushing against the ucv wagon which?? doesnt make sense considering i was on it

if i'm misrepping please lmk

[sheepsaysmeep]

im actually somewhat convinced
the way he says hem disliked ucv to reason a push on him is scummy
it could be a possible misunderstanding but im reconsidering the read atm

pedit reading that wehn im not in class but what does eric andre have anything to do with this

[Hopkirk]

Not read posts past what I'm quoting btw.

VOTE: BuJaber

Avatar is too edgy for me please lynch this

VOTE: BuJaber

Avatar is too edgy for me please lynch this

VOTE: internecine

Hmmm. Avatars mean nothing

er seeing as though that inference doesnt really make sense from both how i remember the conversation as it happened and how i'm reading it, no, the formation of any alignment read on based on UCV's vote is mostly irrelevant to the conversation.

By equal offering and inference I mean that since I explicitly state 4 is NAI, you can conclude I think 7 is equally NAI.
The conversation is about me trying to sort you, and I assume vice versa, yeah.
what do you mean by an equal offering? like if he explained the vote?

[Katyusha]

the non-sequitur feel of how hopkirk responds to things - like in the conversation i spoilered it feels like he and i are talking in different planes of existence

pedit: ok

[Not_Mafia]

That's just what Hopkirk does

[sheepsaysmeep]

and