Team Mafia 2018: White Flag — Day Six

[Thestatusquo]

What do you think about the parts of the post (most of it) that aren't directed at you?

[Gamma Emerald]

Here, I'll help you out:


If your claim is that he "wolfy jumped in the thread" and made a vote based off of wanting to "push a wagon" you'd think maybe he'd have chosen actually a wagon, instead of just randomly throwing a vote at the wind in a place where no one else was.

More to the point, I find it deeply unsettling that you think this is the most important thing to go off of at this point. We have 10 whole pages bruh.

VOTE: gamma emerald

I thought others voted before him, huh
UNVOTE:

[LicketyQuickety]

What do you think about the parts of the post (most of it) that aren't directed at you?

Well that's an interesting way to sidestep what I said.

What I see is lack of consistency into the methodology to get the reads that Reck is representing. In the first case, Reck is using a mind meld read. In the second, he is using a read based on play. And in the third he is using a meta read. So it's quite confusing why Reck is using three methods to get 3 different reads.

[Gamma Emerald]

Also I'm not wild about the fact that your first instinct was to attack me instead of trying to figure out what I meant. As town when someone says something to me that on face doesn't make sense my first reaction is generally to try to clarify, not to fos them.

I thought you were trying to br obtuse, now I see you were right I'm no longer FOSing you

[Thestatusquo]

Ok but why are you voting dunn? Your vote for him is nonsense and there's a lot of scum motivation to park on the lurker who is literally doing nothing, and then make a big show about it as if you had some hyper special read on him and you didn't understand why others didn't. What do you think about the literal anything else thats happened in this game? Why do you think that dunn is the best vote when there is so much going on? Why were you unaware that it wasn't a wagon vote when you've placed your entire sorting efforts in this game into figuring out what happened in that one random early vote?

[Thestatusquo]

What do you think about the parts of the post (most of it) that aren't directed at you?

Well that's an interesting way to sidestep what I said.

What I see is lack of consistency into the methodology to get the reads that Reck is representing. In the first case, Reck is using a mind meld read. In the second, he is using a read based on play. And in the third he is using a meta read. So it's quite confusing why Reck is using three methods to get 3 different reads.

Do you actually think its unusual to use different things to understand your surroundings as they become relevant?

[Gamma Emerald]

Ok but why are you voting dunn? Your vote for him is nonsense and there's a lot of scum motivation to park on the lurker who is literally doing nothing, and then make a big show about it as if you had some hyper special read on him and you didn't understand why others didn't. What do you think about the literal anything else thats happened in this game? Why do you think that dunn is the best vote when there is so much going on? Why were you unaware that it wasn't a wagon vote when you've placed your entire sorting efforts in this game into figuring out what happened in that one random early vote?

Okaaaay you're blowing this way out of proportion and I don't like it. I literally unvoted the second I realized my mistake. And the reason I thought there was a wagon there was I remembered votes on someone Llalmarble suspected, and knew some people were suspecting Marquis, so I thought the votes were on her. I get that there is some scumminess to what I did, but I didn't just votepark, I actually thought I had a point. And I've asked other questions and made other reads, so what I'm seeing here is you boiling down my content to one misguided push. Given that and the fact Something_Smart is telling me not to trust you, I feel comfortable with this.
VOTE: TheStatusQuo

[Thestatusquo]

Alright guys, got our first.

[Sauce]

@Sum Walk me through what you are doing
Ooh, 'Honesty time with Sauce & Thestatusquo' is on. I'm awaiting reads from my teammates on all of you - IARFMTOAOY - so that we may start putting the pieces together for our drinking game. If a player flips the opposite we drink. Personally I also drink when I'm getting insulted for no reason, so that's +5 on my future tab courtesy of Thestatusquo, Liquety and ActionDan.
I'm not sure you calling my vote useless qualifies as an insult, but it certainly calls for some pre-emptive AtE, to set my mood for possibly doing something constructive like meta diving or .. I'm getting ahead of myself.
I might not do anything anymore today except quietly gaze upon the beautiful view on my scum locus -approximation sensor data screen, or contemplate what forum mafia is really about beneath and beyond, and how that reality is make-believe so we ought to act accordingly but we don't. How there's nothing on the line most of the time. How we perceive it as an occasion to evoke our busy RL schedule and so on .. so much to contemplate.
What are you getting out of forum mafia (other than witty username puns, CEScum) and where do you see its role in your cognition? *warning: may or may not plan to condescend for no reason other than to get even.

[Thestatusquo]

"IARFMTOAOY" I have no idea what that means.

[LicketyQuickety]

What do you think about the parts of the post (most of it) that aren't directed at you?

Well that's an interesting way to sidestep what I said.

What I see is lack of consistency into the methodology to get the reads that Reck is representing. In the first case, Reck is using a mind meld read. In the second, he is using a read based on play. And in the third he is using a meta read. So it's quite confusing why Reck is using three methods to get 3 different reads.

Do you actually think its unusual to use different things to understand your surroundings as they become relevant?

No, I don't. But I do think that it shows that Reck either doesn't know what he is talking about because he is forced to use different methodologies instead of keeping the methodologies the same, or you are Scum and that is the reason for the different methodologies.

In short, Reck is using different tactics, so the goal must be the thing that is the same. See here to know what I am talking about: https://forum.mafiascum.net/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=69491
Basically, I think it's a bit more Scummy than Towny the way Reck goes about making these statements.

[Thestatusquo]

What do you think about the parts of the post (most of it) that aren't directed at you?

Well that's an interesting way to sidestep what I said.

What I see is lack of consistency into the methodology to get the reads that Reck is representing. In the first case, Reck is using a mind meld read. In the second, he is using a read based on play. And in the third he is using a meta read. So it's quite confusing why Reck is using three methods to get 3 different reads.

Do you actually think its unusual to use different things to understand your surroundings as they become relevant?

No, I don't. But I do think that it shows that Reck either doesn't know what he is talking about because he is forced to use different methodologies instead of keeping the methodologies the same, or you are Scum and that is the reason for the different methodologies.

In short, Reck is using different tactics, so the goal must be the thing that is the same. See here to know what I am talking about: https://forum.mafiascum.net/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=69491
Basically, I think it's a bit more Scummy than Towny the way Reck goes about making these statements.

I um. Ok. I'm not really sure what to make of that. Carry on I guess?

[Gamma Emerald]

Alright guys, got our first.

Wanna actually address my issues with you rather than say "got our first"? Or do you just want to throw shade?

[Thestatusquo]

I disagree I guess. Frequently when I'm reading through a game I note things and end up with a list of things that bear no relation to each other. Its not because I'm "switching methodologies" or whatever, its that my methodology is reading the posts and seeing what things stick out to me. For instance, if I player I know well is playing very differently from how I would expect them to I take note of it, but I would also take note of posts by that player that seem to have town motivation behind them. I think most people play this way? I don't want to get too far down the theory rabbit hole but this is game relevant so I do want to talk about it

[Gamma Emerald]

So this is based on how you play then? That's alright but not everyone plays the same, so that's not a perfect method of reading people.

[Thestatusquo]

(last post was directed at LQ, gamma. This ones for you bb)

Alright guys, got our first.

Wanna actually address my issues with you rather than say "got our first"? Or do you just want to throw shade?

Not really, no. Arguing to convince scum why they're scum is kind of a waste of time.

But for the good of the rest of the game I'll point out that there has been no change in my arguments or my position from when I originally voted you and now, between which you totally changed your mind on me and said "I'm no longer FoSing you" and then decided that I was blowing things out of proportion. Your anger and suspicion of me seems to be not based around figuring out my alignment, but rather based on the strenuousness of my arguments against you, so I'm not particularly willing to give it much credence.

I have other reasons that I think you're scum, though. For instance, you voted marquis, after declaring that the dunn vote was readable because he came into the thread in order to pile onto the wagon, but its actually your vote that was the wagon pile on, not his. Your position on the wagon was a million times worse than the one you're reading as scum.

You say you've done a bunch of other stuff but what, exactly, do you mean by that? I see you agreeing with an LQ comment. I see you vaguely defending postie. I see you throwing early shade on marquis and dunn by sheeping llamarble and posting no insight of your own. What of these actions do you think represents a reasonable attempt to sort players?

I don't see any of them as such, and I think your vote is convenient and also doesn't accomplish anything in the game and it looks to me like you're content not accomplishing anything in the game.

The two times you've expressed strong suspicion in this game was the vote on the guy who has one post (which as I have already stated is crap) and on me after I asked you a series of pointed questions after voting you.

If you're town you're not doing a very good job.

[Gamma Emerald]

I had multiple questions in my big post today, but it's possible they got lost in the fact that the quotes mangled
Going in order with the rest of the points, you're not trying to convince scum they're scum, you're responding to issues I have with your read/case on me.
I changed gears because there was the fact that my teammate didn't seem to trust you, along with the fact you seemed to completely miss my unvote. So did you miss it or just choose to say I was still voting him?
Yeah I voted Marquis after Dunn which it's fair that you scumread that vote, but there's the fact I didn't realize Dunnstral was the first vote. Plus, his post was a naked vote while I gave early reads in my voting post. So they're not the same.
And you say I expressed strong suspicion on you and Dunnstral, what do you see my Marquis vote as?

[LicketyQuickety]

I disagree I guess. Frequently when I'm reading through a game I note things and end up with a list of things that bear no relation to each other. Its not because I'm "switching methodologies" or whatever, its that my methodology is reading the posts and seeing what things stick out to me. For instance, if I player I know well is playing very differently from how I would expect them to I take note of it, but I would also take note of posts by that player that seem to have town motivation behind them. I think most people play this way? I don't want to get too far down the theory rabbit hole but this is game relevant so I do want to talk about it

You have just moved the goal posts. We were not talking about how you get reads but how Reck came to the conclusion to the reads he gave. You don't what Reck's methodologies are for getting reads and there is evidence of the fact you didn't have this conversation because you said you assume most people play the same way you do without mentioning that Reck said he gets reads the same way you do.

I am getting more and more suspicious of you, shea, because you seem to be bringing up points with me only to drop them later when I say something you are not expecting. It's the hesitation that I see in your responses that tell me that you either feel I am on to something or don't know how to respond. Given you never talked Reck in what I said in reply to Reck, this leads me to believe you are not hesitant because you don't know how to respond (because otherwise you would have talked to Reck about what I said), but rather that you are Scum trying to give a believable spin on things.

FoS Shea

[Thestatusquo]

I changed gears because there was the fact that my teammate didn't seem to trust you, along with the fact you seemed to completely miss my unvote. So did you miss it or just choose to say I was still voting him?

Missed it. Don't think it changes very much, though. As a town player I would expect you to perform the most minimum amount of scrutiny on the attacks you're making.

Yeah I voted Marquis after Dunn which it's fair that you scumread that vote, but there's the fact I didn't realize Dunnstral was the first vote. Plus, his post was a naked vote while I gave early reads in my voting post. So they're not the same.

You didn't give reasoning, you sheeped llamarble. Given that I have already expressed that I don't understand llamarbles reasons for voting him at the time he did, you can probably understand why I find it not likely that you read llamarbles post and said "huh yeah that makes total sense to me." it seemed (and seems) like you were looking to sheep onto the biggest wagon, and did so.

And you say I expressed strong suspicion on you and Dunnstral, what do you see my Marquis vote as?

See previous answer.

[LicketyQuickety]

I disagree I guess. Frequently when I'm reading through a game I note things and end up with a list of things that bear no relation to each other. Its not because I'm "switching methodologies" or whatever, its that my methodology is reading the posts and seeing what things stick out to me. For instance, if I player I know well is playing very differently from how I would expect them to I take note of it, but I would also take note of posts by that player that seem to have town motivation behind them. I think most people play this way? I don't want to get too far down the theory rabbit hole but this is game relevant so I do want to talk about it

You have just moved the goal posts. We were not talking about how you get reads but how Reck came to the conclusion to the reads he gave. You don't

talk about

what Reck's methodologies are for getting reads and there is evidence of the fact you didn't have this conversation because you said you assume most people play the same way you do without mentioning that Reck said he gets reads the same way you do.

I am getting more and more suspicious of you, shea, because you seem to be bringing up points with me only to drop them later when I say something you are not expecting. It's the hesitation that I see in your responses that tell me that you either feel I am on to something or don't know how to respond. Given you never talked Reck in what I said in reply to Reck, this leads me to believe you are not hesitant because you don't know how to respond (because otherwise you would have talked to Reck about what I said), but rather that you are Scum trying to give a believable spin on things.

FoS Shea

talk about

EBWOP

[Thestatusquo]

I disagree I guess. Frequently when I'm reading through a game I note things and end up with a list of things that bear no relation to each other. Its not because I'm "switching methodologies" or whatever, its that my methodology is reading the posts and seeing what things stick out to me. For instance, if I player I know well is playing very differently from how I would expect them to I take note of it, but I would also take note of posts by that player that seem to have town motivation behind them. I think most people play this way? I don't want to get too far down the theory rabbit hole but this is game relevant so I do want to talk about it

You have just moved the goal posts. We were not talking about how you get reads but how Reck came to the conclusion to the reads he gave. You don't what Reck's methodologies are for getting reads and there is evidence of the fact you didn't have this conversation because you said you assume most people play the same way you do without mentioning that Reck said he gets reads the same way you do.

I am getting more and more suspicious of you, shea, because you seem to be bringing up points with me only to drop them later when I say something you are not expecting. It's the hesitation that I see in your responses that tell me that you either feel I am on to something or don't know how to respond. Given you never talked Reck in what I said in reply to Reck, this leads me to believe you are not hesitant because you don't know how to respond (because otherwise you would have talked to Reck about what I said), but rather that you are Scum trying to give a believable spin on things.

FoS Shea

Dude I am having the hardest time trying to understand what you're even accusing me of. If I'm shifting the goal posts its unintentionally. From what I understand your issue is that Recks reads come from different places and different methodologies. What I am trying to articulate is simply that I don't think thats unusual and, indeed, I myself read people in a similar way. I haven't talked to reck about what you said, I'm trying to discuss it with you here because I'm the one who is in this game, not Will. I have brought it up in our discord but he has not responded.

You're right, I have hesitation and I'm not sure what to say to you. But thats not because I am trying to hide anything, its because I legitimately am having a hard time understanding the discussion we're even having or what your point is, as evidenced by the fact that my last post caused you to think I was trying to shift the goal posts.

[Thestatusquo]

Like I don't understand what you think the scum motivation for deliberately misunderstanding you here would be but I promise you that there isn't one.

[Gamma Emerald]

I didn't sheep Llamarble I agreed with him.
On the topic of me giving my pushes scrutiny I believe I've noticed quite a bit of missed content on your side too TSQ.
Also some questions from the aforementioned teammate: why didn't you believe nsg's self-meta, and why did you write Marquis off as null?

[Thestatusquo]

I dont believe anyones self meta, especially when its presented in as an attempt to answer an attack on them.

a) I don't think I have written off marquis as null. Or rather, my position on marquis is more nuanced than that. I declared him to be pretty null on the content of his posts alone, specifically in response to the wagon and LLamarble saying he was very scummy. If you read my post about team commentary, I note that Will thinks he's a lean town, whereas I think that is too strong, and I find that his lack of existence today and lack of response to the wagon makes me think the pressure is in a good spot, which makes me null-scum read him. Giving some deference to my teammate who has a lot more experience with him I am not pushing him right now, but I don't want that wagon to go anywhere until he comes back.

[Thestatusquo]

b) there is no b.