with 9 votes in play, it takes 5 to make a decision. day 1 ends in (expired on 2020-07-07 13:00:00)
Posted: Mon Jul 06, 2020 1:36 am
by Deimos27
VOTE: Sleeper
Let's see how the game reacts to this distribution.
Posted: Mon Jul 06, 2020 1:41 am
by Deimos27
If we execute twice on-coalition and miss both times we probs execute Klick for BoP or smth. Klick's only viable on-coalition teammate is Clover but I can still see off-coalition teammates in Klick/Wug or Klick/Aldus.
Posted: Mon Jul 06, 2020 1:46 am
by Deimos27
For today we should definitely go either Pooky or Sleeper.
Posted: Mon Jul 06, 2020 1:50 am
by PookyTheMagicalBear
In post 1570, Klick wrote:This is false logic because it doesn't take into account reading the room. In order to think Clover is scum, you have to assume Clover knew he would get townread for his behavior and decided it was the best play he could make. I don't think Clover plausibly sees the gamestate going in the direction it did - and if I specifically hadn't pushed for Clover to be townread, it would have had no effect. You're assuming Clover either placed his entire game on someone townreading him for this gambit enough to put him in the coalition, or he already had his buddy in the coalition (in which case he's not the lynch today anyway).
what exactly was the coalition when he made that play? Is it the same coalition that ended up getting passed?
with 9 votes in play, it takes 5 to make a decision. day 1 ends in (expired on 2020-07-07 13:00:00)
This was the most recent VC before Clover's hurt-all
Posted: Mon Jul 06, 2020 2:14 am
by PookyTheMagicalBear
So what was the coalition that would've passed before the gambit?
Posted: Mon Jul 06, 2020 2:16 am
by PookyTheMagicalBear
For your logic about him taking himself out of coalition contention being a genuine gambit with risk - there would have to be something close to a set coalition that was about to pass no?
Posted: Mon Jul 06, 2020 2:21 am
by Klick
Not really?
If he's scum, taking himself out of contention is severely harmful to his wincon unless his partner is super safe in a coalition spot.
Posted: Mon Jul 06, 2020 2:21 am
by Klick
In fact, the fact that things weren't set in stone makes it less likely that he'd want to slim his team's odds of getting someone in the coalition.
Posted: Mon Jul 06, 2020 2:25 am
by PookyTheMagicalBear
You know sometimes people say they don't want something in order to get it right?
Posted: Mon Jul 06, 2020 2:28 am
by PookyTheMagicalBear
There is a certain degree of cunning in Clover that I find inconsistent with his good natured "aww shucks you guys should just leave me off" personality - his posts on the surface level read very happy and bright but if you take actual time to read and re-read his ISO you find that there is some cunning inside each move he makes.
I know because I've re-read him multiple times since Koba asked me to put him on coalition and so many things feel off about his slot.
Posted: Mon Jul 06, 2020 2:33 am
by PookyTheMagicalBear
For example if you pull up his ISO and search my name you get all sorts of doubt/lynchy thoughts:
In post 709, Clover Ebi wrote:Atm I don't really have any stong scumreads but Pooky has been talked about so much I want to lynch him if we don't auto win. That's decent logic right?
In post 820, Deimos27 wrote:I assume your coalition is your townreads. Do you have an idea of who you think scum is?
I haven't been really looking for scum so I can't really say I have anyone listed as scum but I would probably lynch Alduskkel for not having many reasons to townread them and Pooky for information.
In post 964, Clover Ebi wrote:I think Pooky/Don are the slots I need to reread and really look at first.
In post 1053, Clover Ebi wrote:Why is Pooky town for you guys? I've read the iso and nothing has really struck me as super towny
Dude wants to lynch me but puts me on coalition anyway - feels like a setup for when coalition fails
Posted: Mon Jul 06, 2020 2:37 am
by PookyTheMagicalBear
I think maybe I phrased happy and bright incorrectly -
Most of his posts feel like short one liners and his entire approach to getting on the coalition seems to be negative manipulation along the lines of "aww you guys can just leave me off, I'm not posting that much anyway"
But joining coalition is an active decision - he can always choose to keep himself off it if that's what he genuinely believes is best for his role - which I don't think is actually his plan since he just walks back onto the coalition anyway.
Yes, but that's why you make judgements about how likely someone is to use specific methods of tricking you.
If Clover had the manipulative firepower you're suggesting he has to use 'don't townread me' as a way to get townread... then why didn't he just play a game that would get townread in the first place? Occam's Razor suggests he's just town instead of scum who banked on getting townread by telling people to not townread him.
Posted: Mon Jul 06, 2020 2:48 am
by Deimos27
In post 1585, Klick wrote:In fact, the fact that things weren't set in stone makes it less likely that he'd want to slim his team's odds of getting someone in the coalition.
+1
In post 1590, Klick wrote:If Clover had the manipulative firepower you're suggesting he has to use 'don't townread me' as a way to get townread... then why didn't he just play a game that would get townread in the first place? Occam's Razor suggests he's just town instead of scum who banked on getting townread by telling people to not townread him.
+1
I prefer Klick's logic to Pooky's here
Posted: Mon Jul 06, 2020 3:04 am
by PookyTheMagicalBear
In post 1590, Klick wrote:If Clover had the manipulative firepower you're suggesting he has to use 'don't townread me' as a way to get townread... then why didn't he just play a game that would get townread in the first place? Occam's Razor suggests he's just town instead of scum who banked on getting townread by telling people to not townread him.
He did play a game that got townread
Posted: Mon Jul 06, 2020 3:06 am
by PookyTheMagicalBear
He didn't tell people not to townread him - he told people he was going to take himself out of being on the coalition - he then re-entered the coalition - read his ISO and tell me where he made the leap from
"I'm too scummy to be on the coalition"
to
"I'm now good enough to be on the coalition"
You can't be consistent on one and the other.
Posted: Mon Jul 06, 2020 3:11 am
by Klick
I could give you a sensible response to that, but it seems better to let Clover answer that himself.
Posted: Mon Jul 06, 2020 3:14 am
by Deimos27
I do wish Clover would spend more time solving and less time arguing what he does or does not do as scum.
Posted: Mon Jul 06, 2020 3:15 am
by PookyTheMagicalBear
In post 1594, Klick wrote:I could give you a sensible response to that, but it seems better to let Clover answer that himself.
I did ask him,
he says he joined because you promised to defend him
Posted: Mon Jul 06, 2020 3:16 am
by PookyTheMagicalBear
In post 1557, Clover Ebi wrote:Because we were getting close to deadline plus Klick said he could convince people not to vote me and since people don't think Klick is scum I'm very confused how people can think I am.
this is the specific quote
Posted: Mon Jul 06, 2020 3:17 am
by Deimos27
I feel like the entirety of D1 I was tolerating a too scummy to be scum read on Sleeper and at this point I just want to PoE the lad.
Posted: Mon Jul 06, 2020 3:19 am
by Klick
That seems like a sensible response
With my endorsement he goes from 'a distraction' to 'viable coalition member'
PEdit: that's a bit of my vibe on Sleeper as well, though it's helped by the PoE created by the coalition
I do think I slightly prefer a Pooky vote here though.