In post 273, Roden wrote:I'll reword that. The analysis didn't get nearly as much attention as it should have. It reads like someone saw their buddy get scum read and redirected attention onto somebody else.
I should have been less flippant. It got the attention it deserved. It was not dismissed, least of all by myself. Can you clarify the last sentence?
Posted: Wed Jun 30, 2021 4:19 pm
by ClarkBar
In post 179, Psyche wrote:aw man i posted too much no one is taking note of my blurryx read
In post 270, Roden wrote:Now we're talking! I have no idea why Blurry got ignored after Psyche made their analysis on them.
In post 273, Roden wrote:I'll reword that. The analysis didn't get nearly as much attention as it should have. It reads like someone saw their buddy get scum read and redirected attention onto somebody else.
In post 273, Roden wrote:I'll reword that. The analysis didn't get nearly as much attention as it should have. It reads like someone saw their buddy get scum read and redirected attention onto somebody else.
I should have been less flippant. It got the attention it deserved. It was not dismissed, least of all by myself. Can you clarify the last sentence?
I think more attention was put on an argument that was full of miscommunications instead of on an analysis that made some good points. Reading the last few pages, I seriously don't think Nancy vs Val should've gone on for as long as it did.
Like, am I just reading it wrong, or is there just miscommunication going on between them?
Posted: Wed Jun 30, 2021 4:57 pm
by ClarkBar
In post 277, Roden wrote:Like, am I just reading it wrong, or is there just miscommunication going on between them?
In post 226, ClarkBar wrote:Doing this running commentary on the spat between Nancy and Val and watching the temperature rise between them is interesting. Clash of personalities? Something doesn't seem organic here.
I don't want to be overly paranoid, but we got quite a bit out of very little.
Posted: Wed Jun 30, 2021 5:24 pm
by Psyche
call it a personal weakness but my eyes glaze over when i try to dig into the nancy val exchange. i really really hope there's nothing alignment-indicative in there.
Posted: Wed Jun 30, 2021 5:58 pm
by LunarRest
UNVOTE
Will be back later. So many posts with so many words…
Posted: Wed Jun 30, 2021 9:33 pm
by Nancy Drew 39
In post 239, Roden wrote:Nancy, do you think you could explain the "alt thing" for us? Because even after reading through the thread I'm not sure what in particular it's referring to at this point beyond the fact an alt exists. I feel like the argument has morphed this bit into something unrecognizable, to the point where you and Val might not be arguing about the same thing anymore.
I also don't like that you're refusing to engage with someone just because they're pressuring you. I don't think Val is being toxic here, they're just pushing on you hard and you haven't really addressed much of their read on you. If you're town, you should want to defend yourself and prove them wrong, not ignore them.
I never said they were “toxic”, I said and stand by that I felt bullied by the way they interacted with me. I was on the verge of possibly being toxic myself because the way he chose to engage with me -pretty much. “you’re scum unless you do what I think you should do”, is not something I will ever put up with and if you have an issue with that, oh well.
it should be self explainable -- its not that hard to understand.
she townreads me because i am playing the same way i played in a game where she was scum and mislimmed me in.
that game she was on an alt.
and i probably know who she is talking bout -- nd can confirm this did happen.
val and nancy were just going bout either side triumph regarding all that i just epxlained above and it go no where.
it should be self explainable -- its not that hard to understand.
she townreads me because i am playing the same way i played in a game where she was scum and mislimmed me in.
that game she was on an alt.
and i probably know who she is talking bout -- nd can confirm this did happen.
val and nancy were just going bout either side triumph regarding all that i just epxlained above and it go no where.
yall r both town anwyays
Nancy should explain it enough to clarify the situation so everyone can be 100% on the same page. She doesn't need to go into full detail or out the alt.
What do you want me to explain more than I already have? W were both town and I miselimed him. I was extremely shocked when he flipped town in that game.
Posted: Wed Jun 30, 2021 9:39 pm
by Nancy Drew 39
In post 245, T3 wrote:I believe Nancy was on the alt Emily but I might be wrong. Gramma, posting style, and time zones match.
No that wasn’t me but if you do figure it out, please don’t out it, thanks.
In post 245, T3 wrote:I believe Nancy was on the alt Emily but I might be wrong. Gramma, posting style, and time zones match.
I initially thought the same. But of the 3 accounts that mislimmed Grandpa - Loki Dokie, Hopkirk, Emily (see here); only Hopkirk was also on the bugspray wagon, as per Nancys 146. GrandpaMo also has reason to think the Nancy Alt flipped scum (not sure where that comes from, but OK), and Hopkirk is the only other one to fit that description too.
Interestingly, the briefest of looks at that ISO throws up red flags as far as a theoretical scum!Nancy=Hopkirk goes - I can see the "I'm hurt and you are a meanie" attitude coming through from the very first post. That would be a very good reason right off the bat why a scum!Nancy in this game wants to be coy about her scum game in 1009, if we are right about the identity of the alt.
That is why I don't get it. If you aren't scum in this game, why do you need to protect your scum meta from scrutiny? If protecting the alt important to you, then just don't mention the information you gleaned from your alt play, just say "I found this game of Grandpa's, and this is what I see" and don’t mention you were actually in it; or else say "I played in this game under alt X", and just roll a new alt for your next game. Trying to hide the existence of a game you played as scum only makes sense me to me if you also rolled scum this game.
I was town which meant I obviously couldn’t be Hopkirk but I really don’t understand what purpose it serves to trying to out my alt. Please just stop. If I wanted it outed, I already would have done it myself. :/
Posted: Wed Jun 30, 2021 9:48 pm
by Nancy Drew 39
In post 265, Val89 wrote:Grandpa, I would accept your waterfowl epithet for me with good grace if "I carried a mislim on grandpa" was in fact what Nancy said, but it wasn't. It was:
Town says that to town? Yes, they bloody well do - I say I mislimmed you in our game (sorry about that, old chap), and we were both town.
In any case, if you are right that only scum says that, then that's only further confirmation that Hopkirk and Nancy are one and the same; given that Hopkirk was the only scum on your wagon in 1009.
it should be self explainable -- its not that hard to understand.
she townreads me because i am playing the same way i played in a game where she was scum and mislimmed me in.
that game she was on an alt.
and i probably know who she is talking bout -- nd can confirm this did happen.
val and nancy were just going bout either side triumph regarding all that i just epxlained above and it go no where.
it should be self explainable -- its not that hard to understand.
she townreads me because i am playing the same way i played in a game where she was scum and mislimmed me in.
that game she was on an alt.
and i probably know who she is talking bout -- nd can confirm this did happen.
val and nancy were just going bout either side triumph regarding all that i just epxlained above and it go no where.
I suppose that’s fair. I played extremely well in my first scumgame.
Posted: Thu Jul 01, 2021 2:43 am
by Nancy Drew 39
In post 131, BlurryX wrote:Sorry, folks. It was a busy weekend for me so I wasn't particularly active, but I read through the last few pages and I have some thoughts I want to get out there:
In post 62, Nancy Drew 39 wrote:
We have 8 days guys, no need to rush anything. Wrt to Mo, I miselimed him in a past game. He could be scum here or limbait. Some people are naturally scummy players. It would be nice if we had some time to actually see he’s really the best elim or not.
He isn’t playing extremely differently here from the game I miselimed him in so I’m wary.
This post suggests town to me. If someone were scum, I don't know if they would be wanting to inject doubt into the primary bus this early on. It could be waffling, but to me the more likely scenario is town trying to play carefully and make sure that they aren't just getting rid of someone who is unlikeable but isn't scum.
The E-1 early on is probably a good thing, because it's the catalyst that is getting people talking (provided no quick-hammer). Without it, I'm not sure people would be talking as much this early on in the game (although I'm not super familiar with how the early games really go usually).
Thoughts on some other players:
@Psyche
Hasn't really posted anything of substance. Hopped on the wagon early (I guess technically started it, was he 2nd vote on Grandpa?) but I feel like RVS doesn't go anywhere without those first few steps. A few jokes, but nothing that can really be analyzed other than #67. Writing that, but not unvoting could be a way of distancing himself from any blame if wagon ends up lynching town. Kind of like a "see, I'm not a scum who was pushing the wagon, I had doubts about it".
@Clarkbar
Contributing more of substance than the others. I buy his reasoning for putting someone to 4 votes, as has been proven, it is a good way to provoke discussion, which gives more information to work with. I don't think there's anything I want to specifically highlight in his posts, he seems to be asking questions and sharing his thoughts, but I don't think there's anything I can see that tells me anything about his particular leanings.
One thing that did strike me was in
@T3
Similar to Psyche in that there wasn't much substance there, just hopping on the wagon and pressing it. Could be Psyche/T3 scum team (can two SEs be mafia in the same game?) but that would be kind of convenient.
@Grandpa
I don't interpret him voting for himself as scummy as you others do. If I could summarize his defense it is: nobody has built a convincing case on me yet and hammering me early cuts off any further discussion for the day, neither of which tell me anything one way or another. I'm curious to see how this develops over the course of the day.
@LunarEclipse
Self-deprecation aside, they've had one post of any substance #79. I'm not as convinced as Nancy is that this is a town-leaning post, because I think that assuming someone can't put themselves into the mindset of town just because this is their first game on this forum. I think I need to see more posts from them before I develop any ideas of leaning.
I think that covers everyone so far. For now I think keeping Grandpa as the lead contender for the guillotine is the right move, as they do have an erratic posting style that may cause confusion later in the game, but hopefully there is something more substantive to base a day 1 lynch off of in the next few days, and we haven't yet heard from the two AFK players.
It’s the sign of the apocalypse that I’m actually in agreement with Val over absolutely anything. I’m also tend not sr anyone who correctly reads me but in tm recently we miselimed Zor for making a very similar kind of post. This really doesn’t read like busywork to me. It’s not a confident read at all but I read it - without more input from Blurry as NIA for now.
I need to hear a lot more from this slot before I can confidently read it one way or another.
Posted: Thu Jul 01, 2021 2:45 am
by Val89
In post 277, Roden wrote:is there just miscommunication going on between them?
If there is, getting it cleared up now would seem to be best way to move forward because right now I have Nancy as strong scum and that's unlikley to move while this still hangs over us.
In post 247, Roden wrote:I thought she did, but again, not everyone seems to be on the same page atm and Val could be talking about something else involving the alt.
To be clear - I don't think Nancy addressed the point at all. She screamed that I was misrepresenting her several times, she clarified that she had an alt again, and explained that she outted the fact she played under an alt with Grandpa previously because she was being asked by Grandpa and Clark where the meta info was coming from, and said that she would have prefered it if she had played that game under the Nancy account.
None of that addresses the point I made that saying "I have a meta read on X, but I'm not telling you where it is from, you will just have to trust me" feels scummy. If you want to protect the alt, why not just say "I have a meta read on X, here is the game he played in and here is what I think it tells us"; trying to muscle in the fact you were playing in it under an alt seems like a way to try and bolster not very good reasoning with "I was there" cred whilst at the same time trying to hide your own meta tells. You know who worries about thier own meta tells in a mafia game? Scum! Who cares if you get meta read as town if you are town, right?
In any case, regardless of the merits of the inital points, I think her reaction was more telling than anything in my inital read. I can buy that a particulary sensitive individual might perceive my forceful tone as some sort of personal attack, and if I thought that was what was going on I would explain and retract, but are you really going to suggest someone who choses "Thing with Nancy is we just need to tread carefully because if you slip up around her as scum she notices and will tear your spine out and slap you to death with it." and "I'm slightly scared of Nancy" as her signature quotes, and says the things you identify as RED FLAGS in your 236 to a newbie slot is some sort of sensitive snowflake who doesn't go after her own scumreads forcefully herself?
I don't. Performative seems an excellent word for it, and I don't see any town justification for putting on such a performance. However, if you do think this can reasonably chalked up as "miscommunication", lets thrash it out and get it sorted now.
Posted: Thu Jul 01, 2021 3:22 am
by Nancy Drew 39
If you’re actually town with that wild read, you shouldn’t expect any scummie noms anytime soon. No I won’t address this anymore than I already have. Your welcome to your silly read on me. I’m more interested in actually trying to parse slots. Sr that if you like. I don’t have to satisfy you. I know I’m town and if you’re also town and need a building to fall on you to see it, then that’s a you problem.
Posted: Thu Jul 01, 2021 3:28 am
by Nancy Drew 39
One last time:
I was in a game with Mo. We were both town in said game. I miselimed him under an alt account I didn’t want outed.
Should I make this colour-coded or what tf more aren’t youcomprehending?
In post 296, Val89 wrote:If you want to protect the alt, why not just say "I have a meta read on X, here is the game he played in and here is what I think it tells us"; trying to muscle in the fact you were playing in it under an alt seems like a way to try and bolster not very good reasoning with "I was there" cred whilst at the same time trying to hide your own meta tells. You know who worries about thier own meta tells in a mafia game? Scum! Who cares if you get meta read as town if you are town, right?
