Is there a reason you're trying to alleviate the pressure I'm applying?
If you think it's a bad push, explain why. Saying this just gets in the way for 0 reason.
I have a dry sense of humor
Posted: Fri Jan 15, 2021 5:17 pm
by flow trap
In post 499, Prism wrote:I feel like you're missing the point of my questioning on safebet, I'm asking about 191's stance on safebet and how that has changed over time. You seem to be saying you were null at the time of 191, is that accurate?
There are other motives for votes than suspicion
Posted: Fri Jan 15, 2021 5:29 pm
by Prism
Again it puzzles me as to why you're diffusing questions and answering for him. I'm well aware of other motives. It is my job, and yours, to trace his thought process and figure out how legitimate those are. 499 is asking to elaborate on why he voted if my reading-that he didn't actually suspect safebet-is correct.
All you have to do is wait and see if his answers line up to you. You're shooting us both in the foot right now, arguably all 3 of us.
Posted: Fri Jan 15, 2021 5:32 pm
by Prism
Like if you outright think he's town and want to talk about it, that's a productive conversation.
Shutting down my questions to Frederick and suggesting answers instead of just letting him respond is not productive.
Is there a reason you're trying to alleviate the pressure I'm applying?
If you think it's a bad push, explain why. Saying this just gets in the way for 0 reason.
I have a dry sense of humor
Correction. I was merely suggesting the possibility that they were planning something for the future.
Posted: Fri Jan 15, 2021 5:36 pm
by flow trap
In post 503, Prism wrote:Like if you outright think he's town and want to talk about it, that's a productive conversation.
Shutting down my questions to Frederick and suggesting answers instead of just letting him respond is not productive.
No, waiting 10 hours for a single response is not productive. I am unbiased when it comes to defending or attacking someone. If someone does something suspicious I'm going to call them out on it whether I town read them or not. If I find a possible reason I'm going to suggest it.
Posted: Fri Jan 15, 2021 5:45 pm
by Prism
Yeah, I'm sure we both learned a lot more about Frederick from your posting than we would have talking to him.
My patience for the night is spent and this is a waste of time given that you're not even scummy, just getting in the way for its own sake. I'll cede the floor to others for now.
Posted: Fri Jan 15, 2021 5:46 pm
by Prism
The last I'll say on it is your last sentence of 505 is exactly the value in waiting. Figure out the rest for yourself, I'm not going to continue clogging up the thread with this.
Posted: Fri Jan 15, 2021 6:00 pm
by flow trap
In post 506, Prism wrote:Yeah, I'm sure we both learned a lot more about Frederick from your posting than we would have talking to him.
Baloney, you're assumption that they would be able to talk anytime soon is clearly a misrepresentation of what my original motive was.
Posted: Fri Jan 15, 2021 6:32 pm
by esotericzoomer
In post 473, Prism wrote:I think Enchant came off a lot better reading realtime-you (Esoteric) seem to be reading in ISO. I wouldn't call him town but a lot of the filler was either relevant or pretty natural posting, ex. joking about lolhammers after expressing caution about them.
I'm really curious about this:
esotericzoomer wrote:
In post 415, Enchant wrote:Yes. I said exactly that, not "They probably not maf both, but one of them surely there".
If I'm reading this right and the language barrier isn't fucking this up, Enchant pulls a random "one of them is scum" situation out of his ass, very much disapprove.
-0.5
I called a similar issue out with Spartan in 311 and 421. When asked why it's TvS, he gave more resaoning as to why Salsabil individually was town and flow individually was scum rather than they were diametrically opposed. I don't think you touch on this in your wall. Spartan isn't a bad alternative right now.
Yeah I absolutely read his post wrong here, that’s my bad, I still scumread him though.
Don't put people on E-1 unless you surely decide you want them dead. Ask for claims on E-2, so mafia can't trade self on some Cop claim with instant punch.
I decided on it, so don't argue.
possible motives for this:
- wild reaction test (most rational motive)
- attention seeking
- perplex other players
- avoid scumreads for posting weird stuff (like the Mafia joke claim) and then not posting weird stuff
- concern over lolhammer (talked about it at the beginning of the game, very disapprovingly)
In post 473, Prism wrote:I think Enchant came off a lot better reading realtime-you (Esoteric) seem to be reading in ISO. I wouldn't call him town but a lot of the filler was either relevant or pretty natural posting, ex. joking about lolhammers after expressing caution about them.
I'm really curious about this:
esotericzoomer wrote:
In post 415, Enchant wrote:Yes. I said exactly that, not "They probably not maf both, but one of them surely there".
If I'm reading this right and the language barrier isn't fucking this up, Enchant pulls a random "one of them is scum" situation out of his ass, very much disapprove.
-0.5
I called a similar issue out with Spartan in 311 and 421. When asked why it's TvS, he gave more resaoning as to why Salsabil individually was town and flow individually was scum rather than they were diametrically opposed. I don't think you touch on this in your wall. Spartan isn't a bad alternative right now.
Yeah I absolutely read his post wrong here, that’s my bad, I still scumread him though.
Also whether it’s on topic or not, filler is still filler
Hey, i won mafiatest, and got -11, while he got -5.
Why you not pushing me, but instead change mind soo easy.
Because people are more content voting fredrick than they are you.
Aren't you supposed to argue with that, not just agree to execute person, who you find as less likely a mafia?
Fredrick is still a scumlean, it matters not to me who I vote as long as they are below the null bracket
Posted: Fri Jan 15, 2021 8:04 pm
by esotericzoomer
You may be my main scumread but as far as I’ve seen people are far more willing to vote my other scumread in fredrick than they are you. So even though I have a weaker scumread on him I’ll still vote him.
Posted: Fri Jan 15, 2021 8:06 pm
by esotericzoomer
Also you’re trying to discredit me by making me seem incompetent rather than countering any of the points I brought up in my wall. Only making me more confident in my read here lol
Posted: Fri Jan 15, 2021 8:13 pm
by Enchant
In post 518, esotericzoomer wrote:Also you’re trying to discredit me by making me seem incompetent rather than countering any of the points I brought up in my wall. Only making me more confident in my read here lol
In post 351, floo wrote:Just finished reading the thread up to now.
Some players have found my vote switch to flow trap suspicious because I didn't want to attract suspicion (Enchant in 150 comes to mind). If I don't want to be voted out, I don't see why I shouldn't take the effort not to seem overly scummy.
Will post other thoughts soon.
Point is, your vote from
Enchant
to
flow trap
wasn't suspicious but the explanation you gave on post 139 raised suspicion cause towns don't usually bother if they look scummy. But for mafias, they have to blend in, they have to pretend to be towns, that's why 'image-conscious' is not a town thing for sure.
You really think it's like this.
"Hello I'm Mafia I want to blend in!" - floo
"OK Mafia" - Sal
Town doesn't want to seem scummy. There are scummy behaviors that don't benefit town at all like lurking, and there are others that do benefit town if done correctly (aggression as pointed out by Spartan). It was the beginning of the game. Being hyper-aggressive would only seem scummy at the time, no benefit because there was little to no information. So posting scummy would leave me worse off in the first place, and there wouldn't be anything good to make up for that.
Okay, after re-reading all of your posts (which are called ISO here I suppose) open-mindedly, I'm agreeing with you. You may have fewer post counts but those are meaningful (specially: 134, 355, 360 and 439) and I find these as town thought process.
In post 34, Enchant wrote:Vanilla Mafia i calling is boring setups like "Just townies and maybe doctor/cop/SK".
Oh, understood. It's a newbie game, so setups are limited. Do you play on big setups?
Meaning they treated it very seriously, considering they went from getting the same joke to treating a misunderstanding like this, this badly, is a bizarre jump.
-2
You gave me
-2
on that which was literally not what you thought/was seemed to you!
In post 33, I thought
Enchant
was still joking (refer: post 11), but in post 34 they explained that they meant newbie game which they find boring and in post 35 I said that I understood them and questioned them if they play big games.... which was totally a normal conversation, nothing game related cause this conversation happened on page 2 when there was nothing important to discuss.
Correction. I was merely suggesting the possibility that they were planning something for the future.
Meaning they treated it very seriously, considering they went from getting the same joke to treating a misunderstanding like this, this badly, is a bizarre jump.In post 35, Salsabil Faria wrote:In post 34, Enchant wrote:Vanilla Mafia i calling is boring setups like "Just townies and maybe doctor/cop/SK".Oh, understood. It's a newbie game, so setups are limited. Do you play on big setups?