I should clarify that this is posts 20 and 21 specifically. My thoughts on Athena and Keychain were basically exactly this at that point in the game.In post 39, Aristophanes wrote:Reck literally stated most of my thoughts already and I townread him even more strongly than before.
That's the skeeviest part of it! We all should be playing as VT in theory, so why claim anything? It makes no sense and that makes me uneasy.In post 22, insanity018 wrote:I don't think Jingle's VT claim is alignment indicative. In this setup, what else could he possibly have complained?
Now this may be because I am wean and assume those who think similarly to me are of the same alignment, but I believe you're also got good questioning and a forward motion to them, like you're actually sorting people, which is why I am happy with it.Snipped post, obviously.In post 25, Luca Blight wrote:In post 19, Aristophanes wrote:I honestly keep going back to Jingle's VT claim and feeling uneasy about it! It just feels wrong. Their play otherwise is alright so far but nothing stellar.
I like Reck and Korts thus far!
Athena, why is getting a game moving towny, and how do you think he is doing so? I don't see as much forward movement as you seem to in their posts.Bolded- It feels wrong, but not enough to make you switch from your RVS vote? What exactly is so wrong with it anyway?
Italics- Why?
Underlined- You don't see forward movement? All the discussion in the game has stemmed from Jingle's opening posts.
I would actually be far more likely to do this as scum simply because it is an unlikely play btw. Doesn't really matter much to discussion, but I think it is an interesting note.In post 58, Jingle wrote:Ari, on the other hand said much the same thing, once, earlier. Additionally, he didn't just get done playing with me in a game where I'm fairly certain that I mentioned one of my goals starting out most games is to hit L-1 early regardless of Role PM because I find it easier as both alignments to work from a position where I can analyze a wagon on me, making the egregiousness of his infraction much smaller. Had he voted me, however, I would have been almost assured of his town status.
<3In post 73, Lord Gurgi wrote:Please note that I will be suspending activity requirements until the 2nd of January. That means no prods will be sent out until January 5 at the latest. Geriatric Ruleset still applies.
It's times like this i wish my Wiki were up to date.In post 69, Jingle wrote:Do you have any games you can link to to prove/provide evidence for this statement?In post 60, Aristophanes wrote:I would actually be far more likely to do this as scum simply because it is an unlikely play btw.
Yeah, that's why I didn't dive into my own history yo!In post 87, Jingle wrote:In Mini 1969 (Also, your most recent game I can find, with an end date of yesterday) you had ample opportunity to drop an L-1 vote in a town full of lolhammer players and chose not to. In the werewolf thread, you explicitly say your style means you would always talk out the wagon before voting when Boon asks you to lay down your vote. You have literally no reason to lie to your scumpartner in that situation. Why are you provably lying to me here?In post 82, Aristophanes wrote:As town I am usually very worries about lolhammers. I have been burned by them too many times, even being on the receiving end on Page one once. It suchs and it really hurts town's chances even when scum is lynched by it! As scum, I have lolhammered or set up situations where it can be a possibility many times. The reason I prefer L-1 as scum over the actual lolhammer is because it has become almost a scumtell of mine as I can think of probably 5 distinct times when I lolhammered as scum, and I never EVER do it as town! Maybe once? But I don't even think so. That's part of what I mean by unexpected play.
Also, ftr, metadiving listmods is tedious as hell because they close and lock so MANY GAMES.
I thought it felt off but I don't feel it strong enough to warrant a vote. Apparently I'm vote-shy this game.In post 110, insanity018 wrote:I think Jingle makes a fair point in 103 that Ari is waffling quite a bit and has been poking at Jingle without voting for him. I'm still trying to get my head around the meta-related case though.
--
@Ari
In post 101, insanity018 wrote:Why aren't you voting Jingle then?In post 93, Aristophanes wrote:Do I actually syill havs a Reck vote ? Lmfao
UNVOTE:
I like you insanity. Jingle feels like scum pushing a narratinmve tbh.
I dont lime their conclusions. They feel xoncenuevt.
Why would I do this, unprompted, if I were scum? You make literally no sense here!In post 141, Jingle wrote:Mostly, the meta is evidence that he lied about his meta in this game. His last five games ALL have situations directly contradicting his claimed meta in this game. The way and reason he brought up the meta itself is what makes him scum. Basically, the meta is how I know he's lying. The lie is what makes him scum.
I'm not gonna do that, don't worry!
I seem to have little motivation for this game in particular and I don't exactly know why. Every time I come here I just stop feeling like playing and check another thread instead!insanity018 wrote:Ari has been posting around the site, but still refuses to contribute anything here.
On the spoilered case, I thought I was right, I gave you the set of stipulations I believed were true, I then was proven incorrect and gave in to what must be my new meta. I have said this time and time again now.In post 119, RayFrost wrote:Just gonna start with saying I know jingle wants me to react to the vote on me in some way, but this is the limit of what I can say in response to it. "Okay."
What the hell is LAMIST? I've seen it used several times now and can't for the life of me figure out what it's supposed to stand for.
For other Jingle related things: I really dislike using meta to describe / explain everything, including your own play. While there's a certain amount of influence meta should have on your reads, it definitely shouldn't bethething you rely on. People change. How they think changes. Situations and circumstances being different will change how they behave. It's not as cut and dry as "they were like this before so they will be like this again in this situation." In no small part because the situation is not exactly the same. Also, people who are aware of their own meta are capable of actively playing along with / against it.
That's just an in general mafia discussion style comment, though.
As for the Aristophanes case: I think Jingle raises a good point about how Aristophanes is handling the self-meta stuff. I don't think the original l-1 vote argument is worthwhile, though I do feel the following discussion had merit. My short-version understanding of the meta stuff is Jingle saying "ari is suspect for not putting the l-1 vote" with ari saying "no, I don't do that stuff" with Jingle saying "aha! but you do! look at these games" to which Ari responds "hmmm I see I have done this thing but those situations were different" leading to Jingle saying "I have caught you saying you would/would not do things when you have experience doing/not doing those exact things!" and having Ari respond with "well I can't make you think you're wrong on this"
While the original point from Jingle is horribly weak (Aristophanes didn't put someone at L-1! Scum!), I do feel that how Aristophanes handled the rest of it is suspect. This is more so in light of the rest of his posting. He's put more effort into defending himself from Jingle than he has in contributing anything else in the thread so far. His most recent posting about his actual reads before Jingle-stuff was "I have reads forming but nothing to say about them" - which is the equivalent to saying nothing at all. Anyone can say they have thoughts. Whatarethe thoughts? The most clearly worded thought processes are self-defense against Jingle and agreeing with someone attacking his attacker but then saying it's gut.
Regarding Luca putting words in other people's mouth thing, I suppose the more correct wording would be "responding to questions addressed to other people and saying the answers were ~obvious~" - I am typically suspect of calling things obvious (especially when I feel they're not) when it comes to other people's reasoning. It's not saying that it's what they're trying to say, but this post as well as the one below it are mostly along the lines of "they're clearly doing A" - others may read it differently, but that's the feel I get from it. Korts may be wording things better than me about it.
I don't see anything suspect about not putting people at L-1, so commentary from Jingle saying keychain is suspect for that I disagree with - I also am generally finding keychain townish at the moment aside from that. Similarly have town-leaning reads on Korts and insanity.
I'm vaguely interested in seeing the final reveal of Jingle's Grand Plan. Withholding judgment until then.
If there's anything else specifically you'd like me to comment on, feel free to ask. I don't have much else to say on the mind.
Pending content from CultOfAthena's replacement and certain other people's postings, I am comfortable doing the following:
UNVOTE: CultOfAthena
VOTE: Aristophanes
Your vote is based on tone and an assumption that 39 is weird, but it is not. Sucks.In post 173, Hopkirk wrote:'I fluffed a response to.': What do you mean by that?
What about the RayFrost vote?
Thank you, I can do that! Gimme another day? Im sorry I'm such a piece of shit player this game.In post 195, TheGoldenParadox wrote:EBWOP:
Ari I want to hear from you.Get a vote down or I'll L-1 again.
Me tooIn post 210, Keychain wrote:I've got a long weekend! So I'm going to be away for a wee while. I'm hoping when I get back there'll be content from Reck, Ari and the ASP slot to work with maybe.