VOTE: Flea The Magician
~Ircher
In post 69, T3 wrote:By the way, anyone who claims a type of Modified Rolecop is confirmed town. This information I have from somewhere that I will not elaborate on furter.
VOTE: T3
How is that a lolohammer?
In post 199, Almost50 wrote:@T3: I don't see how you "accidentally" hammered when you had a P-edit suggesting you did see that MC was @E-1
That's fishy as hell.In post 233, Galron wrote:In post 199, Almost50 wrote:@T3: I don't see how you "accidentally" hammered when you had a P-edit suggesting you did see that MC was @E-1
This sounds like T3's claim that he has some source of information regarding a modified role cop. I don't see anything in the rules or the flavor about gaining this type of information unless he's just taking a stab based on his own role, and I'm not going to go rolefishing to find out, but the only people who would try to flesh something like that out would lkely be scum in my experience.In post 259, Xlos wrote:if that was really his role, then wouldn't Ircher have been more specific about it?
@xlosIn post 263, Galron wrote:And I don't mind your forgetting me in your reads list, but yeah, I did notice the pronoun thing with DGB just because I noticed it at the beginning of the game; I'm not really into pronoun policing. I don't really get your read on Titus. That mafia may have built that wagon is one thing, but you're taking an illogical leap, conflating her being on it and her voting you for her being mafia and then really the only reason you think she's mafia is because she voted you especially when you just got done saying that Flea being on the wagon didn't mean that much wrt being mafia. It's a bit circular.
In post 318, Flea The Magician wrote:Straight up if I'm the D1 elim I'm not going to effort a catchup post.
What I will do, is demand justification for the votes on me, I'm not going searching for them.
In post 319, Flea The Magician wrote:so thats Toogs, Wheme, Murdercat and Titus.
DGB is town.
I still don't see it, and if it's there, I'm gonna say the whole thing is contrived.In post 556, T3 wrote:Basically I fakehammered nom. He had a good reaction and basically got annoyed and claimed town.
On board with this actually. VOTE: xlos
I don't understand this. Are all roles calculus based? You're talking role flavor right? Other than the derivitaves I have no idea (because calculus). I mean the color mentions algebra, geometry and calculus. And what does it mean that "anyone claiming not analysis would have been scumtelling?" What is not analysis? Does that mean not problem solving? Like someone would have to be Pythagorean Thoerem but not Set Theory?In post 799, Xlos wrote:A50 has a role that gives reason to believe role flavor impacts the game, I dont.In post 794, Titus wrote:@Xlos, why doesn't the argument you make against A50 apply to you seeking if people were algebra geometry or calculus?
A50 is asking for specific role flavor, I was asking for something weaker.
Since peoples roles are all calculus based, anyone claiming not analysis would have been scumtelling. Otherwise no info is leaked.
I don't know that it's a great idea either. It seems the math geeks could figure out the roles from the flavor, which leaves me out. I pretty much exhausted my math knowledge with Pythagorean Thoerem.In post 811, WhemeStar wrote:I think claiming flavor is really dumb
There are really only about five players actually saying anything. I count myself as not pulling my weight as far as that goes. So boredom? But A50's role apparently means he's a neighbor infmored about a specifc flavor matching a specifc role. I think that's where it started. As I type that out it sounds about as convo;uted as nom's claimed role.In post 839, Jake The Wolfie wrote:Why are we talking about flavor and mech instead of analyzing the players?
And this kind of says the oppsite.In post 825, T3 wrote:DGB's claim is probably real by the virtue of my flavor being second deriv and DGB being first deriv.
In post 846, Xlos wrote:Some terminology: anything that is calculus is analysis. Analysis is also a bit more, I might even say that "real number" falls into analysis, though it's also algebra. I'm basing analysis as things covered by Spivak's textbook on analysis. Things that are algebra and not analysis could be abstract algebra (Group/Ring Theory) or linear algebra (matricies/vectors). Things that are geometry are not analysis. Lots of other math is not analysis (topology, number theory, statistics).In post 838, Galron wrote:I don't understand this. Are all roles calculus based? You're talking role flavor right? Other than the derivitaves I have no idea (because calculus). I mean the color mentions algebra, geometry and calculus. And what does it mean that "anyone claiming not analysis would have been scumtelling?" What is not analysis? Does that mean not problem solving? Like someone would have to be Pythagorean Thoerem but not Set Theory?In post 799, Xlos wrote:A50 has a role that gives reason to believe role flavor impacts the game, I dont.In post 794, Titus wrote:@Xlos, why doesn't the argument you make against A50 apply to you seeking if people were algebra geometry or calculus?
A50 is asking for specific role flavor, I was asking for something weaker.
Since peoples roles are all calculus based, anyone claiming not analysis would have been scumtelling. Otherwise no info is leaked.
Every role flavor claimed so far has definitely been analysis, plus A50 said their flavor was "calculus". So it stands to reason that all roles are from analysis, so if someone had claimed to have a geometry role, it would be very suspicious, and I would have treated it as a scumtell.
In post 848, Galron wrote:I guess I see your point, but it would take a math person to pick up on that. That seems a little too in the weeds from a game writing perspective. But if I recall correctly, The Baker did a guitar player based game a while back, and I'm thinking that the flavor may have matched up with the role and that was more familiar to me.
She's pseudo-trolling like she said in the preface.In post 853, MathBlade wrote:I am sorry, are you legit suggesting that DGB and nom are both town? Am I reading that correctly?In post 851, Titus wrote:Alright Math... you want trollIn post 850, MathBlade wrote:No no no what I mean isIn post 847, DrippingGoofball wrote:People were asked to flavor claim, I'm the only one who has actually claimed a role in addition to the flavor.In post 842, MathBlade wrote:but DGB’s claim is an action
That's why my claim is singularly an action - so far.
QED
“First Derivative Test” is an action.
It’s a thing someone does. It doesn’t match everyone else’s flavor.
The flavor miller that doesn't claim D1 checks the actual miller who doesn't claim day 1 and they both get upset with each other for being too bad to be town while the rest of us just blow fireworks rather than blow our actual lids.
That seems to be xlos's point. And I'm guessing wheme's.In post 852, MathBlade wrote:I think flavor has some importance just I think piecing it together now is dangerous.
I don't remember that.In post 858, MathBlade wrote:And mine first.In post 856, Galron wrote:That seems to be xlos's point. And I'm guessing wheme's.In post 852, MathBlade wrote:I think flavor has some importance just I think piecing it together now is dangerous.
In post 864, MathBlade wrote:I’d rather her elaborate.In post 859, Galron wrote:I don't see why they both can't be town. Queue DGB. But I don't think that's what Titus's point was.
For me is the DGB+nom3 situation. I don’t see myself voting outside there short of someone scum claiming or a damn good explanation. I agree he’s suspicious but the only one elim a day makes it difficult.
What makes you say their lying about their role?
I am pretty sure they’re a neighbor. That seems an odd thing to lie about? Unless you mean lying about the informed bit which is unfalsifiable. If no one matches the flavor A50 expects then A50 just says so player X is scum and a 1v1 forms. Or if someone matches the flavor then A50 says “player X matches the flavor” or maybe not even that. There’s no way to check him. So since there’s no way to check it no way to know if he is lying and this bs about flavor shouldn’t even have started today with all the open claims.
Of this, if all this is analysis like xlos was talking about, then what distingueshes the green flavor from the red flavor?In post 0, Ircher wrote:2: Flea The Magician,Euler's Method(Vanilla Councillor of Calculasia), faded into obscurity Day 1.
11: MURDERCAT,Limits(Councillor of Calculasia Doctor), collapsed from a lack of rigor Night 1.
13: nomnomnom,Derivatives(Intuitionist Jack of All Trades (Flavor Cop, Doctor)), faded into obscurity Day 2.
8: T3, theSecond Derivative Test(Councillor of Calculasia Even Night Modified Rolecop), collapsed from a lack of rigor Night 2.
Unlikely. Nom had that role for a reason.In post 983, Titus wrote:Could be a fake out but unlikely.
Reading last page of day 2 it seemed fairly clear that if nom flipped red, toogs was probably not a rb.In post 994, Titus wrote:@Galron, Why are you voting Toog?
There's at least one more Theorem.In post 991, Almost50 wrote:I'd like to know that too.In post 984, Galron wrote:Of this, if all this is analysis like xlos was talking about, then what distingueshes the green flavor from the red flavor?
All I see is that anything to do with "Derivatives" has some kind of Cop to it.
Note: They were both claimed already by the time I called for the flavour claim.
If I was to believe that the flavour is alignment indicative I'd confirm DGB as Town (as that wasn't already evident by the nom flip), confirm Wheme (that's the player I was informed of their flavour and I do have "flavour" reason to TR them now IF flavour is alignment indicative), put Titus & Italiano as "same alignment" (both are Theorems).
So, unless we think the remaining 2 scums are exactly Titus+Italiano then scum are in Xlos, Jake, Galron & Toog
I didn't really take that into account, no. But mom claiming bring blocked and then toogs confirming was way too rest for whatever nom cooked up. I have both the benefit of the doubt the majority of the day, and mom's red flip soured me on the whole thing. I jumped right to tools scum and I still think that's the simplest explanation.In post 999, Titus wrote:And you didn't consider the possibility of nom knowing he had been roleblocked by a town toog?In post 998, Galron wrote:Reading last page of day 2 it seemed fairly clear that if nom flipped red, toogs was probably not a rb.In post 994, Titus wrote:@Galron, Why are you voting Toog?
If nom had tried to use his flavorcop and failed, he could have deduced he was blocked.
Is everyone just now reaching this conclusion?In post 1167, Titus wrote:Possible but not certain.In post 1166, Jake The Wolfie wrote:So you're saying Nom was.. Fakeclaiming?In post 1164, Titus wrote:Spoiler: snip!
Nom's claim doesn't make sense with a bus driver. He was either blocked or scum with Toog.
Either a) Toog blocked him or b) Toog is scum.
Nom doesn't claim blocked without backup.
Is this still why you think Toog is Town A50?In post 1023, Almost50 wrote:My vote goes to the former option. He did still want nom yeeted, so his claim wasn't tp try and save him. (Check Math's post above for quotes of Toog showing his stance on You/Nom)In post 1017, DrippingGoofball wrote:
Is Toog...
a town roleblockerwho happened to?block a player who claimed to be a conditional PR
scum (any role or goon)whoto have blocked nom to give credence to nom's claim of having been roleblocked?pretended
I should ask, if it is, is it the only reason?In post 1172, Galron wrote:Is this still why you think Toog is Town A50?In post 1023, Almost50 wrote:My vote goes to the former option. He did still want nom yeeted, so his claim wasn't tp try and save him. (Check Math's post above for quotes of Toog showing his stance on You/Nom)In post 1017, DrippingGoofball wrote:
Is Toog...
a town roleblockerwho happened to?block a player who claimed to be a conditional PR
scum (any role or goon)whoto have blocked nom to give credence to nom's claim of having been roleblocked?pretended
You're kinda driving that way. We've got lots of time left and you're talking about burning him without any further discussion.In post 1165, Jake The Wolfie wrote:Excuse me? I'm not even voting Toog here, let alone rushing to axe them. What the hell, Titus.In post 1163, Titus wrote:Don't like Jake rushing to lim Toog.In post 1157, Jake The Wolfie wrote:Should we wait for Galron's slot to come back before we axe Toog, or nah? I don't really feel comfortable axing Toog if Galron's slot didn't want to axe them, but on the other hand if Toog is scum then I don't really care what Galron says.
So you think scum were both informed and had a flavor cop?In post 1195, Xlos wrote:The funny thing is that this is the towniest thing about you from my perspectiveIn post 1191, Toogeloo wrote:I just want to understand why I'm being scum read. Because all I see is that some people don't believe that I blocked nom, and thought I was trying to save them. Is that the gist of it? No damning evidence, no other associatives, just the refusal to believe that I blocked nom.
I doubt it. Unless scum got a very detailed flavor->role explanation from Ircher, I think they have info like thisIn post 1179, Galron wrote:Xlos, Mathblade are there things equivalent to Tests, Thoerems and Derivatives that I'm missing?In post 792, Xlos wrote: "you know that <player flavor>'s power is <specific power>."
Why are you giving Toog the benefit of the doubt but not A50. Your A50 argument was starting to make sense, but with this inconsistency, it sounds like picking and choosing. A50 claims this complex role that really doesn't make sense and you're scum reading him, and Toog claims a relatively simple role but looks scummy in the way he claims he played it but you're willing to town read him. What you're saying, using your words, is there's no feasible world where A50 is town. Assuming the conclusion then working whatever it takes to reach that conclusion? I mean assuming that Toog is town is in no way proving that they are. It's like saying that a=4 and your proof is 4=a.In post 1230, Xlos wrote:Toog says this. I'm saying that there is a feasible world where they are town, so to prove this I assume that they are town and thus not lying about their actions.In post 1229, DrippingGoofball wrote:Xlos, who says that Toog even blocked anything?
This is what I was trying to think to say but I couldn't think of a way to phrase it without being insulting so I just let it go.i still think he's scummy but I'm thinking it may be the manic style that is bleeding into my read, and I'm less confident than I was. I would add that town just don't want to talk to someone who isn't going to at least honestly listen and consider what's being said.In post 1238, Titus wrote:@Math, The way you're approaching this is terrible. You're trying to dictate your perception onto the thread and arguing anyone who disagrees is scummy. It isolates yourself from the game. Town get afraid to work with you and scum shut down which prevents hunting for their partners. You're not doing anyone any favors by refusing to scumhunt half the thread.
"Blocking nom was a good move because nom was scum." Except a Town!toog doesn't know nom was scum, and nom was pretty well town read Day 1, so it's a lucky move, not a good move. Using that as a jumping off point to say that I was blocked "Since Galron was blocked" to further confirm toog as roleblocker (and to confirm me as Town) doesn't make sense. Nor does your statment "or some member other of scum is." I don't follow that at all.In post 1351, Xlos wrote:Just realized that I misread DGB's post a while ago 1226. I thought it said Galron claimed something D2, but he didn't. So I feel like blocking Galron wasn't that unreasonable. Scum is going to use the least suspicious player to submit the NK, so choosing a random ish player to RB is pretty reasonable. Since blocking nomnomnom is also a good move (they were scum), the argument for Toog seems weaker.
Since Galron was blocked, it would seem that they are a roleblocker (or some member other of scum is). If he is a roleblocker, I kind of doubt he was lying about visiting nomnomnom D1 since scum likely feared a tracker. It's totally possible that they took the risk during the day after seeing the doctor + cop flip, though. I'm not sure that scum wanted to protect nomnomnom at all since their claim fated them to a quick death, but the opinion flip on them is pretty strange.
It's not a bad argument, but the actions seem pretty logical from a town 2-shot RB as well. Contrast to A50, a player who has done even more scummy things and whose actions can't be explained from a town perspective. DGB, did I miss something here?
Also I'm thinking we should count Galron as conftown for getting blocked.
Queue Janet Jackson.In post 1355, Jake The Wolfie wrote:Hey so what has Galron done recently?
In post 1367, Toogeloo wrote:So you think I'm town?In post 1365, Galron wrote:nom was pretty well town read Day 1,so it's a lucky move,not a good move.
In post 1365, Galron wrote:Except a Town!toog doesn't know nom was scum
You think DGB bussed?In post 1369, Jake The Wolfie wrote:One of the reasons this game is really hard to read is that I don't townread any of you. All I'm seeing isredandgrey, without much (if at all)green.
There is no organization or association to what I'm seeing. Nothing here is making sense.