Mini 2273: Science Diagrams That Look Like Shitposts 2 [END]

[clidd]

Reading soon.

[clidd]

Ok, there's not much to analyze but Vivax looks good (t) to me in these few pages.

The

''I'm publicly suspicious of someone but I don't intend to vote yet''

is something I see more often coming from town than scum in my personal experience (although I don't sympathize with his read about George).

Also, Crescent's

''this player suspecting me is probably town''

seems towny to some extent, but the sudden focus on self-meta gives me a bad impression. Not enough to classify the act as tendentious, but I don't think I can consider the slot a townlean from what I've seen so far.

[clidd]

The rest of the discussion that goes on didn't suggest much in the AI ​​sense. Feels like almost everyone who posted so far is literally dancing in null variations tbh.

I need to read more to be able to infer something more expressive, which implies the need for more posts, interactions and etc.

[clidd]

There is one player in particular that I'd consider voting for but the reason is so moonlogic that the chance of the read being right would be as accurate as voting randomly, so not helpful at all.

Anyways, I have two questions:

@Gibus
Why did you vote Crescent if you said that your vote was ''bad''?

@Geraint
Which part of the description of why Vivax was voting George struck you as performative? why?

pedit: Yep

[clidd]

I don't like political eliminations, but I've experienced incredibly difficult games due to absent players.

It'd be a hemorrhagic pleasure not have to deal with that again, although I still prefer to play the traditional way and eliminate scum if viable.

[clidd]

Well, now Crescent undid the bitter taste of self-meta earlier.

But Elsa's backup plan makes practical sense to me, assuming we don't reach a consensus, which is perfectly possible.

[clidd]

Right, I'm waiting for you Gera.

VOTE: geraintm

I'm curious how you notice something is performative so early in the game.

In our last experience, town!you took a bit longer to develop reads. Maybe you know something else that I don't?

[clidd]

Spoiler:

Right, I'm waiting for you Gera.

VOTE: geraintm

I'm curious how you notice something is performative so early in the game.

In our last experience, town!you took a bit longer to develop reads. Maybe you know something else that I don't?

it wasnt a read, it was me just saying i didn't like what someone else was doing. i'd given someone else a naughty point too, i just like to try and keep arecord of when people do something that makes me sit up, so i can note them for later. if they d a bunch of weird stuff....it can mean something

Not voting (7): geraintm, GoldfishFromTheMoon, Vivax, Elsa Jay, Eiralox, Crescent, Corwinoid

Scum is in here somewhere

games over boys, we can all go home. sherlock here has solved it.....

There is one player in particular that I'd consider voting for but the reason is so moonlogic that the chance of the read being right would be as accurate as voting randomly, so not helpful at all.

Anyways, I have two questions:


@Geraint
Which part of the description of why Vivax was voting George struck you as performative? why?

@Geraint --- u are yet to answer this question.

chill the f out. i can sleep

The rest of the discussion that goes on didn't suggest much in the AI ​​sense. Feels like almost everyone who posted so far is literally dancing in null variations tbh.

I need to read more to be able to infer something more expressive, which implies the need for more posts, interactions and etc.

VOTE: clidd

The rest of the discussion that goes on didn't suggest much in the AI ​​sense. Feels like almost everyone who posted so far is literally dancing in null variations tbh.

I need to read more to be able to infer something more expressive, which implies the need for more posts, interactions and etc.

VOTE: clidd

Whats wrong with that post? I thought it made sense.

Well, you would....



I'm going to have fun with this

The rest of the discussion that goes on didn't suggest much in the AI ​​sense. Feels like almost everyone who posted so far is literally dancing in null variations tbh.

I need to read more to be able to infer something more expressive, which implies the need for more posts, interactions and etc.

VOTE: clidd

Whats wrong with that post? I thought it made sense.

it contributes nothing and draws no one out, basically stating the intent to lurk until others do the work yet in a flowery and overly-convulated manner.

That said, @geraintm has offered no qualifier to the vote, other than the fact that @clidd has voted fro them(which they did not explicitly state). Their reply to @clidd's vote in itself was a defense of their method, so where does the decision to vote clidd come in? Is the above post decisive enough a motivation?

You get a naughty point for defending me

The rest of the discussion that goes on didn't suggest much in the AI ​​sense. Feels like almost everyone who posted so far is literally dancing in null variations tbh.

I need to read more to be able to infer something more expressive, which implies the need for more posts, interactions and etc.

VOTE: clidd

Whats wrong with that post? I thought it made sense.

it contributes nothing and draws no one out, basically stating the intent to lurk until others do the work yet in a flowery and overly-convulated manner.

That said, @geraintm has offered no qualifier to the vote, other than the fact that @clidd has voted fro them(which they did not explicitly state). Their reply to @clidd's vote in itself was a defense of their method, so where does the decision to vote clidd come in? Is the above post decisive enough a motivation?

You get a naughty point for defending me

that's funny i don't see it that way, my post reads pretty neutral? thinking ur just fishing for shade to throw atm lol.

it felt like you were coming up with a reason for my vote, when there wasnt one. so i gave you anaughty point because it felt like you were trying to buddy up to me for some reason

it felt like you were coming up with a reason for my vote, when there wasnt one. so i gave you anaughty point because it felt like you were trying to buddy up to me for some reason

"@geraintm has offered no qualifier to the vote, other than the fact that @clidd has voted fro them(which they did not explicitly state). "

again, i explicitly state that you offered no reason for your vote. my analysis of clidd's post is wholly on me, and even if it is my inferred interpretation of why you quoted it, it was pretty clear that Goldfish and I had no idea as to why you voted.

So after the vote you rejoin me with one-liners, Goldfish you answer with an insinuation and the non-sequitur of 'having fun'.

So we're some way into this, Clidd votes for u, u vote for Clidd, and your entire motivation is that you have no reason, after quoting a specific post, again for nos specific reason other than replying to Goldfish as you did. Instead of weighing in on Alex/Elsa wagons you go an tangent with clidd and an eventual vote which you state has no meaning, after which you throw some very flimsy shade on me and to a lesser extent Goldfish.

I don't see where you're going with this, there's scummier activity than Clidd's atm tbh

my vote for clidd

was purely random

[clidd]

Ok, I'm trying to understand if for some reason Gera is trying to provoke a reaction or something for ''?'' reasons.

Feeling that something is scummy/towny using guts is normal, but assigning a ''performative'' value to something you're not even sure is meaningful feels more like he's making things up.

Not that I think it makes a lot sense for scum!Gera to play this way, but I don't find the motivation for town!Gera either.

[clidd]

I have a question.
I missed this post the first time, so kinda late. But is "moonlogic" supposed to be crumbing that that person is me? If so why, if not I still wanna hear your moonlogic and which player you were considering voting.

No, it's someone else, but the theory has kind of become obsolete. It has to do with activity and game time (in general).

[clidd]

Well, on a second look, I'm fine with my vote.

If I were to draw my reads in real time, they'd look like this:

[

GoldfishFromTheMoon

] [

Crescent

] [

Eiralox

] [

Vivax

]
=
[

Elsa Jay

] [

Alexcellent

]
[

Corwinoidhis

]
[

Not_Mafia

] [

gibus

] [

UNOwen

] [

GeorgeBailey

]
=
[

geraintm

]

[clidd]

Actually, we already played together (2021) iirc.

In our last experience you were scum and made me townread your slot for a whole day until I woke up and realized your behavior wasn't town being erratic but just scum being scummy.

[clidd]

There is also a town!Gera game that caused me some mental confusion when I tried to read your slot, but that's before the scumgame.

I haven't played/watched you play since then, so I don't know if your playstyle has evolved but judging in isolation I consider it more scummy-y than towny-y. At least until you actually generate "real" reads.

[clidd]

Actually, we already played together (2021) iirc.

In our last experience you were scum and made me townread your slot for a whole day until I woke up and realized your behavior wasn't town being erratic but just scum being scummy.

I think I am.terrible scum and really easy to spot. I get really panicky (my scum threads are wild swings of emotion)

I didn't know though if you knew my random method of voting was my main thought.

There is also a town!Gera game that caused me some mental confusion when I tried to read your slot, but that's before the scumgame.

I haven't played/watched you play since then, so I don't know if your playstyle has evolved but judging in isolation I consider it more scummy-y than towny-y. At least until you actually generate "real" reads.

You are jnlikely to get any real reads from me until day 2, once there is an elimination and whatever info people bring to the table. That is when I start pushing at people.more.

Hum. Nop, I still think you're scum.

Not trying to be rude, but it looks like you're trying to buy time for suggesting that I need to evaluate you later (D2).

[clidd]

@Vivax

That was a real-time update *meta-based* read (160), having ''mini 2190'' and ''mini 2196'' games as references.

The games are old but you can find them by searching geraint's profile or mine.

[clidd]

@Crescent

The points I'm using are from memory, so pointing to specific parts I won't be able to.

You can compare Gera's ISO in both games and draw your conclusions from what he's shown here so far.

[clidd]

@Gibus

He mentioned at one point that a read was only meaningful to him when the player presented a set of ''bad'' signals, which struck me as strange when I saw the expressive *performative* impression he got from a single post. In this context, It's as if he were judging something as performative being aware that that action, for being isolated, was not significant. But that's not why I'm voting for him, even though it's another chip in the pile.

I hope this makes sense to you.

[clidd]

Gibus, I don't understand what's your point.

Are you trying to read my slot or the accuracy of my read?

[clidd]

MN 2196 was a super stressful game.

It took me centuries to eliminate my main scumread (which was scum) and we got close to lose because of apathetic slots and TvTs.

[clidd]

Gibus, I don't understand what's your point.

Are you trying to read my slot or the accuracy of my read?

Well, I can't join you in your pursuit if I'm not convinced.
It would be nice if your responses turn out ai tho.

It's hard to structure a concrete case about Geraint being scum, since most of it is in my head and I don't think there's anything super tangible that I can advocate with 70% certainty.

But from all the impressions I've had so far, he has a >rand chance (compared to slots with little content/participation) of being scum imo.

Maybe the right word or argument will come to mind eventually, but for now that's what I've to offer.

[clidd]

Good analysis by the way, Crescent.

[clidd]

While the meta-centric explanation from clidd regarding his decision to put geraintm into the scum pile leaves a sour aftertaste, I'll bite. Certainly would have helped to point that out immediately for its credibility. Noting that I didn't go and look up if the meta wasn't even valid. It's not an approach I use on players I don't know well.

[clidd]

Update:

[

Crescent

]
[

Vivax

]
[

GoldfishFromTheMoon

] [

Eiralox

]
=
[

Alexcellent

] [

Elsa Jay

]
[

gibus

]
[

Not_Mafia

] [

UNOwen

] [

GeorgeBailey

] [

Corwinoid

]
=
[

geraintm

]

[clidd]

Update:

[

Crescent

]
[

Eiralox

] [

Vivax

] [

GoldfishFromTheMoon

]
=
[

Alexcellent

] [

Elsa Jay

]
[

gibus

]
[

GeorgeBailey

] [

Corwinoid

] [

Not_Mafia

] [

UNOwen

]
=
[

geraintm

]

[clidd]

The other two are moving up.

Eiralox had a *bah* start, but after perusing the slot a bit more the impression I got was that she was genuinely trying to get reads (uninformed perspective, hence towny perspective).

Goldfish, on the other hand, demonstrated a fluidity of posting that I'm judging as towny. Mostly tonality, to be honest.

[clidd]

And Eiralox just strikes me as waiting for something to actually happen before doing something instead of trying to force it to happen.

The wall post.. Honestly doesn't really say anything though. It rehashes the game, but it doesn't actually provide any content that advances the game, as it includes little to no reads or reactions to what they're rehashing. It's just a long post that exists for the sake of existing.

so u don't see summations being helpful to town?
u saying we should go in blind here?
you're not providing input on any of those I mention(hell, Elsa used my post to start a vote and fingered UNOwen out of their hiding hole, and lo and behold, here you are posting as well after a dearth of inactivity?)

my wall of text of text might be boring but it sure as Zeus is pretty, and you taking such a strong stance on it has just rocketed my suspicion of you to a level where it never was. Hell, I'm tempted to vote for you right now but i'm yet to post by second wall of useless text so i'll let of for the moment.

And this reaction felt expressive to the point that I imagine scum!Eira might not care so much (because her reads would be fake), whereas it'd make sense for town!Eira to feel semi-offended by the disregard for her effort (because it's genuine).

Of course, that's like level 1 reads, so I wouldn't say I'm one hundred percent sure, but it's a decent thing to start a PoE with.

[clidd]

Regarding Fish,

Spoiler:

'Cause an entire day had passed and his "sticking with the basics" line suggests having an actual reason to vote that wasn't strong enough to actually go into detail on.

His "sticking with the basics" line is a direct copy of what elsa said in the first post of the game, I don't think there's much more to it that that.

That interaction felt very weird.
Not nessasarily scummy, just weird

It feels like you trusted each other and buddied up WAY too fast.

What are your thoughts on the last page or so, Goldfish?
I know you didn't seem to like my whole 81 but what about everything else (me vs Elsa etc). Any reads on anyone yet?

P-edit:

Birds are alright, except for magpies, whom are spawn of the devil

Early reads, take all these with a grain of salt, I have difficulty coming up with reads early game

I think vivax is town, (don't nessasarily agree with what they've said but I think they are town)
Gibus I also think is town

As for you/elsa, I think I coukd find reasons to scumread you both, I'm not going to take a side at this point.

The rest of the discussion that goes on didn't suggest much in the AI ​​sense. Feels like almost everyone who posted so far is literally dancing in null variations tbh.

I need to read more to be able to infer something more expressive, which implies the need for more posts, interactions and etc.

VOTE: clidd

Whats wrong with that post? I thought it made sense.

That said, @geraintm has offered no qualifier to the vote, other than the fact that @clidd has voted fro them(which they did not explicitly state). Their reply to @clidd's vote in itself was a defense of their method, so where does the decision to vote clidd come in? Is the above post decisive enough a motivation?

This is really what I wanted to know from my question.

my vote for clidd was purely random

You say this, but the fact that you voted in a reply to a post clidd made seemed to indicate you found something particularly scummy there that you didn't like. The fact thag clidd was already voting for you also suggests otherwise.

@Goldfish - you may have missed my question 126

Who was copying what now?

gibus first post copies Elsa first post, "stick to the basics" looks more suggestive without this context.

Yeah I did miss it sorry,
So my logic at the time was that we were a few real time days into the game and gibus basically hadn't produced any content except for some joking around and a vote that didn't look serious, I didn't think scum would risk that because in my experience scum tend to have a high post count early on day one to try and seem present and helpful, steer the game, and avoid being scumread for lurking, if they are going to drop off it usually happens much later.

The read is tentative and is subject to change though and now that some proper content is happening I'll need to look through again.

I like this set, simple and transparent. It gives the impression of someone playing in real time, without a plan in mind.

There are other slots that share the simplicity, but I believe Goldfish is unique within this classification.

[clidd]

Hitting scum would be more desirable (*cough* Geraint *cough*) but I'm fine in taking out someone who has no significant contribution too.

It's better than eliminating someone at random in panic or ending the day with no elim.

[clidd]

clidd sus for lack of benedict cumberbatch gifs

gotta pump those numbers up

I miss you, my friend.

We're kind of destined to play opposite alignments, but hopefully this time things will be different, right?

[clidd]

Ok, I think we should just elim Gera and then start hunting the rest of mafia tomorrow.

I take responsibility for this push/flip if wrong, but his slot stinks as *scum but trying to appear scummy town* imo.

[clidd]

Who do you want then?

[clidd]

Alright, no problem.

I'll do a reread later to check if something changes.

[clidd]

VOTE: UNOwen

[clidd]

Crescent, stop calling my random vote not random.
You are talking out of your ass.
I will ignore you the for the rest of the game because your insistence that you know my actions better than me is just baffling me.

I actually do like this post.

It's not something I think scum!Gera would go so far to say as scum. Scum!him can be scummy and messy, but he's not toxic.

Crescent was getting in his nerves and town!Gera would be more likely to react this way.

pedit: What's sloths? (my english is not native).

pedit: Spicy.

[clidd]

UNVOTE: Not_Mafia

@Unowen, can you expand on your Corwin read? I'm not getting it

The initial vote was because I thought 24 was a little awkward, but it's mainly his posts since about you/Elsa that look phoney. My impression is that he's gone backwards, asking a fairly pointless question of Elsa, then shading the exchange between you, then coming with an elaboration on his thoughts but retracting it because the whole thing is arbitrary. 194 reads to me almost like an apology for raising it in the first place.

Spoiler:

I think part of it is the pronoun "her" in 79 threw me for a bit because I dropped the context for it, so I thought you were referring to Elsa. George was right that your vote seems oddly placed there. And then she signs off with the OMGUS/"Riddle that vote" post, which goes from 74 that seemed like a mellow promoting activity and avoiding division to 87 a couple of hours later where she's looking for a fight.

I think it's making a mountain out of a mole hill though, I think her progression is more organic than I thought, and I think I misread or was confused by your posts starting the exchange because of the context change.

1) he's saying he didn't like your vote because he agrees with George's 85 but that it also might be because he got confused by another post of yours.
2) notes Elsa's progression as though it's a jarring but that you voted her in a pretty accusatory way in between these posts which to me is a pretty obvious explainer for why she would change her perspective.
3) again, the question of whether Elsa considers herself a strong personality seems completely irrelevant to whatever issues he had with that exchange. Supposedly if she'd answered "No." then that would be suggest she was pretending but I don't see how at all. Is someone who doesn't consider themselves a strong personality not supposed to react to votes against them? If the idea was that Elsa faked her reaction to Alex, the intuitive way to press this is by asking her about her vote on Alex.

Too political, not an organic tone and a weak slot overall ^

He'd enter the classification of ''wispy activity but trying to look towny'', which I think would be the standard approach to a scum!Uno scenario.

[clidd]

pedit: What's sloths? (my english is not native).

the mossy-ass looking animal in our benevolent host's avatar ; )

el perezoso?

Got it. Odd word, but thank you for teaching me Miss Eiralox.

[clidd]

@Crescent

Basically none, but his posting pattern reminds me of scumplayers I've seen in the past (2020/2021).

So I would say it's more like pattern assimilation and not something particular about him.

[clidd]

"Will you walk into my parlour?" said a spider to a fly;
" 'Tis the prettiest little parlour that ever you did spy.
The way into my parlour is up a winding stair,
And I have many pretty things to shew when you are there."
"Oh no, no!" said the little fly, "to ask me is in vain,
For who goes up your winding stair can ne'er come down again."

[clidd]

Update:

[

Crescent

]
[

Eiralox

]
=
[

Elsa Jay

] [

Vivax

]
[

Alexcellent

]
[

GoldfishFromTheMoon

]
[

geraintm

] [

GeorgeBailey

]
[

Corwinoid

] [

Not_Mafia

] [

gibus

]
=
[

UNOwen

]

[clidd]

Well, you care a lot about causing a change in the current gamestate and express concern about the direction of other players' reads in general.

[clidd]

An example is that when I mentioned the past games I had with Geraint, you took the time and effort to search and read the games, something that regardless of whether or not it's a feature of your playstyle, few scumplayers play like that, especially in a stagnant environment where neutrality and apathy benefit scum.

[clidd]

The point is that scum!you wouldn't have to do that much to have an impact on the game, as eventually town would destroy itself. The way you're navigating today, however, brings extremely unnecessary exposure, something that makes more sense in a town!you scenario being uninformed and also looking for as much information as possible to make the best choice, not just follow common sense or settle for complacency.

[clidd]

Not to mention your obvious frustration with the constant suspicions about your slot that reflect me as "I'm doing my best but people still sus me, what the heck?", which is a pretty common line of thought coming from a town mentality.

[clidd]

The moon hangs above the town. It's symbolic.

Yep, that too.

[clidd]

So.. Did a lot happen while I was gone?

[clidd]

I have a few ideas in mind but I'll wait for the flips first (assuming the last vote was a hammer).

pedit: Spicy.

[clidd]

What's your full role, George?

[clidd]

I saw ''detective'' once in a game (2020) and the player in question, as far as I can remember, was also eliminated on day one.

Tragic.

[clidd]

Speaking of which, does anyone know why this image is in Alex's ISO? ^

[clidd]

It's an anomaly to me that Crescent was eliminated considering how obvtown she's been since D1.

[clidd]

At least it was an interesting game to follow (although I'd rather not be a ghost most of the time).

[clidd]

At least it was an interesting game to follow (although I'd rather not be a ghost most of the time).

Sorry Clidd. Unfortunately my scum style is killing people like you day 1. You seemed chill and you might've prevented the wrecks that were day 2 or 3. Also why I liked the Alex kill.

I go after the people who are more likely to stop stuff going out the window and leave people like Vivax, Cres, and Corwin alive even if they're confirmed town because they kinda create enough conflict that this stuff happens.

Well, no problem. I expected the reason to be something like "you guys thought I was PR", but looking at it from the social angle (and considering what happened after D1), yeah, your explanation makes more sense.