Total posts: 1,950
Posted in:
-->
@Lunatic
In 372, I asked this:
Ok. That raises a new question from me then. If Ragnar is town do you think Zaradi is scum? Alternatively, if Ragnar is scum do you think Zaradi is scum?You did not mention a possible Ragnar/Zaradi combination. Do you think that is not viable? Why?
I meant to ask this:
Ok. That raises a new question from me then. If Ragnar is town do you think Zaradi is scum? Alternatively, if Ragnar is scum do you think Zaradi is TOWN?
You did not mention a possible Ragnar/Zaradi combination. Do you think that is not viable? Why?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Zaradi
Not for death. Pretty sure I made it explicitly clear I dont support lynching him yet
Ok, fine. I am not willing to VTL Tuf at the moment, though. Certainly that could change. But I am not voting TUF at the moment.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Zaradi
Shit. I misread that. So TUF was defending himself, potentially.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Lunatic
I am waiting for Ragnars response also on lucky for a vote count before I potentially vote him, but I am on the same page. Currently seeing scum between objectivity/ragnar or objectivity/zaradi. The first seems more likely atm based on Ragnar's non-read of objectivity.
Ok. That raises a new question from me then. If Ragnar is town do you think Zaradi is scum? Alternatively, if Ragnar is scum do you think Zaradi is scum?
You did not mention a possible Ragnar/Zaradi combination. Do you think that is not viable? Why?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Danielle
You mean beyond the fact that the few posts he's made are totally inconsistent with his town meta?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Danielle
@Lucky
Your vote is still on Ragnar, correct? I think it is?
MOD: Two things. Please confirm that roles and affiliations were randomized and post a vote count. Thank you.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Objectivity
I am willing to lynch him by tomorrow night if he doesn't give more complete reads that make him seem less scummy. I would rather not lynch him today/tonight because A. He did say he was having an irl emergency and assuming he's not a bad person who would lie about that he deserves a little slack B. There's no reason to prematurely end DP1
No one is suggesting prematurely ending DP1. In fact, I have said the opposite at least three times now.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Objectivity
Fair, I think 3 people is a good enough wagon for now with others agreeing to jump on tomorrow night if he doesn't speak up. 4 seems too close for comfort because someone could end the day phase early then with a 5th vote, so I'm withholding my vote for now with an assurance that I'll vote that way tomorrow night absent changing circumstances.
Perhaps, but you scum read Ragnar at this point, correct? I agree we should not lynch until Max says something which he has heretofore failed to do, but if you are unwilling to lynch him and he flips scum you have to understand why I am coming after you next, right?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Lunatic
Not making excuses for Max's activity, but again your not going to get more than a few posts from him a day phase. He will probably put effort into the ones he does post, but you can refer to his activity in warrens "the office" mafia to see just how much he will post. He doesn't have much free time. That said, I think lynching him or focusing on him early is kind of a waste. Let's get more content from him before jumping there.
Well, actually you are making excuses for Max's inactivity and you have done so several times so far. But maybe those are good excuses. For now they are at least good enough that I am willing to focus on Ragnar and Objectivity, in that order.
Also, if roles and affiliations are randomized, you agree that the mod psych reason Dani gave for Max's affiliation is no longer viable? If you disagree, explain why. Your independent alternative explanation is a reason to discount Max's inactivity as being affiliation indicative. I presume you think that is sufficient? For the time being I am willing to entertain this.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@oromagi
Your inactivity is conspicuous as well. Surely your list of reads has changed since you first posted it. Update the same. And when you do that, just list the people in the game and indicate your reads and the reasons for those reads. Your past dashboard is confusing to me and I think potentially confusing to others as well. It does not give me an adequate chance to understand where your head is.
Indicate whether you agree with Ragnar being today's lynch.
Further, indicate whether you think we should be lynching Objectivity or Airmax instead and explain why.
Indicate whether your read on TUF has changed.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Objectivity
We can walk and chew gum at the same time. I want a wagon built on Ragnar while we keep Max on the backburner. Even still, I posted my analysis as to why Ragnar over Max in 345.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Danielle
I am skeptical of mod psych because it is both inherently speculative and assumes roles and affiliations were not randomized, which is Lucky's standard operating procedure as mod. So the argument that Airmax is not scum because of mod psych assumes that Lucky deviated from what he always does in every game, which is randomize roles and affiliations. Even still, I will wait to VTL Airmax until we get confirmation one way or another as to whether Lucky randomized roles and affiliations.
Ragnar is the only person at this time I think I am willing to VTL. Despite being prompted for reads he has posted less than nothing that moves the ball forward. He responded after being prompted which means he was lurking and waiting. While there are potentially other explanations, like his timely response to my admonishing his inactivity and your doing the same, followed by his response in around an hour was just fortuitous; but the more probable explanation is that he is lurking and potentially has been this whole time. That in combination with what he both has and has not done today makes me want to VTL him for death. He is not playing his town meta, which I think you would agree with. All of this makes him a more viable candidate for lynching than Airmax at this stage, in my opinion.
So we should be VTLing Ragnar.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Danielle
@Lunatic
@Lucky
MOD: Please confirm whether roles and affiliations were randomized.
Thank you.
Created:
Posted in:
TUF is looking more town now but he is overall neither town nor scum; null read. My prior analysis still stands but I need to reflect more on TUF before committing to lynching. This is of course subject to change but I am now disinclined to make TUF today's lynch candidate.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@airmax1227
Your inactivity is conspicuous and your analysis so far has been weak and inconsistent with your town meta. Like I said with Ragnar, we are 320 posts into the DP and you have yet to make more than one semi-substantive post in response to anything that anyone has written. You need to be more active or I will be at least as willing to lynch you as I am Ragnar, but at least he has posted something.
I want your full list of reads immediately and an indication of why you think them; as well as the person who you think we should be lynching today and why. If you disagree with Objectivity, I want an explanation as to why.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Barney
We are now 316 posts into DP1 and you have yet to make more than one semi-substantive post in response to anything anyone has written. You need to be more active or I am going to be very open to VTLing you because at this point it is looking to me like you are lurking while others go after each other benefitting from that disorder and chaos. You aren't the only one, as Airmax is also doing the same thing; but it's now looking like either of you are the prime candidates at the moment.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Barney
I really am getting tired of waiting for your list of reads and the reasons for them. Everyone else, even and including probably the most clueless players here, have done so. I know you aren't clueless and have thoughts so vocalize the with all deliberate speed.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Lunatic
Zaradi is posting on a phone and I would rather him and others be active as opposed him or anyone else potentially on a phone lurk. While I agree that I would prefer full analysis in the first instance, the mere fact of having activity is better than no activity at all.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Lunatic
This post regards my thoughts on your post in 305.
Objectivity is an inexperienced forum mafia player so if he is making mistakes relative to the meaning or significance of buddying, or even identifying whether that is happening in the first place, I am less concerned. What concerns me about him is that he has not posted a list of reads that enables me to see where his head is at on what I see as the issues in the game. So I am having to speculate about what he's thinking and why. I don't like that because it's unreliable.
I agree with what you said in response to him. I was skeptical of Zaradi and I defended my prior town read of you up until fairly recently. Objectivity missed that, or he didn't read fully. If he missed it, then he was skimming, which means he is more likely to have an informed perspective because he already knows the difference between town and scum. On the other hand, Objectivity was re-reading the posts as a series where he may not have appreciated the time differences in the evolution of my thinking; and because the volume of my posts in the thread most recently expresses agreement with Zaradi, and where he read the DP out of order, that could also explain the error from the perspective of an inexperienced townie.
Independently of your comments on 305, I am increasingly concerned about the reads I am seeing and the reasons for them I am not seeing from objectivity. However, he is not my main focus at the moment.
What I would like to see from you is a complete list of reads, with reasons for them, and in particular a statement of who you prefer to lynch today (assuming it is not objectivity). Assuming it is objectivity, then I need to better understand why your case against him is any stronger than Zaradi's case against you.
I also would like to see more reasons why you disagree with the four people Danielle identified. Specifically, if your preferred lynch today is Objectivity, why him and not the four Danielle identified?
Created:
Posted in:
I am okay with pressuring TUF for reasons you mentioned, though we could also just insist he posts some more detailed reads ASAP. For now I'll keep my vote on Ragnar and wait to hear from him and Airmax. Oro should post something more substantive too. I appreciate his friendly interjections but I'm curious about his reads.
I agree with all of this.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Objectivity
You scum read TUF based on 289, but only "slight scum" read on Danielle, and yet Danielle is in your top 3 candidates for lynching but not TUF?
Explain. Why are you not willing to VTL TUF? Why are you more sure TUF is scum than Danielle, but TUF is not in your top 3 while Danielle is?
Why isn't Ragnar or TUF your No. 1 lynch candidate?
Why aren't you VTLing?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Objectivity
Post a list of reads of all players specifying in particular whether you think they are scum or town.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Danielle
I'm willing to VTL Ragnar. He currently has two votes. I would like to see who, if anyone, is willing to be that third. I am also interested in seeing if Ragnar has thoughts on what has happened so far. Nothing he has done makes sense as town from an objective standpoint, but subjectively it's harder to parse. I don't know much about him so once we have results DP2 and I have a day's worth of activity against which to compare his behavior to I think I will have a more confident read on Ragnar.
I also want to see if TUF continues to defend Ragnar, or if Airmax jumps in. I think the TUF wagon is worth pursuing to see what flies out of the bushes at this point. I agree he is useful as town, but that is assuming he is town and I am not so confident about that at the moment for reasons I have detailed above. Your point about TUF's potential town utility is more of why I want to see if someone else jumps on the wagon. That could provide valuable insight; both in terms of who is willing to jump on board and who is not. Obviously if it looks like TUF's wagon is getting too full such that scum could potentially hammer and end the DP, I will unvote so that that doesn't happen. But I still think pressuring TUF is worth doing. The purpose of this would be because I want to know if TUF has theories on who else we should be pursuing. He has so far said less than nothing in the way of alternatives to your list he disparaged; but maybe he just hasn't fully formulated his thoughts yet. Perhaps a 3 vote wagon would pressure him to post actual reads and identify actual candidates for pressure and/or death. So this should be his chance to clear up some of what Zaradi noted and what I stated as well and I think pressure is the way to do that.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Danielle
As between Ragnar, TUF, Airmax, and Oro, who do you most want to VTL right now?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Zaradi
I have reviewed your post in 273 and my thoughts are as follows: You are making a case for why we should be VTLing TUF (Lunatic) for death based on a number of considerations.
I will address the more pertinent ones here. I agree that TUF's post 181 raises several questions, some of which your response identifies. I think 191 also raises similar questions. Specifically, in 191, TUF characterized Dani's list of candidates to investigate further as a "convoluted pressure group". I have a hard time understanding why that group is convoluted. The group Dani identifies in 179 is Ragnar, Oro, Lunatic, and Airmax.
Absent from Dani's group is TUF. If Dani had scum read TUF I could understand his being defensive if he is town. But she didn't. So TUF isn't defending himself, but a group of four others. I do not understand why. If TUF is town then he should be willing to pressure at least one of that group, and he should have a preference for which among the group is the best candidate or he should be suggesting another option based on a set of reads wherein he identifies a more ideal candidate for investigation/pressure. Instead, in 181, TUF is doing one thing that matters and not doing two things that matter. The two things he is not doing is even entertaining a willingness to investigate/pressure while in the same instance he is not suggesting another alternative outside of that group. As town, if TUF has a better idea of who to pressure then he should be speaking up. The one thing he is doing that matters in 181 is he is casting doubt of the very utility of pressuring/investigation in the first instance. You identify this, correctly, as well, and seem to understand the implications to the degree that you are at least willing to state it.
In my prior post I claimed that both of you could not be scum. So, there are three possible worlds: TUF is town and you are scum; TUF is scum and you are town; or you and TUF are both town. The first and the third options become less viable, considering TUF's more recent activity I discuss above; which means that the world I am thinking about now as being the most likely would mean that TUF is scum, but that also would mean you have to be town. So as town, what I would expect you to be doing is at least catching most of the obvious things, and moving the ball forward. Independently of your past interactions with Oro, it seems like you're doing that. The events as they develop also look consistent with my past thinking that you both cannot be scum because you are hard scum reading TUF now to the point that you want him to be at L-1, which is not something I expect scum to do. You are also willing to lead the wagon here whereas you beat around the bush with Oro. I think you are saying that you are more confident that TUF is scum than you were that Oro was scum, and more confident that TUF is scum than that either of Objectivity are scum. (Here's something that's lingering in the back of my mind, though. I think as well you seem to have been demonstrating the most interest of anyone in actually getting something useful out of DP1; difficult as that may be. I think there's two possible reasons for that. More on this tomorrow.)
So there's a huge contrast between what you're doing and what TUF is doing. I am open to revisiting my town read on TUF. As of 278, Danielle VTL'd Ragnar, Sui followed Danielle. The only other vote on the board is yours, after TUF unvoted in 154, which I note is the first instance where my thinking on TUF became less certain. I asked others to post insight on why they thought my town read on TUF was wrong. Admittedly, it wasn't a strong read but one of instinct. I have a lot of thoughts on 154, but I've said enough for now. But here's the key quote from 154 that stands out to me:
Zaradi- Trying to decide on him as well. His aggressive early inquisition (while mostly pointless and mostly self explanatory from what I've seen) seems like a genuine interest to provoke activity, which is pro town. But his line of questioning in both my case, and Oromagi's case doesn't seem to go anywhere, or demonstrate what he specifically thinks is scummy in either case. I'd say it feels a bit convoluted, but again, I am not in his head. Maybe he had a thought and the answers just satisfied that line of inquiry and he didn't feel the need to further the questioning.
(I have added emphasis to this; TUF did not include the bold in the original).
TUF says that an aggressive early inquisition seems like a genuine interest to provoke activity, which TUF characterizes as pro-town to justify in part a potential town read (on you). Then TUF posts what he posts in response to Dani, and then you (note also 266), which I discussed at length above. where by his own standard what he is suggesting is diametrically opposed to not only an "aggressive" inquisition, but any inquisition at all without "a valid reason for it" as stated in 181. So what I am trying to figure out is what counts in the world where TUF is town as "a valid reason"? As well, Dani had reasons for wanting to pressure the group TUF characterized as "contrived". She didn't elaborate on them to the extent I have, but it's not like she was simply saying "pressure for the sake of pressure".
On the other hand, in the world where TUF is town, his reasons for defending that group is that he doesn't want to have a mislynch or waste time on something that isn't going to be productive. That means that he would have to have some alternative candidate for pressure/investigation AND a good reason for it; specifically a reason better than the reasons Dani had for her group. TUF hasn't produced this information. So I am having a hard time seeing TUF's actions from a town perspective. (Note: you in other posts, and others here, have identified incongruence between what I have done/said and what TUF said I have done/said. I agree that TUF has mischaracterized some of my actions, but that doesn't make me scum read him. Town misread people's actions all the time and when you're paraphrasing, as he was, and using adjectives to characterize behavior, there is high risk for miscommunication and misinterpretation. TUF's misreading or mischaracterizing them is null for this reason. My thinking here is independent of that consideration.)
So I am willing to VTL TUF. These actions make more sense as scum to me than as town; and the things he's done post my initial town read make me question my initial town read for a range of reasons, many of which I have stated above.
That means I am town reading you now. Depending on what happens tomorrow I will be more sold on this idea, potentially. We will see.
My list of reads is as follows:
Lunatic - Potentially scum
Ragnar - Potentially scum
Max - Potentially scum
Objectivity - Uncertain; needs to post more and respond to my prior post 199
Oro - Uncertain; seems like clueless town
Zaradi - Potentially town, subject to events NP1 and DP2
Sui - Potentially town
Danielle - Town
I'm also willing to VTL Ragnar or Airmax.
VTL Lunatic
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@oromagi
I am more interested in in how people act. I don't think there are uniquely "TUF" tells, but I don't think he is playing his scum meta if that is what you are asking.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@oromagi
It's DP1. I'm just taking notes.
It seems like you're suspicious of TUF. So do you agree with Zaradi that town should be pressuring him?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Zaradi
I would rather pressure Objectivity, but before I do anything I need to understand why you think my town read on TUF is wrong and further why you scum read him. I do not follow your thinking here, so please explain it to me.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@oromagi
Dani, Max- arriving late, staying low is good scum strategy. Gives town a chance to start infighting.If there's any town infighting to be done, TUF's just the man to do it.
I don't understand this. Are you saying all three are possibly scum? Or that Dani and Max seem like they're coordinating and therefore scum?
So you disagree with my town read on Danielle?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Zaradi
Because theres no way his reaction in 218 is townsided.
Why?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Lunatic
in regards
For the love of all that is sacred on earth in general and within the English language and modern usage in particular, purge that phrase from your vocabulary and replace it with "with regard" or "in regard". The "regard" is singular, not plural. Alternatively, "with respect" or "in respect" are also appropriate.
/endgrammarnazirant.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@oromagi
This is unhelpful.
What are your reads on Dani, Max, TUF?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Zaradi
There is is. You made me wait 200 posts for it.
You should take this:
And send me your results.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Zaradi
Why do you want to pressure TUF?
Why is my town read on TUF wrong?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@oromagi
What are your reads on Danielle and Max?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Zaradi
The fact that I agree with both of your reads so far is why I am not VTLing you, if you were curious. Even if you were reluctantly aggressive with Oro and you were bring bratty/teasing with Adam, the reads aren't wrong and while it seems like you might be putting out feelers to generate a potential mislynch I think it is more likely your style to just be doing what you're doing.
I am still thinking about you (with your shirt on, if you were wondering).
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Zaradi
I prefer to sexually harrass you on kik ;)
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Zaradi
I don't think you could've sat more directly on the center of this fence if you tried. Well done.
The above is the text you wrote from #105, and I agree with your criticism to the extent that Objectivity's prevaricating is a problem, objectively from the perspective of what town should be doing and subjectively based on Objectivity's meta.
Though how you said it is something I am still thinking about.
What stands out to me is the difference between how you scum read Oro versus how you implied Objectivity's reads were anti-town. I think there was a difference between the nature of their reads, but with Oro you were reluctantly aggressive whereas with Objectivity you were more bratty/teasing/playful. Although you only posted this after my prior comments about the sequence of events in relation to your jumping on the lynch (potentially seemingly reluctantly) of Oro, so maybe you're just gun shy because you're worried others may spend more time scrutinizing you if you VTL too quickly? Seems like that's some kind of paranoia.
There is also world where I can see a comment like that turning into something that is decidedly anti-town, even if you correctly noted Objectivity's anti-town prevarication (and you did), and seem to understand the potential significance of it. However, I will refrain from saying more on the subject. Too early to say anything else useful, beyond that I am open to potentially pressuring objectivity today.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Zaradi
Specifically starting at 105
I will review.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Zaradi
@coal: what do you think of my pressuring objectivity?
Please indicate which post(s) you are referring to. I won't ask you to link because I know you're on your phone.
Also, respond to my non-mafia related Kik message.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Objectivity
I want Objectivity to post a list of reads on everyone and to place all players into either a town or scum bucket.
With the understanding that you don't want to be wrong, that you are potentially afraid of being wrong, and worry that someone will misinterpret your actions as potentially a scum tell; take a position on everyone, and give reasons why you are taking that position.
I need to understand where your thinking is on people and why.
Created:
Posted in:
I want Zaradi's reads on Max and Dani.
I want Ragnar's reads on everyone; namely Max and Dani.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@sui_generis
what makes you so sure? not familiar enough with her scum meta
Dani meta, and her activity so far, reads. Dani is town. I will write up a more detailed set of thoughts later on but I think I'd rather hear what other people have to say now.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Danielle
Zaradi, the post where he mocked Objectivity for being neutral in his assessment felt town
I agree that was accurate criticism. Not wanting to post reads that commit to anything could be that he is just not wanting to be wrong; but it also potentially indicates a lack of interest in actually scum hunting.
Created: