|
On January 27 2015 04:11 Toadesstern wrote:Show nested quote +On January 27 2015 04:05 Eden1892 wrote:On January 26 2015 13:04 Eden1892 wrote:
Coming-down-Magic was fun but not for why you'd think it would be.
Anyway I am back and I ?hope? of sound mind and judgment.
I feel like my liancourt read was still pretty coherent. Maybe not in execu-- no, definitely not in execution, but at least in the logic. Let me try to explain it with a little more clarity of mind.
My play style was different from both games he's seen from me, and I was mafia in one and town in the other. At the very least he's obscuring the truth by citing Imperial as the inspiration for his read without making any mention of the fact that my play is different from the time he saw me play mafiasided. I feel like a townie would make mention of this and try to give the other player a fair shake instead of simply going "different from this town game therefore mafia!" while ignoring the equally-important "different from this mafia game therefore ???"
I also kinda felt like it was a cheap shot trying this kind of obscurantist read while I wasn't quite at full mental capacity, but to be fair it's not his fault that I decided to try new alcohol right before he gave his reads. Idk maybe it's unfair to hold that to him, but I felt like it was more sinister than a misunderstanding or error. I agree in that liancourt feels like he is picking his target and once he has picked that he's writing something about them (because he has to) rather than going with the flow. It should be the other way around, you find something weird and you talk about it no matter who it is, especially early on into d1. Is he usually the kind of guy that locks on his target and just goes at it?
hts says so, i've only played one game with him where he was town and i was mafia, and he locked onto me. but idk if he just does it in general or was zeroed in on me because i was obvious LOL
my issue is less that he's zeroed in on me and refusing to budge or explain himself, because townies and mafia both tunnel on targets all the time. my issue is the reasoning he's using, which i feel like doesn't come from the position of someone who doesn't have the truth and is trying to figure it out, but instead from the position of someone who does have the truth and is trying to obscure it from the others
|
additionally, although i acknowledge this probably isn't the strongest point, i should nonetheless observe that lian explicitly said in the game we played together that he was "trying someone else's meta," and in this one that he's "playing his own meta instead of someone else's" (not exact quotes but the idea is conveyed accurately). so i'm not really weighing meta as much if the guy is explicitly saying he predetermined his play style would be different from a previous game
|
In the Void game which we both recently played (disclaimer: that game is still in progress, but both of us have been eliminated from it...so my discussion on that is somewhat limited intentionally) Lian said the same thing about playing a certain meta and was lynched D1 for doing jack all, effectively policy lynched so I believe that's why he "switched metas" again this go.
But what has been consistent across all metas I've seen is the lockdown on a singular target. And his confidence about it.
|
<3
On January 27 2015 04:05 Eden1892 wrote:
anyway we should kill liancourt because his meta argument on me is BS and he hasn't issued a retraction yet
On January 27 2015 02:14 IAmRobik wrote:
GB: I metaread Robik as mafia because he isn't posting.
Robik starts posting
GB: Robik is scum because: meta
Why isn't this day over yet with mafia!GB lynched?
Eden = town ... not for the above post, but for quoting his earlier posts
|
On January 27 2015 04:15 Eden1892 wrote:Show nested quote +On January 27 2015 04:11 Toadesstern wrote:On January 27 2015 04:05 Eden1892 wrote:On January 26 2015 13:04 Eden1892 wrote:
Coming-down-Magic was fun but not for why you'd think it would be.
Anyway I am back and I ?hope? of sound mind and judgment.
I feel like my liancourt read was still pretty coherent. Maybe not in execu-- no, definitely not in execution, but at least in the logic. Let me try to explain it with a little more clarity of mind.
My play style was different from both games he's seen from me, and I was mafia in one and town in the other. At the very least he's obscuring the truth by citing Imperial as the inspiration for his read without making any mention of the fact that my play is different from the time he saw me play mafiasided. I feel like a townie would make mention of this and try to give the other player a fair shake instead of simply going "different from this town game therefore mafia!" while ignoring the equally-important "different from this mafia game therefore ???"
I also kinda felt like it was a cheap shot trying this kind of obscurantist read while I wasn't quite at full mental capacity, but to be fair it's not his fault that I decided to try new alcohol right before he gave his reads. Idk maybe it's unfair to hold that to him, but I felt like it was more sinister than a misunderstanding or error. I agree in that liancourt feels like he is picking his target and once he has picked that he's writing something about them (because he has to) rather than going with the flow. It should be the other way around, you find something weird and you talk about it no matter who it is, especially early on into d1. Is he usually the kind of guy that locks on his target and just goes at it? hts says so, i've only played one game with him where he was town and i was mafia, and he locked onto me. but idk if he just does it in general or was zeroed in on me because i was obvious LOL my issue is less that he's zeroed in on me and refusing to budge or explain himself, because townies and mafia both tunnel on targets all the time. my issue is the reasoning he's using, which i feel like doesn't come from the position of someone who doesn't have the truth and is trying to figure it out, but instead from the position of someone who does have the truth and is trying to obscure it from the others
though if he's tunneling he has confirmation bias by definition. If that's what he's doing it's likely he might ignore the parts you're blaming him for simply because he's certain you're mafia and looking at it only one way: Try to point out things that don't fit with your townmeta because you're mafia anyways
Both what you said and what I said come down to the same thing I feel. It could very well be malicious just the way I think locking on to just one target could be something malicious because that way he doesn't have to make up stuff about a lot of people and can just focus on one guy. But if he does tunnel a lot that's a moot point.
|
Can someone clarify the term confirmation bias in this game? Or is that the same thing as tunnelling?
I see it used often, but I don't know what it means with respect to this game.
|
Never mind, I just looked the normal definition up....I think I can figure out what it means now in this game.
|
On January 27 2015 04:22 Toadesstern wrote:Show nested quote +On January 27 2015 04:15 Eden1892 wrote:On January 27 2015 04:11 Toadesstern wrote:On January 27 2015 04:05 Eden1892 wrote:On January 26 2015 13:04 Eden1892 wrote:
Coming-down-Magic was fun but not for why you'd think it would be.
Anyway I am back and I ?hope? of sound mind and judgment.
I feel like my liancourt read was still pretty coherent. Maybe not in execu-- no, definitely not in execution, but at least in the logic. Let me try to explain it with a little more clarity of mind.
My play style was different from both games he's seen from me, and I was mafia in one and town in the other. At the very least he's obscuring the truth by citing Imperial as the inspiration for his read without making any mention of the fact that my play is different from the time he saw me play mafiasided. I feel like a townie would make mention of this and try to give the other player a fair shake instead of simply going "different from this town game therefore mafia!" while ignoring the equally-important "different from this mafia game therefore ???"
I also kinda felt like it was a cheap shot trying this kind of obscurantist read while I wasn't quite at full mental capacity, but to be fair it's not his fault that I decided to try new alcohol right before he gave his reads. Idk maybe it's unfair to hold that to him, but I felt like it was more sinister than a misunderstanding or error. I agree in that liancourt feels like he is picking his target and once he has picked that he's writing something about them (because he has to) rather than going with the flow. It should be the other way around, you find something weird and you talk about it no matter who it is, especially early on into d1. Is he usually the kind of guy that locks on his target and just goes at it? hts says so, i've only played one game with him where he was town and i was mafia, and he locked onto me. but idk if he just does it in general or was zeroed in on me because i was obvious LOL my issue is less that he's zeroed in on me and refusing to budge or explain himself, because townies and mafia both tunnel on targets all the time. my issue is the reasoning he's using, which i feel like doesn't come from the position of someone who doesn't have the truth and is trying to figure it out, but instead from the position of someone who does have the truth and is trying to obscure it from the others though if he's tunneling he has confirmation bias by definition. If that's what he's doing it's likely he might ignore the parts you're blaming him for simply because he's certain you're mafia and looking at it only one way: Try to point out things that don't fit with your townmeta because you're mafia anyways Both what you said and what I said come down to the same thing I feel. It could very well be malicious just the way I think locking on to just one target could be something malicious because that way he doesn't have to make up stuff about a lot of people and can just focus on one guy. But if he does tunnel a lot that's a moot point.
Nah, there's a key difference in what I'm observing - for him to start tunneling on someone he thinks is mafia he first has to have some reason for thinking it. If his initially-given reason for thinking I'm mafia doesn't actually make sense from a townie POV, it makes him significantly less likely to be town and tunneling.
Let's say it's d2 and he had done this awesome vote count analysis and made a decent argument for me being mafia. Say I afk'd with my vote on an outlier. He gives his case, then votes me, never reconsiders and starts turning everything I say into something suspicious. He's tunneling on me, but his fundamental argument that began the tunnel is sensible, so he's probably town tunneling.
In contrast, let's say it's d1 and he decided I'm mafia because I posted a picture of a puppy. (shit doesn't have to make sense just roll with it) He then never reconsiders and starting turning everything I say into something suspicious. He's tunneling again, but it starts to look a lot more like mafia tunneling to avoid having to engage the thread, because his original reason for suspecting me was bogus and he then starts adjusting his interpretations of everything I say to justify himself post-facto.
Obviously he's somewhere in the middle, but as I argued before, I think he's closer to the puppy side than the awesome side of the spectrum. His reasoning outright ignored half of his (two) data points without explanation, which is something I think is more likely to come from mafia than from town. He then proceeds to tunnel and misinterpret what I'm saying. The tunneling can go either way but the ignoring of the data points to make his first read can't.
|
All people wanting to lynch Liancourt, I urge you to please wait 3-5h until he wakes up before pushing his lynch. He is unable to defend himself because he's asleep.
Perspective please.
|
Liancourt, when you wake up, can you explain your reads a little more in depth for those of us who are not familiar with your play?
|
On January 27 2015 04:25 Half the Sky wrote:
Can someone clarify the term confirmation bias in this game? Or is that the same thing as tunnelling?
I see it used often, but I don't know what it means with respect to this game.
If you go into an attempt to interpret data with a conclusion about the data already in mind, you are more likely to misinterpret the data you're observing to fit the conclusion than you are to form the rationally optimal conclusion from the data (whatever that conclusion is). Typically this manifests in magnifying data points which support the conclusion while ignoring or discarding data points which don't. The process is unintentional, which is important; it's an innate cognitive bias rather than a deliberate effort.
I do have an issue with characterizing liancourt's read as confirmation bias, though, because it presupposes an honest mistake instead of a more insidious, deliberate misrepresentation. The reason I have an issue with that is because I already pointed this mistake out to liancourt and he ignored my pointing it out without issuing a retraction or even addressing it. An honest mistake would be acknowledged and his conclusion would be modified to account for it. This hasn't happened.
|
Eden, you have a very valid argument, and to be fair I scumread him for how he played last game because of this. I want to give him a chance to explain himself prior to punishing him for it.
|
On January 27 2015 04:36 Half the Sky wrote:
All people wanting to lynch Liancourt, I urge you to please wait 3-5h until he wakes up before pushing his lynch. He is unable to defend himself because he's asleep.
Perspective please.
He has one vote and I'm deliberately not voting him to make sure the lynch doesn't snowball and end the day hella early.
And while I understand he probably won't be online to defend himself for a little while, these aren't new accusations. I raised these points yesterday, to him, and he ignored me then. If you really want this lead explored, you need to stop pushing people away from raising these questions, because if this just subsides for a few hours he'll probably wake up, look at this discussion, shrug it off and not do anything.
|
On January 27 2015 04:36 Eden1892 wrote:Show nested quote +On January 27 2015 04:22 Toadesstern wrote:On January 27 2015 04:15 Eden1892 wrote:On January 27 2015 04:11 Toadesstern wrote:On January 27 2015 04:05 Eden1892 wrote:On January 26 2015 13:04 Eden1892 wrote:
Coming-down-Magic was fun but not for why you'd think it would be.
Anyway I am back and I ?hope? of sound mind and judgment.
I feel like my liancourt read was still pretty coherent. Maybe not in execu-- no, definitely not in execution, but at least in the logic. Let me try to explain it with a little more clarity of mind.
My play style was different from both games he's seen from me, and I was mafia in one and town in the other. At the very least he's obscuring the truth by citing Imperial as the inspiration for his read without making any mention of the fact that my play is different from the time he saw me play mafiasided. I feel like a townie would make mention of this and try to give the other player a fair shake instead of simply going "different from this town game therefore mafia!" while ignoring the equally-important "different from this mafia game therefore ???"
I also kinda felt like it was a cheap shot trying this kind of obscurantist read while I wasn't quite at full mental capacity, but to be fair it's not his fault that I decided to try new alcohol right before he gave his reads. Idk maybe it's unfair to hold that to him, but I felt like it was more sinister than a misunderstanding or error. I agree in that liancourt feels like he is picking his target and once he has picked that he's writing something about them (because he has to) rather than going with the flow. It should be the other way around, you find something weird and you talk about it no matter who it is, especially early on into d1. Is he usually the kind of guy that locks on his target and just goes at it? hts says so, i've only played one game with him where he was town and i was mafia, and he locked onto me. but idk if he just does it in general or was zeroed in on me because i was obvious LOL my issue is less that he's zeroed in on me and refusing to budge or explain himself, because townies and mafia both tunnel on targets all the time. my issue is the reasoning he's using, which i feel like doesn't come from the position of someone who doesn't have the truth and is trying to figure it out, but instead from the position of someone who does have the truth and is trying to obscure it from the others though if he's tunneling he has confirmation bias by definition. If that's what he's doing it's likely he might ignore the parts you're blaming him for simply because he's certain you're mafia and looking at it only one way: Try to point out things that don't fit with your townmeta because you're mafia anyways Both what you said and what I said come down to the same thing I feel. It could very well be malicious just the way I think locking on to just one target could be something malicious because that way he doesn't have to make up stuff about a lot of people and can just focus on one guy. But if he does tunnel a lot that's a moot point. Nah, there's a key difference in what I'm observing - for him to start tunneling on someone he thinks is mafia he first has to have some reason for thinking it. If his initially-given reason for thinking I'm mafia doesn't actually make sense from a townie POV, it makes him significantly less likely to be town and tunneling. Let's say it's d2 and he had done this awesome vote count analysis and made a decent argument for me being mafia. Say I afk'd with my vote on an outlier. He gives his case, then votes me, never reconsiders and starts turning everything I say into something suspicious. He's tunneling on me, but his fundamental argument that began the tunnel is sensible, so he's probably town tunneling. In contrast, let's say it's d1 and he decided I'm mafia because I posted a picture of a puppy. (shit doesn't have to make sense just roll with it) He then never reconsiders and starting turning everything I say into something suspicious. He's tunneling again, but it starts to look a lot more like mafia tunneling to avoid having to engage the thread, because his original reason for suspecting me was bogus and he then starts adjusting his interpretations of everything I say to justify himself post-facto. Obviously he's somewhere in the middle, but as I argued before, I think he's closer to the puppy side than the awesome side of the spectrum. His reasoning outright ignored half of his (two) data points without explanation, which is something I think is more likely to come from mafia than from town. He then proceeds to tunnel and misinterpret what I'm saying. The tunneling can go either way but the ignoring of the data points to make his first read can't.
yes I agree with that and it is part of the reasoning I haven't unvoted him.
|
On January 27 2015 04:36 Half the Sky wrote:
All people wanting to lynch Liancourt, I urge you to please wait 3-5h until he wakes up before pushing his lynch. He is unable to defend himself because he's asleep. And we should be lynching GB anyway
Perspective please.
FYP
|
Robik....I see what you did there.
I am also aware there are two scum. GB is and has been out of thread, and if he returns when I'm in thread, I will continue pushing him.
Eden, I know what you are trying to say, I'm not discouraging the questions, but am wary of anyone collapsing on him. The lead should be explored. If he wakes up and ignores them again, then I think voting him will be justified.
|
Grocery run for approx 1h, likely less. I will return.
|
I'd like to hear that read from Palmar. It's already "tonight"
|
also unvoting lian. If he's actually a tunnelish guy pressuring isn't the way to get something from him and will only make him more stubborn
##unvote
|
Robik, I see from your filter you have townreads on Eden and Palmar, scumreading GB as well.
What are your thoughts on everyone else in the thread?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
