|
I can't decide if I want my Null reads voting for me or not
##Mafia Problems
|
On June 06 2016 04:06 Jealous wrote:t Show nested quote +On June 06 2016 01:02 QuickTwist wrote:On June 05 2016 00:34 Tictock wrote:
Ok first thing I feel like talking about, reading based on activity.
Generally I find this to be an unreliable metric. There is some correlation, but it depends pretty heavily on the player in question. Scum can be tryhard and post a ton and town can loose interest or get busy and post very little.
My point?
Plynches based on activity tend to be coin flippy and giving someone a townread kus they are active and posting is weak at best.
It's generally better practice to try and look at the reasons and modivations behind when and why people are posting rather than try and use filter length as a metic. There are some exceptions such as scum-burn out, but even then activity alone is usually not your only indicator.
So the reads I've seen so far like "This dude made a hello post then left! Lynch the scum!" or "Well he's posting a lot so I think he's town" are pretty piss poor imo. IIoA What's that? Inconclusive indicator of alignment?? <- Just a guess. Show nested quote +On June 06 2016 02:47 QuickTwist wrote:
So apparently, I am getting lynched today for giving town a shit ton of stuff to talk about. OK. That's a false generalization of the arguments presented against you and your defeatist tone reminds me of how I posted when I was Mafia in one of my games way back when. This post to me reads like a weak and desperate last-minute defense.
I told you not to confirmation bias, but you continue to do it nontheless.
Very disappointing.
|
On June 06 2016 04:21 Jealous wrote:
As far as the other posters, I'm glad that people have started pushing some ideas around as we approach the deadline. Here are some thoughts I have on the game so far:
1. I think that a lot of people in this thread are grasping at straws right now, which is understandable because there isn't much to go off of on Day 1. I don't see any utterly clear alliances here as of yet. It seems like a lot of A thinks B is scum who thinks C is scum who thinks D is scum who thinks A is scum, or something of the like.
2. Given the seemingly inconclusive finger-pointing patters so far, we will have to wait to see the results of the lynch and who voted for whom as our next indicator. As of right now, if my hypothesis is correct and QT is scum, then the people who voted alongside him without much early justification would be kushmountains and Tumblewood, who have not changed their vote despite the player being changed out and I found their arguments for removing sqrt to be weak in the first place (inactivity plynch 2 hours into the game, if I recall correctly? on top of that, other people were just as inactive). This is the most alliance-y thing I can point at so far, but it's too early for me to concretely say I feel that they are scum.
3. Following this line of logic, I don't feel that the votes/inclinations on QT are indicative of a scum alliance because most people have shown their own reasons for voting for QT, most of which are valid, or at least more valid in my eyes than a Scott lynch. Of course, if QT flips town it is possible that one or two scum bandwagoned in order to ensure that he wins over Scott in the last voting push, but it will be hard to tell who. It's simply too early to speculate in specific terms about who would be scum or not in this hypothetical scenario, so I will wait until I see all of the votes and their results.
4. I haven't gotten a strong read on anyone, which is probably because I'm newbie. So far my "could be scum" list is:
1. Kushmountains
2. Tumblewood
3. Superbia (weak read on this, don't have much certainty at all)
4. Fecalfeast (too absent, regardless of whatever excuses he may have)
and of course QT.
Everyone else, as far as I can tell, is townie. Scott can be thrown up there as well for his relative inactivity but I don't think it's fair to judge as quickly because he only learned he was in the game less than 24 hours ago.
What if I said YOU could be scum if I turn out to be Town. Baseless you think?
Honestly it is really freaking annoying you haven't re-evaluated your read on me and somehow everything I do is scummy to you. That is the definition of confirmation bias.
So because you have chosen to no re-evaluate your read on me, even though my content has improved as the shit posting of day 1 decreases. can't help but think you are pushing an agenda.
Claiming VT.
##Vote: Jealous
|
On June 06 2016 04:53 Superbia wrote:
I dislike that everyone was scumreading quicky that quickly (lolol), but I also don't like how quicky has been playing.
Tbh, I have looked up a game of quicky on another site (town game), and quickly looked through it on Friday. He struck me as a decently clever town player. I'm kind of missing that feeling here. He feels very defensive and uncomfortable.
But I'm pussying out and voting kush.
What site? What game?
|
On June 06 2016 05:01 Jealous wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2016 04:45 QuickTwist wrote:On June 06 2016 04:21 Jealous wrote:
As far as the other posters, I'm glad that people have started pushing some ideas around as we approach the deadline. Here are some thoughts I have on the game so far:
1. I think that a lot of people in this thread are grasping at straws right now, which is understandable because there isn't much to go off of on Day 1. I don't see any utterly clear alliances here as of yet. It seems like a lot of A thinks B is scum who thinks C is scum who thinks D is scum who thinks A is scum, or something of the like.
2. Given the seemingly inconclusive finger-pointing patters so far, we will have to wait to see the results of the lynch and who voted for whom as our next indicator. As of right now, if my hypothesis is correct and QT is scum, then the people who voted alongside him without much early justification would be kushmountains and Tumblewood, who have not changed their vote despite the player being changed out and I found their arguments for removing sqrt to be weak in the first place (inactivity plynch 2 hours into the game, if I recall correctly? on top of that, other people were just as inactive). This is the most alliance-y thing I can point at so far, but it's too early for me to concretely say I feel that they are scum.
3. Following this line of logic, I don't feel that the votes/inclinations on QT are indicative of a scum alliance because most people have shown their own reasons for voting for QT, most of which are valid, or at least more valid in my eyes than a Scott lynch. Of course, if QT flips town it is possible that one or two scum bandwagoned in order to ensure that he wins over Scott in the last voting push, but it will be hard to tell who. It's simply too early to speculate in specific terms about who would be scum or not in this hypothetical scenario, so I will wait until I see all of the votes and their results.
4. I haven't gotten a strong read on anyone, which is probably because I'm newbie. So far my "could be scum" list is:
1. Kushmountains
2. Tumblewood
3. Superbia (weak read on this, don't have much certainty at all)
4. Fecalfeast (too absent, regardless of whatever excuses he may have)
and of course QT.
Everyone else, as far as I can tell, is townie. Scott can be thrown up there as well for his relative inactivity but I don't think it's fair to judge as quickly because he only learned he was in the game less than 24 hours ago. What if I said YOU could be scum if I turn out to be Town. Baseless you think? Honestly it is really freaking annoying you haven't re-evaluated your read on me and somehow everything I do is scummy to you. That is the definition of confirmation bias. So because you have chosen to no re-evaluate your read on me, even though my content has improved as the shit posting of day 1 decreases. can't help but think you are pushing an agenda. Claiming VT. ##Vote: Jealous Your only concrete argument as far as I recall is the one you just made, which is that I am pushing an agenda, so it's not entirely baseless. However, as objective as I can possibly be about this, I would have to say that your argument is weak. The majority of the town has read me as town, and for some that was a choice between scumreading me or you. I will concede that your posting has definitely improved since the first 24 hours. I see what you mean by confirmation bias now more clearly. I will justify by saying it is akin to how one approaches science: you formulate a hypothesis, run a test, gather some data, try to ascertain a conclusion. Then you present your article for peer review. So far peer review has corroborated my initial findings. The initial results will be put to the test after we see the flop. Although you claimed Blue PR since the first minutes of the game, which could've meant anything since you were shitposting a lot in that time, this is the first time you've claimed VT. MoosyDoosy also claimed VT, if I'm correct in assuming VT = Veteran, but his posting has been inconsistent too. I'm not saying this to make any sort of point, just doing stream of consciousness at the moment. I don't think it'd be wise of you to claim Blue PR if you actually were a Blue PR in the first minutes of the game, because scum would know that you are not scum, and thus when both the Day 1 lynch and the first scum kill are relative stabs in the dark, this seems like a poor strategy because it paints a target on your back. Of course, this could backfire and cause us to do scum's work for them, but I believe that there is no stronger case right now for anyone else and thus I will maintain my vote for you.
OMG you are so wrong its not even funny. VT stands for vanilla townie. You are lynching the most worthless role there is in this game based on confirmation bias. People should take a really good look at you tomorrow.
|
IIoA is Information Instead of Analysis, just so we're clear.
|
On June 06 2016 05:03 Superbia wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2016 05:01 QuickTwist wrote:On June 06 2016 04:53 Superbia wrote:
I dislike that everyone was scumreading quicky that quickly (lolol), but I also don't like how quicky has been playing.
Tbh, I have looked up a game of quicky on another site (town game), and quickly looked through it on Friday. He struck me as a decently clever town player. I'm kind of missing that feeling here. He feels very defensive and uncomfortable.
But I'm pussying out and voting kush. What site? What game? Uhh mafiamaniac "The Most Elite Pigeons (Medium Basic Mafia)".
Oh God, how the hell did you find that game? My play has changed substantially since then. I did a lot of reaction testing this game and it was viewed as scummy without people understanding what I was doing.
FML.
|
On June 06 2016 05:08 Tictock wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2016 04:53 Superbia wrote:
I dislike that everyone was scumreading quicky that quickly (lolol), but I also don't like how quicky has been playing.
Tbh, I have looked up a game of quicky on another site (town game), and quickly looked through it on Friday. He struck me as a decently clever town player. I'm kind of missing that feeling here. He feels very defensive and uncomfortable.
But I'm pussying out and voting kush. I kinda agree, the general flow of the game and how the votes are going seem to signal a very low key scum team that is probably not up for lynch atm. QT is also giving me vibes that he's not really to concerned with the pressure atm which isn't really in line with a try-hard scum playing the activity game. I'm wondering if he's a player more like Moosy who's play can be pretty questionable and is lynchbait. While he's kinda all over the place and I have a hard time tracking much line of thought he is being pretty consistent about putting stuff out there. Is your desire to lynch kush based on meta, or is it more policy due to him being pretty lackluster and only pushing a plynch himself? I think I might be more keen on lynching Skynx myself.
Funny story, my first 16 games I was lynched day 1 eight times. When people don't understand what I do I get lynched, simple as that.
|
On June 06 2016 05:09 Jealous wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2016 05:05 QuickTwist wrote:On June 06 2016 05:01 Jealous wrote:On June 06 2016 04:45 QuickTwist wrote:On June 06 2016 04:21 Jealous wrote:
As far as the other posters, I'm glad that people have started pushing some ideas around as we approach the deadline. Here are some thoughts I have on the game so far:
1. I think that a lot of people in this thread are grasping at straws right now, which is understandable because there isn't much to go off of on Day 1. I don't see any utterly clear alliances here as of yet. It seems like a lot of A thinks B is scum who thinks C is scum who thinks D is scum who thinks A is scum, or something of the like.
2. Given the seemingly inconclusive finger-pointing patters so far, we will have to wait to see the results of the lynch and who voted for whom as our next indicator. As of right now, if my hypothesis is correct and QT is scum, then the people who voted alongside him without much early justification would be kushmountains and Tumblewood, who have not changed their vote despite the player being changed out and I found their arguments for removing sqrt to be weak in the first place (inactivity plynch 2 hours into the game, if I recall correctly? on top of that, other people were just as inactive). This is the most alliance-y thing I can point at so far, but it's too early for me to concretely say I feel that they are scum.
3. Following this line of logic, I don't feel that the votes/inclinations on QT are indicative of a scum alliance because most people have shown their own reasons for voting for QT, most of which are valid, or at least more valid in my eyes than a Scott lynch. Of course, if QT flips town it is possible that one or two scum bandwagoned in order to ensure that he wins over Scott in the last voting push, but it will be hard to tell who. It's simply too early to speculate in specific terms about who would be scum or not in this hypothetical scenario, so I will wait until I see all of the votes and their results.
4. I haven't gotten a strong read on anyone, which is probably because I'm newbie. So far my "could be scum" list is:
1. Kushmountains
2. Tumblewood
3. Superbia (weak read on this, don't have much certainty at all)
4. Fecalfeast (too absent, regardless of whatever excuses he may have)
and of course QT.
Everyone else, as far as I can tell, is townie. Scott can be thrown up there as well for his relative inactivity but I don't think it's fair to judge as quickly because he only learned he was in the game less than 24 hours ago. What if I said YOU could be scum if I turn out to be Town. Baseless you think? Honestly it is really freaking annoying you haven't re-evaluated your read on me and somehow everything I do is scummy to you. That is the definition of confirmation bias. So because you have chosen to no re-evaluate your read on me, even though my content has improved as the shit posting of day 1 decreases. can't help but think you are pushing an agenda. Claiming VT. ##Vote: Jealous Your only concrete argument as far as I recall is the one you just made, which is that I am pushing an agenda, so it's not entirely baseless. However, as objective as I can possibly be about this, I would have to say that your argument is weak. The majority of the town has read me as town, and for some that was a choice between scumreading me or you. I will concede that your posting has definitely improved since the first 24 hours. I see what you mean by confirmation bias now more clearly. I will justify by saying it is akin to how one approaches science: you formulate a hypothesis, run a test, gather some data, try to ascertain a conclusion. Then you present your article for peer review. So far peer review has corroborated my initial findings. The initial results will be put to the test after we see the flop. Although you claimed Blue PR since the first minutes of the game, which could've meant anything since you were shitposting a lot in that time, this is the first time you've claimed VT. MoosyDoosy also claimed VT, if I'm correct in assuming VT = Veteran, but his posting has been inconsistent too. I'm not saying this to make any sort of point, just doing stream of consciousness at the moment. I don't think it'd be wise of you to claim Blue PR if you actually were a Blue PR in the first minutes of the game, because scum would know that you are not scum, and thus when both the Day 1 lynch and the first scum kill are relative stabs in the dark, this seems like a poor strategy because it paints a target on your back. Of course, this could backfire and cause us to do scum's work for them, but I believe that there is no stronger case right now for anyone else and thus I will maintain my vote for you. OMG you are so wrong its not even funny. VT stands for vanilla townie. You are lynching the most worthless role there is in this game based on confirmation bias. People should take a really good look at you tomorrow. Yea, I made that mistake, again (posted this on the previous page), please disregard that last line of reasoning. However, this does not make the rest of the post "OMG so wrong." I stand by it. If you're saying the truth and you flip VT tomorrow, that would be unfortunate but not as bad as you being a blue PR, so that's taken a load off my shoulders ^^ If you're lying and you're scum, then that would be great and I'd be a boss. I'm liking this scenario.
What does the word RE-EVALUATE mean to you?
|
On June 06 2016 05:10 Superbia wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2016 05:08 QuickTwist wrote:On June 06 2016 05:03 Superbia wrote:On June 06 2016 05:01 QuickTwist wrote:On June 06 2016 04:53 Superbia wrote:
I dislike that everyone was scumreading quicky that quickly (lolol), but I also don't like how quicky has been playing.
Tbh, I have looked up a game of quicky on another site (town game), and quickly looked through it on Friday. He struck me as a decently clever town player. I'm kind of missing that feeling here. He feels very defensive and uncomfortable.
But I'm pussying out and voting kush. What site? What game? Uhh mafiamaniac "The Most Elite Pigeons (Medium Basic Mafia)". Oh God, how the hell did you find that game? My play has changed substantially since then. I did a lot of reaction testing this game and it was viewed as scummy without people understanding what I was doing. FML. Google. If you link me your more recent games I may look at them at some point in the future. If either of us are still alive then.
No thanks, I'll take the lynch. I can't help but think Jealous thought I was PR which is why he was so strong on me getting lynched.
|
On June 06 2016 05:12 Jealous wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2016 05:10 QuickTwist wrote:On June 06 2016 05:08 Tictock wrote:On June 06 2016 04:53 Superbia wrote:
I dislike that everyone was scumreading quicky that quickly (lolol), but I also don't like how quicky has been playing.
Tbh, I have looked up a game of quicky on another site (town game), and quickly looked through it on Friday. He struck me as a decently clever town player. I'm kind of missing that feeling here. He feels very defensive and uncomfortable.
But I'm pussying out and voting kush. I kinda agree, the general flow of the game and how the votes are going seem to signal a very low key scum team that is probably not up for lynch atm. QT is also giving me vibes that he's not really to concerned with the pressure atm which isn't really in line with a try-hard scum playing the activity game. I'm wondering if he's a player more like Moosy who's play can be pretty questionable and is lynchbait. While he's kinda all over the place and I have a hard time tracking much line of thought he is being pretty consistent about putting stuff out there. Is your desire to lynch kush based on meta, or is it more policy due to him being pretty lackluster and only pushing a plynch himself? I think I might be more keen on lynching Skynx myself. Funny story, my first 16 games I was lynched day 1 eight times. When people don't understand what I do I get lynched, simple as that. Care to reveal how many of those times you were scum?
I don't recall. My second game I was no lynched day one and I was scum. an unproportionate amount of times I was Town in my first 16 games though.
|
On June 06 2016 05:14 Tictock wrote:
QT what was your reasoning for claiming VT now?
I'm getting lynched, Duh.
|
On June 06 2016 05:21 Jealous wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2016 05:18 Fecalfeast wrote:On June 06 2016 05:09 Jealous wrote:On June 06 2016 05:05 QuickTwist wrote:On June 06 2016 05:01 Jealous wrote:On June 06 2016 04:45 QuickTwist wrote:On June 06 2016 04:21 Jealous wrote:
As far as the other posters, I'm glad that people have started pushing some ideas around as we approach the deadline. Here are some thoughts I have on the game so far:
1. I think that a lot of people in this thread are grasping at straws right now, which is understandable because there isn't much to go off of on Day 1. I don't see any utterly clear alliances here as of yet. It seems like a lot of A thinks B is scum who thinks C is scum who thinks D is scum who thinks A is scum, or something of the like.
2. Given the seemingly inconclusive finger-pointing patters so far, we will have to wait to see the results of the lynch and who voted for whom as our next indicator. As of right now, if my hypothesis is correct and QT is scum, then the people who voted alongside him without much early justification would be kushmountains and Tumblewood, who have not changed their vote despite the player being changed out and I found their arguments for removing sqrt to be weak in the first place (inactivity plynch 2 hours into the game, if I recall correctly? on top of that, other people were just as inactive). This is the most alliance-y thing I can point at so far, but it's too early for me to concretely say I feel that they are scum.
3. Following this line of logic, I don't feel that the votes/inclinations on QT are indicative of a scum alliance because most people have shown their own reasons for voting for QT, most of which are valid, or at least more valid in my eyes than a Scott lynch. Of course, if QT flips town it is possible that one or two scum bandwagoned in order to ensure that he wins over Scott in the last voting push, but it will be hard to tell who. It's simply too early to speculate in specific terms about who would be scum or not in this hypothetical scenario, so I will wait until I see all of the votes and their results.
4. I haven't gotten a strong read on anyone, which is probably because I'm newbie. So far my "could be scum" list is:
1. Kushmountains
2. Tumblewood
3. Superbia (weak read on this, don't have much certainty at all)
4. Fecalfeast (too absent, regardless of whatever excuses he may have)
and of course QT.
Everyone else, as far as I can tell, is townie. Scott can be thrown up there as well for his relative inactivity but I don't think it's fair to judge as quickly because he only learned he was in the game less than 24 hours ago. What if I said YOU could be scum if I turn out to be Town. Baseless you think? Honestly it is really freaking annoying you haven't re-evaluated your read on me and somehow everything I do is scummy to you. That is the definition of confirmation bias. So because you have chosen to no re-evaluate your read on me, even though my content has improved as the shit posting of day 1 decreases. can't help but think you are pushing an agenda. Claiming VT. ##Vote: Jealous Your only concrete argument as far as I recall is the one you just made, which is that I am pushing an agenda, so it's not entirely baseless. However, as objective as I can possibly be about this, I would have to say that your argument is weak. The majority of the town has read me as town, and for some that was a choice between scumreading me or you. I will concede that your posting has definitely improved since the first 24 hours. I see what you mean by confirmation bias now more clearly. I will justify by saying it is akin to how one approaches science: you formulate a hypothesis, run a test, gather some data, try to ascertain a conclusion. Then you present your article for peer review. So far peer review has corroborated my initial findings. The initial results will be put to the test after we see the flop. Although you claimed Blue PR since the first minutes of the game, which could've meant anything since you were shitposting a lot in that time, this is the first time you've claimed VT. MoosyDoosy also claimed VT, if I'm correct in assuming VT = Veteran, but his posting has been inconsistent too. I'm not saying this to make any sort of point, just doing stream of consciousness at the moment. I don't think it'd be wise of you to claim Blue PR if you actually were a Blue PR in the first minutes of the game, because scum would know that you are not scum, and thus when both the Day 1 lynch and the first scum kill are relative stabs in the dark, this seems like a poor strategy because it paints a target on your back. Of course, this could backfire and cause us to do scum's work for them, but I believe that there is no stronger case right now for anyone else and thus I will maintain my vote for you. OMG you are so wrong its not even funny. VT stands for vanilla townie. You are lynching the most worthless role there is in this game based on confirmation bias. People should take a really good look at you tomorrow. Yea, I made that mistake, again (posted this on the previous page), please disregard that last line of reasoning. However, this does not make the rest of the post "OMG so wrong." I stand by it. If you're saying the truth and you flip VT tomorrow, that would be unfortunate but not as bad as you being a blue PR, so that's taken a load off my shoulders ^^ If you're lying and you're scum, then that would be great and I'd be a boss. I'm liking this scenario. I really don't like this line of thinking. Yeah of course it's better to kill vt than blue but if you think there's a decent chance he is town why are you still so adamant about killing qt? I don't think there is a decent chance. I only said "if." I'm adamant about killing him because he is the only scumread I have any certainty about and so I went after it.
Then you suck at this game.
|
On June 06 2016 05:34 Tictock wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2016 05:15 QuickTwist wrote:On June 06 2016 05:14 Tictock wrote:
QT what was your reasoning for claiming VT now? I'm getting lynched, Duh. It's just... if you are VT and decided to open the game by claiming Blue (having a PR) then I can only assume you did so to create some discussion and in a very off chance draw mafia KP. If it looks like you are getting lynched then I'm not sure why you would change your plans there and claim VT instead. Like if I were in your shoes I'd go full fake claim to try and get the wagon off me and draw mafia KP tonight. Chance you get lynched anyways but hey you are only VT, and if you convince people you are blue you have a good chance at drawing KP. Sure you are setting yourself up to die one way or another, but if you wanted to play the long game you probably don't open with a fake claim to be a PR. So claiming VT now as an "hey don't lynch me I'm just town and not important" doesn't really make sense. It seems more like a play for survival especially since you literally said, Show nested quote +On June 06 2016 05:05 QuickTwist wrote:On June 06 2016 05:01 Jealous wrote:On June 06 2016 04:45 QuickTwist wrote:On June 06 2016 04:21 Jealous wrote:
As far as the other posters, I'm glad that people have started pushing some ideas around as we approach the deadline. Here are some thoughts I have on the game so far:
1. I think that a lot of people in this thread are grasping at straws right now, which is understandable because there isn't much to go off of on Day 1. I don't see any utterly clear alliances here as of yet. It seems like a lot of A thinks B is scum who thinks C is scum who thinks D is scum who thinks A is scum, or something of the like.
2. Given the seemingly inconclusive finger-pointing patters so far, we will have to wait to see the results of the lynch and who voted for whom as our next indicator. As of right now, if my hypothesis is correct and QT is scum, then the people who voted alongside him without much early justification would be kushmountains and Tumblewood, who have not changed their vote despite the player being changed out and I found their arguments for removing sqrt to be weak in the first place (inactivity plynch 2 hours into the game, if I recall correctly? on top of that, other people were just as inactive). This is the most alliance-y thing I can point at so far, but it's too early for me to concretely say I feel that they are scum.
3. Following this line of logic, I don't feel that the votes/inclinations on QT are indicative of a scum alliance because most people have shown their own reasons for voting for QT, most of which are valid, or at least more valid in my eyes than a Scott lynch. Of course, if QT flips town it is possible that one or two scum bandwagoned in order to ensure that he wins over Scott in the last voting push, but it will be hard to tell who. It's simply too early to speculate in specific terms about who would be scum or not in this hypothetical scenario, so I will wait until I see all of the votes and their results.
4. I haven't gotten a strong read on anyone, which is probably because I'm newbie. So far my "could be scum" list is:
1. Kushmountains
2. Tumblewood
3. Superbia (weak read on this, don't have much certainty at all)
4. Fecalfeast (too absent, regardless of whatever excuses he may have)
and of course QT.
Everyone else, as far as I can tell, is townie. Scott can be thrown up there as well for his relative inactivity but I don't think it's fair to judge as quickly because he only learned he was in the game less than 24 hours ago. What if I said YOU could be scum if I turn out to be Town. Baseless you think? Honestly it is really freaking annoying you haven't re-evaluated your read on me and somehow everything I do is scummy to you. That is the definition of confirmation bias. So because you have chosen to no re-evaluate your read on me, even though my content has improved as the shit posting of day 1 decreases. can't help but think you are pushing an agenda. Claiming VT. ##Vote: Jealous Your only concrete argument as far as I recall is the one you just made, which is that I am pushing an agenda, so it's not entirely baseless. However, as objective as I can possibly be about this, I would have to say that your argument is weak. The majority of the town has read me as town, and for some that was a choice between scumreading me or you. I will concede that your posting has definitely improved since the first 24 hours. I see what you mean by confirmation bias now more clearly. I will justify by saying it is akin to how one approaches science: you formulate a hypothesis, run a test, gather some data, try to ascertain a conclusion. Then you present your article for peer review. So far peer review has corroborated my initial findings. The initial results will be put to the test after we see the flop. Although you claimed Blue PR since the first minutes of the game, which could've meant anything since you were shitposting a lot in that time, this is the first time you've claimed VT. MoosyDoosy also claimed VT, if I'm correct in assuming VT = Veteran, but his posting has been inconsistent too. I'm not saying this to make any sort of point, just doing stream of consciousness at the moment. I don't think it'd be wise of you to claim Blue PR if you actually were a Blue PR in the first minutes of the game, because scum would know that you are not scum, and thus when both the Day 1 lynch and the first scum kill are relative stabs in the dark, this seems like a poor strategy because it paints a target on your back. Of course, this could backfire and cause us to do scum's work for them, but I believe that there is no stronger case right now for anyone else and thus I will maintain my vote for you. OMG you are so wrong its not even funny. VT stands for vanilla townie. You are lynching the most worthless role there is in this game based on confirmation bias. People should take a really good look at you tomorrow. Which just says to me "Hey don't hurt me, I'm not important"
Fantastic logic. One problem though. What happens when we lynch a different townie today and then people find out my claim is bogus so I get lynched anyways? I rather have 1 town die than two, its that simple.
|
On June 06 2016 06:39 Tictock wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2016 05:42 QuickTwist wrote:On June 06 2016 05:34 Tictock wrote:On June 06 2016 05:15 QuickTwist wrote:On June 06 2016 05:14 Tictock wrote:
QT what was your reasoning for claiming VT now? I'm getting lynched, Duh. It's just... if you are VT and decided to open the game by claiming Blue (having a PR) then I can only assume you did so to create some discussion and in a very off chance draw mafia KP. If it looks like you are getting lynched then I'm not sure why you would change your plans there and claim VT instead. Like if I were in your shoes I'd go full fake claim to try and get the wagon off me and draw mafia KP tonight. Chance you get lynched anyways but hey you are only VT, and if you convince people you are blue you have a good chance at drawing KP. Sure you are setting yourself up to die one way or another, but if you wanted to play the long game you probably don't open with a fake claim to be a PR. So claiming VT now as an "hey don't lynch me I'm just town and not important" doesn't really make sense. It seems more like a play for survival especially since you literally said, On June 06 2016 05:05 QuickTwist wrote:On June 06 2016 05:01 Jealous wrote:On June 06 2016 04:45 QuickTwist wrote:On June 06 2016 04:21 Jealous wrote:
As far as the other posters, I'm glad that people have started pushing some ideas around as we approach the deadline. Here are some thoughts I have on the game so far:
1. I think that a lot of people in this thread are grasping at straws right now, which is understandable because there isn't much to go off of on Day 1. I don't see any utterly clear alliances here as of yet. It seems like a lot of A thinks B is scum who thinks C is scum who thinks D is scum who thinks A is scum, or something of the like.
2. Given the seemingly inconclusive finger-pointing patters so far, we will have to wait to see the results of the lynch and who voted for whom as our next indicator. As of right now, if my hypothesis is correct and QT is scum, then the people who voted alongside him without much early justification would be kushmountains and Tumblewood, who have not changed their vote despite the player being changed out and I found their arguments for removing sqrt to be weak in the first place (inactivity plynch 2 hours into the game, if I recall correctly? on top of that, other people were just as inactive). This is the most alliance-y thing I can point at so far, but it's too early for me to concretely say I feel that they are scum.
3. Following this line of logic, I don't feel that the votes/inclinations on QT are indicative of a scum alliance because most people have shown their own reasons for voting for QT, most of which are valid, or at least more valid in my eyes than a Scott lynch. Of course, if QT flips town it is possible that one or two scum bandwagoned in order to ensure that he wins over Scott in the last voting push, but it will be hard to tell who. It's simply too early to speculate in specific terms about who would be scum or not in this hypothetical scenario, so I will wait until I see all of the votes and their results.
4. I haven't gotten a strong read on anyone, which is probably because I'm newbie. So far my "could be scum" list is:
1. Kushmountains
2. Tumblewood
3. Superbia (weak read on this, don't have much certainty at all)
4. Fecalfeast (too absent, regardless of whatever excuses he may have)
and of course QT.
Everyone else, as far as I can tell, is townie. Scott can be thrown up there as well for his relative inactivity but I don't think it's fair to judge as quickly because he only learned he was in the game less than 24 hours ago. What if I said YOU could be scum if I turn out to be Town. Baseless you think? Honestly it is really freaking annoying you haven't re-evaluated your read on me and somehow everything I do is scummy to you. That is the definition of confirmation bias. So because you have chosen to no re-evaluate your read on me, even though my content has improved as the shit posting of day 1 decreases. can't help but think you are pushing an agenda. Claiming VT. ##Vote: Jealous Your only concrete argument as far as I recall is the one you just made, which is that I am pushing an agenda, so it's not entirely baseless. However, as objective as I can possibly be about this, I would have to say that your argument is weak. The majority of the town has read me as town, and for some that was a choice between scumreading me or you. I will concede that your posting has definitely improved since the first 24 hours. I see what you mean by confirmation bias now more clearly. I will justify by saying it is akin to how one approaches science: you formulate a hypothesis, run a test, gather some data, try to ascertain a conclusion. Then you present your article for peer review. So far peer review has corroborated my initial findings. The initial results will be put to the test after we see the flop. Although you claimed Blue PR since the first minutes of the game, which could've meant anything since you were shitposting a lot in that time, this is the first time you've claimed VT. MoosyDoosy also claimed VT, if I'm correct in assuming VT = Veteran, but his posting has been inconsistent too. I'm not saying this to make any sort of point, just doing stream of consciousness at the moment. I don't think it'd be wise of you to claim Blue PR if you actually were a Blue PR in the first minutes of the game, because scum would know that you are not scum, and thus when both the Day 1 lynch and the first scum kill are relative stabs in the dark, this seems like a poor strategy because it paints a target on your back. Of course, this could backfire and cause us to do scum's work for them, but I believe that there is no stronger case right now for anyone else and thus I will maintain my vote for you. OMG you are so wrong its not even funny. VT stands for vanilla townie. You are lynching the most worthless role there is in this game based on confirmation bias. People should take a really good look at you tomorrow. Which just says to me "Hey don't hurt me, I'm not important" Fantastic logic. One problem though. What happens when we lynch a different townie today and then people find out my claim is bogus so I get lynched anyways? I rather have 1 town die than two, its that simple. Why are you assuming we'd lynch a townie if we don't lynch you?
Who is assuming anything here? I said what happens when, not if we don't lynch me we lynch a townie.
|
On June 06 2016 07:26 Jealous wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2016 06:52 Fecalfeast wrote:On June 06 2016 06:49 Jealous wrote:On June 06 2016 06:47 Jealous wrote:On June 06 2016 06:40 Skynx wrote:On June 06 2016 00:00 QuickTwist wrote:
OK I reread the thread, here are my reads:
Skynx and Ticktock are far and away my strongest scum reads and I really want one of them to get lynched today. I would be OK with a scott lynch.
The Town AF people are:
Emperorchampion
blkcoffee
beentheredonethat
Tumblewood
These are the people I will not be voting all game. After posting this why would you vote Jealous? Scott was tied with you for a long time and you making an impossible case 5 hours befour lynch? If you're really VT your moves dont make any sense. To be quite honest, one possible reason is if he is in fact town, and thus suspects me of being mafia, so if he flips town he will further cast suspicion on me by voting for me. Someone already mentioned that if he flips town, they will think I am scum. This made me doubt he was scum for the first time in a while, because it makes sense as a townie move to me and would be guaranteed to have impact post-mortem whereas a vote for Scott would be seen as him trying to save his hide and might not even work considering how many people have been leaning scum on QT. The other possible reason is because according to him I "suck at this game." EBWOP Even though it made me doubt he was scum, it would be doubly foolish for me to change my vote, on top of the fact that I still see him as the #1 candidate. I understand your reasoning here but why are you answering for your #1 scumread? Because I felt like it would be better coming from me than it would be coming from him.
Read: because it gives me townie points when I know he is going to flip Townie.
|
On June 06 2016 07:34 Tictock wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2016 07:01 QuickTwist wrote:On June 06 2016 06:39 Tictock wrote:On June 06 2016 05:42 QuickTwist wrote:On June 06 2016 05:34 Tictock wrote:On June 06 2016 05:15 QuickTwist wrote:On June 06 2016 05:14 Tictock wrote:
QT what was your reasoning for claiming VT now? I'm getting lynched, Duh. It's just... if you are VT and decided to open the game by claiming Blue (having a PR) then I can only assume you did so to create some discussion and in a very off chance draw mafia KP. If it looks like you are getting lynched then I'm not sure why you would change your plans there and claim VT instead. Like if I were in your shoes I'd go full fake claim to try and get the wagon off me and draw mafia KP tonight. Chance you get lynched anyways but hey you are only VT, and if you convince people you are blue you have a good chance at drawing KP. Sure you are setting yourself up to die one way or another, but if you wanted to play the long game you probably don't open with a fake claim to be a PR. So claiming VT now as an "hey don't lynch me I'm just town and not important" doesn't really make sense. It seems more like a play for survival especially since you literally said, On June 06 2016 05:05 QuickTwist wrote:On June 06 2016 05:01 Jealous wrote:On June 06 2016 04:45 QuickTwist wrote:On June 06 2016 04:21 Jealous wrote:
As far as the other posters, I'm glad that people have started pushing some ideas around as we approach the deadline. Here are some thoughts I have on the game so far:
1. I think that a lot of people in this thread are grasping at straws right now, which is understandable because there isn't much to go off of on Day 1. I don't see any utterly clear alliances here as of yet. It seems like a lot of A thinks B is scum who thinks C is scum who thinks D is scum who thinks A is scum, or something of the like.
2. Given the seemingly inconclusive finger-pointing patters so far, we will have to wait to see the results of the lynch and who voted for whom as our next indicator. As of right now, if my hypothesis is correct and QT is scum, then the people who voted alongside him without much early justification would be kushmountains and Tumblewood, who have not changed their vote despite the player being changed out and I found their arguments for removing sqrt to be weak in the first place (inactivity plynch 2 hours into the game, if I recall correctly? on top of that, other people were just as inactive). This is the most alliance-y thing I can point at so far, but it's too early for me to concretely say I feel that they are scum.
3. Following this line of logic, I don't feel that the votes/inclinations on QT are indicative of a scum alliance because most people have shown their own reasons for voting for QT, most of which are valid, or at least more valid in my eyes than a Scott lynch. Of course, if QT flips town it is possible that one or two scum bandwagoned in order to ensure that he wins over Scott in the last voting push, but it will be hard to tell who. It's simply too early to speculate in specific terms about who would be scum or not in this hypothetical scenario, so I will wait until I see all of the votes and their results.
4. I haven't gotten a strong read on anyone, which is probably because I'm newbie. So far my "could be scum" list is:
1. Kushmountains
2. Tumblewood
3. Superbia (weak read on this, don't have much certainty at all)
4. Fecalfeast (too absent, regardless of whatever excuses he may have)
and of course QT.
Everyone else, as far as I can tell, is townie. Scott can be thrown up there as well for his relative inactivity but I don't think it's fair to judge as quickly because he only learned he was in the game less than 24 hours ago. What if I said YOU could be scum if I turn out to be Town. Baseless you think? Honestly it is really freaking annoying you haven't re-evaluated your read on me and somehow everything I do is scummy to you. That is the definition of confirmation bias. So because you have chosen to no re-evaluate your read on me, even though my content has improved as the shit posting of day 1 decreases. can't help but think you are pushing an agenda. Claiming VT. ##Vote: Jealous Your only concrete argument as far as I recall is the one you just made, which is that I am pushing an agenda, so it's not entirely baseless. However, as objective as I can possibly be about this, I would have to say that your argument is weak. The majority of the town has read me as town, and for some that was a choice between scumreading me or you. I will concede that your posting has definitely improved since the first 24 hours. I see what you mean by confirmation bias now more clearly. I will justify by saying it is akin to how one approaches science: you formulate a hypothesis, run a test, gather some data, try to ascertain a conclusion. Then you present your article for peer review. So far peer review has corroborated my initial findings. The initial results will be put to the test after we see the flop. Although you claimed Blue PR since the first minutes of the game, which could've meant anything since you were shitposting a lot in that time, this is the first time you've claimed VT. MoosyDoosy also claimed VT, if I'm correct in assuming VT = Veteran, but his posting has been inconsistent too. I'm not saying this to make any sort of point, just doing stream of consciousness at the moment. I don't think it'd be wise of you to claim Blue PR if you actually were a Blue PR in the first minutes of the game, because scum would know that you are not scum, and thus when both the Day 1 lynch and the first scum kill are relative stabs in the dark, this seems like a poor strategy because it paints a target on your back. Of course, this could backfire and cause us to do scum's work for them, but I believe that there is no stronger case right now for anyone else and thus I will maintain my vote for you. OMG you are so wrong its not even funny. VT stands for vanilla townie. You are lynching the most worthless role there is in this game based on confirmation bias. People should take a really good look at you tomorrow. Which just says to me "Hey don't hurt me, I'm not important" Fantastic logic. One problem though. What happens when we lynch a different townie today and then people find out my claim is bogus so I get lynched anyways? I rather have 1 town die than two, its that simple. Why are you assuming we'd lynch a townie if we don't lynch you? Who is assuming anything here? I said what happens when, not if we don't lynch me we lynch a townie. Well if you are town, and we move off you then 3/9 chance that who we move to is scum. Hopefully with all your flailing and reaction testing you have a pretty decent idea who is scum and can help move town onto a good lynch given your perspective. I don't really see you doing that, you're read on Jealous is pretty obviously just OMGUS + Show Spoiler + or put more simply you are throwing the same style of confirmation bias scum read you are accusing Jealous of having on you back at him. Also you don't seem to be pushing it that hard. It's also hard to believe you have solid scumreads when your response to explaining why you scum read me was to quote a few of my posts with one liners. So... yea I'm having a hard time seeing why we shouldn't just go ahead and lynch you QT.
Don't give me that 3/9 chance that is shit and you know it. How am I OMGUSIng/confirmation biasing when I have evolved my read on that slot a shit ton? I did a filter of you and saw shit, that's why you are a scum read.
Fucking lynch me then. *throws hands in the air*
|
Ticktock has ensured my lynch. Pay attention to this. His vote on Obv Town is stalling content near EOD.
|
GG team. Glad I could play in this game even though I had pretty much no effect on it.
|
On June 19 2016 07:20 Tictock wrote:
I actually hope you decide to play again, you were really active and seemed to be pretty interested in getting advice on how to improve in Obs.
Though there are plenty of players around here who will want to lynch you with the playstyle you have. Eventually people will learn to read you a little better and if you keep at it (especially taking advantage of coaching, obs, and shadowing if you would like) you'll find your own play improving.
Oh, I'll play here again, no doubts there. Still don't have a feel for how your guys do things here well enough yet. Don't expect the same kind of spastic play though, this game I was doing something different. Games differ for me both depending on where I go and how I play. Sometimes I'm even considered a town leader. It just depends on what my mood is towards that particular game. My perspective is often random on how I approach a game, sometimes I don't post much (rarely, but the trend is shifting to go that way more recently) and sometimes I am like how I was this game, just depends how the winds are blowing for me.
How about I link a game so people can see a little more of my play? A Midnight Sun. this was a good game for me. My biggest mistake was changing who I read as Scum at the end. Scum had nothing but terrible things to say about me in their Chat.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
