Open 901 - Normal Idea Mafia Redux - Postgame

[JacksonVirgo]

As of this message I will be ignoring you if you keep going down this route

[JacksonVirgo]

Jacob being protected? Laughable

[JacksonVirgo]

And I'm saying, I looked up all the roles that could affect my role and said it was roughly an 8% chance. Stop role fishing

pedit: I don't really care what you're calling out, it's meaningless

[JacksonVirgo]

I am not claiming.

[JacksonVirgo]

@Black

why do you think STD is a wolf? PoE?

[JacksonVirgo]

And I'm saying, I looked up all the roles that could affect my role and said it was roughly an 8% chance. Stop role fishing

pedit: I don't really care what you're calling out, it's meaningless

And how could we trust that it is a comprehensive list?

Does it matter? As I said to Jacob himself, the chance was >rand to a substantial degree and I scum-read him anyway as did many others. You're barking up the wrong tree

[JacksonVirgo]

Btw I hope you're aware that you're really never getting me to claim, so you're wasting your breathe if you're still trying

[JacksonVirgo]

And wasting my time, I would rather be talking about literally anything else than a useless topic such as this

[JacksonVirgo]

Just out of respect for you I'm going to be as blunt as I can. You can argue any of this, but this is like core fundamental beliefs that I have so it's not going to budge unless you smack me with earth shattering logic. I'm not claiming as I don't see the need to and keeping my role ambiguous only benefits the Town, I'm not claiming just because you voted me and keep asking for it. I'll claim when I feel it benefits more than I lose by doing so, and right now is not that time.

If you don't like that then sorry, but it's what I'm doing.

[JacksonVirgo]

Who was scum reading him?

Majority of people that had voted them because of the guilty had claimed that they were in their scum pile.

It might not. The only thing that might matter is that it's more likely that you are >rand scum than you would be >rand town with a framed result.

Great, this is a start of you starting to actually push me for me rather than asking for my claim. Why am I >rand scum? The soft-guilty and how people treated it were a direct view at the views that people had on them. If I had instead failed my action on someone people had thought was town, it would have been met with higher levels of scrutiny. What benefit would scum!JV have to fake a red-check on a Town on day 2 of all days

[JacksonVirgo]

Jackson, you don't need to claim. You need to answer for why you are more likely to be town than scum despite you killing a townie.

I don't need your blessing to not claim lmao. I don't need to answer anything, the burden of proof first lands on the person who is pushing not who is pushed

[JacksonVirgo]

If you want a proper response, ask more focused questions. I'm not arguing "You're scummy, you gotta answer me as to why you're not scummy"

[JacksonVirgo]

I need to take a step back because I'm getting quite apathetic towards you and I don't want to be

[JacksonVirgo]

Ima make a drink and come back, love you <3

[JacksonVirgo]

That being said, the way you have been defensive is awfully familiar to scumJackson in Mafia has a Cop

Mhm and now compare it to my just closed game where I was overly nice to everybody. Meta bad

[JacksonVirgo]

I know this was directed at Jake lol, but love you too.

<3 <3

[JacksonVirgo]

I'm just frustrated that I keep saying that I'm not claiming and he keeps trying to argue or push that I should. It feels like I was a broken record

[JacksonVirgo]

I forgot to go make my drink

[JacksonVirgo]

Sure, I'm hard-claiming this. If I move, kill me on sight

[JacksonVirgo]

Who was scum reading him?

Majority of people that had voted them because of the guilty had claimed that they were in their scum pile.

It might not. The only thing that might matter is that it's more likely that you are >rand scum than you would be >rand town with a framed result.

Great, this is a start of you starting to actually push me for me rather than asking for my claim. Why am I >rand scum? The soft-guilty and how people treated it were a direct view at the views that people had on them. If I had instead failed my action on someone people had thought was town, it would have been met with higher levels of scrutiny. What benefit would scum!JV have to fake a red-check on a Town on day 2 of all days

I don't have time to do a deep dive statistical argument for why you're likely to be scum, but suffice for now to say that it is more likely that you lied about having a redcheck of the loyal variety on Jacob than it is that it was a framed result.

In an ideal scum!Jackson world, Jacob would have been the SK. In a less ideal one, on the overnight after Jacob dies two town players die, leading to a 3 Town, 3 Mafia, 1 SK Elo, a very enviable position for scum.
You would have at least some motivation to have this happen, even if you got caught in the backlash.

[I'm doing my grocery shopping right now, responses will be delayed until I finish.]

I don't really care about the >rand scum stuff. I want reasonings, not placements. Just fyi. Why would scum!JV risk putting his ass out in the line of fire for an elim that was realistic to get anyway? If I was willing to take myself out, would I not use that play as an opportunity to take out someone of a higher caliber than a new player that many people already had in their scum pool?

[JacksonVirgo]

I didn't actually know we were that close to Elo if we are, that's actually pretty scary

[JacksonVirgo]

If you want a proper response, ask more focused questions. I'm not arguing "You're scummy, you gotta answer me as to why you're not scummy"

Alright. Got done shopping.

Last night, you investigated Cakez. What led you to investigate him?

There's a few isolated reasons but I'll take you on storybook lane.

Somewhat after I claimed my result on Jacob I realised that even though I was right on Jacob (this is me speaking from my perspective then) I feel like realistically I probably should have "checked" the miller claim as like I am in a super prime position to verify a miller claim so I wanted to do that.

When Black pointed out Cakez reluctance it made me take a second look at them but figured that since I was right on Jacob (I was confident), no scum would dare be reluctant to vote their red-checked partner but post-flip that thought came flooding back in my head that their actions and their words did not seem to align AND they didn't flip red so that paired with the thought that I can verify the miller both came together to have me pick them over another person. I was also tempted to switch up my gameplan, as it started off as a failure, and target someone like Black/STD but that was less to do with utilising the modifier to its fullest and more with the actual role and to work around the chance of me getting pinned down but I ended up not going down that path, and did a goof instead not remembering Cakez full claim.

[JacksonVirgo]

I also wanted to do some ISO diving with the stated "counterwagons" which weren't actual counterwagons but more so the slots people said they wanted if I hadn't had my result to try and counteract the false positive but decided that I feel more comfortable trusting myself than to trust other people's thrown out reads

[JacksonVirgo]

I still feel pretty bad for Jacob

[JacksonVirgo]

I think I know what you'd claim to be, and it's a little confusing.

Did I seriously slip up? Ugh, just pretend you never saw anything I guess

[JacksonVirgo]

I mean just keep what you think it is to yourself thanks, if it's confusing it really shouldn't be if you think about me utilising the loyal modifier over the other part

[JacksonVirgo]

mmmmm too tired to think

will get into srs business mode soon

I just realised ur avi is literally skygazing

[JacksonVirgo]

I mean just keep what you think it is to yourself thanks, if it's confusing it really shouldn't be if you think about me utilising the loyal modifier over the other part

What motivation did you have to target Jacob as opposed to other, more experienced players?

It was more complex than a simple motivation as I will have to explain my entire gameplan that I went in with to really explain it but simply put I scum-read them, they were LHF and were not getting pushed to any real degree. If I could confirm they're a wolf, yay me I get some cookies my pride can munch on. If they're Town, they're out of the scum pool entirely and we're ballin'. They were unlikely to get shot given their position and I could actively push against their wagon without being obvious about it to keep what we had alive and kicking for as long as I can, hopefully to a point where we win by default through numbers. Given you asked this question I'm pretty sure you know my role so I should just claim but I'm not going to because I'm stubborn

[JacksonVirgo]

I mean if I was wolf I could have 100% swung a jacob elim if I wanted it

[JacksonVirgo]

I'm not jumping back and seeing who said what, I don't really care for it

[JacksonVirgo]

Anyone else you could've claimed a guilty on would've been an experienced player who could conceivably wriggle their way out of an axe, or at the very least provide a good last testament before their death, either of which would make the venture more risky. I don't know your scum game, so I wouldn't know how big of a risk taker you are.

If I really wanted someone out I would have claimed a hard guilty, or that N1 informed that has like two options one of which is confirmed evil to get the elims I needed without the backlash. For my scum game, it's incredibly wide and I don't think anybody can realistically catch me based on how I'm acting in comparison with other games but what I can say is that I am always the scum that plays for the endgame and as such, I often (and I don't recall a game where I was invested and didn't) make endgame when I'm actively motivated and trying.

[JacksonVirgo]

I mean just keep what you think it is to yourself thanks, if it's confusing it really shouldn't be if you think about me utilising the loyal modifier over the other part

What motivation did you have to target Jacob as opposed to other, more experienced players?

It was more complex than a simple motivation as I will have to explain my entire gameplan that I went in with to really explain it but simply put I scum-read them, they were LHF and were not getting pushed to any real degree. If I could confirm they're a wolf, yay me I get some cookies my pride can munch on. If they're Town, they're out of the scum pool entirely and we're ballin'. They were unlikely to get shot given their position and I could actively push against their wagon without being obvious about it to keep what we had alive and kicking for as long as I can, hopefully to a point where we win by default through numbers. Given you asked this question I'm pretty sure you know my role so I should just claim but I'm not going to because I'm stubborn

Do you think they would've been a more useful player to target than a nullread?
[In order to ask what I'd want to ask, I would need a more complete list of your reads.]

For sure, I wanted to get on the right path as fast as I possibly can. If I'm on the wrong path, I want to know I have to shift off as fast as I can possibly get it. If I can clear a wrong path and form a [redacted] at the same time OR verify that I am on the right path and keep going I am FOR SURE taking that path. I trust in my reads a lot, and I use mech to supplement it for where I'm off and that's no different here.

[JacksonVirgo]

mmmmm too tired to think

will get into srs business mode soon

I just realised ur avi is literally skygazing

A---Aurora Borealis? At this time of year! At this time of day! In this part of the country! Localized entirely within your kitchen?!?

Yes :)

[JacksonVirgo]

How is it risky?

[JacksonVirgo]

Oh I thought u were responding to my last post

[JacksonVirgo]

Sure, you could have done that. However, it would have been more risky on your end. Something which I stated in that post.

What part would have been more risky?

[JacksonVirgo]

Jackson, is it within your play style to check players you think are highly likely to be scum rather than pushing them during the day?

No it isn't

[JacksonVirgo]

How is it risky?

The person you would be pushing against with evidence, they would be more experienced with the game and more able to defend themselves. Even when you axe them, they would have given out more town-driven content that would be usable, as they are more experienced with what the town needs.

You may have been able to claim a redcheck on anyone to get them axed, but you risk being caught in the backlash.

If I wanted to gambit I would gambit, I wouldn't do a half assed one to get a LHF killed but this is beyond the point

[JacksonVirgo]

Jackson, is it within your play style to check players you think are highly likely to be scum rather than pushing them during the day?

No it isn't

Would it be within your play style to check players you thought had some scum equity?

I'm not sure if you're talking in a specific way or not, if you're asking a super specific question that I am not understanding please clarify but I check players who I scum-read. I'm confident in my reads as I said, and if I start walking off the proper path, I want to get back on it so I do that. I definitely see the use in checking those (on a surface level anyway) I am less sure on but the options are that if I clear them then great I'm still on the path I am on. If I'm wrong that's a mislim. If it's a red-check great, but I feel deep down that I feel more confident that my scum-read flips red than someone I'm not sure on. Which is obvious lol. So why would I do a suboptimal check from my pov?

Aka I check who I think are wolves

Spoiler:

I'm already confident you are meaning this as the logic you had town-read me for before when I was talking with Clap, I wanted to ask you to make sure so I don't unnecessarily tunnel on you but like I'm impatient and the feelings behind this is dying to get loose, so I'm not waiting any further to write this up. I will sit on my hands for a little bit after writing this and because of the amount of effort I'll be putting in with this I will probably post it anyway even if you do say it wasn't to do with back then.

Alright, so walking through it. In post 58 you said that you were ready to say that we're both Town as of post 53. I ask you what reasoning you had to label both of us as Town this early, you say that for me I was townie because I spoke honestly and with detached curiosity. Because of that read, you wanted us to both look elsewhere insinuating that this read was not a throwaway vibe read, it was a confident one that you wanted us to focus elsewhere for. So this read was to do with my content as of and prior to post 53.

Okie dokes, so taking your reasoning to heart, I looked back at every single one of my posts as of 53 and prior there is not a

single

post that had even an

ounce

of curiosity in it, at all. I was calling out Claps' logic for what I saw it as. If I take detached curiosity as I am seeing the thread with an open mind (aka not attached to any particular idea) then that isn't true either, I was straight up shading Clap for most of that and laughing at him for taking this further than it needed to be taken. On top of that, what could I even have remotely said in those four posts that would give you any sense of my honesty? The only part that I spoke about myself that could be attributed to that type of read is me talking about my voting patterns which has absolutely no alignment-tell within it at all, even if you thought it was it would be shallow at

best

.

All this logic would definitely apply to my current play completely and I believe that the initial read on both of us was faked for whatever reason you have needed to fake it. When I waited for you to answer why your read was the way it was, the game advanced further so my true play revealed itself which you could pin as speaking honestly and with detached curiosity. But since your initial read was fake, you don't have the recall about the read that you would have if it was genuine and thus you claim that you read on me as of post 58 was from my actions in the future.

And that don't make much no gosh darn sense, does it?

VOTE: Mucho Man Randy Passion

Look at my posts for yourself

Spoiler: My posts

S

U

P

C

L

O

D

P

O

L

E

S

,

I

'

M

T

H

E

J

E

S

T

E

R

A

N

D

I

'

M

H

E

R

E

T

O

T

R

O

L

L

T

H

E

F

E

C

A

L

M

A

T

T

E

R

O

U

T

O

F

T

H

I

S

G

A

M

E

!

VOTE: Not_Mafia

Just curious - I've seen this from you before, is it a standard opening you use to avoid giving information?

Straight into shading someone, gotta love it

Just curious - I've seen this from you before, is it a standard opening you use to avoid giving information?

Straight into shading someone, gotta love it

Says the man throwing shade without a vote.

Since when did I need to place a vote to make a point

Since when did I need to place a vote to make a point

What's the motivation for a townie who sees supposedly scummy activity, and isn't currently voting anyone, to NOT vote the scummy activity? OTOH, scum could want to point out the activity in hope that another townie picks up on it and starts a push.

Also, your point on my question is wrong. Even if she answers yes, that just means she's playing to her overall scum meta (town would want towniness to come through in RVS). It says nothing about this particular game. It's literally designed to say nothing about this game. So, how would I push her on it, even with an affirmative answer?

All the question does is help me understand her for future games. That's why I prefaced it with "Just curious."

Oh you're serious, lmfao alright.
Even if I was serious enough to think you were >rand wolf from this, I don't care about a vote, I consider it a useless thing to flop around unless I really wanna do something with it or I'm making a joke. If a vote is what's needed to make a point, there's no point in doing anything but just voting people. We can use words, so I'll use words.

My point on your question isn't wrong, it's framed in a way that appears to be trying to make them look bad OR to make you look like you're doing something both of which are bad but I didn't even remotely care outside of poking fun until you're taking this way further than I expected it to.

Ah fuck just realised macho won't respond to me. They've been neutral hunting, which is a scum tell

Was she neut hunting? She mentioned it a few times, but it wasn't like, her passion project.

Who would make it super obvious? It's a common scum tell, her focus was finding the SK.

we really should be DOMINATING the third party REFEREE today

Nor do I agree that thinking it could be best to take out the SK first is a scumtell. Especially when you're just coming out and saying it like that.

How is it not? Is this a cultural difference? The only people who should care about taking out/focusing the SK are the mafia. Town should just be focusing on who is wolfy

1.FINAL

Votecount 1.FINAL

Invisibility (EXECUTED): shaddowez, Black, SirCakez, Jake The Wolfie, Save The Dragons, Hu Tao, Skygazer, Roden
shaddowez (2): Not_Mafia, Argonauts
Argonauts (1): Invisibility
Jacob24 (1): JacksonVirgo
Skygazer (1): lucca261
SirCakez (1): Jacob24

With 14 players alive, it took 8 votes to secure an execution.

And I thought they were a wolf

And if I get nudged off the wrong path by a green check. I also have the benefits of my role that I can utilise, which to be was a secondary use. At least that was my focus this game.

[JacksonVirgo]

You would have needed to gambit if this LHF wasn't as scumread as you've said.

I wouldn't have done a gambit to begin with, I was like majorly town-read

[JacksonVirgo]

I can control the Town pretty easily (to a degree where it's still useful to me, not saying I'm an ultra powerful megamind overlord)

[JacksonVirgo]

And when I am majorly town-read, I can control the Town pretty easily (to a degree where it's still useful to me, not saying I'm an ultra powerful megamind overlord)

EBWOP

[JacksonVirgo]

I might as well claim tbh the whole "saying but not saying" is giving me the ick, 3-shot loyal neighbourizer

[JacksonVirgo]

My gameplan was to lean into the loyal part of the neighbourhood. There's little point (in my eyes) picking who I think is Town if I want to utilise both sides of the role so I felt to squeeze the most utility out of the role, I have to first focus on the loyal modifier which can double as a way to nudge me in the right direction in terms of my reads AND if my scum-reads are wrong I form a masonry that is unlikely to get shot and I can direct people away from to keep them in the balance of not at risk of getting shot AND elimmed so then the masonry lives on much further. If I'm mostly wrong in the game, I form a strong and large masonry. If I'm right, we kill wolves. Optimal even if my reads are wrong rather than just verifying my town-reads which I feel is next to useless or doing what I said earlier and picking nulls which keeps me on the path I am on which does me no good

[JacksonVirgo]

If I'm understanding this right, you've (generally) chosen players for whom you expected your ability to fail?

Mhm, but given a green flip I did think maybe I should switch to the more "traditional" way of using this role but decided against it

[JacksonVirgo]

haha i won

Regrettably

[JacksonVirgo]

and I still don't trust you

That's okay I'll town-read you double to make up for it

[JacksonVirgo]

When I'm Town, I have the freedom to play how I see fit. What's the problem with that mindset? Lmfao

[JacksonVirgo]

I see no issues with thinking like that

[JacksonVirgo]

I mostly just wanted to pressure Black as if I had some juicy dumper coming right after, I will comment on it though

[JacksonVirgo]

When I'm Town, I have the freedom to play how I see fit. What's the problem with that mindset? Lmfao

To answer this question, I would need to go so far out of the scope of this game that it would necessarily have to be in a Mafia Discussion post just so that the presumption of good faith would be guaranteed by all parties.

Aww, alright :C

[JacksonVirgo]

I mean, shit on it all you want. It's how I was playing this game, if it doesn't work out (which is hard to tell cuz I overthought my gameplan but overlooked a stupid ass ascetic or I'm getting pinned) it's an experiment and I can learn from it

[JacksonVirgo]

When I'm Town, I have the freedom to play how I see fit. What's the problem with that mindset? Lmfao

To answer this question, I would need to go so far out of the scope of this game that it would necessarily have to be in a Mafia Discussion post just so that the presumption of good faith would be guaranteed by all parties.

Aww, alright :C

Just go for it anyway I am like so curious

[JacksonVirgo]

I fail to see how that would be any of that. I'm aiming to win the game but sure we can wait for post-game to talk about this

[JacksonVirgo]

Also I don't see Black as a wolf

[JacksonVirgo]

I don't really want your push, nor Black's push. I think you're both voting town

[JacksonVirgo]

I can go into depth but not until a little later, just like my read on you most of it is just how you're presenting yourself. It feels pure and I don't see scum motivation coming from it. I'm not like lock-towning either of you by any means, if my demeanour says otherwise it's just I'm again confident in my own reads. If you want specifics as to what I think is pure you're gonna have to wait cuz I don't wanna half-ass it

[JacksonVirgo]

I can see scum motivation, I just don't see it

as

being motivated by being scum. I don't know if that makes sense but just to clarify

[JacksonVirgo]

I can see scum motivation, I just don't see it

as

being motivated by being scum. I don't know if that makes sense but just to clarify

What would the latter look like to you?

Just simple stuff like scum motivation being talking for the sake of a push rather than pushing because that's the outcome of the talking. Awful wording but I think I'm making sense? Copium

I'm really tired

[JacksonVirgo]

I'm getting more and more incoherent, I'm gonna go have a nap or something. Talk later

[JacksonVirgo]

I'll explain my black read in more depth when I'm able

[JacksonVirgo]

Everybody is busy lmfao that’s hilarious

[JacksonVirgo]

@mod: Not V/LA until Monday

Not noted.

- Alianna

[JacksonVirgo]

Good morning, Jackson.

Mornin'. Woke up to a storm, which was actually really cozy

[JacksonVirgo]

I have a "meeting" so will go into more details about Black after that. Should be no longer than a few hours

[JacksonVirgo]

It seems like Black and Jackson are vibing incredibly hard with eachother.

I said I vibed with them, I don't know how they feel about me

[JacksonVirgo]

Why do you need to be sanity checked?

[JacksonVirgo]

Oh, I know what you're trying to insinuate

[JacksonVirgo]

Don't you feel that's heavily confbiased?

[JacksonVirgo]

Where do you think that feeling is coming from?

[JacksonVirgo]

My attention is loosely placed here, I can respond in shallow ways. Working on a project but will be done soon

[JacksonVirgo]

I know why you asked to be sanity checked and I respect that a lot, I'm specifically asking if you know where the feeling is coming from in regards to the actual read you had. Is it just because we seem to be vibing AND you're scum-reading both of us or is there something more?

[JacksonVirgo]

As you framed it now it feels like it's all just an extension on the scum-read of us both so you're seeing a connection where there isn't

[JacksonVirgo]

Which is fine, I'll explain my TR on black soon

[JacksonVirgo]

I know why you asked to be sanity checked and I respect that a lot, I'm specifically asking if you know where the feeling is coming from in regards to the actual read you had. Is it just because we seem to be vibing AND you're scum-reading both of us or is there something more?

When I was looking over her ISO, I couldn't help but notice that Black has mostly strayed close to you, with only a few conflicts if I recall.

Like, take the start of today. Black followed your vote, with no hesitation or second thought. It was only after it was revealed that any check that you made on Cakez would've inevitibly turn up red that she moved her vote onto someone else.

This is just one example, and I haven't read your ISO through to see if it holds up on your end, but it just feels fishy.

It's possible they're trying to keep me pocketed, they know I'm good at wolf perhaps they consider me good at town as well as a natural extension. Especially given I've shown an ability to check someones alignment, it could be that I am not pinned but I just had my action blocked by a mafia JOAT with a single block attempt and I just goofed and checked a true ascetic and they're trying to dodge (or control) that as best as they can. Unsure, that second bit is just speculation

[JacksonVirgo]

Like, take the start of today. Black followed your vote, with no hesitation or second thought. It was only after it was revealed that any check that you made on Cakez would've inevitibly turn up red that she moved her vote onto someone else.

With all due respect, I think you're barking up the wrong tree. She was the one that called Cakez out initially and was the reason I saw Cakez day-play as bad as an additional reason to check them. It would be natural to do this regardless of alignment so it's NAI.

[JacksonVirgo]

I do think Black has a point when she said you were looking at her posts with "rose-tinted glasses"

[JacksonVirgo]

I do understand how in isolation it has an innocent explanation, however what I'm proposing is that this is one part of a pattern of a behaviour that she has shown.

Can you quote a few posts where they've done this? Straying close to me specifically

[JacksonVirgo]

Or the pattern you're seeing

[JacksonVirgo]

You've been known to scumread Jackson and Black? You guys are being really confusing and probably partly because Jackson just uses whatever pronouns he feels like describing people with.

Whoops

[JacksonVirgo]

Stream of consciousness be like brr

[JacksonVirgo]

I'll try and be more consistent

[JacksonVirgo]

Ima be straight, I got no idea what you're seeing in those posts

[JacksonVirgo]

68 is just her acknowledging I said what she was thinking, which happens with me all the time with other people
103 was acknowledging a misunderstanding she had in regards to what I said
893 was just her stating what she thought about the mech surrounding me

I don't really see how any of these are overly straying too close to me to any reasonable degree. I see this as her town-reading me and valuing my slot and what I'm saying much more than maliciously straying too close to me.

[JacksonVirgo]

That answer only confuses me more. Are you talking about what's happened in THIS game? That isn't the expected use of the phrase. You sounded like you were talking about previous games.

Well I'm understanding what he's saying perfectly fine

[JacksonVirgo]

I ISO dived them and you pulled pretty much the only quotes that they were obviously referring to my slot in a positive light. One of which you didn't quote the post which they disagreed with me on just prior (and taking about the exact same thing).

I just feel Town has a substantially higher chance of acting entitled because there's no inherent noose dangling over their heads like there is for wolves + they don't feel the need to have a good image

That makes sense, but the last part I don't really agree with. I think certain players feel the need to seem townie when they are town. If people find me as town then I feel like I'm doing something right and the PoE is reduced for the people that townread me, which helps them narrow in on the baddies

You're then ignoring the parts where our reads and thoughts were not aligning by throwing it under "generally". Like the major reads for today excluding Cakez we're in disagreements on. If I were to eyeball a number I'd say the agreement to disagreement ratio is about 50% and she just town-reads me. I don't know where you're seeing something bad with this. I skimmed her ISO for pocket-like statements but I aint seeing much.

[JacksonVirgo]

I think you just scum-read both of us and actively trying to find a link between the two of us to justify a pairing.

[JacksonVirgo]

I think you just scum-read both of us and actively trying to find a link between the two of us to justify a pairing.

Which comes full circle to the rose-tinted glasses analogy

[JacksonVirgo]

Jake can you link a town-game from you

[JacksonVirgo]

Jake can you link a town-game from you

Preferably one with a mech-focused game

[JacksonVirgo]

Jake can you link a town-game from you

Meta Good?

Meta bad when using it to scum-case somebody

[JacksonVirgo]

I'm trying to see something in particular

[JacksonVirgo]

I should rephrase, I generally think meta is bad because people often misuse it to a pretty substantial degree. People often try and prove their beliefs directly which is an extremely ineffective way of thinking because it leaves you open to confirmation bias and cherry picking what feels right (because it's what you believe). You need to actively try and disprove what you're feeling, but nobody really does this whenever they meta-dive. I see time and time again that they try and prove themselves right. It doesn't work. There's a reason the scientific method is to DISPROVE your theories instead of just proving them.

It's easier to just say "meta bad" than to explain why

[JacksonVirgo]

I think it was Drew who I said meta was bad to. It was bad in that circumstance because it was not an accurate representation of my scum range, which is what I'm referring to with the cherry picking (which isn't really cherry picking in this circumstance but I lack a better term).

That's how I see meta anyway, hope this isn't another "we should talk about this in a mafia discussions thread" lmfaooo

[JacksonVirgo]

I should rephrase, I generally think meta is bad because people often misuse it to a pretty substantial degree. People often try and prove their beliefs directly which is an extremely ineffective way of thinking because it leaves you open to confirmation bias and cherry picking what feels right (because it's what you believe). You need to actively try and disprove what you're feeling, but nobody really does this whenever they meta-dive. I see time and time again that they try and prove themselves right. It doesn't work. There's a reason the scientific method is to DISPROVE your theories instead of just proving them.

It's easier to just say "meta bad" than to explain why

Sorry to break up the J&J party going on here.

But I do kinda agree what you are saying here Jackson, you need to be skeptical when using meta. Don't use it to prove your point per se, use it to to back up the read you have on someone(or to do the opposite........ie, in one game where they were scum they acted like this here.....but I have seen them act differently as scum as well).

That being said, this isn't always the case.......meta can help you catch someone as scum(and more often with me helps me find someone as town). And as I have said, meta hasn't made me find you as town so far(and even have said meta reminds me that you seem somewhat similar to your scum game in mafia has a cop, and doesn't remind you as you were in that last 9:12 game where I was scum).

-Asclepius

Pre Edit: Jackson, imo meta is the best used when applying it to a very similar situation where someones role was known(a back and forth where one game you were scum, and another game where you were town). I was saying your defensiveness seemed more like when you were scum vs the game where you were town.......you seemed more sure of yourself and your read, or at least expressed it better than just lashing out.

It

is

always the case, the logic is faulty if you're taking unneeded risk of bias/fallacies but this is just the fallacy fallacy. Just because the logic is faulty, doesn't mean the outcome is inherently wrong. The logic you're using is not taking into account my full town/scum range and thus it's faulty logic but you can still use it but if you use the same logic in a scum game of mine and you're right. You were right, but the logic was still faulty.

[JacksonVirgo]

Right for the wrong reasons etc etc

[JacksonVirgo]

Pre Edit: Jackson, imo meta is the best used when applying it to a very similar situation where someones role was known(a back and forth where one game you were scum, and another game where you were town). I was saying your defensiveness seemed more like when you were scum vs the game where you were town.......you seemed more sure of yourself and your read, or at least expressed it better than just lashing out.

Meta is best used to try and find something you find townie in a scum game of theirs and vice versa. To try and see if your logic is putting you on the right path or leading you down a wrong one. You're seeing a connection where there isn't one because you're not taking the full sample size of how I play into mind. You're seeing a very small portion of games, not acknowledging the range that I actually have and then continuing with that frame of mind.

Which is inherently just faulty logic, I'm not saying to not do that I don't really care but I have to inject that you're not taking my true range to heart when you make arguments such as this so I'm just going to disregard it.

[JacksonVirgo]

Yes, Black did disagree with you; And at the end of that argument she agreed with you.

Great, she agreed with me. Can town not agree with somebody?

[JacksonVirgo]

Like if I were to go further into why comparing a small amount of games to my alignment is that I was an extremely demotivated scum in the mafia has a cop as my partner literally claimed a slot that doomed her and I wasn't in the position where I could control the Town that well which made it worse with an already shitty period in my life that I just couldn't really handle properly. And you're comparing that, to a game where I am highly motivated and enjoying the living hell out a game. It's not really a fair comparison.

The reference to my town game is also ignoring the fact that it's a different game with a different perspective. My feelings change, and just because it's the same alignment doesn't mean I have to do a carbon copy of my behaviour. I like switching things up, I like experimenting with what works and what doesn't. It's not fair to compare these things, but I'm also not expecting you to brush up on your JV encyclopedia. This is just me talking "mafia theory" I guess and saying that you

are

not looking at my slot with as wide a lens that I would like.

[JacksonVirgo]

I should rephrase, I generally think meta is bad because people often misuse it to a pretty substantial degree. People often try and prove their beliefs directly which is an extremely ineffective way of thinking because it leaves you open to confirmation bias and cherry picking what feels right (because it's what you believe). You need to actively try and disprove what you're feeling, but nobody really does this whenever they meta-dive. I see time and time again that they try and prove themselves right. It doesn't work. There's a reason the scientific method is to DISPROVE your theories instead of just proving them.

It's easier to just say "meta bad" than to explain why

Sorry to break up the J&J party going on here.

But I do kinda agree what you are saying here Jackson, you need to be skeptical when using meta. Don't use it to prove your point per se, use it to to back up the read you have on someone(or to do the opposite........ie, in one game where they were scum they acted like this here.....but I have seen them act differently as scum as well).

That being said, this isn't always the case.......meta can help you catch someone as scum(and more often with me helps me find someone as town). And as I have said, meta hasn't made me find you as town so far(and even have said meta reminds me that you seem somewhat similar to your scum game in mafia has a cop, and doesn't remind you as you were in that last 9:12 game where I was scum).

-Asclepius

Pre Edit: Jackson, imo meta is the best used when applying it to a very similar situation where someones role was known(a back and forth where one game you were scum, and another game where you were town). I was saying your defensiveness seemed more like when you were scum vs the game where you were town.......you seemed more sure of yourself and your read, or at least expressed it better than just lashing out.

It

is

always the case, the logic is faulty if you're taking unneeded risk of bias/fallacies but this is just the fallacy fallacy. Just because the logic is faulty, doesn't mean the outcome is inherently wrong. The logic you're using is not taking into account my full town/scum range and thus it's faulty logic but you can still use it but if you use the same logic in a scum game of mine and you're right. You were right, but the logic was still faulty.

Listen, if we are gonna argue if meta is good or bad......acting like your own self meta is infallible is just plain wrong at best, and manipulative at worst.

YOU don't know when you are giving clues to your play and alignment most of the time, no matter how hard you try to stay in your town range. Everyone gives clues to their alignment in every game, and the more you play with a person the more you will pick up on said clues(obviously with some people it is harder than others).

I am using a very specific meta read, one game where you were scum and one game where you were town.......and saying how much more defensive you were in your scum game than your town game(which btw, in the scum game there was no real risk of you being limmed at that point, most people town read you besides me at that point).....whereas the town game of yours it literally was lylo, and you played it way more cool.

You can act like you have some amazing range as either alignment, and I won't dispute that, but many times you don't realize how you act in very specific situations.

That is the main part of why meta can be great in these specific situations......where it takes an outside perspective from someone who was right there with you, to see that might be pulling the wool over our eyes.

-Asclepius

You can do whatever you want with your reads, I just think you're putting my entire play into a box which I know that I exceed which feels like you're not seeing me for me which doesn't feel good.

[JacksonVirgo]

See, this is why I said Jackson has posted most of the words in this game.

It's a thing

[JacksonVirgo]

That's not the point I was making. It's one part of a larger case.

I don't understand your larger case then

[JacksonVirgo]

I love talking about this sort of thing, I'm indulging myself :)

[JacksonVirgo]

I'm genuinely having the most fun this game than I have in a long time

[JacksonVirgo]

Jackson, you're encyclopedic, help me out here!

[JacksonVirgo]

Observation would be the word, I was under the impression this was like a substantial case you had on Black which I felt was like pretty shallow for a case but if it was just trying to explain an observation then I guess that makes a lot more sense.

[JacksonVirgo]

I still don't agree with it, but it makes more sense

[JacksonVirgo]

I think you're better off waiting to see if others see what you're seeing, cuz I don't at all

[JacksonVirgo]

A lot of it is just me vibing with them, a lot of the town-case will just be me trying to put in words how I feel when they post. It's not like I have a backlog of strong logical evaluations (for lack of a better term) on her.

[JacksonVirgo]

I love talking about this sort of thing, I'm indulging myself :)

I didn't want to create a huge quote tree lol
--snip--
So, with all due respect, love you man.......but spare me the self meta defense

-Asclepius

I believe I am picking up what you're putting down, but this is all meaningless. I wasn't making that discussion to defend myself, I was trying to talk about my thoughts on meta and used that as an example.

[JacksonVirgo]

Which is definitely the wrong place to talk about that but I got ahead of myself, was having too much fun

[JacksonVirgo]

I love talking about this sort of thing, I'm indulging myself :)

I didn't want to create a huge quote tree lol
--snip--
So, with all due respect, love you man.......but spare me the self meta defense

-Asclepius

I believe I am picking up what you're putting down, but this is all meaningless. I wasn't making that discussion to defend myself, I was trying to talk about my thoughts on meta and used that as an example.

You literally were calling me out for not realizing how much of a range you supposedly have and that I was putting your play in a box.

How is that not using your own perceived self meta as a defense?

-Ascelpius

I don't agree with the logic you're using at all, it's not like I am saying that I am okay with it. I just was using it as an example in what I was saying because it was recent and was in my head

[JacksonVirgo]

I feel like I'm almost high when I post here (I'm not), which is probably bad so I'm probably gonna take a step back for a lil bit. Probably ;)

[JacksonVirgo]

I came in to say after I digested a little bit, I have this bad feeling in regards to Jake but I'm gonna sit on that for a bit

[JacksonVirgo]

I'll wait to see how he responds to my "town-case" of Black

[JacksonVirgo]

I'm gonna go through their ISO with a finer comb than I did just before and comment on everything I see of worth, which doubles as both an explanation as to what I'm seeing as well as an excuse to reconsider my stance on Black with the lens that I could be getting pocketed but I really doubt that I am.

[JacksonVirgo]

(68) "You put into words what I was pretty much thinking about Clap's question"

I liked this at the time because it felt like we were on the same wavelength, I felt the way Clap was speaking was incredibly obvious to be the way I was explaining it and when Black said that she agreed with me it made me feel two things. One of which "showed" me that I am on the right path which idk if you got this impression yet, is very important to me and also if she did truly think this way that it's a good sign that we're thinking on the same wavelength, which is townie. Of course just from this one post you can't really know if it's true or not, not saying that it's obvious that we were (and she's not pocketing me) but it's what made me start vibing with her.

I wanted to check if she had her own thoughts on that or if she was copying my reads, so I asked her what her conclusions were to it and it was different than mine. Which is a really good sign to me, cuz she could have just agreed and said that we both had the same line of thinking (for if it were a pocket attempt) but she didn't. She responded to me with her own beliefs on her wrist, misunderstanding what I was saying. So it truly was a "mindmeld" of sorts but she was misunderstanding me.

I doubt scum would take the effort to purposefully fake a misunderstanding only to just agree with me at the end. That takes a lot of weird backwards ass logic to assume so Occam's razor just tells me that it's her true thoughts and that we were mindmelding. Which is a huge deal for me.

And in 149 they posted something that I myself was thinking (aka they were posting in a way to make me look bad), but didn't say which is the inverse of what happened earlier in the game which again is a huge sign. They follow up in their next post with posts that was not along the same line of thinking and calling out lucca, but trying to understand their pov.

Their town-read on me (and lack of reads on anybody else as of 194) makes a lot of sense from a town!black pov as I am a person who said what she was thinking but that may be injecting what I town-read people from into her so take with a grain of salt.

297 feels like they're genuinely giving Mucho the light of day to open themselves up and show us what they're made of rather than pushing because it's easy. They weren't afraid to say that they don't have scum-reads and they're just voting for the sake of wagoning somebody. It feels raw and pure to me.

432 Black addressing Skygazer this way (after voting them) in a way that gives them an out. It seems like a question that if coming from scum was made to make Skygazer look bad/worse, giving a reason for the ADHD seems unnecessary and not like something Black would be thinking of instead just remove that sentence to lessen Skygazers social positioning in a sense. This one is a little iffy cuz I don't really know but it's what I had thought in the moment, I don't myself hold much weight to this one.

I like both 616 and 618 as it shows they're giving the game critical thought rather than pushing and casing those they think they can/should be pushing.

855 was another example of saying something that I was thinking, although this was an obvious one that I feel scum could and would catch. When this happened in the moment I figured Jacob was just talking about TRing the hydra and has nothing to do with the "if this flips red" cuz that's silly.

Black could have very easily just followed me in my Cakez vote, but they didn't they voted off in their own reads which I like. When I explain to them that I town-read STD they genuinely started trying to get in my brain to understand me it feels like instead of just disregarded my TR (which they could have done considering I started taking pretty vaguely and then elaborated only after they asked me more questions) and just pushing anyway. Them readdressing the reads of "lack of towniness" of all their PoE is the only thing I don't really like but that's NAI I think, or I wanna think it's NAI anyway.

When you made your case against Black, Black's rose-tinted glasses analogy fits perfectly with how I see you making your arguments so it feels like a pure and genuine response to your wall-case.

[JacksonVirgo]

Should have spoilered that

[JacksonVirgo]

After a reevaluation I am still pretty confident they're Town, bar that one post which gives me the ntnagfaafa

[JacksonVirgo]

Mornin' everyone

[JacksonVirgo]

sorry i got sick

i'm getting town/town from the jackson-jake back and forth but if i'm wrong i think i'm wrong on jackson

why did everyone forget about argonauts

Is there something terribly wrong with Argon that I missed?

When can I expect you to comment on what I've said so far?

[JacksonVirgo]

Jackson do you like my new new avatar? I think it's better tbh. The last one was made by AI apparently so I don't want to use it

Ooo yeah it fits so much nicer

[JacksonVirgo]

Low-key worried about Jackson knowing my alignment but I need to actually read them tomorrow when I get the chance

I mean I wouldn't anyway cuz SK/Mafia both exist but I understand the sentiment

[JacksonVirgo]

so hey Cakez when you come back to the thread wanna explain why you fake claimed miller of all things

thanks!

Hm? Want to clarify further?

[JacksonVirgo]

that to say I think at least one of them is faking the read

I'm still waiting on Jake to respond to me cuz I have pent up feelings I want to let loose

[JacksonVirgo]

on one side Black is the towniest townie who has ever towned, pratically an angel who has come down from heavens to teach players how to be town. every one of her posts? incredibly town.

The exaggeration is hilarious but no, I pointed out things I disliked

[JacksonVirgo]

Might as well just say what I'm seeing, I doubt Jake proves me wrong. I have a feeling that they're pushing black for the sake of pushing black. I don't think he's giving her the light of day

at all

. I think he's trying to actively find reasons to push her (and by extension myself through his actions), that paired with his constant role fishing for my role while nobody else was doing it shows that his mindset was different than most others in my eyes and I cannot shake this feeling. I was hoping he would post a response sooner rather than later but I guess not.

[JacksonVirgo]

Checked for myself and he's right

[JacksonVirgo]

idk i'm genuinely asking, they were wagoned heavily d1 and then that kind of just stopped

I think their reaction to the guilty D2 was townie

[JacksonVirgo]

honestly was exaggerating a little to be funny (majorly on JV part), but his big post on @1198 is a very big defense outside of like one sentence justifying why all of your posts make sense as town

Was hyping up the case, I couldn't be a letdown fr fr

[JacksonVirgo]

We had one last night

[JacksonVirgo]

Imagine you didn't realise the setup has a confirmed SK and you just wanted to fake-claim vig as the SK

[JacksonVirgo]

I wish I was the SK lmao that role is fun AF I just feel stressy with this bc I don't feel good about shooting anyone rn, thus my holster. NM I shot because it's NM lmao

Lmfao, this is like textbook fake response. The first bit anyway

[JacksonVirgo]

isn't there a SK that actually can't kill on the role list?

I doubt it because inherent multitasking is enabled

[JacksonVirgo]

fake claiming vig as SK in a setup with a CONFIRMED SK? that would be moronic

It's okay, you can believe that :)

[JacksonVirgo]

I lost a lot of my town points for Jake I think (pending his response to me, it could come back). This thing with Cakez is either very obvious he's evil or a huge ass coincidence that's incredibly unfortunate for Cakez. Argo/Black/Lucca/STD all Town. A few of Lucca's posts give me pause but that's for a future JV. I think what Black recently saw with Skygazers "slip" isn't really much to look into, I liked a few of Skygazers posts D1 quite a lot where I labelled them very obvious Town. I don't want recency bias to hurt that too much but I really don't remember them doing a single thing beyond that D1 post I am referring to. I am null on Shadow rn.

Gun to head the solve would be Jake, Cakez, Shadow and then Skygazer as an extension but I'm not really confident on that last one so I might be wrong on one of my town-core.

[JacksonVirgo]

I had a weird vibe I can't rlly explain about the whole Jacob thing, idk if you're scum or there was some kind of roleblock. I knew we had to push it through but idk

Why didn't you shoot me?

[JacksonVirgo]

As a vig, you should have shot me

[JacksonVirgo]

Why did you shoot NM

[JacksonVirgo]

Because you being wrong doesn't make you 100% scum and I don't want to kill off a town pr

In a borderline role madness game, what's the harm in risking shooting a PR that's in a vacuum more likely to be fake than true.

[JacksonVirgo]

JV I am incredibly conflicted on

Which makes it weird as to why you didn't shoot me

[JacksonVirgo]

Nah, you can just die. It would mean one scum faction had their kill voided twice in a row. Your actions don't really make a lot of sense, but I'm willing to personally look beyond that as a possible playstyle difference but your responses have been even worse.

1. You're talking in a way that's trying to subconsciously bargain with the Town "Don't worry y'all one of you guys can eat a bullet tonight"
2. You've attempted to try and distance yourself from the slot doing the bronze rank strat of "Lol I would be having more fun if I was wolf so I'm not"
3. Your logic surrounding my slot and deciding to holster feels disjointed. It feels like you think one way, but acted in another. Not to a super obvious degree but enough that it's making me feel worse around your slot.
4. You were apprehensive to vote Jacob even though your words said you were thinking/believing otherwise.
5. Your counterargument to me saying "you could have overlooked SK existed 100% of the time" was "I would be stupid to claim vig as an SK in an SK game" which was not a counter to what I was saying at all so it feels disingenuous even when my argument was half joking.
6. You claim your ascetic is confirmed by me when it's clear it isn't. I was blocked N1 what makes it so I couldn't have been N2? You even said the chance was me scum or blocked, either world would make you not confirmed so this is just flailing to make your point.

[JacksonVirgo]

Also the ascetic isn't confirmed even if I WAS blocked because it's a loyal check lmfao

[JacksonVirgo]

If this was a scum gambit, it failed

[JacksonVirgo]

I do, because I don't believe you. I don't care for bargaining with wolves

[JacksonVirgo]

I'm not saying it failed twice in a row because of a block.
It was N1.

I'm saying you're a wolf, therefore it failed.
Or you're ascetic therefore it failed.

My check has nothing to do with it

[JacksonVirgo]

You are scum or have trash reads this game

Nice one, you got me bro

[JacksonVirgo]

I'm not saying it failed twice in a row because of a block.
It was N1.

I'm saying you're a wolf, therefore it failed.
Or you're ascetic therefore it failed.

My check has nothing to do with it

If I'm a wolf how did NM die n1?

I have no way of knowing

[JacksonVirgo]

I admit if I'm wrong I'm heavily conf-biased but everything is lining up to you being wolf

[JacksonVirgo]

ok but I can confirm this very easily tonight lol
fake claiming vig as SK in a setup with a CONFIRMED SK? that would be moronic

What were you referring to with this post

[JacksonVirgo]

No it's okay, I realised I was being the same so I felt like levelling myself and trying to understand you a little bit more than to jump to conclusions.

[JacksonVirgo]

Sorry for calling what you did a bronze rank strat

[JacksonVirgo]

I'm a little ashamed to admit this considering how confident I was a moment ago but I do think that realistically it would be a little bit silly to assume scum would claim that role specifically unless they were doing a gambit, as I'm assuming scum have a reasonable idea of the role they're going to be claiming especially given how early they claimed ascetic miller. I still believe how they've been acting is scummy, I think I'm still trying to convince myself I'm right as I'm like "yeah but we're so close to ELo that it would make sense to delay their flip" but like they would have had to have planned for this moment from the start which is incredibly unlikely.

The biggest problem I'm seeing with Cakez that I haven't said yet is that it doesn't feel like he's treating me the way he's saying he thinks about me. I'm not talking about the "why didn't you shoot me" but the fact he's saying I've cleared him when like logical thought was obviously say that it isn't the case. Not just because a loyal check wouldn't make a difference if he was real or fake (excluding town fake-claiming), but the fact he's holding the result to a weight that I don't really expect him to hold it at considering his stance on me seemed to be leaning more into distrust as our conversation grew.

[JacksonVirgo]

^ about Cakez. Not Skygazer

[JacksonVirgo]

Jackson, be not afraid, for I am writing up a response to your post.

Thanks brother

[JacksonVirgo]

Now that I'm thinking further, of course Town would think it verified them. Scum would be kinda silly to make that argument knowing that it wasn't inherently a clear

[JacksonVirgo]

I mean the chances were pretty low. There's 3 town and 3-nontown neighbour roles

[JacksonVirgo]

Excluding neighbourizers like my role and the 1-shot loyal neighbourizer

[JacksonVirgo]

I'm twiddlin' my toes waiting for you Jake

[JacksonVirgo]

I'm twiddlin' so fast they're about to fall off

[JacksonVirgo]

Eh taking too long
VOTE: Jake

[JacksonVirgo]

It's Jake or Shadow for me today I think

[JacksonVirgo]

Oooo thank you sm, will get to that soon

[JacksonVirgo]

Out of respect I'll UNVOTE:
VOTE: shadow

[JacksonVirgo]

Before I dive into my thoughts on this, I would like to state my general appreciation with the text. While I don't agree with its' conclusion, this was well written and a useful resource.

Oo thank you :D I'm interested to see what you think of it because inherently I'm pretty confident they're Town. Going into Lucca's joke more, we're at like the far extremes of the same person and that's hilarious

Point 1

, in this conversation, Black takes the position that some town players are likely to care about their self image, while Jackson takes the position that most wolves are likely to care about their self image. Both of these positions are reasonable, and Black ends their end of the conversation by agreeing that Jackson's position is reasonable.
For my analysis, this is more or less NAI. It would be expected for any alignment to agree with Jackson's position here.

It's not about the outcome that I'm reading into, just because somebody agrees with someone else doesn't make it AI (on its own anyway). I think that the way they were doing it and the way they followed up that showed natural progression on a read rather than one forced to change because of foolproof logic from the god amongst men, JV

Point 2

, Black makes the observation that Lucca either scumread Jackson or (what I believe Black had more faith in) Lucca was attempting to shade Jackson. She follows this up with a question to Lucca:

[...]
Do you think there are differences between his play in that game and in this game?

After a while and a reminder from Black, Lucca answers that the two games didn't have many similarities that he could see.

Now, regardless of whether Lucca was scumreading Jackson or shading him, this is a normal response to Lucca's actions. While I might take issue with Black's uncertainty and lack of a clear interpretation of Lucca's actions [Was this a scumread by Lucca, or was this shading from Lucca?], I think that these two posts are more or less unremarkable.
With the question pointed at Lucca, I get the feeling that it feels a little iffy. This is by no means an attack on Black, but it feels like a weird question to be asking Lucca.

I understand that you cannot have the same perspective that I do regarding that, as it's not about you and you didn't have the same reaction that I did (that Black had said) but that is a pretty huge deal for me. The main thing I tried disregarding my personal perspective about and talk about is the progression they had with it (which is a common thread I am just now noticing). She isn't stick on her current line of thinking, it feels like she is genuinely trying to understand more even if she believes the things she believes.

Point 3

, Black (among other things) shares that they like Jackson, but feel mixed about everything else.

You've provided one minor criticism of this point yourself, but I would like to bring something else up. Remember 149? Black provided what I called a lack of a clear interpretation. This is a bit of a reach, but the combination of these two posts [149 and 194] suggests that Black hadn't formed an interpretation of Lucca's action, instead listing out the two most likely options. I find this to be suspicious, but not outright wolfy.

I don't see a lack of clear interpretation in those posts, I see she's confident that it was made to make me look worse which was what I had concluded as well. Can you elaborate further as to why you see it the way you do?

Point 4

, Black backs off Mucho stating that while she was hard to read, Black could see some solving from behind the mask. She then moves her vote onto Shadez, stating that she had no scumreads at this time and was joining on a wagon.

For the first part of this, I think that this is NAI. Given the context of Black up to this point, she has been more laid back and chill. If she were a wolf, she might not want to engage with Mucho because of this context, a deviation of what a wolf might be expected to do. [Going after a player for hiding behind a posting gimmick.] A town Black would, naturally, be telling the truth here and be wanting to move on.

For the second part of this, I would like to conjecture that this is posturing by Black. Consider posts 329 and 330. These two posts are continuations of Black lacking wolfreads, without much effort in trying to obtain wolfreads. Why do I say this is posturing instead of frustrated town?
Black had a few opportunities, between post 297 and 329, to engage with current events, however she opted not to do this.

Could this be town-motivated? Certainly. Her next posts engage with the game as it happens. Do I believe that town would make these posts? I don't know, I would suspect not.

Regarding the first part, Black has shown themselves to use this way of pivoting (as Town) before, it isn't something outside of her town-range. I am not town-reading it because of the consistency but I'm not throwing it away. It seems you're saying it's NAI (the first bit) but then you're explaining logic that I deem to be townie so I'm a little confused. I do see what you're seeing regarding positioning, I want to sleep on that for now and I'll get back to you if I think about it in a degree that's worth talking about.

Point 5

, Black questions Skygazer regarding their lack of interaction with the game. This is a continuation of questioning that Black started after Skygazer replied to her original vote on them. The exchange ends when Skygazer admits to have only read a few pages, with Black giving them a townlean from it.

Like with point 3, you've erred on the side of caution with making this point. I don't have many notes here; Black could've pointed Skygazer in a useful direction here, but it's not wolfy of her to not have. The main issue that I might have will be elaborated in the next point.

I don't have much to say either except that if Black were trying to be positioning themselves to push the "slackers" more, I don't think Black would frame it in the way that they did assuming this is not just her personality. I'll wait to see what the next point is

Point 6

, Black responds to a post by Argon which defends Jacob's slot, questioning Argon on what their read on Jacob was and pointing out that they've defended Jacob a few times. Argon responds with no knowledge of these defenses. Black in turn points out two instances of Argon defending Jacob's slot, followed with both another ask of their read on Jacob and stating that she doesn't scumread Argon for this behaviour.

The initial question by Black feels off to me. Why should Argon's read on Jacob dictate whether they can defend another player? This may be a difference of opinion, but from my perspective it shouldn't matter what your read on a player is. I'm sure you'd agree, Jackson, that even if a player you lock!Wolf was attacked with an awful argument, that you should still be able to defend them from that argument.
Regardless, I think that Black's tone between post 616 and 618, being more aggressive in the former and diplomatic in the latter, is a little suspicious to me. If I were to try to put it into words, it's as if Argon's response was unexpectedly lax to Black and they had to tune it back to not look outright hostile.
This is complete speculation on my part, and if someone could vouch that Black is just like this I'd be willing to drop it.

I had to go look back over the context for this one. While I understand how you came to this conclusion, I don't agree with you. I think it's natural to ask where they actually stand on somebody given they defended a slot repeatedly for whatever reason that could be. I can definitely see possible underlying "agenda" or intent in the words she used in both those posts but I think she's genuinely seeing something line up, and then asking questions appropriately but I do see what you're seeing. Also I do agree with you that I would defend a slot I hard-SR if the logic used against them was awful.

Point 7

:

Anyway, if this flips red then the hydra is incredibly townie

Agreed to that

:thinking:

Well, you're right that it was obvious enough to catch, given that Lucca did before Black in post 853. Not by an insignificant time margin, either. It was more or less 30 minutes, certainly enough time for Black to have seen that Lucca replied. Regardless, this is NAI 7 ways to Sundaye.

Let me take this moment to tell you how I love how you're discussing this with me, making sure to outline what the context is before saying what you think. I love it, thank you.

Point 8, Finale.

There was something interesting that I caught in that interaction between you and Black. You had responded to it, even. It was this tidbit:

I do

Ok. Why?

Mostly from their predecessor, who leaked entitlement like it was sweat and that was incredibly townie to me. Going back to the very early game and their interaction with me it didn't feel like scum at all and considering it was us "swinging" at each other that's pretty telling to me as usually in that circumstance just through inherent bias you get the feeling of scum when someone pushes against you or at least it does for me and I didn't get much of an ounce of scumminess from Clap while disagreeing entirely with what they were doing. It feels pretty cut and dry to me
[...]

Can you point out what entitlement you saw?
[...]

Now this is more strange than suspicious to me, but this post puts into focus the fact that Point 1 (the agreement that you two achieved,) was not about what had happened over the course of this game, but rather was about Mafia Theory.

What are you making of that? If it was mostly about mafia theory, why does that reflect on her alignment. I'll wait to say my full thoughts for when you answer that

I shall take a bow, to avoid the death glare that Jackson will give me for not spoilering this wall post.

Just for prosperity I shall too not spoiler this response

Responses in

Bolded Red

[JacksonVirgo]

I think you're town again, yay

[JacksonVirgo]

Yeah I don't think Sky is the way to go

[JacksonVirgo]

For today anyway

[JacksonVirgo]

At work so I’ll respond back to you later

[JacksonVirgo]

I’m just not really feeling it

[JacksonVirgo]

I can try in a sec

[JacksonVirgo]

It’ll likely be stream of consciousness so I got no idea how legible it’ll be

[JacksonVirgo]

Can you elaborate on that feeling at all

I just really really liked their early game, and thinking about it for what it is I don't think how they're acting right now to take from that read. Recency bias overtook me for a little bit + filling a void because the people I scum-read hard kept becoming people I started to town-read heavily again (Jake) and Cakez being like objectively a silly wagon today I just wanted to fill that gap but thinking objectively. I still kinda like Stargazer, I will probably do an ISO-dive like I did with you to see if I do agree with those posts that I think are townie (from memory) but really I think we focus Shadow today

[JacksonVirgo]

VOTE: Sky

e-1 again

Does that mean you're okay with a hammer now?

[JacksonVirgo]

Considering the reason you unvoted

[JacksonVirgo]

i'm still unsure i want to vote out skygazer

i think scum is unlikely to make that claim. it's possible but seems rather unlikely. i also kinda liked her day 1 play

I don't want skygazer either but this logic is awful, their claim is NAI at best.

[JacksonVirgo]

To me it feels like she doesn't really know how to believably seem like she's solving the game in the current game state. There are no signs of sky's town games here. No partner theories, no firm stances, no questioning people, no analyzing behaviors or posts or anything. There are no critical thoughts about the game

Are you saying she consistently does absolutely nothing as a wolf?

[JacksonVirgo]

but lack of activity these past few days have forced the hand of the members of scum to leave the wagon to make sure their buddy is not limmed.

Yeah, I'm mafia and I'm trying to get the votes all off my buddies wagon. Can you help pretty please?

[JacksonVirgo]

JV up to page five seems p townie

not to say they're not townie after page 5

i just got to page 5

Not sure how I feel about this looking back, it feels like it was a "oh shit I just said that, gotta clarify" type of panic which pings me a little bit but it could also just be them just casually wanting to clarify. Not sure

I would like to slay the three-headed hydra for the crime of using their roleplay to obfuscate their reads and the identities of the heads. I don't mind prose in small doses, but I'm having too much trouble understanding what the fuck they're even saying and I can't keep track of who's saying what. Plus some of their posts are literally just roleplay filler and I can't just skim their posts to find out what's worth reading and what's just for fun.

I originally voted Passion for the same thing, but I feel like as the Day has progressed that she's putting in effort to keep the roleplay concise and keep the content flowing and easy to read.

i *think* this feels like a town post

This is the post which holds the most of the skygazer TR in my eyes. I don't think scum!gazer would be reluctant to label somebody as Town, in fact I would say it's incredibly unlikely this post ever comes from scum!gazer. It feels almost completely pure of heart, I don't really know how to explain it beyond that. I commented on it at the time as well saying how townie it is and I was aiming to look back at this post in particular when I said I was going to ISO dive to see if my thoughts changed on it but it hasn't

i rlly wanna lolhammer in honor of our fallen miltank hero

jv i hope this isn't a repeat of your large normal fakeclaim situation lol

i actually find JV townie here idk

This though, maybe not that last post I quoted but idk this does feel off considering the action had actually failed. Shadow responded in this way too (in regards to that same game) but that felt like he believed in the result but was scared I did one. This feels different. This feels like they're trying to make a point(?), I will try and think on that to see what I don't like about it.

Overall: I think gazer is town still, but if people are confident I don't mind them going out. I have some paranoia around it for lack of a better term

[JacksonVirgo]

Sky is either scum true claiming neighbor or town true claiming

Lying about being a neighbor lends yourself to a potential counter claim

I would guess there are more town neighbor roles than scum neighbor roles but I could be wrong about that, haven't counted

Yes, that's why their claim does not matter. There's exactly 3 town neighbours and 3 evil neighbours

[JacksonVirgo]

Neighbor seems like a great fake claim for scum here actually. Thanks for pointing that out

Now that feels like conf-bias

[JacksonVirgo]

What sucks is I know it's a problem I have but my brain still tells me I've found more evidence every time

Literally same, I'll humour you though. What makes you feel it's a great fake-claim for scum?

[JacksonVirgo]

I mean the amount of neighbours doesn't really matter. They claimed it, therefore it's a true-claim no matter what excluding a gambit which makes it NAI.

[JacksonVirgo]

Just due to the nature of the role itself

[JacksonVirgo]

It does matter odds wise but I'm not willing to fight this further

I mean the odds don't matter to any reasonable degree because the chance is so low either way and doesn't really change anything of value one way or another. It's just like a traitor game, like the chance exists but it doesn't really matter either way. You just acknowledge the chance of it and move on and make your arguments as you would. Black seeing scum in skygazers claim is just like you seeing town in skygazers claim. It's simply just a reflection of how you both are feeling about her more than the claim itself.

[JacksonVirgo]

but lack of activity these past few days have forced the hand of the members of scum to leave the wagon to make sure their buddy is not limmed.

Yeah, I'm mafia and I'm trying to get the votes all off my buddies wagon. Can you help pretty please?

K thanks for admitting it

Cakez, feel free to shoot this guy tonight. Or shaddowez. :mrgreen:

-Atalanta

I await the mighty bullet

[JacksonVirgo]

I mean the amount of neighbours doesn't really matter. They claimed it, therefore it's a true-claim no matter what excluding a gambit which makes it NAI.

Why can't she fake claim neighbor as scum?

I mean if she fake-claimed a neighbour there'd be a reason why she's risk getting counter-claimed by an actual neighbourhood. Why would they?

[JacksonVirgo]

If she goes out after trying to risk getting counterclaimed, the claimed neighbourhood would be like confirmed to not have wolves in it.

[JacksonVirgo]

Bruh

[JacksonVirgo]

Don't hammer yet

[JacksonVirgo]

I'm cooking

[JacksonVirgo]

Why? It gives her claim some surface level credibility if she true-claimed a sole-neighbour

[JacksonVirgo]

Spoiler: Math

86 Town
26 Mafia
25 Werewolves
13 Serial Killers

Neighbour Roles

20 - Town Neighbour Neighbourizer
21 - Mafia Neighbour Combined Rolecop Neighbourizer
22 - Town Neighbour
26 - Town Neighbour Messenger
11 - Werewolf Neighbor Messenger
110 - Mafia Neighbour

3 Town. 2 Mafia. 1 Werewolf.

Roughly 3.5% of the Town are neighbours.
Roughly 7.69% (nice) of the Mafia are neighbours.
Exactly 4% of the werewolves are neighbours

TOWN

• 10 total attempts at 3.5%
  
• 1 - (1 - 0.035)^10
  
• Roughly 30% chance one exists.

MAFIA

• 3 total attempts at 7.69%
  
• 1 - (1 - 0.0769)^3
  
• Roughly 21.3% chance one exists (if this faction is confirmed 100%)

WEREWOLVES

• 3 total attempts at 4%
  
• 1 - (1 - 0.04)^3
  
• Roughly 11.53% chance one exists (if this faction is confirmed 100%)

SERIAL KILLER

• 1 total attempts at 0%
  
• 1 - (1 - 0)^1
  
• Exactly 0% chance one exists
  
• I did this because it's hilarious

Since we don't know which scum team we have the total odds for an evil neighbour rolling is

• (0.5 * 0.213) + (0.5 * 0.1153) + 0.0
  
• Roughly 16.43%

Once we find out the evil faction we can just use their individual odds, which is less than Town's anyway.

If my math is wrong, please correct me.

TL;DR substantially higher chance that any given Neighbour is a Town role.
I don't actually care for statistics in Mafia but I felt this would be fun to do so I did it

[JacksonVirgo]

I don't understand your comment. I'm saying if she has the role 2-Shot Roleblocker or something and the only 2-Shot Roleblocker on the list is a scum role then she can't claim that

If she's actually a scum neighbor then yeah she would just true-claim neighbor

That's not a fair comparison at all though, this has nothing to do with Skygazer's claim.

I just don't understand why she has to be a neighbor just because she said she is. It's really not that important but that comment confused me

I don't see her ever fake-claiming neighbour specifically unless she is one. Regardless of alignment, it doesn't make sense to fake-claim it therefore she likely is

[JacksonVirgo]

What are the reasons a scum would fake-claim Neighbour when she isn't one?

[JacksonVirgo]

Even if you have to stretch to reach some reasons I don't mind

[JacksonVirgo]

Nah, I think this is scum!sky

I feel like there is usually a point in Sky's town games where she buckles down and really starts to think critically about the game. I haven't seen that at all here. She's just coasting

Like I think sky posts reactively a lot but when she's town there's usually a moment where she feels guilty about not doing anything and then starts to be proactive for a bit before she slides off into obscurity again. I've seen it after her being pushed before but she got to e-1 and she's still just lurking around

I would like you to prove your case here.
Is her current gameplay consistent with her scumplay, and atypical of her townplay? Provide a few of her games as evidence.

Will you read and compare those games?

[JacksonVirgo]

Does it really even matter who is right?

...yes? If I'm right, we don't mislim a town?

[JacksonVirgo]

I feel I'm misunderstanding your question

[JacksonVirgo]

Yes. I may not like constructing a meta case against someone, but I'd be willing to follow up on a meta case that I'm requesting.

Yeah alright, cuz I see countless times people ask for these things and then proceed to do

nothing

with it to a point where I get icky seeing someone ask for it