In post 174, Mystik Spiral wrote:why? in this kind of setup, policy quickhammering is what could make us lose.
If a player is L-1 and not voting themselves, we've already lost if they're the jester. If they're town, they're likely to selfhammer to prevent losing to the jester. The only people who have no motivation to selfhammer are, in fact, mafia. So either I cut down time to what will already happen (a selfhammer) or I get to hammer mafia. It's like literally the only setup where quickhammering doesn't have drawbacks.
Also, Meg is correct that we obviously shouldn't qh someone who is already on their own wagon, but I don't see it as likely that someone will already be on their own wagon.
I'm not going to self hammer and I'm not Scum.
I was anything worse than you! Anything worse than you was I!
You was doided teh aposit_tisopa het dedoid saw em.
i actually think that town shouldn’t self-hammer unless they’re somehow in a tight 1v1 with someone they’re strongly confident is jester. doing that will only make it easier for scum to get parity.
I feel like Bingle isn't looking at my thought process and isn't fact-checking me to see if I use weird reasoning for my reads. Of course, you are free to prove me wrong.
I was anything worse than you! Anything worse than you was I!
You was doided teh aposit_tisopa het dedoid saw em.
In post 202, Bingle wrote:I mean… not selfhammering when you’re obviously going to die is just wasting time, but really the takeaway is that e-2 is actually e-1.
why? if you’re going to die anyway, then you obviously wouldn’t need to self-hammer. who tf cares about “wasting time” unless it’s near deadline?
In post 173, Mystik Spiral wrote:it concerns me that neither you or lq are even considering the fact that i could be town here, so why is that?
I am considering you could be Town. I said that more or less.
i still don’t like imaginality. he shouldn’t be having that reaction to my response wrt to Wisdom’s question. i don’t think he’s town but jester is possible. ugh.
imaginality, why shouldn’t i revote you?
and i also, explain to me again why you’re voting Meg?
In post 96, imaginality wrote:Giving benefit of the doubt I can see that you might have interpreted "why the vote change" as "why did you stop voting me(Wisdom)" whereas I interpreted it as "why are you now voting Gamma and no longer voting Wisdom". It doesn't seem as natural a reading but it is plausible. So I don't see your 31 as scummy but neither is me asking for the other half of the answer
so what is disingenuous about my reaction? i’m still not convinced you actually did think i dodged Wisdom’s question because fmpov, it seemed pretty obvious i didn’t do that.
Exactly this. You seem smart enough that I don't believe you don't understand my point (that you in fact didn't answer the question from my perspective of why vote Gamma, while I admit your post #31 did answer the question from your perspective of why you stopped voting Wisdom) so I believe you continuing to argue I'm misrepping you is disingenuous.
"holy shit this entire time i thought imaginalitys profile was a purple seahorse" - camelCasedSnivy
In post 189, imaginality wrote:Also I have a theory about why Bingle has that policy. Not gonna say that either though.
Nah. It's a Jester Nightless policy. I had it the first time I played Jester Nightless. I will have it the next time I play Jester Nightless. It just makes sense.
My theory was you were hoping to lure some dumb Jester into self-voting themselves to E-1 expecting you to hammer so you could then not hammer them.
You expanding to say you won't quickhammer if they self voted means I was wrong about that.
I do agree that if you're only quickhammering non-selfvoters it's fine. It's actually a helpful policy since it evens things out since E-1 is effectively E for everyone then not just the Jester.
"holy shit this entire time i thought imaginalitys profile was a purple seahorse" - camelCasedSnivy
In post 96, imaginality wrote:Giving benefit of the doubt I can see that you might have interpreted "why the vote change" as "why did you stop voting me(Wisdom)" whereas I interpreted it as "why are you now voting Gamma and no longer voting Wisdom". It doesn't seem as natural a reading but it is plausible. So I don't see your 31 as scummy but neither is me asking for the other half of the answer
so what is disingenuous about my reaction? i’m still not convinced you actually did think i dodged Wisdom’s question because fmpov, it seemed pretty obvious i didn’t do that.
Exactly this. You seem smart enough that I don't believe you don't understand my point (that you in fact didn't answer the question from my perspective of why vote Gamma, while I admit your post #31 did answer the question from your perspective of why you stopped voting Wisdom) so I believe you continuing to argue I'm misrepping you is disingenuous.
you really want me to vote you don’t you, otherwise why keep pushing this inane bullshit? hmmmmm
In post 96, imaginality wrote:Giving benefit of the doubt I can see that you might have interpreted "why the vote change" as "why did you stop voting me(Wisdom)" whereas I interpreted it as "why are you now voting Gamma and no longer voting Wisdom". It doesn't seem as natural a reading but it is plausible. So I don't see your 31 as scummy but neither is me asking for the other half of the answer
so what is disingenuous about my reaction? i’m still not convinced you actually did think i dodged Wisdom’s question because fmpov, it seemed pretty obvious i didn’t do that.
Exactly this. You seem smart enough that I don't believe you don't understand my point (that you in fact didn't answer the question from my perspective of why vote Gamma, while I admit your post #31 did answer the question from your perspective of why you stopped voting Wisdom) so I believe you continuing to argue I'm misrepping you is disingenuous.
you really want me to vote you don’t you, otherwise why keep pushing this inane bullshit? hmmmmm
town!imaginality would take into account that i unvoted him but he ignores it. would scum!imaginality really go out of his way to antagonize me after that?
this is what i think imaginality. i think you know i’m telling the truth and are very obviously trying to provoke me. otherwise you would stop telling me that you know my mind better than i do.
In post 218, Mystik Spiral wrote:town!imaginality would take into account that i unvoted him but he ignores it.
How should my answer to your question have been different because you unvoted me versus if you still had your vote on me?
To my mind it's either:
"I think you're being disingenuous because XYZ. I see you've unvoted me but that was because you were thinking of voting Bingle and you later still said I'm not town so it seems like your views on me haven't changed."
Or if you hadn't unvoted:
"I think you're being disingenuous because XYZ."
Same answer to your question in either case.
"holy shit this entire time i thought imaginalitys profile was a purple seahorse" - camelCasedSnivy
In post 51, Bingle wrote:Regardless, my takeaway here is Wisdom never dies before D4.
In the game Shirley, You Jest (a variant of Jester Nightless with moar Jester) Wisdom won as the third Jester limmed by playing as town as possible. It is not only a good theoretical strategy, it's a proven one I have first hand experience with. Me being uber town is not a reason to say I'm not Jest.
OTOH:
VOTE: LQ
Jester hunting in lieu of scumhunting is a pretty good reason for me to think you're maf.
this post is another reason to vote Bingle - I don't think this vote comes from town Bingle
UNVOTE:
i will seriously consider this.
What conclusion did you come to after your serious consideration of this?
"holy shit this entire time i thought imaginalitys profile was a purple seahorse" - camelCasedSnivy
In post 74, Bingle wrote:Not knowing how jester works implies not being jester. Faking it implies the exact opposite. Frankly I’m more interested in how other people react than how you do though.
"holy shit this entire time i thought imaginalitys profile was a purple seahorse" - camelCasedSnivy