Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[mcmcsalot]

I mostly just don't want to incentivize people to post cryptic nonsense right out of the gate alluding to thoughts relating to their PM  they may or may not have had to score immediate towncred.

So would you prefer no posts to the kid of posts that iguana made?

Actually curious here. You(faust) seem to be saying here that you very much approve of Iguana's post and that "no posts of the kind iguana made" is a bad thing. WHy do you think that is a bad thing? I dislike iguana's post, and don't say well it kickstarted interactions because I think there are better ways to do that. In a vacuum why do you like iguana's post specifically.

All I do there is ask a question. I also prefer having posts to having no posts. Other than that there is nothing about iguana's post in particular that gets me excited.

But no posts is not the opposite of no posts of the kind iguana made so if there is nothing that excites you about iguana's post why press cuzz for saying he didn't want to incentivize iguana's post at all and why pose the question in a way that made it look like cuzz was saying he preferred no posts.

[mcmcsalot]

I essentially agree with Galzria.

So you think scum would not have townread scum!iguana here. Why?

I think scum's more likely immediate reaction is a frustrated "this proves nothing!"

Why?

I feel like we've seen scum react that way, in cases where some kind of setup or PM or timing error thing has been exploited for town cred. I know that I myself have reacted that way as scum, though I can't recall when.

And these are instances where they reacted to their scum partner, in a premeditated town-cred grab?

If you are asking if robz's scenario is an instance where scum reacted with a frustrated this proves nothing to their scum partner for town cred, I think you are reading what robz said wrong. He is saying he as scum has reacted to similar posts from town!iguana by making a frustrated "this proves nothing" therefor he feels iguana is town and the people reacting to iguana frustratedly (cuzz, maybe myself?) are scummy. If so do you argree or disagree with robz thoughts.

If you read robz right I think you are asking if there are instances where scum reacted to their scum partner with a frustrated this proves nothing to their scum partner in a premeditated town-cred grab. If so I think it is unlikely scum does that as premeditated town-cred grabbing plans day one primarily serve to just put light on scum day one in a current meta that has had slow day ones with last minute scrambles.

Well I asked why scum would/would not react to a scumpartner this way, since Robz said that he agreed with Galzria who was making that point. It may well be that Robz answered a question that I did not ask.

Oh you are right I was confused as well but yes robz didn't answer your question.

Galz said scum is unlikely to come out in support of scum!iguana therefor likely iguana is town.
Robz said he agreed and then gave an explanation for why by saying scum is unlikely to come out in support of town!iguana. Unless I am wrong about robz response but I don't think I am. Either way i think robz point is valid despite not being in direct support of galz's statement.

[Cuzz]

Good. Now that we've gotten that out of the way, which of these seems most likely:

Scum {any of us} supports Town Iguana
Scum {any of us} supports Scum Iguana
Town {any of us} supports Town Iguana
Town {any of us} supports Scum Iguana

Personally, in a void, I think option 2 is least likely in any given game. That means even if you value the others all equally, Iguana is more likely than not town.

Since this has led to some other interactions, e.g. Robz's agreement with Galz, can we take a moment and talk about how utterly awful this reasoning is? You cannot value all other possibilities equally because Iguana is more likely to be town in the first place. Iguana is more likely than not town because there are more town than scum in this game, not because of any argle bargle about how his scum partners would respond to his post.

There is this weird bias where people seem to be subconsiously assuming that everyone starts off with a 50/50 chance of being town/scum and then updates these probabilities from that baseline based on reads, and it leads to a ton of terrible arguments.

Not to mention, you know, this isn't scum iguana.

This is fine if you wanna use this as your reasoning, but don't commit crimes against conditional probability in the process.

[Robz888]

Yeah, mcmc got it. Sorry, I guess I read Galz wrong, or too quickly.

I think iguana is town, so "how would scum react to scum iguana" isn't really a scenario that matters to me.

[faust]

I mostly just don't want to incentivize people to post cryptic nonsense right out of the gate alluding to thoughts relating to their PM  they may or may not have had to score immediate towncred.

So would you prefer no posts to the kid of posts that iguana made?

Actually curious here. You(faust) seem to be saying here that you very much approve of Iguana's post and that "no posts of the kind iguana made" is a bad thing. WHy do you think that is a bad thing? I dislike iguana's post, and don't say well it kickstarted interactions because I think there are better ways to do that. In a vacuum why do you like iguana's post specifically.

All I do there is ask a question. I also prefer having posts to having no posts. Other than that there is nothing about iguana's post in particular that gets me excited.

But no posts is not the opposite of no posts of the kind iguana made so if there is nothing that excites you about iguana's post why press cuzz for saying he didn't want to incentivize iguana's post at all and why pose the question in a way that made it look like cuzz was saying he preferred no posts.

I think you misread my original question. I never used the phrase "no posts of the kind iguana made".

[mcmcsalot]

I mostly just don't want to incentivize people to post cryptic nonsense right out of the gate alluding to thoughts relating to their PM  they may or may not have had to score immediate towncred.

So would you prefer no posts to the kid of posts that iguana made?

Actually curious here. You(faust) seem to be saying here that you very much approve of Iguana's post and that "no posts of the kind iguana made" is a bad thing. WHy do you think that is a bad thing? I dislike iguana's post, and don't say well it kickstarted interactions because I think there are better ways to do that. In a vacuum why do you like iguana's post specifically.

All I do there is ask a question. I also prefer having posts to having no posts. Other than that there is nothing about iguana's post in particular that gets me excited.

But no posts is not the opposite of no posts of the kind iguana made so if there is nothing that excites you about iguana's post why press cuzz for saying he didn't want to incentivize iguana's post at all and why pose the question in a way that made it look like cuzz was saying he preferred no posts.

I think you misread my original question. I never used the phrase "no posts of the kind iguana made".

I believe I understood your question.

"So would you prefer no posts to the kid of posts that iguana made?" does that not mean, So would you prefer no posts to (instead of) the kind of posts that iguana made?

And if I am correct my question stands. A) If nothing excites you about Iguana's post, why are pressing cuzz for not wanting to incentivize iguana's post.

And B) why did you try to make it sound like Cuzz would prefer no posts instead of the kind of posts iguana made when cuzz cleary just said he didn't want to incentivize that kind of post not any post at all.

[Galzria]

Good. Now that we've gotten that out of the way, which of these seems most likely:

Scum {any of us} supports Town Iguana
Scum {any of us} supports Scum Iguana
Town {any of us} supports Town Iguana
Town {any of us} supports Scum Iguana

Personally, in a void, I think option 2 is least likely in any given game. That means even if you value the others all equally, Iguana is more likely than not town.

Since this has led to some other interactions, e.g. Robz's agreement with Galz, can we take a moment and talk about how utterly awful this reasoning is? You cannot value all other possibilities equally because Iguana is more likely to be town in the first place. Iguana is more likely than not town because there are more town than scum in this game, not because of any argle bargle about how his scum partners would respond to his post.

There is this weird bias where people seem to be subconsiously assuming that everyone starts off with a 50/50 chance of being town/scum and then updates these probabilities from that baseline based on reads, and it leads to a ton of terrible arguments.

Not to mention, you know, this isn't scum iguana.

This is fine if you wanna use this as your reasoning, but don't commit crimes against conditional probability in the process.

Disagree completely. You're looking at it in a vacuum based purely on numbers. I'm looking at it through the lens of a social construct. Players have alignments, and players have actions/reactions. Those actions/reactions are influenced by their alignments, and absolutely tip the scales beyond a purely mathematical outcome.

[Galzria]

I should say, I don't disagree with your math (obviously) - I disagree with looking at things in a vacuum, instead of looking at/for interactions.

Although yes, everybody in the game starts at 50/50 to me (or neutral), in relation to one another, because every person is as likely as the next to be town/Scum.

[Cuzz]

Disagree completely. You're looking at it in a vacuum based purely on numbers. I'm looking at it through the lens of a social construct. Players have alignments, and players have actions/reactions. Those actions/reactions are influenced by their alignments, and absolutely tip the scales beyond a purely mathematical outcome.

Let's look at what you actually said:

Good. Now that we've gotten that out of the way, which of these seems most likely:

Scum {any of us} supports Town Iguana
Scum {any of us} supports Scum Iguana
Town {any of us} supports Town Iguana
Town {any of us} supports Scum Iguana

Personally, in a void, I think option 2 is least likely in any given game. That means even if you value the others all equally, Iguana is more likely than not town.

To paraphrase: "There are four possibilities. I think one of the ones where iguana is scum is least likely. Therefore he is probably town" This is circular nonsense.

You're talking above about actions and reactions, but your original post said nothing at all about anyone's actual reaction to iguana's post. Like maybe I am missing something, but you were the one trying to frame your argument in terms of the relative likelihoods of 4 possible scenarios and I absolutely do not follow how the conclusion was supposed to follow from anything you said, except possibly as a pure tautology.

Can you break down the second quote above and explain it to me like I'm an idiot?

[Galzria]

Townie (in no particular order):
Mcmc
LaLight
SirClemens
Iguana

Scummy:
DatSwan
Cuzz
TWM

Neutral:
Faust
Robz

No read:
Everybody else (Space, Teproc, PPS)

[Cuzz]

No read:
Everybody else (Space, Teproc, PPS)

Oh, wow, Vote: Teproc yeesh

[Galzria]

Disagree completely. You're looking at it in a vacuum based purely on numbers. I'm looking at it through the lens of a social construct. Players have alignments, and players have actions/reactions. Those actions/reactions are influenced by their alignments, and absolutely tip the scales beyond a purely mathematical outcome.

Let's look at what you actually said:

Good. Now that we've gotten that out of the way, which of these seems most likely:

Scum {any of us} supports Town Iguana
Scum {any of us} supports Scum Iguana
Town {any of us} supports Town Iguana
Town {any of us} supports Scum Iguana

Personally, in a void, I think option 2 is least likely in any given game. That means even if you value the others all equally, Iguana is more likely than not town.

To paraphrase: "There are four possibilities. I think one of the ones where iguana is scum is least likely. Therefore he is probably town" This is circular nonsense.

You're talking above about actions and reactions, but your original post said nothing at all about anyone's actual reaction to iguana's post. Like maybe I am missing something, but you were the one trying to frame your argument in terms of the relative likelihoods of 4 possible scenarios and I absolutely do not follow how the conclusion was supposed to follow from anything you said, except possibly as a pure tautology.

Can you break down the second quote above and explain it to me like I'm an idiot?

My post was a direct reaction to TWM in post #81, which was looking at direct reactions to Iguana's claim. In TWM's world, he didn't buy iguana being town, and found those finding him townie to be scummy.

I don't believe the argument for finding the reaction scummy is invalid, but I did believe that support of such an argument should make it significantly more likely that Iguana is town.

[faust]

I mostly just don't want to incentivize people to post cryptic nonsense right out of the gate alluding to thoughts relating to their PM  they may or may not have had to score immediate towncred.

So would you prefer no posts to the kid of posts that iguana made?

Actually curious here. You(faust) seem to be saying here that you very much approve of Iguana's post and that "no posts of the kind iguana made" is a bad thing. WHy do you think that is a bad thing? I dislike iguana's post, and don't say well it kickstarted interactions because I think there are better ways to do that. In a vacuum why do you like iguana's post specifically.

All I do there is ask a question. I also prefer having posts to having no posts. Other than that there is nothing about iguana's post in particular that gets me excited.

But no posts is not the opposite of no posts of the kind iguana made so if there is nothing that excites you about iguana's post why press cuzz for saying he didn't want to incentivize iguana's post at all and why pose the question in a way that made it look like cuzz was saying he preferred no posts.

I think you misread my original question. I never used the phrase "no posts of the kind iguana made".

I believe I understood your question.

"So would you prefer no posts to the kid of posts that iguana made?" does that not mean, So would you prefer no posts to (instead of) the kind of posts that iguana made?

And if I am correct my question stands. A) If nothing excites you about Iguana's post, why are pressing cuzz for not wanting to incentivize iguana's post.

And B) why did you try to make it sound like Cuzz would prefer no posts instead of the kind of posts iguana made when cuzz cleary just said he didn't want to incentivize that kind of post not any post at all.

A) Because pressing people is a good thing and I was interested to see how heartfelt Cuzz's frustration was.
B) I did not try to make it sound like anything. I asked a question which Cuzz answered and now everyone is clear on where he stands on the matter.

[Galzria]

 That is, if you find us scummy for reading iguanas post as townie, fine. But unless you're suggesting that it's scum pushing a town narrative on a scum partner after his opening D1 post, then to find us scummy should mean that Iguana gets moved more into the town column.

[Cuzz]

That is, if you find us scummy for reading iguanas post as townie, fine. But unless you're suggesting that it's scum pushing a town narrative on a scum partner after his opening D1 post, then to find us scummy should mean that Iguana gets moved more into the town column.

Ok, but I think you can find 2 people scummy while also thinking it is unlikely that they are scum partners.

[Cuzz]

I asked a question which Cuzz answered and now everyone is clear on where he stands on the matter.

Yes, just in case there is any ambiguity, I disliked iguana's post but I also dislike having no posts at all.

[faust]

I asked a question which Cuzz answered and now everyone is clear on where he stands on the matter.

Yes, just in case there is any ambiguity, I disliked iguana's post but I also dislike having no posts at all.

Which I suppose your latest vote illustrates.

Do you think Teproc is scummy for not posting or is it more of a prodding kind of vote?

[Galzria]

That is, if you find us scummy for reading iguanas post as townie, fine. But unless you're suggesting that it's scum pushing a town narrative on a scum partner after his opening D1 post, then to find us scummy should mean that Iguana gets moved more into the town column.

Ok, but I think you can find 2 people scummy while also thinking it is unlikely that they are scum partners.

I mean... yes? No? SK or third faction aside, I get what you're saying, but also have mixed feelings on it. Obviously finding two people individually scummy doesn't mean you're going out and looking for or calling scum teams. And it's quite frequent to have more scum reads than scum in the game.

But again, social construct, you can't look at everything individually. Maybe you think iguana's post is scummy. And maybe (naturally, even) you think those arguing that it's townie are scummy as well. But I believe one directly impacts the other. Sure, you could leave it at that, but I think the logical next step is the one that I made ("Scum pushing town narrative on scum partner") - and that sort of thing just doesn't happen. At least, not D1, with no knowledge of what Town PR's are in the game (Tracker, Watcher, Cop, etc) that could catch you out.

I don't know. I get your point, but I think there's more to it than that.

[Cuzz]

I asked a question which Cuzz answered and now everyone is clear on where he stands on the matter.

Yes, just in case there is any ambiguity, I disliked iguana's post but I also dislike having no posts at all.

Which I suppose your latest vote illustrates.

Do you think Teproc is scummy for not posting or is it more of a prodding kind of vote?

I think it is definitely anti-town and possibly scummy.

[Robz888]

I can't imagine that Teproc not posting yet is actually alignment indicative of him.

[Cuzz]

I can't imagine that Teproc not posting yet is actually alignment indicative of him.

Any thoughts to share on those who have posted?

[Robz888]

I can't imagine that Teproc not posting yet is actually alignment indicative of him.

Any thoughts to share on those who have posted?

Not really. This seems like fairly typical mcmc and faust so far, though.

[SpaceAnemone]

crimes against conditional probability

I'm in the process of catching up from having gotten a bit behind over the course of today. I have very little will to engage with the kind-of-negative argument about how to interpret Iguana's statement and various reactions to it. But I did enjoy the phrase from Cuzz that I'm quoting above :-)

[SpaceAnemone]

Oh, silver isn't in this game :-( Otherwise, he'd've had things to say on conditional probabilities, too.

[SpaceAnemone]

The setup is a bit limiting in terms of allowing setup discussion, so those of us who love cold hard figures are at more of a disadvantage than with the more setuppy games.

I'd quite like to steer the conversation to something that's less tedious than people vaguely talking past each other or arguing for numbers vs reads. Unfortunately, the other interesting thing to pick up on in recent posts is the comment about scum-team probabilities, and I'm not going to make myself very popular for giving thoughts on that and not on current in-game players.

Though chances are that if we rank the posters in frequency order, the set that is least-present is probably not the scum team. That holds especially if I've already managed to slide all the way down the post count rankings :-P