Print

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

[Jimmmmm]

Yeah I wouldn't say I'm angry, and I did lean into the argument a bit because I think getting into early-game arguments helps me get into the game, particularly when at least one side has/has expressed a scumread on the other.

I really think faust's strategy is not only damaging to Town, but damaging to the game. If it was pro-Town then everyone should do it, and if everyone did it we wouldn't have much of a game left. I think it was #238 when it became clear to me that this was something that faust was really going for. I think it's something of a devious strategy because it potentially makes him effectively unexileable. If we misexile him once then all the better for him as he can then point to that in the future. I think this kind of acti-lurking is significantly worse than lurking, and if we "exile all lurkers" as an attempt to disincentivise lurking, then we should do something similar for this.

[jotheonah]

I guess we can add “advocating for a policy exile” to the Jimmmmm is scum bingo card.

[Jimmmmm]

Only if I flip scum.

[faust]

If angry is too strong a word, then when did your negative feelings peak?

Peak negative feelings was definitely here:

What definitely does not serve town is debating which playstyles are and aren't helpful to town instead of scumhunting.

For sure. And look at the rabbit-hole you're leading us down.

[faust]

If it was pro-Town then everyone should do it

This is a fallacy.

I think this kind of acti-lurking is significantly worse than lurking, and if we "exile all lurkers" as an attempt to disincentivise lurking, then we should do something similar for this.

Please explain how what I do is worse than lurking.

[faust]

I did lean into the argument a bit

This to me really illustrates how disingenuous the post i quoted for my peak negative feelings really was.

[Jimmmmm]

If it was pro-Town then everyone should do it

This is a fallacy.

How? Are you suggesting you're the only one who should do it?

I think this kind of acti-lurking is significantly worse than lurking, and if we "exile all lurkers" as an attempt to disincentivise lurking, then we should do something similar for this.

Please explain how what I do is worse than lurking.

Well for one, normally when lurkers are called out for lurking they try to stop. When you're called out for acti-lurking it results in this.

[Jimmmmm]

I did lean into the argument a bit

This to me really illustrates how disingenuous the post i quoted for my peak negative feelings really was.

Nope. Never said I did or said anything disingenuous.

Regarding the post you quoted, the fact that not giving you a free pass inevitably leads us down this rabbit hole is one of the major problems with your strategy.

[Jimmmmm]

And then for you to chide others for debating playstyles when it's the only talking point you allow for yourself is part of the deviousness of the strategy.

[faust]

I am not engaging with this further.

[Jimmmmm]

[-snip-]
I would have preferred to avoid the meta argument entirely, but sadly there's nothing else to talk about when it comes to faust's game.

I don't think you can say this any more in good faith. faust has divulged quite a bit. He shared his opinion on the EFHW wagon, gave more of a read on MiX, etc. He's playing less one dimensionally than you are giving him credit for in your argument.

Looking through faust's posts, I stand by my statement.


I assume regarding the EFHW wagon you're referring to this:

The three players I have voted for (joth, iguana, Jimmmmm) have all since ended up on the EFHW wagon, so unless you think that is completely town-driven, I have already voted for scum. If you do think that the EFHW wagon is completely town-driven, then it is probably beneficial to join that wagon rather than start a new one on me.

This is a nothing argument. You don't get credit for voting for a group that may contain scum, certainly not pre-flip and not necessarily post-flip. The extent of faust's shared opinion on the EFHW wagon is "I've voted for EFHW-voters, so either I'm right or EFHW is scum (or at least should be exiled)". This is not plainly true, unhelpful in itself, and moreso given that it's based on unhelpful votes.


Comments on/to MiX:

Don't you think you can buddy me!

I was just about ready to vote MiX, and now you leave?

MiX is scum but it's not the exile we want right now.

MiX is scum but it's not the exile we want right now.

why not?

If I tell you we'd have to kill him.

I am disappointed in you, MiX. Two people having a drawn-out emotional discussion and then a third player going "I think this is TvT" is such a meme. I expected better.

I am disappointed in you, MiX. Two people having a drawn-out emotional discussion and then a third player going "I think this is TvT" is such a meme. I expected better.

It's a meme for a reason. I think your particular way of reacting to Jimmmmm makes him town. And of course, it makes you town too.

In my experience the statement is about as likely to be correct as random chance once you restrict to only instances where townies say it.

Also, wait - the way I reacted to Jimmmmm makes him town? How does that make sense?

The things he said that made you react like that, and the reaction itself, tells me that you subconsciously think that he's being honest and genuine.

What does is matter what I think?

Also, the fact that scum can be honest and genuine about these things was like, the entire point i tried to make earlier.

Oh also if I was scum I would be more accepting of MiX and his townread on me.

...
Conveniently ignores joth...

Are you saying this because joth is now also voting for Jimmmmm or because joth was the third vote on the EFHW wagon?

Nothing here sheds any light to me on either of their alignments or faust's read on MiX. Is there something I've missed?

[faust]

MiX is scum but it's not the exile we want right now.

[...]
Nothing here sheds any light to me on [...] faust's read on MiX.

[Jimmmmm]

Yep you said the words "MiX is scum" early on Day 1. Perhaps I should have said it sheds no light on your scumread on MiX. If you are Town and have some strong reason to believe MiX is scum, I'd love to hear it. Until I do, the statement is meaningless as far as I'm concerned.

[Jimmmmm]

Taking a closer look at EFHW, particularly the defensiveness claim.

Enough digression/regression regarding the last game. How shall we get out of RVS?

math, were you seriously pushing MiX, or was that more RVS?

This seems reasonable. I don't know what happened last game, but I can understand not wanting to let it cause problems for this game.

so anyway faust is town & Didds is town & MiX is but he's being pleasant and helpful.

idk, nobody's pinging me overmuch, which makes sense because none of you are terrible at this game.

Vote: EFHW

Wait a minute - are you salty too?

I could see an argument for this being defensive - joth didn't mention the last game but EFHW guesses it as the reason for joth's vote. Could be read as a light-hearted jab.

I feel better and better about my EFHW vote. 

I think you have this on speed dial. I used to scum read it. Now I think it's NAI.

This seems reasonable if the WCD/EFHW thing is as common as it sounds.

so anyway faust is town & Didds is town & MiX is but he's being pleasant and helpful.

idk, nobody's pinging me overmuch, which makes sense because none of you are terrible at this game.

Vote: EFHW

Wait a minute - are you salty too?

Because there can't be anything in the current game that is scummy.

The fact that she quotes her own post to justify it without prompting rings a small bell.

math, were you seriously pushing MiX, or was that more RVS?

If LL hadn't joined the vote already, I would have already moved on. But since there were 2 votes, I thought I'd see if anyone else was interested in joining too.

So maybe RVS? But

I don’t know if I believe in RVS anymore.

Ditto?

MiX wanted my response to this. I don't play this way, but I know some people do. Meaning being influenced by existing wagons in placing a vote. Maybe that's why joth just voted me. But given that math exhorted others to vote MiX, I'd say this is not a satisfactory answer. I don't see how it can be RVS since he had reasons. Not random.

I'm having some trouble parsing this post, but Didds pointed it out as the one that felt defensive. MiX pointed out the bolded statements as the ones that can look defensive. I don't see the first bolded statement as defensive, rather as an intro to the post, which makes sense to clarify that she was replying to MiX but quoting math. The context of this was EFHW's question to math about whether his vote was RVS or serious; the response being that it was wagon-based / maybe RVS. EFHW's response seems to be that she wouldn't join the wagon for wagon's sake, but connects it to joth's vote on her by suggesting it might be the reason for that. But only one sentence out of six is about joth's vote; the rest is about math's response to EFHW's question, so I don't see this as defensive at all.

I think the RVS/non-RVS thing is pretty moot. Whatever you call it, votes at the start of Day 1 are different because there has been little or no opportunity to develop reads. Most people in my experience call that RVS. Just because some bristle at the term doesn't make it ("is this a serious vote"?) an invalid question.


So, aside from possibly a couple of minor things, I disagree with the EFHW defensiveness argument.

[Jimmmmm]

Can someone articulate why the Jimmmmm wagon?

He's scummy.

And uh I was also townreading Jimmmmm before this recent discussion.

Anyway, it would be cool if we had other wagons, or maybe even just collapse on EFHW. I'll reread the game in a few hours and decide then.

MiX, what and when was the change in your attitude towards me between these posts, which are 17 hours apart?

[Jimmmmm]

Ok, I'm going to respond to one question directed at me, then give my 2 cents on the 2 pages of excessive banter while trying not to extend the discussion in a meaningless way... good luck, self!

Hi Everybody!

What meaningful scumtells do you infer from this post? Quacks like RVS to me.

TBH though, the interactions before and after this rang a little scummy to me. So my vote wasn't entirely without reason. Also, creating interaction, seeing who defends and who jumps on wagon is helpful too.

What interactions rang scummy? You say "before and after" this - are you quoting the post you didn't find scummy?

Specifically, the quoted post felt artificial. Then looking at the post he quoted, and the 2 or 3 that followed, it felt to me like Jimmmmm was trying to create interaction ... I don't know, it just didn't feel like genuine town posting to me.  (No, don't ask me what town posting feels like... it was just my gut feel.)

I still don't really understand this. The quoted post was sarcastic, and probably trying to be a bit clever, so it was artificial in that sense, but the meaning was genuine - disbelief that a vote based only on that post was a serious "Let's exile joth" vote. Of course it could have been for some other reason, such as putting pressure on him to get a reaction, but to me that still falls within RVS.

What do you mean that I was trying to create interaction? It's not clear to me which the 2 or 3 posts you're talking about are.

[MiX]

Can someone articulate why the Jimmmmm wagon?

He's scummy.

And uh I was also townreading Jimmmmm before this recent discussion.

Anyway, it would be cool if we had other wagons, or maybe even just collapse on EFHW. I'll reread the game in a few hours and decide then.

MiX, what and when was the change in your attitude towards me between these posts, which are 17 hours apart?

The first one was a joke. I wanted to stay on your wagon despite toenreading you, so I said that.

[MiX]

In fact, Vote: faust. Scum or anti-Town, you don't get a free pass just because you want one.

@Jimmmmm, at what point did you start feeling angry at faust?

@faust, same question re: Jimmmmm.

I am willing to policy exile EFHW for this post.

[LaLight]

In fact, Vote: faust. Scum or anti-Town, you don't get a free pass just because you want one.

@Jimmmmm, at what point did you start feeling angry at faust?

@faust, same question re: Jimmmmm.

I am willing to policy exile EFHW for this post.

why?

[MiX]

In fact, Vote: faust. Scum or anti-Town, you don't get a free pass just because you want one.

@Jimmmmm, at what point did you start feeling angry at faust?

@faust, same question re: Jimmmmm.

I am willing to policy exile EFHW for this post.

why?

Because she brought up the faust/Jimmmmm argument again, for what it seems like no real reason.

[jotheonah]

Idk if this needs to be said to a bunch of vets, but policy exiles are scummy because they give scum cover to get someone exiled without committing to that person being scum. We get one exile per game day. It’s not pro town to use it for anything other than pursuing our collective wincon.

[2.71828.....]

In fact, Vote: faust. Scum or anti-Town, you don't get a free pass just because you want one.

@Jimmmmm, at what point did you start feeling angry at faust?

@faust, same question re: Jimmmmm.

I am willing to policy exile EFHW for this post.

why?

Because she brought up the faust/Jimmmmm argument again, for what it seems like no real reason.

So.... Not a policy exile.

[EFHW]

In fact, Vote: faust. Scum or anti-Town, you don't get a free pass just because you want one.

@Jimmmmm, at what point did you start feeling angry at faust?

@faust, same question re: Jimmmmm.

I am willing to policy exile EFHW for this post.

I want to sort out if either of them is scummy for that argument.

[EFHW]

Ok, I caught up. Sorry.

[MiX]

In fact, Vote: faust. Scum or anti-Town, you don't get a free pass just because you want one.

@Jimmmmm, at what point did you start feeling angry at faust?

@faust, same question re: Jimmmmm.

I am willing to policy exile EFHW for this post.

I want to sort out if either of them is scummy for that argument.

What were/are your reads on them before/after this question?