Print

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

[faust]

What changed your read on me?

I'm not willing to give scum a primer on how to talk me out of scumreading them, sorry.

[Jimmmmm]

Having another look at EFHW. This jumped out at me:

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.

vote: MiX. I did apologize.

Sorry: to clarify, I'm scumreading that post. I'm not trying to policy exile you anymore.

Honestly, if we want to exile someone for thread health, Jimmmmm's the way to go.

ok, unvote

EFHW votes MiX in agreement with joth's assertion that policy exiles are scummy (or rather, policy votes or advocating for a policy exile). Then when MiX states that he now scumreads EFHW for that post and is no longer trying to policy exile her, EFHW immediately unvotes. Why would the fact that he's now saying it's also scummy change the scumminess of the original call for a policy exile?

[Jimmmmm]

Whoa, this could be something. Swowl mentioning joth asking about wagons as a way to flood the thread reminded of something I saw recently.

This game:

Let’s

Vote: mathdude

Dude seems a little too eager to have wagons.

And that's scummy why?

Town wants to exile scum. Scum just wants to exile.

But what does that have to do with wanting wagons? Having wagons is the best way of catching scum.

Say more about that.

Czech Mafia, in which joth was scum:

...
But I'd love to hear the "wagons are protown" argument.
...

Why is joth asking the same question again?

[Jimmmmm]

Hang on. Earlier he demonstrated that he understands the wagons thing perfectly and that it's a good, Towny plan, only to later bemoan the f.ds meta of using wagons to put pressure on people:

I suspect MiX and faust are voting on me in the hopes that I’ll overreact to a small wagon which is one of my primary scum tells. It’s a good plan, town points all around.

I hate that FDS meta makes it towny to do a thing I consider to be the most scummy (fishing around for a “viable” wagon rather than properly scum hunting).

I actually believe it’s possible to productively scumhunt without forcing a bunch of claims and giving scum cover to pull off a town exile, which is what wagons for wagons’ sake usually accomplishes. But I guess we can agree to disagree.

[EFHW]

I'm more curious about why joth has ignored my support of exiling you.

[EFHW]

EFHW, do you think that getting angry, emotional etc is a scum- or Town-trait?

In you,  I'd say town. Scum!you wouldn't get carried away by emotion, and I don't think you did in this game.

[MiX]

ISOing joth is annoying because of all the codenames messages in between. Clearly this is scummy!

joth does have a bunch of opinions about wagons that are weird. In fact, this is most of his posts early in D1.

joth then votes EFHW to sheep, then scumreads Jimmmmm and votes there, then scumreads faust after townreading them before. Then votes EFHW. Hmm.

I think joth's town. But this looks really weird. It probably means joth is scum, but I don't know, I like wall posts from joth and he's been making enough...

This isn't an easy person to read today I'd say.

[Jimmmmm]

EFHW, do you think that getting angry, emotional etc is a scum- or Town-trait?

In you,  I'd say town. Scum!you wouldn't get carried away by emotion, and I don't think you did in this game.

I don't know why, but I found this funny. Like, using the fact that I said I wasn't angry to argue that I'm scum, even though you thought I was angry. Do you think as scum I would allow myself to be perceived as angry?

[MiX]

EFHW is town.

What is there to say about this...her Jimmmmm case is very strong and townie. It's logical, consistent, and yet has that tiny bit of not knowing Jimmmmm's alignment. It reveals EFHW's been reading the game closely for scumhunting.

Unvote

[Jimmmmm]

...
Also I think it's obvious joth voted you because you were a wagon.

lol. I voted EFHW because of a combo of trusting my town reads and PoE.

This struck me as odd at the time; how can you PoE someone early Day 1? Then I realised it must have been PoE out of the wagons and yeah joth's attitude to wagons is super weird.

[MiX]

...
Also I think it's obvious joth voted you because you were a wagon.

lol. I voted EFHW because of a combo of trusting my town reads and PoE.

This struck me as odd at the time; how can you PoE someone early Day 1? Then I realised it must have been PoE out of the wagons and yeah joth's attitude to wagons is super weird.

I've been assuming it's a joke.

[jotheonah]

What can I say guys? I’m a mystery wrapped in an enigma wrapped in a tortilla.

[MiX]

What can I say guys? I’m a mystery wrapped in an enigma wrapped in a tortilla.

Vote: joth

A smart man once said, the only sure way to know someone's alignment...

[jotheonah]

Seriously I can address some of this if it’s helpful but since no one but faust seems to actually think I’m scummy enough to vote for, might not be a great use of energy rn. Also I’m not gonna promise explanations will be 100% satisfying.

I have a really disorganized brain and a really poor working memory. I think that sets me apart from most forum mafia players. It’s definitely not going to do me any favors when you’re declaring a contradiction with a post from 2018. But contradictions within this game I feel deserve to be addressed, so let’s talk about wagons and nonsense some more.

I guess the bottom line is that I find F.DS’s day 1 meta exhausting. We always run around in circles for 20+ pages arguing about nothing because we have no info and end up on a weak consensus exile that’s significantly worse than random. And some of the tactics we use to do this inane dance have to do with wagons and pressure voting.

Which, to paraphrase Churchill, is the worst way of doing things except for all the others.

So I really like to challenge the conventional wisdom around wagons and pressure votes and things partly because it gives me something to talk about out the gate and partly because deep down I hope to find a better way of doing things that sticks going forward.

But often I end up coming back to wagons and pressure myself because it’s a learned behavior and it sort of works sometimes?

This game I really wanted to just pick a read and stay on them for the sake of limiting scum’s ability to manipulate and maybe I should have stuck to my guns there. The switch to EFHW was a bit of a whim and looking back not really helpful in any way.

Vote: Jimmmmm

[Jimmmmm]

What was your purpose in asking faust to say more about wagons?

[jotheonah]

What was your purpose in asking faust to say more about wagons?

I think I wanted to draw out the difference between productive wagon analysis and wagonning for waggoning’s sake. I do think there’s an important distinction.

Like the other thing we were arguing about today was unexplained votes.

Wagons do two things— one they create pressure that creates reactions that can be alignment-indicative, and they do that regardless of whether the votes that make them up are genuine votes based on genuine scumreads.

But the other thing they do is allow for wagon analysis, which is where we start construct theories about who’s scum based on the web of who’s voted for whom. The problem is, votes without reasons or votes that were just done for pressure or to create wagons sort of make this kind of analysis less useful.

So I think I wanted to make a case a bit more nuanced then “wagons are good no wagons are bad”. Certain wagons are useful, but that doesn’t mean that all wagons are good and therefore you can do whatever you want as long as it makes a wagon. But I asked faust the question because I wanted to get their in a Socratic way.

[Jimmmmm]

I accept that. Obviously you've been mulling over the wagon stuff, and that seems to be the cause of the weirdness. I'm not so much into past-game meta analysis, but I had a quick look at a couple of your recent scum games and couldn't find any more similar example.

[faust]

This game I really wanted to just pick a read and stay on them for the sake of limiting scum’s ability to manipulate and maybe I should have stuck to my guns there. The switch to EFHW was a bit of a whim and looking back not really helpful in any way.

Vote: Jimmmmm

I'm confused about this. Weren't you voting for EFHW before you ever started suspecting Jimmmmm?

[Jimmmmm]

Why are we changing directions when we have two perfectly cromulent wagons right here?

I was thinking Jimmmmm and EFHW, but I see the EFHW wagon has sputtered out.

Anyway, let's get rid of Jimmmmm, he's being very scummy.

So this is you trying to stick with your read and advocating against running around in circles?

[Jimmmmm]

I would join this wagon.

This was about mathdude. Were you considering having mathdude be your read for Today, or would joining that wagon be non-committal?

[Jimmmmm]

I would join this wagon.

This was about mathdude. Were you considering having mathdude be your read for Today, or would joining that wagon be non-committal?

Wait no this was after you were already on me. How did this relate to your plan?

[Jimmmmm]

Why are we changing directions when we have two perfectly cromulent wagons right here?

This seems to directly contradict your being open to joining the mathdude wagon.

[Jimmmmm]

(You said the two wagons were me and EFHW, although math had the most votes at the time.)

[EFHW]

Having another look at EFHW. This jumped out at me:

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.

vote: MiX. I did apologize.

Sorry: to clarify, I'm scumreading that post. I'm not trying to policy exile you anymore.

Honestly, if we want to exile someone for thread health, Jimmmmm's the way to go.

ok, unvote

EFHW votes MiX in agreement with joth's assertion that policy exiles are scummy (or rather, policy votes or advocating for a policy exile). Then when MiX states that he now scumreads EFHW for that post and is no longer trying to policy exile her, EFHW immediately unvotes. Why would the fact that he's now saying it's also scummy change the scumminess of the original call for a policy exile?

He didn't vote me when he said he wanted to policy exile me.

[Jimmmmm]

I think I have some understanding of joth's game so far now, and it's making a bit more sense. I think the "stick to a read" plan explains the vibe I (and I gather Swowl) was getting, and it sounds likely to be a premeditated (ie non-alignment-dependent) plan. I think I'm leaning slight Town, but also that he warrants further investigation on a future Day.

I would like to know why MiX said joth voting for EFHW was a scumslip - was that ever explained? Was it just because it contradicted his plan?