New XKCD Forums

Theallieza wrote: ↑Tue Nov 19, 2024 9:08 pm Vote: moody

I think moody and Santy are more or less the only people who I think make sense as partners to somi. Santy, actually, probably has the best reason to have killed JC in the night so I think that's somewhere that is worth following up on regardless of moody's flip.

I think Wam is probably a great information yeet. My gut is that he is a miss but I'd be willing to go there over other choices.

bessie and Mak I'm fairly confident are both misses.

Adum's claim of one-shot BP looks like a huge outlier in this setup and I don't believe that he has no night actions of any sort. His play today has been very strange. I'm parking this read for now and I will try to come back to it later.

Town
Thea
Fred
Seven
Mak
bessie

Probably not mafia, maybe indy
Wam
Adum

Possible scum
moody
Santy

Ok then, we kill Wam toDay and if I'm wrong I'll offer no resistance to being Yeeted toMorrow, fair?

Somi/Wam stuff:

Spoiler (Show/Hide)

somitomi wrote: ↑Sun Nov 10, 2024 9:19 pm town core in no particular order
- Adum, Mak (tone as discussed already)
- Fred, Thea (I'd probably scumread Fred in isolation, but I don't think there's a way mafia!Thea would do something as audacious and risky as claiming masons D1)
high-probability town
- Seven (clearing Adum)
scares me
- Santy (super open posting that's hella townie to me, but from what I recall they did just about the same as my replacement, so I have all the paranoia)
PoE
- JC
- moody
- wam
- bessie
Yeah, look at me calling all these kettles black, but the PoE group didn't leave much of an impression on me so the differences are rather marginal. JC feels a little more townish than the rest but I can't justify this vague impression. I'll go back to reread these people a bit, but for the moment it seems like picking any would likely hit scum and we're one NK ahead so the order isn't critical.
...
Yes, I hear the little alarm bell saying some kind of nuke will go off N2 to completely turn me on my head.

somitomi wrote: ↑Tue Nov 12, 2024 2:36 pm Thanks you, that makes sense now.

Vote: Wam

I believe that's E-1

Wam wrote: ↑Tue Nov 12, 2024 12:35 pm I will self pres vote if needed but of all the POE JC is my top town read.

I'm thinking outside my towncore.and yes paired scum/indies is possible for thea and Fred but think we can solve that later in game and I think it's unlikely.

Town

JC - most town jc has ever looked I find it weird that's who thea has gone for
Moody - think thier reactions to the claim stuff show a desire to solve.
Mak - feels Town but within scum range
Bessie - see previous post
Santy - I think they are lying about having a vig shot to give them cover being caught shooting someone later. See previous post about how they didn't flag back to adum with a vig shot its not mathematically optimal to no elim.
Somi - interactions with claim are weird.

Scum

Vote somi

Yeah, no, WTF, Wam started the counterwagon on somi even though everyone else was going for JC at the time. Somi was indifferent to Wam over others in his PoE and chose him based on Adum's push, but never budged his vote once it went down. Maybe this is a hell of a double bus, but I really strongly doubt it.

Theallieza wrote: ↑Tue Nov 19, 2024 9:08 pm Adum's claim of one-shot BP looks like a huge outlier in this setup and I don't believe that he has no night actions of any sort. His play today has been very strange. I'm parking this read for now and I will try to come back to it later.

I made no such claim, what are you pulleding Thea?

Wam wrote: ↑Tue Nov 19, 2024 3:03 pm

AdumbroDeus wrote: ↑Mon Nov 18, 2024 7:48 pm You know what, I'm actually fucking done with this.

vote: Adum

I'm tired of this, I want your guarantees of apology dances and that you'll murder wam after this.

I didn't see an unvote I may have missed

Ah, skipped over that, somehow read that as Mak voting for Adum

AdumbroDeus wrote: ↑Tue Nov 19, 2024 9:33 pm

Theallieza wrote: ↑Tue Nov 19, 2024 9:08 pm Adum's claim of one-shot BP looks like a huge outlier in this setup and I don't believe that he has no night actions of any sort. His play today has been very strange. I'm parking this read for now and I will try to come back to it later.

I made no such claim, what are you pulleding Thea?

If you'd like to clarify your claim, you are welcome to do so. Based on what you've said so far, this is what your role appears to be.

Theallieza wrote: ↑Tue Nov 19, 2024 9:39 pm

AdumbroDeus wrote: ↑Tue Nov 19, 2024 9:33 pm

Theallieza wrote: ↑Tue Nov 19, 2024 9:08 pm Adum's claim of one-shot BP looks like a huge outlier in this setup and I don't believe that he has no night actions of any sort. His play today has been very strange. I'm parking this read for now and I will try to come back to it later.

I made no such claim, what are you pulleding Thea?

If you'd like to clarify your claim, you are welcome to do so. Based on what you've said so far, this is what your role appears to be.

That's what you BELIEVE it is. That's not what I claimed. Which again brings up the question, what are you trying to pull?

A claim out of you. Seems fairly straightforward and obvious

AdumbroDeus wrote: ↑Tue Nov 19, 2024 9:42 pm

Theallieza wrote: ↑Tue Nov 19, 2024 9:39 pm

AdumbroDeus wrote: ↑Tue Nov 19, 2024 9:33 pm

I made no such claim, what are you pulleding Thea?

If you'd like to clarify your claim, you are welcome to do so. Based on what you've said so far, this is what your role appears to be.

That's what you BELIEVE it is. That's not what I claimed. Which again brings up the question, what are you trying to pull?

I'm not trying to pull anything. I'm working with the information that I have available to me.

I think the deliberate ambiguity you are creating around your role is extremely scummy and I cannot see any pro-Town reason for you to do so. I don't care what powers you have or how strong you think they are. You are creating space for scum to operate, or you are scum.

Freddino18 wrote: ↑Tue Nov 19, 2024 9:54 pm A claim out of you. Seems fairly straightforward and obvious

Trying to get me to fully claim is piling on votes.

That's not what lying about what I claimed is.

Theallieza wrote: ↑Tue Nov 19, 2024 10:00 pm

AdumbroDeus wrote: ↑Tue Nov 19, 2024 9:42 pm

Theallieza wrote: ↑Tue Nov 19, 2024 9:39 pm

If you'd like to clarify your claim, you are welcome to do so. Based on what you've said so far, this is what your role appears to be.

That's what you BELIEVE it is. That's not what I claimed. Which again brings up the question, what are you trying to pull?

I'm not trying to pull anything. I'm working with the information that I have available to me.

I think the deliberate ambiguity you are creating around your role is extremely scummy and I cannot see any pro-Town reason for you to do so. I don't care what powers you have or how strong you think they are. You are creating space for scum to operate, or you are scum.

I have to cool down my language because, that's genuinely so bad meta-wise. A BP had one purpose, to absorb NKs. After the full extent of a BP is already known, it can do nothing more useful. A one shot can't pull an important power, a full BP won't be targeted again or will just get strongmanned, a commuter or hider will get roleblocked, etc.

But regardless of whether we disagree, that is no excuse for lying about my claim.

AdumbroDeus wrote: ↑Tue Nov 19, 2024 10:07 pm

Theallieza wrote: ↑Tue Nov 19, 2024 10:00 pm

AdumbroDeus wrote: ↑Tue Nov 19, 2024 9:42 pm

That's what you BELIEVE it is. That's not what I claimed. Which again brings up the question, what are you trying to pull?

I'm not trying to pull anything. I'm working with the information that I have available to me.

I think the deliberate ambiguity you are creating around your role is extremely scummy and I cannot see any pro-Town reason for you to do so. I don't care what powers you have or how strong you think they are. You are creating space for scum to operate, or you are scum.

I have to cool down my language because, that's genuinely so bad meta-wise. A BP had one purpose, to absorb NKs. After the full extent of a BP is already known, it can do nothing more useful. A one shot can't pull an important power, a full BP won't be targeted again or will just get strongmanned, a commuter or hider will get roleblocked, etc.

But regardless of whether we disagree, that is no excuse for lying about my claim.

I'm not lying about your claim. If you claimed something different and I missed it, I apologize--point me to the post. If your claim is "I did nothing and have nothing to say about anything I might do", then I feel fully justified in working with what you have given me.

Theallieza wrote: ↑Tue Nov 19, 2024 10:11 pm

AdumbroDeus wrote: ↑Tue Nov 19, 2024 10:07 pm

Theallieza wrote: ↑Tue Nov 19, 2024 10:00 pm

I'm not trying to pull anything. I'm working with the information that I have available to me.

I think the deliberate ambiguity you are creating around your role is extremely scummy and I cannot see any pro-Town reason for you to do so. I don't care what powers you have or how strong you think they are. You are creating space for scum to operate, or you are scum.

I have to cool down my language because, that's genuinely so bad meta-wise. A BP had one purpose, to absorb NKs. After the full extent of a BP is already known, it can do nothing more useful. A one shot can't pull an important power, a full BP won't be targeted again or will just get strongmanned, a commuter or hider will get roleblocked, etc.

But regardless of whether we disagree, that is no excuse for lying about my claim.

I'm not lying about your claim. If you claimed something different and I missed it, I apologize--point me to the post. If your claim is "I did nothing and have nothing to say about anything I might do", then I feel fully justified in working with what you have given me.

Digging the hole deeper.

This was specifically in response to you:

AdumbroDeus wrote: ↑Mon Nov 18, 2024 10:48 pm

Theallieza wrote: ↑Mon Nov 18, 2024 10:40 pm

AdumbroDeus wrote: ↑Mon Nov 18, 2024 7:58 pm There is no fixing this paranoia.


You both are full up on confirmation bias and adding increasingly unlikely attributes game attributes to make it work, then treating that the theory exists as proof that it's what happened without any mech or social evidence it's what happened.

And yet you conspicuously still aren't claiming.

Yes I did. You wanna know what I did last night?

1b475405-5543-4d29-ade6-113f8bf00df4_text.gif

Which was immediately followed by this:

AdumbroDeus wrote: ↑Mon Nov 18, 2024 10:49 pm The same is true of what I can do for any future night unless somebody gifts me a power, which I don't think exists in this setup.

Which you misstated as "have nothing to say about anything I might do".

The element that you lied about before, where you said my BP was one shot, just isn't in my claims at all. I in fact explained multiple times said how I don't want to explain it.

I don't see either as reasonable town motivated interpretations, especially of the bolded which was a clarifying post to a post directly addressed to you, right under it. But it would be more reasonable if your initial response was "I misunderstood" instead of "you're welcome to clarify your claims".

So I'm gonna chew on your and Fredd's slots some more, but of course why would scum Wam clear you both of you (whether he actually copped you or not). Obviously if I'm wrong about Wam, town-Wam has no incentive to lie.

I think you're overreading into this (like you thought me trying to convey a plan to you was crumbing a role, or like how last year you thought I had role info that Heury wasn't human).

These are entirely different scenarios. The plan thing consisted of you prodding me to make a guess based on cryptic information. It's similar to when you asked me why I thought you weren't voting frequently in AI. I simply did not know and had no speculation, but made a guess per your request. I don't remember the Heury isn't human thing, I don't remember much of that game because it was I was in a "minimized window" mindstate, but I imagine it also involved cryptic information.

There's also something you and Santy must understand about me. Much of this isn't relevant to this particular comment, but rather to how you and Santy reacted earlier. I have 3 modes while playing: probing, catalyzing, and resolving. While in probing mode, I am throwing out theories/speculation. I don't believe any of these; I am entertaining them—trying them on to see how they fit, bouncing them off others, and noting how others respond to them. Example. Catalyzation is chaotic momentum. It involves building wagons and counterwagons. The goal is to elicit players to take stances, provide openings, and provoke engagement. Examples: Chain of posts here and here. Resolving involves putting pieces together and forming a stance. Examples: 1, 2.

Assumptions, presumptions, speculations, and inferences are all different things. An assumption is an acceptance of an idea based on little to no evidence. Presumptions are like assumptions but based on educated guesses. For example, how you and I presumed that Madge would be ok with gaming replacement info. Speculations are not an acceptance of information but a pondering of possibilities. Inferences in Seven-speak are Bayesian, probabilistic conclusions based on evidence and inductive reasoning.

When I say things like "Maybe Adum has a one-shot GF ability" or "scum has night chat only and bessie and somi were communicating," these are speculative probes, not inferential resolutions. I do frequently obfuscate which of these modes I am in by phrasing speculation as hard statements of truth a) in order to brait and elicit reaction, b) because it is amusing, and c) it will look really cool when I throw out something off-the-cuff and it turns out to be true. So it is entirely of my own making that people have difficulty grasping when I am genuinely crying out wolves falling from the sky, and when I am not. It is the second edge to the sword that is an enigmatic playstyle.

--

I will admit, though, that JC's comment wasn't as clear-cut as I remembered it being. Based on it, I would put the chance that he used a Watcher ability at about 35% (above the random 20%). Regardless, I don't at all believe that it can be concluded that Wam is lying about the Watcher result because of the inconsistency between 'JOAT' and 'Publisher Cop' in his results. We have no information that indicates that these should have been the same, I could easily verify it, and Wam would be smart enough to make the results consistent.

--

AdumbroDeus wrote: ↑Tue Nov 19, 2024 9:16 pm

Seven wrote: ↑Tue Nov 19, 2024 8:35 pm I will eliminate moody and wam only. Neither of their reasonings for their reads on Bessie are sensible. Additionally, Wam and Adum are the only players who weren’t being observed last night, so it is likely one of them did the kill. I’m not sold that the kill came from Indy. In fact, I don’t think I buy into it at all.

You never responded to how you feel about Moody's "you're next" post to FF.

He was BCing that he was going to target Mak, so I think it is NAI.

Then what is the difference?

Two "Modifiers" vs One. I'd infer that Publishing Cop is the name of the role, just like Role Cop is the name of a role. And that Variable-Reliability is the modifier.

Along those lines of what I said to Thea about my role, I will talk about Seven's philosophy. I think it's a selfish way to play and I fundamentally disagree with it because the more information is immediately out in the open, the less possible traps you can make and in a complicated game, the easier it is for scum to wiggle out of them.

This is how I played last game, as I discussed in Gojoe and it's how I'm playing this game.

AdumbroDeus wrote: ↑Tue Nov 19, 2024 10:31 pm

Spoiler (Show/Hide)

Theallieza wrote: ↑Tue Nov 19, 2024 10:11 pm

AdumbroDeus wrote: ↑Tue Nov 19, 2024 10:07 pm

I have to cool down my language because, that's genuinely so bad meta-wise. A BP had one purpose, to absorb NKs. After the full extent of a BP is already known, it can do nothing more useful. A one shot can't pull an important power, a full BP won't be targeted again or will just get strongmanned, a commuter or hider will get roleblocked, etc.

But regardless of whether we disagree, that is no excuse for lying about my claim.

I'm not lying about your claim. If you claimed something different and I missed it, I apologize--point me to the post. If your claim is "I did nothing and have nothing to say about anything I might do", then I feel fully justified in working with what you have given me.

Digging the hole deeper.

This was specifically in response to you:

AdumbroDeus wrote: ↑Mon Nov 18, 2024 10:48 pm

Theallieza wrote: ↑Mon Nov 18, 2024 10:40 pm

And yet you conspicuously still aren't claiming.

Yes I did. You wanna know what I did last night?

1b475405-5543-4d29-ade6-113f8bf00df4_text.gif

Which was immediately followed by this:

AdumbroDeus wrote: ↑Mon Nov 18, 2024 10:49 pm The same is true of what I can do for any future night unless somebody gifts me a power, which I don't think exists in this setup.

Which you misstated as "have nothing to say about anything I might do".

The element that you lied about before, where you said my BP was one shot, just isn't in my claims at all. I in fact explained multiple times said how I don't want to explain it.

I don't see either as reasonable town motivated interpretations, especially of the bolded which was a clarifying post to a post directly addressed to you, right under it. But it would be more reasonable if your initial response was "I misunderstood" instead of "you're welcome to clarify your claims".

So I'm gonna chew on your and Fredd's slots some more, but of course why would scum Wam clear you both of you (whether he actually copped you or not). Obviously if I'm wrong about Wam, town-Wam has no incentive to lie.

So, to summarize, my initial comment on you was "I don't believe that he has no night actions of any sort". I was acknowledging that this was a thing that you claimed, but I don't believe it is true.

And you've claimed BP, which I acknowledged and I believe is true. I gather that you are upset about me saying the "one-shot" part, which IDK is just kinda obvious from context to me? I am assuming that the description looks something like "You have a one-shot protection against night kills. You will be informed when this power is depleted". I've played a similar role myself and have used it in some of the games I have run.

Seven wrote: ↑Tue Nov 19, 2024 10:38 pm

I think you're overreading into this (like you thought me trying to convey a plan to you was crumbing a role, or like how last year you thought I had role info that Heury wasn't human).

These are entirely different scenarios. The plan thing consisted of you prodding me to make a guess based on cryptic information. It's similar to when you asked me why I thought you weren't voting frequently in AI. I simply did not know and had no speculation, but made a guess per your request. I don't remember the Heury isn't human thing, I don't remember much of that game because it was I was in a "minimized window" mindstate, but I imagine it also involved cryptic information.

Did you get none of what I've been trying to crumb to you?

No, it didn't though. It involved you interpreting something as crumbing role info that was actually just my analysis.

There's also something you and Santy must understand about me. Much of this isn't relevant to this particular comment, but rather to how you and Santy reacted earlier. I have 3 modes while playing: probing, catalyzing, and resolving. While in probing mode, I am throwing out theories/speculation. I don't believe any of these; I am entertaining them—trying them on to see how they fit, bouncing them off others, and noting how others respond to them. Example. Catalyzation is chaotic momentum. It involves building wagons and counterwagons. The goal is to elicit players to take stances, provide openings, and provoke engagement. Examples: Chain of posts here and here. Resolving involves putting pieces together and forming a stance. Examples: 1, 2.

Assumptions, presumptions, speculations, and inferences are all different things. An assumption is an acceptance of an idea based on little to no evidence. Presumptions are like assumptions but based on educated guesses. For example, how you and I presumed that Madge would be ok with gaming replacement info. Speculations are not an acceptance of information but a pondering of possibilities. Inferences in Seven-speak are Bayesian, probabilistic conclusions based on evidence and inductive reasoning.

When I say things like "Maybe Adum has a one-shot GF ability" or "scum has night chat only and bessie and somi were communicating," these are speculative probes, not inferential resolutions. I do frequently obfuscate which of these modes I am in by phrasing speculation as hard statements of truth a) in order to brait and elicit reaction, b) because it is amusing, and c) it will look really cool when I throw out something off-the-cuff and it turns out to be true. So it is entirely of my own making that people have difficulty grasping when I am genuinely crying out wolves falling from the sky, and when I am not. It is the second edge to the sword that is an enigmatic playstyle.

I will keep that in mind but my point there was it's fundamentally flawed.

I will admit, though, that JC's comment wasn't as clear-cut as I remembered it being. Based on it, I would put the chance that he used a Watcher ability at about 35% (above the random 20%). Regardless, I don't at all believe that it can be concluded that Wam is lying about the Watcher result because of the inconsistency between 'JOAT' and 'Publisher Cop' in his results. We have no information that indicates that these should have been the same, I could easily verify it, and Wam would be smart enough to make the results consistent.

I fully disagree. But you can't verify it anymore, because Wam isn't loud, remember?

AdumbroDeus wrote: ↑Tue Nov 19, 2024 9:16 pm

Seven wrote: ↑Tue Nov 19, 2024 8:35 pm I will eliminate moody and wam only. Neither of their reasonings for their reads on Bessie are sensible. Additionally, Wam and Adum are the only players who weren’t being observed last night, so it is likely one of them did the kill. I’m not sold that the kill came from Indy. In fact, I don’t think I buy into it at all.

You never responded to how you feel about Moody's "you're next" post to FF.

He was BCing that he was going to target Mak, so I think it is NAI.

Quite possibly. But it also has an unusual amount of conviction which I've basically never seen from Moody. At the very least it feels like moody thinking they caught scum.

Then what is the difference?

Two "Modifiers" vs One. I'd infer that Publishing Cop is the name of the role, just like Role Cop is the name of a role. And that Variable-Reliability is the modifier.

Nope, I again disagree. Role cop is a different role with a similar name that detects something different. A "publishing role cop" would be a modifier on said role cop.

I haven’t read y’all’s back and forth but if you’re saying that claiming is selfish, it’s literally the opposite of selfish. At least four townies are asking you to claim. Not doing so is keeping us in the dark for your own personal reason when everyone else has already claimed.

Nope, I again disagree. Role cop is a different role with a similar name that detects something different. A "publishing role cop" would be a modifier on said role cop.

Incorrect. This isn’t mafia scum and it has already been established we aren’t playing with mafia scum roles.

Theallieza wrote: ↑Tue Nov 19, 2024 11:04 pm So, to summarize, my initial comment on you was "I don't believe that he has no night actions of any sort". I was acknowledging that this was a thing that you claimed, but I don't believe it is true.

And you've claimed BP, which I acknowledged and I believe is true. I gather that you are upset about me saying the "one-shot" part, which IDK is just kinda obvious from context to me? I am assuming that the description looks something like "You have a one-shot protection against night kills. You will be informed when this power is depleted". I've played a similar role myself and have used it in some of the games I have run.

I am not "upset", I am suspicious. You're better than this Thea and your scumslips when they do come are subtle manipulations.

The issues are:

1. That you presented your analysis of my role as my claim for the role.

2. That you stated I said I wouldn't talk about future night actions when I claimed I don't have them.

3. That you are trying to act like it was reasonable to do so. And now that you're subtly trying to frame this as me being irrational about it.

Again, this is giving me shades of how you played scum last Halloween, very subtle manipulations to reframe things in a way that's advantageous to you.

Seven wrote: ↑Tue Nov 19, 2024 11:08 pm I haven’t read y’all’s back and forth but if you’re saying that claiming is selfish, it’s literally the opposite of selfish. At least four townies are asking you to claim. Not doing so is keeping us in the dark for your own personal reason when everyone else has already claimed.

I'm saying your play PHILOSOPHY which you articulated before is selfish. This is independent of the conditions of any particular game.

Seven wrote: ↑Tue Nov 19, 2024 11:10 pm

Nope, I again disagree. Role cop is a different role with a similar name that detects something different. A "publishing role cop" would be a modifier on said role cop.

Incorrect. This isn’t mafia scum and it has already been established we aren’t playing with mafia scum roles.

And?

Role cop literally gets a different piece of information than cop. Unless we're treating every investigative role as a modifier on the cop, that argument makes no sense.

AdumbroDeus wrote: ↑Tue Nov 19, 2024 11:25 pm

Seven wrote: ↑Tue Nov 19, 2024 11:08 pm I haven’t read y’all’s back and forth but if you’re saying that claiming is selfish, it’s literally the opposite of selfish. At least four townies are asking you to claim. Not doing so is keeping us in the dark for your own personal reason when everyone else has already claimed.

I'm saying your play PHILOSOPHY which you articulated before is selfish. This is independent of the conditions of any particular game.

What philosophy???


On the role thing, bessie can just ask.

Seven wrote: ↑Tue Nov 19, 2024 11:31 pm

AdumbroDeus wrote: ↑Tue Nov 19, 2024 11:25 pm

Seven wrote: ↑Tue Nov 19, 2024 11:08 pm I haven’t read y’all’s back and forth but if you’re saying that claiming is selfish, it’s literally the opposite of selfish. At least four townies are asking you to claim. Not doing so is keeping us in the dark for your own personal reason when everyone else has already claimed.

I'm saying your play PHILOSOPHY which you articulated before is selfish. This is independent of the conditions of any particular game.

What philosophy???


On the role thing, bessie can just ask.

This one:

Seven wrote: ↑Tue Nov 19, 2024 3:57 am @bessie

Why the pressure on Adum to claim? Suspicious.

Because it’s a hidden variable and I don’t like hidden variables. I have more faith in my ability to solve with all information than I do in the value of PRs. I’m surprised you don’t know that about me by now.


IMG_1867.jpeg

I just fundamentally disagree with it.

Thats not a philosophy, that’s a preference. Most players don’t have that preference.

Seven wrote: ↑Tue Nov 19, 2024 11:46 pm Thats not a philosophy, that’s a preference. Most players don’t have that preference.

That's a fair distinction.