oh also oracle only gets info on the gamestate going into the start of the night

so they don't yet know if Stanari was scum and can't separate scum!Stanari from a successful lynch today. They will currently know whether Jari is scum or not though.

 

Dude stop.

 

Sorry, I don't speak gif :v
--- Post automerged ---
(apparently >_>)
--- Post automerged ---

Teambuild around Stanari and see how often Jari/Stanari falls out, maybe?

 

ILY jan

Would like the info if anyone has it but I'm assuming we got at least one in Stan>Jari.

Will also assume shadowtown until told otherwise.

Probably gonna reread Jan. Wanna say he's just a low info spk, but there may be a reason and he probably had good thoughts to build on anyway.
--- Post automerged ---
Oh right since jari didn't claim...

There was like a 12 hour period of day 1 where I was reading and suddenly convinced that jari was a very clumsy acolyte to priestthug.
So back to "if jari is a witch he TMIed him town"
--- Post automerged ---
Yeah cobalt let me do some searching to find all the relevant posts and figure out what it means.

 

Pretty much 100% of the time, I think.

Think about worlds where the wagons are shadow/Jarizok and Stanari is mafia; she has a wishy-washy sort of townread on Jarizok that she's not really defending him with, hard pushing shadow, think it makes very little sense unless Jari is her partner and she's trying to save him.
--- Post automerged ---
(fonti's going to hate me for the garcia

...if that even qualifies)

 

I'm not even gonna quote the post Newcomb made about the unalignment. Afaict something angly about the second of these posts. I generally disagree with that, but I'm not making a read on him making it.

Here they are:

Both of these are ~defending thug? Could be w/w.

This definitely fits where I was at with DC yesterday. Witch just bouncing around saying stuff.
Gonna officially "doubt" him having both of these thoughts

Vote DC
--- Post automerged ---
Tuesday 1:11 am, #609
Thursday 1:27 pm, #1002

Thug made ~1 post in the span.
It was meh. Didn't look super hard but doesn't look like DC responded to it.

I do not know what it means for the thug slot. I'm not even trying to get anything on Newcomb, though I would like to hear his thoughts on the two posts together.
--- Post automerged ---
Jan's "legacy":

Only notable things after this are starting to suspect waco for his shadow push and a pretty nifty shadow/fonti same alignment read that I kinda dig.

Can't really tell who he would have been pushing today beyond stanari.
Probably asmo. Possibly waco.

Those tier 2 reads freak me out

 

I mean

Would Stanari really have that atrocious of an EoD 1 if she was w/w with Jarizok?

To the point of repeatedly saying "I hate you all" "I hate everyone" etc when the lynch gets thrown onto her partner?

She couldn't have known she'd be DoB'ed, so how would she have talked her way out of that one if it's revealed Jari is scum later?

Should we angle the D2 lynch on maybetown and direct the potential vigi kill to see if Jarizok was a witch or not?

 

Good afternoon.

Still not as disastrous as a Leeroy > DOB > Witch triple death D1.

 

No we should lynch witches
--- Post automerged ---
Hey vaimes

 

Absolutely not.

The only time you ever, ever potentially try and trigger the Vig is if there's confirmed scum itt and we're planning on using the potential Vig shot on them. Either you lynch a Witch, or you Vig one. It lets the confirmed scum openly rolehunt/Soup, so it's risky.

plus potentially mislynching on purpose gets town closer to Soup+overrun

 

I think the way to use that is as a sort of option select thing?

Like, there's four possibilities:

- scum!Jari and town!todaylynch, we can potentially discover this N3 if we hit another town (and if we hit a second scum then meh one scum remaining it'll get to f{3, 4} at worst)
- scum!Jari and scum!todaylynch, lol
- town!Jari and scum!todaylynch, vig fails to trigger today or tomorrow. Maybe triggers N4 if we get that far. This is the worst/most ambiguous case, but it's offset by the fact that we hit a scum (which also offsets the fact that Jari was town)
- town!Jari and town!todaylynch, we discover this when the vig goes off

and we can tilt at them in a few ways:
- Just try to hit scum. That's aiming for 2 and 3
- Try to hit specifically "scum if Jari is town". That's aiming for 1 and 3
- Try to hit specifically "scum if Jari is scum". That's aiming for 2 and 4.

I think the correct thing to do is to just try and hit scum, but use "more likely to be scum if Jari is town" as a tiebreaker if multiple candidates present. What this does is hedge out the really shitty outcome where we mislynched twice in a row, in favour of the less shitty outcome where we mislynch today but not yesterday and can potentially discover this if the vig goes off N3.

Basically it's taking the safest route by weighting town!Jari higher because it's worse.

 

--- Post automerged ---
oh you're talking about Stanari/Jarizok, not just Stanari, my b
--- Post automerged ---
Lynch dC

derps plus rolefishing are nah

 

Okay yeah you're gonna have to explain where any of that was rolefishing

 

@Newcomb

Spoiler

Have been trying to figure out how to articulate the "going" thing, but finding it really really difficult. I think it might be mostly tonal. I think there's like, a sense of investment and trajectory in his towngame that's mostly lacking in his scumgame, at least ime.

The first one is mafia, the second one is town. I think there's a pretty noticeable difference in the level of commentary in the first one that is lacking from the second.

So, as far as "going", in the first one, take his Azu read. If you start at "Azu the only one" and end at "let it play out", can you tell where tom's thoughts have gone? If you take a simple A->B analogy, there's no B in that read. There's no movement whatsoever. He's turning in circles.

Compare his Attar read, from "Attar had some stuff that pinged me" to "got Marlowe lynched". There's an unmistakable A->B process there.

Different post from the invitational:

- Florita: "disliked, still dislike" -> "disliked these things" -> "altguess understand" -> "understandthings" -> "hate her playstyle but maybe understand" -> "Flor town". There's an A->B there in a sense (disliked but town), but they're disconnected, because it's staged. It's layers of thoughts designed to make tom's thoughts seem legitimate. There's no actual thought progression/movement happening /for tom/ there.
- Klaus: "encouraging fights" -> "this didn't bother me" -> "progression terrible" -> "Isabel" -> "badcase". The read doesn't go anywhere.
- Lalo: "super meh" -> "done nothing but defend scumread". There's a nice and simple A->B there.
- Azu: "like azu" -> "couple posts" -> "awesome snapshots" -> "townfeels". Ehhh I am not sure if you could call that an A->B honestly. It's more like A A A. The read moves but not really in a coherent way. It feels tangential from start to finish even though it's all "Azu town".
- Oscar: "still working into the game" -> "but it just feels right" -> "organic or whatever". Nice A->B, until he breaks it off with the third part.
- Elivra: "want to dislike wagon" -> "read Elvira different" -> "can understand other's reads" -> "I'll hold off". This one just turns in circles.

Another one from the other game:

"Behavior-wise" -> "it's pretty stark". Like, holy shit that is town. It's so clear how his thoughts are moving through the read there.

Then, his paranoid follow-up,
"must be one playing well" -> "but that's bad solving" -> "they all want to lynch scum" -> "if they vote like town they're town" -> "Lawrence's vote worst" -> "Lawrence maybe symp". It's again so, so clear how his thoughts are moving through the read. And yeah, spoiled bias really helps. But still. You don't have to squint to see the movement.

That's like, more or less, how I think I look for town tom.

Which feels... more confidently stated than it really is. But I think those are fairly reliable markers?

There's clear movement there, I think?

Feels more like scum tom. It's really tangential and the thought is pretty loopy. "Jari did this thing therefore he's not thinking critically" -> "not sure it's scum indicative" -> "if he's scum he's not thinking critically" -> "fonti is reaching" -> "not necessarily intentional". Like, the core thought there if tom is town is "Jari not thinking critically is not alignment indicative". But there's no actual argument for why it's NAI (meta?), and his comments re: fonti are borderline non-sequitur, so he just ends up circling the drain, so to speak.

Feels more like town tom? "I'm bad but why that and not this" and then on top of that the extra level of "actually more likely just town". There's a level of "I'm confused", which moves into a thought that potentially clears up that confusion. And it doesn't super look tangential or forced either.


Um. I feel like I've done a really bad job of explaining this. It seems way more formulaic on the page than it feels in my head, but maybe it somehow makes enough sense to you?

I think boiled down it's mostly just a thing of "is this just commentary or is tom actually really feeling this / going somewhere with this". Which I guess in principle you can apply to anyone, but I feel like the way it works with tom is a little different somehow.

Bleh.

 

So, lemme get this straight:

This is stupid.

This is somehow even MORE stupid.

 

well, it's either that or being completely careless :I
--- Post automerged ---
like

people will claim if they want/need to claim

people might also push worlds without hard confirming any information they have

asking people if they're claiming is Not Good

 

I legit don't even recognize those me quotes from the spoiler.

I mean I can figure out what games they're from because of the alt names but no memory of making those posts.

 

The post you quoted has some live footage that may be relevant to your assessment.

Also I was under the impression that the opposite was true (i.e. if someone claims and town doesn't notice but scum does, then scum now knows the role and town doesn't so it's strictly advantageous to verify whether it was actually a claim or not), but whatever.