Kasimir

I do It's called paranoia. It's called double fricking standards I've been dealing with it to the point of writing a whole rant about it in the LG91 dead doc but we don't give a crap about dead docs, we only read for our own names, apparently Being sus of a player is one thing. Being paranoid to the extent that you are applying standards to one player you are markedly not to literally any other player is going to make that other player sick to the back teeth of this crap eventually. If you want a less cynical answer, it's D1. This is the literal definition of D1 voting. But I don't see a particular reason to feel charitable right now and I would like nothing better than to flip. So we're going to go with: paranoia, and double standards.

No, it's not going to. You can believe what you want. We'll see who is right by rollover. I am weakly willing to consider moving it if you make a sufficiently convincing argument for any other candidate, but on the whole, I'd rather not. For once in an SE game, I am happy to accept my vote is being made for selfish reasons, when I should be putting my team above this. I've alluded to this as much in the LG91 dead doc, but no one reads dead docs apparently apart from ctrl+fing to find their own names. Edited to add: It's D1. You are legit voting on a V read of mine for gut reasons. I fail to see where this is a substantively worse train. If you're CCing on C3/C4, something has gone very wrong.

https://www.17thshard.com/forum/profile/25585-ookla-the-forgotten/ Do I want to test this. This would effectively be a CC. At the same time, I think it's important to get the ML to finish a training epoch in order to save long term aggravation. Edited to add: Inb4 he's doing it to salt the E!Xino pattern with V!Xino inactivity.

TUN has exactly eight times in which he was Elim, so that's a sample size problem to begin with. (I say, despite having a grand total of nine times...) QF61 - not re-reading to satisfy my curiosity and he wasn't caught anyway LG87 - not caught MR56 - Doesn't count because was converted LG73 - the one in which he was caught LG90 - last Elim standing, so PoE QF58 - Archivist type Illwei CW C1 LG79 - Claimed Elim, vote analysis MR52 - Sus action claim. At least 4/8 cases IMO point to the fact you can't catch him by comments alone or post analysis but typical analysis works just fine. Edited to add: While the dead doc had quokkagate, I certainly recall a number of dead doc comments about TUN's votes being off too.

This is sort of my take, in that I don't like giving the Elims anything to work off at all. I would quite honestly say that was just what motivated my initial Danex vote: I just did not like the focus on lylo (why do you care about lylo when odds are we just won't know when the last IC member is under threat? Is there some reason you want to wait until lylo to play hard?) and the information take seemed off enough (along with the pre-explained "I always do this") that I felt it was worth pressure. This is a fair point. I feel we've caught E!TUN over behaviour more than we have comments, e.g. the map thing. I am not sure I want to theorise E/E on D1. It's probably a me thing rather than a you thing, but it just has to do with the sheer number of possibilities on D1, so I prefer to look directly at candidates. Also I genuinely am content for the moment with believing that Stick is expressing quite a different attitude from her LG91 opener. I am comfortable with a V read of her for the moment. This is my worry. I actually think you should give him a bit more credit than this. The second sentence is bloody insane, but it's a classic Fifth gambit play - just claim and kill through your suspects before the Elims do. I will say I don't expect this situation to obtain, and if it somehow does, it'll entail the game has been going fairly Village-side anyway, but that being said, yeah. It's not literally a gambit but it has a Fifth level of love of risk that really, really annoys me because I just want to play it classically. So this is the thing. I think your point about the need to analyse in thread is also correct, and yet the Fifth thing reads to me as being on brand. He and Drake discovered the value of having a pure Village doc to discuss in in the previous MR and I could see that skewing his take, especially given his risk appetite. I am eh about the Elims forming a defence early on - they can if they want to! TMI is just as much a tell IMO, and that could put them in hot soup, which suits me just fine. I agree more about the obviousness of bringing up the same analysis - it really boils down to the need to play circumspectly, maybe sow a bit of in-doc misdirection. Which does cut against Fifth's point but I do take it to fundamentally be a trade-off between risk and misdirection. You can gain a lot from being sincere and truthful in the doc, but you also lose because of the risk of death. And being safe decreases doc utility. I sort of read Fifth's post as coming from V!Fifth, which rather puts me out as I had a nice suspicion of him pre-sleep but we can commit to re-reading and re-evaluating Fifth some other time I guess. I was being circumspect about this because I didn't want to distract people, but I'm just going to go for it as it might convince Fifth to put his money where his mouth is and vote for me, in which case we might actually get to ML me for once I have, by this point in time, hit the view that I need to let the Village ML me maybe ten times before people learn that they're actually on unending paranoia over the last couple games. I'm happy to make it twenty or thirty if the Village is smoking RMSProp 1e-4 instead Long story short, it has to do with a Very Bad Situation that may have been averted by their late sign-ups, for which I'm grateful. I would extend returning player amnesty to the three of them entirely, but - sorry man it's a QF, I can't afford to do that, though I guess Hael isn't under threat anyway. You missed Nerdy's vote. I'm referring to Nerdy - specifically I believe his vote looks very opportunistic. But vote analysis has to be tempered with the fact he's a player on his second game, which means: I don't have a strong read of how thoughtful a player he is (we played in BT3) but it's D1 and I firmly believe you just bring up your suspicions and go for it because you never want to die with suspicions/thoughts unsaid even if we know the Village will ignore it. At least in that world you did your best Is it just me or has there been zero Xino presence this game at all? Three games I can see/think of: QF61 (most recent, though granted it's a response to Archer), LG79 (as Cream Tuatara), and LG87. I'll give you this IMO: I looked at LG90 and LG73 as well and I'll agree his engagement this game just feels different from in those three I've identified. Enough that I'm not sure that's where I want to go. But that's an engagement v. direction point tbh. I think the person you should be annoyed with is yourself because I am not doing any sidetracking. I would argue players can change their playstyles but their tendencies are harder to change. I also think that meta matters whether to a fine-grained or coarse-grained degree. It's no different from taking into account a player's experience level, rather than basically the entire MR61 thread deciding it was okay to ML Bookwyrm and Silho because lol who cares about having a baseline for player behaviour? The IC does but in a different way - the dynamic I'm interested here is more in how the uninformed majority protects an informed minority against another informed minority. In other words, I'm not looking at this from the Winzik POV. I'm looking at this from the Village POV. But I also think this is a moot point so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Why? Why is it odd? I'm interested in why Fifth thinks it's hedgy because E!Stick has been hedgy when asked early on to give a firm stance on players. It seems to me it should reflect either on Fifth's sincerity in the thread or Stick's alignment, neither of which I know, so I have reason to want this information. I think people are using it since I used it in QF62 though the context was very specific - Dannex in that game should've been an instant softmechclear IMO. We had a pool of only three players left who could have been the converter Elim and Danex wasn't in there. But Mat kept raising increasingly insane possibilities and just generally degrading the discussion space by causing uncertainty and doubt to the point Dannex got MLed, and nearly pushed I think Devo as well, though Devo was a less obvious clear. It was a very specific but effective tactic, and I am not sure I'd use it in the Winzik context, and the fact he used it to great effect to the point of securing the Dannex ML and Archer kill is what makes me wary of players who are peddling it. Since that game, I've taken to being stronger about my thoughts/views even when I may not be as sure about them. We can call it trauma from Mat.

K gonna sleep and on mobile so I'll engage with the rest later but no. As I said, the fact you considered a fakeclaim Jedi gambit to draw out the hidden Village faction and got beaten to the punch is stronger on my mind. I agree with Stick the correct read is NAI but I've been shamelessly using you as bait to solicit thoughts and try to get a sense for how people are thinking.

Why not? In a V!Danex world which I'm still entertaining, Fifth gets free Village points from pushing Mat and not continuing to allow people to dig deeper into the Danex hole. At the point of hos vote, Danex must have been four or five votes deep. I think that's the classic stage an Elim who is as noisy as Fifth would seek an alternate sidetrain rather than by alarming everyone else by stacking further. I think the blunt CBA could be a good look for Fifth and maybe I'm a bit more thrown than I should be by the paranoia, but his reads and approach are ods to me. I say all this just to acknowledge I think such a move is necessary coming from a good Villager. Day discussion mustn't narrow. He avoided that. Good. But that it's an exceptionally low cost place to insert yourself as an Elim if the Village is about to screw itself over. Curious why you don't seem to think that's a viable route. Edited to add: Confused by the shift from Wiz back to Fifth/Danex.

Hmm. It puts me in mind of something that used to be true about E!Wiz. I would straightforwardly agree this is a good catch. There is more I could say but I am weighing how explicit to be given this game's set up. I would agree with pressure on him. With regard to advice — reluctant to bet the farm on this. QF63 reasons. Was badly wrong. Has to do with overestimating the team and amount of advice going down, similar deal for Archivist on the Mat-Danex-Wiz team. Stick and I disagreed, I felt Archivist's vote was too Evil for him not to have been advised against it. Stick was right. Either way I'm not keen on a second game player on a D1. Edited to add: @Ookla the Tall, current state of your Wiz thoughts?

Simply put: notable =/= suspicious though, and you've framed your unease about him as being substantively dependent on your unease about me. The point is if that's your order of evidence, then the correct way to go is in terms of evidential priority and dear God I can't believe the world is twisted enough I'm saying this but your refusal to follow your own logical entailment and kill me first is really making me start to doubt you. As a more general aside: Nerdy's vote is nakedly opportunistic. But second game. I don't know the right level to think on for newer players and have a tendency to get it wrong. Not sure where Mat's issue with OG analysis players comes from given we both literally just watched Fifth tunnel hard on new players and Alv because who needs meta or context we just ML like men. Edited to add: If you've ever wondered how Jain got MLed, this is literally the most OG vote Fifth could cast.

It's always the beginning of a proto streak. See, here's what I don't understand. If you think I'm suspicious, then vote on me. I'll help you out: Kasimir. You seem to be saying your E!Mat issues, I quote, come from your unease about me. There are sharper comments I could make about how for all you claim Village me should be apparent by now, paranoia or you being Evil is very good at making players not see the obvious. This is easily the third or fourth game I've been paranoided on for being too noisy, too visible, too not apparently Village, whatever. My point is, if you are Village then I don't understand your vote. Your entailment is then from me to Mat, specifically because you don't like me pointing out that the action is weird or distracting but voting on that basis os pretty much weird too. If Mat flips V, it doesn't help you answer whether a world in which E!me defended Mat. So are you fishing about for another convenient train? I mean lbr I genuinely don't care, the dead doc has Araris and I can probably talk World Cup with Szeth so if you think I am Evil, why don't you just take the shot? That's the correct order of entailment.

No drek I do? I read her V, and you're calling her hedgy. I'm interested in whether there's something I'm not seeing, or whether your Village streak has once again been strangled in the crib I sympathise, but I have to say it's also disappointing when the case for V!reading Stick is essentially made off a single post comparison. If you dismiss the entire content of the Day on the grounds it's uninteresting to you, that doesn't make it NAI - that makes it a major case of CBA and gets my hackles up because it shows a disinterest in trying to get it right. That's interesting because I'm not getting anything off her right now, and you were paranoiding on her a short while after C1. Cool. Is this a policy lynch? Edited to add: Let me sharpen the point. It gets my hackles up because it exonerates you of needing to engage with any discussion whatsoever and allows you to just stick to your guns and appear constructive while doing so. You may very well be approaching it from a Village perspective, but the slip from "I do not want to deal this" (understandable) to "this is NAI, too bad" is a significant one. You have the right to refuse to engage in this discussion but dismissing discussion you are uninterested in as NAI is not NAI - that's CBA.

Martinez man god of mind games no wonder he got carded. Ok. Game relevant thoughts: -I want to relook the Dannex train tomorrow morning (for me, it's fine, DW, ample time.) Not fundamentally comfortable with the comfort level implied by the votestate right about now. My point is that Stick does get hedgy as an Elim and she does it by refusing to assign a read, or waffling. This was literally the whole point of me badgering her on her thoughts on Dannex, TUN, and Mat. We saw this in action in D1 LG91, where she did exactly that on V!Mat, trying to keep her options open. She's much less hedgy here. The other reason is I'm a sadist and I remember exactly how much E!me hated it when Aman kept @ing me to ask me stuff in QF59 so I thought I'd share the love I don't consider refusing to consider TUN's vote to be more V than E to be an especially weird take as the game so far has indicated it finds my takes weird, and moreover, I don't have as good a read on TUN as a player, in general, as I'd like. Saying that the refusal to utilise TUN's vote in her read of TUN makes her hedgy is just odd - sure it's a specific point on which to hedge, but I don't see that as being as worrisome as hedging on the player himself. Her view of TUN is in spite of it and I'm okay with that. I guess you could say you are only making a statement about what is hedgy but that's just odd - why are you only interested in litigating hedging apart from the context of the entire game? I'm not sure what you think is hedgy about that again. Once again, you are defending a literal definition of hedginess. Well, is it literally hedgy if she refused to assign him a read on that basis? I guess? But compare that to her view of V!Mat in LG91 D1: I was actually just about to comment on that - the answer is not exactly. Does he seem a little combative? Maybe, but I'm wondering if that's my conf bias playing into it. I don't think I'm getting the vibes as explicitly as I got in that other game. Ignoring just pure vibes though, and looking at actual posts, there's this: I don't think e!Mat would just put this out here without following it with something more...substantial. It doesn't seem to serve a purpose, other than (badly) addressing the he's not paranoid enough point you brought up. Hm. I'm now. Hm. I do kind of agree with some of those points but maybe not to that exact extent. Like I said, he seems combative and in a defensive mood, but I can't decide whether I'm fully on board with that being the only e!mat indicator and also I'm growing paranoid of you two now but isnt this too early to be thread brawling?? quick guys tell me if kas/mat e/e could potentially be a thing xD This is insanely hedgy. This isn't a commitment to V!Mat or a straight refusal to assign a read, just outright waffling IMO and padding on both sides of the fence. This is E!Stick keeping her options open because a V!Mat/V!Kas threadbrawl is fine for her team. Like, perhaps we are talking past each other. I am not interested in whether Stick correctly fits a Platonic ideal of hedging. I'm interested in whether this hedging looks Evil or not. I think the refusal to assign a read to Mat is fairly straightforward, fairly determined, fairly reasonable, and to the point. It is a direct response - and it seems to come from a different sort of place, a certain comfort and confidence with the thread. As stated, I also think it is an eminently reasonable point of view to take on, given that Mat explicitly wanted to try this gambit when Evil in just such a position. The fact it is plausible from both V!Mat and E!Mat's perspectives as a play should jolly well lead to a reasonable NAI answer, and that's not hedging. That's a fairly decisive claim "this doesn't matter", rather than "well, I can see both E and V Mat." I think the way I would put it is NAI is a direct evaluation - V and E Mat ish is beating about the bush. Fine, maybe I'm wrong. I misread Stick when it counted on late D3 of that LG and wouldn't have held my vote firm if not for JNV. But this is C1 and I'm fine with my Stick read for now. -More Dannex (sorry for the lack of organisation.) Raw Dannex Data: Dannex: Raw Thoughts Summation / tldr; Analysis/Insights: I think that's about it from me. Well, one more point. I do think it is odd and a deviation for Danex to be this brawly this game when E!him historically tends to avoid early clashes. And I'm not sure the vote state inspires confidence right now. But JNV's post did make me look for something I remembered: This was a nonsensical lynch. We basically had far better candidates than Danex and Danex was getting lynched for reasons I still do not understand when we had a soft mechclear of him that Devo was pointing out, due to a tonne of Mat FUD. Dannex is totally chill with it there.

MAN IT WENT TO PENS ARGENTINA YOU CAN DO THIS GO GO GO! EDITED TO ADD: HELL YEAH ARGENTINA DID IT! So. Uh. SE. There's...a game right? Pens? GK? Red cards? >>

I have an analysis. But right now there's a nail-biting ET round between Argentina and France, Mbappe is a god but we already knew that. Still, go Argentina! 2-2 at ET, break now, let's hope Argentina can recover because what was this game even >> Edited to add: Probably this thread right now: "We just found something Kas cares more about than SE! Turns out it's the World Cup."

TUN yes - Mat wasn't, and that was explicitly why I asked her, because that is explicitly my view on Mat. She's actually V!reading TUN on the basis of his posts, which is a lot more definite than I got from Stick last game. It's a good first look to me anyway. As for Mat, I can see a Village reason for this, and I note that I GMed MR61 where Mat explicitly mourned the fact he didn't get to pull this off in the MR because he was pre-empted. I think that alone should make any reasonable player reluctant to assign a read to Mat on that basis. Would you disagree? I am doing an analysis of E!Dannex right now, but long story short is I actually am not sure E!Dannex is this confrontational this early (substantiating evidence to come when I've finished reviewing all his four E!games - on QF57 now and also watching World Cup) but there are some other points that still leave me leaning E on Dannex - I'll flag them later, but note they include difficulty generating suspicions (he defaults to rigid heuristics.) I'm going to say this now even though everyone will ignore this after/if I die: E!Dannex is not easily found by kill analysis because he will explicitly lie about his Elim meta. That's one of my takeaway points from this analysis. Or at least, he will frame it as if it isn't, e.g. "Why would any Elim kill Tani for voting on them" when that's the kill order he basically put in. It's true he didn't but it's also false because he considered that element and didn't care anyway. E!Dannex is found by opportunistic voting patterns, and poor thread engagement. It ramps up later in the game, potentially as he feels more comfortable for killing a few proactive players. He tends to be found quite handily by the TJ Principle and his lack of Village enthusiasm, as far as I can identify. I think that's worth noting. Later. Want to finish analysis first, sorry >> And World Cup. And pazaak code... But yes I have automated part of it. @_Stick_ - I've also found one E!TUN game with mech analysis, happy to see if you disagree with the flow, but Dannex is currently under threat and I'm more interested in getting Dannex right as a result, will do the quick and dirty on TUN after that. To be honest, no. Yes, in part, but meta isn't effective if one person is doing it and there isn't the collective heuristic. If it's an outlier, then it only serves to confuse and distract. Or the Elims decide they like to FAFO. MESSI SCORED MY ENTIRE NEIGHBOURHOOD WAS ROARING I COULD HEAR THE PEN GO ARGENTINA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Edited to add: Tbh the energy from Argentina is incredible right now. Hoping Messi gets his trophy, France already has theirs EDITED TO ADD: ALVAREX MACALLISTER DIMARIA HOLY CHULL WHAT THAT RUN 2-0 I KNOW IT'S A TYPO BUT SURE HE CAN BE KING

He has eight Elim games. This is a fairly narrow query. I could do this without wanting to commit seppuku......... Yeah okay lesgo I guess. Honestly I am still more sus of Danex than TUN at this point, and I bring the TUN point up despite having him as a null, but if I can I actually also want to run a Danex study - I don't have a strong memory of how E!Danex responds to pressure and while the overreaction is notable, I want to see Danex parameters too. How many E games does he have? Four? HAHAHAHAHAHA LESGO I GUESS

Funny though. Are we interested in logic here, or are we interested in finding Elims here? If you are interested in logic, you may get yourself a time machine and sign up for the Introductory Logic course, or the Advanced Logic course I tutored for at university. If you are interested in finding Elims, show it. The fact that having reasons is good Village practice does not mean that the failure to provide reasons is indicative of: A. no reasons at all, or B. that no reasons exists or can exist. And if you've been paying attention rather than immediately being defensive, you would have noticed I have more or less already outlined the reasons informing my suspicion of you. So why don't you ask for reasons for basically every other unexplained vote on p1? You're welcome to look at how strongly I phrased things in LG91, the game immediately preceding this, in which I was a Villager. Of course, if you're Evil, I suppose you wouldn't be interested in doing so Edited to add: A few things: 1. I like this point and I want to check up on it more because my impression of TUN is a player who basically keeps using mech to get into the game. I'm probably going to just pull up a list of E!TUN games to run a comparison. 2. Question for you. Does this mean you V!read TUN for these reasons prior to checking his playhistory?

Avalon: the Resistance. You've seen a variant of it in one of my games you IMed, and played in the other one - QF40 and MR51. There's a similar dynamic with another of my games that you've also, coincidentally, played - MR61 In Avalon, Village has a role known as the Merlin who knows all of the Evil players. The issue with Merlin is you have TMI, but must blend in with the Village because if you die to the Assassin, the Village immediately loses. Among other complications. Long story short, while Devo rebuked Silho for claiming Jedi or softclaiming Jedi in that MR, that sort of move is actually highly encouraged in A:tR - A:tR meta is rife with Merlin claims because the costs of losing the Merlin are so high that you never ever want the Elims/Mordred's Minions to get a clear bead on the Merlin. There are reasons A:tR meta doesn't translate well to SE, some of which I suspect are sociological, but that's neither here nor there. I admit I have given the matter some thought in the week of sign-ups but don't find A:tR meta too promising here for a number of reasons I shan't go into. Interested in where you find her hedgy :eyes: I think the main strategic thought I have at this point is that I believe the most promising strategy on our parts is to be noisy and aggressive. While we can't guarantee no theoretical overlap between threats and IC/Winzik, I think it's important to place the Elims in a situation where they either have to exert themselves in thread to keep the lynch from drifting their way, or to actively consider using the NK on a player pressuring them in the thread to try to ease things a little. The world we least want is the one in which they feel they can coast along, quietly observing the Inner Circle doc and deciding who Winzik/IC might be. Forcing them to have to use the NK for more normal suspicion/threat kills seems to me to be the best thing we can do for Winz/IC right now, apart from muddying the waters. Edited to add: @Fifth Scholar When I say rife with claims, it's not uncommon for a player to be grilled about their voting patterns, particularly if accurate, and for the player to simply brave it out by exclaiming they are the Merlin, so of course they know. I think once at the table we had five Merlin claims in a row to the point an exasperated new Village player asked if the real Merlin could just stand up. (I don't think he fully understood the rules at that point...)

I think my point is that I'm not calling it suspicious behaviour: I'm saying it seems performative/to emerge from a mindset where you're not really in it to solve the game or have difficulty doing so, and that reads more E to me than V. That's distinctive from being suspicious behaviour itself. Hmm. Then what about his posts do you like?

Yes and no, not particularly, but in general being surprised is usually a good thing, especially this early into the game! He did, but he also felt rather disengaged from it besides responding to you - I'd normally expect a bit more interest. I suppose what I'd say is this: are you sharing your opinion or trying to start a discussion? If you are trying to share your opinion, fine, but you normally don't frame it as an open question. If you are interested in trying to start a discussion, why is it that the only thing you are interested in responding to is the comment on Inner Circle size? Something like that feels to me like you're talking for the sake of talking and looking productive, rather than an interest in solving, with a potential side of "looks like you're having difficulty formulating suspicions" and it partly informs my negative reaction to Danex at this current point in time, next to Danex's defensiveness, cf. good old "you have to have a reason to vote for me!" Like sure, it's C1 p1, I am absolutely hoping to refine my thoughts/reads as the NAs return and chime in, but I might as well just throw out my thoughts and give them something to D: over when they get on Either way, I am not fully sure that vote comes from E!TUN. Fairly bold move for an Elim. Probably null overall, but eh, do not feel strongly about it.

Imma be honest this was not the response I was expecting when I went fishing and I have no one else to blame for my surprise but myself Interested in why you V!lean TUN - I have a very, very mild E!lean on TUN on further re-reading. Largely to do with TUN's seeming disinterest in the discussion he himself tried to open, but that being said, I am also not sure that E!TUN would be so bold as to want to auto-vote Mat or Dannex for the Winzik claim, so I suppose I'm willing to revise upwards back to null again

Oh? I have posted a Danex read It's Evil. I don't really care about whether people are interested in my Danex reads - I know why I lean Evil on you, I'm more interested in what Stick thinks. Edited to add: @_Stick_ - What do you make of Mat's claim? :eyes:

I'm already voting Danex but will be happy to swap to Mat.

I'm interested in your read of Danex

I think that counts as a justified reason for euthanasia :eyes: