[Advanced] Nightmare Before Christmas - Town Wins!

[Zander?]

I think scum!Zander sees me appear to fumble and either 1) defends me because he's had a great deal of success buddying me in the past or else 2) starts digging up dirt to build a case because omg maybe we can actually mislynch Shad instead of having to night kill him.

 

Zander didn't really pursue either of those here. If he was scum, I think he would have quickly noted his original reason to feel leery about me and brought that to the table.

 

It was this:

 

 

 

 

 

Humor me please?

AJ took Nolder out of the picture by ensuring Tab would have four votes if Snow doesn't go down. I'm torn between Nolder and Snow but I would lynch either of them over Tab, so Snow it is.

 

 

So in theory if I switched to Nolder you'd vote there?

 

No. In reality I have no clue who I want to lynch but AJ made the decision easy for me.

 

fwiw youre starting to worry me a bit.

 

In a very simple sense, it looked like I was passing the buck onto AJ for my involvement in Snow's lynch. A reasonable thing to be concerned with--even moreso now that Snow is confirmed town.

 

So I quoted Zander encouraging us to lynch Tab and fake-voted her essentially on the grounds that Zander told me to. A similar 'absolving guilt' move, this one probably obviously contrived to some of you. Zander seemed pretty accepting of that vote.  I'm kind of null on that in the moment, since Zander tends to get excited when people follow his lead regardless of his alignment.  But I think that if his initial concerns with my Snow vote were faked, he wouldn't so readily forget them after my shenanigans.  I think he's authentically jarred by the fake vote and the unvote, not digging for dirt here.  I mean, what is easier mislynch fodder: a town whose vote explanation can be easily spun to "don't hold me a accountable if the flip is town", or a town who they know is pulling some sort of unpredictable trick move?  But the impression I get is that Zander isn't stopping to think about it; he's not jumping on an opportunity to build a case on me.  Rather, he seems to be in the irritable state of having both lynched a townie and lost a stronger town read back down into the POE.  I think I can safely cross him off of my suspect list.

 

 

So after I mentioned that your EoD actions bothered me,  you post that only Scum!Zander would start start building a case against.  I really really don't like that statement.  Because you know if I think someone's scummy or does something off I'm going to be looking into it.

 

FWIW- Snow wasn't the guaranteed lynch atp.  I was and am more concerned with the fact you wanted no part lynching Tab who was by far the better option.  You didn't even seem interested in my case on her. 

 

I'm extremely irritated but 2 things.wrong with what you said here:  1st I didn't lynch a townie you did.  2nd John wasn't at all one of my stronger town reads. I thought there was a chance he might scum.  But I brought up why I didnt want to vote him atp and my case on Tab is solid.  Her and Nolder were far better lynches imo.

[Andrej]

They'll definitely be on the block for D2 imo

 

Sorry I've been scarce. I was a bit irritated after the reveal yesterday so I just spent my time putting in more work on the house. I have quite a bit of reading to do whenever I find the time but that'll have to wait for tonight

[Zander?]

 

Your question is predicated on the idea that I caught him in an out and out lie. I never said that nor did I mean to imply it if that's what you got. I said he was distorting the issue.

Seems like your running away right here, by not answering his question. You instead attack the reason he asked the question, not the question itself.

 

 

 

tbh i dont know if i necessarily agree with what Lenlo is saying here.  I'll have to go back and read it in context but I like the fact he's looking at these types and mentioning them. 

[Shad_]

 

 

Your question is predicated on the idea that I caught him in an out and out lie. I never said that nor did I mean to imply it if that's what you got. I said he was distorting the issue.

Simple fact. You sir are the one who's trying to distort the situation.

The second quote is what I specifically highlighted and asked you about. If you simply worded it poorly, I don't know why you couldn't have just come out and said so in the first place.

 

First of all I didn't word it poorly I said what I said and I meant it.

Secondly you were asking me for a "follow through" or whatever.

I don't know what that means nor do I know what you're looking for.

You are the one who could be clearer here imo.

 

Saying that someone is intentionally misinforming and saying that someone is lying mean the same thing. I can't believe I am actually having this conversation again.

 

The 'follow through' question was an out. You did something that struck me as pretty blatantly contradictory: you called Pizza out for intentionally misrepping something, then said you hadn't made up your mind on him yet. This means that either 1) the accusation was a reaction test, 2) you thought he might be town intentionally lying, or else 3) you are not thinking through what you're saying at all. The first two are significantly more likely to stem from a town state of mind than the third.

 

I went down the line without telling you what a 'townie' response would look like in my mind ahead of time. I treated it as a test, and that confused you. Check. I asked what made you think he might be town intentionally lying. You refused to answer for a while and then said you never thought that. Check. So you are either scum or a highly razzled town prone to losing focus any time you're under pressure.

 

 

 

Re: convenience

 

This coming from the guy with the naivete to believe that town always tells the truth.

I don't actually believe you believe this but I'm not going to bother arguing the point if that's what you want to pretend your position is.

Talk about convenient.

Of course I don't believe that.

 

Oh, so you lied just to shove off what I was talking about and to get your question answered first.

That's low. I mean even in a game of lying I kind of expect most people to stick to some modicum of etiquette when it comes to conversation.

Maybe that just makes me the fool to think even some people would respect such things.

 

You asked a question with an extremely obvious correct answer. I treated it as rhetorical, but you brought it up again, so I gave the incorrect answer. Your reaction was to say that I am blowing you off because I wanted you to answer my question first, and that I'm being disrespectful. This doesn't make much sense to me. You either thought I might sincerely believe the 'wrong' answer, thought that only scum would give the 'wrong' answer, or it was a purely rhetorical question and my answer didn't matter. You aren't following through with any of these options, instead twisting it into a personal attack. This is another example, as Lenlo would point out, of "running away" from the discussion. But I struggle to wrap my head around why you would be doing this as either alignment. Perhaps the 'constantly feigning confusion' scum meta that had been presented earlier? I just don't remember your confusion tactic for deflecting attention being so... hostile, in your last scum game.

 

 

What was the point of you wanting me to state whether I believed town could intentionally lie before you would address my question?

What do you care? You lied to stop me from making my point and now you want to hear it? Shove off.

 

Do you consider me outed scum whose curiosity concerning your thought process is necessarily artificial, or do you have zero interest in allowing anyone in this game to develop a read on you? You act as though I am preventing you from making some point, but when given the opportunity to make it you refuse. This leads ~every town reading your posts to believe that you never had a point in the first place.

[Zander?]

Oh god this feels like my Caulder battle.

 

Really cause Calder claimed Maf outright!!!  lol

 

Can you explain what you mean by that?

[Nolder]

 

Your question is predicated on the idea that I caught him in an out and out lie. I never said that nor did I mean to imply it if that's what you got. I said he was distorting the issue.

Seems like your running away right here, by not answering his question. You instead attack the reason he asked the question, not the question itself.

 

Missed this post earlier (thanks for bumping it Xander).

 

I didn't answer the question because it's loaded. It has a false premise.

He's asking me what lie I caught when I never said I caught a lie.

I would be the liar if I even attempted to answer the question in the first place.

[Zander?]

 

Re: convenience

 

This coming from the guy with the naivete to believe that town always tells the truth. 

I don't actually believe you believe this but I'm not going to bother arguing the point if that's what you want to pretend your position is.

Talk about convenient.

 

Of course I don't believe that.  I'm also your top town read last I checked, and I feel like there is a bit of a disconnect between how you've said you feel about my slot and the sort of attitude you've been approaching me with in this conversation.

 

That being said, I don't remember you being nearly so chippy in AoL.

 

What was the point of you wanting me to state whether I believed town could intentionally lie before you would address my question?

 

 

Yeah I dont understand Nolder's point/post here at all.

[Zander?]

@ Nolder Concerning http://www.dragonmount.com/forums/topic/96267-advanced-nightmare-before-christmas-night-1/?p=3579716

 

 

How do you feel Shad lied?  And your point on Town sometimes lying sometimes makes the fact you calling him low for doing so very weird. imo. Cause I'm pretty sure you've been town reading thus far.

[Zander?]

ebwop town reading him (Shad)

[Shad_]

The biggest thing holding me back from a full commitment to Nolder being scum is that I've seen this sort of disconnect out of him in non-game-related debates. A part of it is really just his authentic thought process, and that makes it difficult to pinpoint his motivation.

 

Wouldn't stop a lynch on him tomorrow as things stand though. I feel pretty strongly that AJ or Pizza should be peeked tonight, and I'm going with one of those slots if I am the cop. I do recognize that they are high-value night kill targets, but they can't both get shot tonight and they are the two most important players to mechanically resolve by means other than a lynch in this game imo.

[Shad_]

 

Oh god this feels like my Caulder battle.

 

Really cause Calder claimed Maf outright!!!  lol

 

Can you explain what you mean by that?

 

Every time I prodded Calder's slot, he responded by saying my question was scummy instead of answering it, and we had a long debate over the same specific issue of "is saying someone was intentionally dishonest the same as saying someone lied"? (It is. At least one and possibly two town on DM somehow don't see this, and that is the root of my /facepalm.)

[Lenlo]

Then just correct him and respond to the post anyway. If you just answered the question and then in the same post corrected him, no one would have a problem with it. Instead you struggle to find excuses not to answer things

[Zander?]

Dice, I need your help on my suspects tomorrow.

 

Taborline will be the lynchee, with Nolder being a nice alternate in case she comes up with a reason for abandoning us that we can swallow.

 

id like to see a read lists/ POE from you before that if you can.

 

Bold FTFY

[Nolder]

Saying that someone is intentionally misinforming and saying that someone is lying mean the same thing. I can't believe I am actually having this conversation again.

It's about the method. The end result is the same but the way you get there is different.

For example telling a lie vs lying by omission.

 

The 'follow through' question was an out. You did something that struck me as pretty blatantly contradictory: you called Pizza out for intentionally misrepping something, then said you hadn't made up your mind on him yet. This means that either 1) the accusation was a reaction test, 2) you thought he might be town intentionally lying, or else 3) you are not thinking through what you're saying at all. The first two are significantly more likely to stem from a town state of mind than the third.

 

I went down the line without telling you what a 'townie' response would look like in my mind ahead of time. I treated it as a test, and that confused you. Check. I asked what made you think he might be town intentionally lying. You refused to answer for a while and then said you never thought that. Check. So you are either scum or a highly razzled town prone to losing focus any time you're under pressure.

Well there's where your whole test falls apart.

I never said he was lying. You seem to think distorting means lying.

They're similar words but they mean different things.

Which is why they're different.

 

Lrn2English

 

You asked a question with an extremely obvious correct answer. I treated it as rhetorical, but you brought it up again, so I gave the incorrect answer.

Of course it was rhetorical.

But you refused to play ball and allow me to make my point.

You chose to be obstinate.

 

Your reaction was to say that I am blowing you off because I wanted you to answer my question first, and that I'm being disrespectful. This doesn't make much sense to me. You either thought I might sincerely believe the 'wrong' answer, thought that only scum would give the 'wrong' answer, or it was a purely rhetorical question and my answer didn't matter. You aren't following through with any of these options, instead twisting it into a personal attack. This is another example, as Lenlo would point out, of "running away" from the discussion. But I struggle to wrap my head around why you would be doing this as either alignment. Perhaps the 'constantly feigning confusion' scum meta that had been presented earlier? I just don't remember your confusion tactic for deflecting attention being so... hostile, in your last scum game.

It's because I'm not scum.

And I never believed for a second you actually believed that but if you were going to even bother to pretend like you did I wasn't going to waste my time arguing about it.

 

Do you consider me outed scum whose curiosity concerning your thought process is necessarily artificial, or do you have zero interest in allowing anyone in this game to develop a read on you? You act as though I am preventing you from making some point, but when given the opportunity to make it you refuse. This leads ~every town reading your posts to believe that you never had a point in the first place.

I refuse now yes.

If you wanted to hear my point why did you do what you did in the first place?

For giggles?

 

Don't pretend like you want so badly to know my point so you could get a read on me when you purposely tried to block my rhetoric in the first place.

 

If people are going to judge ME negatively for that then so be it.

More the fool them for not seeing why I'm so damn frustrated in the first place.

[Askthepizzaguy]

The biggest thing holding me back from a full commitment to Nolder being scum is that I've seen this sort of disconnect out of him in non-game-related debates. A part of it is really just his authentic thought process, and that makes it difficult to pinpoint his motivation.

 

Wouldn't stop a lynch on him tomorrow as things stand though. I feel pretty strongly that AJ or Pizza should be peeked tonight, and I'm going with one of those slots if I am the cop. I do recognize that they are high-value night kill targets, but they can't both get shot tonight and they are the two most important players to mechanically resolve by means other than a lynch in this game imo.

 

I'm an utterly terrible N1 peek. Godawful.

[Zander?]

 

I really really hate bringing this up because i truly hate it but if I get NK'd tonight it needs to be said.  Tab was online and checking this thread at least 3 times this afternoon and evening that i saw.  I didnt wanna bring it up cause I thought the lynch was gonna go that way but...it didn't.  I follow things quite closely while playing hence why I switched my sign in to anonymous round Bellicheat.

 

I'm sorry to bring it up Tab but it's the truth.

 

Don't apologise, it's the truth. I kind of hoped I'd go, as I won't have next to any time to commit to the game until after Friday due to sudden work commitments, and the best I could give you as a rebuttal yesterday was "Don't bother, I'm town".

 

And all I can give you this morning is that I don't feel good about Nolder, Lenlo and Thane, based on their interactions yesterday. I didn't like the way Nolder called out Thane as his very first game related post, putting words in his mouth, and continued to kind of go after him but allowing for his inactivity because he said he wouldn't be around much until D2. Then Nolder's back and forth with Lenlo felt off, both Nolder's pushing Len from the beginning (his post about fence sitting in the same first game related post about Thane), and Lenlo's skirting issues by saying things like "I dunno, like, I sometimes worry that he is hiding something behind all those words. I know its stupid, which is why I havnt even tried to build a case or anything off of it, but its in the back of my mind every time I read him."

 

One of Nolder and Lenlo is probably scum.

 

 

 

Well thank you for verifying the truth, much respect to you for doing so.

 

And don't worry about the Bolded my dear, I'm such a nice guy I'm gonna clear this Mafia game off your schedule tomorrow so you can prepare for the next one.

 

[Shad_]

 

 

Your question is predicated on the idea that I caught him in an out and out lie. I never said that nor did I mean to imply it if that's what you got. I said he was distorting the issue.

Seems like your running away right here, by not answering his question. You instead attack the reason he asked the question, not the question itself.

 

 

tbh i dont know if i necessarily agree with what Lenlo is saying here.  I'll have to go back and read it in context but I like the fact he's looking at these types and mentioning them.

 

You shouldn't. Lenlo was off there, and Nolder explained why in a way that maintained consistency with his recent comments:

 

 

 

Your question is predicated on the idea that I caught him in an out and out lie. I never said that nor did I mean to imply it if that's what you got. I said he was distorting the issue.

Seems like your running away right here, by not answering his question. You instead attack the reason he asked the question, not the question itself.

 

Missed this post earlier (thanks for bumping it Xander).

 

I didn't answer the question because it's loaded. It has a false premise.

He's asking me what lie I caught when I never said I caught a lie.

I would be the liar if I even attempted to answer the question in the first place.

 

But I kind of love the fact that you're picking up on things like this Zander, because it's extremely hard for me to accept in my head that you are town given our recent history.  But you're consistently doing really townie things that help me get over that and accept you. 

 

As for Lenlo, I'm pretty null on the misrep itself and think it was probably an honest mistake, given that his overall perspective in this game strikes me as town like 90% of the time.

[Nolder]

@ Nolder Concerning http://www.dragonmount.com/forums/topic/96267-advanced-nightmare-before-christmas-night-1/?p=3579716

 

 

How do you feel Shad lied?  And your point on Town sometimes lying sometimes makes the fact you calling him low for doing so very weird. imo. Cause I'm pretty sure you've been town reading thus far.

He said he believed one thing (that townies never lie) and then admitted he didn't really believe that.

 

Your later point is an ironic coincidence nothing more.

I was trying to make a point but I never got around to making it.

[Zander?]

Eh? I said one thing about Thane. I didn't return to him until I gave my reads list.

 

Also, so you think I have a point about Lenlo hedging AND Thane (why do you feel bad about Thane?) but you still feel bad about me?

 

This is kinda pointless imo.  John Snow said he thought Tab was scummy based off my case on her and had me as his Top scum read so go figure....

[Zander?]

 

 

Oh god this feels like my Caulder battle.

 

Really cause Calder claimed Maf outright!!!  lol

 

Can you explain what you mean by that?

 

Every time I prodded Calder's slot, he responded by saying my question was scummy instead of answering it, and we had a long debate over the same specific issue of "is saying someone was intentionally dishonest the same as saying someone lied"? (It is. At least one and possibly two town on DM somehow don't see this, and that is the root of my /facepalm.)

 

 

 

Calder GOAT????

 

 

lolololololol

[Cory Caboose]

Calder is wolfy and smug like that in real life too.

 

He's pretty much the smuggest person in the world.

[Zander?]

 

@ Nolder Concerning http://www.dragonmount.com/forums/topic/96267-advanced-nightmare-before-christmas-night-1/?p=3579716

 

 

How do you feel Shad lied?  And your point on Town sometimes lying sometimes makes the fact you calling him low for doing so very weird. imo. Cause I'm pretty sure you've been town reading thus far.

He said he believed one thing (that townies never lie) and then admitted he didn't really believe that.

 

Your later point is an ironic coincidence nothing more.

I was trying to make a point but I never got around to making it.

 

 

Its called sarcasm imo  and I dont put a lot of stock into Coincidence in Mafia games,

[Nolder]

Is he smugger than Snivy?

His nickname was literally Smugleaf before we had an official name for him.

[Nolder]

 

 

@ Nolder Concerning http://www.dragonmount.com/forums/topic/96267-advanced-nightmare-before-christmas-night-1/?p=3579716

 

 

How do you feel Shad lied?  And your point on Town sometimes lying sometimes makes the fact you calling him low for doing so very weird. imo. Cause I'm pretty sure you've been town reading thus far.

He said he believed one thing (that townies never lie) and then admitted he didn't really believe that.

 

Your later point is an ironic coincidence nothing more.

I was trying to make a point but I never got around to making it.

 

 

Its called sarcasm imo  and I dont put a lot of stock into Coincidence in Mafia games,

 

Not in the mood for sarcasm lately and that's on you I guess.

You'll see eventually either way.

[Shad_]

 

The biggest thing holding me back from a full commitment to Nolder being scum is that I've seen this sort of disconnect out of him in non-game-related debates. A part of it is really just his authentic thought process, and that makes it difficult to pinpoint his motivation.

 

Wouldn't stop a lynch on him tomorrow as things stand though. I feel pretty strongly that AJ or Pizza should be peeked tonight, and I'm going with one of those slots if I am the cop. I do recognize that they are high-value night kill targets, but they can't both get shot tonight and they are the two most important players to mechanically resolve by means other than a lynch in this game imo.

 

I'm an utterly terrible N1 peek. Godawful.

 

 

Maybe.  My impression from our short time together is that you are probably an incredibly capable scum player who will eagerly take the reigns and lead town to its demise.  I would put you in the Cory/Clov/Yates club.  And while at least with Clov and Yates I have a ton of town meta to work with, Cory was able to completely crush my soul when he was scum in our first (real) game together because I underestimated him and didn't have any memory access to the more subtle reasons that should have made me suspicious of him.  Resolving you removes an enormous layer of fog from my vision.  It also runs a high risk of wasting a peek.