Mafia 57 Matrix

[BunnyGo]

I think there is a non-zero chance that Macca subbed out because he rolled scum again and did poorly his first mafia round as scum.

You're factually correct.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hou0lU8WMgo

[worcej]

Nanook having actually shown up, I will ##VOTE SUMMIT. Come out, come out wherever you are...

Question for you: How is publicly voting lurkers any more information than voting EMC? Is that actually who you think is scum? How are you choosing the order of lurkers to vote?

Because typically there is a scum in the lurker group. Also, lurking town are liabilities in the end.

My pro-tip for anyone: If you don't have a good read, voting a lurker is never a bad idea.

[worcej]

I think there is a non-zero chance that Macca subbed out because he rolled scum again and did poorly his first mafia round as scum.

You're factually correct.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hou0lU8WMgo

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQw4w9WgXcQ

[BunnyGo]

You're factually correct.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hou0lU8WMgo

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQw4w9WgXcQ

##vote worcej

[ghug]

This stands out to me as something town!Tom would likely not read into, since the GM explicitly said Macca would not have internet access. Why try to shade that slot?

Because I don’t take the GM explanation (even if relayed directly from Macca) at face value.

I think scum-Tom wouldn't say that because he should know that it would draw the kind of attention it did, or that it would draw other negative attention from people objecting that we can't know so we shouldn't speculate (which, of course, is just a round about way of getting to the former...).

I like this take.

[BunnyGo]

Nanook having actually shown up, I will ##VOTE SUMMIT. Come out, come out wherever you are...

Question for you: How is publicly voting lurkers any more information than voting EMC? Is that actually who you think is scum? How are you choosing the order of lurkers to vote?

Because typically there is a scum in the lurker group. Also, lurking town are liabilities in the end.

My pro-tip for anyone: If you don't have a good read, voting a lurker is never a bad idea.

What's that Fox? You say that you've hacked worcej's account and are accidentally answering as him?

[worcej]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hou0lU8WMgo

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQw4w9WgXcQ

##vote worcej

[worcej]

Question for you: How is publicly voting lurkers any more information than voting EMC? Is that actually who you think is scum? How are you choosing the order of lurkers to vote?

Because typically there is a scum in the lurker group. Also, lurking town are liabilities in the end.

My pro-tip for anyone: If you don't have a good read, voting a lurker is never a bad idea.

What's that Fox? You say that you've hacked worcej's account and are accidentally answering as him?

Yes, yes I am.

[ghug]

Question for you: How is publicly voting lurkers any more information than voting EMC? Is that actually who you think is scum? How are you choosing the order of lurkers to vote?

Because typically there is a scum in the lurker group. Also, lurking town are liabilities in the end.

My pro-tip for anyone: If you don't have a good read, voting a lurker is never a bad idea.

What's that Fox? You say that you've hacked worcej's account and are accidentally answering as him?

I've done no such thing!

[rdrivera2005]

This stands out to me as something town!Tom would likely not read into, since the GM explicitly said Macca would not have internet access. Why try to shade that slot?

Because I don’t take the GM explanation (even if relayed directly from Macca) at face value.

I think scum-Tom wouldn't say that because he should know that it would draw the kind of attention it did, or that it would draw other negative attention from people objecting that we can't know so we shouldn't speculate (which, of course, is just a round about way of getting to the former...).

Agree with this. Tom is one of my top townreads until now.

[BunnyGo]

Because I don’t take the GM explanation (even if relayed directly from Macca) at face value.

I think scum-Tom wouldn't say that because he should know that it would draw the kind of attention it did, or that it would draw other negative attention from people objecting that we can't know so we shouldn't speculate (which, of course, is just a round about way of getting to the former...).

Agree with this. Tom is one of my top townreads until now.

Why "until now" if you agree with it?

[Foxcastle]

Question for you: How is publicly voting lurkers any more information than voting EMC? Is that actually who you think is scum? How are you choosing the order of lurkers to vote?

As opposed to privately voting lurkers?

Yes. Copy-edit my extraneous adjectives, but I am curious about your thoughts.

Sure, you've caught me out in a hypocrisy. But scum are known to lurk. I forget who did it in a recent game—and it was by no means thorough or scientific—but they went back and looked and basically a third to half of the lurkers turned out to be scum in the games they looked at. Anyway, the theory is that players who come back and find themselves voted are more likely to participate in order to placate the voter, and in doing so create information and connections that can be studied later.

Contrast that to EMC, who doesn't care that you're voting him and won't change his behavior.

[rdrivera2005]

I think scum-Tom wouldn't say that because he should know that it would draw the kind of attention it did, or that it would draw other negative attention from people objecting that we can't know so we shouldn't speculate (which, of course, is just a round about way of getting to the former...).

Agree with this. Tom is one of my top townreads until now.

Why "until now" if you agree with it?

Because my English sucks. He is one of my top townreads.

[worcej]

As opposed to privately voting lurkers?

Yes. Copy-edit my extraneous adjectives, but I am curious about your thoughts.

Sure, you've caught me out in a hypocrisy. But scum are known to lurk. I forget who did it in a recent game—and it was by no means thorough or scientific—but they went back and looked and basically a third to half of the lurkers turned out to be scum in the games they looked at. Anyway, the theory is that players who come back and find themselves voted are more likely to participate in order to placate the voter, and in doing so create information and connections that can be studied later.

Contrast that to EMC, who doesn't care that you're voting him and won't change his behavior.

It was me who did it.

Man, people may actually listen to me, but they forget I was the one who did it...

[BunnyGo]

As opposed to privately voting lurkers?

Yes. Copy-edit my extraneous adjectives, but I am curious about your thoughts.

Sure, you've caught me out in a hypocrisy. But scum are known to lurk. I forget who did it in a recent game—and it was by no means thorough or scientific—but they went back and looked and basically a third to half of the lurkers turned out to be scum in the games they looked at. Anyway, the theory is that players who come back and find themselves voted are more likely to participate in order to placate the voter, and in doing so create information and connections that can be studied later.

Contrast that to EMC, who doesn't care that you're voting him and won't change his behavior.

I don't object to hypocrisy. Hypocrisy is fine and not a sin; it is the backbone of society. I just wanted to know your internal reasoning.

[BunnyGo]

As opposed to privately voting lurkers?

Yes. Copy-edit my extraneous adjectives, but I am curious about your thoughts.

Sure, you've caught me out in a hypocrisy. But scum are known to lurk. I forget who did it in a recent game—and it was by no means thorough or scientific—but they went back and looked and basically a third to half of the lurkers turned out to be scum in the games they looked at. Anyway, the theory is that players who come back and find themselves voted are more likely to participate in order to placate the voter, and in doing so create information and connections that can be studied later.

Contrast that to EMC, who doesn't care that you're voting him and won't change his behavior.

I'm not voting EMC to change his behavior. I'm voting EMC to register my objection to his behavior. I think town shouldn't want him in the game. I am willing to stop this eventually, but after 2 modkills, I must.

[BunnyGo]

Agree with this. Tom is one of my top townreads until now.

Why "until now" if you agree with it?

Because my English sucks. He is one of my top townreads.

That's what I thought. Just wanted to check.

[goldfinger0303]

My town reads are probably

Jamiet
Bunny
Tom

In that order.

I keep going back and forth on ghug. I just can't tell yet if the hate boner is being forced or if he's just tunneling.

I'll do a further re-read of the smaller talkers, but currently I would seriously consider wagons on worcej and damo.

[Chaqa]

Because I don’t take the GM explanation (even if relayed directly from Macca) at face value.

I think scum-Tom wouldn't say that because he should know that it would draw the kind of attention it did, or that it would draw other negative attention from people objecting that we can't know so we shouldn't speculate (which, of course, is just a round about way of getting to the former...).

Agree with this. Tom is one of my top townreads until now.

Fox, Rivera, ghug:

Wouldn't scum!Tom know that people would have this exact reaction and perhaps say something like this for exactly this type of town cred?

[Foxcastle]

Yes. Copy-edit my extraneous adjectives, but I am curious about your thoughts.

Sure, you've caught me out in a hypocrisy. But scum are known to lurk. I forget who did it in a recent game—and it was by no means thorough or scientific—but they went back and looked and basically a third to half of the lurkers turned out to be scum in the games they looked at. Anyway, the theory is that players who come back and find themselves voted are more likely to participate in order to placate the voter, and in doing so create information and connections that can be studied later.

Contrast that to EMC, who doesn't care that you're voting him and won't change his behavior.

I'm not voting EMC to change his behavior. I'm voting EMC to register my objection to his behavior. I think town shouldn't want him in the game. I am willing to stop this eventually, but after 2 modkills, I must.

I guess I'm just frustrated that you're obscuring your "real" reads. I think you're now joke-voting Worcej, for example. And it's all well and good to say "yes, but I'm leaving a record of my thoughts," but you also know that following votes on the bot is a low-effort analysis that more people are willing to undertake, whereas sorting through all your posts to figure out what your "real" reads were is high-effort and fewer people are likely to undertake it.