Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[notquitethere]

I've finally got some real computer time, but only for a lunch break. There are 14 other players. In the past I'd try to juggle engaging with everyone, but it was probably wasted effort. Instead, I'll compare three random players. As ever, I value words backed up with red text more than anything else.

Spoiler: Randomisation (click to show/hide)

For each of these three, I'll just ask two questions:

1. Do they believe in their vote? (Have they made a non-RVS vote yet?)
2. Are they curious about the game? (The other players and their motivations, as well as mechanically how the game works)

Toony

I think he said that he submitted TMNT to the defunct beginner BYOR game, so that might explain the change of avatar and tagline. If we start seeing TMNT powers turn up in flavor reports, we'll know why.

1. Conviction
Hasn't made a vote, not even in RVS

2. Curiousity
Comes in with some appraisal of everyone's first posts. Good stuff, but so far most posts are removed commentary rather than direct engagement

Conclusion: Not that impressed so far!


EuchreJack

Downplays his double-voting

1. Conviction
One empty distancing vote on Juicebox, then an empty vote on Toaster coached in excuses for not voting other players

2. Curiosity
Comments on some current topics of conversation. Has some very brief reads based on a current bun fight.

Conclusion: weak conviction and curiousity. Self-conscious about how the votes would appear to others.


A_Curious_Cat

1. Conviction
Early fight with Lenglon, unvotes when gets good content. Currently voting the vote counting bot for not scumhunting. Assuming this isn't a joke, this is a pretty legitimate line of attack if Mamobo was actually a player.

2. Curiousity
Pretty active in the thread, engaging with what's happening, asking questions about unknown terminology, with some pushed towards casting the net wider with more questions.

Conclusion: Nothing particularly telling yet, but a competent early D1 showing.


As the game stands, I'd be happy eliminating EuchreJack. As we enter the mid part of D1, I want to see Toony use his vote.

[Knightwing64]

Alright, I’m here. Somebody give me the cliffnotes of what happened please, as I would prefer not reading through 20 pages.

Also, if anybody asked me anything, just ask it again here, because I again, don’t want to scroll through lots while working (loosely)

[EuchreJack]

Alright, I’m here. Somebody give me the cliffnotes of what happened please, as I would prefer not reading through 20 pages.

Also, if anybody asked me anything, just ask it again here, because I again, don’t want to scroll through lots while working (loosely)

Hector13 and NQT were being scummy, you should probably vote one of them.
Easy peasy.

[EuchreJack]

Randomizer my a$$ 

[EuchreJack]

Hm, actually NQT's randomizer post is growing on me.
But not enough Robots.

[EuchreJack]

You seem to have a different recollection of that game than I do. I lost that game for my team N1, and I think it took ‘til D4 for town to realize it. The reason I went after you was because everyone else was mechanically cleared, and the fact you thought it was a thunderdome is testament to the play of my team.

If you want to thunderdome now I’m pretty sure I could make zero posts between now and the end of the day, and I’d still win. That’s how badly you’ve played.

Equally so, both the people you want to sheep have me as a scumread. Fire away if you want, I’ve been one of the most prolific posters of the day, there’s plenty enough evidence to build a case if you think I’ve played horseshit. I won’t even argue against it.

If you're not going to argue, what again is the point of Thunderdoming?

Besides me, whom are your top three scum picks?

[EuchreJack]

NQT: What is your analysis of Toaster?

[EuchreJack]

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

I don't plan on playing shitty just to prove that I am town. I kinda need to break that habit.

[Knightwing64]

Alright, I’m here. Somebody give me the cliffnotes of what happened please, as I would prefer not reading through 20 pages.

Also, if anybody asked me anything, just ask it again here, because I again, don’t want to scroll through lots while working (loosely)

Hector13 and NQT were being scummy, you should probably vote one of them.
Easy peasy.

Hm. noted.

[FallacyofUrist]

Okay, I'm about to enter work and the post from phone realm, but I still have a bit of time to lay some groundwork.

Mileage may vary, but the way I see it, ideal vote targets lie at in two particular confluences.

People who are active, but, make no effort to contribute.

And people who are active, but, contribute in bad faith while trying to seem like it's in good faith.

These two categories define scum. There's also people who are just less active, but it's pretty hard to diagnose scumminess from that, though pressure votes are still useful to get things moving.

Personally I find the second of the two confluences I defined to be the more useful one. Just off the top of my head, I like what I've seen more out of Toaster, NQT, hector and somehow juicebox (not very much posting, but it's all good stuff, no wasted juice whatsoever), and dislike what I've seen out of Spin, ToonyMan, Tric, and Jim.

That still leaves like... half the player base though. And I'm sure you've noticed once again that I haven't defined why I feel the way I do about the players I named. Heck, my vibe checks could be completely out of date.

So that's what I'll be trying to work on today. Feel free to call me out if I try to skip out on actually doing that part, because that's the important part. The details. But the day is still long, and we can afford players getting their chance to get their game face on.

I probably won't get too much of that done while at work and forced to PfP, but I'll aim to apply that process of categorization to like, three players? Maybe four.

[notquitethere]

EuchreJack, maybe consider collecting your thoughts before you vomit all over the thread.

Regarding Toaster, pretty solid ball-keepy-up posting here and here. So at the least I can rule out lazy-scum (which is more than can be said for many players at this point).

What don't you like about Toaster, specifically?

---

PPE: Fallacy, I think I'd agree with that rubric. Good direction to explore.

[Knightwing64]

Jack and Fallacy have differing views, I guess?

[Toaster]

PFP and let me reiterate I hate phone posting because it ate my first attempt at this

So I’ve had a revelation about TricMagic.

TricMagic is Org 2.0.

He’s out here playing by a different set of rules than the rest of us, and it irks me because he’s somehow able to get by without contributing because it’s TricMagic. He’s hardly done anything of real substance and instead of people getting on his case, it’s all just “Oh that rascally TricMagic is at it again!”  I can’t even say it’s a scum thing to let him go because so many different people are doing it!  I’m getting really frustrated because apparently it’s so fine that this is happening that I’m the jerk for pointing it out now.

And sure, there are other people with low contribution rates, but they’re all either new players, people who have done at least something, or are getting called out. I’ll point out Lenglon as someone I suspect who isn’t doing enough.

So is this the world we live in?  Is TricMagic simply allowed to do his own thing without helping and there is a collective agreement to just smile and let it happen?

Because I hope not.

[Jim Groovester]

I can't legitimately vote hector13.  Yeah, I think his vote on me is horseshit, and his play is horseshit, and he reminds me of that game we thunderdomed and I totally owned his scummy ass.  But lashing out at the one person pushing a case against you is counterproductive.

wtf is this reasonable attitude towards hector13's suspicion to EuchreJack????????

thunderdome

dumb dumb dumb

Instead, I'll compare three random players.

Why three random players instead of three players you might have some suspicion of?

The analysis itself is fine.

Alright, I’m here. Somebody give me the cliffnotes of what happened please, as I would prefer not reading through 20 pages.

Also, if anybody asked me anything, just ask it again here, because I again, don’t want to scroll through lots while working (loosely)

DO YOUR OWN HOMEWORK

So is this the world we live in?  Is TricMagic simply allowed to do his own thing without helping and there is a collective agreement to just smile and let it happen?

Look, man, I can screech all day about how some players are useless and don't meaningfully contribute and nobody would ever argue with me for being wrong.

But also, it's not my job to make sure they don't suck, and ultimately,

I just want to play mafia.

Is it fair? Not in the slightest.

[Maximum Spin]

So is this the world we live in?  Is TricMagic simply allowed to do his own thing without helping and there is a collective agreement to just smile and let it happen?

Pretty much, yes.

Look, we're here playing the game of mafia, and part of the game of mafia is appearing town in a way that convinces the other players. The fact that Tric's way of doing so is a little different doesn't mean it doesn't work. In fact, it may shock and horrify you, but Tric sometimes even catches scum, even, once in a while, when nobody else did! There is absolutely no requirement in the rules of mafia that everyone play in lockstep. It's not connect four or tic tac toe, there's no single proven solution. For example, I have my own way of playing that's different from many others, which sometimes upsets people who think everyone should be playing the same, but it also works and I've managed to come to a point of gelling pretty well with enough other players to keep making it work. TricMagic's no different. This is the ideal TricMagic. You may not like it, but this is what peak performance looks like.
I read the entire rest of the thread, but forgot anything I was going to respond to, so I'll come back after having some breakfast.