NOC E.G.O Wielders Mafia - A 17P Role Madness (Game Thread) - MAFIA WIN

M2H said:
Why does it make you upset that I am reading into your joke, if from your POV I am correct?
Click to expand...

wisteriapurple said:
am i blind how are you guys gleaning pairings/unpairings from the ch3mdah vote/unvote thing
Click to expand...
M2H said:
its mostly the way ch3 unvoted and revoted
Click to expand...
The way you responded made it seem to me that you were trying to get info from something I did on a whim, plus I believe someone else attempted to pair me and wisp over this a while back, I guess it just stacked up over time, regardless it isn't really that much of a big deal now
 
skippergamez said:
Fuck I accidentally deleted my whole NE iso

Basically in my eval, NE had some glaring holes:
He never provided a read on Flandrs. 220 was a glaring part of this. His first part of d1 centered around Flandrs and it just never ended in a read. Specifically, the concerning part of 220 is “so much so as forcing a conflict between the two [Flandrs and AP]” and then NE forces a conflict between Flandrs and himself. And then 600 he gives examples of bad reads from Flandrs and then never really uses the bad reads to form an opinion on Flandrs.
The other hole is his Celever progression, we go from
222: “Celever looks really good from how they approach ck”
270: “As I see it celever is playing into the role of a spectator which doesn’t really affect his position in the thread”
489: “re:celever vote I’m interested in that I think celever’s really not been proactive wrt solving”
601: “wow this guy has been shockingly unproductive despite how many posts they have”
726: “The problem is that so much of your posting just doesn’t really do shit?”
So like the jump from 222 to 489 is kinda alarming

So like these two holes make me very weary; however, the rest of the iso I felt like it came from a town perspective overall and not the way scum would be playing.

Also, to follow up with my Evie vote on d1

Welp AF can’t anymore can she
Click to expand...
NightEmerald
 
NightEmerald said:
It’s lone town hunting in a way that feels entirely selfish. Mafia wouldn’t have to do this, since they already know who’s town, and skipper unless they went to the mafia monks in the himalayas wouldn’t really post that type of line of reasoning when they could latch onto the convo at hand
Click to expand...
how is bolded relevant if mafia wants to telegraph their "progression" in-thread
 
NightEmerald said:
Hi good morning I will now explain the flandrs votes which I didn’t before because I feel like dropping info and leaving before engaging with its reactions is just a headache

The simple version of it is that I think Flandrs’ questions asked in the thread just don’t really show any interest in solving AP so much as just forcing a conflict between the two. Given um, *me* I agree that double replying is kinda meaningless and for that and it really feels like that alone to spiral into an unstated read feels terrible to me. I call it an unstated read because CLEARLY flandrs is approaching AP with an air of suspicion
Click to expand...
why explain the flandrs votes when you were not voting him yourself
 
NightEmerald said:
wis is town im not so sure about ck but im gonna have to reread them a bit

neon is town and I do *somewhat* agree with the AP stuff. Last night, reading AP, a lot of their posting just had me ask “what’s the point of all of this” That said, they’re far more willing to engage directly with others aorn so I mark it a terrible vote for d1 specifically.

I am still not sure of CK’s alignment.

Celever looks really good from how they approach ck but I feel like misunderstandings can be kiiinda easy to fake, wouldn’t vote them but would like to see them interact with more ppl
Click to expand...
what is your read on CK now
 
NightEmerald said:
As I see it celever is playing into the role of a spectator which doesn’t really affect his position in the thread if you flip town or scum, if flandrs flips town now, sure id 100% look into celever because the time worn trope of tvt while scum lets it happen is a thing but i don’t really think voting celever off the rip is a good idea w/o more words in the thread.

If I had to pick a cw itd be fairy unfortunately this is how fairy always plays so my issues wrt urgency could literally be =rand.



I vaguely remember underrating you frequently
Click to expand...
did you ever explain the bolded
 
NightEmerald said:
Once=113 where flandrs seemingly develops a scumlean for double posting

Second=224 where flandrs makes a super bad faith read on wis and even after correcting holds onto it

Third=224 where flandrs makes a bad faith read on celever based on celever trying to predict how flandrs would act?

Second is a bit better than the other two but all three are just not good reads.
Click to expand...
what made the read "bad-faith"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top