• Check out the relaunch of our general collection, with classic designs and new ones by our very own Pissog!

NOC 9p Matrix 6 Game Thread [GAME OVER]

Schiavetto said:
Opinion in 686 still stands, yes. I think OM's accusation holds water, inasmuch as Former's response to Tommy's read on him (or more precisely, Tommy's scumpool) uses emotional appeal as a point of departure (in OM's words, guilting Tommy by professing disappointment). He then goes on to prop up Tommy's read as an instance of a more general scum tactic (posing two potential votes as a kind of false dilemma) without actually interrogating the post itself to determine if that is in fact what's happening. Tommy directly calls him out on this, and Former's response is to ask Tommy to provide the reasoning again.

When OM picks up on this, and accuses him of gaslighting, Former is far more preoccupied with picking at the wording and reacting to the pushback he drew (all on his own, mind you) than he is with actually getting caught up with the thread. When I directly asked him to elaborate on two of his reads, his response was riddled with disclaimers. I have absolutely no issues with someone unable to dedicate time to the game for reasons beyond their control--hell, as someone who works ridiculous hours and has mostly only been able to keep up my current activity due to schools being off for the holiday weekend, I'm pretty sympathetic to anyone in that position. But to wield that excuse in the way that Former has after making the kinds of plays Former has is, for me, problematic. It's a means of shirking accountability for flimsy/disingenuous posts, and whether it comes from town or scum, it is not helpful . Without any word on his part concerning, oh idunno, the better part of the game, I'm not willing to commit to a town read: he lives on the ruddier side of null for me. I would not be heartbroken if he were to go today.
Click to expand...

Frankly, I think what happened with that whole incident was just an awkward post due to IRL busyness and then people overanalyzing the hell out of it.

Schia's post is actually a pretty good example of overanalysis. "This person is probably mafia because they didn't do x" really only works if two people have the exact same playstyle. For example
Schiavetto said:
He then goes on to prop up Tommy's read as an instance of a more general scum tactic (posing two potential votes as a kind of false dilemma) without actually interrogating the post itself to determine if that is in fact what's happening.
Click to expand...
Schia is making a huge assumption here that my playstyle would be to interrogate the post itself. That might be how Schia plays, but that isn't my style at all. Here's how I saw the situation, I saw this post while quickly checking my phone while with other people:

Duskfall98 said:
If I were to give a hot prediction (this is probably not accurate but if I am right I will take street cred)

It is one of tbz/former and one of whydon/caff
Click to expand...
and then saw it had a double pairing that included me. I really instinctively do not like pairings for reasons I've already said (aka Tommy could be mafia, we have no way of knowing if there are actually 2 mafia in that group or if they exist in the other 5 players). I did not know if there was mafia in the other 3 pairings, and I hadn't closely read Tommy's reasons for those pairings at that point (I had seen it, but I had only skimmed it and then was distracted by irl people). But I didn't want other people to sign on to what I saw as a potentially very fatal move for town. I also kind of wanted to keep pressure on Tommy's slot because I felt like people weren't really pressuring him and I wasn't really quite sure how I wanted to read him.

Duskfall98 said:
Have you even tried to understand my reasoning yet?
Click to expand...
Then Tommy said this, and no, I hadn't tried understanding the reasons. I didn't really feel the need to, I was busy at the time and saw a strategy that I thought was unjustifiably bad. (Frankly, even understanding the reasons, I still think it's bad. It's way too easy for town to get in the mindset of "it's one of these two people" and just be wrong and both are town...then town loses the game. I've seen it tons of times and I wasn't interested in having that happen this game. )

So yeah, Schia makes this assumption about how I play the game and how I should have played the game...and that's not just how I play or how I think it should be played. I was looking at something that seemed mechanically bad coming from a slot I found hard to read properly and so I wanted to dismiss that plan and put pressure on Tommy....so that's what I did. Or tried doing.

Schiavetto said:
When OM picks up on this, and accuses him of gaslighting, Former is far more preoccupied with picking at the wording and reacting to the pushback he drew (all on his own, mind you) than he is with actually getting caught up with the thread. When I directly asked him to elaborate on two of his reads, his response was riddled with disclaimers. I have absolutely no issues with someone unable to dedicate time to the game for reasons beyond their control--hell, as someone who works ridiculous hours and has mostly only been able to keep up my current activity due to schools being off for the holiday weekend, I'm pretty sympathetic to anyone in that position. But to wield that excuse in the way that Former has after making the kinds of plays Former has is, for me, problematic. It's a means of shirking accountability for flimsy/disingenuous posts, and whether it comes from town or scum, it is not helpful . Without any word on his part concerning, oh idunno, the better part of the game, I'm not willing to commit to a town read: he lives on the ruddier side of null for me. I would not be heartbroken if he were to go today.
Click to expand...

This whole paragraph is more of Schia just really misunderstanding what I was saying.

I really personally don't like gaslighting and I was concerned when I was called out for doing it. Mostly because what I was doing didn't match the definition of gaslighting I had in my head (and tbf, it also didn't match the definition of gaslighting in general).

I also never said I wasn't caught up in the thread....what I had said was that I wanted to re-read the thread so I could better develop my reads.

How I've learned to play D1's over time is to keep my head on a swivel and just poke at as many different angels as I can. In that way, I try to engage with a lot of different people and just look for anything that pings me. This strategy has typically worked pretty well, and I think it works particularly well in larger games when it's really difficult to keep track of 15-16 other players, but I think it really didn't work well in this game for 2 reasons

1. It's a smaller 9p game and it didn't move like a 15p game. In a 15p game there's usually a bunch of different conversations woven together and it's really difficult to keep track of them all so I usually don't bother and stick to my own little world, but I think doing that this game left me kind of disconnected with the far fewer things happening this game.
2. I think genuinely this was a really boring D1. With the exception of stuff around M24 stuff just...really didn't happen. There wasn't really any drama, or any fights, people didn't go into it about roles. There wasn't much that could ping me.

Anyways, going back to this:
Schiavetto said:
When OM picks up on this, and accuses him of gaslighting, Former is far more preoccupied with picking at the wording and reacting to the pushback he drew (all on his own, mind you) than he is with actually getting caught up with the thread. When I directly asked him to elaborate on two of his reads, his response was riddled with disclaimers.
Click to expand...
Like I said, I didn't need to catch up with the thread. I wanted to go back and reread it so I could look for any clues or pings that might help me put together some more reads. My D1 strategy wasn't really panning out either so I didn't have much to go on. I put disclaimers in my quick readslist because I thought my reads might be really different once I reread the thread (spoiler: they weren't, besides M24) and I wanted to put a reason why they would be different just in case some idiot came at me with "why were ur reads different only a few pages apart". Furthermore, my thoughts were really scattered since I wasn't trying to pay attention to the main narrative, just the few pokes and responses I had done here and there.


Schiavetto said:
I have absolutely no issues with someone unable to dedicate time to the game for reasons beyond their control--hell, as someone who works ridiculous hours and has mostly only been able to keep up my current activity due to schools being off for the holiday weekend, I'm pretty sympathetic to anyone in that position. But to wield that excuse in the way that Former has after making the kinds of plays Former has is, for me, problematic. It's a means of shirking accountability for flimsy/disingenuous posts, and whether it comes from town or scum, it is not helpful . Without any word on his part concerning, oh idunno, the better part of the game, I'm not willing to commit to a town read: he lives on the ruddier side of null for me. I would not be heartbroken if he were to go today.
Click to expand...

I actually took some personal offense to this part of the post and found it to be really rude, especially because it was 100% just based in Schia misunderstanding what I was saying and not understanding how I was playing.

Especially because "the better part of the game" at that point...wasn't much. We were only a dozen or so pages in and nothing really interesting had happened so far. If anything, the thing happening at that time was the most interesting thing of the day.

Overall...I think a lot of Schia's post is really just baked in misunderstanding or erroneous assumptions about how Schia thinks people other than Schia should play. Without an actual understanding or attempt to understand how I play.

But like...even then, Schia wasn't scumreading me for it. They said it themselves, they found it all null. Because well, basically most of it was NAI to begin with.
 
So uh, what's everyone elses thoughts on getting whydon.

I won't lie, Former's post is really making me reevaluate what I think of him, I'm not completely convinced anymore that he is scum, but I won't dismiss the idea entirely.
Former' post in my eyes comes from someone that wants to reiterate himself, and I really want to believe that he has been misunderstood here, at least depending in whydon's affiliation.

I don't think we're currently in a position to accurately predict our final two, so I would like to hard propose the idea of eliminating Whydon, his extreme ambiguity will make day 3 nearly impossible to win, struggling with a 50/50 on himself, or trying to find a potential partner/ the two real scums.
Even if whydon is town (which I personally believe he is), we have to get rid of this shred of uncertainty to move foreward into a day 3 scenario successfully (and potentially get a scum if we're lucky).
 
M24 said:
So uh, what's everyone elses thoughts on getting whydon.

I won't lie, Former's post is really making me reevaluate what I think of him, I'm not completely convinced anymore that he is scum, but I won't dismiss the idea entirely.
Former' post in my eyes comes from someone that wants to reiterate himself, and I really want to believe that he has been misunderstood here, at least depending in whydon's affiliation.

I don't think we're currently in a position to accurately predict our final two, so I would like to hard propose the idea of eliminating Whydon, his extreme ambiguity will make day 3 nearly impossible to win, struggling with a 50/50 on himself, or trying to find a potential partner/ the two real scums.
Even if whydon is town (which I personally believe he is), we have to get rid of this shred of uncertainty to move foreward into a day 3 scenario successfully (and potentially get a scum if we're lucky).
Click to expand...

If you read me as town how am I any more “uncertain” of a slot than literally anyone else in the game you read? Tommy’s voting me bc he genuinely thinks I’m scum, your reasoning makes no sense?
 
Whydon said:
If you read me as town how am I any more “uncertain” of a slot than literally anyone else in the game you read? Tommy’s voting me bc he genuinely thinks I’m scum, your reasoning makes no sense?
Click to expand...

I'm saying this because

You literally haven't contributed this entire game

We have nothing to read off you

Maybe your slot is less incertain to me, but I'm thinking about how to deal with a 3v2 scenario where you aren't scum, you're putting the one other inno (that is assuming I'm still alive, and you all still beliebe I'm inno) in what is essentially a 50/50 scenario between voting you or any individual of the other group. Even I could be wrong here, that' how much getting rid of you clears up this game, we've had interactions between every other player (maybe a tad less with tbz, but at least it's more than you), this'll put us in a position where we can more accurately predict a pairing.
 
Whydon said:
M24 if i flip scum who is my partner :v4:
Click to expand...

Whydon the point is even if you are town, you're still opening yourself up to be the town losing miskill by not playing. At this point it also feels like you're not playing our of stubbornness rather than lack of time, why? Do you just generallt not want to play, when did you make that decision? This is an honest question.
 
Former said:
Frankly, I think what happened with that whole incident was just an awkward post due to IRL busyness and then people overanalyzing the hell out of it.

Schia's post is actually a pretty good example of overanalysis. "This person is probably mafia because they didn't do x" really only works if two people have the exact same playstyle. For example

Schia is making a huge assumption here that my playstyle would be to interrogate the post itself. That might be how Schia plays, but that isn't my style at all. Here's how I saw the situation, I saw this post while quickly checking my phone while with other people:


and then saw it had a double pairing that included me. I really instinctively do not like pairings for reasons I've already said (aka Tommy could be mafia, we have no way of knowing if there are actually 2 mafia in that group or if they exist in the other 5 players). I did not know if there was mafia in the other 3 pairings, and I hadn't closely read Tommy's reasons for those pairings at that point (I had seen it, but I had only skimmed it and then was distracted by irl people). But I didn't want other people to sign on to what I saw as a potentially very fatal move for town. I also kind of wanted to keep pressure on Tommy's slot because I felt like people weren't really pressuring him and I wasn't really quite sure how I wanted to read him.


Then Tommy said this, and no, I hadn't tried understanding the reasons. I didn't really feel the need to, I was busy at the time and saw a strategy that I thought was unjustifiably bad. (Frankly, even understanding the reasons, I still think it's bad. It's way too easy for town to get in the mindset of "it's one of these two people" and just be wrong and both are town...then town loses the game. I've seen it tons of times and I wasn't interested in having that happen this game. )

So yeah, Schia makes this assumption about how I play the game and how I should have played the game...and that's not just how I play or how I think it should be played. I was looking at something that seemed mechanically bad coming from a slot I found hard to read properly and so I wanted to dismiss that plan and put pressure on Tommy....so that's what I did. Or tried doing.



This whole paragraph is more of Schia just really misunderstanding what I was saying.

I really personally don't like gaslighting and I was concerned when I was called out for doing it. Mostly because what I was doing didn't match the definition of gaslighting I had in my head (and tbf, it also didn't match the definition of gaslighting in general).

I also never said I wasn't caught up in the thread....what I had said was that I wanted to re-read the thread so I could better develop my reads.

How I've learned to play D1's over time is to keep my head on a swivel and just poke at as many different angels as I can. In that way, I try to engage with a lot of different people and just look for anything that pings me. This strategy has typically worked pretty well, and I think it works particularly well in larger games when it's really difficult to keep track of 15-16 other players, but I think it really didn't work well in this game for 2 reasons

1. It's a smaller 9p game and it didn't move like a 15p game. In a 15p game there's usually a bunch of different conversations woven together and it's really difficult to keep track of them all so I usually don't bother and stick to my own little world, but I think doing that this game left me kind of disconnected with the far fewer things happening this game.
2. I think genuinely this was a really boring D1. With the exception of stuff around M24 stuff just...really didn't happen. There wasn't really any drama, or any fights, people didn't go into it about roles. There wasn't much that could ping me.

Anyways, going back to this:

Like I said, I didn't need to catch up with the thread. I wanted to go back and reread it so I could look for any clues or pings that might help me put together some more reads. My D1 strategy wasn't really panning out either so I didn't have much to go on. I put disclaimers in my quick readslist because I thought my reads might be really different once I reread the thread (spoiler: they weren't, besides M24) and I wanted to put a reason why they would be different just in case some idiot came at me with "why were ur reads different only a few pages apart". Furthermore, my thoughts were really scattered since I wasn't trying to pay attention to the main narrative, just the few pokes and responses I had done here and there.




I actually took some personal offense to this part of the post and found it to be really rude, especially because it was 100% just based in Schia misunderstanding what I was saying and not understanding how I was playing.

Especially because "the better part of the game" at that point...wasn't much. We were only a dozen or so pages in and nothing really interesting had happened so far. If anything, the thing happening at that time was the most interesting thing of the day.

Overall...I think a lot of Schia's post is really just baked in misunderstanding or erroneous assumptions about how Schia thinks people other than Schia should play. Without an actual understanding or attempt to understand how I play.

But like...even then, Schia wasn't scumreading me for it. They said it themselves, they found it all null. Because well, basically most of it was NAI to begin with.
Click to expand...

Lynch Whydon
 
Votecount 2.2

(L-1!) Whydon (3) - Duskfall98, M24, OM
Former (1) - Thunder~BALLZ

Not Voting: Whydon, shubaka17, Former

Day ends in 10 hours, 15 minutes :heart: If I made any errors, let me know!

With 7 alive, hammer at 4.
 
Duskfall98 said:
Are you considering killing shub today?
Click to expand...
I have a scum lean on them from PS but that's about it. If I go through my ISO and find some really shady stuff I'm down to switch the wagon. But I also agree that Whydon pretty much has to die here and it's not a great situation to leave the person with 2/6 odds of being mafia alive.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top