Why do you bandwagon on NP?
Finished Mafia XLII: War of the Gods ~ GAME OVER ~ Town wins!
- Thread starter double o squirtle
- Start date
- Status
On NP's case on Lorde:
@NinjaPenguin; I think you're trying too hard. By that I mean that a lot of the points you brought up are overthought and involve you reading too much into the posts, presuming scummy intentions from them, and thus are flawed. It's tunnel vision. Some examples:
I think that in the core of it, the points NP raised boils down to some WIFOM-yness and some average logic. The first I think is a legitimate issue, and lorde saying "it's normal despite how hard I try" sounds more like an excuse. The second point is very shakey, since there's a lot of average logic going around right now. Aggressiveness was discussed somewhat, but that's not really the tone that I'm picking up.
On Lorde:
The potentially scummy things that I noticed in lorde's defense was some passive aggressiveness (might be normal), potential OMGUS (still needs confirming/clarifying) and some weird reasoning in "- WIFOM is normal for me, no matter how much I want it not to be.", this simply showing that WIFOM is actually a legitimate point on lorde.*
*A tangent thought; I'm actually thinking that maybe a good case is one that can't be well defended against. A defendable case implies that there are flaws in the arguments. Yeah, this only just clicked for me. Dx'
Lorde's tone seems calculated and inconsistent
The reason why I'm reading lorde as scum at this point is that I think her tone is coming off quite calculated, which I don't think is normal for her. It reminds me, rather, of how she played this previous game as scum. Follows are lorde's first five posts (not in consecutive order); I suggest you read them all first before you read my thoughts on them.
Compare that to the following posts, which are much more-lighthearted or significantly shorter. Particularly compare the last post (about 'bad reasoning') with the ones above. It's something that could have easily been overexplained - lorde didn't say why 'it' is bad reasoning; however it didn't actually need to be explained. This is interesting because the posts above do explain fairly obvious problems. So there's definitely some inconsistencies in tone.
Lorde's WIFOMY behaviour
This combined with the WIFOMyness that we've seen so far; take this post, which is generally just maybe/maybe not. There's also a bit of noncommital behaviour here, which NP brought up, and I think that is probably expressed through the WIFOM.
Interestingly, she's also been sticking to the NP case nearly tunnel-like. Whenever she uses WIFOM, it's nearly always bias towards NP being scum. Remember, one of lorde's scummiest plays this past game was being selective. It's definitely toned down thus far, but it's still evident in this bias WIFOM. For example:
tl;dr
lorde is scum because:
- inconsistent tone that feels artificial, calculated and overexplained
- general WIFOMyness
- selective (bias towards NP being scummy) when using WIFOM
- potential OMGUS (needs clarifying/confirming)
@NinjaPenguin; I think you're trying too hard. By that I mean that a lot of the points you brought up are overthought and involve you reading too much into the posts, presuming scummy intentions from them, and thus are flawed. It's tunnel vision. Some examples:
This point is based off the assumption that lorde is scum and intentionally trying to stop bandwagons. What lorde said could have just as easily be said by town.
This also assumes that lorde is scum and intentionally trying to stall the game state. Not only is this not on most newer scum's agendas, it was RVS (as lorde pointed out) and you've taken it out of context.
This assumes that lorde is scum and is intentionally trying to make it so IE needs not to react. In fact, most town will say things that prevent the ideal reaction of the person another is scumhunting unintentionally, so this is also not alignment indicative.
I think that in the core of it, the points NP raised boils down to some WIFOM-yness and some average logic. The first I think is a legitimate issue, and lorde saying "it's normal despite how hard I try" sounds more like an excuse. The second point is very shakey, since there's a lot of average logic going around right now. Aggressiveness was discussed somewhat, but that's not really the tone that I'm picking up.
Bolded
On Lorde:
The potentially scummy things that I noticed in lorde's defense was some passive aggressiveness (might be normal), potential OMGUS (still needs confirming/clarifying) and some weird reasoning in "- WIFOM is normal for me, no matter how much I want it not to be.", this simply showing that WIFOM is actually a legitimate point on lorde.*
*A tangent thought; I'm actually thinking that maybe a good case is one that can't be well defended against. A defendable case implies that there are flaws in the arguments. Yeah, this only just clicked for me. Dx'
Lorde's tone seems calculated and inconsistent
The reason why I'm reading lorde as scum at this point is that I think her tone is coming off quite calculated, which I don't think is normal for her. It reminds me, rather, of how she played this previous game as scum. Follows are lorde's first five posts (not in consecutive order); I suggest you read them all first before you read my thoughts on them.
Both of these are overexplained and are some notable posts where I notice a calculated tone. Keep in mind that this is in early RVS. They also seem to be overthought. For example, in the second post, lorde devotes three sentences in her explanation, despite the issue being somewhat obvious - the same meaning could be conveyed with the last sentence alone. Why did she bother with her longer explanation, particularly in RVS? This indicates either town trying too hard to find tells, or scum overthinking and overexplaining things as to present 'flawless' cases, or to ensure that town would have no way to think they've slipped. These posts feel artificial to me.
Compare that to the following posts, which are much more-lighthearted or significantly shorter. Particularly compare the last post (about 'bad reasoning') with the ones above. It's something that could have easily been overexplained - lorde didn't say why 'it' is bad reasoning; however it didn't actually need to be explained. This is interesting because the posts above do explain fairly obvious problems. So there's definitely some inconsistencies in tone.
Lorde's WIFOMY behaviour
This combined with the WIFOMyness that we've seen so far; take this post, which is generally just maybe/maybe not. There's also a bit of noncommital behaviour here, which NP brought up, and I think that is probably expressed through the WIFOM.
Interestingly, she's also been sticking to the NP case nearly tunnel-like. Whenever she uses WIFOM, it's nearly always bias towards NP being scum. Remember, one of lorde's scummiest plays this past game was being selective. It's definitely toned down thus far, but it's still evident in this bias WIFOM. For example:
This is some obvious and major evidence of using WIFOM to discredit a defense on NP.
She says here that jade's point is half-true, but then is like "oh, but it's a great point still", which is some more implicit evidence of lorde using WIFOM against NP.
tl;dr
lorde is scum because:
- inconsistent tone that feels artificial, calculated and overexplained
- general WIFOMyness
- selective (bias towards NP being scummy) when using WIFOM
- potential OMGUS (needs clarifying/confirming)
I think that NP and lorde are the two most likely scum at this point, although I highly doubt that they'd be scumbuddies. NP could be scum because of that contradiction from earlier, and lorde could be scum from the points I raised just now. I think that the points above are more solid than those on NP, and I'm also somewhat concerned about the general apathy towards NP's lynch. There's noone particularly against it, and noone else has brought other options to the table; on the contrary, scum tend to not just let their scumbuddy die. In fact, there's not many people actually voluntarily posting, which is strange.
Hence, ##UNVOTE: Celever ##VOTE: lord o da rings
Hence, ##UNVOTE: Celever ##VOTE: lord o da rings
Also where are you, @mirdo and @Professor Palutena? I saw both of you around while I was finishing that long post of mine above. There's this post's of scattered, NP's case on lorde and now my case on lorde, which all have significant discussion value, so you've got no excuse to post.
In fact, it's been 24 hours since NP posted the case on lorde, yet only myself, SM, NP and lorde have actually said anything about it. Where is everyone else? Ice Espeon? mordacazir? rainy?
@Jadethepokemontrainer You posted after NP's lorde case was posted here and completely ignored it, and then bandwagoned on NP not long after.
@PikaMasterJesi You've been online since you got subbed in, yet haven't even posted something to say you exist.
In fact, it's been 24 hours since NP posted the case on lorde, yet only myself, SM, NP and lorde have actually said anything about it. Where is everyone else? Ice Espeon? mordacazir? rainy?
@Jadethepokemontrainer You posted after NP's lorde case was posted here and completely ignored it, and then bandwagoned on NP not long after.
@PikaMasterJesi You've been online since you got subbed in, yet haven't even posted something to say you exist.
I have a problem understanding what she commented on (I read Jade's post) it just looks like Lord said "it's kinda true, good job though!".
I can't follow sm's post. There's so much in it that I can't stay with the points he's making and as a result, I don't understand the case.
I do like NP's case on Lord though. Easy to follow and excellent post.
I don't know if bb has a case or not. Do you agree Lord is scummy but not for the reasons NP says? That's how it's coming across.
Apologies for the inactivity. I'm working 50+ hours a week right now so I can only post every so often. I'm also locked to mobile most of the time and so long posts are often going to get ignored simply because they're a PITA to read on my phone.
NP is definitely not scum lol. I still think everyone is over-reacting about the RVS vote.
##Unvote: bbninjas
##Vote: lord o da rings
I do like NP's case on Lord though. Easy to follow and excellent post.
I don't know if bb has a case or not. Do you agree Lord is scummy but not for the reasons NP says? That's how it's coming across.
Apologies for the inactivity. I'm working 50+ hours a week right now so I can only post every so often. I'm also locked to mobile most of the time and so long posts are often going to get ignored simply because they're a PITA to read on my phone.
NP is definitely not scum lol. I still think everyone is over-reacting about the RVS vote.
##Unvote: bbninjas
##Vote: lord o da rings
You sure very confident in stating who's scum or not.
Is that how you judge the case? This is not an essay, and you are not a teacher here PP, if you don't understand something, ask, I am right here
Also my post is not the case on NP, it is just my attempt to explain it to those who did not understand it after reading it, the initial case has been brought up by Celever.
AAnd he's gone.
##UNVOTE
##VOTE:NP
I don't remember switching my vote.
##VOTE:NP
I don't remember switching my vote.
I believe she's commenting on the bold part. There is something I don't quite understand, however, if this is the case. What's the purpose of lorde of saying that the part is kinda right, and then encouraging/congratulating Jade, if she isn't actually drawing anything out of the post? The way it is worded comes across as lorde agrees with the point, despite it only being half right, which is still vague and bias with WIFOM (why didn't she just disregard the point, if it wasn't really right?).
It's funny that you say you don't follow SM's post, because I think it's much more legigable and thought-out than NP's post, and even mine. In fact, I think that NP's points a rather average and subjective. I don't agree with all of NP's reasons, but I do think lorde is scummy for reasons I state in my own case.
@scattered mind What exactly are your thoughts on lorde?
I am getting into this case little by little and sooner or later I will post my full comment on Lord's case. Real life holds me back from doing it right away, and unlike others I actually want to say more than "seems right/well written/I don't know"
I get what you mean; I took three blocks of time to get around to completeing that lorde case. When do you think you'll get it done?
I do realize the case is mainly over her WIFOMy behaviour, and I did see evidence of that, just want to look into it deeper.
Next few hours (3 maybe), hopefully.
I just don't understand what you're saying beyond "NP is scum".Is that how you judge the case? This is not an essay, and you are not a teacher here PP, if you don't understand something, ask, I am right here
I guess I just can't process everything you're saying in it because there's so much there. Can you give a tl'dr version?
Np has been accused for trying to imitate his town meta (was very aggressive over RVS vote and gave a quote from last game to justify his aggressiveness) then after NP said it is not true he was asked what is the reason then for the exaggerated behavior he showed and as response said that it is his new view on RVS that is harmful for town and should be sought to be ended as fast as possible. So far so good , but then bb alerts that this is a strange reason, giving the fact that NP made an RVS vote on Ice Espeon, which contradicts the explanation of NP that the reason for his exaggerated behavior is his new ideology regarding RVS and not the other option given by Celever, that he is scum trying to play too much his town meta.
About NP's case on Lord:
Point #1:
From first look, I'm not sure that this is what came across her mind (stopping RVS), and that it is more logically that she just spontaneously reacted to your exaggerated accusation on the first RVS vote of the game (how did you want the day to start? I was baffled too by that post ). Also the only way I can think of this being in scum Lord's interest, would be if she was trying to defend morda because he was her scumbuddy, but- that's way too reaching to deduce, and the simpler explanation (a spontaneous reaction to your exaggerated behavior) seems more logical here to me.
This is Lord's comment on this point:
Point #2:
Yeah I agree that that reason to vote bb was very weird. However you explain that this is because she tried to stop the pressure on you. Why should scum Lord do that if you are town? Why should she care? and why not letting others vote and maybe risk early hammer, assuming you are town and she is scum?
Lord's response to this point:
What is the meaning of that, Lord?
Point #3:
This is hypocritical. You did it yourself in voting IE, remember? "RVS is still important/how else could I pressure IE?" - How else could Lord pressure PP?
Lord's response:
Yeah he gave there NP's quote voting IE, how surprising.
And before I go on to the other points, this is what NP had to say about all of the answers of Lord up until now:
Not very enough, NP.
Point #4:
The point that she says at the beginning is actually similar to my point- up until NP's contradiction revelation by bb, the explanation of NP to his aggressiveness was indeed decent and there was no point in going on with this case. This is also a weird thing on NP's part to say. She's basically telling others your explanation is good, NP.
So I guess your problem here is that she does not know why you are scummy, yet finds you scummy. This is the interesting part. The reason for finding NP scummy by Lord in that post is written: "His mindset isn't what I think makes him scummy, its his defense and his promotion of intense pressure...Him not replying to further conversation when he earlier implied he wanted to keep it alive with pressure is super contradictory and is scummy as well."
I'm trying to analyze this..
"His mindset isn't what I think makes him scummy"- The reason NP gave, stating his improved/new view on RVS and how its bad for town to not get out of this phase as quick as possible, is not the scummy part.
k, what is it then?
"its his defense and his promotion of intense pressure"- His defense is the mindset part.. isn't it? if not then what are you referring to?? the intense pressure itself is not scummy, it is the reason why he's so aggressive that can be scummy.
Lord, you didn't really respond to that, so do that or correct me if I'm wrong.
There are a few more points, but I am tired now, so I rather invest the rest of my energy on bb's case on Lord.
---
Point #1:
From first look, I'm not sure that this is what came across her mind (stopping RVS), and that it is more logically that she just spontaneously reacted to your exaggerated accusation on the first RVS vote of the game (how did you want the day to start? I was baffled too by that post ). Also the only way I can think of this being in scum Lord's interest, would be if she was trying to defend morda because he was her scumbuddy, but- that's way too reaching to deduce, and the simpler explanation (a spontaneous reaction to your exaggerated behavior) seems more logical here to me.
This is Lord's comment on this point:
Point #2:
Yeah I agree that that reason to vote bb was very weird. However you explain that this is because she tried to stop the pressure on you. Why should scum Lord do that if you are town? Why should she care? and why not letting others vote and maybe risk early hammer, assuming you are town and she is scum?
Lord's response to this point:
What is the meaning of that, Lord?
Point #3:
This is hypocritical. You did it yourself in voting IE, remember? "RVS is still important/how else could I pressure IE?" - How else could Lord pressure PP?
Lord's response:
Yeah he gave there NP's quote voting IE, how surprising.
And before I go on to the other points, this is what NP had to say about all of the answers of Lord up until now:
Not very enough, NP.
Point #4:
The point that she says at the beginning is actually similar to my point- up until NP's contradiction revelation by bb, the explanation of NP to his aggressiveness was indeed decent and there was no point in going on with this case. This is also a weird thing on NP's part to say. She's basically telling others your explanation is good, NP.
So I guess your problem here is that she does not know why you are scummy, yet finds you scummy. This is the interesting part. The reason for finding NP scummy by Lord in that post is written: "His mindset isn't what I think makes him scummy, its his defense and his promotion of intense pressure...Him not replying to further conversation when he earlier implied he wanted to keep it alive with pressure is super contradictory and is scummy as well."
I'm trying to analyze this..
"His mindset isn't what I think makes him scummy"- The reason NP gave, stating his improved/new view on RVS and how its bad for town to not get out of this phase as quick as possible, is not the scummy part.
k, what is it then?
"its his defense and his promotion of intense pressure"- His defense is the mindset part.. isn't it? if not then what are you referring to?? the intense pressure itself is not scummy, it is the reason why he's so aggressive that can be scummy.
Lord, you didn't really respond to that, so do that or correct me if I'm wrong.
There are a few more points, but I am tired now, so I rather invest the rest of my energy on bb's case on Lord.
---
- Status