Training Mafia 3.0: Advanced - GAMEOVER

[Mackc2]

Call it a gut feeling but something is tonally off about Bartozio's responses, I can't quite figure out what it is though. I need a bit of time to re-evaluate my reads and see if they are still valid 

[XnadrojX]

 

9 hours ago, Bartozio said:

He's a slow starter, so I'm willing to give him time to get going. This is why I said if he continues, instead of me outright suspecting him now.

There's a limit to how much time I'm willing to give him though, and that limit is less then a full day phase.

Fair. It doesn't strike me as completely different, but tone is generally not something I'm great at remembering. I'll see if I have time to reread some of his ED1 posts that game.

If you (or other people) read my post as me saying you actually said Athena was being dumb (etc.), then I apologize, that was not my intent. I did actually interpred it as you reacting only to his factual questions, and not his intent (getting an rvs wagon going, or just any kind of thing to move the game out of rvs). Maybe I'm being dumb and it really wasn't that obvious and maybe we really have completely different ways of approuching rvs. I still find it an odd interaction from your part, especially since you seemed (from my PoV) fine with it ending without you having gained anything from it, not even a good read on Athena.

Yes, you had some suspision on him halfway through, and yes you pushed that. And yes, I read his response of "Joking". But... isn't that a pretty easy answer? Why did that stop all your suspision? And if it did, doesn't that mean you ended with no read on him? Why didn't you try to analyze whether jokingly approuching you was more likely to come from town or scum Athena?

He townread you for showing emotion at all, and didn't delve too much into why you would have those emotions in the first place. His point was valid in the sense that I can see him reaching that conclusion, even if I don't agree with it.

I'm actually saying I think your scum, for what that's worth.

I explained one. for two: reacting seriously to jokes like this is a pretty good way to stop them from continuing. A rvs wagon on me isn't going to start when you already explained why all of his reasons are reaching. If you actually didn't get he was joking, you didn't break of the interaction, sure.

Considering you said that after (in my interpretation, annoyed) explaining why all of his topics were super reaching, I don't think it's such a weirt interpretation.

I do not consider my logic flawed, so even if it is flawed in your opinion, it doesn't make my comments a leap? Since I'm the one making them?

 

I feel like I explained this above, but let me know if you think I didn't.

He walked away with a read on you though.

I think I already said this before, but you could have easily sheeped his logic and voted me for SB not shitposting. Or ask why he isn't voting me at putting his money where his mouth is.

Or just vote him for only coming up with reaching reasons to vote someone. Or talk about people entering the thread without voting, like he and Mack did later on. Any of these would have moved the thread along more then what you did.

...Apart from the fact that I need a lot of "leaps in logic"....which clearly aren't fallacies...

 

Actually believing said misrepresentation? Boring story, I know.

I mean, you literally said 

11 hours ago, Bartozio said:

Uhm, no? All you did in that conversation was react with: this question is dumb. This question is dumber. Why are you being dumb? (in rvs)

so I'd say it's pretty reasonable to read your post as you saying you actually said Athena was being dumb. Again, after they said it was a joke, what are you expecting me to gain out of it? And if I did gain any reads or anything out of it, do I need to state it? In fact, I think that whole interaction was pretty worthwhile because now you've tried to push me in a way I can't see town doing.

Yes, "Joking" is that strong of an answer. Does one need a reason to joke in RVS? Is joking in RVS alignment indicative? No, and No. I'm not going to analyze something that isn't worth analyzing.

So you can see people thinking I'm Town for showing emotion, but you think I'm scum for showing emotion? So how about you delve a little into how showing emotion makes me scum, why you can see how showing emotion can lead to me getting townread, and telling us why you disagree and think I fit the scum case instead of the town case?

Throwing shade is literally saying you think someone is scum but done discreetly.

Uh, the point was about me asking a question, not me reacting. Stop sidestepping the main point. Let's say that I knew they were jokes and chose to respond seriously anyway, how does that cut off interaction? How would you react when asked a joke question without doing it in a way that, in your definition, "breaks off interaction".

I think it's definitely a weird interpretation. Even if I outright told him he was reaching and proceeded to ask "What are you trying to pull here?", how does that interpret as "Why are you being dumb?". Your case on me relies on me not wanting to prod him more, and you choose to "misinterpret" the question where I actually prodded him about his intentions? Like, I post these questions to get an answer, not to get them twisted and warped to try to paint me as scum. Me being annoyed just leads to the question "What are you trying to do by asking me these?" or "What do you hope to gain from this?" being phrased into "What are you trying to pull here?", I honestly can't see any way you can think to get "Why are you being dumb?", which I might add is borderline ad hominem.

Uh, yes it does? You're making conclusions from logic that can't logically lead to said conclusion? That's a leap to me.

I still don't understand how me being annoyed leads "What are you trying to pull here?" into "Why are you being dumb?"

Let's see, I chose to believe he was joking and dropped the whole joke question thing, so that removes the "vote him" option. I took the "SB isn't shitposting" thing as a joke, because it was pretty obvious that mentors posting would have minimal impact on alignment, so that removes the "vote him for not voting Bartozio" option. Mackc2 thing later when I had already stopped reading the game, and it was solved by the time I came back. All these "options" you're giving me are using reasons I wouldn't have, and I'm not going to make up reasons to get scum to fake a townread on me.

Leaps of logic aren't fallacies imo. But that's besides the point, it doesn't change the fact you could have a reason to do this as scum. You're sidestepping again.

Even after I clarified after the first time?

 

Bartozio's explanation gives nothing, it's either just sidestepping or resulting in even more confusion that there already was.

[XnadrojX]

 

7 hours ago, Rapier said:

Ok so I got to read the topic again and I noticed a few things I skimmed over on my first time.

 

I’m reading Athena and XnadrojX’s interactions as the latter being blatantly oblivious to the former’s jokes and taking them seriously. I don’t think he is avoiding discussion because he bothered to answer Athena and even offered himself to comment on what he thought were “tons of game-relevant stuff to talk about”.

 

To be honest, page 3 could be summarized as “Athena is trying to get reads on others by joking around and people are trying to answer him seriously”. On retrospect, I like his effort on getting out of RVS and trying to promote discussions within the game, despite the lack of game-relevant content at that time. He also took the time to scumhunt before anyone else did and got a townread out of XsomethingX.

 

I still don’t agree with his logic on some reads/votes he made, though, such as his vote on Mack simply because he didn’t answer his inquiry in the 20 minutes timespan between his question and his vote. Expecting someone to answer you asap and blaming them for not doing so is bad logic, especially when you only give them 20 minutes to reply. I also don’t like how he gave XsomethingX a townread, then sometime later said he said he doesn’t give him townpoints for his previous behavior (https://serenesforest.net/forums/index.php?/topic/83798-training-mafia-30-interested-new-players-read-first-post-day-1/&do=findComment&comment=5243704 ) (that warranted a townread before), then sheeps Bartozio’s vote on the aforementioned player through a sudden 180º turn on his previous townread.

 

Actually, if I could summarize Bart and Athena’s interactions on page 3 and 4, they’ve been going back and forth questioning each other’s logic, but then conceding on each other’s points and ultimately forming a two people wagon on XsomethingX. Their interaction felt like a subtle attempt at buddying to me.

 

Speaking of XsomethingX, he seemed kind of defensive when Athena questioned him. I agree with Fenrir Aesir’s post where he finds odd that the former answered the later with “what are you trying to pull here?”. I don’t really like this reaction.

 

 

 

Honorable mentions:

 

Fable (https://serenesforest.net/forums/index.php?/topic/83798-training-mafia-30-interested-new-players-read-first-post-day-1/&do=findComment&comment=5243531) and Makaze are players who I can think of who only dropped in the thread for RVS styled shitposting even when there were discussions and votes happening. Ok, I need to check this out for pages 5 and further, but I’ll stop here because thinking is hard.

 

Wait, so you don't like the people voting me and you think they're buddying subtly, but you also don't like my reaction? So you scumread all 3 of us?

[XnadrojX]

Eugh, I'd say some stuff about Satsuma but like so much of what can be said has already been said lol. What situation do you think would require you to fall on a backup info lynch? Because I see no such situation at the time of your post and I don't see why you would need this "safety net".

I'd probably vote Satsuma if I weren't convinced that Bartozio is scum.

[Mackc2]

I feel like Xan vs Bart is town vs town, I feel if one of them where mafia they would have tried to back down by now especially since their interactions haven't drawn any extra votes their way or started any wagons. 

[Iris]

VOTALS

Makaze (3): Rapier, Zeonth Fable
athena_57 (2): Fenrir Aesir, SatsumaFSoysoy
Fenrir Aesir (2): Mackc2, athena_57
XnadrojX (1): Bartozio
Bartozio (1): XnadrojX
EvanManManMan (1): Junk
Fable (1): Makaze
SatsumaFSoysoy (1): RADicate
Rapier (1): EvanManManMan

Phase ends in ~19 hours. With 13 alive, it takes 9 to hammer, or the person with the most votes will be lynched at deadline.

Using the new format is great, all! Keep it up.

@Zeonth 

@Rapier

Reminder to use the new specified format for voting.

[Mackc2]

@Fenrir Aesir Do you think if Athena intended to pocket Xan that something as weak as Bart's argument would have made him back off? Assuming he is pocketing what would swapping to vote that person serve to accomplish? 
Do you think that Athena is more likely to flip scum than Satsuma?
Also general question for everyone, does Fable have any reason to be unco-operative as scum? Wouldn't scum want to do the exact opposite?

[Fable]

@Fenrir Aesir

I brought up what I did about mak not mentioning that he only played the game with me because the language he was using was basically suggesting he knows my meta inside and out and that came across as very disingenuous to me. He played one game with me where he subbed in late and didn't see me play d1 which is the day I struggle with most. The thing that seemed off to me most was he did it before I was even making a read I was still kinda goofing off shitposting and he immediately went to "He's a wolf he's shitposting has to be a wolf" which is insane because that's very normal for me regardless of alignment so him freaking over that and then trying to cite meta is garbage. Which I'm not saying that can't come from village but that part that makes me think wolf is the level of certainty because he has only played the one game and he seemed so firm with it being a meta read is very unnatural to me. 

[SatsumaFSoysoy]

7 hours ago, athena_57 said:

I'm not moving my vote there yet since he's probably sleeping at the moment and I would still like Fenrir to come back, but Satsuma for me is a scumread on par with Fenrir.

Whilst his shading is probably NAI, it's still not something I want scum!him to get away with. His responses to me were dissatisfactory and did not seem aimed at either having a conversation or moving the game forward. I'm their biggest scumread, yet they don't have anything to say on me besides saying there were good points made against me. I've replied to most of these points already and am awaiting replies from the people who've made them, if he agrees with these points he should be able to answer these questions himself.

Overall seems uninterested in gamesolving and appears to be answering my questions out of necessity.

Additionally, I'm probably biased here, but I'm still annoyed by his meta post on me. When told by me this was bullcrap and confronted by Junk on his not backing this up with a vote, his reply was:

He just shaded me for no real reason, gets called out and basically says "lol, whoops"

Finally, I'm bothered that they mentioned nadroj was a good info lynch but never bothered to look into his content.

I don't actually scumread you. I'm pretty much null on everyone on Day 1s most of the time. I only voted you because we've had this conversation about dropping votes for no reason multiple times already, so I voted you tongue in cheek. I could have asked you any of those questions without that vote and not much would change other than perhaps your own perception.

I'm not very invested in solving the game at Day 1, when reads will be mediocre and quickly subject to change.

Now I guess I have to catch up on a few pages.

[Makaze]

1 hour ago, Mackc2 said:

Call it a gut feeling but something is tonally off about Bartozio's responses, I can't quite figure out what it is though. I need a bit of time to re-evaluate my reads and see if they are still valid 

What reads are you re-evaluating? As of which post did start you have reads/what set you on your path?

43 minutes ago, Mackc2 said:

I feel like Xan vs Bart is town vs town, I feel if one of them where mafia they would have tried to back down by now especially since their interactions haven't drawn any extra votes their way or started any wagons. 

What felt tonally off about Bart to you? How does it fit in with this town vs town narrative?

11 minutes ago, Mackc2 said:

@Fenrir Aesir Do you think if Athena intended to pocket Xan that something as weak as Bart's argument would have made him back off? Assuming he is pocketing what would swapping to vote that person serve to accomplish? 
Do you think that Athena is more likely to flip scum than Satsuma?
Also general question for everyone, does Fable have any reason to be unco-operative as scum? Wouldn't scum want to do the exact opposite?

You know my stance, but: If he can get away with it as town, he can get away with it as scum. If he can get away with it as scum, then it's not necessarily a bad play. This is WIFOM at best. You have to decide what you think is actually happening in this game instead of what you think makes sense in most cases.

That said, I've said this before: it is not that he is hiding his reads and being uncooperative. There are cases where doing those is a valid town strategy. What's scummy about it is the way he's going about it and how he is handling challenges. His emotional range is defensive, self-preserving and not investigative at all.

Just for shits and giggles, I'm going to reply to Fable's posts, to make sure I didn't miss anything. He said he asked me two questions. Hopefully I've already answered them.

On 6/17/2018 at 11:23 PM, Fable said:

This gif was his first post in response to my vote on him.

On 6/18/2018 at 8:16 PM, Fable said:

Why are people looking for the meaning of life in shitposts? 

Assuming this broad question was directed at me, I personally don't need the content of a post to be game related for the reason for making the post to be game related. I try to reason out why you made a post instead of what the content means, so I can read into anything, including when, where, how and why you made a shitpost.

Depends on the person making the post. If the behavior is unpredictable, it's different from being predictable and alignment indicative. I don't think anything I have commented on qualifies as random or independent of motivations related to the game.

On 6/18/2018 at 8:25 PM, Fable said:

Can I ask why you're obsessed with me? 

I assume this was the question asked to me.

I got strong scum vibes from your entrance and re-entance posts, and see distinct differences in tone and intensity compared to the last game, where I knew you were town right off the bat. I've said this to others several times.

On 6/18/2018 at 10:33 PM, Fable said:

Mak's plan to randomly call people wolf and see what happens is interesting. 

Not a question, but I did reply to it.

On 6/18/2018 at 11:33 PM, Fable said:

Where's the thunderdome? 

I'm here meming and you're doing.....something.....I don't actually know what.

I responded to this question by actually explaining what I meant by thunderdoming or what I think people will see as thunderdoming, so think it's kind of weird if this is the second question he was talking about.

12 hours ago, Fable said:

Interesting that mak doesn't add the asterisk that last game was the only game he's ever played with me. 

Not a question, but I did reply to it.

I'm struggling to come up with what I ignored except for the leading "Why are you obsessed with me?" question, which has been answered a few times over.

[XnadrojX]

7 minutes ago, SatsumaFSoysoy said:

I don't actually scumread you. I'm pretty much null on everyone on Day 1s most of the time. I only voted you because we've had this conversation about dropping votes for no reason multiple times already, so I voted you tongue in cheek. I could have asked you any of those questions without that vote and not much would change other than perhaps your own perception.

I'm not very invested in solving the game at Day 1, when reads will be mediocre and quickly subject to change.

Now I guess I have to catch up on a few pages.

Doesn't this just mean you should put more effort into game-solving in Day 1, since you want to have non-mediocre reads?

[SatsumaFSoysoy]

2 minutes ago, XnadrojX said:

Doesn't this just mean you should put more effort into game-solving in Day 1, since you want to have non-mediocre reads?

I just like to be certain about whatever reads I have, and the ways people react to the gamestate actually changing usually is more telling to me than the fishing on Day 1.

[Fable]

On 6/18/2018 at 11:40 PM, Fable said:

I'll humor the lunacy for a second though. 

Mak you haven't actually provided any reasons, you've just said "lynch Fable" over and over like that's suppose to mean something. I asked earlier about it and you ignored me, RAD asked and you ignored him. This doesn't sound like someone trying to discern an alignment it sounds like someone trying to force a lynch through saying "No but trust me though". 

Tell me Mak is genuine in his push when he pretends I never tried to engage with him when he skips over this post every single time. 

 

[XnadrojX]

So why aren't you actively changing the gamestate?

[Makaze]

11 minutes ago, Fable said:

@Fenrir Aesir

I brought up what I did about mak not mentioning that he only played the game with me because the language he was using was basically suggesting he knows my meta inside and out and that came across as very disingenuous to me. He played one game with me where he subbed in late and didn't see me play d1 which is the day I struggle with most. The thing that seemed off to me most was he did it before I was even making a read I was still kinda goofing off shitposting and he immediately went to "He's a wolf he's shitposting has to be a wolf" which is insane because that's very normal for me regardless of alignment so him freaking over that and then trying to cite meta is garbage. Which I'm not saying that can't come from village but that part that makes me think wolf is the level of certainty because he has only played the one game and he seemed so firm with it being a meta read is very unnatural to me. 

He is correct that I have only played the one game, but I am also confident in my experience, and I have no reason to doubt my strongest instincts in both games. Small sample sizes are irrelevant when it comes down to how I feel about it. It's disingenous to say I think shitposting makes you scummy. I've denied that several times. It's your tone. You can't do anything to defend against that aside from show genuine solving and town motivation like you had last game, but that doesn't mean you can defend yourself against something I didn't say. You can't shake me by misrepping me.

[Fable]

1 minute ago, Makaze said:

He is correct that I have only played the one game, but I am also confident in my experience, and I have no reason to doubt my strongest instincts in both games. Small sample sizes are irrelevant when it comes down to how I feel about it. It's disingenous to say I think shitposting makes you scummy. I've denied that several times. It's your tone. You can't do anything to defend against that aside from show genuine solving and town motivation like you had last game, but that doesn't mean you can defend yourself against something I didn't say. You can't shake me by misrepping me.

And I've said that it takes me a while to get going and d1 is my worst day it was true last game and it was true this game and if you actually cared about my fucking alignment you would go back and check but you're more interested in pushing your narrative. 

[Makaze]

 

3 minutes ago, Fable said:

Tell me Mak is genuine in his push when he pretends I never tried to engage with him when he skips over this post every single time. 

 

I skipped over that post originally because it doesn't contain a question, and actually only states the facts. I don't see what kind of response you expected, since your statement was correct. I wasn't trying to discern your alignment, I was asserting what I thought your alignment was, with confidence. Not having active doubts and waffles after already discerning your alignment is not something I am uncomfortable with.

Before you have a fit about "how can you refuse to question your reads", notice I use the word active. I play with a style where I am constantly confident I am right, but I change what I am right about as the need arises. You saw this first hand, and I can adapt to new information. I just don't doubt myself until new information arrives.

You had and have chances to prove me wrong, but you could not do that by answering any questions I had. You would have to do something I did not expect you to do to change my mind.

I don't think I ignored RAD, but I can't remember who I actually answered, so I probably ignored several people until I finally answered.

I stand by not answering when I said no because I have gained more info from people reacting to my gauntlet throw than I would have if I gave my reasons and saw lazy "I don't agree" or "I'll sheep that" posts. I had reasons to throw down and not answer until later similar to how you had reasons to throw nothing down and then come out with reads later. I think my method is more investigative because I am actively affecting how much information is gained before I reveal things instead of just waiting until a certain time to say anything, though.

[Makaze]

11 minutes ago, Fable said:

And I've said that it takes me a while to get going and d1 is my worst day it was true last game and it was true this game and if you actually cared about my fucking alignment you would go back and check but you're more interested in pushing your narrative. 

I'm actually only interested in how what you say feels not the content. If you do the same shit as both alignments then you're being intentionally NAI with that play, and I'm here to tell you I can read which you are through the BS despite you having the same basic content because the way you say it has different connotations and emotions.

If I'm wrong, then so what? Why are you so bothered by it when no one else is sheeping me? Why so defensive, why so angry? On second thought, don't answer that, I don't really care; my point is, I'd rather see something that pings me town, than argue over stuff that, at best, you think shouldn't ping me at all, but still does. You are not going to change my mind about what pings me in the past. You are going to have to ping me town with new stuff starting now. No way around it.

[Fable]

1 minute ago, Makaze said:

 

I skipped over that post originally because it doesn't contain a question, and actually only states the facts. I don't see what kind of response you expected, since your statement was correct. I wasn't trying to discern your alignment, I was asserting what I thought your alignment was, with confidence. Not having active doubts and waffles after already discerning your alignment is not something I am uncomfortable with.

Before you have a fit about "how can you refuse to question your reads", notice I use the word active. I play with a style where I am constantly confident I am right, but I change what I am right about as the need arises. You saw this first hand, and I can adapt to new information. I just don't doubt myself until new information arrives.

You had and have chances to prove me wrong, but you could not do that by answering any questions I had. You would have to do something I did not expect you to do to change my mind.

I don't think I ignored RAD, but I can't remember who I actually answered, so I probably ignored several people until I finally answered.

I stand by not answering when I said no because I have gained more info from people reacting to my gauntlet throw than I would have if I gave my reasons and saw lazy "I don't agree" or "I'll sheep that" posts. I had reasons to throw down and not answer until later similar to how you had reasons to throw nothing down and then come out with reads later. I think my method is more investigative because I am actively affecting how much information is gained before I reveal things instead of just waiting until a certain time to say anything, though.

You sound like a jackass.

"I don't need facts or logic if I just assume I'm right all the time"

Like actually fuck off i'm done talking to you and if we don't lynch you that's disgraceful.

 

[Mackc2]

21 minutes ago, Makaze said:

What reads are you re-evaluating? As of which post did start you have reads/what set you on your path?

What felt tonally off about Bart to you? How does it fit in with this town vs town narrative?

I was re-evaluating my thoughts on Fenrir, the conclusion is that his recent posts have more of a town lean. I have my suspicions about Athena but at this point its nothing more than a gut instinct, I haven't started to gather evidence to support it yet. 

I believe Bart is acting more confident than usual, I was not sure if that is scum or town would be more confident but I don't think as scum he would be tunnelling the one issue with Xan. 

[Makaze]

1 minute ago, Fable said:

You sound like a jackass.

"I don't need facts or logic if I just assume I'm right all the time"

Like actually fuck off i'm done talking to you and if we don't lynch you that's disgraceful.

 

Okay. I don't need to talk to you to observe you talking to others, which is where pings will be more helpful anyway.

[Junk]

Satsuma bothers me a lot more now. I was under the impression they were going to make a significant content post with  reads that weren't athena because satsuma wasn't voting athena, but all he did was vote athena in the end for the reasons i'm assuming he outlined in his athena meta post? It feels like he only voted athena because some people called him out on his lack of commitment and he was forced to commit. I don't understand why he couldn't have committed earlier. Top scumread

@Bartozio I'm not sure how he could have really derived athena's allegiance unless he somehow thought athena was lying about joking and maybe it's just me but I really don't feel like another rvs vote is going to change the game significantly. I also disagree with the fact that athena could have only continued to the joke. I feel like athena could have definitely asked nadraj to clarify his stance on athena and why he felt that way since nadraj seemed to vaguely suspect athena. I don't care that athena didn't do this but what bothers me somewhat is that it feels like you're too easily giving athena a pass but heavily criticizing nadraj. I also agree with nadraj that you contradict yourself by finding athena's reasoning for townreading nadraj "good" despite the fact that your reasoning opposes athena's. Overall definitely somewhat bothered by bart now.

@athena_57

8 hours ago, athena_57 said:

You may not have gotten to my post on this yet, but I never scumread nadroj. I saw Bart's vote as an opportunity to start a 2-man wagon, which applies a lot more pressure than a two separate votes.

This seems really confusing because I got the impression that you reversed your townread when you stated "Whilst Im not covinced by the "unwilling to participate in conv"-point, I missed the fact that he dropped the conversation despite shading me before." gives me the impression that you at least somewhat had a minor suspicion of him. You even posted a picture of a 15 degree rotation from "town" to "scum" :P.  Why couldn't you have said all you wanted was to apply pressure before when asked why you reversed your stance? Now it feels like to me that you forced yourself to come up with a reason for voting nadraj. I think your satsuma read is fine for the most part but this part bothers me. "His (Satsuma) responses to me were dissatisfactory and did not seem aimed at either having a conversation or moving the game forward." When you were asking and responding to satsuma before this post I never got the impression that you felt this way and to suddenly come to this conclusion just seems kind of convenient for your case. Also maybe you missed my question but what do you think of  rad's theory that fenrir genuinely did not realize what your vote on nadraj meant to his pocket theory. I think it's definitely crucial you look at this since your whole case on fenrir rests on him omitting your vote on nadraj Definitely bothered by this slot but slightly less than satsuma i'd say.

@Rapier I only suspected athena and evan at that time and after evan's wtf posts (that came off as scummy) I figured I should pressure him.

Speaking of evan it's been 23 hours since my pressure  post and nothing so my pressure has failed it seems :(. In lieu of this

##unvote

##vote Satsuma

Athena's fenrir case is decent if he addresses rad's theory at least and his satsuma read for the most part is fine but satsuma hasn't really had anything much and his athena vote reeks of being forced to vote rather than coming off  naturally IMO.

As of right now Satsuma>Athena>Bart>Evan

Nadroj comes off as townie based off his tone and I think he's responding to bart well. RAD's still town to me. Everybody else is null

[Junk]

##unvote

##vote @SatsumaFSoysoy

[Mackc2]

25 minutes ago, SatsumaFSoysoy said:

I just like to be certain about whatever reads I have, and the ways people react to the gamestate actually changing usually is more telling to me than the fishing on Day 1.

Then wouldn't the best course of action to be to be to try to consolidate your reads? Why do you not vote those people? Would that not get you a reaction that you could analyse? 
##Vote: @SatsumaFSoysoy
 

[Fable]

 

 

1 hour ago, Mackc2 said:

I feel like Xan vs Bart is town vs town, I feel if one of them where mafia they would have tried to back down by now especially since their interactions haven't drawn any extra votes their way or started any wagons. 

 

1 hour ago, Mackc2 said:

I feel like Xan vs Bart is town vs town, I feel if one of them where mafia they would have tried to back down by now especially since their interactions haven't drawn any extra votes their way or started any wagons. 

What caused the quick shift here?

Also explain the second thought? If either are wolves why would they care if they actually got the wagon or not?