Shovel Knight Anonymafia - Game Over

[Marisa Kirisame]

Who do you want to lynch besides Treasure Knight (someone I'm not really bothered by anymore?)?

[Olivier]

##Unvote

I like Tinker's last post. There's things in it I don't agree with but Treasure should address them themselves.

Very happy with King's post as well, since I had already written up the same issue with Black Knight's sudden dip in activity, as well as the big change in tone between #126 and #169.

Players I wouldn't burn at the stake today are King, Propeller, Treasure and probably Plague. I'll be rereading Polar, Black and Mole and be back in a bit.

[Rain Nijika]

well, if I had to go for someone else, it would be one of Polar Knight, Black Knight and Mole Knight, only because they are on the null side

[Marisa Kirisame]

Oh right, still making that post, but could you expand on your Mole Knight read? You never did so yesterday.

[Marisa Kirisame]

@PolarKnight

-What other content did the Black Knight bring up that Propeller Knight missed?

-Right, I remember why I thought his tone was good but not really enough to move him significantly down. It's because he didn't feel pressured despite half of the players being willing to vote him earlier (this is something that would bother me as scum). I somehow didn't notice his second post (which is why I was still bothered, because it felt like he was ignoring the rest of the game), which is mostly townreads but eh I don't give a fuck. Probably would have him below Black Knight.

@PlagueKnight

-Noone really commented on it but his rant was super townie lol (this is something that's annoyed the fuck out of me in previous town games, so I can get where he's coming from).

@TinkerKnight

-Wasn't really fond of this post because it was more him defending his viewpoints and asking questions (not scummy) without actually giving any new thoughts (scummy); dunno how to explain it, but basically it came across as him not really paying attention to the game.

-...OK, so you did expand on your Mole Knight read. I'm just bad at this game. Fair enough. It would still be cool if you could address Treasure Knight's issues with your Mole Knight read.

-Your reply to Treasure Knight didn't really change my read on you (I can see you making the same reply as either alignment, honestly), but I can't see scum being so recalcitrant to claim at such a pivotal point. Mreh.

##Unvote

##Vote: Mole Knight

PS Not comfortable with a Polar Knight lynch, and really I'd prefer a Black Knight lynch, but there are like zero votes on him

[Marisa Kirisame]

Oh man, I think I just figured out who Tinker Knight was. I'll go through their ISO again and see if it strengthens/weakens my current read on them.

[Olivier]

##Vote: Black Knight

Tentative gut vote, I'll continue in 2~ hours when I get back. As of right now I'm more willing to vote Black or Mole than Polar or Tinker but I'm nowhere near done re-reading.

[Marisa Kirisame]

In retrospect, ISOing a person who has never rolled mafia before to see if they are in fact mafia was a bad idea. Their ISO does seem perfectly in line with their town play FWIW. Also putting my money where my mouth is.

##Unvote

##Vote: Black Knight

[Marisa Kirisame]

PLAGUE KNIGHT PROPELLER KNIGHT AND SPECTER KNIGHT

KING KNIGHT IT'S GREAT THAT YOU'VE GOTTEN THE SCUM.

KING KNIGHT

THERE REALLY IS MORE IMPORTANT THING THAN THIS. THAT IS...

[Marisa Kirisame]

DREAM AND FRIENDS

[Refakitty³]

That certainly bodes well for me! Where's that warp powder when I need it? I still don't particularly like Plague and would much rather push for their lynch rather than Mole's, who is admittedly my second choice now. I'm pretty miffed about being a gut vote or being a possible candidate for being null, but I can see the logic at least. Wall incoming, apparently it's a crime to not be posting at 4 in the morning.

[Marisa Kirisame]

No, we're just racist.

[Refakitty³]

Waaaaagh.

Polar's post is pretty bad. Nothing terribly unique in it, and it seems like he's treading over stuff that's already been covered, so his opinions aren't up to date with the thread.

Spectre, do you think Black would be so adversarial and such as mafia? Not a rhetorical question, genuinely curious since I'm not sure myself. It seems like a great way to get everyone to want to get rid of you, and from my experience mafia tend to only act that way after people already are on them, not as a default way. Not to say scum are never dicks, but usually it's in a "I'm better than this I don't care" arrogant sort of way which isn't how I'm reading Black.

So, Plague avoided talking about the issue, right? This post says otherwise. I took issue because reference to actual content is a one liner and a filler question takes up a paragraph.

Sorry, I kind of sort of fell asleep assuming that I had more than enough time to make a post (but now there are like 4 hours left ;/). I remember my basic thoughts being that I wasn't sure what to make of Artic Knight's post (but that someone made a decent point about his tone that would make my reads more like Tinker Knight > Mole Knight > Artic Knight = Black Knight), and skimming through now I don't really like how Black Knight sort of disappeared (yes, I'm being hypocritical here, but it feels like there was a lot more that he needed to answer for that he just sort of didn't). Elaborating on everything now.

Tinker Knight should really claim.

Well, this seems reasonable enough!

PS Not comfortable with a Polar Knight lynch, and really I'd prefer a Black Knight lynch, but there are like zero votes on him

Oh wait, there's a massive change in priorities. Funny how a scumread with very few votes suddenly takes priorities over three other people. If Mole's near top of your hypothetical list, it would have been logical to vote for them. I can't really a see a reason why you wouldn't want one of your top reads voted, well, not as town anyway. However, looking back I'm actually struggling to see why Mole's near the top of your list. In fact, all I can find is you townreading them. Funny, right?

[Refakitty³]

OK, that was less of a wall than I expected.

No, we're just racist.

I only approve of positive discrimination!

[Refakitty³]

I also dislike how Mole's vanished off the face of the planet, and hasn't had a content post that isn't waffly speculation for about two days now.

[Marisa Kirisame]

Oh wait, there's a massive change in priorities. Funny how a scumread with very few votes suddenly takes priorities over three other people. If Mole's near top of your hypothetical list, it would have been logical to vote for them. I can't really a see a reason why you wouldn't want one of your top reads voted, well, not as town anyway. However, looking back I'm actually struggling to see why Mole's near the top of your list. In fact, all I can find is you townreading them. Funny, right?

lol

The real answer is that everyone else makes more sense as town. I was townreading them before, but I reevaluated my read when people (in particular, Treasure Knight) explained their reasoning for scumreading Mole Knight.

[Marisa Kirisame]

Actually how have my priorities massively changed at all?

[Refakitty³]

What baffles me is that you changed your mind so drastically in the space of 15 minutes, right after Specter's post. Either you've got anti-BBM reading skills (Churchill reading skills?) or you saw the vote and decided you wanted in on things.

[Marisa Kirisame]

I already voiced that I'd prefer to vote for you earlier.

[Refakitty³]

I already voiced that I'd prefer to vote for you earlier.

That was in a post giving three other people with higher priority, in the same post. You left yourself with several uncommited options, none of them terribly well explained and copied a vote after you saw one.

[Marisa Kirisame]

PS Not comfortable with a Polar Knight lynch, and really I'd prefer a Black Knight lynch, but there are like zero votes on him

[Refakitty³]

Sorry, I kind of sort of fell asleep assuming that I had more than enough time to make a post (but now there are like 4 hours left ;/). I remember my basic thoughts being that I wasn't sure what to make of Artic Knight's post (but that someone made a decent point about his tone that would make my reads more like Tinker Knight > Mole Knight > Artic Knight = Black Knight), and skimming through now I don't really like how Black Knight sort of disappeared (yes, I'm being hypocritical here, but it feels like there was a lot more that he needed to answer for that he just sort of didn't). Elaborating on everything now.

I made a mistake, this was an hour before, but the point remains that you had a list of reads that contradict how you're voting.

[Marisa Kirisame]

None of them contradict how I'm voting. I already explained why I didn't want to vote either Tinker Knight/Artic Knight, and why you were a higher priority than Mole Knight (and it's not like I'm suddenly not OK with lynching Mole Knight anyways).

[No Elimination]

real post time. so yes my last read post was lazy i had something else that i was more focused on at looking at it now, it wasn't as clear as it should have been and it wasn't as in depth as it could've been. thing is i don't care. the first game was hype enough that i don't care if focusing more on that game then on my post causes me to get lynched. #worth.

that being said about half of my most recent post is now irrelevant due to recent posts and me just changing my opinion on things. i will just be talking about significant changes in reads or anything that's relevant to the current discussion.

tinker knight:

the points i made in my last post still stand. and you never addressed them, i know that for a fact. yes you say in one of your post that you think the new treasure is scummy, but you didn't explain why you thought it was a good idea to vote somebody, based on the limited interactions their predecessor had, and why you didn't bring up the problems you had with the previous player, when you said player when on at the same time. and some of the your recent posts just don't seem logically sound, or consistent with whats happened in the thread. for example this directed toward treasure, "You did not try to get something out of mole knight" which is fine if the thread were developing with us having a conversation or an argument, but that's not an interaction that has occurred between us. what did happen is he was presenting his case to other people who were online at the time, and there is no logical reason why he should focus on getting anything out of me, when he could be discussing the read and getting things out of other people.

in addition you haven't really presented all that much of your own thoughts on anything important. i already discussed the post with your vote was bad, and the reason for the vote on the new player is unclear i don't think i need to go over that again. the problem though is that your next post isn't much better. you start talking to treasure, and actually making me more confused about your logic for voting him but not his predecessor. is there like an actual reason for that? yes you said you were waiting for a response, but the questions you asked, would not return answers that should change your read.

then this is part that really irritates me, its kinda scummy, but its mostly just really bad play. "I was not scum reading you, until you being overeager to find out whether a person was(technically you said is was is just better english in my opinion) scum reading you or not." thats fine, if that was your reason for voting him then ok thats a decent reason, not great but decent. the problem is you never presented that when you voted him. so you either didn't present your actual reason for voting him, or you didn't have that as a reason yet, in which case why vote him. (i also don't see where he is eager to find out so idk, can you just show me that instance(s) so that we can be on the same page). you have to show me where you think he acted overeager because that will change whether this is scummy or just bad play. if its you not presenting the reason that you think he's actually scummy then that's bad play, if it's voting without a reason and then coming up with one later that's scummy. and i will consider it the latter until you show me that he was overeager before you voted him. ftr that's why i'm wiling to present which one is scummy even though he can just claim its the other one, he needs evidence to convince me otherwise and i don't think he has it.

so outside of that part, i still have some problems with what you've done. particularly this "Why should i elaborate on what i think on a post, if i can get a read on someone else using it first?" and the answer is incredibly simple. if you present your opinion on a topic, you will immediately start conversation on the topic. and from that conversation you can get multiple reads in a short period of time. by asking what somebody else thinks about a post that is not directly involves them you wait for them to respond, before you can get any reads from it. and you might not get a good read because it might not be a topic they give a shit about. then once they respond conversation may start, but it isn't guaranteed to. it is to reliant on a good response that can start a conversation. now if you have an opinion on the topic, that is significant enough to actually post, then more likely than not it will start a conversation. presenting your opinion on a topic is almost always pro-town action. (with the exception of stuff like setup or roles). now while asking somebody a question isn't inherently anti-town, the way you did it makes it have an anti-town element too it. and particularly considering the fact that the topic, wasn't discussed. and its a relevant topic, i am logically inconsistent at times, that is something that should have at least page worth of discussion, but presenting the topic in the manner you did has made it so that a conversation on it has not been present for the last 4 hours. and given that there is a significant portion of the game that is deciding on their votes, and either null or scum reading me that conversation would be very significant right now. but the way you presented the topic has made it so we will only have, at most 10 hours to discuss the topic instead of 14, and while that may not seem like that much of a difference consider that we are over 60 hours in and there are no consensus scum reads. 4 hours is a very significant amount of time to miss out on potential discussion.

Polar Knight:

there is definitely something not right here. the logic is decent i guess. i'm not thrilled with it. i feel like it's not really that strong out side of the points on my consistency. the rest of the points aren't really logically strong. and i'm just gonna say this, if you complain about effort not being a definitive towntell, do not have your read on somebody be "King Knight seems to be town with effort, although his posts are a pain to read (paraphrasing after this) because wallposts". you're logically wrong in this case, cause you just invalidated your read if you think that its not a valid reason to town read them. and if you do think its a valid reason then you are logically inconsistent. not hypocritical, making a comment on my one liners with one liners is hypocritical though. and then you are logically inconsistent as well with your conclusion, you present these reasons my reads are invalid and why tinker isn't, even though the logic isn't but i will address that on its own.but you give these reasons why i'm wrong but you don't come to any conclusion about my alignment on it. you brought up in your first post that you were leaning scum on me. you have presented nothing to indicate your opinion has changed. and yet somehow i'm now null. that is inconsistent with what you have posted about me, and a logically unsound progression.

so on to the criticism of my case on tinker. yes you can have a read carry over from the original player to the new player and thats really not a problem, its valid in my opinion. what isn't valid though, is not showing any signs of thinking the original player was scum and then proceeding to case, only after they subbed out. and the quotes you present as your case was from a point in time where both of you were interacting with king at the same time. there was no indication that he was even remotely suspicious of him. and the timezone explanation is invalid. they were both posting at the same time. the quotes in question where from a point in the game where both players where active.

now with regards to your problems with propeller. i agree i can't really think what he has done that is horribly impactful. the problem your read though is you complaining about him playing subjectively. people aren't robots, its incredibly hard to be objective in mafia. its not even possible that's why omgus is a thing, because people can't be objective. all reads are subjective because they are all our opinions. opinions cannot be objective its not possible, the two are antonymous. i'm not sure that effected your read i just don't like that you said that.

propeller knight:

i would love to have something significant here. i just don't. and i don't know why. i should be the person who can understand the thought process behind the posts the best. i just don't. it's really frustrating actually.

so this is already significantly longer than i wanted it to be, i will be aback in like two hours to give my black knight read, but for now i'm gonna have to peace.

[Refakitty³]

I'm still not sure why Mole's even a priority for you. The only thing I found in your ISO is you agreeing with my point about his contradictions.