Recuperating from a Super Bowl loss by finally getting around to looking at timmer:
timmer wrote: ↑Tue Jan 30, 2018 1:02 am
Sloonei wrote: ↑Tue Jan 30, 2018 12:54 am
timmer wrote: ↑Tue Jan 30, 2018 12:53 am
Trying out the "thing"
Do you have an opinion of Jack thinging?
I don't know Jack. *distant rimshot*
Gives a null read on Jack after some banter. A stance is always preferable to no stance, but given that he's apparently never played with Jack and Jack is doing A Thing this game, I can't say that's a really bad look for timmer, but he's also not scoring any townie points for this.
timmer wrote: ↑Wed Jan 31, 2018 9:27 pm
Did a read through. Not much stands out mostly becauseIve lost touch with peoples usual m.o. Not a fan of Long Cons posts but the attention he's getting feels a bit easy. Holding my vote for now.
Caution about the Day 1 LC wagon, but also expresses a bit of suspicion against Long Con. [mention]timmer[/mention], can you talk about the players who had been voting for Long Con at this time? Do any of them stand out as potentially opportunistic bandwagoners?
timmer wrote: ↑Wed Jan 31, 2018 11:55 pm
Okay, so how have Day 1's been going around here these days? I see a lot of people either seeming to establish a meta (I'm going to do THIS this game") or reinforcing what seems to be their perceived norm (Sloonei "hi, I post a lot and ask a lot of questions") etc.
How does this meta-market typically end up? I guess I'm just struggling to find an entry point into the conversations.
timmer wrote: ↑Wed Jan 31, 2018 11:56 pm
And for those whoo may not know me, or don't remember, I have a truly poor memory, so I can't really help/retain info about anyone's norm, so you'll have to forgive if I ask a lot of questions about things that maybe many of you know intuitively!
A couple of posts expressing a feeling of rust. timmer's been absent from the Syndicate for a while, so that's understandable, and from what I recall this sort of behavior doesn't strike me as out of character one way or the other from him. That said, it will be uninspiring if he doesn't come up with substantive reads soon.
timmer wrote: ↑Thu Feb 01, 2018 12:28 am
Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Feb 01, 2018 12:21 am
timmer wrote: ↑Wed Jan 31, 2018 11:55 pm
Okay, so how have Day 1's been going around here these days? I see a lot of people either seeming to establish a meta (I'm going to do THIS this game") or reinforcing what seems to be their perceived norm (Sloonei "hi, I post a lot and ask a lot of questions") etc.
How does this meta-market typically end up? I guess I'm just struggling to find an entry point into the conversations.
My self-analysis was just an attempt to break the ice with rabbit, who wasn't giving me anything to work with. In fact, he still hasn't. He came in, made a bunch of nothing posts, then bailed. I want to see reads or some attempt to play the game out of him soon.
But uh, the meta stuff happens when new folks are around. I know I like to not be left in the dark when it comes to new players, hence my asking the two new faces (to me, at least) about their mafia experience early in the game.
You can enter the conversation right here! Do any players stand out to you one way or the other so far?
Yeah, I wonder if he's feeling a bit like I am? (Am i right that this is rabbit's first foray back in a long time?) I remember rabbit being someone who could post a lot or a little but no specific feature that would help you with his current output.
As for the rest, not really. I'm mostly just observing for now. I've always been pretty useless on Day 1, but once I get my hands on lynch polls I can correlate data wit the best of them.
I'd say the votes on LC seemed a bit easy, but then so did LC's own vote, it's typical Day 1 stuff. I'll mostly be watching for people making too much of a mountain out of a day 1 molehill, that's generally what constitutes my early pings.
I haven't played a ton with timmer in the past, but I've played enough games to have a slight handle on his gameplay, and I feel like I've seen him make this exact post in all our games together. He expresses the same sentiment about Long Con as earlier and offers an old-timer's meta read on rabbit that seems favorable. There's not a lot that's jumping out at me in either direction here.
timmer wrote: ↑Thu Feb 01, 2018 8:14 pm
I'm going to put my vote on DFaraday.
I agree with his briefest of points about rabbit, that he hasn't contributed much, but then again, neither has Wilgy (all jokes), neither has DF himself ( posts), or novaselinenever (barely here), neither have I, really. In a game full of quiet players, singling one out who doesn't have an established meta while others with established metas run rampant with jokes etc and you give them a pass just feels cheap and like something a mafia would do. Why tangle with a meta people know when you can vote the new guy?
Ah here we go. A firm stance on something. timmer places a vote on DFaraday, citing that he seems to be unfairly singling out rabbit for behavior that could be applicable to a number of players in this game. I haven't looked too closely at the specifics in this case, but at face value I like that timmer was able to offer a Day 1 vote with a clearly articulated justification. I suppose I'll look into DFaraday and the commotion around this vote next.
timmer wrote: ↑Thu Feb 01, 2018 8:21 pm
Kylemii wrote: ↑Thu Feb 01, 2018 8:17 pm
hey okay. I put my vote on DFaraday as a placeholder and now he has 3 votes
Why does that bother you?
timmer wrote: ↑Thu Feb 01, 2018 8:24 pm
Kyle, what do YOU think of me and Faraday?
I like these posts too. He casts his vote and then keeps the conversation going by grilling Kyle a little. I'll like them more if something comes out of this.
timmer wrote: ↑Thu Feb 01, 2018 10:17 pm
nutella wrote: ↑Thu Feb 01, 2018 10:05 pm
timmer wrote: ↑Thu Feb 01, 2018 10:03 pm
The discussion astound rabbit is been mostly that he hasn't played in forever. Even long con who had played with rabbit more then almost anyone admitted that it had been awhile and he's not sure of rabbits norm.
Discussion of a potential meta is different than discussion of any established meta imo
this does nothing to explain why you think DF is suspicious
Of course it does? If he voted for any other lesser contributor the odds of his vote being weighed against known meta would be higher. On day 1, avoiding that kind of thing is a ping for me.
Exchange with nutella about the vote. I think they both look good here, but again, i've not looked too closely at this.
timmer wrote: ↑Thu Feb 01, 2018 10:45 pm
Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Feb 01, 2018 10:40 pm
@timmer what is your read on rabbit?
He coasted thru day 1. He was basically a less jokey Wilgy. No alignment feel on that, though.
Null read on rabbit when I pressed him, but the word "coasted" seems to carry a negative connotation. Care to explain what that word means to you in this context, timmer?
I also notice that there is no read on Kyle expressed in these posts after that light grilling timmer gave him earlier. Got a read on kyle, timmer?
timmer wrote: ↑Sat Feb 03, 2018 12:46 am
Rip nova.
So im feeling better about faraday atm, no immediate replacement ping. I'll be around here and there for the next 24 hours with more activity after the Patriots win the Super Bowl!
Feeling better about DFaraday today, featuring an inaccurate super bowl prediction (we'll be back next year, no sweat timbo). what inspired this change of heart?
and that's pretty much where we are now. I have a few questions for timmer that I've raised here, but overall I got more town vibes than bad. I'd put him as a light green shade on my hypothetical rainbow right now, but awaiting answers to those questions. Probably not gonna be leaving my vote here.
linki: speak of the devil...
there's no role that gets a "red card" on other players. you were doing a jay gambit.
