I've mostly lost track of who has what opinion on meta. agent and HSL both seem overly fixated on it imo. Of course people are going to be inconsistent about what they like/don't like about how OTHER people use meta, while perfectly comfortable with all the times we all use it to the extent it suits us.

I should probably re-read it, but my gut sense of your Joe post was that you said a lot of things I had basically said, just in a superior, smarter fashion. Is that unfair? I wasn't going to call you on it since it legit felt like we were agreeing on the general substance, but I'm curious why you're picking this particular nit.

Would I put money on it, no. By D1 standards, I feel reasonably good about it, compared to firing randomly in completely chaotic fashion or worse (I'm pretty much consistently not a fire drill fan), and definitely compared to other current options.

We're roughly...12ish hours to deadline, maybe, and I don't expect to be around tomorrow until afternoon PST, at the earliest, by which point the day will almost certainly be closed. I'm not voting ZFR. Probably won't know til post-game, but I'm curious right now how many of the people voting him would say they actually read him closely AND are town.


I don't follow - where does my play time vs. Ix's come in to this segment of the discussion?

As for the rest, same issue as above - when I voted you, here's what I see:

~36 hours to deadline (I think, but definitely <2 days). No viable wagon even STARted yet for later analysis, much less to build meaningfully / in any organized fashion that would allow people to assess who jumped on/off over a natural wagon lifespan.

I did manage to sneak online very briefly this morning which I hadn't expected, but I knew I likely wouldn't be online for the final stretch to vote-jockey. If it ends up taking you to claim Friday, or another wagon takes off, great, because then I have Friday night to make a final assessment/decision.

So, why am I restricted only to the players with multiple votes? Because starting a new wagon is so beyond sound strategy at that point in the game day, EEEEVEN if I were a player with great charisma who people naturally piled on every wagon I ever started. (Guess if that's so)

To what great mecca of organized wagon-making are you proposing I toga up and lead my people out of the great sand desert of D1?

No one besides agent/I is eyeballing scene that I can see. It's not even worth re-reading agent to see if it's worth weighing rejoining cristi at that point because no one else besides the two of us seemed to be eyeballing him at that point (ok, well, and scene, but that appears to be 100% OMGUS I want no part of), unless I missed it. I'd be moving from one going-nowhere 2 vote wagon to another. In regards to D1 vote, flub IS flub even if I were inclined to vote him which I'm not I don't see him getting numbers. I'm not voting cristi, or ZFR. Ix is a non-presence. Mud I was liking, though the vote / explanation doesn't thrill me. Etc.

I know you probably won't, but go back and look at the argument I had with Vitek in game #53 where I was pushing for consolidating wagons 4 DAYS before deadline so there would be time to, you know, work with them. No one agreed with me, and everyone pissed around and waited to make any real move until the last 24 hours and SPF skated with a late fake claim, that might well have been talked out if we'd had time to consider the options instead of jamming a decision into the end.

No fire drills. No standing on the sidelines if you aren't happy with the options. They are the options. Even if sometimes, yeah, that means you/me end up biting it.

Sick child interruption...brb.


I'm sorry, I'd really prefer to spend this time making jokes and having fun. But...

1. Okay, all that analysis is fine logically/theoretically. Nice work. Very sound. Statistically significant.

The practical problem, though, is that all the logic/theory seems to rest entirely on the underlying, unspoken, premise that D1 would ever, under any circumstances, end with the leading wagon(s) having 2 votes.

That's just not realistic.

And again, we waited til fricking phase 2 (<48 hours, semi-ambiguous deadline) to make ANY WAGON AT ALL, in a game with 3 factions, and where maj is not required (see: ZFR vote on Joe). Which blows a number of our standard assumptions (even ignoring the frequency with which we've no lynched of late), and waiting like we always do was probably not, you know, going to result in ideal, normal game activity. I mean, you could end up being completely right (though I'm not sure what the conclusion was, exactly).

It could be everyone looked at the field, and decided in their calmest towniest fashion that, hey, this IS our last chance to make a good wagon - let's band together! All town on the Joe wagon! It could be mafia protecting a teammate (ZFR/SPF/scene?). Meh. It could be town/neutral looking and thinking, holy shit - the leading wagon has 2-3 votes! If I don't help consolidate the lynch could quickly shift to me, and I could be in that random draw to be lynched with 3 bleeping votes worst-case!

I guess I'm not clear now if this is real concern on your part (you are the reluctant voter, after all) or if this is trying to look deeply concerned while justifying not getting taking sides on any of the leading wagons (as maf or neutral) since you have nothing actually riding on the outcome.

pre-post edit: Huh. Well, SPF made the same argument in 10% of the verbiage. Well done him.