I wanted to vote for you using your name in the vote !!!
Mini 1117 - Manhattan Special - [GAME OVER]
-
-
CrazyQuestions Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 416
- Joined: December 7, 2010
-
-
CrazyQuestions Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 416
- Joined: December 7, 2010
-
-
CrazyQuestions Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 416
- Joined: December 7, 2010
-
-
CrazyQuestions Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 416
- Joined: December 7, 2010
I assume that (you parroting me) + (you voting for me) implies that your vote is randomShadoWolf wrote: Calling his posts dumb isn't a great move, either, as they were RVS posts. The fact you needed reasons for a vote in RVS is also suspect, but forgiveable for now.
VOTE: CrazyQuestions: Looks like I've got the CrazyAnswers for him.
Post 10. Read the four consecutive rhetoric questions of Internet Stranger. Introducing such foursubstrike wrote: Crazy exactly what are you trying to saw with the "4 serious words"?seriouswords after arandomvote by Grey is kinda a curious phenomenon.
My vote on Grey is 100% independent of his initial post. I would have voted for him no matter the number of votes he had when I posted (except probably L-few situation). My words for him express the reason of my vote, which is totally unrelated to this game.substrike wrote: Awfully opportunistic to take something like that and hop straight onto a wagon.
That might be interesting if I would consider Grey's action scummy (and attacking one of his voters and blabla). As I do not find his action scummy, it is completely natural to point out how Internet Stranger's post is worth-reading. Let's see another example of curious practices:substrike wrote: I also think it's interesting that you pointed that out while also being on board with the wagon.
a) Shadow points out IS' post curiousity (indeed, just parrots me)
b) You point out to IS' post curiosity
c) You vote for Shadowsubstrike wrote: IGMOY Stranger.
These practices have names. Sorry for describing them without their proper name (indeed, the episode includes a similar thing involving the triple Shadow-Me-You...a very curious post that of yours)
You STOLE my words !!!substrike wrote: Personally I'm finding your play just as suspect as Shadow's right now.
However, I will avoid using them, because: (i) in my case, YOUR refers to substrike instead of empking, and that might create confusion in the audience and (ii) I like slow play and I would not use the word suspect for these episodes...-
-
CrazyQuestions Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 416
- Joined: December 7, 2010
Recorded. You are right in that part.Substrike22 wrote:Crazy for the record, the entirety of the second paragraph of my first post was aimed at IS and not you.
Sorry for the confusion there
It addresses the triple You-me-shadow since there is no longer such issue.substrike22 wrote: and that kind of addresses your above 4th point about what might be interesting.
It does not address the triple IS-You-Shadow. Recorded too.
---
Quote 1:
This is also interesting. Look at these other two quotes:substrike wrote: Also, unrelated: Crazy you and I find IS's post "curious" for two very different reasons. Additionally, "curious" does not equal "scummy" in my book, without hearing out his explanations.
Quote 2:
Quote 3:substrike wrote: I don't even understand Crazy's points on IS, though.
Now a fancy story. Imagine for a moment that Substrike-scum and IS-scum are parent/child. IS-scum says something very very bad to a little boy (Grey) and Crazyquestions and Shadow tell to IS that he has been a bad boy. Daddy Substrike comes and:substrike wrote: Shadow, why are you calling Crazy out when there are clear flaws in IS' post, which Crazy is actually pointing out?
a) says to me: Quote 2...oh, my little boy did bad? how exactly? I cannot understand what you say...
b) says to his boy: ah yes little boy, you probably were bad, you did this and this...do not do it, little boy...
c) says to Shadow: Quote 3... why dont you want to play with Crazy? He has reasons to tell my little boy bad.. (even if he did not understand my reasons !!) ah, bad bad, I do not want to play with you !!!
A time later, daddy meets crazy and says: Quote 1...ah, my little boy did bad. Not exactly what you said, but I also think he did bad (even if he did not understand what i said), but daddy still does not play with shadow...and obviously daddy plays with son
Recorded too.-
-
CrazyQuestions Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 416
- Joined: December 7, 2010
I love to read piece by piece. Here is where the son tells to Shadow boy...I do not want to play with youInternet Stranger wrote:WTF Subs? Are you trying to frame me already? Why the hell has the last three people tried to misinterpret me too?either, you bad boy !!
[/quote]
You do not throw shame on your daddy, do you?? ahh...such a sonIS wrote: There are NO flaws in anything I said, and shame on you for trying to portray them as such.-
-
CrazyQuestions Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 416
- Joined: December 7, 2010
-
-
CrazyQuestions Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 416
- Joined: December 7, 2010
I already answered this. More or less as much as any other player. I voted due to another game...I would have voted for him no matter he posted or not, or what he posted...indeed, if you want a more precise answer, I thought he was "very very slightly" townie, since I interpreted IS attack on him very very slightly scummy.Erratus Apathos wrote:
How scummy do you think Grey was as of post #5?CrazyQuestions wrote:Vote GreyIce
I wanted to vote for you using your name in the vote !!!
My vote is not for this post. I am voting him because in a different game he replaces the player i was voting for. I think he is scummy in that game but I did not write the "vote grey" in the other game because i was already voting for the player replaced. Thus, I wrote "vote grey" in this game as a funny thing...and it has nothing to do with his initial post...erratus wrote:
How can your vote be independent of his first post when you voted him for said post?CrazyQuestions wrote:My vote on Grey is 100% independent of his initial post.-
-
CrazyQuestions Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 416
- Joined: December 7, 2010
I do not know what chainsawing means exactly, but I am not even considering Empking in my analysis. It involves only YOU, IS, Shadow and myself.Substrike22 wrote: Also, Crazy you could just as easily be chainsawing for EMP right now. If anything I've remained skeptical of IS's play thus far, and asking you to clarify your point of "curious", which is (purposely?) a vague definition/word is not a scum tell.
It's like saying someone did something "interesting". Interesting in what way? Curious in what way? It all begs the same question, because calling something "curious" now doesn't help us determine your alignment later.
You have not explained the inconsistency of your quotes. RECORDED.-
-
CrazyQuestions Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 416
- Joined: December 7, 2010
-
-
CrazyQuestions Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 416
- Joined: December 7, 2010
el simo wrote: Quote for me, where you commented on IS's alignment. You didn't, you flung mud, you said he was curious and implied negative connotations. You were purposely being vague.
You can read it ascrazy wrote: We have a curious "Strange" phenomenon to play with...
1 post
2 times calling dumb or similar to grey
3 reasons for his vote !!
ONLY 1 POST (by Grey)
IS CALLS GREY TWICE RIDICULOUS/DUMB !!
AND ALREADY HAS 3 REASONS TO VOTE
You can read as:crazy wrote: "Strange" phenomenon updated. The regularity remains...
4 serious words consecutively used in a post: (rid, quick, lynch, scum)
And used 4 !! times rhetoric expressions about lynch/scum on Grey ...
What else do you want me to comment? I hope you do not ask people to shout "SCUM SCUM SCUM" after few posts...I just pointed out to the things I found curious....-
-
CrazyQuestions Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 416
- Joined: December 7, 2010
substrike wrote: Also, Crazy you could just as easily be chainsawing for EMP right now.
How is this possible?Empking wrote: Chainsawwing is indirectly defending a player by attacking the attacker. We're on page 3 unless he can back it up with some facts he shouldn't be using it.
I started "attacking" IS in post 9 for the IS-Grey episode. Nobody was attacking you at this point, and obviously, not IS , who was following you...
I started "attacking" Substrike because of his quotes on the IS-Grey-Shadow episode...and Substrike was voting for Shadow...-
-
CrazyQuestions Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 416
- Joined: December 7, 2010
el simo wrote: You don't want me to ask people to shout scum but you have no problem with Emp shouting town? What is the difference? Both of them have the same dangers.
Empking said I am town. If he thinks so, fine.
I expressed what I found interesting in IS's words. Obviously, my message was an announcement to pay attention to his words. You need me to say SCUMSCUMSCUM when I point out to people's inconsistencies? I can do it with ctrl copy and ctrl paste if you need it.
I dont want you to REQUIRE IT as a necessity all the time. I think my words were clear.You don't want me to ask people to shout scum but you have a whole daddy son scum team theory going on?
I have not a scum team general theory. I just gave a plausible interpretation of what I was observing. I think it fits.-
-
CrazyQuestions Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 416
- Joined: December 7, 2010
Given your violent reaction, you can change Daddy/son for Wife/husband, mister alpha...your wife "substrike" may not like to be called wife maybe...you will make him/her to OMGUS vote for me !!!Internet Stranger wrote:Oh yea, thats right.
Unvote: GREY
OMGUS: Crazy
Vote : CRAZY
For making ME the son in that father/son bullcrap. You might as well have put up some inane survey and had people ask questions on who they think is scum. They are both as useless.
If youre having daddy issues, go see a therapist. Im here to catch the scum, not to make you feel better about yourself.
All that emotional reaction instead of discussing my arguments...-
-
CrazyQuestions Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 416
- Joined: December 7, 2010
-
-
CrazyQuestions Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 416
- Joined: December 7, 2010
Do you really need to know why reacting with 2 ridiculous/dumb shoutings and having 3 reasons to vote after just 1 random vote post sounds scummy? Well, I seem the pro here, I am surprisedel simo wrote: You don't need to say SCUMSCUMSCUM you just need to tell us what his curious words imply about his alignment, is it suspicious? Do you think it is scummy? etc. Saying it is just curious is baiting the town.
Creating dichotomies is not very pro-town. Do you know what probabilities are?elsimo wrote: You think it fits, so you think IS and Sub are scum? If you don't then it doesn't fit.
I already said that after the first post by IS i thought he was very very slightly scum. After all what has happened later, I think they are slightly scum. From that to say they are scum there is a big gap. I am going to analyze all evidence I can before crossing that point...-
-
CrazyQuestions Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 416
- Joined: December 7, 2010
-
-
CrazyQuestions Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 416
- Joined: December 7, 2010
a) If you think I am scum, fine. Keep your eyes open so you can check your theory or find connections. Make a case on me so I can discuss it, etc...el simo wrote: So thinking you are scum is extreme but talking about daddy son scum teams isn't?
b) I said labelling my words as "non committal" and "hesitant" is extreme. This is a game of uncertainty, and we were talking of page 3. I just start to see facts and point them out for everybody to have them.
c) My story on daddy/son is just what I perceived from IS and Strike against Grey and Shadow. I described in a funny way how what they were doing sounded curious to me. I am not considering them openly scum, or I would write down a case and push for their lynch. I just consider them slightly scummy now, and I continue observing and writting down what I consider useful.
By the way, that will be the case for most of the time, so if you are town, better you enjoy it. I like to play this way because I think it helps the town to share as much information as possible.
Post your thoughts on why.longing wrote: No seriously, I think everyone is town but you and maybe Crazy.
My "attack" started much earlier with IS. And I am not saying you are mafia. I am just saying your contradictions are interesting and point out some scumminess to me. And I noted it. You yet have not answered to the contradictions pointed out.strike wrote: Crazy, your chainsaw occured when I vote for EMP and then you suddenly post a wall of text on p1 explaining why I'm mafia. Also, fuck your husband/wife daddy/son thing. It's stupid and obnoxious.-
-
CrazyQuestions Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 416
- Joined: December 7, 2010
I will write my two main points on Substrike for him to answer in a less funny way.
Question 1
a) He dedicates 10 lines to criticize Internet Stranger and Empking for their votes on Grey. He even finds suspicious some of these attacks.
b) He finds scummy and votes for the only player "defending" Grey.
How are a) and b) compatible in your scumhunting?
Question 2
a) He says that he does not understand my issues with IS
b) Critizicing and voting for Shadow he says that there are clear flaws in IS that I am pointing out
c) Later he says we are point out to different flaws
How are b) and c) compatible with a) ?-
-
CrazyQuestions Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 416
- Joined: December 7, 2010
Also, simo, your argument is clearly mistaken
Read back posts 9, 12 and 20.elsimo wrote: Not only is it totally non committal but it's classic scum bait, I bet he is just waiting for someone else to take his hook and run with it.
9 states my observations
12 states shadow's observations
20 states how I call shadow's observations "parroting me" (because he mentions exactly the same two facts i mentioned)-
-
CrazyQuestions Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 416
- Joined: December 7, 2010
You are not making implications as to what my second flinging mud means about my alignment.el simo wrote: But on the other hand you do the same thing you were guilty of doing with IS and that is flinging mud, you claim he is parroting but leave it at that, you make no implications as to what this means about his alignment (ie is it scummy).
I obviously disagree that I made any flinging mud. The word "parrot" is as clear as the word "flinging mud". In any case, I did not find his parroting especially important, since some people tend to misunderstand or not even read some of my messages. Since his vote on me seemed to be a joke/random, I did not pay more attention to it.
You do not need it. You made a mistake (assuming you did not understand my post) calling me on flinging mud. After my explanation, you had to rationalize your past mistaken accusation so you have come with a ridiculous argument. It is so weak that you even retreat politely saying that you need a meta...el simo wrote: I need to get a meta on you or something.-
-
CrazyQuestions Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 416
- Joined: December 7, 2010
Your opinion is noted, but you started this episode so biased that no matter your alignment, it is not going to affect my view.
simo wrote: (personally I don't think it was a parrot but that is irrelevant)crazy wrote: 1post
2 times callingdumbor similar to grey
3reasonsfor his vote !!shadow wrote: Doesn't mean you can push a BWon someone who clearly made 2 RVS posts.Calling his posts dumbisn't a great move, either, as they were RVS posts. Thefact you needed reasonsfor a vote in RVS is also suspect, but forgiveable for now.-
-
CrazyQuestions Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 416
- Joined: December 7, 2010
Question 1
Allow me to ask how your mind decided to vote for Empking in 15 seconds, since 15 seconds before you said:Substrike22 wrote:
Q1) I voted for EMPKing about 15 seconds later. Check the post times if you don't believe me. I realized that I found EMP scummier than Shadow at the time and changed my vote accordingly.
---substrike wrote: Personally I'm finding your play just as suspect as Shadow's right now
Question 2
This is NOT all.substrike wrote: Q2) We had two different arguments on IS,I didn't understand yours. I asked you to clarify.That's all. For point "b", see my above answer.
If you did not understand my questions, how the hell would you say in the same post:
If you did not understand my questions, how the hell would you know our reasons were VERY DIFFERENT?substrike wrote: there areclear flaws in IS' post,which Crazy is actually pointing out
.substrike wrote: Crazy you and I find IS's post "curious" for two very different reasons.-
-
CrazyQuestions Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 416
- Joined: December 7, 2010
I proved you that I both noted the behavior of IS and Shadow. The parroting was noted by me, and it was a very minor issue to me since he had not been inconsistent voting me (seemed a fun vote). The behavior of IS was noted by me, and I have been following the story later. You can read the daddy-son story. There is not any mud at all. If you want a wall of quotes to see it, I will do it, at the cost of making people tired of me.el simo wrote:How am I biased? I saw a scum tell and attacked you for it. Why does this make me biased? How am I being prejudice? That is a silly notion.
POST 11
POST 20crazy wrote: "Strange" phenomenon updated. The regularity remains...
4 serious words consecutively used in a post: (rid, quick, lynch, scum)
crazy wrote: I assume that (you parroting me) + (you voting for me) implies that your vote is randomcrazy wrote: Read the four consecutive rhetoric questions of Internet Stranger. Introducing such four serious words after a random vote by Grey is kinda a curious phenomenon.
You STOLE my words !!!crazy wrote: [quote="substrike]
Personally I'm finding your (EMPKING) play just as suspect as Shadow's right now.
However, I will avoid using them, because: (i) in my case, YOUR refers to substrike instead of empking, and that might create confusion in the audience and (ii) I like slow play and I would not use the word suspect for these episodes...
[/quote][/quote][/quote][/quote]
Again, you just totally biased by your first impression when you had not even understood my messages. I doubt you understood the message on "the four words". And I also doubt you understood my sentence on the stolen words with substrike...and hence, you better ask someone to explain to you...-
-
CrazyQuestions Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 416
- Joined: December 7, 2010
-
-
CrazyQuestions Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 416
- Joined: December 7, 2010
-
-
CrazyQuestions Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 416
- Joined: December 7, 2010
The fact that somebody does not vote or say SCUMSCUMSCUM does not imply anything. Have you noticed that I have not voted yet?? My words express my opinions. If you cannot read them or my messages are confusing, just ask, but I have expressed clearly that I was mostly looking at IS and Strike. I do not need to show off saying, I am looking you "BECAUSE I AM TOWN", "I AM SCUMHUNTING", HEY YOU SEE ME GUYS? I AM A GOOD TOWNIE...if you need to do this, then I will ask myself whether you are scum, because I do not see the reason for which a townie would do so. I have expressed very openly my observations, and I have shared them. That is pro-town, the rest is either a contest of "im the towniest among the townies" or "im the dick-est among the dick-ies". None of them helps to catch scum.el simo wrote: You never said he was scummy or voted him once in these quotes.
What am i supposed to do in page 1 with my observations except throwing them up in the air?????simo wrote: you made these statements but did nothing with them, you were just throwing them up in the air.
lynch? what the hell you talking about? This was the first day in 2 weeks. I am planning to use all the time we have for deciding which is the best lynch. And when I have enough observations, I will do my cases and attack more seriously players. Meanwhile, I post my observations for you to notice what I am finding relevant along the game.simo wrote: this is scummy because its bait for town to use with out you getting yourself dirty after a possible lynch.
Again, what am i supposed to do? SHOUT MORE?? I do not need to vote someone everytime i find a scumread, or i would be voting 10-20 times every day. I post my thoughts and give ideas for people to observe/analyze. That is how town succeeds, by sharing information. Measuring Dicks, Shouting stupidly and voting 20 times you only create chaos and confusion, and mafia benefits from it.simo wrote: again you did nothing with it, you just left it
I HAVE NOT BEEN PURPOSELY VAGUE. I HAVE OPENLY EXPRESSED MY VIEWS ON IS AND STRIKE.simo wrote: to check a meta, to find out if this is your normal play, to see if you are always this purposely vague or if it's just you being bad scum.
YOU CALL VAGUE TO A RATIONAL PRO-TOWN BEHAVIOR. NOTED.-
-
CrazyQuestions Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 416
- Joined: December 7, 2010
The question is repeated in the 2-lines post. You avoided it again. I bolded it to facilitate your work.TheLonging wrote:
I'm sorry I missed your question. What was it?CrazyQuestions wrote:
Snif Snif, you forgot me. No need to tell me why, but you can do it after answering me what you have avoided,TheLonging wrote:...words...i.e., why you found me scummy first.-
-
CrazyQuestions Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 416
- Joined: December 7, 2010
-
-
CrazyQuestions Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 416
- Joined: December 7, 2010
DEFINITELY, YOU ARE NOT READING MY POSTS.Internet Stranger wrote:Is there a reason why Crazy is deliberately NOT mentioning Shado in any of her posts? That just screams misdirection to me. In fact, Crazy has mentioned just about everyone except Shado. First it was the whole sillyness of some childre'ns book story and now a little staged war with Simo.
I have talked of Shadow in two different episodes.
1) In one of them, Substrike/IS bad daddy-boys argued with Grey/shadow.
2) In another, I mentioned his parroting.
I am sorry if i cannot dedicate more time to all players. Time is limited. There are indeed many others I have not explored at all. And your insistance in changing votes makes it more and more chaotic.
Do you really made A CASE on one player in page 6?IS wrote: I made my case on Shadow, its not my fault none of you all are ignoring his scummyness.
I would appreciate if you summarize in an ordered way your findings, so I can analyze them in detail. I promise to answer each of them and take the most nitid position allowed by your "case". I do not promise to defend him with my armour or to initiate a shouting lynching, as it is page 6, but I promise to give as detailed answers as possible to your "case-points".
Let's just agree that lurking is a (minor) scumtell all along the game. Sharing information helps the town. Otherwise, we are just playing an equal chance lottery.grey wrote:LURKING, ESPECIALLY IN THE EARLY GAME, IS A SCUMTELL.-
-
CrazyQuestions Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 416
- Joined: December 7, 2010
Ok, noted. I will answer to you after reviewing him. Until now, he was a "parroter" in my agenda, which is not "far way" from your description, so umm...i probably will agree with your case. Now I will analyze other players too if you do not mind. If you add things to your case, keep me posted.Internet Stranger wrote: I already said why Shado is scum. He hasnt even contributed anything. No accusations, no observations, nothing. Even after I called him out. Just snippets and snide remarks. You want a case, thats it.-
-
CrazyQuestions Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 416
- Joined: December 7, 2010
This is my first summary/review of players. Plan to continue later with the rest.
SUBSTRIKE:
1. He declares Grey action null/wifom and goes for his attackers. Dedicates more time to IS and his view can be supported by my previous criticism of IS. However, he "votes" for Empking. In his favour:The fact that he p-edited may have focused his attention on Empking
Weak
2. He is incoherent discussing my reasons on IS. He first declares not to understand. In the same post, he declares that IS has flaws WHICH I AM ACTUALLY POINTING OUT. Later again, he declares that my reasons are VERY DIFFERENT to his. These two seem incoherent with not understanding my reasons
Weak/Medium (since he has not answered properly)
3. Immediately he turns his views outside the wagonners Empking/IS. Suddenly, he analyzes questioners of the wagon or the wagonee himself (sorrow, Greyice). Just after calling Empking alpha, he agrees with him on Grey. However, he goes back to Empking after another episode. I agree with him in that Empking is a bit volatile wagoning, but I am having the impression that Strike is not touching almost anyone in his analysis.
Confusing/Weak
----------------------------
IS
1. He is attacking Grey immediately with big words, but re-reading sounds more like energy plus wishes to have activity/discussion.
Confusing/Null
2. He criticizes repeatedly Strike but moves his vote to me without any solid reason, despite he is saying what strike is doing is scummy. In his next post he moves to Midnight without a reason, sharing the wagon with his "enemy" Strike. He changes the vote after saying it is a mistake to Shadow. His reason is just a parroting of Erratus but later he wants to simulate this is "his case", etc.
Weak
3. He is very concentrated on Shadow without any attention to other player, or at most, conditional (looks at me for not "talking of shadow", when his only comment on shadow was a parrot).
Weak-
-
CrazyQuestions Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 416
- Joined: December 7, 2010
Where did I? ---> This is my first summary/review of players.Internet Stranger wrote:blah blah blah Crazy. Did someone make you a judge adjudicator when I wasnt looking? Why do you assume that your criticism and ratings and criteria are valued more than anyone elses?
Did you read my post? ---> Plan to continue later with the rest.IS wrote:
Hey Crazy, if youre going to yuck it up on Subs and I, you might as well do it on everyone else to be fair.-
-
CrazyQuestions Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 416
- Joined: December 7, 2010
By popular petition, I start with Shadow. I continue later.
SHADOW
1. Parrots my words attacking IS in his first post. I read his vote on me as a joke, but mixes a serious criticisms with a fun joke.
Weak
2. He moves into clarifications with me and empty discussions with Empking, including ridiculous extreme arguments like depicting Empking as someone who already found scum in 10 posts. Shadow can perfectly be interested in slow play, but in that case and thinking as I do, where is he trying to get hints or reads? Which players is he targeting or studying?
Weak/Medium
3. When pressured to participate after lurking, he mixes a "defence" of lurking as null-tell with an attack to the player who favours wagoning lurkers (Grey) at the same time that Grey has disfavoured the player with whom Shadow is discussing (Empking). In his last post, he parrots me again as I pointed out in my summary how IS' case is just one observation (that is not even his).
Confusing/Weak
---
EMPKING
1. His initial posts sound like provocations to get reactions. He starts analyzing them (Shadow, Strike), but soon he deviates into uninteresting debates with Shadow that end up in fun references. But he seems to have a reason behind, as the hyperbole thing is what he seems to be doing.
Weakly positive but tending to Confusing
2. He is interested about Grey's participation, votes for strike in a coherent way with his previous observations and the fact he sees me as town and IS as semi-town. The attacks on him are nothing relevant and he attacks shadow later. Though I was feeling that Empking was volatile in voting, he is consistent in the group of players he initially targeted, a small but enough diverse group.
Weakly positive
3. Good observation on Empkings' avoidance. Do not see coaching in his other observation. However, he is pointing out to behaviors and keeping conversations and hints alive. The hyperbole is also accompanied by a moderate behavior without any rush.
Weakly positive/ Medium positive.
CAVEAT: Possible Bias, due to his town read on me and the fact that some of the attacks on him were empty.-
-
CrazyQuestions Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 416
- Joined: December 7, 2010
-
-
CrazyQuestions Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 416
- Joined: December 7, 2010
???? This guy is totally out of mind...IS wrote: P-Edit: Oh hey, Crazy comes out now trying to correct her behavior. Bravo!
You just repeated Erratus' observation, as I mentioned. This does not defend Shadow at all, as I saw him as a parroter at the beginning and I do agree with Erratus in his view. You are hiding in your alpha-ness the fact that you just parroted Erratus...IS wrote: Crazy: By attempting to sabotage all of my very accurate points on Shadow and trying to paint me in a negative light, youre clearly employing the oh so popular Chainsaw Defense mechanism.
In my summaries up to now, Strike and Shadow are up in my list, but you are not. However, your alpha-ness is as useless as simo's.-
-
CrazyQuestions Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 416
- Joined: December 7, 2010
GREYICE
1. Starts the game with a bomb. That was neutral to me at the beginning. The fact that he chooses Pergol sounded to me like a fun/safe option because of non-game issues. However, he suggests later that Pergol is inexperienced and I do not know where he is taking this view from.
Null/Confusing
2. His attacks tend to focus on those players who "favoured" him (calls longing buddier, Shadow lurker), and takes the side of Empking. He does not expose any theory on what he was expecting to happen from his funny thing, which sounds bad. And quickly he moves into lurkers (saporo).
Weak
3. He insists on Lurkers. However, this is an easy path as he could be equally studying those players participating in the thread while at the same time pointing out to lurkers (for instance, asking to mod for prods when time passes). When prompted to "come back" to the game, he points to Empking in a very inconsistent way to his initial views of the game. That is bad because it shows his initial provocation had not any real purpose and he has not thought about its implications. He later claims not to have any view on anybody active since describes Empking as townish.
Weak/Medium
caveat: My views can be biased for an ongoing game.
----
ERRATUS
1. Starts the game questioning actively, and shows later that he follows his questions. Points to Empking in a natural way and turns to Shadow with an accurate observation and to IS for not answering him.
Weak Positive
2. Points to the fact that Grey is not interested in forming wagons. He does not mention how this is especially incoherent with the fact that Grey "prepared a trick to see reactions", but it is a good observation.
Weak Positive
3. I find strange he is attacking Shadow because of his responses to IS. IS is attacking
without any coherence and does not let even answer (and Erratus is suspecting of IS) but all in all, that is:
Confusing-
-
CrazyQuestions Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 416
- Joined: December 7, 2010
Why? This is useful (at least for me) to check my positions later when Empking may change his position on me. To be aware of your own possible biases can only help you. I just did a caveat, not that I do not take my observations seriously...TheLonging wrote:
This is where I stopped taking you seriously.CrazyQuestions wrote:CAVEAT: Possible Bias, due to his town read on me-
-
CrazyQuestions Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 416
- Joined: December 7, 2010
-
-
CrazyQuestions Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 416
- Joined: December 7, 2010
-
-
CrazyQuestions Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 416
- Joined: December 7, 2010
EL SIMIO
1. He starts the game discussing me only. If his post 4 is about me and he is assuming that I am voting Grey with a scumread, then clearly he is not reading me. Thus, he is reading superficially the game and can interpret my words as muddy.
Confusing
2. Participates in no other activity in the thread. A short exchange with empking about lurking and a comment without expressing what he thinks in post 11. Didnt he consider mudding bad? why is he doing here?
Weak
3. Keeps his attack on me without any extra reason. Accepts that I described IS' attitude though now changes his view to "vote and say people is scummy". He is however not pointing out to anyone, so clearly there is no single piece of scumhunting in his actions. Especially important that in post 18, he takes the chance to move to Grey using Empking argument. Especially important since he tells Grey that there is much information in the thread, while he has not analyzed any single player except me. Again, turns to shadow by agreeing with someone and includes me again in his list even if he declared me null finally.
Medium
-----
Longing
1. Starts the game late and glancing at the thread. Consistent with his own "mood", defends Grey with respect to Empking. He was tunnelling in what seems a townie way, as it is consistent with his own way of playing and entrance. Accepts and moves. Similar episode with respect to avoiding answering me.
Weakly Positive
2. Votes for Shadow but does not show any interest in analyzing him. Buddies with saporo, makes casual comment on my summary, but says nothing more about the game. No scumhunting whatsoever.
Weak-
-
CrazyQuestions Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 416
- Joined: December 7, 2010
SORROW
1. Two posts. However, the second one contains info. He points out how Strike is against lurker-voters, when precisely strike kept his vote 3 days on Sorrow-lurker. Good Point.
Note: Go back to Strike and update the observation on Lurkers.
Weak Positive
2. Avoiding participation in the thread. Lurking.
Null/Weak
-----
SAPOROVIRUS
1. Quick read of the thread, expressing opinions over players. However, the summary shows no specific targets or interests and some contradictions (Erratus, later with IS review).
Weak
2. Avoiding participation in the thread. Lurking.
Null/Weak
-----
CONFIDANON
1. 1. Quick read of the thread, expressing opinions over players. The summary shows specific targets and, partially, seems not to be parroting too much.
Weak Positive (if the second part confirms this view)
2. Avoiding participation in the thread. Lurking.
Null/Weak
-----
PERGOL
1. Does Pergol exist?
@Mod: Game Started around 12.27 pm on Tuesday Jan 25. I assume Pergol is going to be prodded around 12. 27 pm on Friday Jan 28. Thanks.-
-
CrazyQuestions Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 416
- Joined: December 7, 2010
1. I am aware of your vote/wagon on Shado and your arguments. That is fine. Points 1 and 2 in my description of you describe that part of you.Erratus Apathos wrote: I don't think IS is attacking Shado without any coherence. Of course, that's because his attack is basically my attack from 81,except more loud and obnoxious.
Why is it confusing that I suspect Shado for his reaction to IS?
2. In my third point, I was discussing mostly your attacks on shado based on his responses to IS, nothing else. These attacks are such loud and obnoxious, and expressed in such extreme and incoherent ways that Shado cannot answer properly no matter what he says. This has nothing to do with the existence of arguments, that I am aware and share.
3. It is confusing because I kind of read you as putting rational observations, and not feeding your view of shadow with IS' mad/extreme/tunnelled whatever. How would you expect Shado to react to IS? I am hardly reading anything from this reaction since I think IS attack does not allow to discriminate the reactions...-
-
CrazyQuestions Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 416
- Joined: December 7, 2010
Maybe because you did not write to whom it was directed. You master of liking precise accusationsel simo wrote: That wasn't directed at you, don't know how you could think this.
elsimio wrote: Post 11? I think you're confused.
I am not. ISO 11.
Quite an elegant answer.elsimio wrote: This quote doesn't have any truth to it.-
-
CrazyQuestions Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 416
- Joined: December 7, 2010
Well..my initial message on IS did not say he was SCUM, but my analysis (updated later with the 4 words post, and calling parroting to shadow when he was "accusing" IS) clearly showed my position. You started to point out to my words like absence of commitment. I might think you are a picky player not paying much attention on what others say, but you seem not to be picky with this topic, because you do it yourself.el simo wrote: Post 11? You mean where I comment on TL's trademark late coming and declaring he ows who scum is? I don't see how this is mud flinging.
You did not comment nothing. you just copied his QUOTE and added I WAS WAITING FOR THIS.
A picky you would judge your words in the following way:
I wanted you to comment on the implications (THE QUOTE) has and what it means about (THE QUOTED) alignment - like a townie would have.
I shouldn't have to know anything it's your post and this is why it's scummy. You left it out in the open for us to interpret and run with with out making any commitment yourself.You don't need to say SCUMSCUMSCUM you just need to tell us what (THE QUOTE) imply about his alignment, is it suspicious? Do you think it is scummy? etc. Saying (YOU WERE WAITING FOR THIS) is baiting the town.-
-
CrazyQuestions Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 416
- Joined: December 7, 2010
They get old if:el simo wrote: Why did I need extra reasons? Scum tells don't get old, I don't need a new tell every page.
a) You realize you did not understand my message.
b) You realize my message points out why i found curious to IS (and this is clearly i read him "scum" because there is no other possible interpretation)
c) You say that Shadow parroting me would be enough and then you realize shadow parroted me.
d) You say that you are gonna meta me and you do not do it at all.
e) You claim your read on me is NULL and however continue...
You quote again, I answer again
And I answered that my words are:el simo wrote:You don't need to say SCUMSCUMSCUM you just need to tell us what his curious words imply about his alignment, is it suspicious? Do you think it is scummy? etc. Saying it is just curious is baiting the town.
I. Saying that he is "overstating dumbness, overstating reasons to vote, overstating the situation by using 4 times serious words" clearly states my position. Adding that Shadow parroted me when he ATTACKED using the same words that I used clearly states my position (otherwise I would say, nooooo, this is a town tell). My positions were clear from the very beginning. In the best scenario of you being town, you are biased because you did not understand my message at the beginning.
After you decided I was not the only player in this thread, you have parroted twice. I do not call this scum hunting.simio wrote: I've made three cases on people, how am I not scum hunting?
Incorrect. Empking EXPLICITLY sayssimio wrote: This is a lie, I never used Emps argument I used my own. Our arguments on Grey are completely different, Emp wasn't even on Grey when I voted him. Emp's vote on Grey was because he claimed scum and because he was purposely avoiding the thread, mine was because he was not participating and was just chasing lurkers instead.OR we can lynch scum, which I clearly interpreted as stop lurking stuff, that is irrelevant at this point. You just parroted. Your case on shadow starts again agreeing with someone. Parroting again.
No scumhunting at all apart from your stuff on me that you have not followed. Where is your PROMISED META??
penis wrote:Finish and klaar.-
-
CrazyQuestions Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 416
- Joined: December 7, 2010
PARROT is clearly a "collective" word in this game. It has a meaning for everyone. It speaks by itself most of the time. It is not mud flinging.el simo wrote:You parrot post just calls is a kinda curious phenomena, I don't see how this is making your stance on him clear at all.
Yeah I wasn't making any observations or analysing his posts or anything, it was a totally non game related post about TL's habit of appearing late and calling out scum, he does this every game (I've seen of him). It doesn't have any implications about his alignment and it isn't meant to. It's a joke about our history together. How is this mud flinging
YOUR REFERENCE is "personal" and has not a meaning for everyone. It does not speak by itself and thus needs clarification.
You ask for clarifying/expliciting/not-flinging the word parrot and not clarifying/../.. your own reference?-
-
CrazyQuestions Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 416
- Joined: December 7, 2010
Where did I say that?TheLonging wrote: It's the fact that you're saying "Well he thinks I'm town, so I'll give him more cookie points!" basically that alarms me.
It is the opposite. I said, "my valuations might be unconsciously affected by the fact that he considers me townie so openly. Keep it in mind". And I said it to myself and to the rest of people. And precisely, I think this is important because games are long and people change their positions. This will help me to review the thread more easily in case that happened.
I would not consciously give cookie points to anybody for considering me town without a specific reason to do so. You are misreading the message.-
-
CrazyQuestions Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 416
- Joined: December 7, 2010
You and Simio yes. That makes a reasonable 20 per cent of male population, more or less. YeahInternet Stranger wrote: Seriously Crazy, do you think we are just dumb?
[quote="IS']
All youre doing is trying to get the conversation away from Shado. You try to piss on Simo and Simo and his ego falls for it.
[/quote]
Yours too. However, this is done without any intervention on my side.
Why do you ask me? I am analyzing the game, including shado. I like the wagon. Shado is scummy and the scummiest player in it is Simio, with some town and neutral reads...so yeah, I like it. so I am fine with the wagon. But if you pretend to lynch right now, this is not the way I play. We have two weeks. And I plan to use the time.IS wrote: You realize that Shado is a L-2 right? So where is the focus? Where is the discussion?
quotes please. I am a rational player. A bit of fun is nice, but my arguments are coherent all along the game.IS wrote: Its like Crazy is trying to employ the Puppet Defense. "Ooh everyone, look at me im C R A Z Y!!"
1. I have analyzed Shadow much more than you.IS wrote: Dont you think that taking a good look at Shado and realizing that I am oh so correct in my findings is the best course of action?
2. I want no credit for it.
3. You are a parroter.
4. You are as ego-alpha as simio.
Which game are you reading? I havent said he is town at any single point in the thread.IS wrote: "Oh... the future is.. hazy, he... he might be.... town" Yes heesh Crazy, thanks for your illuminating insight.
lynch? Forget it for one week at least...you can ask me back then. I like discussion. I plan to use the time.-
-
CrazyQuestions Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 416
- Joined: December 7, 2010
-
-
CrazyQuestions Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 416
- Joined: December 7, 2010
a) I count 1 blank and 4 semi-blanks.GreyICE wrote:You are scummy because you just asked people to keep voting him in a game with three total blanks and a ton of activity. KEEP voting, as if he's at L-4 or L-3...
No. That makes sense that it's scummy. You respond by attacking me back? Nice. Can you explain your actions?
b) If we have "a ton of activity", why couldnt empking have a clear view that Shadow is scum? If so, why wouldnt he push for it?
The ones who are not voting are players. They can decide what to do. Given the usual way of playing in the thread and the high amount of impulsiveness/testosterone/etc in this game, I find the push very natural. The wagon is legit, and I like it. As you know my play, Grey, it is also likely that I ask right now for an extesion. I want to see the discussion coming from all this. I will not vote because of this, sorry impulsive/testosterone/etc...
If the game drags for 3/4 days without serious analysis and nothing relevant changes, you can count with my vote. If the discussion is fluid and my second analysis of players next week remains similar, you can count with my vote.
@empking: you can use the last two sentences as a promise so you can put more pressure on shadow.-
-
CrazyQuestions Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 416
- Joined: December 7, 2010
peace and love...GreyICE wrote:Crazy, given your meta, I'm going to assume you're the village fucking idiot, and ignore all the shit you spout at all times, ever, in every game we ever play together.
you have to reconsider your strategy (unless your strategy is a different one), because if I am a village fucking idiot as you think, the immediate response to your AtE words would have been to side Empking more and vote for Shadow...-
-
CrazyQuestions Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 416
- Joined: December 7, 2010
It is very different. I provided my view of Empking. I believe my view of Empking is correct.TheLonging wrote: What I think I'm seeing here is that either you're honestly believing that what you're saying is different then what I said
I take note of the fact that he DECLARED me Townie as a substantial caveat, since I have observed people can be biased by this. Not that I think I am. But I keep record of this thing to re-study in the future if this changes. Same stuff with Grey (and Pergol if he were around) since we are in an ongoing game and that is relevant to me.
As far as I understand his words, this is:longing wrote: "So he's either all types of scum... or town!"
She is town. Understanding her behavior if she is mafia would require to accept that she is AT THE SAME TIME such type of scum and such an opposite type of scum.-
-
CrazyQuestions Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 416
- Joined: December 7, 2010
You agree with me here, since I consider the case mostly correct, and 97 was precisely a parroting of your previous read on shadow. It is later when IS developed the "bolded attacks" and you seem to agree that he did. Fine. Now, what comes is the confusing.Erratus Apathos wrote: While the bolded is true of IS's last few posts on Shado, it is not true of IS's 97. It's also not true of the attacks on him by Emp, me, or simo.
When voting for shadow, you announced the vote with "Now Shado is just resorting to ad hominem. " (in response to one IS' attack. Not 97, but a later one, one of these bolded ones !!) That I found confusing and odd.
With these 2 i also agree. The wagon is fine for me. You can, as i said, use my future vote to get more reactions. You need another one. I want as much information as possible meanwhile...erratus wrote:
1. I would expect town Shado to concentrate more on the cases against him, rather than IS's "SCUM SCUM DIE LYNCH SCUM" posts. Shado focusing on the latter means that he doesn't want to respond to the former.
2. I'd expect town Shado's reaction to IS to be more considerate of IS's alignment. Be it a town read, scum read, somewhere in the middle, or even something to try and figure out IS's alignment. The absence of anything of that sort is a good sign that he doesn't care to figure out IS's alignment, i.e., he already knows what it is.-
-
CrazyQuestions Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 416
- Joined: December 7, 2010
As far as I understand, you asked me no question. Do you want me to answer something in particular?TheLonging wrote:OK crazy and emp, so you ARE going to ignore me. fine. I see.
You asked Empking. I believe he thinks the question on why he finds me town was doubly answered in the thread. First, in a direct way when I asked long ago. Second, with a contradiction argument right above.
-----
CrazyQuestions wrote:Accepts that I described IS' attitude though now changes his view to"vote and say people is scummy".
Wed Jan 26, 2011 6:03 pmelsimio wrote: Siiigh againyou are over stating me. I've made it clear that I'm not ordering you to go and vote and call people scum...Stop exaggerating my points...elsimio wrote: You neversaid he was scummy or votedhim once in these quotes.This was my original point...
----penis wrote:Finish and klaar.
Tue Jan 25, 2011 4:52 pm
Strike votes for MS
Wed Jan 26, 2011 4:26 pm
Strike changes vote to Empstrike wrote: Lurker can wait.
Fri Jan 28, 2011 3:14 am
MS votes for Strike
Fri Jan 28, 2011 6:17 pm
Strike votes again for MS
@Strike: MS remains being a Lurker.
Since you do not like to vote for lurkers so early in the game, I have to assume that you find him scummy for his actions. Since his first post was scummy for you (yes, you pointed out why) but not scummy enough as to keep your vote on him, I have to assume that the second one is adding scumminess. Since you have not described at all what is scummy in the second post, I have to assume that you are OMGUSing here.
Alternatively, I can also assume that your lurk stuff is full of contradictions.
Please let me know which of these interpretations is closer to reality...-
-
CrazyQuestions Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 416
- Joined: December 7, 2010
Here you explain why you VOTED for him. He is yet a lurker, so, why are you voting NOW for him if lurkers can wait and you have no new information on him??strike wrote: MS my vote on you was the fact that you pop in, vote for EMP without explaining it, and then withdraw back into the shadows. Only half that vote is because of your lurkiness, and you're taking both of my statements out of context. I don't like when people vote/pressure people who haven't even posted yet. You had already posted a scummilicious post.-
-
CrazyQuestions Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 416
- Joined: December 7, 2010
really? read the underlined pieces.el simo wrote: His parroting hasn't changed this because after you called him out for parroting, again you did nothing with it, you just left it, you neversaid it was scummy or that you were suspicious of himnordid vote him, you just said it.
....
I clearly listed other alternatives to calling him scum or voting him. Stop reaching.
look, my words were clear. And I analyzed later, as my daddy/boy stuff suggests, and my summaries suggest. If you just wants to have the last word, as STOP REACHING suggests, this is not the place. So if you really want to stop reaching, think what you are saying, because you are not correct.
p.s. And do not depict yourself as "involved in a one-to-one discussion without wishing" as you try to suggest by saying that I do not stop, and blabla. You can both discuss with me while analyzing other players, I am not jealous-
-
CrazyQuestions Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 416
- Joined: December 7, 2010
1. You have a wisdom ability?Internet Stranger wrote:I still believe that he is trying to lay low while someone else draws all the attention [ie: Crazy].
Pretty soon Crazy will start "changing her mind". Maybe go after some other "likely scum", like say, Simo, whom she has been pissing on all game.
2. I do not see any attempt from your side to pressure shadow, get information and a seventh voter. Some of your wagon mates (including me) are probably looking at you saying "this guy is just a shouting shouter".
3. My vote is compromised as much as yours. Well, indeed more, because you are just looking any excuse not to do your job.
4. The list of suspects includes strike and grey too. And among the lurkers, saporo. You can read it easily from my summaries.
5. Do your job and stop protesting.
??IS wrote: She expects us to be like little lemmings and follow her over the Cliff of Mislynch.
My vote is essentially on Shadow. I just simply want information. Go and find a seventh voter, explore the wagon and people outside the wagon, proceed with the pressure and all these violent things you will do to shadow...it is pretty evident that you like to torture people...go ahead...-
-
CrazyQuestions Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 416
- Joined: December 7, 2010
-
-
CrazyQuestions Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 416
- Joined: December 7, 2010
God is dead. God remains dead. And we have killed him. How shall we comfort ourselves, the murderers of all murderers? What was holiest and mightiest of all that the world has yet owned has bled to death under our knives: who will wipe this blood off us? What water is there for us to clean ourselves? What festivals of atonement, what sacred games shall we have to invent? Is not the greatness of this deed too great for us? Must we ourselves not become gods simply to appear worthy of it?. Nietzsche.God IS wrote: ...-
-
CrazyQuestions Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 416
- Joined: December 7, 2010
@Grey: As far as I am reading, your case on Empking started simply because you considered the following words as the scummiest thing in the thread.
Given the fact that IS shouts for L-1 and the rest of players in the wagon implicitly consider L-1 correct, even the crazy-one who is voting-not-voting shadow, might you tell me why Empking is a rara avis in this group? Why is that especially relevant in his case?Empking wrote: Oh yeah somebody needs to vote Shado-
-
CrazyQuestions Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 416
- Joined: December 7, 2010