farside 358 wrote:yeah it was wrong. Why is it scummy? As scum I'm more careful your counter point? Where did I say he mislead the town? Again I thought I have the first valid case on him in my view with a serious vote.
This idea is you're making an implication with the eye roll and the, "I have the first vote, how is this bandwagonning" comment. Only after Parama brings it up do you say, "Oh yeah, ignore the other votes already there". So you're actively looking to throw dirt on Parama with that post rather than looking to see whether he is town or not.
farside 358 wrote:No proof with accusation [...] same
I just explained those. If you weren't trying to frame Parama, then you didn't bother to bring Jack or xvart up. You were purposefully omitting that information because you subjectively thought they shouldn't count. I don't buy your Parama push. Period.
farside 358 wrote:Can I call you a hypocrite for not reading since you are saying I found xvart town when I never did or lazy?
This is different. I stated that I misspoke when I went back and checked the source. When Parama called you out, you tried to cover it up by saying you were the first "real" voter. It just shows me that you're more interested in throwing dirt on Parama than you are in figuring out whether you have an accurate read or not.
---
Jack 364 wrote:What would you say if I told you Gamma majorly scumslipped in our neighbor qt?
I'd say make with the quote, or at least explain the situation.
---
Phate 368 wrote:Accusation of being 'over-the-top defensive'. Can't believe I missed this in my first readthrough.
Do you disagree? Parama spent too much time constructing defensive angles over his own meta, personality, etc. It was as if he was challenging people to attack him. I liked him being upfront about "If you know me, you know I wouldn't choose scum", because I think there's something to be said for that argument, as WIFOMy as it is. Players tend to favor one side or the other.
Phate 368 wrote:He's seriously advocating (he definitely stated there that it wasn't tongue-in-cheek) lynching a bunch of people purely because he doesn't like their posting style. You didn't miss any "Hey Parama, will you stop posting one-liners?" Nope, just "we should lynch these people." Scummier than that is the fact that he actually hasn't done any scumhunting by this point (this is his
second post
, on
Page 13
). He literally still has his random vote on farside.
One, it wasn't a random vote, two, you're one to talk about activity (we all have obligations in life outside of MS), and three, I'm only "seriously advocating" a group with which I'm going to pick a lynch from. It's borderline impossible for me to believe that you honestly thought that I was setting up lynches for Day 9 and beyond... It wasn't a tongue-in-cheek list because I'm not kidding around about the list. Obviously I hadn't called out 10 or more players as scum though, Phate. :/
Phate 368 wrote:What the hell? She voted me. How is that a cop-out? What do you expect her to do, dayvig me?
There was nothing to separate you from any of the other lurkers in this game at that time. Anyone could've picked from d3x, Jazz, pops, or Cobalt and said "X's only post looks scummy". Anyways, it wasn't really a point of contention, I just wanted her to explain why it was you deserved special attention more than anyone else.
Phate 368 wrote:Besides, farside gave a reason (her opinion of my town meta involves more postage) as to why me over some of the other lurkers.
After Parama called her out. I think it was a bigger deal than what she's acknowledged. It's funny that I get the same feeling about farside that you just said you get from me. She jumps onto this anti-Parama sentiment and when Parama calls her out, she doesn't bother to check it out, Parama pushes back again, and she kind of backs away onto, "Hmmm, Phate usually talks more".
Little moves like that are how scum are caught, I've found.
Phate 368 wrote:What? How the hell does that make sense? You think he's making a whole bunch of scummy plays hoping that people won't be able to notice his scummy plays?
Absolutely. He's saying controversial stuff and hiding behind this idea that he's a controversial fellow, so we just need to deal with it.
This
bravado about bringing up a Cult and being mum about it reminds me exactly of PYP2. Now that SC is in this game, he'll probably remember this attitude even more than I would. I'm kind of surprised Cobalt hasn't moved on it either, but I don't know if he's actually here or not.
---
Llama 370 wrote:What are the timelines of your farside and Parama suspicions? Are the Jack/Gamma suspicions mostly signal to noise things? You seem to continually fall back to things like that about them.
farside since the beginning, and Parama since a little bit afterward. He's kind of shifted though; it wasn't a huge thing. Yes, for Jack and Gamma, in different ways. Gamma is just throwing around a lot of suspicions, and Jack is similar with his wagon hopping, but also with a meta I have on him (above).
---
Ojanen 375 wrote:I don't get why you don't think she really thought she was the first on Parama and forgot the page 1 votes. Why deliberately fake something so easily checkable and so obviously counter-arguable.
Then why the kneejerk eyerolling when Parama calls her out? It was just fake all around. I didn't think what Parama did was scummy, and I didn't think farside needed to make a big deal over Parama calling her out for jumping on the bandwagon. Instead of adjusting her view of Parama accordingly, she just kind of slips out toward making a case on Phate out of thin air. Something doesn't feel right about this, Ojanen. Maybe my intuition is off, you know, maybe it was just something simple as you think, but I don't know. Maybe farside was just looking to get on board without Parama noticing too.
---
Fishy 376 wrote:On these three issues, it feels like xvart really isn't bothering to think about the situation. For me, the continued stubbornness on the QT thing feels like he doesn't want to admit his error. I think this posting lots without thinking about what you are writing about is much more likely scum than town.
I want to see how Jack's comment plays into what xvart said about the QT.
---
DGB 382 wrote: You've seen it at work in Kingdom Hearts, or was it PYP1? It caught Cruciare quite squarely in endgame. I'm surprised to see you try to discredit it instead of protesting your townieness.
I've got to agree with Fishy on this one. You're talking about endgame scenarios after lots of flips have happened. I think the difference here is that we're still in D1, when we don't know the alignment of anyone on the xvart wagon.
---
VP 390 wrote:Honestly, I'm really disinterested in this game atm. I think tomorrow I am going to try to muster the will to read the last like 5 pages or so since I've only been skimming. If I can't get myself into it, I may replace out because my laziness isn't helping the town and it's better replacement wise if I get out early.
It is a bit tiring, so I kind of know what you mean. For what it's worth, I think I like this post as townie.
---
Zorblag 404 wrote:So no one at all complained that Phate told farside22 that he wasn't interested in providing a list of reads because it helps scum to know who town thinks is town and then he proceeded to spend his next couple posts deciding why he thinks Jack is town.
Well, that's kind of a political thing. I've heard that argument before. Still, Jack is only one player, not a list, so why should it be noteworthy?
---
pops 410 wrote:FishytheFish has correctly identified
Gambler's Fallacy
in the analysis of his wagon, and I think he's town anyhow. Please quit wagoning him. It gives me headaches in my math/logic lobes. (to be fair though, he did fail to realize that each townie member does make the next more likely to be town, but that is because they are a member of the town, not a member of the wagon. The town has a definite composition.
I agree with you, but you used this exact same line as scum in Caught in the Crossfire for yourself. Why should I be willing to cut you slack here?
---
If we use meta here, I'm liking pops or Jack for our lynch.
If we think the mechanic of choosing your side makes meta too risky, then I like farside, Gamma, or xvart.
The case on Fishy is completely crap as far as I can tell.
Now that the the bulk of the lurkers are being plucked, SttB and now imaginality are both kind of the only ones running into lurker territory.
Lynch should be one of those seven (pops, Jack, Gamma, xvart, farside, SttB, and possibly imaginality).