Simenon wrote:The opportunistic club. I don't see why that necessarily has to refer to voting.Goatrevolt wrote:Out of what?Simenon wrote:I noticed you're leaving out Cass, Goat.
QFT.Simenon wrote:The opportunistic club. I don't see why that necessarily has to refer to voting.Goatrevolt wrote:Out of what?Simenon wrote:I noticed you're leaving out Cass, Goat.
Look at the 3 people I listed again. I left out Nhat and you and you are both voting for habitang. That list was not a "who's currently voting for habitang list," which is why I'm still confused by your line of questioning. I agree with your general sentiment though, and I generally will count FoS' as similar to votes in situations such as this.Simenon wrote:The opportunistic club. I don't see why that necessarily has to refer to voting.Goatrevolt wrote:Out of what?Simenon wrote:I noticed you're leaving out Cass, Goat.
I understand the function of your list, but I was making a point myself: if you're going to nail somebody for opportunistic behavior (which I don't oppose), I would naturally go for the person who isn't committing to a vote.Goatrevolt wrote:Look at the 3 people I listed again. I left out Nhat and you and you are both voting for habitang. That list was not a "who's currently voting for habitang list," which is why I'm still confused by your line of questioning. I agree with your general sentiment though, and I generally will count FoS' as similar to votes in situations such as this.Simenon wrote:The opportunistic club. I don't see why that necessarily has to refer to voting.Goatrevolt wrote:Out of what?Simenon wrote:I noticed you're leaving out Cass, Goat.
Tritch is numero uno obviously. The other are Nhat and Andycyca, who seem to be lurking in plain sight. I think there's a scum among them, I wish they would post more so I could find him... I'm not sure I should include Matin, as he is being replaced.nureins wrote:Just in case I have a different view on who the lurkers are...who are they ?Cass wrote: I still feel worst about the lurkers in this game.
I disagree with the idea that a FoS is more opportunistic than a vote. Both can be opportunistic, but a vote actually furthers along the wagon. I feel much more confident going for the person who threw on additional meaningless reasoning to justify their vote, especially since Andycyca was in my top 3 prior to the habitang vote anyway.Simenon wrote:I understand the function of your list, but I was making a point myself: if you're going to nail somebody for opportunistic behavior (which I don't oppose), I would naturally go for the person who isn't committing to a vote.
True, but silly and unreal do not tell me anything about his alignment.Simenon wrote:Oh come on. It was plain silly and unreal.Ythill wrote:I don't buy a lot of the reactions to his latest post. It was an unnecesarry appeal to emotion, yes, but he's done this before, just not so explicitly. The added intensity seems to have naturally developed from the increased number of arguments against him.
My statement was unfair and my only excuse for this is that I was in a bit of a rush when I made that post. To clarify, your case was not pointless, but the bit about him knowing the set-up was. Its inclusion made the whole case seem somewhat contrived, like it was bad icing on an otherwise reasonable cake.nhat wrote:You left out the part where he's jumped back on to Jahudo for the flimsiest of reasons.Ythill wrote:Nhat's "case" on habit is pointless. It's clearly possible, even probable, that habit misread the flavor.
If presented the choice, I'd always go for the easier one. And the easier choice there is to "FoS".Goatrevolt wrote:I disagree with the idea that a FoS is more opportunistic than a vote. Both can be opportunistic, but a vote actually furthers along the wagon. I feel much more confident going for the person who threw on additional meaningless reasoning to justify their vote, especially since Andycyca was in my top 3 prior to the habitang vote anyway.Simenon wrote:I understand the function of your list, but I was making a point myself: if you're going to nail somebody for opportunistic behavior (which I don't oppose), I would naturally go for the person who isn't committing to a vote.
They sure do tell me something!True, but silly and unreal do not tell me anything about his alignment.
I agree with Simenon on this one, or at least with the point he was making at the time. Goat's answer to it was fine.Goatrevolt wrote:I disagree with the idea that a FoS is more opportunistic than a vote. Both can be opportunistic, but a vote actually furthers along the wagon. I feel much more confident going for the person who threw on additional meaningless reasoning to justify their vote, especially since Andycyca was in my top 3 prior to the habitang vote anyway.Simenon wrote:I understand the function of your list, but I was making a point myself: if you're going to nail somebody for opportunistic behavior (which I don't oppose), I would naturally go for the person who isn't committing to a vote.
The whole point of being town is being real. Townies shouldn't fake anything. Meanwhile, a scum wants to fake emotional explosions because they keep them from getting lynched. This is at the heart of Pooky's strategy, and why it is so hard to get him lynched as scum (although habitang, with all do respect, is no pooky).Ythill wrote:About his alignment? Really? Please explain what and, more importantly,Sim wrote:They sure do tell me something!True, but silly and unreal do not tell me anything about his alignment.how.
I'm not judging either town or scum reasons to admit OMGUSing. I just stated that OMGUS is never good for town. I don't FoS a lot and all I have is a vote. So, I see someone blatantly admiting an antitown attitude, I vote. End of story.Goatrevolt wrote:He admitted to having OMGUS tendencies. What possibly self-serving reason would scum have to admit something anti-town like this? This screams to me as additional weak justification to hop aboard the wagon. "Well, he said his initial reaction was to want to OMGUS, and since OMGUS is a scum tell, I'll add it to the case."Andycyca wrote:Confirmed OMGUS attitude (antitown)
Vote Andycyca
I need to catch up in other games, but I can certainly provide reasoning for my top 3 targets later on.
Again, I would like you to present to me your proofs of my lurking. I don't have as much internet access as I'd like and I can't be logged in as much as the previous months. Everytime I'm around here I try to post something.Cass wrote:...and Andycyca, who seem to be lurking in plain sight.nureins wrote:Just in case I have a different view on who the lurkers are...who are they ?Cass wrote: I still feel worst about the lurkers in this game.
Yes, but habit was in no danger at all. The effect of the post was to draw the spotlight to him, something which could have been foreseen. To play the WIFOM game... what do you think of a player who is crafty enough to employ this tactic but daft enough to time it so poorly?Sim wrote:...a scum wants to fake emotional explosions because they keep them from getting lynched.
Ok Thanks. I was including Matin after somebody mentioned him. In the case of Andycyca, if this may help you, I have a curious impression. I found him participating, so I do not feel anymore he is a lurker. His posts have content, so that is ok. He is just very neutral in emotions, and then he lives in a "heaven". So this does not mean he is a lurker. My lurkers' vibes come from tritch, nhat and matin.Cass wrote: Tritch is numero uno obviously. The other are Nhat and Andycyca, who seem to be lurking in plain sight. I think there's a scum among them, I wish they would post more so I could find him... I'm not sure I should include Matin, as he is being replaced.
Ythill, Im reading positively from you lately, so do not take my words as an attackYthill wrote: (@sim)... what do you think of a player who is crafty enough to employ this tactic but daft enough to time it so poorly?
Jahudo, what does your information consist of to vote me (I did read your vote post), I mean other than the specifics of my post? How do you account for the momentum you created upon my case?Jahudo wrote:the TPT wagon never looked like gaining momentum enough for a lynch, which is what the scum are looking for. The pro-town wouldn't have momentum as their top priority as long as they gain information to help them decide who's who, right?
This is another gear change for which I don't see valid reasons but I'd rather not discuss what makes you see people as townie, so I guess we'll let it lie for now.nuriens wrote:Ythill, Im reading positively from you lately
Isn't judging town or scum reasons for doing specific actions the entire basis behind how you determine who is scum or town? What's the scum motivation for admitting OMGUS tendencies, especially when it does precisely what it has done in this situation, which is draw unnecessary suspicion upon oneself.Andycyca wrote:I'm not judging either town or scum reasons to admit OMGUSing. I just stated that OMGUS is never good for town. I don't FoS a lot and all I have is a vote. So, I see someone blatantly admiting an antitown attitude, I vote. End of story.