Open 193 - Friends and Enemies: It's over!

[Albert B. Rampage]

If we don't discriminate in our actions, we are acting no better than at random.

My personal policy is that any bandwagon is a good one.

Lynch this scum now please.

My personal policy is that any bandwagon is a good one.

Is

every

bandwagon a good one?

Any bandwagon will lead to pro-town content

if

it's not pushed randomly. If it's random we're still in the RVS and there's no data to be gleaned. But if there's

intention

behind the bandwagon then we can dissect that.

See, it's rubbish comments like that one from VP that I don't like. He's not bitching about a lack of content, he's making a specific accusation against you. His argument said you are hypocritical for attacking someone for only having a gut reason when you yourself have used mostly gut so far to come to your reads. This is scumhunting, or what passes for it early on D1.

You also invoked lynch all liars for what barely passed for a 'lie', you were surprised Albert was touchy when being accused of scum, alluded to meta reasons for suspecting Albert but produced none when asked, Didn't join the Albert wagon until there was someone else on it.

So yep, you're the scummiest person around at the moment, just on the usual D1 straws.

QFT

Ojanen - no votes yet?

I have a random based vote on Vi. No ping has felt significant enough to change and improve the accuracy.

VP, my problem with you is that at first you implied meta from ABR that was contradictory to what I (and several others seem to) have; when asked to provide this you said it was more because

Everyone plays differently, of course, but there is a certain standard of play I expect from people who I respect as players and are experienced. If I see variances from that, expect me to call him/her on it.

which picked my bs-rhetorics-o-meter. What does the "standard of play" actually mean, seems empty. Makes me think of "deviant=scummy" (don't like).

QFT

I don't believe I've seen ABR so touchy before.

That comment does not speak to something that would be meta exclusive to ABR, nor was it drawn from a specific point in any single game.

Shenanigans. You are claiming that you can take an abstract of how a good player should act and use that as a standard about how you have 'seen player X act in the past'? You most definitely

were

implying meta specific to ABR there.

Again, QFT

Wow VPB, you're so delusional, it's almost comical. I don't expect you to agree with me though, as you're personally invested.

The LAL thing made me laugh though, good to see VPB has decided to ignore that.

And QFT as well.

A note of general interest:

The following players have enough experience with me to have a solid meta:

Zorblag
Ojanen

Players who have had extensive contact with me but in less than 3 games:

Charlatan
SerialClergyman

Players who really have no idea what my meta is:

Sando
VP Baltar
Scien
Amished
PorkchopExpress
Debonair Danny DiPietro
Vi

FOS

Charlie for implying that we should all just bandwagon the first person that gets some votes. If we did that, the mafia would have total control of the game.

That's not what I implied at all. If anything,

you

suggested that with the assertion that all bandwagons are good ones. If you actually just wanted to run up a bandwagon on someone and it didn't matter who it was, you would have contributed to the already existing bandwagon. Obviously, we do not play in a vacuum. Obviously, you had a reason for wanting a new bandwagon on VP. Obviously, you should be able to provide that reasoning. For whatever reason, you still do not, which is a problem.

Look at the beginning of my post to see what I mean. Also, I find VPB's bulldog attacks very scummy indeed. Not only does he pull nonsense out of his ass, he actually tries to defend them as valid arguments.

[Albert B. Rampage]

Zorblag can definitely attest to how reluctant I am to provide reasoning when asked. I say what I mean and mean what I say when I think it's the time for me to say it. What do you think of VPB's rising scumminess?

[Amished]

Why did you ask Zorblag over Ojanen, ABR?

[charlatan]

Zorblag can definitely attest to how reluctant I am to provide reasoning when asked. I say what I mean and mean what I say when I think it's the time for me to say it. What do you think of VPB's rising scumminess?

Just that, that it is indeed rising. I think arguments on both sides of the fence are contrived, and am comfortable with voting in either direction more than for anyone else in the game at this time.

[VP Baltar]

Oh ho, but you definitely did. This is the funniest thing in the game so far, because it's far closer to an outright lie than ABR's fuzzy logic was. I'm going to go ahead and be the fourth person to mention it since you still haven't addressed it in your last few posts.

I thought he was talking about ABR, which is why I was so annoyed because I didn't say that about ABR. Frankly, I didn't even recall saying it about Scein and it was obviously just a flippant remark meant to pressure.

[Albert B. Rampage]

Why did you ask Zorblag over Ojanen, ABR?

Because I remember several specific instances of it with Zorblag, whereas with Ojanen, she often replaced me or replaced in after I was NK'd so I don't have a strong recollection of her presence in those specific instances. So Ojanen has a very good read on me but I don't recall the specific instances where she was in the game and I demonstrated the aforementioned behavior.

[VP Baltar]

find VPB's bulldog attacks very scummy indeed. Not only does he pull nonsense out of his ass, he actually tries to defend them as valid arguments.

So you think being aggressive is a scumtell?

Also, I haven't heard you actually address much of anything I've said about you, but rather you seem content to let others defend you. Which arguments are "out of my ass"?

[Vi]

I find VPB unhelpful and more of a eyesore than anything else, so I won't be missing him once he's gone. Scien hasn't done anything to bother me.

That's strange. The first post where you said anything about VP Baltar being

scummy

(225) came after this one.

When did VP Baltar stop becoming a lynch of convenience and start becoming the scumlynch that you're pushing now?

(I'm sure the English there is poor but etc.)

[Albert B. Rampage]

I find VPB unhelpful and more of a eyesore than anything else, so I won't be missing him once he's gone. Scien hasn't done anything to bother me.

That's strange. The first post where you said anything about VP Baltar being

scummy

(225) came after this one.

When did VP Baltar stop becoming a lynch of convenience and start becoming the scumlynch that you're pushing now?

(I'm sure the English there is poor but etc.)

As of post 223 I was still on page 8 of the game.

find VPB's bulldog attacks very scummy indeed. Not only does he pull nonsense out of his ass, he actually tries to defend them as valid arguments.

So you think being aggressive is a scumtell?

You're not aggressive at all (neither am I at the moment). You're just being stupid and scummy. A town or mason wouldn't try to lynch me based on a bad judgment call, and then claim it to be for meta / game experience reasons.

Also, I haven't heard you actually address much of anything I've said about you, but rather you seem content to let others defend you. Which arguments are "out of my ass"?

The great thing about being in an invitational game with good players is obviously that they will make good points. This means less headbutting and more agreeing. Rather than making the same points and pawning them as my own, IOW plagiarizing, I am content with quoting the players that share my thoughts, which are rather self-evident imo.

[SerialClergyman]

Stupid friends and enemies. Who decided on this bad setup

Everyone, cut it out about the LAL stuff. I'm sure he as scum didn't think he was going to pull a fast one and deny it out of existence. As soon as he starts yelling in capitals that he didn't do something he obviously did it's a breakdown in communication, not a scumtell. Was going to rip into sando, but he had the good sense to reread and come to the same conclusion.

charlatan, however, did not. I also am NOT loving the 'arguments are contrived on both sides, I'm prepared to vote on either' from him either. Charlatan jumps striaght into the number two scummy position.

Vi - I have known Sando in real life for ~12 years, including living together during university. We're good friends in real life. I've watched some of his games thoroughly and played in two completed ones. He has a very aggressive and prickly style that tends to attract suspicion. I actually see a lot of similarity between the start of this game and the start of the last game we played together, where he was the D1 lynch as a townie. I don't have nearly as much of a town read on him in this game as I did in the other, but the day is young.

[Amished]

I remember that lynch fondly.... >_>

[Albert B. Rampage]

charlatan, however, did not. I also am NOT loving the 'arguments are contrived on both sides, I'm prepared to vote on either' from him either. Charlatan jumps striaght into the number two scummy position.

QFT

[SerialClergyman]

Yes....

Vi, I don'tk now if you were following the game, but here is the answer to your issues: the previous incarnation of this game

A quick skim of sando and why he was lynched D1, and a quick skim of my defense of him and pushing of Amished might give you a clue as to VP's attitude, my attitude and sando's playstyle.

What was weird to me about the exchange with VP was that, at least form my perspective, he made a bad point on Sando, I pointed it out and he went straight to 'you're full butt hurt for your friend'. No looking at other games I've played with sando where were town-town fought and scum accused, no acknowledgement that in the game he's drawing his conclusions off I was right and the wagon I was pushing instead was scum that was never lynched. And I barely said anything in sando's favour, my main point was that VP was deflecting with a shallow attack.

It doesn't feel right from him.

[Vi]

What was weird to me about the exchange with VP was that, at least form my perspective, he made a bad point on Sando, I pointed it out and he went straight to 'you're full butt hurt for your friend'. No looking at other games I've played with sando where were town-town fought and scum accused, no acknowledgement that in the game he's drawing his conclusions off I was right and the wagon I was pushing instead was scum that was never lynched. And I barely said anything in sando's favour, my main point was that VP was deflecting with a shallow attack.

It doesn't feel right from him.

He didn't accuse you first thing. He only made things personal when you defended a point that he saw as blatantly wrong.
For what it's worth, I can gather from the linked game that you playing Sando's oracle can get frustrating quickly. Furthermore, it's not exactly VP Baltar's civic duty to research the history of your relationship with Sando if he hasn't played in those games.

--

@charlatan - Why aren't you voting VP Baltar?

[Amished]

@Vi: Thank you for being the voice of reason.

@SC: I've been getting a better read of you lately; and I think you're overreacting to a personal pet peeve (admitted to or not) of yours. Calm down and look at the situation again.

On a related note

Unvote
Vote: Albert B. Rampage

[Albert B. Rampage]

What is there related to your vote of me lol

[SerialClergyman]

Vi, that's rubbish. If you are going to say that an argument has personal links rather
than deal with it on it's merits, it really is your responsibility to do that work. I'm not playing his oracle, all I did was say that he was indeed scumhunting and vp's criticism is unfair. As far as I'm aware, you agreed with that point (with the proviso that in earlier posts you felt he wasn't providing much of content) so i'm not seeing where you are coming from ATM.

However, I'm officially jumping ship to charlatan. I'm going to avoid confirmation bias if it kills me and I get the impression I'm on the wrong track, good reasons or no.

unvote, vote charlatan

[Albert B. Rampage]

We should wait for charlatan to confirm his stance and defend himself or change his mind about "both sides having bad reasoning". Don't you think he deserves a chance?

[Amished]

I said that I thought either you {abr} or SC were scum. With SC not being read as scum; that leaves you!

[Albert B. Rampage]

Why

[Albert B. Rampage]

That doesn't even make no sense Amished. That's just pure hate right there.

[SerialClergyman]

It's not just that point, it's also calling out vp for denying mentioning lal when that was an obvious communication error and not a scum tell.

Since when do you lay off voting someone in deference to a possible defence? Get loose baby.

[Albert B. Rampage]

It's not just that point, it's also calling out vp for denying mentioning lal when that was an obvious communication error and not a scum tell.

Since when do you lay off voting someone in deference to a possible defence? Get loose baby.

How is it a communication error? Can we call it a memory lapse instead?

[SerialClergyman]

Sure.

The communication part comes because he thought all my points pertained to his attack on you, he hadn't realised the first was about his attack on Scien. But the memory component is just as powerful, so if you want to lump it in that category, go ahead.

[Albert B. Rampage]

Oh, I understand now. I just find the way he latches on to me pretty scummy. If he drops his ridiculous accusations I'll probably explore new avenues of discussion too.