ISO of Civil:
First 11 posts: RVS, fluff, jokes and smalltalk
Civil's Post #11 wrote:Ellibereth wrote:
Bad logic is bad.
You're basing Clock as biggest possible thread off of one game too? >.>
I agree with Ant, on the basis of almost 3 games. Add to this that his town-meta had Holycon mixed up last game, and I can see why. I think the actual debate, if there is to be one, is whether or not his benefit as town outweighs the risks.
Are we really going to suggest voting ACM just for being a threat? That sounds like the opposite of policy lynch. Of course you don't vote for him being a threat, but rather whether or not you think he's town or scum. Granted reading a "threat" player is like reading an "idiot".......hard! But if he's a mafia veteran and he's pro-town, then we'll be able to see it in some way I think.
Post # 12: This is a justified concern. I really don't like the extent that Ellibereth was being mysterious. I see that this is his meta, but it's really frikin annoying and I don't how it gets the town anywhere.
Post # 13 & 14: sorta fluff
Post #15: thinks Park had missed his questions
Civil's Post #16 wrote:I also was curipous as to why Parknouise is so concerned with other's people's habits and not his own.
Isn't this mafia we are playing?
Post #17: The "parts" and "bits" discussion.......please NO!
Post # 18: Part of this seem to come out of no where, not much justifying on his part. But it's also not to far from the RVS that it's almost acceptable.
Post # 19, 20 & 21: Revolved around Park not addressing his concern, then follows the whole mixup of whom Civil asked a question. Nothing real telling here.
Post # 22: More concerning Park and Elli not answering his concern. Then continuing the awkward "parts" and "bits" discussion.
Post #23: Jumps from talking about Mike to Elli to Mike.
Post #24: Admits 23 was confusing. FOS's MAD without explaining.
Post #25: Explains his vote on Park was because of unanswered questions, then thinks ACM is calling himself lazy by not checking up on Doubt.
Post #26: More on the laziness talk.
Post #27: Filled with a lot of insightful discussion, but nothing to implicate town or scum.
Post #28: This is what's interesting and what I pointed out before. He FOS's Ant with ZERO reasoning. Most of this post was referring to ACM.
Post #29: Nothing real relevant here...
Post #30: simply fluff
Civil's Post #31 wrote:I know you're not Ant, but I intend to look into him in the near future.
Gladly I will (Is that a tactic to snip the quote in half? A scum hunting tactic? or something else?) In the first part of the quote that isn't there, I said that you should have been more concerned with Ellibereth on that point. Because, it was his and because he was using it to base his vote on. I discussed it because I brought it up, but I hadn't thought much of it, and I was just saying how that's Ellibereth's game you're playing into, taking the issue up with me now after bringing up his point. Maybe I shouldn't have been guessing, but it was fairly obvious what Ellibereth was getting at in the quote, and on this page he admitted that it was obvious, and that the "lack of effort" was basically the same obvious point he was getting at -I trust, at least, that he's not lying about that.
Here he says he FOS'd Ant for a further look. So pretty much you IGMEOY'd him. Then continues on with the whole "Ellibereth game plan" discussion. Since you didn't use actual quotes and such, I had a hard time following it. I didn't think Ellibereth's strategy was obvious at all until he admitted it. His whole plan confused me, but maybe I'll better understand when I do his ISO.
Civil's Post #32 wrote:Holycon wrote:
i want to know more about that fos
ACM wrote:
It seemed strange that you'd talk about me in the entire post and then, without any segue or explanation mention that you were FOSing Ant. Tbh I figured you'd meant to type "ACM" and your FOSing him was a typo.
I can understand why you guys think that is strange.
But I was discussing Elli's point.
I didn't say that I thought it was scummy, or that ACM is scummy.
Can you please quote Elli's point then? I looked for it, couldn't find it. This seems to me an attempt to avoid the point of not explaining his FOS on Ant.
Civil's Post #32 continued wrote:I feel like Holycon is reaching around a little. Her usage of meta, to justisfy her suspicion of Ant, is a little premature and less than convincing. I think you need more than "they're not posting as much." That could be caused by too many things not related to their meta. (irl, less interest in the game atm, confusion, etc). Now that I think about it, I can see why the "this isn't easy" comment from Ant could be scummy. That was good point, so the jury's out on Holycon.
This needs more looking into from me, will comment later.
Rest of Post #32: I find your ISO & FOS of Doubtful was reasonable. I wish I could have gotten more into his head when he said what he said here.
Post #33: Correction of something from #32
Posts #34-37: Park rant!
Post #38: Then unvotes him. Says he voted him initially to punish him. Says he didn't like the sound of MAD's posting.
Post #39: Edits #38
Post #40: Says Elli's question for me is a good one. Pushes for more activity before deadline.
Post #41: To me this just comes across as fluff.
Post #42: complete fluff
Post #43: I agree with most everything here.
Post #44: Points out a contradiction of Holy's
from Civil's Post #45 wrote:I liked that he was voting Parknourie, so I dropped it.
That's a crappy reason for dropping a suspicion. Especially since you didn't have a good reason in the first place.
Post #46: If you said what you meant, then it was way lost in translation
Post #47: Are you frikin serious? You're voting for me because YOU can't explain yourself well!
Civil's Post #48 wrote:ACM wrote:
I like how you throw FOSs and votes at anyone who takes issue with your behavior.
Wow, ACM, this is bull shit. "My behavior" = the one Fos ??? This is the only thing anyone's
got
on me, and it's god damn NOTHING. NOTHING. But I see how horribly scummy it is, for someone to get frustrated with the one lousy mark against them...and then get accused of OMGUS'y type behavior.
Anyways, as nice as it was for you to assume this here, everything in that post is fairly serious.
I didn't realize it would be horrible
It's very nice of you to assume that. I'd have you know that
Dude why the 'tude? ACM may have stretched here, but your vote for me is still mystery, just like your FOS of Ant.
Post #49: Already commented on.
Post #50: explains her FOS on her accusers and says she didn't think her FOS on Ant was strange [O RLY?]
Civil's post #51 wrote:Sure is, but just because I didn't provide an explanation doesn't mean I don't have them.
Doesn't mean it's not suspicious.
post 51 cont. wrote:It might be the coincidence that the people who have mentioned my-FoS'ing are the most active and the most-discussed (targets) of the other active players. That could be the coincidence, I really don't know.
Don't see how this is relevant to anything.
post 51 cont. wrote:I'm also waiting for MAD to come back, and ZeroFang to complete his read-up. I might as well
Fos: MAD
, but I don't want to go into it right now.
why not?
Post #52: mostly fluff
Post #53: fair enough (find's most people suspcious)
Civil states the obvious wrote:I never provided my rationale for the original Fos. I provided a rationale for having "un-Fos'ed" him later. So no, I never justified the Fos after the fact.
*facepalm* Why didn't you admit this earlier??
The rest of Post #54 is blah, blah, blah
Post #55: Already replied too.
Post #56: fair question it seems
Post #57: blah, blah, blah
Post #58: touche
Post #59: I don't get this
Civil's Post #60 wrote:You do realize you still don't have anything on me right?
Not entirely true
Post #60 continued wrote:While a frighteningly weak argument for me being scummy, this is a great move for you if you were scum, makes a possible later vote for you look like OMGUS from me. Pretty Slick.
The WIFOM here is pretty obvious. FAIL.
Post #61: more blah, blah, blah
Civil's Post #62 wrote:I think you're the one who's pedantry has clouded
his
judgement. Your pedantry about FoS'ing. Really, that's where this all started.
Explain this please. Who his?
Post #63: the word game argument here is making my head hurt
Post #64: even more blah, blah, blah and I still don't know what a strawman argument is LOL
Summary of Civil after ISO:
Reading Civil is not easy because he jumps around from point to point and doesn't adequately quote people. I'm willing to excuse his FOS of Ant, even though it came out of nowhere. However, I don't believe he was justified with his vote on me. I also don't like his manner of arguments and defense. He suggests that we have NOTHING on him as him he has been perfect this whole game. He owns up to his mistakes after we relentlessly pestered him about it. My scum reading on him though still feels more like a townie, who just hasn't explained himself well. I don't want to rule out the possibility that he is scum though. For now, I'll give him a strong
FOS
and a
IGMEOY
!
