@Seacore
– If you expect serial posting or spam posting from me you should expect to be disappointed. I generally post once to twice a Day during the week. I’m not going to flood the thread with short, relatively content free posts.
Fate wrote:MoI sitting with his vote on VibeBox while making a case on podium is particularly unproductive.
I have move vote sitting, you know, because I think Vibe is scum. I’ve taken every opportunity to address his posts as they appear. Not good enough for you?
Just because your personal drive to question Podium has waned doesn’t mean I have to ignore him. You already have your personal sheep Nacho to keep you company.
But to further address your concerns – why is Podium’s vote on Ghostwriter or Zdenek’s vote on Seacore less worthy of your disdain? Both were single votes as of your post?
VV wrote:I don't buy it. Plus it is severely outdated. Do you still think so?
Severely outdated? The thread has been open less than 1 full week. Please don’t try to portray this as a read I made in the first week Day 1 and have held til Day 4.
I have already stated he was correct in his attack on implosion. His “scummy actions not a scummy player” post directed at you I find complete fluff now that he’s explained his reasoning. And I stand by his ‘hop’ on Seacore was driven by Fate’s suspicion. On first blush his 'case' on Ghostwriter is less than compelling. I'll have to re-read that exchange later.
Vibebox wrote:There's nothing more annoying than someone who thinks they have an awesome read, and clearly don't. Preperations for a new job have taken up almost all my time since my last post, with my only free time being occupied keeping up with this thread. This has left me no time for analysis.
tl;dr : stfu
First off I’m sure you do find it annoying that I’m calling you scum and not letting up. Whether that’s because you are the poor, innocent person you are claiming or because you are actual scum remains to be seen.
So these preparations for a new job sprung up between Wednesday the 17th when you wrote “POST MOAR” and Thursday the 18th when you posted your last actual content post?
TL;DR – No, I don’t think so. Why don’t you just hang and save us the trouble of replacing your scummy self?
Podium wrote:9.98 times out of 10 when someone says 'i think that was an in-game communication' and then VOTES the person for it, they are implying it is coaching. I don't think many would disagree. So that's where 'coaching' came from. if you didn't necessarily think he's scum, and might be some type of town pr, then why attempt to blow his cover?
what did you mean by 'reaction test'? i assumed you meant he was trying to get a reaction from whoever he was talking to... what's scummy about that?
You are so completely wrong about the first portion I don’t know what to say. If I had thought he was Coaching I would have called him on it. You ignored the MANY other examples I provided and provide statistics that you pulled out of your ass (I’d like a cite for 9.98 out of 10 times, otherwise you are just inventing empty statistics to fluff your position).
That vote and statement was reaction fishing on my part. I picked up on his odd comment, tacked on several possible motivations that might explain what he was doing, and then voted for him.
He could have reacted in any number of ways. He could have reacted like you did and questioned me on a coaching accusation. He could have called it role-fishing if he was a Town player trying to find a partner. He could have said it was reaction-fishing, which isn’t scummy at all.
But he did none of these. He threw on a façade of indifference and tried to play the "I'm too good to give you guys any information" game.
Podium wrote:1. Don't misrep me. i SPECIFICALLY said i would include more detail if someone wanted it, but that i was leaving it out for brevity... as i was making a game-wide analysis.
Yet you didn’t include the specifics now when I specifically made issue of it. You made unbacked accusations. I’m not particularly impressed that you thought to include the “I’ll do it later” caveat. Your excuse that it was a game-wide analysis doesn’t hold water. You took the time to support your assertion, in that post, that my attack on Vibe was based on coaching. Why go to the specific trouble of providing direct links to said posts (which require you to ISO them for the URL) and not provide the purpoted scummy logic directly in your post?
Podium wrote:Sure, there might have been a non-shared point here and there, but this seemed to be the primary focus of each argument.
Way to quote mine, as it were. You nicely sniped off the other portion of my ISO 1 which said the following
Spamming the thread just to post hardly qualifies as either scum-hunting or being useful.
Nice of you to ignore my call of his play as spamming and not scum-hunting.
Podium wrote:3. you cant understand that? i thought vibe's explanation was sufficient, so did VV. when you didn't, i found it interesting... because i dont know how much better he could have explained things. sure, it's a very subjective thing... that's why i said it was interesting.
I can clearly understand it. You said it was interesting that I didn’t back off when VV did. You didn’t mention that his subsequent retraction had to do with labelling Vibe’s post as IIOA, which I never did. And you are correct it is very subjective. Why again should I be substituting your reads for my own?
Podium wrote:4. hah. the ole 'interesting' bit (which was the semantics issue seacore went after, in the game that you mentioned earlier). are you trying to tell me, that in a post in which I expressed strong suspicion of you, that because i used the word interesting, you dont know my intent towards you? this wasn't anything you did, and it is a subjective and possibly nullish observation... that's why it's interesting. sometimes when someone says 'interesting', they are just using the word.
I attack your semantics because the use of interesting in that sentence is scummy. You’ve stated that you were putting me under heavy suspicion in that post. If that is the case why are you presenting ‘Nullish’ information in the middle of a post trying to outline my scummy behavior? There is no pro-Town motivation for doing so.
I note with interest that you reference AGM’s game with Seacore. You do remember that Seacore was going after Deer, who was scum, in the early part of the game when he attacked on the use of ‘interesting’, right? Thanks for supporting my statement!
Podium wrote:i didn't know that i had to provide all possible qualifiers every time i said something like this. a day-cop could know my role to... it was just a figure of speech.
Then it was a poorly placed ‘figure of speech’ that flies in the face of very basic Mafia information. Why do you so often tack on 'figures or speech' or inaccurate information as a means to prop up your arguments?
Podium wrote:Dont assume what i might have perceived, or that i believed VV was scummy. A scummy action does not always equate to a scummy player.
What was your purpose for pointing out scummy actions if you didn’t think it came from a scummy player? It certainly isn’t scum-hunting if you make an entire post dedicated to VV’s scummy bahavior that doesn’t indicate in any way you think he may be scum.
Podium wrote:Implosion and seacore. Just because YOU think my attack was 'incorrect' (and hey, i'll hit you with the same sort of qualifier gotcha... how could you know it was incorrect, unless you know their roles? ) doesn't mean that i didn't express that i was suspicious of him being a scum partner.
But was it scummy behavior by Seacore or do you actually think he is a scummy player?
I call it incorrect because you backed off of that suspicion at ISO 18 shortly after you made it. So I’m following your suggestion.
And not to be too nitpicky you actually said you had MORE than 2 scum-reads when you made your VV ‘this is scummy actions but not a scummy player’ post. So besides implosion and Seacore (who you soon backed off) who were your other scum-reads that made our total more than 2?
"I am a leaf on the wind ... watch how I soar!"
Pretty much Geriatric game restricted at this point ... unless there are players I REALLY want to play with.
