@Anyone with a Zoraster Town read
– Look at his ISO and please explain to me the Townishness? Is it based on past experience? Because I some ‘See I’m Town look at how worried I am about something that will work itself out’ posting, a single post indicating reads (ISO 4), some unexplained vote-hopping and much filler fluff.
--
@Twilight Sparkle – Hito edition
: I don’t think you ever responded to my question regarding Newb scum’s motivation to draw attention to themselves in a Large Theme game with many experienced players (in relation to Shadow). Did I miss that explanation?
--
xvart wrote:But your willingness to provide examples of town VI killing the town endgame and VI scum winning in endgame is strange based on your first stated premise not to lynch VIs immediately. Where do you draw the line and when should those people be lynched?
I’m starting to wonder about your thought process here. I’ve said it very clearly … if someone (VI or no) acts scummy they should be lynched. It’s a pretty simple process. Letting someone act in a manner consistent with being scum and letting them off the hook for being a VI (or any other ‘they always act this way’ excuse) is just inviting potential disaster down the line.
I draw the line at lynching scummy people (VIs or no) when they act scummy. It's a pretty standard concept.
--
Bunnylover wrote:@MoI: What counts as buddying to you?
I best can demonstrate the prior instances from completed games that to show you what I mean –
Fred Garvin in Newbie 969 wrote:And BTW...that was one quality post from MoI. Took the words right out of my mouth.
This is right after I pointed out (correctly, the argument being made was bad) that an attack on Fred wasn't valid. As I said, as Town my instinct is not say “X made a great post defending me, that’s awesome”.
Next read The Fonz’s ISO 1 and 2
HERE. In context I had been placed under pressure mainly for an ‘Invisible tell’ that MacavityLock ‘had’ (which ended up, of course, being completely invalid). It’s much more subtle than Fred Garvin’s (one of the reasons why it worked for him) but in hindsight it is there.
Lastly we have –
Kapia in Gorrad’s Large Theme Favorites wrote:Btw, great posts by Magna. You defended me better than I would have ever been able to myself. Also good case against Chess, I agree.
Once again I was pointing out why the attack being made wasn’t logical (again, this is independent of Kapia’s actual alignment). What really made this ring my Scumdar was that Kapia played as Town in Newbie 969 and saw Fred Garvin do exactly the same thing.
Then look at diddin’s ISO s 0 and 2 in the sections where he mentions me. While ostensibly attacking GreyICE the manner in which he does so looks more as ‘Defend MoI’ than ‘Go after Scummy GreyICE’. I don’t particularly feel the need to have someone else fight my battles for me and the language diddin chose to use set off my patented Buddying detection system.
--
Zdenek wrote:I've looked at your games in the past, and I don't think that your posting style is radically different depending on whether you're town or scum. As far as the particular issue mentioned in the quote above, is there a particular game that you would like to direct me to? It would be quite difficult for me to demonstrate that you never do something as town, but quite easy, I think, for you to provide evidence that you do.
Do you think that there is a scum motivation behind GreyICE's exaggeration? If you do, what is it?
In regards to the first part I’m asking you to help determine my read on you. I don’t have any particular game I want you to see. I’m just sizing up the potential motivation you may have had in making an attack, however minor you later profess it to be, based on a small subset of games.
I do see scum motivations in GreyICE’s method of attack. Town doesn’t need to attack based on incorrect or exaggerated ‘data’. For example, the attack on DGB for using ‘clearly false’ data was bad since it was demonstrated that DGB wasn’t inaccurate in her statements.
I also don’t like Grey’s habit of ‘attacking the attacker’. I’ve seen multiple instances where he’s focused on rhetoric in labelling questions as ‘useless’ as opposed to answering them.
I also find it suspect that when presented with arguments showing facets of Grey’s attacks are incorrect he suddenly shifts gears. DGB was obvsccum for among other things the whole ‘Post Restriction’ attack and when refuted suddenly DGB disappears from Grey’s ISO. No mention that he was incorrect in his attack. He stops the DBG is obvscum attack cold and suddenly moves on to “I’m going to lynch Muki”.
"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.
