Thor wrote: Greetings all - I'm up through page 8 and, as usual, my brain is less than amused at this stage and has ordered an all stop in order to refresh the anti-idiocy shields enough for me to wade through more later. Thus far nothing too meaty to really dig into as with so many players page 8 is not as content filled as it would be in a smaller game, that said I have the following brilliant (and 10% accurate) observations;.
Thor wrote:Liking Locke
Liking GreyICE
These comments do not compute. At all.
First you are complaining about the idiocy you have been forced to endure in your brief read-through. Next you complain that nothing meaty exists to dig into.
Then you like those two players.
By page 8 Locke had exactly two posts. The typical RVS ISO 0 and ISO 1 where he attacks DGB for lack of scum-hunting.
1. How does his total lack of content in the first 175 posts jibe with your complaint about the lack of meaty content you were bemoaning?
2. If you respected his DGB observation why not a single mention of DGB in your post or even a vote for him?
Why do you like GreyICE? His contributions to page 8 include –
1. Attacking DGB for ‘attempting to stifle discussion’ with her stance on raising which is obviously incorrect.
2. A stupid stance on the Governor power that he later back-tracked on (first it is potentially game breaking for scum, then when he realizes you can’t self-governor it isn’t so bad).
3. Heavy use of rhetoric and pointless ‘Look at me I’m Town’ grand-standing.
What about that is anything other than indication of idiotic play? Furthermore in the first 8 pages DGB is also GreyICE’s number 1 target.
@Thor
– please specify in detail what you like about Locke and GreyICE’s Page 1 to 8 posting. Also please explain why DGB does not appear at all in your post 780 when
--
Benmage wrote:So you wait till the VI townie hammers the town doc, then you venge-lynch them and cost us the game.....Wonderful concept.
You know very well this is exactly NOT what I’m saying. CSL should have been hung Day 2 when Mina made the case on him. He skated by after being stabbed. Town should not have let that happen.
Benmage wrote:Uhhh Thor was following a Cops results....
Yes. That’s 1000 times better than offering it up under little pressure Day 1 for public inspection. That said I’m more referencing that Thor got it right by not coming out Day 1 publicly and simply waited to use the shot when it was most likely to derive positive Town results.
I’m of course not arguing results at this point.
Benmage wrote:Where's KmD to say Dayvig doesn't mean town!
See I was wanting to wait to see who argued against the concept strongly since KMD was pure scum in that game …
--
Raivann wrote:Yeah I didn't think diddin was particularly scummy. So I guess null leaning town would have been a better way to put it. The more info the better.What is scummy about that?
It’s purely scummy because you are basically buddying up to diddin. You having a ‘Town read’ on diddin should make ZERO difference to him regarding his read on you. What you basically did was say to him “Hey, others suspect you but I don’t! Don’t vote me and let’s go after someone else we can agree on since we are both Town”.
--
Twilight Mina wrote:@MagnaofIllusion: I've been meaning to ask you about something. How come you attacked GreyICE for accusing you of IIoA early on D1, but never responded to this post of mine?
It rang a small bell for me at the time when you attacked an easier target with a more controversial playstyle but left me alone. Maybe it's because despite GreyICE's rhetorical skills sucking, he rang as so genuinely town from our POV, so I disliked you hammering to him to death.
I didn’t address it because quite honestly I didn’t even see it since you followed so quickly on the heels another Twilight post. In looking at that post are taking the soft tactic that I’ve noticed Sotty-head also taking – swiping at me with accusations that are meant to undermine but not outright directly call scummy. That’s a scum tactic – I should know I used it on Benmage in Clash myself (and he rightfully called me on it but didn’t really pursue it). I obviously disagree with your conclusions as I did with GreyICE. The difference is that he kept throwing crap any which way while you said nothing further.
@Twilight Mina (when you get back)
- Why did you let that slide for 700 or so posts before bringing it up again?
But back to your earlier assertion – you intimate that GreyICE is an easy target. Did you find him to be a VI? Are you attempting to say I wouldn’t attack your slot for scummy-behavior simply because of it’s make-up of Hito, you and Sotty?
--
Bunnylover wrote:The Zoraster case I'm not really seeing.
I understand why MoI is voting for him, but thats not why others are voting for him.
Again, these two lines do not compute.
Bunny please explain your thinking here. If you don’t see a Zoraster case how can it make sense that I am voting for him? That’s contradictory.
Either you see the case I have laid out and think it make sense for me to be voting him (thus you see the case) or you don’t see any valid case on him and thus my voting for him doesn’t make sense.
Bunnylover wrote:The Zoraster FOS buddy - Vote Townie is nice. Frankly I would rather lynch Raivann (the FOS buddy) which upon flip of a scum result will prove (or at least strenght) the fact that Zoraster was in fact doing that.
Lynching Zoraster really doesn't dissolve Raivann status.
Um what? Implicit in your agreenment that Zoraster is possibly pulling the ‘Vote: Town, FOS: Partner’ play is the fact that you MUST think Zoraster is scum. If you think Raivann is scum and am unsure of Zoraster it doesn’t make sense to make the link in the reverse direction. It is not a bi-directional tell.
@Bunny
– Do you think we are in a multi-scum environment? Please answer in your next post.
--
xvart wrote:I agree with this.
Why do you agree with Bunny’s stance? As I stated above that’s not a bi-direction scum-tell, at least in my mind.
--
Magua wrote:I am sad that Zoraster has been on-site to post in other games, but hasn't posted here.
I am sad that every single one of Twilight Sparkle's heads have been on-site, two of the three posting in other games, but haven't posted here.
I have to agree that with others who have stated that these statements are suspect / scummy. Magua’s later attempts to say that they are not statements made specifically to show suspicion but just general statement doesn’t stand up to logical scrutiny.
@Magua
– I see your explanations at 783 and 788 and I don’t buy it them. I also really think you little High Horse act in 800 is bad. I’m guessing there are any number of players who might fit this pattern if we looked into posting records from when you brought this up. You in 780 essentially fluffed.
Magua wrote:To borrow your little bar:
[Town]------LynchMePls-----Kast--DGB-[* Benmage * ]-Raivann-Zdenek-----------------[Scum]
Quick question for you - why did you you specifically exclude me from your Town to Scum list when you responded to Zoraster?
--
@Zoraster
– The following were responses you made to Magua, but I am specifically addressing them. I wanted there to be no confusion.
Zoraster wrote:2.
I missed cow claiming payne. I think it's pretty easy to do when his only confirmation is a smiley face.
I thought it might be helpful to place the claim, which was being heavily doubted, firmly in the context of the books, but clearly that was not.
Anyway, assuming you're right and I was just trying to be helpful without having read the thread, do you think this makes me scummy or just inattentive?
Emphasis added.
The first bolded portion is quite frankly crap. I have ZERO flavour knowledge of the series and I was easily able to pick up that Cow acknowledged that he was claiming Ilynn Payne (or however it is spelled) despite his use of smilies.
The second bolded portion in my mind is clear – you are scummy. Town players have no reason to pretend to be ‘helpful’.
Zoraster wrote:4. So? I got you mixed up and that changed how I felt. I wasn't sure how until I reviewed it.
Where did you explain where you review process and changed opinion happened? After I rebut your defense and point out that you mixed up the two of us your response is “Oops” and that’s it. In my mind that’s further evidence of your scummy behavior.
You concocted a ‘defense’ that was mostly an attempt to do so by being dismissive about how I came to my conclusions, not attacking the elements of why I drew that conclusion. When I pointed out a large part of your dismissal revolved around attacking me with the actions of another player you just dropped it.
--
Nexus wrote:Of the two leading wagons, I am still not really seeing the zoraster case. Sure, he's said scummy things, but he's done more scumhunting than Raivann. Sure, he was over defensive when he was accused of rolefishing, but other than that, the only other reasons I've seen are him not raising-I and six others aren't raising. It's not scummy. The other thing was him posting elsewhere. If he had been doing it for weeks at an end, then yeah, it's a problem. He isn't. It's a null tell.
1. You clearly aren’t reading closely since I’ve posted a case that includes more than ‘role-fishing’ and not raising.
2. Marking this relational tell down for later – if Zoraster does turn out to not be scum (which I doubt) Nexus likely is.
To some degree number 2 should also apply to Danakillsu since he is making similar statements.
"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.
Woah (why did I think Shadow was the dayvig…)(Oh right skimmed post 725 before)
