|
I thought about merk more. I think I'm pro merk.
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 02:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 09:24 |
|
|
merk posted:I'm not really sure I understand what you're saying about his case then: Rarity, did you answer this? I'm curious to hear your thoughts.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 02:39
|
|
|
ljtrigirl posted:That's like not even true at all. I said initially that I thought Lumpen might be evil because it felt like he tried to use random mod poo poo to clear a bunch of people in a way that seemed forced. Since then, it's felt like he's trying to blend in but in a way that someone antagonistic would do. I said that Pinterest Mom clearly wasn't reading my posts, which felt like disengaged evil. Since then, she's had really blendy votes. LJT, what do you think a scum Lumpen was trying to achieve in that post where he cleared a bunch of people?
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 02:46
|
|
|
Rarity posted:ANarc you're being terrible. Stop being terrible EccoRaven posted:AnonymousNarcotics has been replaced by Mithross. Everyone say hi!! Good one, Rarity.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 02:47
|
|
|
I'm starting to feel better about TMM. This post in particular:TMMadman posted:This is pretty much spot on about me. I tend to post a lot of crap on D1 (I try to focus and not post as much poo poo after D1) because I'm a messenger and spend the majority of my day in my car alone with my phone. So I tend to treat D1 as a time to shoot the poo poo and just try to get people to post in the thread, even if it doesn't really have to do with the game. I have mulled over and find it satisfactory. ##unvote
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 02:52
|
|
to make it obvious that I'm not taking myself seriously.
|
CCKeane posted:This, combined with this: This post has really convinced me though. On a reread of Gamer he looks really bad. For one, his response to Keane: Gamerofthegame posted:I can think an action isn't scummy while holding someone to claims of content at the same time!! is terrible. You are voting someone who has promised to give you reads right after said promise? What is the value of this vote other than posturing? Additionally, this post: Gamerofthegame posted:not to devalue your opinion lumpen but who do you think isn't scummy is particularly bad because it's casually dismissing everything lumpen has said without either addressing it or asking him about it. He just asks him to clear people as town. Gamer is trying to look engaged. ##vote Gamer
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 02:56
|
|
|
I think Gamer is scum. There is a serious lack of substance to his posting. Firstly he replies to a couple of players who talk about merk, but I dont see what his purpose is in those responses. Is it because he believes merk is town? Does he think the players he is responding to are scum? It seems more like buddying up to merk than anything else. Gamerofthegame posted:Why Merk? You don't reference him at all in your effort posts outside of an offhand comment of someone unvoting him and that still wasn't directed to Merk specifically. Gamerofthegame posted:literally chopped liv- His posting with TMM is a lot more suspicious. He has a totally hedgy post about TMM, then votes for TMM (in what I think is a joke vote?? I honestly can't even tell) Gamerofthegame posted:I can see the argument for TMM, but on the flipside in the same breathe it looks like he's waiting for content to jump on. Instead of just being passive he's trying to get people to post and get poo poo going, constantly referencing post counts like a tosser to criticize people into Gamerofthegame posted:##vote TMM I dont see how he is committed to that vote on TMM at all. Lastly his defence of that vote, when called out by Keane makes no sense at all to me. Gamerofthegame posted:I can think an action isn't scummy while holding someone to claims of content at the same time!! What action does he think isn't scummy? Why is he voting TMM? ##unvote ##vote Gamer
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 02:59
|
|
|
BottleKnight posted:This post has really convinced me though. On a reread of Gamer he looks really bad. For one, his response to Keane: Oh yeah, just pretend I said this. Nice case BK  The other thing I didn't like about his Lumpen post is, why is it bad to be suspicious of a lot of people?
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 03:02
|
|
|
 man our cases were close together time-wise!I'm glad we're on the same page though.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 03:04
|
|
|
fiery_valkyrie posted:LJT, can you explain why you moved your vote to PMom at this time? You had an earlier post where you said you thought PMom was scum, but your decision to switch your vote here doesn't seem to have been prompted by anything that I can see. I will not explain it for the third time.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 03:39
|
|
|
fiery_valkyrie posted:LJT, what do you think a scum Lumpen was trying to achieve in that post where he cleared a bunch of people? Probably just forcing content that looks like hunting/town circle building. Possibly clearing a fellow scum.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 03:41
|
|
|
ljtrigirl posted:I will not explain it for the third time. Why didn't you have any confusion when people started voting a guy named "Diqnol"?
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 03:45
|
|
|
merk posted:Why didn't you have any confusion when people started voting a guy named "Diqnol"? Because I haven't looked at the roster at all. By the second or third time, I realized it was always in response to pizza dude or quoting him and talking about why his posts were evil. 1+1 does generally equal 2.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 03:48
|
|
|
ljtrigirl posted:Because I haven't looked at the roster at all. By the second or third time, I realized it was always in response to pizza dude or quoting him and talking about why his posts were evil. 1+1 does generally equal 2. I think you just skipped the votes. The explanation that you made some realization about his name doesn't ring true to me. Do you want to revise?
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 03:56
|
|
|
ljtrigirl posted:I will not explain it for the third time. I'm not asking you to explain the reason behind your vote, I've read that post. I'm asking why you put your vote on PMom at that time? It would make sense to me if there had been something happen that triggered your vote move -- PMom posting, the two of you have a discussion, etc -- but I cant see why at that moment you felt that the PMom vote was stronger than your previous vote on Lumpen.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 04:05
|
|
|
fiery_valkyrie posted:Why does QPQ give you bad vibes? I thought his posting was particularly townie actually. I swear I saw something when I was reading this morning but I don't see what it was now. I must have meant someone else, I will see if I can find it again. oh and because I forgot where I was before... ##unvote ##vote Samfucius
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 04:24
|
|
|
Hey everyone, I am a person in this game now.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 04:45
|
|
|
Mithross posted:Hey everyone, I am a person in this game now. Person? Or spooky ghost?
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 04:46
|
|
|
CCKeane is there a reason you aren't voting anyone this game?
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 04:48
|
|
|
BottleKnight posted:CCKeane is there a reason you aren't voting anyone this game? Ghosts can't vote, silly.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 04:50
|
|
|
Hmmm.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 04:51
|
|
|
Bottle Knight why are you so riled up about what people are or aren't doing like halfway through the first day?
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 04:53
|
|
|
Because Keane is making good cases and not voting. I wanted him to confirm that there was a reason for this.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 04:54
|
|
|
BottleKnight posted:Because Keane is making good cases and not voting. I wanted him to confirm that there was a reason for this. Everyone knows ghost can't vote, silly
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 04:56
|
|
|
Thanks Hal.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 04:56
|
|
|
BottleKnight posted:Because Keane is making good cases and not voting. I wanted him to confirm that there was a reason for this. But I meant in general, not just with Keane. You were all fired up about lurkers earlier too. Just relax and let things come to you it's totally the best that way
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 04:57
|
|
|
Hal Incandenza posted:Everyone knows ghost can't vote, silly well, not outside chicago, anyway 
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 04:58
|
|
|
Hal Incandenza posted:But I meant in general, not just with Keane. You were all fired up about lurkers earlier too. Just relax and let things come to you it's totally the best that way Just not the way I play. I play video games to relax. Mafia works parts of my brain I don't work enough.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 05:00
|
|
|
Alright, I'm finally home (it was a looooooooong day), I've had dinner and done some re-reading and here are my thoughts right now. The first thing I'm going to do is step in that pile of poo poo between merk/diqnol. When I originally read it I thought that it was just the standard D1 town slap fight, but after re-reading it I think something might be in there. I'm going to start from the huge Diqnol post. It starts off bad with this: GUISSEPPE PIZZAPIE posted:Bad joke that later turned into an exchange between TMM and him that ends up with merk unvoting the moment TMM questions the vote. Even if merk did mean this as a joke, why did he feel the need to remove his vote? Why didn't he keep it on after TMM reacted to it? I would expect a town merk to use that opportunity to probe TMM some more. Instead, merk just slides off. As a participant in the exchange, I felt that merks vote on me was a joke and my questioning of it was also meant as a joke (did you see it that way merk?). Why wouldn't he remove a joke vote to try and move onto other targets? He got a reaction, we had some fun with each other and then it's time to move on. In fact, I make my own joke vote against Kashuno a few posts after this whole exchange and now I'm going to remove it. ##unvote It changes a bit in the middle because I actually kind of agree with Diqnol that merks BK callout was bad. However, it still feels like Diqnol is trying to make something out of nothing and he's using a lot of words to do it. But the thing that really bothers me is at the end when he specifically points out that he was already voting merk but just wants to do it again for emphasis. It just seems so insincere and phony. But the worst part is the very next post in the thread is: GUISSEPPE PIZZAPIE posted:I think this is a rather scummy post, though. He's hedging very hard and in light of his earlier posts, I would vote for Samfucius. You make a huge case against merk and then immediately turn around and say you would vote for someone else in the very next post while saying that person is hedging. There is some next level poo poo right there. It gets even worse when he says this a few posts later: GUISSEPPE PIZZAPIE posted:You're keeping me open as a potential vote candidate so you can plausibly vote for either Rarity or I at your leisure. Your earlier posting was pinging me too but I don't have examples on hand. Give me a minute and I'll see if I can find those posts again. While I don't think that Samfu's posting has been particularly great so far, you are doing the very same thing you are accusing him of doing. Keeping a second vote candidate open so you can plausibly vote for either of them at your leisure. I find this to be pretty scummy and when combined with the whole "I'm not going to defend myself to I could totally move around you merk to You are going down" thing prior to the big post reads so badly that I would vote for you. And just to be clear, I am currently leaning town for merk. I'm not going to vote for you right now though because there is something else bothering me that I'm going to detail in a different post. This took way longer than it should have to write. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 06:28
|
|
|
And that person is Hal. His first vote against SamV is a little opportunistic perhaps, but not bad over all because SamV had grabbed the pearl. So no big deal there even with a jokey post asking lj to help SamV die. But what bothers me is his next post asking ANarc to summarize the thread so he didn't have to read it and then in his next post is a light jab at ANarc for letting him down, so he did a re-read with this post: Hal Incandenza posted:Ok, Anonymous Narcotics totally let me down and didn't do poo poo so I just read and caught up. There's no justification for the vote, it's just jumping on a train that's starting to move and it feels very opportunistic to me. As a driver, I can't fault him for excusing himself for several hours to do a long drive, although I don't really like the the casual dismissal of BKs questioning. But what bothers me is this post: Hal Incandenza posted:I swear I saw something when I was reading this morning but I don't see what it was now. I must have meant someone else, I will see if I can find it again. This is the second person to noticeably unvote and revote the same exact player and it just feels fake and scummy to me. Especially when it's followed up with his next few posts asking BK why he is so riled up and trying to tell him how to play. I don't like any of it and it feels worse to me than diqnol at the moment, so that's where my vote is going. ##vote Hal I should also note that Hal also makes a light defense of diqnol by saying he seems pretty townie so far, which doesn't make him look better in my eyes because I also think diqnol is scummy. But between the two, diqnol seems more engaged (despite tunneling on merk) while Hal has seemed disengaged and uncaring. Also, yes, I did write both of these posts up one after the other in separate tabs because it helped me organize my thoughts better.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 06:29
|
|
|
Mithross posted:Hey everyone, I am a person in this game now. What do your fresh eyes see?
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 06:38
|
|
|
I'm fresh home from work and digging into the game. My first thought was "20 pages already?" Then I read the first five pages, and am still not actually into the game. I'm less impressed. I will say Lumpen easily won the pre-game game, and am more impressed with him, instead of less.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 06:39
|
|
|
How very fresh! Also I took another look at the merk/diqnol thing, as well as their post histories in general. I don't get about 1/3 of diqnol's megapost at all, basically calls merk out for not doing jokephase right, which is nonsense. The rest of it I guess I understand but I do not agree with. I'd still vote diqnol over merk, no question.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 06:47
|
|
|
TMMadman posted:And that person is Hal. TMMadman, I don't know about the other person, but my unvote/revote was because I had not followed proper Ecco format and therefore my vote had not counted because I had an earlier vote on SirSamVimes so there was no special intent other than to actually record my vote. See the votecount that Ecco had posted a little earlier to confirm my statement. Also you do realize that I defended diqnol because merk specifically asked me for my thoughts, which I provided. I'm sorry if our opinions on diqnol differ, but I tent to think that I am right here. Also also it hurts that you think I don't care. No one cares more than me.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 06:55
|
|
|
Hal Incandenza posted:TMMadman, I don't know about the other person, but my unvote/revote was because I had not followed proper Ecco format and therefore my vote had not counted because I had an earlier vote on SirSamVimes so there was no special intent other than to actually record my vote. See the votecount that Ecco had posted a little earlier to confirm my statement. Fair enough, I did indeed miss that your first vote for Samfu hadn't actually counted. I retract my statement that your unvote/revote is fake and scummy. However, I still think you are disconnected and not really trying to scum hunt, so I find you scummy and am comfortable leaving my vote on you.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 07:10
|
|
|
ljtrigirl posted:Why did you go from a real vote to this one, which feels like a joke? It's expressed as a joke but the reasoning behind it is genuine
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 07:51
|
|
|
I have a few first read impressions I'm going to write out before bed, tomorrow I'll do a second read when I'm more awake, and go from there. My first read through of the merk/diqnol mess: merk comes out looking better than Diqnol, that big post is a couple decent points built into a wall, and feels blown out of proportion. Especially as it grew out of merks presentation of a point, rather than the point itself. BK backing merk over diqnol when the whole things started with an (admittedly poor, but not scummy) case on BK is interesting. I'm not sure exactly what I think of it, but I am thinking about it. Keane is clearly a powerful role, town aligned, and a ghost. I support his existence and hope he chooses to haunt our enemies and amuse our allies. Also, I hope you like your avatar ljtrygirl. I had it sitting on my desktop waiting for the next time I was in a game where two people had the same avatar. Tremendous Taste almost got it in Chrono Trigger mafia when he and Asiina were potatoes, but someone else changed his avatar first.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 07:58
|
|
|
fiery_valkyrie posted:Rarity, did you answer this? I'm curious to hear your thoughts. I thought I had but apparently not. It's mostly column A with a little of column B. It's not enough for me to vote merk as well but it's enough for me to be throwing a beady eye his way.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 08:02
|
|
|
Hal Incandenza posted:Bottle Knight why are you so riled up about what people are or aren't doing like halfway through the first day? It's called playing mafia, it's what you should be doing?
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 08:06
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 09:24 |
|
|
So yes, Hal.Hal Incandenza posted:I apparently signed up for this game and ecco gave me my typical vanilla town role pm so I guess I am ready to find the scum I said it at the time, this immediate VT claim stands out to me. VT is always a worthless claim that you can throw out at any time but it's rare to see actual VT immediately claim (unless it's PMom). Scum always fall back on VT as a failsafe claim even though they're then scared of being caught by watchers/trackers. I think Hal's trying to pull a double bluff here, make a show of how unafraid of the PRs he is by putting the claim out early. Hal Incandenza posted:##vote SirSamVines greedy Again, already said this but this is a vote on the player that chose to stand out which Hal can later play as either a joke or serious. It's giving him an excuse to put a vote down without having to make an opinion and allowing him to keep his options open. Hal Incandenza posted:Ok, Anonymous Narcotics totally let me down and didn't do poo poo so I just read and caught up. Jumping on the most solid bandwagon going just like TM said. Hal Incandenza posted:QPQ gives me bad vibes. Hal Incandenza posted:I swear I saw something when I was reading this morning but I don't see what it was now. I must have meant someone else, I will see if I can find it again. Hal mentions QPQ's name, forgets about him, brushes it off when asked about it later and then forgets about finding the original source of his bad vibes. He's just tossing out QPQ's name to look like he's doing things without having any genuine reads. Hal Incandenza posted:This bottle knight might actually be a bad guy Hal Incandenza posted:Bottle Knight why are you so riled up about what people are or aren't doing like halfway through the first day? Hal Incandenza posted:But I meant in general, not just with Keane. You were all fired up about lurkers earlier too. Just relax and let things come to you it's totally the best that way He's sort of suspicious of BK but maybe not but perhaps he's scum but oh well, let's just have a little joke about things instead. Like I pointed out, he's just having a go at BK for playing mafia. BK's not really doing anything particularly crazy to count as "riled up". And then he doesn't follow through with suspicion, he ends up playing it off as a chill joke/slight mafia dadding. It looks like again Hal's just throwing out names and questions to look like he's contributing without having anything of actual value to offer. In short, there is nothing in Hal's post history of any actual substance and combined with his early claim I feel confident in my read. Let's lynch Hal for a better tomorrow.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 08:56
|
|