|
Hello everyone! I think the last time I had to replace out it was chaoslord who took over for me, happy to return the favor haha. I'll read this thing tomorrow, anything I should be looking out for?
|
#
¿
Aug 21, 2015 05:52
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 26, 2024 09:03 |
|
|
EccoRaven posted:
If you push the deadline back I won't complain at all. Still have 26 * 40 posts to read.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 21, 2015 18:34
|
|
Note that Friday is technically a weekend, and weekend deadlines suck noodles. I am around though and in my judgment I can push it back to Sunday if it looks like nobody is around. This is something I said I'd do when I started the day just reminding you.
|
I forgot how unenjoyable it is to actually read joke posts for 10 pages straight. Can I get a good of idea of about when the game actually starts?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 21, 2015 19:06
|
|
|
GUISSEPPE PIZZAPIE posted:##unvote ##vote merk Before I saw this I had in my notes: - merk making joke abou TMMadman setup spec and not even rolling one post with it feels overcautious, like he realizes this one is going to make him look bad if he pursues it. So if there is some kind of merk vs Diqnol fight to expect later, I think the first blow Diqnol landed here was pretty good.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 21, 2015 19:14
|
|
|
merk posted:I think Diq is scum. That case doesn't sound believable. I was leaning towards him puffing up nothing because of pride, but his response to my question didn't win me over. I'm on Page 22 and definitely going faster than I was on earlier pages. The end is so near! Anyway to save you guys some suspense, ##vote merk for voting Diqnol and thinking he's scum solely because "he voted me and I didn't like it" while doing piss all else today.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 21, 2015 20:24
|
|
|
Wow that was a lot of posts. I skimmed through the last few pages so yeah, hope there wasn't anything too important there. Eventually I stopped taking notes but here are some f my Hot Takes from reading the thread. Obviously coming out swinging against merk here. Pretty much everything I saw him do in this thread was scummy. I would like to think I'm pretty good at spotting him out too. Here are a few that I remembered to write down, sorry for the spelling errors. - merk making joke about TMMadman setup spec and not even rolling one post with it feels overcautious, like he realizes this one is going to make him look bad if he pursues it. - More awkward jokes from merk that functionally amount to making excuses for not having to post about the thread, while also maintaining an appearance in the thread. - Bad bandwagon vote on a bad Sam case. - BottleKnight vote reeks. Scumhunting without putting mustard behind it still looks better than emptyposting to look like you're engaged. - "Helpful" posting from merk. Thanks merk. http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3734881&userid=0&perpage=40&pagenumber=16#post449153384 And of course so obviously OMGUSing Diqnol. This poo poo is scummy for a reason folks. It's scummy to find someone scummy solely because of the fact that they voted you. I don't even need to explain why, it's obvious why scum would instinctively want to discredit people expressing suspicion against them. Merk's only real argument against Diqnol is that his case seems disingenuous. But I came to most of the conclusions he did while reading the thread and I did it independently, so how disingenuous or "fluffed up" could it be? Merk doesn't really have anything else against Diqnol. Merk would not have ever voted Diqnol if Diqnol had not voted him first.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 21, 2015 20:35
|
|
|
What else? Samfucius: I don't think he's scummy. Here was my note on the first wave of people voting him: - Early votes on Samfucius look bad. All Samfucius said was posting opinions based on two jokeposts was a waste of time. People jumped all over him for... not wasting time analyzing one-line jokeposts. This is a guy being consistent with his opinion and getting jumped on for it. From there I haven't really seen anything from him that looks like scum. Samfucius plays like a guy who will go with something if it jumps out to him, but who otherwise isn't too interested in combing through posts looking for subtle meanings. From what I've seen his opinions have been consistent and vocalized. He doesn't express his vote reasons very well but most of them can be inferred by the timing of his posts. I would not want to vote him today. -------------- Meinberg: Find scummy, would vote. I don't find taking on PRs to be inherently scummy in itself, but the way Meinberg played up and then subsequently abandoned his PR looks very scummy to me. My notes: - Meinberg scummy for taking on this post restriction only to eventually abandon it. Having used PRs myself as town I can attest that they really aren't much work, the actual work of the game comes from being scum and having to pretend you know what's going on. - First use of PR mechanic is empty fluff, not much of an attempt to say anyhting about the game beyond merk looks kinda bad. He's barely posted period, so I don't like how he sorta blames his RP for taking up too much time. Again, it's doing things like reading the thread (and if you're scum, lying about it) that take up time in Mafia, not adding flowery language to your sentences. Forsooth, this scoundrel has misled you with his fine vocabulary for long enough! -------------- ljtrigirl: Originally I liked some of the points Rarity made on ljtrigirl but I don't think they held up long term. My notes: - Rarity makes some good points about ljtrigirl buyt it could be explained by new player So yeah, I think ljtrigirl's play picked up a lot as the game went. Good scumhunting, I can definitely see an experienced player here, and I have a town read. -------------- Lumpen: Probably my #2 for scum after merk. I think he's made a lot of nonsense posts (like Ecco responding to players ITT clearing them as town, which I know for a fact is not a reliable tell), but his Diqnol vote also stood out to me: - Bad Lumpen vote on Diqnol. "His case is bad and fake" comes off as hollow to me, there's not much evidence to support it. Again this is sorta the narrative that Merk began pushing and it's not one I believe in or agree with. Instead of talking about anything Diqnol said with substance, Lumpen just accuses Diqnol of making an OMGUS vote on merk, when Diqnol voted merk before merk had said anything about him. This is scummy and shows Lumpen either isn't reading the thread (scummy) or is voting based on something he should know isn't true (extremely scummy).
|
|
#
¿
Aug 21, 2015 20:47
|
|
|
Pretty much everyone else I'm fairly neutral about, I've already talked about most of the posts that have made a big impression on me. Uhh I guess here's some of my more minor thoughts and observations: - Hal feels like he's lurking, I didn't much like his big defense post against TMMadman given that he's not done much else in this game. Too much effort on defense, in other words. - I've never played with Kashuno before but my read here is scummy. Here are my notes on him: ---- Kashuno content hounding early without producing much in the way of his own. ---- "Why do people always think I'm scummy when I'm town" unvote post. ---- Samfucius vote seems a little overblown, like he's trying to disguise a bandwagon vote as a case - Slight town lean on Keane who while playing spectator style at least has remembered to fade out of it occasionally this game to make real comments -------------------------- Hope you guys found the wait worth it. My suspicions in rough order: merk > Lumpen > Meinberg > Kashuno
|
|
#
¿
Aug 21, 2015 20:54
|
|
|
ljtrigirl posted:I mostly like Ninth's entrance, but the one thing that made me go "eh?" was the inconsistency in the stance on me. Rarity's early pings can be explained by me being new but you think my experience shows through in my posting? You're new here.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 21, 2015 21:20
|
|
|
Merk did not even comment on me voting him. Scummy.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 22, 2015 03:53
|
|
|
I'm exhausted and haven't paid enough attention to the Gamer case to vote it one way or the other. If merk isn't happening then I'm gonna ##vote Lumpen instead, because he's also probably scum.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 22, 2015 04:04
|
|
|
It's interesting that most of the people I find scummy have just gone up to bat for Lumpen, who I also find scummy. ##vote Lumpen
|
|
#
¿
Aug 23, 2015 23:20
|
|
|
Still very happy to lynch merk too, it's just not as sporting when he isn't around. The way merk is posting, again, smells very cautious to me. This isn't merk out for blood; it's him doing damage control. It's scummy.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 23, 2015 23:22
|
|
|
merk posted:To be a bit more clear, Lumpen plays a character, and, therefore, all of his posts are fake. Because of this place style, it is very difficult to get a tone read on him. This is also why Lumpenis periodically lynched on day one regardless of his alignment. I believe that Lumpen's alignment will be more easy to determine when we see some of the results of his casework. Merk using a meta argument to defend Lumpen. How very against merk's town meta...
|
|
#
¿
Aug 23, 2015 23:23
|
|
|
Lumpen posted:I just looked over Diqnol's big post and it is really bad. It is wordy, sure, and framed in a manipulative but not persuasive way. And looking closer it boils down to a bombastic OMGUS around the middle. It reads to me like a fake case forced together out of not much, against someone Diqnol Speaking of things that ring really fake, forced and insincere. Diqnol makes a good big case and Lumpen fails to comment on any of its specifics. "Manipulative but not persuasive?" What the gently caress does that mean? Like you were almost swayed, but somehow didn't fall for Diqnol's sneaky tricks? "Looking over the evidence?" What evidence? Not a single example of evidence is provided in this post, just Lumpen's opinion that Diqnol is faking it.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 23, 2015 23:27
|
|
|
QuoProQuid posted:Yes, this is the beginning of an argument! Your earlier argument of "let's lynch Meinberg regardless of alignment. It wouldn't be that bad for the town anyway" is not at all convincing and more than a little suspicious. Policy lynching is an argument as old as time, and one that many a townie has made. Are you really all that surprised to see it again and from a player new to SA?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 23, 2015 23:34
|
|
|
Lumpen posted:TNL, manipulative but not persuasive means that Diqnol was using manipulative language, in my opinion, and trying to move votes through appeals to emotion and trying to "act really really sure" and "post lots of words", but his arguments struck me as insincere and hollow, and delived in an overblown way. There isn't a case on Diqnol so I don't have much water to carry there. And no, "I thought Diqnol's case was overblown" isn't a case. It's barely a registering opinion. This post of yours, however, is overblown. Your most recent one is too.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 24, 2015 01:26
|
|
|
Also LOL that I'm voting you to cover for Diqnol. I voted you yesterday, and cased you then too. Did you forget?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 24, 2015 01:29
|
|
|
We have some big-time lurkers this game. EXACT Science hasn't posted in this game since Tuesday. Was around on Friday posting in PYF though.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 24, 2015 01:34
|
|
|
SirSamVimes posted:Are you saying there was a night zero poison? Also I'm dubious about the claims on merk, he doesn't seem particularly scummy and if he's town it'd be awful to lose a town merk so early. ...Claims? You mean cases, right?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 24, 2015 08:50
|
|
|
For a town that mislynched on Day 1 we've had almost no actual discussion of the candidate who got lynched. Can someone who voted for Gamer early (BottleKnight, FV, Kashuno looking at you guys) explain to me a day later why you thought he looked so scummy?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 24, 2015 20:00
|
|
|
I think Pinterest Mom is a pretty uninspired lynch and most of the evidence I've seen against him is stuff that could either be applied to other games he's played (short votes without followup) or are flat-out arguments that don't make sense to me (why would scum give up on their scum team as early as Day 2 without any of them having been lynched?).
|
|
#
¿
Aug 24, 2015 20:04
|
|
|
I agree with merk, not voting is scummy and if Keane can vote but is choosing not to then that's scummy.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 24, 2015 20:05
|
|
|
Lumpen backing off of Diqnol, acquiescing to me and calling me town, and posting a LumpenList™ all in one post gave me the immediate reaction that he smelled the wind turning against him and decided to play it safe. Not the Lumpen I know, who would go out on his shield for opinions he believed in.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 24, 2015 20:11
|
|
|
EccoRaven posted:The following players have made: I would basically be up for lynching any of these people to help Ecco out. Preferably fiery_valkyrie who the only thing I can remember her doing was promoting the Gamer lynch.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 24, 2015 20:13
|
|
|
Samfucius posted:Lumpen where has merk done a significant amount of 3p hunting? His posts regarding Keane's lack of votes. That's about it.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 24, 2015 20:24
|
|
|
Lumpen posted:It's more important to be right in the end than right from the start. As much as I love the thought of getting the whole Scumteam right on D1, I've learned to sleep on it and admit when I'm tunneled and leading myself astray. As more posts and flips happen, evidence changes. You're right that I don't back down from opinions I believe in, but I'm clear about what I believe and what my best hypothesis is at a given time. Flips didn't change your opinion though. I'd like to believe it was my persuasive posts and arguments that convinced you in the end, but to be honest I think it's more that people were starting to agree with me about you. I have no problem with people changing their minds. I don't like how fast and how drastically yours changed.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 24, 2015 20:29
|
|
|
CCKeane posted:Explains our lovemaking. Will you drop an attempted vote in the thread to prove you can't vote?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 24, 2015 20:36
|
|
|
##unvote ##vote CCKeane
|
|
#
¿
Aug 24, 2015 20:50
|
|
|
CCKeane posted:You're making a GHA(o)STLY mistake. It'd be a bigger mistake to let a voteless player into the lategame.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 24, 2015 20:54
|
|
|
CCKeane posted:I am being coy about details. I understand your concerns and it will not be a problem. Either you can't vote or you won't vote. I'd prefer to know which it is, at the very least.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 24, 2015 20:58
|
|
|
CCKeane posted:Big fan of leading charges on easy votes today, huh Ninth? The fact that you didn't answer my question suggests that you can vote but have chosen not to, and you don't want to come out and admit it.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 24, 2015 21:06
|
|
|
CCKeane posted:You seem pretty determined to get role details from someone who you implied was town. I haven't made any case on you yet. I've voted you and asked for clarification on why you haven't voted this game. Is it because you can't vote, or because you won't?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 25, 2015 01:10
|
|
|
How can you accuse me of avoiding culpability for my opinions when you haven't backed up a single one of yours with a vote, Keane?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 25, 2015 01:12
|
|
|
BottleKnight posted:I mean you can read my case. He looked really bad for several reasons. Obviously I could have gone back and looked at whatever case you made. I'm asking you a day later why you thought he was a good lynch.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 25, 2015 01:23
|
|
|
BottleKnight posted:This is a stupid question TNL. I thought he was a good lynch because of all the reasons in my case? I don't see how my current trait of hindsight on that lynch illuminates anything about my thought process D1. For a guy who you just said looked really bad for several reasons, you seem to have trouble paraphrasing what those reasons were.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 25, 2015 01:29
|
|
|
Basically it's "illuminating" for me to see if you can state in a sentence why you thought Gamer was worth the lynch. If you can't remember, well, it makes me think maybe your suspicion wasn't all that genuine to begin with.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 25, 2015 01:32
|
|
|
merk posted:TNL, can you analyze the Gamer lynch? That's my plan. Gamer was someone that literally was not on my radar at all on Day 1 and I still don't know how he ended up the lynch. Obviously a lot of people voted him to keep from a no lynch. BottleKnight posted:His vote on gamer to 'prod him to post' was fake content, he was more concerned in getting town reads from players than scumreads, and his responses to when he was called out for it were really really bad. Good this is what I wanted to see. Thank you.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 25, 2015 01:33
|
|
|
Hal Incandenza posted:Add me into the "not buying the ghost/can't vote" pile What's preventing you from voting? Who are you suspicious of?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 25, 2015 01:47
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 26, 2024 09:03 |
|
|
CCKeane posted:I've taken responsibility for being a motivating force on the gamer execution and I haven't walked it back. A vote isn't the end all be all, Mr. Layer. It's what distinguishes a player from a spectator.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 25, 2015 02:31
|
|