|
Murmur Twin posted:I am the CS equivalent of someone walking forward into a corner with no idea how to change directions. The main vote leaders have been Winged Orpheus and Chic Trombone. You should read them if nothing else. I'm suspicious of FV and to a lesser extent KFC for reasons outlined above and I'd suggest reading them.
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 19:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 08:44 |
|
|
Asiina posted:hello uranus how are you? i'm doing pretty great, mostly. did you have a nice new year and holiday time?
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 19:38
|
|
|
Somberbrero posted:The main vote leaders have been Winged Orpheus and Chic Trombone. You should read them if nothing else. I'm suspicious of FV and to a lesser extent KFC for reasons outlined above and I'd suggest reading them. I'm not seeing either the WO or CT argument. Which means if there's anyone I need to read, it's this guy
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 19:58
|
|
|
and somber pushes fv after fv criticises the ct push curiouser
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 20:00
|
|
|
Allen Wren posted:and somber pushes fv after fv criticises the ct push Did you read FV's post? There are some pretty clear issues with it and I explained what they were. While you're here, what do you think of Rarity's case on KFC?
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 20:12
|
|
|
yeah I read fv's post. I don't think it's as big a deal as you're making it out to be rarity's case seems solid though
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 20:16
|
|
|
as solid as anything can be while we're playing chess.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 20:17
|
|
|
Allen Wren posted:yeah I read fv's post. I don't think it's as big a deal as you're making it out to be This is not at all rhetorical, can you explain the following for me? If you agree that the points against KFC are good, what do you think of FV saying that Rarity's case on him is 'lazy' and too 'by the book'? Why is voting someone based on a 'by the book' case a bad idea? Is the case on Chic Trombone bad as in wrong, or bad as in scummy? Can you explain the thought behind your answer? FV seems to think it is both and hasn't explained why.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 20:24
|
|
|
jesus christ stop crawling up my rear end chill also i'm typing with a wrist brace on so gimme a goddman minute
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 20:29
|
|
|
If you were using a goddamn mic this wouldn't be a problem. Hop on IRC if you want to type all day but I'm here to kick rear end and chew up pubbies, and I'm all out of rear end.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 20:34
|
|
|
This is not at all rhetorical, can you explain the following for me? what the gently caress does 'this is not at all rhetorical' mean speak english If you agree that the points against KFC are good, what do you think of FV saying that Rarity's case on him is 'lazy' and too 'by the book'? wait i thought fv was talking about the ct case fml Why is voting someone based on a 'by the book' case a bad idea? because shut up no seriously it's because there is gently caress all for content and basically we're still at the point where people are throwing poo poo at the wall and overreacting to it so there is no such thing as a by the book case at this point and so acting like there is one is scummy Is the case on Chic Trombone bad as in wrong, or bad as in scummy? Can you explain the thought behind your answer? FV seems to think it is both and hasn't explained why. what's the difference what you want me to read fv's mind? gently caress if I know
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 20:36
|
|
|
hello, our dearest friend winged orpheus tried to shoe-horn mafia gameplay where it doesn't belong because he felt like he had to who feels like they 'have to' add mafia discussion, most people just shoot from the hip at what they disagree with also notice how he's tried to stay under the radar by not commenting about it?
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 20:41
|
|
|
WO has been active but most of it has been game chat. That's not a criticism as it mirrors the thread as a whole. They said they haven't played SA mafia for a while. To me they are reading as someone that is trying to fit in due to following discussion but that could just be from rusty.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 20:47
|
|
|
WO has five previous games on votefinder, three years ago. maybe "a-ha, they're self-consciously faking content" isn't a great argument against them in that context.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 20:48
|
|
|
allen are you mad
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 20:58
|
|
|
uranus posted:allen are you mad Allen Wren posted:I continue to be amazed at how people read what I post as being mad or having flipped out.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 21:08
|
|
|
Allen Wren posted:This is not at all rhetorical, can you explain the following for me? It means I wanted you to actually respond, I realized while I was writing it like it could sound like I was just being a dick. Thanks for taking the time to do so. Allen Wren posted:If you agree that the points against KFC are good, what do you think of FV saying that Rarity's case on him is 'lazy' and too 'by the book'? Does this change your opinion of FV? Allen Wren posted:Why is voting someone based on a 'by the book' case a bad idea? Okay, 'by the book' is something FV said, which is why I repeatedly put it into quotation marks. Does this mean you think FV is scummy? Allen Wren posted:Is the case on Chic Trombone bad as in wrong, or bad as in scummy? Can you explain the thought behind your answer? FV seems to think it is both and hasn't explained why. yeah actually i would like you to explain what FV is thinking if you're defending the same position I think I made the difference clear earlier but the distinction between bad-wrong and bad-scummy is important because uh, it says something about alignment.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 21:10
|
|
|
if you want to not sound mad, i suggest not using mad sounding words like 'gently caress' and italics make you look like youre yelling, not whispering
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 21:15
|
|
|
Quidnose is afk in spawn (not posting). Someone jump on their head.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 21:25
|
|
|
Somberbrero posted:I mean, day one, if someone does something textbook scummy, it's a bad idea to lynch them because _______? Help me fill in the blank here. Because I think "textbook scummy" doesn't net us scum much these days. Your phrase "textbook scummy" is probably a better phrase than"by the book" but I think we mean similar things. It's one of those things the community has turned into a definitive scum call when I believe it isn't. Rarity made a easy case, people make the whole "saying stuff without advancing an opinion is scum" case regularly and I don't think it's the scum gotcha that Rarity makes it out to be, at least not on D1. (A pattern of doing it across multiple days is a different matter.) In my opinion is it an easy thing to call out. It's lazy. I know from experience that Rarity makes the easy cases as scum (sorry Rarity, no offense intended). So I'm suspicious of it and I pointed it out.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 21:26
|
|
|
uranus posted:if you want to not sound mad, i suggest not using mad sounding words like 'gently caress' and italics make you look like youre yelling, not whispering I'm not yelling, I'm just making sure you can hear me this is how I always sound though to be fair, I don't think you've ever seen me play before? also the painkillers kicked in, so the brace is off and I can use my shift key if I feel like it so I'll have something like actual analysis never after lunch
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 21:40
|
|
|
basically I don't feel the onus is on me to not say gently caress so that I look more town or less mad or whatever I mean what kind of fuckin' bullshit is that
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 21:43
|
|
|
Valk, I am not sure I see what is so scummy about an easy case. Yeah, opportunism is a thing sometimes, but it's very situational and I don't see it here. I also think that characterizing Rarity's vote as lazy and then making an alignment call based on a perceived meta for her is wrong, at best.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 21:45
|
|
|
Allen Wren posted:basically I don't feel the onus is on me to not say gently caress so that I look more town or less mad or whatever I mean what kind of fuckin' bullshit is that You would look less scummy if you stopped freaking out and actually read the last couple pages.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 21:47
|
|
|
Somberbrero posted:Valk, I am not sure I see what is so scummy about an easy case. Yeah, opportunism is a thing sometimes, but it's very situational and I don't see it here. I also think that characterizing Rarity's vote as lazy and then making an alignment call based on a perceived meta for her is wrong, at best. Except I'm not sure she is scum. I'll be looking at her later posts with interest, but it's not enough to make me want to vote her now.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 22:00
|
|
|
Your Personal Muse posted:Amoeba, who are the scum? gently caress if I know.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 22:02
|
|
|
I don't think much of the case on CT either. I haven't played many games with her(?) but I've read a few I haven't played and she strikes me as just a genuinely nice person. The comment to Winged Orpheus feels to me more like a nice person trying to help someone out than a scummy non-opinion
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 22:03
|
|
|
its ok allen im not even readng your posts
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 22:07
|
|
|
or anyone elses
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 22:07
|
|
|
im just here to hang out and have fun
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 22:08
|
|
|
Somberbrero posted:You would look less scummy if you stopped freaking out and actually read the last couple pages. man have you ever seen freaking out this is not it
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 22:11
|
|
|
also I said after lunch my eggs are almost done boiling
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 22:11
|
|
|
fiery_valkyrie posted:I don't think much of the case on CT either. I haven't played many games with her(?) but I've read a few I haven't played and she strikes me as just a genuinely nice person. The comment to Winged Orpheus feels to me more like a nice person trying to help someone out than a scummy non-opinion I could agree with that but the timing in particular is odd. She acknowledges that Orpheus made a scummy/bad post, but it might look opportunistic to hop on at that juncture so she doesn't lay down a vote. I don't particularly like meta calls and it seems like that's most of your base here so I'm not convinced.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 22:14
|
|
|
Somberbrero posted:I could agree with that but the timing in particular is odd. She acknowledges that Orpheus made a scummy/bad post, but it might look opportunistic to hop on at that juncture so she doesn't lay down a vote. I don't particularly like meta calls and it seems like that's most of your base here so I'm not convinced. Were both interpreting CT's post. Your interpretation is that she is trying to avoid looking opportunistic. Mine is that she's just being nice. You are saying that my position is based on meta, therefore not convincing. What is your interpretation based on, other than your reading between the lines to determine CT's intent? Why should I find your position more convincing?
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 22:27
|
|
|
Somberbrero posted:You would look less scummy if you stopped freaking out and actually read the last couple pages. Look at Stretch Armstrong here. Stretching. (about him freaking out, not about the other stuff, you're good there)
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 22:28
|
|
|
fiery_valkyrie posted:Were both interpreting CT's post. Your interpretation is that she is trying to avoid looking opportunistic. Mine is that she's just being nice. I dunno if an argument over the validity of meta-gaming mafia is really worth either of our time, but I have a lot of work I'm avoiding so why not? Reading into a player's alignment based on knowledge of their behavior in other games is super tempting. It's a way to generate content where there is none, and can be useful in particular situations. However, too often we try to apply meta arguments where they don't belong. To start with, my acceptance of a meta argument is based on my trust that you are making an accurate and unbiased read on that player. I've played a single game with Chic Trombone, you've played a few and read a few others. I have no real way to judge whether that's the case, so how can I just accept your read? I don't even particularly agree with your read on Rarity and I've played with her a bunch. There's just no reliable way to read someone without a lot of games to back up that assessment. Even then, you have to consider everything different between that game and the one you're playing. Everything. I've been in games where I've been called out for not playing like myself due to personal poo poo. I wouldn't trust myself to read you and I've watched and played over at least a dozen games with you. As to why you should find my argument more reasonable, there's a reason some behavior is generally considered scummy. There are overarching trends in scum behavior because, at some point, the mafia have to lie. Newer players are especially cautious about plays that appear overeager or aggressive, I'm seeing that caution here.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 22:42
|
|
|
uranus posted:whats up kfc, have any good whisk(e)y lately? Highland park Dark Origins is pretty cool if you like sherried stuff and don't mind trying a wonky NAS bottle. Rarity or anyone else who's thinking about voting me, at least consider the merit of the WO case. I'd agree with somber against lynching a high activity poster early but there hasn't been any useful activity yet.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 22:53
|
|
|
KhyrosFinalCut posted:Highland park Dark Origins is pretty cool if you like sherried stuff and don't mind trying a wonky NAS bottle. The dude has five games. Newbie policy aside, I would pretty much expect him to make scummy posts and I don't think we'll hit scum. Regardless, it's not what you did as much as how you did it. I don't like the wording of your votepost or the leadup to it at all.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 22:57
|
|
|
so it turns out im actually the bomb
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 23:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 08:44 |
|
|
Somberbrero posted:As to why you should find my argument more reasonable, there's a reason some behavior is generally considered scummy. There are overarching trends in scum behavior because, at some point, the mafia have to lie. Newer players are especially cautious about plays that appear overeager or aggressive, I'm seeing that caution here. There is also a reason why we give newbie players a pass in their first game and that's because what we have determined to be "scummy" behaviour is common behaviour in newbies. Your opinion is based on a "newbie scum" meta. I think it as valid/not valid as mine.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 23:10
|
|