|
Basically, Ernie is my first choice but I'm not entirely unreasonable. I know you want me to get back onto Somber. Reiterate a case, succintly, in a single post. If you want it work for it, but make it fresh without linking back to previous cases you've made.
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 00:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 06:41 |
|
|
You can use the same reasoning by the way, just rewrite it out. It's a weird thing, but a fresh succinct post helps me re-evaluate things. Re-reading the thread bogs me down.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 00:30
|
|
|
Amoeba102 posted:Basically, Ernie is my first choice but I'm not entirely unreasonable. so you're being unreasonable in voting for me? why is this sentence phrased this way?
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 00:30
|
|
|
Why would you interpret it that way. I'm not unreasonable so as to stick my vote on you in the face of not reaching a majority.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 00:32
|
|
|
Amoeba102 posted:Why would you interpret it that way. I'm not unreasonable so as to stick my vote on you in the face of not reaching a majority. no you said you're not entirely unreasonable what part of your voting me is unreasonable, in that not moving your vote off is entirely unreasonable?
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 00:33
|
|
|
i feel like mills making this argument but god drat if it isn't a good argument
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 00:33
|
|
|
...or he is trying to say he has his vote on you but he's not unwilling to change it to someone else.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 00:36
|
|
|
Met posted:...or he is trying to say he has his vote on you but he's not unwilling to change it to someone else. yes i get that part so the sentence should be 'yeah, i'd like ernie dead first, but i'm not unreasonable, i'll switch if necessary' why is the 'entirely' in there? it strikes me as off, like when people say 'if i'm going to be honest' - like aren't you supposed to be honest?
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 00:37
|
|
|
I'm not entirely unreasonable in the context of The Ram asking me who else I would vote for. The implication is that I would move my vote given the appropriate motivation - such as a compelling case or say a real possibility of us failing to reach a majority. You're approaching this in a way to to make it seem like I'm saying my vote for you is unreasonable and hence invalidate my vote.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 00:38
|
|
|
Ernie. posted:yes i get that part Because it's the way I talk.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 00:39
|
|
|
Ernie, you're looking to make something out of nothing.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 00:39
|
|
|
Amoeba102 posted:Ernie, you're looking to make something out of nothing. it's a distinction nonetheless, i wasn't kidding when i said i felt like mills for a moment that said - anonnarc's newbie armor expired the minute she signed up for multiple games and my argument against her has nothing to do with newbie tells - show me what part of what i said against her is a common newbie thing
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 00:40
|
|
|
Amoeba102 posted:Ernie, you're looking to make something out of nothing. I was just coming by to say, yes, this. Chill bro, relax and have some drinks and we will plorp the scum together.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 00:41
|
|
|
Signing up for multiple games doesn't expire newbie armour to me. I'd wait for their conclusion or a reasonable amount of time to pass. Some people go in with both feet and get in over their head. It doesn't mean they'll suddenly start playing like a vet. Your case was that AnonNarc was only showing up to post stuff people agree with - or have already agreed with. This is generally a sign of having not many opinions of their own - which is a thing that happens with new players.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 00:45
|
|
|
CapitalistPig posted:I was just coming by to say, yes, this. Amen brother, let's git those commie scum!
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 00:47
|
|
|
Amoeba102 posted:Signing up for multiple games doesn't expire newbie armour to me. I'd wait for their conclusion or a reasonable amount of time to pass. Some people go in with both feet and get in over their head. It doesn't mean they'll suddenly start playing like a vet. i guess we disagree then, i generally find self-conscious newbie play either causes someone to stir up the thread with a bunch of off-sounding posts, or to go completely quiet. participating just enough to not fade into the background and only agreeing with the majority isn't newbie-typical play.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 00:47
|
|
|
nah no scum slip from amoeba I think that's dumb re: somber, hmmm basically I keep calling him stupid but I suspect he might be disingenuous and a scum
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 00:48
|
|
|
Ernie. posted:i guess we disagree then, i generally find self-conscious newbie play either causes someone to stir up the thread with a bunch of off-sounding posts, or to go completely quiet. participating just enough to not fade into the background and only agreeing with the majority isn't newbie-typical play. New players can all have their different quirks. Some go awkward some go quiet. I also find they are impressionable and take on others opinions pretty readily. Which is natural since you expect more experienced players to know what they are doing. (Then later on they learn we all suck at mafia) So you get new players agreeing with thread consensus. This isn't a truism though and some are head strong etc etc. Basically, AnonNArc is still new and if you're going for her then fine. I don't like it. Who else would you vote for, though?
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 00:52
|
|
|
TheRam posted:nah no scum slip from amoeba I think that's dumb How does the part of his play you've been ignoring change things for you? Specifically, Somber trying to clear themselves in a way that conventionally wouldn't clear scum at all.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 00:54
|
|
|
Everyone should probably just stop voting for somber and vote for narc yo.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 00:55
|
|
|
Amoeba102 posted:Basically, AnonNArc is still new and if you're going for her then fine. I don't like it. Who else would you vote for, though? lumpen and only lumpen, i am entirely unreasonable
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 00:55
|
|
|
Any reasons for Lumpen?
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 00:56
|
|
|
he jumped on numerrik because numerrik was being confrontational it came off to me as something lumpen would do because he misread the momentum of the thread rather than something lumpen would actually believe he should vote someone over
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 00:57
|
|
|
Amoeba102 posted:How does the part of his play you've been ignoring change things for you? Specifically, Somber trying to clear themselves in a way that conventionally wouldn't clear scum at all. I didn't ignore that. I said it's the only thing in his favour and I don't think it's enough. I want to see Somber's flip and move on from there.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 00:58
|
|
|
I'm playing Smash 4 atm, I'll try to final check on Somber soon.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 00:58
|
|
|
TheRam posted:I didn't ignore that. I said it's the only thing in his favour and I don't think it's enough. I want to see Somber's flip and move on from there. Must have misread what you said then.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 01:01
|
|
|
TheRam posted:This is true, I'm mostly ignoring it because of everything else to do with Somb. Right, just a figure of speech.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 01:02
|
|
|
Ernie. posted:he jumped on numerrik because numerrik was being confrontational I don't think it was for being confrontational, seemed like it was a Harold Krell Joke thing. Who the hell is Krell anyway? But you're right, it definitely feels out of place.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 01:04
|
|
|
Amoeba102 posted:Who the hell is Krell anyway? This guy. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 01:12
|
|
|
So... 45 minutes to go. Votecount for Day 1   Somberbrero (4): Somberbrero, Rurea, AnonymousNarcotics (4): Poison Mushroom, numerrik (3): Lumpen, Ernie. (2): CapitalistPig, TheRam, Rurea, Murmur Twin, AnonymousNarcotics, CapitalistPig (1): Poison Mushroom, Ernie., MC Eating Disorder (0): Amoeba102, TheRam, numerrik, Rurea, Lumpen, AnonymousNarcotics, TheRam (0): Somberbrero, MC Eating Disorder, Rurea (0): Poison Mushroom, Lumpen (0): Poison Mushroom, merk (0): Murmur Twin, Amoeba102 (0): Rurea, Poison Mushroom (0): Rurea, Not Voting (1): Hal IncandenzaWith 15 alive, it's 8 votes to lynch. The current deadline is March 12th, 2015 at 9 p.m. EDT -- that's in about 46 minutes.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 01:13
|
|
|
Yeah, but what did they do and why would Lumpen make that joke? It is important to play to understand how disjointed Lumpen's play was.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 01:15
|
|
|
i really don't think it's somber, folks is it plurality or majority in this game?
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 01:15
|
|
|
I'm not at all confident about this. ###vote narcotics
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 01:15
|
|
|
Majority.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 01:15
|
|
|
Somberbrero posted:I'm not at all confident about this. Over hashing.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 01:16
|
|
|
Ernie. posted:i really don't think it's somber, folks Majority
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 01:16
|
|
|
Somberbrero posted:I'm not at all confident about this. are you more confident about yousrelf? because why would you make this post when your vote is obviously self-preservation jesus
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 01:19
|
|
|
numerrik posted:Majority thanks, krell or not
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 01:19
|
|
|
##vote anon It's funny to ride the bandwagon y'all
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 01:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 06:41 |
|
|
Someone explain Krell to me please.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 01:20
|
|