|
That's a pretty rough avatar, imgay.
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 00:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 20:30 |
|
|
Back to Quandry: I may not have been specific enough. He said: "Is this a joke?" while pushing a vote 3P agenda. Later he's on about "I doubt it was serious". Re-reading it, I'm not sure if he was intentionally pretending to not get it, or if he genuinely just didn't get it then eventually realised "oh wait, yeah it was a joke claim". I feel like it's more the former than the latter, since I don't read Quandry as so naive.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 00:31
|
|
|
Quandary posted:You hedge your bets by claiming ignorance on CPig before voting, and then jump on a joke comment and include some meta for some reason. It's a very very weak vote that you still felt the need to give yourself a way to backtrack out of. There's nothing inherently wrong with making a vote on a weaker case day 1 given we have less to go on, but giving an unrelated out on your vote is trying to take a stand while not making one simultaneously Aside from his Ernie stuff, his posts with regards to 100yrs are solid. In particular the above.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 00:37
|
|
|
Amoeba102 posted:Back to Quandry: I may not have been specific enough. He said: "Is this a joke?" while pushing a vote 3P agenda. Later he's on about "I doubt it was serious". He's rather non-committal about the whole thing, which is, again, what sparked my attention. He starts by asking if it is a joke, and then adds a post saying that "as a general rule Lynch all third parties is a good plan" (1). This post is not a commitment to the case, but advances the pressure against Ernie. After the town mood starts shifting against the initial bandwagon, he says that he will hold off on role speculation (2). Again, it's not rejecting the votes against Ernie, but it is not supporting it either.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 00:41
|
|
|
You're good to play with Amoeba, even if you kill my jokes. I'm confirming that I am confirmed masons with Ninth.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 00:42
|
|
|
CCKeane posted:You're good to play with Amoeba, even if you kill my jokes. Why would you outright claim rather than breadcrumb?
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 00:48
|
|
|
Oh, TNL never said he was confirmed masons with you. I just got joked.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 00:49
|
|
|
QuoProQuid posted:After 100 Years asked for additional examples of CapitalistPig voting for Ernie for a fake claim, I decided that it might be interesting to see whether there were any examples of this happening in their post histories. Did this post go anywhere? I see a lot of examples without a lot of alignment reads.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 00:51
|
|
|
I started writing a post about how I didn't agree with your read of Quandry and 100 Years's interactions, but after going back and rereading I'm a little more conflicted. While the claim that you can't trust someone a third of the way through D1 reads like a fairly transparent attempt to sow doubt about 100 Years's scumhunting, 100 Years response to him (1) is actually awkward and seems out of place. Quandry is doing much the same thing he accuses 100 Years of, giving himself an out by saying that "there's nothing inherently wrong with making a vote on a weaker case day 1," (2) but his critique actually isn't misplaced.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 00:52
|
|
|
Let's have some bourbon chat. Best bourbons: Jefferson's Ocean 2 Blanton's Angel's Envy Eagle Rare
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 00:53
|
|
|
CCKeane posted:You're good to play with Amoeba, even if you kill my jokes. Why would you claim this now? Also Quid that post was awesome. You and Opop are two people I am definitely not inclined to vote today. Pig looks bad to me because he was the second on Ernie, not the first as I originally thought. I'm mostly ignoring the other numerous "joke" votes. I also have some gut paranoia of Pinterest Mom that I can't explain. I'll be back later tonight to review other folks and put down an actual vote.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 00:54
|
|
|
Darn it, I meant Quo, not Quid. Sorry.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 00:55
|
|
|
Glockenapfel posted:Why would you claim this now? What do you like about the post? What do you think it says about alignment?
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 00:56
|
|
|
Glockenapfel posted:Why would you claim this now? Because I am bulletproof and so if scum try to kill me they will just waste a night kill. We've been over this.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 00:57
|
|
|
QuoProQuid posted:I started writing a post about how I didn't agree with your read of Quandry and 100 Years's interactions, but after going back and rereading I'm a little more conflicted. While the claim that you can't trust someone a third of the way through D1 reads like a fairly transparent attempt to sow doubt about 100 Years's scumhunting, 100 Years response to him (1) is actually awkward and seems out of place. Quandry is doing much the same thing he accuses 100 Years of, giving himself an out by saying that "there's nothing inherently wrong with making a vote on a weaker case day 1," (2) but his critique actually isn't misplaced. I don't see his "voting a weaker case is fine" point as him getting an out. It's him illustrating why someone finding an out is a bit too prescient.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 00:57
|
|
|
Amoeba102 posted:What I don't like about Cpig's posting the most is his Jedit vote. Yes, I know he says it's a thing he always does, but that's exactly why I don't like it. I guess because by default it's a forced joke that always triggers me. In my mind, I see someone force themselves to act like they always act so as to appear town. And if your main goal is to appear town then it's likely you're not. Pig always makes a weak push on me on Day 1 because I'm a fairly easy early game lynch. I lack intuition, which makes it tough for me to generate content until day 2 or sometimes day 3.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 00:58
|
|
|
merk posted:Did this post go anywhere? I see a lot of examples without a lot of alignment reads. I don't like CPig, but not for the reasons outlined by Ernie. CPig should be familiar with Ernie's schtick, but the examples show CPig doing the same thing repeatedly in the face of Ernie's fake claims. I'm more concerned with Capitalist Pig's dismissing content and pretending that we are still joking around. He's just latching himself to other people's content; I see him as a probable scum target for that reason. CPig is why I started looking at Quandry. I remembered Quandry jumping in to attack 100 Years's vote. After going through his content, I saw a lot of unproductive posts about general mafia theory and some jokes instead of scumhunting. I asked Amoeba for his opinion on the matter and the more I think about it, the more I like the idea of a CPig-Quandry scum team. It's probably the only strong read I have thus far.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 00:59
|
|
|
Mafia edit: I'm still not home from the gig and won't be until tomorrow evening. I'll read all those links when I get back.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 01:00
|
|
|
Jedit are you being defensive because you're scum?
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 01:01
|
|
|
Jedit posted:Pig always makes a weak push on me on Day 1 because I'm a fairly easy early game lynch. I lack intuition, which makes it tough for me to generate content until day 2 or sometimes day 3. 1) It's poor meta enforcing behaviour, which as a joke gets old. 2) It reads to me more like you are defending yourself here more than CPig.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 01:02
|
|
|
Amoeba I'M NEEDLING JEDIT HERE BACK OFF JEEZ
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 01:03
|
|
|
All right, he's yours.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 01:05
|
|
|
merk posted:What do you like about the post? What do you think it says about alignment? I like the fact that he was willing to do homework that helps out newer and lazier players like me. The results are fairly inconclusive, but the willingness to do it is towny I think.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 01:05
|
|
|
CCKeane posted:Jedit are you being defensive because you're scum? No, I'm being defensive because being lynched before I can get started is getting pretty loving tiresome. That's part of why I haven't played a game in a while. (Cue several "humour" votes including at least one scum, so I'm going to bed.)
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 01:16
|
|
|
Jedit posted:No, I'm being defensive because being lynched before I can get started is getting pretty loving tiresome. That's part of why I haven't played a game in a while. So who voting you is scum, then?
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 01:49
|
|
|
Amoeba102 posted:Quandry definitely reads like he believed Ernie's claim. But then he's all about it being faked. He seemed more into exploiting an easy vote than CPig. I'm also inclined to say Ernie is more guilty of exploiting an easy vote than CPig, but less than Quandry is. Please find my post where I believed Ernies claim for me
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 01:52
|
|
|
Believed may be too strong. You were definitely seriously considering that it could be real.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 01:53
|
|
|
Amoeba102 posted:Believed may be too strong. You were definitely seriously considering that it could be real. I'm seconding this.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 01:57
|
|
|
I have mixed feelings about Ernie's claim but i do know that we should policy lynch day one! ##unvote ##vote Cpig
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 02:02
|
|
|
Since apparently it's a big point of debate, I was unclear if the ernie claim was real and wanted to wait until he came back before making any real judgements. A few comments about the merits of lynching third parties were more academic than anything
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 02:03
|
|
|
winvirus posted:I have mixed feelings about Ernie's claim Those being...? And do you see the case against CPig as a policy lynch only?
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 02:04
|
|
|
Quandary, I think your posts on 100yrs outweigh your potentially scummy actions with regards to Ernie.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 02:06
|
|
|
QuoProQuid posted:Those being...? On the one hand I see it as a thing ernie would do for jokes but on the other it may be a scum gambit so he could go "no look I did it here too and I was town" I see it as a policy and I'm ok with that
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 02:09
|
|
|
Policy votes are bad votes. No one is going to build a case on Ernie then throw it away because "Oh that fakeclaim during jokephase means he's town". Ernie isn't arguing he is town because of his fakeclaim, so don't vote him for using spurious defenses.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 02:13
|
|
|
winvirus posted:On the one hand I see it as a thing ernie would do for jokes but on the other it may be a scum gambit so he could go "no look I did it here too and I was town" thats dumb
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 02:15
|
|
|
AWU's vote on ernie that he made during the fakeclaim and has kept haphazardly defending is really bad.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 02:16
|
|
|
Winvirus are you scum? y/n/I'm the cop
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 02:18
|
|
|
I can confirm that I am not scum.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 02:24
|
|
|
Quandary posted:AWU's vote on ernie that he made during the fakeclaim and has kept haphazardly defending is really bad. How does a scum player benefit from clinging to a case that now seems more suspicious than credible? How do you explain his confused posts after Ernie returned to the thread (1), (2)? They read to me as genuine. I'm genuinely asking. If you want to make a case, I'd be happy to read it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 03:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 20:30 |
|
|
Yah, reading AWU is weird. He starts off with a reasonable response - a joke vote. Then he walks himself into it being more of a serious vote, then it's a new reason to vote keep his vote on Ernie (Thinking that Ernie is making a BS case on CPig). It's sounds like weak justification to maintain a joke vote by turning it serious, so as to avoid having to do something else.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 03:33
|
|