|
So Gamer doesn't like this post by Max:Gamerofthegame posted:
Changes his mind shortly afterwards and goes after Keane instead: Gamerofthegame posted:Hmm... re-reading. (I just want to point out here he actually asks "why does rolefishing matter?" [my emphasis]) And when WHICH WAY MADNESS asks about the unvote: Gamerofthegame posted:
What does this mean? He does explain his reasoning later: Gamerofthegame posted:... However, in re-reading it Max came across far more frustrated then anything else, with Keane pushing an angle that was weird to me and felt somewhat forced. Both feel kinda suspicious to me now for differing, yet the few that jumped on his dick (Quo!) seem a lot more scummy because they saddled up with Keane and push the vote with him for a quick D1. but I am very confused by the gambit comment?
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 02:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 23:04 |
|
|
Why does it matter was referencing his defensive insistence, not the rolefishing comment. I don't think what amounts to rolefishing can be helped in that sort of situation. "Do this specific thing!" "What, why." "ROLEFISHING!" I also took Keane's push in the matter to stir up posting, getting people to bandwagon onto the argument that can then be scrutinized. Mostly because it was a dumb back and forth argument that wasn't going anywhere, yet people jumped along with it. Such as Quo! Or Wins. Hence, the gambit. The lie detector whatsit came later. That's one read I got from the push, anyway. It still all felt really weird to me, but it's why after looking it all over I'm not voting for either of them anymore. That's my beef.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 02:55
|
|
|
Quidnose has posted a lot without saying anything at all:Quidnose posted:Do I need to read this Max & Keane interchange, because this is insufferable. Quidnose posted:I just went back to try and read it and yeah, I'm not reading that. Quidnose posted:Can someone quote the weirdness with Gamer? Quidnose posted:
Quidnose posted:WHAT'S IN THE BOX Quidnose posted:##vote yuming When he voted yuming these were her only content posts: yuming posted:I don't think Max is scummy for refusing to say whatever-ever. yuming posted:It's a p rare role but I've seen it. Amoeba ran a cool game once where there was a scum faction that won by cursing certain words that would kill people when they used them. I don't understand why he would vote her for that?  Am I missing something obvious?Anyhow I really don't like his long string of "summarise things for me" and joke posts. ##vote Quidnose
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 03:16
|
|
|
Gamerofthegame posted:Why does it matter was referencing his defensive insistence, not the rolefishing comment. Ok thanks for explaining  I agree with Keane's opinion that it was rolefishing though - to me, someone not rolefishing would be more like "No I won't say it, I don't want to possibly entrap myself thanks" rather than "No, I won't say it unless you explain why it would help town".
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 03:20
|
|
|
Quidnose is a loquacious blowhard
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 03:22
|
|
|
tbh that's just kinda how quid quidsQuinquereme posted:Ok thanks for explaining In retrospect I agree, but on the flipside this already happened and then lead to further needling.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 03:23
|
|
|
merk posted:Can we go back to this post? I do agree that is incredibly waffly!
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 03:25
|
|
|
Hal Incandenza posted:Quidnose is a loquacious blowhard Gamerofthegame posted:tbh that's just kinda how quid quids Ah, that's how he always is? I thought I had something there  In that case: ##unvote ##vote WalrusWhiskers
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 03:29
|
|
|
I was voting Yuming purely to see how she would react to it, and she reacted OK, I guess. ##unvote I'm trying a new thing this game where I try to take it less seriously, I guess?
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 03:31
|
|
|
Gamerofthegame posted:In retrospect I agree, but on the flipside this already happened and then lead to further needling. I don't think so - this is where it starts: Max posted:
And the he immediately starts asking why: Max posted:Why the insistence? You know how I feel. Max posted:Why dodge the question? Max posted:Why do you need me to specifically make that statement when I've answered it in spirit. To me it seems immediately rolefishy.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 03:33
|
|
|
After reviewing his post history, I have to say that there is no sense of engagement in Gamer's posting. In fact, I see a lot of his content as useless white noise that looks helpful but adds little to discussion. His set-up post shows this issue very well. While players are deciding how to respond to Keane's request, either by obliging Keane or rejecting the matter, Gamer ignores the issue altogether. Squiggly is right to point out that speculation posts are not always made by scum (1), but I find the post suspicious based on its timing and context. Why is Gamer ignoring a discussion that has already swallowed up a quarter of a page, and why is he doing so with something as toothless as set-up speculation? He reads to me like someone that wants to distract away from the issue, but doesn't know what to distract it with. As I previously mentioned, Gamer should know better than to do this kind of thing (1), (2). That he immediately jumps back on the people who point this out "joking-not-joking" accusations (1), (2) does very little to dissuade this idea. He then lays in wait for the opportunity to attack the first person who called him out (3). It's opportunistic play, at best, and a lazy vote at worst. It's not even a suspicion that he's particularly attached to. The moment someone calls him out (4), Gamer jumps back in and unvotes because he's "Hmm... rereading" (5) It's weird, inconsistent play. I don't get the sense that he's engaged or scumhunting so much as he is trying to provide the illusion of content. There's no serious reads, except for his one post about Max that he immediately drops (6). It should be noted that Gamer does EVENTUALLY respond to gambit/lie detector/whatever (7), but that's after the whole issue has been made moot and people seem unwilling to continue discussing it (8). His latest few posts are less transparently scummy, but there is still some residual weirdness around them. His post responding to Squiggly basically says nothing but "I thought Max was weird... now I don't know! Maybe both are suspicious?" (9), which is not so much a position as it is avoiding commitment to any cause. His next post (10), which I admittedly had some trouble reading, is a defense against Quin that seems to do very little to address her objections. In short, I don't think Gamer is playing the game. I get the sense that he's posting to post and that he doesn't have any real thoughts to share. I neglected to look at him because of the Max/Keane debate, but after a second look he really does look bad. ##Vote: Gamer Quinquereme posted:(I just want to point out here he actually asks "why does rolefishing matter?" [my emphasis]) Eh. I don't like a lot of Gamer's content, but I'll defend him on this issue. The post you are quoting (11) doesn't read like a scum player caught in a bind and trying to escape. It reads like a player who genuinely doesn't understand the accusation (12). It's a null tell that indicates confusion more than anything. I don't get the sense that Gamer is trying to exploit the situation and gain information about Keane.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 04:29
|
|
|
Uuuughhh, that ended up taking me longer than I thought. Can someone briefly summarize the issue with Walrus? I don't see anything particularly egregious in the posts Quin just made about Quidnose (1). I'm never really good at meta, but there's nothing too exciting about his content imho.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 04:33
|
|
|
oh balls i messed up the numbering on my footnotes gooooooooooodddd daaaammmmmmnnnnnnn itttttt
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 04:34
|
|
|
QuoProQuid posted:oh balls i messed up the numbering on my footnotes Still, it's the effort that counts. WW is coming across with a tone that feels forced and that post that merk quoted shows someone who wants to look like they are commenting on current events without really saying anything or taking a stance
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 06:22
|
|
|
Max is still scum, I am making a very angry face about this.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 15:33
|
|
|
CCKeane posted:Max is still scum, I am making a very angry face about this. Do you think a scum player would persist so long in non-cooperation? Seems like he's drawing a lot of attention to himself.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 16:36
|
|
|
QuoProQuid posted:Do you think a scum player would persist so long in non-cooperation? Seems like he's drawing a lot of attention to himself. Yes.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 17:15
|
|
|
Iron Chef Ramen posted:ICR's Official Day 1 Votecount!!! I believe my vote on wins wasn't counted. And Puntification: you didn't unvote before voting wins, so it wasn't counted. I'm still feeling good about my vote on wins, but I could also switch to Quidnose. The way he backtracked on his vote on Yuming, without her actually really posting anything is kind of suspicious and I don't think it's cool how he was suggesting getting rid of CCKeane and Max just for being talky (here). Any content is useful. A reminder, we need 11 votes for a lynch to happen. With the amount of lurkers and non-voters in this game, this might be an issue. Yuming, zzyzx, fiery_valkerie, Squiggly, Nth Docter, a worthy uhh, Amoeba. Y'all need to come in this game to talk and vote!
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 17:30
|
|
Also make sure to ##unvote before you ##vote again.
|
QuoProQuid posted:Do you think a scum player would persist so long in non-cooperation? Seems like he's drawing a lot of attention to himself. It's certainly possible. If he did back down someone else (or maybe even you!) would come in here and point out how he backed down because he was scum who wasn't really invested in his argument or some such thing.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 17:31
|
|
|
WalrusWhiskers posted:A reminder, we need 11 votes for a lynch to happen. With the amount of lurkers and non-voters in this game, this might be an issue. Squint. Until there's a deadline there's no reason to rush the vote. You're posting has been white noise at best and more awkward then mine and I'm bad D1. Then you just jump onto a vote with someone else and nudge people to vote to finish the day, all the while looking to the lurkers. That's p fukken scummy to me. ##vote WalrusWhiskers, I'm confident in this one.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 17:59
|
|
|
Can you say why, gamer?
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 18:35
|
|
|
I am going to EAT MAX. I am going to unhinge my mighty jaw and swallow him whole.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 18:38
|
|
|
WalrusWhiskers posted:And Puntification: you didn't unvote before voting wins, so it wasn't counted. Yes you're quite right, ##unvote ##vote wins
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 18:47
|
|
|
WalrusWhiskers posted:I believe my vote on wins wasn't counted. Edited.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 20:01
|
|
|
CCKeane posted:I am going to EAT MAX. That's not very gentlemanly of you.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 20:44
|
|
|
CCKeane posted:Yes. why Hal Incandenza posted:It's certainly possible. If he did back down someone else (or maybe even you!) would come in here and point out how he backed down because he was scum who wasn't really invested in his argument or some such thing. I'm not asking if it is possible, I am asking if other people find it probable. Saying something is possible isn't really an answer at all. If Max is scum, I don't know why he would constantly refute Keane's points. You say that the alternative is having people accuse him of backing down too easily, but I don't know if anyone could argue this in good faith at any point in their six page argument (1) (2). You also aren't considering the ever popular "bug out of the thread" option. Max was never obligated to continue to responding and could have broken off their argument at any time by simply disappearing. With any hope, the tensions would have died down and the town's attention would have shifted elsewhere. It's a low risk option and seems in line with the scum's general motivation: avoiding as much attention as possible. Their argument has gone on pointlessly long. I would have preferred Max jumping on board, but Max's continued engagement with Keane just makes me agree with wins. I think he's just being stubborn.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 20:50
|
|
|
Quidnose posted:Can you say why, gamer? Pretty sure I just did. He looks scum. It's gut in a way, sure, but that post read scum more for me then Wins and Quo's similar posting, especially in conjunction with the rest of his posts. unless you mean like rush the vote or something and that's because there isn't a deadline??? We can chat all day and get more weird posts, (like that one) there's no reason to light a fire under the thread's rear end to seal the deal. To me that reads like scum happy with how the votes are going and wanting to get to night.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 21:01
|
|
|
QuoProQuid posted:why I don't stop until I am satisfied. You can refuse to engage and I will still hunt you down and impale ye upon my spear of justice.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 21:10
|
|
|
Keane the more you harp on Max the more I am thinking you are the Bad Man here. Why not just be like "yeah dude is scum for not wanting to answer my question" and move on to scumhunt more people?
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 21:14
|
|
|
Quidnose posted:Keane the more you harp on Max the more I am thinking you are the Bad Man here. Why not just be like "yeah dude is scum for not wanting to answer my question" and move on to scumhunt more people? Because I have found scum and don't see a reason to move away from it, particularly since there isn't pressure on Max from many besides myself ATM.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 21:17
|
|
|
CCKeane posted:I don't stop until I am satisfied. okay. fair enough. What do you think of the other players, like Walrus? Beyond his "maybe both sides are wrong" post (1), nothing about Walrus really sticks out to me. What are your opinions on Gamergate? His last two posts (1), (2) strike me as opportunistic.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 21:17
|
|
|
Like Max has acknowledged a huge contradiction in his posts with a "oh yeah well I guess I just wasn't thinking straight" and everybody is like "oh okay that makes sense".
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 21:18
|
|
|
Gamerofthegame posted:Squint. Also, Gamer, I literally have no idea what you mean by "jump onto a vote with someone else." Could you please clarify what you are referring to and how it is scummy?
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 21:19
|
|
|
QuoProQuid posted:okay. fair enough. Yeah I'd buy it in Walrus. I don't really have a strong opinion on Gamer.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 21:19
|
|
|
I buy the Walrus Argument too. He kinda contributed during our big fight on Friday without actually like, contributing.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 22:08
|
|
|
Keane, I would have found your Max poo poo persuasive if you stopped it about ten posts earlier. You look more fake than him since it went on for so long.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 22:11
|
|
|
merk posted:Keane, I would have found your Max poo poo persuasive if you stopped it about ten posts earlier. You look more fake than him since it went on for so long. Theb you aren't judging Max's scuminess off of his posts but someone else's, which is WERID.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 22:17
|
|
|
CCKeane posted:Theb you aren't judging Max's scuminess off of his posts but someone else's, which is WERID. There have now been a few people that have echoed merk's sentiments, so at some point you have to look yourself in the mirror.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 22:20
|
|
|
##vote Keane I just played on a scumteam with Keane and I feel like this sort of locked-on-don't-give-a-gently caress attitude is indicative of his scum game.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 22:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 23:04 |
|
|
CCKeane posted:Theb you aren't judging Max's scuminess off of his posts but someone else's, which is WERID. Thems the breaks, kid. You try to run guns with the best, but you ain't got the gumption. *spittoon*
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 22:22
|
|