|
Nth Doctor posted:See what buying lightning cables gets you, kids? A pluses and not knowing what the gently caress. Fairly accurate.
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2015 02:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 18, 2024 10:09 |
|
|
zzyzx posted:You said it was an "odd" and "bussy" vote, and now it's "generally bad". What don't you like about it? I don't like that it was odd and bussy, bussy because it's placement in the vote order and because of the way that it's made that allows little to no culpability, if walrus had flipped town and gives you credit if he flipped scum. The junk posts are pretty much your posting outside of that post on D1. They're jokes and conversation. Had you kept that up on D2, I feel that that + your vote would allow for a comfortable vote on my part. But your play has improved and I don't think a single post/vote is strong-enough evidence.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2015 07:41
|
|
|
Wow there's a lot of new stuff since yesterday morning! Sorry I didn't check in last night as planned, didn't get back from work til about 8pm and still super busy. I'm going to read through as much as I can now during my dinner break.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2015 09:26
|
|
|
Quidnose posted:
I didn't think what he said was very strange? I know saying "I think I found a scum, and I'm going to write up a case later" isn't particularly useful but I don't understand why you would feel so strongly about it? I think maybe I'm missing something obvious here (my first game, after all) so if you would please explain for me? 
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2015 10:16
|
|
|
Re QPQ on Gamer:Quidnose posted:The messiness of this megapost feels more like scum trying hard to pin something on a buddy for cred later than it does trying to spin a web about a town member. I read this in a complete different way - I felt like QPQ was basically making a list of all the things that he could call Gamer out on without really thinking about whether all those things, together, actually point to Gamer being scum. And that made me think QPQ was more interested in pushing Gamer as hard as possible which in turn makes me think Gamer is likely town. Quidnose posted:Let's assume for a moment that Gamer IS scum and he tried to spin a web on me, as Wins pointed out - the two look pretty different, don't they? It's super easy to pretend you're town and find poo poo that a town member is doing poorly. It's way harder to actually nail your scumbuddy. I assume you're talking about the Gamer case on you here? I think it's much more likely that the differences are just from different playstyles and thought processes. Quidnose posted:His final posts have him ignoring the issue to complain about his formatting, briefly asking about the Walrus thing, trying to poke a few people about their opinion on Gamer....and then he's gone. Early vote on a potential Gamer swing and nothing else from him. And then he flips scum. CURIOUS. And this is also why I think Gamer is town - when Walrus is getting voted QPQ tries to point people towards Gamer instead.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2015 10:38
|
|
|
Quidnose posted:I don't like how little thought went into making this statement. Literally just quotes the Gamer case I ripped apart without thinking about it at all. I hope my comments above explain how I saw the QPQ case in a completely different light to you. I did think about it and just came up with a completely different read!
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2015 10:46
|
|
|
Quidnose posted:
I don't think that's very fair - I think that shows where my suspicions on Max came from and iirc in the next post I go over Max's actions and vote him.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2015 10:49
|
|
|
Quidnose posted:
Sorry - can you link where Max is being suspicious of Walrus' post? I read back and couldn't see Max stating his suspicions anywhere. Here is the link to the Walrus post. I really can't find Max talking about that post anywhere. Quidnose posted:Furthermore I have absolutely no idea how that statement is hedgey in any way. It is this part: Max posted:What are your issues with it? I had my own at the time, but I'd like to hear other people's opinions on it. Max says he had his own issues at the time - which I couldn't find - and uses "I had" which implies he no longer has issues with that post. But he has not shared his original issues or why they are no longer issues. That is what I found hedgy.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2015 11:01
|
|
|
Quidnose posted:Quin's points on Max not voting Walrus are good catches but I'm not loath to belive them because he completely loses me in the end here: Sorry, I could definitely have explained my thoughts better there. Let me try again. Max's vote was on Gamer for most of the day. It was based only on this post: Gamerofthegame posted:alright so the last two games i scumhunted with perfect accuracy This is the Walrus post for comparison: WalrusWhiskers posted:Yea to be honest it's pretty clear what Max is implying. CCKeane is being weird by being insistent that he has to phrase it a certain way, which kind of annoys me. I find the Walrus post much more scummy than the Gamer one. If it was me I would have moved my vote to Walrus because I find the Walrus post much worse. But (as far as I can see) he does not make any comment on that Walrus post - you said above that Max said he found it suspicious but once again I really can't see it. When merk brings attention back to that post, he says this: Max posted:What are your issues with it? I had my own at the time, but I'd like to hear other people's opinions on it. As I explained above I find this very hedgy. It also sounds like he's fishing for people's reasons so he can defend Walrus (maybe I'm reading way too much into this one though). When it's obvious a lot of people find the Walrus post scummy, he posts this "I agree" but still doesn't vote him. Max posted:I buy the Walrus Argument too. He kinda contributed during our big fight on Friday without actually like, contributing. If I really "bought" the Walrus argument, there would be no way I'd still keep my vote on Gamer's setup speculation post compared to the Walrus post. This is what I found really suspicious. I hope that makes it clearer Quidnose
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2015 11:13
|
|
|
Amoeba102 posted:He probably would have harped on about it if it were an early scum bus. He would have done the same thing. But he'd do the same thing as town. It's a null tell. You're making way too much out of it. Quidnose posted:Yeah I figured that was what you would say, just wanted to see how you would respond if I pushed a little. Quidnose - you've said you wanted to see how people respond to your prods twice now. It's probably really obvious for you but since I haven't played before and don't know anyone could you please explain what you are getting out of these responses? Did you expect Amoeba to say that as town or as scum? Thanks!
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2015 11:16
|
|
|
fiery_valkyrie posted:Ok, so if you claim you were looking for a reaction, what are your conclusions? My conclusion is that neither you or zzyzx actually looked at the vote counts or context to my post
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2015 11:43
|
|
|
WHICH WAY MADNESS posted:After doing my reread, I am going to ##vote Quinquereme, I don't like how you've basically attached yourself to merk's hip. You parrot his suspicion of walrus, and you go out of your way to say merk is practically confirmed town because walrus wanted merk lynched. posting. I don't think I said "practically confirmed town" at all: Quinquereme posted:Considering Walrus posted this I feel pretty good about merk and wins. I know it's possible merk was bussing Walrus and Walrus was distancing them but I really think if they were in it together Walrus would have put more effort into his own defense to make merk look even better by comparison. Instead he just points rather apathetically to merk (for obvious reasons) and wins because that was the only vote he'd made during the day: WalrusWhiskers posted:
So based on the above I don't think he was in some big plan with merk/wins and once again I feel good about them, but they are in no way confirmed in my mind. Also is there a reason you point out merk and not wins? And if you want to call agreeing with merk parroting him then sure WalrusWhiskers posted:I also don't like how you let people talk you out of your Quidnose vote. You also said that Gamer is town because QPQ cased him, and I am really uncomfortable with how easy you are clearing people as town. You are letting other people dictate your cases, and that shows you lack conviction in your posting. Of course I lack conviction - this is my first game and I have no idea what I'm doing  Everyone seems to be judging people based on meta stuff so when people who have presumably played with Quidnose a lot tell me his posting is very typical as town, I believe them.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2015 11:52
|
|
|
Spoonsy posted:I see a lot of posts from Quid overnight. A bunch of them are short. I'm still not completely comfortable with the timing thing of yesterday given the Walrus flip. Can you explain what the timing thing is? I don't get it sorry
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2015 11:58
|
|
|
Quinquereme posted:When it's obvious a lot of people find the Walrus post scummy, he posts this "I agree" but still doesn't vote him. I think you're missing the first time I called out Walrus because it's buried in between the Keane fight. Max posted:For the record: This was way before anyone else had been mentioning him. If you find that argument thin, it's because I was in the middle of a spat with Keane and wasn't devoting much time to anything else. After that ended I was burnt out and was only just checking in to the thread for the rest of day 1. Either way, I never had a problem with the Walrus vote.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2015 12:12
|
|
|
Quinquereme posted:Can you explain what the timing thing is? I don't get it sorry It's all bit too convoluted to be taken seriously in my opinion. I think the idea is that the series of events that took place in regards to merk's posting and walrus and all that seemed coordinated. Personally I think I'm going to go through QPQ's posts and see if I can't get something out of that. The only other Walrus votes that stood out to me were Gamer's and Quid's. Max pointed out that the former seemed to be the most likely target for the scum to push to avoid getting their man killed and I think that makes some sense given QPQ's vote. The other push they may have made would've been Wins. Still the final vote count will be the 2nd lead I look into after QPQ's posts. As for Quid, he strikes me as a hedgehog, spikes pointing out everywhere incapable of trusting anyone. I don't think he's scum.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2015 12:15
|
|
|
Squiggly posted:SORRY MY SCUMDAR IS TOO GOOD Who is scum now? Why is that person scum?
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2015 14:43
|
|
|
Quinquereme posted:
I didn't say anything about wins because I don't trust him. And it's day two, so my newbie policy is now expired for you. A lesson you need to learn is to make your case and stick to it. What if Quidnose were scum and the people backing him up were scum too.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2015 15:59
|
|
|
Hal Incandenza posted:Spoonsy's only other real post this game, checks in to say "well yeah, I did just post that to look like I was doing something" but still can't elaborate on anything or return to the people he cased earlier. I like this case ##vote Spoonsy
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2015 16:31
|
|
|
Max posted:Also, Gamer pointed out something about Quid that I missed: What town doesn't immediately check who died during the night? Wouldn't a town player think to check that in case they died? The only people that can reasonably assume they are safe are scum. To make sure I'm not missing anything, your case on Quidnose is QPQ's light defense of him in response to Quinquereme's vote and then Quidnose failing to read the flips right, correct? While I think the former is a (possible) point, I don't think misreading flips is a scumtell. Or, if it is, it's a strange one because Quidnose didn't have to make it public that he missed it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2015 16:32
|
|
|
Also, Ecco told you all to say hullo and no one did
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2015 16:33
|
|
|
I'd vote Squiggly too. He is trying to sell how town he isSquiggly posted:I'll humor you: I dunno. Two of the four people I posted about are dead and flipped scum Squiggly posted:I ended the day voting quid I dunno what to tell ya man Squiggly posted:SORRY MY SCUMDAR IS TOO GOOD pretty hard. Also, I don't buy his explanation for his "vote" on gamer. He claimed to be "going for a reaction" and never gets one. If he was trying to get a reaction and got ignored, wouldn't the next idea be "try to get a reaction again"? Instead, he decides to say "I'd vote walruswhiskers" and never comes back to gamer. Even when asked about what reaction he got from it, his response is Squiggly posted:My conclusion is that neither you or zzyzx actually looked at the vote counts or context to my post His whole point for the "vote" was to (supposedly) learn more about gamer's alignment from a reaction. When the reaction didn't come, he left it alone, shrugged his shoulder, and watched the day end without trying again. The whole sequence reads more to me more like he was trying to change the direction of the vote, forgot Ecco's rule, realized that when the postcount went up, saw the writing on the wall, and paid lip-service to what was becoming the clear lynch for the day. If he thought gamer might be a badguy (which is why you'd be going after a reaction), why didn't he use the time at the end of the day to try to get some more posts out of him? His only posts after the "vote" were saying "I'd vote walrus" and then trying to give walrus more time to claim. He says he is still unsure of gamer today in his first post I quoted, so why has he not tried to get any reaction out of him since the new day has started? I think it's because he already knows what gamer's alignment is so he doesn't have a reason to actually try to get it. Actually, I've talked myself into it ##unvote ##vote Squiggly
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2015 17:11
|
|
|
chaoslord posted:
This is a solid point, and one of the reasons I'm having trouble with squiggly's explanation; the claim is that he never meant it to be a vote, but he never follows with another vote for the rest of d1. Also, the concern is partly due to how his vote seems to try to shift momentum away from Walrus - however it was intended, it appears to be a tying vote for all practical purposes. The robot (which is what everybody relies on) counted it, and each player to look at it so far has assumed it was a serious vote.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2015 17:26
|
|
|
We've had a few people express concern about Spoonsy, so I'd encourage people to have another look at this case.zzyzx posted:With Spoonsy, it's this post, mostly.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2015 17:28
|
|
|
zzyzx posted:We've had a few people express concern about Spoonsy, so I'd encourage people to have another look at this case. Sorry, been completely out of everything else - sister/roommate had medical stuff occur and I've been looking after her. Not looking to be replaced, but just letting you know
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2015 19:28
|
|
|
Quinquereme posted:I know saying "I think I found a scum, and I'm going to write up a case later" isn't particularly useful but I don't understand why you would feel so strongly about it? I think maybe I'm missing something obvious here (my first game, after all) so if you would please explain for me? It's backwards reasoning - usually you see something scummy and then see if there's a pattern, or at least that's what I do. I don't go "I am going to think this person is scum and then go find evidence to back that up." That feels like a scum mindset to me.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2015 20:27
|
|
|
Quinquereme posted:Quidnose - you've said you wanted to see how people respond to your prods twice now. It's probably really obvious for you but since I haven't played before and don't know anyone could you please explain what you are getting out of these responses? Did you expect Amoeba to say that as town or as scum? Thanks! I think I was just trying to see if Amoeba was going to come down hard one way or the other rather than saying "this is a null tell," which is what he did. Jumping on something either way with me could have spoken to him wanting to push one side for his own purposes. But also it was pretty late and I don't really remember what I was getting at 
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2015 20:29
|
|
|
zzyzx posted:With Spoonsy, it's this post, mostly. Hal Incandenza posted:Spoonsy's only other real post this game, checks in to say "well yeah, I did just post that to look like I was doing something" but still can't elaborate on anything or return to the people he cased earlier. I've been feeling my way around these cases made for Spoonsy for the last day or so. Hal's is actually what appears to have made you pull the trigger, zzyzx, but so far: you two are the only two who have taken up this vote against Spoonsy. And that appears to be largely because Spoonsy was a late-ish vote on Walrus that also showed some hesitancy to commit. The interesting thing I find is you were also not fully making a vote against Spoonsy until Hal's post, zzyzx. To me that shows just as much of the scummy behavior you and Hal see in Spoonsy.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2015 20:32
|
|
|
Do we have a deadline? I know votefinder is not reliable this game because ~Ecco~ but there's nothing there
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2015 20:33
|
|
|
EccoRaven posted:
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2015 20:34
|
|
Day 2 deadline: Friday, July 17th, ~11PM EDT. I know this is a Friday so I am fine extending it to Sunday or contracting it to Thursday depending on how fast this day goes.
|
Oh cool we have plenny of time.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2015 20:35
|
|
|
Quidnose posted:Oh cool we have plenny of time. Naw man better add a bunch of votes on me and then hammer cause you're bored. Don't try and wait for my claim either that poo poo is scummy THIS IS AN AUTOMATED RESPONSE. THIS IS A JOKE POST. ROBOTS BEWARE BEEP BOOP BEEP
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2015 20:41
|
|
|
Nth Doctor posted:I've been feeling my way around these cases made for Spoonsy for the last day or so. Hal's is actually what appears to have made you pull the trigger, zzyzx, but so far: you two are the only two who have taken up this vote against Spoonsy. That's not a bad point. Zzyzx was a little over the top talking about how townie he was earlier too for his vote yesterday which came off as a little more forced than just a joke.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2015 21:19
|
|
|
merk posted:Who is scum now? I don't think anyone is scum right now I haven't seen anything today worth calling out. I thought zzyzx was scum, until he posted and said to read his post history. Then I realized that he had posted a whole bunch. I don't really like any of the other cases I don't like you and gamer currently. Gamer...just has weird posts. Doesn't mean he's scum. As for you, your posting is just odd. But I don't get a gut feeling of you as scum. I think if anything you're anti town/3rd party. This post is actually a prime example. It's hypocritical to ask for a reason why I think someone is scum when all of your votes have come without reasons. Which is odd because it's sloppy and your gameplay is usually crisper If anything, I'd vote Spoonsy because he's lurking and scum lurk. But that's a lurker case and I don't vote for those til day 4/5 SORRY MY SCUMDAR ISNT GOING OFF
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2015 21:20
|
|
|
chaoslord posted:I'd vote Squiggly too. He is trying to sell how town he is Man that's a lot of words that essentially boil down to you writing a whole new narrative of my actions. Good thing you're not me! I'll respond briefly to my prod. No, I didn't pursue it. If a gambit fails then you give it up. I like to prod and poke and make meaningless claims. And they tend to end poorly and blow up if you stick with it. So yes, I dropped it. I didn't get a response, which is interesting in and of itself. Kinda poo poo that a bunch of you didn't read the rules and decided that I must not have either. Sorry I looked at how Ecco wanted his game played
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2015 21:27
|
|
|
I do not see how squiggly was trying to get people off of Walrus with his "hold on" post.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2015 21:30
|
|
|
zzyzx posted:This is a solid point, and one of the reasons I'm having trouble with squiggly's explanation; the claim is that he never meant it to be a vote, but he never follows with another vote for the rest of d1. So you actually read my posts. Why would I remove my vote from someone I actually thought was scum? I offered to move it to another person I thought was scum (walrus) but I made an actual case (and by case I mean somewhat substance filled post) on quidproquo. I even asked someone else to look. Could I have done more to draw attention to it? Sure. But in comparison to my gamer "vote", it's pretty clear which one I actually think is scum. I think it's probably the best post I made all of D1 and actually has content. How are people reconciling this with their other narratives? Are you just straight up ignoring it?
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2015 21:32
|
|
|
Max posted:I do not see how squiggly was trying to get people off of Walrus with his "hold on" post. It's like everyone forgot how to play mafia or something
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2015 21:34
|
|
|
Nth Doctor posted:The interesting thing I find is you were also not fully making a vote against Spoonsy until Hal's post, zzyzx. To me that shows just as much of the scummy behavior you and Hal see in Spoonsy. I was going over your posts vs Spoonsy's posts and settled on Spoonsy.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2015 21:35
|
|
|
Squiggly posted:It's like everyone forgot how to play mafia or something Apparently.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2015 21:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 18, 2024 10:09 |
|
|
Hal Incandenza posted:That's not a bad point. Zzyzx was a little over the top talking about how townie he was earlier too for his vote yesterday which came off as a little more forced than just a joke. There is nothing forced about how handsome I am. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2015 21:40
|
|