|
OmegaGoo posted:So it takes someone other than me asking you to justify your vote to justify your vote? That's obnoxious and doesn't help anyone but yourself. I'd actually point out that my refusal generated further points against you, in provoking you into making the OMGUS vote and continued case, so yes it served a purpose further fermented my opinion of you as scum. So far the case you are putting against me being scum is that I am scummy, and I will throw the same to you: explain your vote. You also can't use anything that was posted after your vote, that would be justifying your vote after the fact, so my interactions with birdstrike are irrelevant. Why am I scummy enough to vote? Or don't, I'm not your mom, I'm not too invested.
|
# ? Jul 23, 2015 06:02 |
|
|
# ? Apr 25, 2024 18:34 |
|
TMMadman posted:Can I love the thrill of battle? You can love whatever you want, I'm not your boss, I don't care what you do.
|
# ? Jul 23, 2015 06:03 |
|
My phone autocorrected cemented into fermented, which I kind of like better.
|
# ? Jul 23, 2015 06:05 |
|
ok I am being Decisive. ##vote goooooo
|
# ? Jul 23, 2015 06:05 |
|
CCKeane posted:Why am I scummy enough to vote? I voted you for three reasons: 1) You weren't really posting anything that looked like content. 2) You voted me without interacting with me or even mentioning me at any point except CCKeane posted:Goo are you scum? Which had nothing to do with anything I had been talking about, since I was talking about my ROLE INTERACTIONS, which, of course, have earned me the Hated status. You think I'd be willing to risk that status if I was scum? 3) You blatantly shut down my questioning about your vote. I had no interest in voting you until you decided that you weren't going to interact with me further until I did.
|
# ? Jul 23, 2015 06:12 |
|
You don't need to interact with somebody to say if they are scum or not, so those points all seem pretty silly. If I was amused by silly things I might chortle.
|
# ? Jul 23, 2015 06:14 |
|
EccoRaven posted:if you disagree say so. You know I actually do. Another thing which pings me is the fixation on the behaviour of people in the challenge, which is a convenient way to have game related discussions without scum hunting.
|
# ? Jul 23, 2015 06:14 |
|
Goo you also never answered my question when I asked if you were scum, I imagine some people (not myself) would find that very upsetting. Not even acknowledging somebody asking you a direct question, for shame.
|
# ? Jul 23, 2015 06:16 |
|
CCKeane posted:You don't need to interact with somebody to say if they are scum or not, so those points all seem pretty silly. If I was amused by silly things I might chortle. Noted. I'll keep that in mind for future games. Birdstrike posted:You know I actually do. *sigh* It's more relevant to my role mechanics than anything else that has happened this game, so I apologize for fixating on something I get to play with.
|
# ? Jul 23, 2015 06:17 |
|
CCKeane posted:Goo you also never answered my question when I asked if you were scum, I imagine some people (not myself) would find that very upsetting. I'm not scum.
|
# ? Jul 23, 2015 06:17 |
|
OmegaGoo posted:I'm not scum. I actually do appreciate this, thank you.
|
# ? Jul 23, 2015 06:20 |
|
Segur thinks the gambler should live for today. I have to agree that it seems to be weird to be fixating on Goo because it seems like whatever he is has something to do with the challenges.While it's certainly possibly that Goo is scum, I'm willing to let it play out for another day to see what happens to him after the next challenge. Or he he dies in the night because the scum don't want to see if something happens. Who else do you think is scummy Keane?
|
# ? Jul 23, 2015 06:29 |
|
I think it's a little unfair to bash Goo for focusing on the challenge considering it's his flavor and people asked him about it.
|
# ? Jul 23, 2015 07:14 |
|
OmegaGoo posted:I voted you for three reasons: Points one and two make enough sense, but three... They explained why they voted so it doesn't work. I will say, I get the feeling at times that goo posts in a way that is similar to me, I think they are more likely to just spout off ideas more than strategically plan their posts out, so some of the things you point at as questionable, I don't know if i agree with. I realize this suggests that I am in kahoots with goo, but I'm not. If we had secret dealings, they would have known my intentions in the challenge before I went into it, I would have suggested they bet on somebody other than me, and ended up hated as a result. Just a heads up, I will be gone for most of the day, I am helping interview people for jobs at my school, but I will be around well in time for deadline.
|
# ? Jul 23, 2015 11:40 |
|
King Burgundy posted:Interesting. And you feel the same way after my most recent posts on the subject? Yeah, I still do. Your posts build pressure on Murmur without putting forth reasonable effort to understand her motivations. What, for example, does Murmur gain through "a dishonest interpretation" of the votes against her (1) (2). In what way does that benefit scum? It might be weird, but I cannot fathom how "dishonest interpretation" of that incident is helpful. It's taking anti-liar policy to an extreme. You engage in a similarly thoughtless attack later on, when you discuss Murmur's motivations for voting you (3). It is not contradictory to accuse you of blindly supported a bad case (4) and saying that you supported a case without reading it (5). Based on her clarification (6), Murmur's meaning seems pretty straightforward: Her case was never intended to be serious, and if you thought it was a good case then you clearly never read it. "Flailing" might not be the best word to use, but I do think you are being exploitative and I'm still struggling to explain why you are caught on a hella dumb flavor case against Keane (7). OmegaGoo posted:Yeah, so I'd vote for Yuming, Merk, or Garth, just based on amount of content. (Yeah yeah, replacements and such, but still). Yuming is an extremely low content poster, regardless of alignment. Know nothing about Garth, but I assume he's a newbie player. Merk typically does a bunch of weird flavor stuff D1 before swinging back around and playing for reals. Nothing about his posts thus far ring as off to me. Also, lurker votes are baaaaaaaad. Roydrowsy posted:damnit i typed a response and it deleted itself. did you just confess to posting just so that you could have a higher post count and now that you've chided me for not understanding your positions, would you please tell me your positions because my previous post about not understanding your positions was intended to get you to explain those positions, not explain to me that you can explain those positions. thx
|
# ? Jul 23, 2015 13:03 |
|
I can see situations where something like Murmur's gambit would be useful. For example if you have an investigation result to clear a scummy-looking town, you might build a case on them and see who follows with the intent of exposing a scum or two. One situation where this absolutely doesn't work is D1 so I think the shame rests with MurmurTwin most of all.
|
# ? Jul 23, 2015 13:22 |
|
Good morning all!Birdstrike posted:I can see situations where something like Murmur's gambit would be useful. For example if you have an investigation result to clear a scummy-looking town, you might build a case on them and see who follows with the intent of exposing a scum or two. When you say "absolutely doesn't work", what do you think my intent was in making the case in the first place?
|
# ? Jul 23, 2015 13:39 |
|
Murmur Twin posted:Good morning all! I have no idea. It doesn't strike me as scummy in itself, I just think that turning around at people and saying "ha ha you fell for my fake case" without knowing whether or not that case was correct or not is absurd. At the time you posted you couldn't have evidence that Keane isn't scum. The exercise might have had value in showing who would follow bad cases, but it doesn't support any conclusions as to alignment. Sorry that's wordier than I hoped I'm tired and about to sleep, be back in a few hours.
|
# ? Jul 23, 2015 13:53 |
|
Birdstrike posted:I have no idea. It doesn't strike me as scummy in itself, I just think that turning around at people and saying "ha ha you fell for my fake case" without knowing whether or not that case was correct or not is absurd. She doesn't need to know my alignment to show who is willing to follow a bad case. You can also get information based on this by building relationships independent of meaningful persuasion. Or something like that, I don't know.
|
# ? Jul 23, 2015 14:16 |
|
OmegaGoo posted:Trying to keep 16 different people's posts straight has been rather difficult. This post feels scummy to me: (a) the actual scum calls on Keane and PMom aren't explained, and are kind of tacked onto the end of (b) saying Opop is scummy, and then calling him (and me) null-lean-town (c) saying KB is town (which, as mentioned before, I am inherently suspicious of) (d) reiterating/asking questions to Roy/TMM that don't really have anything to do with scumhunting (to me it's natural that people would try and go for items/victory in the challenge regardless of flavor/alignment) Goo: Why PMom and why not Opop for scum? Take me through the evolution on your reads there.
|
# ? Jul 23, 2015 14:17 |
|
A major component of day one is forcing content and forcing opinions, so that was accomplished at least. Overall I liked the move.
|
# ? Jul 23, 2015 14:17 |
|
lCCKeane posted:Overall I liked the move. Gotcha! I knew you had a heart in there.
|
# ? Jul 23, 2015 14:22 |
|
Murmur Twin posted:l I have the heart of a child. I keep it in my desk at home.
|
# ? Jul 23, 2015 14:23 |
|
Birdstrike posted:I have no idea. It doesn't strike me as scummy in itself, I just think that turning around at people and saying "ha ha you fell for my fake case" without knowing whether or not that case was correct or not is absurd. Basically, I felt that we were stuck in jokephase/challenge discussion and so I threw out a case to get Mafia-ing started. That's really all my intent was when I made it.
|
# ? Jul 23, 2015 14:30 |
|
King Burgundy posted:(a) Keane lying about being apathetic is scummy because it allows him to float through the thread without putting forth any opinions on scum, making cases, etc. It was not a joke vote, but I can see why someone would think it was. Your case was a wordier version of this, thus I agreed with it. --- I should point out here that Keane has started engaging with the thread and putting forth opinions, so this is now moot. Ignoring that last quote that I changed, you read: MT's initial case on Keane posted:I hope the first mod challenge is erotic massage, since I don't care about Exakt's strange smells. and thought that constituted proof that Keane isn't actually apathetic?
|
# ? Jul 23, 2015 14:44 |
|
LISTEN BROTHER A VOTE FOR THE MERKSTER IS A VOTE FOR YOUR PAIN *stares into camera*
|
# ? Jul 23, 2015 14:48 |
|
merk posted:LISTEN BROTHER https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GGwe0XCo4Sw Dare I ask for game-related opinions?
|
# ? Jul 23, 2015 14:53 |
|
|
# ? Jul 23, 2015 14:57 |
|
Wouldn't be opposed.
|
# ? Jul 23, 2015 14:59 |
|
QuoProQuid posted:
Why do you think lurker votes are bad?
|
# ? Jul 23, 2015 15:05 |
|
Also who is new this game?
|
# ? Jul 23, 2015 15:54 |
|
I haven't seen this Merk guy before but other than him, who is new?
|
# ? Jul 23, 2015 15:54 |
|
This is my second game of forum Mafia. I've played a fair bit of IRL werewolf.
|
# ? Jul 23, 2015 16:05 |
|
CCKeane posted:Also who is new this game? This is only my only my fourth game of Mafia ever.
|
# ? Jul 23, 2015 16:07 |
|
garthoneeye posted:This is my second game of forum Mafia. I've played a fair bit of IRL werewolf. So far I like your posting and hope to see more of it
|
# ? Jul 23, 2015 16:10 |
|
I am so honored that you made this for me <3
|
# ? Jul 23, 2015 16:16 |
|
garthoneeye posted:This is my second game of forum Mafia. I've played a fair bit of IRL werewolf. WOLFY WOLFY WOLFY WOLFY WOLFY BROTHER
|
# ? Jul 23, 2015 17:26 |
|
Murmur Twin posted:This post feels scummy to me: So now that I'm less frustrated by my inability to post properly, let me post something that probably isn't going to help my case any. 1) This is my 3rd (2nd really. WIFOA doesn't count) game on SA. Apparently I'm out of practice from my previous experience. 2) My logic is inconsistent, but goes something like this: "My read on this guy is X, but I'm terrible at reading, so I must be wrong. Therefore, they are actually Y." Again, that logic has been used inconsistently without me noticing until now. 3) No matter what I do at this point, I am going to look like I am waffling on my opinions, and that's my own drat fault for not thinking things through. 4) I have explained my stance on Keane. Apparently that's a "silly" case. My case on Pmom is approximately the same. Apparently not explaining a vote isn't inherently scummy, though, so perhaps I am wrong. 5) Your case on KingB sucks for D1. Again, I could be wrong, since I appear to always be wrong. 6) To be fair, (d) is rather important, but still got me a bunch of relevant info for my role, rather than for town. I do apologize for focusing on the wrong things, though.
|
# ? Jul 23, 2015 17:38 |
|
Hey everyone, just a reminder that deadline is in a little under twelve hours. I'd like to see everyone have at least twenty posts, or an equivalent amount of content, by that time. Happy murdering! Votecount for Day 1 Roydrowsy (2): TMMadman, EccoRaven, EccoRaven (2): Birdstrike, OmegaGoo (2): Roydrowsy, CCKeane, Opopanax (1): merk, EccoRaven, King Burgundy (1): Murmur Twin Pinterest Mom (1): Opopanax AnonymousNarcotics (1): Pinterest Mom, EccoRaven, Murmur Twin (1): Pinterest Mom, CapitalistPig, CCKeane (1): King Burgundy, Murmur Twin, imgay (0): Birdstrike, CapitalistPig (0): EccoRaven, merk (0): EccoRaven, Opopanax, yuming (0): CapitalistPig, Not Voting (5): AnonymousNarcotics, Birdstrike, garthoneeye, Roydrowsy, TMMadman With 17 alive, it's 9 votes to lynch. The current deadline is July 24th, 2015 at midnight EDT -- that's in about 11 hours, 23 minutes.
|
# ? Jul 23, 2015 17:39 |
|
|
# ? Apr 25, 2024 18:34 |
|
2) My logic is inconsistent, but goes something like this: "My read on this guy is X, but I'm terrible at reading, so I must be wrong. Therefore, they are actually Y." Again, that logic has been used inconsistently without me noticing until now. Can you explain this a bit more? It is pretty confusing, and I tend to quickly lose interest in things I find confusing.
|
# ? Jul 23, 2015 17:41 |