|
QuoProQuid posted:I am in a rush today and unfortunately did not have a lot of time to devote to posting over the weekend. I really didn't think she was scum yesterday, hence the "uugggghhhh," and I was hoping she would post something to alleviate some issues surrounding her. She referring to Narco.
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 12:35
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 18, 2024 08:03 |
|
|
I'm cooling a little bit, I think. ##vote: Anon
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 13:02
|
|
|
CCKeane posted:I'm cooling a little bit, I think. ##unvote Man, gently caress mornings.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 13:03
|
|
|
The next challenge will start at 7 PM tonight
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 14:04
|
|
|
Votecount for Day 2  AnonymousNarcotics (5): Pinterest Mom, CCKeane, merk, EccoRaven, QuoProQuid, imgay (1): OmegaGoo Pinterest Mom (1): Opopanax Murmur Twin (1): AnonymousNarcotics QuoProQuid (1): Birdstrike merk (0): imgay, OmegaGoo (0): merk, Not Voting (6): CapitalistPig, CCKeane, garthoneeye, imgay, King Burgundy, RoydrowsyWith 15 alive, it's 8 votes to lynch. The current deadline is July 28th, 2015 at 6 p.m. EDT -- that's in about 1 day, 8 hours.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 14:04
|
|
|
AnonymousNarcotics posted:I really think you're scum just doubling down on this vote because I caught you out on your lovely tactics. We may need to agree to disagree here - given that we both seem to think the other is scum, fair enough. AnonymousNarcotics posted:You are still misrepresenting my words. Why does my case on you on D2 change whether I was scum hunting on D1? [quote="AnonymousNarcotics" post="448211963"" 4. "She All I said was that he made a scummy vote. It wasn't necessarily a hunch. Does anyone else see why it's scummy? If they do, then it's not a fabricated opinion. [/quote] That's my point - all you did was say he made a scummy vote. Does this mean you think he's scum? If so, why not ask him more questions to follow up on your lead? If not, why bring it up at all?
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 14:11
|
|
|
I'm on board for Goo now.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 14:20
|
|
|
#1 - beginning of D2, Merk will vote Narc:merk posted:I will probably vote Anarc. #2 - Merk decides the people casing ANarc are more suspicious than she is and declares he is most suspicious of Omega/PMom/Keane: merk posted:People who said the yuming case was 'pretty weak' or 'really bad' who didn't comment on the yuming case as it was gaining votes: #3 - still in D2, Merk switches back to ANarc: merk posted:##vote Narc Merk: Can you explain the evolution of your reads on Keane/PMom specifically? Also what about Narc's posts caused your switch from #2 to #3?
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 14:20
|
|
|
##vote Goo
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 14:20
|
|
|
CCKeane posted:I'm on board for Goo now. Why? Not saying you're right or wrong, just looking for the logic behind the switch.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 14:22
|
|
|
Murmur Twin posted:Why? Not saying you're right or wrong, just looking for the logic behind the switch. Combination of the item being useless for scum and the recent uptick in posting and casing I don't think Anon is cleared by any means, but I do think the preponderance of evidence weighs heavier on Goo.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 14:25
|
|
|
Murmur Twin posted:Merk: Can you explain the evolution of your reads on Keane/PMom specifically? Also what about Narc's posts caused your switch from #2 to #3? Everything I want to say is already in the thread. That sounds snarky, but it isn't meant to be. I don't have anything to save over what I've already said.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 14:28
|
|
|
I will add that Narc's posts have a constructed tone to them. The two yuming empty quoted at end of day yesterday jump out, for example, and the most recent set of posts do the same. A Narc post doesn't fit the flow of the thread... I have to stop and read them slower, if that makes any sense.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 14:30
|
|
|
I wanted to check in. The weekend has been busy so I've not had time to play much. I am going to try and find some time to read over everything and get caught up on posting.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 14:41
|
|
|
hello! sorry I was gone yesterday. I have now caught up though. here are my thoughts: 1) KEANE don't say what it does but does the thing you got do good or is its benefit more ambiguous? 2) I think from a setup perspective anon's role doesn't make much sense for scum to have. Giving out items publicly is a huge anti-scum aspect (giving to scumbuddies is really obvious so they're incentivized to give to a townie), making them challengeable is another (can't even be sure who will ultimately receive it, scum would need to not look like colluding, etc.), and if the items actually seem to have a positive effect then that's a third reason. Scum would only ever use the power to prove they have it, which is a dumb since it'd mean actually helping the town each time they used it. 3) I know I voted for anon but a lot of it from the anon-voters are posting almost like it's a sort of inevitability? or something? which makes me think she's town and scum are hoping to apathy-vote her. I dunno, something just feels really off about today.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 17:29
|
|
|
EccoRaven posted:hello! sorry I was gone yesterday. Objective good.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 17:32
|
|
|
Part of me really doesn't like that murmur dropped her case on me in a hot minute. MT you voted me yesterday but then didn't even mention me at all today? I know I wasn't around yesterday but. It just doesn't feel like you're casing sincerely. Your points against Anon in this post are mostly garbage for instance.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 17:38
|
|
|
CCKeane posted:Objective good. Keane how do you feel about murmur? ##unvote
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 17:38
|
|
|
EccoRaven posted:Keane how do you feel about murmur? I'm still more town than not on her.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 17:40
|
|
|
CCKeane posted:I'm still more town than not on her. That was grammatically ambiguous.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 17:40
|
|
|
OmegaGoo posted:That was grammatically ambiguous. I think Murmer is town at the moment. I don't think she is a good vote right now.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 17:42
|
|
|
CCKeane posted:I think Murmer is town at the moment. I don't think she is a good vote right now. See, that makes more sense.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 17:43
|
|
|
As a linguist I approve Keane's earlier post. Also pinmom is evil pass it on
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 17:47
|
|
|
EccoRaven posted:Part of me really doesn't like that murmur dropped her case on me in a hot minute. MT you voted me yesterday but then didn't even mention me at all today? I know I wasn't around yesterday but. It just doesn't feel like you're casing sincerely. Your points against Anon in this post are mostly garbage for instance. I still find you suspicious, but behind ANarc and Merk at the moment. MurmurTwin posted:My reasons for suspecting ANarc: What about the above points do you think are "garbage"? I think the last two specifically are pretty rock-solid. Note that I removed the strikethrough parts of the post I quoted to reflect my current opinions after being corrected on my wording. EccoRaven posted:3) I know I voted for anon but a lot of it from the anon-voters are posting almost like it's a sort of inevitability? or something? which makes me think she's town and scum are hoping to apathy-vote her. Can you cite a quote or two to explain what you mean by this? I'm having trouble following this logic.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 17:52
|
|
|
CCKeane posted:I'm still more town than not on her. I'm really feeling her though! Let me try to provide bullet points: - murmur made a jokevote on you and then here tried to say it was super townie of her to do so, but then backs away as soon as someone calls her out on it. if she double-downed on her initial "it's so pro-town to make obvious joke cases!" I'd believe it was something she genuinely believed but she didn't, she immediately said "oh well it's just something I've been doing lately" (and later admits she's done it as scum before, too). - she made a post here that seems townie at a glance, since she's calling a poster scummy and engaging them with questions, but despite goo responding MT never follows up on it. just a hit-and-run kind of suspicion, much like she has against me later. - she votes me here and left it there for the deadline, but when day 2 begins (and throughout all of day 2 for that matter) she never followed up on it. she asked me to clarify my suspicions on opop and, again, I do so but she never engaged with me about it. - here points against anon here are actually really bad? like if you actually read them they're not "anon is scum for her posts" points, it's half "merk did weird things" + "anon didn't pursue QPQ" (which is lol considering the above) and then "she said one thing about my jokevote and then said it later!" (which is like, recontextualizing is totally a thing). I'm not really feeling anon anymore but I'm really feeling mt now! and I see in the preview that she's responded so me so I will respond to her now.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 17:55
|
|
|
Murmur Twin posted:I still find you suspicious, but behind ANarc and Merk at the moment. okay but then why didn't you address this ever at all day 2? You end day 1 voting for me after I had given you some posting responding to your concerns, did you totally forget that happened? quote:What about the above points do you think are "garbage"? I think the last two specifically are pretty rock-solid. Note that I removed the strikethrough parts of the post I quoted to reflect my current opinions after being corrected on my wording. - Your first and second points aren't actually scummy unless Anon is already scum, in which case yeah merk is a very solid candidate for a scumbuddy. But it's not proof Anon is scum, it's just "there's some weird connection to merk, here." - Your QPQ point is hardly rock-solid; she mentioned she found a vote QPQ made to be scummy, but she probably didn't pursue it too hard because QPQ has like no content this game, and because she was busy defending herself/doing her role stuff/etc. Not to mention it's a little hypocritical to call her out for posting suspicions but not following up on them when you've done that all game so far. - People are more than allowed to change their opinions about posts as the game progresses. Plus I viewed her "she can only make fake cases!" thing as more rhetorical flourish than an actual indictment. The QPQ point is the only one that's actually relevant to her posting imo but it's not a very strong point at all, and it's disingenuous for you to present them as "rock-solid."
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 18:02
|
|
|
What's your take on Merk, ecco? This isn't meant to distract you from your posts on MMT, I am curious on Merk.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 18:07
|
|
|
CCKeane posted:What's your take on Merk, ecco? I thought merk's case on yuming day 1 was overblown, I agree that his interactions with Anon could easily be viewed as strange (but if anon is scum it makes me think it'd be really kind well obvious to give her first item to a scumbuddy?), I didn't like how he was a Secret Player for who knows how long (I could imagine Exakt making the role thinking it could last forever and merk not wanting to play with that gimmick). But those aren't damning by any means and also it's merk so any case against him is going to require a level of effort and mental preparedness I don't have.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 18:12
|
|
|
(for instance when I recently played a game with merk and got scummy vibes from him I didn't even once case him, I just used a daycop on him, because effort.)
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 18:14
|
|
|
I'm on a phone so effort-reply to will come later. Ecco - can you clarify your point regarding how people acting like Anon is an inevitable vote makes you lean town there?
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 18:25
|
|
|
Murmur Twin posted:I'm on a phone so effort-reply to will come later. Ecco - can you clarify your point regarding how people acting like Anon is an inevitable vote makes you lean town there? oh! sorry. I mean like, even after Anon claimed nobody was really talking about the claim and how it fit in with her alignment. Merk mentioned "I've seen scum inventors before!" which, yeah, but the mechanics around her power are way different than I would expect for a scum inventor. Everyone else is just sort of talking around her claim rather than about it (QPQ for instance). It's just a feeling, there aren't specific posts.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 18:32
|
|
|
To clear something up, I asked to be a secret player in the game when I signed up because I wanted to do a Hulk Hogan entrance. I don't think my role has anything to do with that request.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 18:51
|
|
|
I don't agree that a public inventor is a townie role and am a bit concerned that someone with as much creativity in setup design as Ecco is relying upon that assumption. A public scum inventor has the same exact concerns as private scum inventor: items that don't do what they say they do, items that have negative effects, etc. I don't see why Anarc's claim has anything to do with Anarc's alignment.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 18:53
|
|
|
Why didn't Anarc give out an item on day 1?
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 18:54
|
|
|
merk posted:Why didn't Anarc give out an item on day 1? This is a good question.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 18:58
|
|
|
merk posted:I don't agree that a public inventor is a townie role and am a bit concerned that someone with as much creativity in setup design as Ecco is relying upon that assumption. A public scum inventor has the same exact concerns as private scum inventor: items that don't do what they say they do, items that have negative effects, etc. I don't see why Anarc's claim has anything to do with Anarc's alignment. the difference between a public scum inventor and a private one is that a public one will always be held accountable for the stuff they give out. a private one can give good items to their scumbuddies and bad items to townies at their leisure, and never even have to claim it. I mean if like tomorrow Keane posts "oh yeah the shield tried to eat me" or something Anon is an obvious vote, but as long as it's explicitly a "pro-town" item then it's really, really weird that it'd be public and also scum. proving its power means hurting the scumteam, and I try to avoid designing setups where scum have to hurt their own team by using their role. the biggest exception to that was Somber's daykill power in Arrentia but that's the only exception, and it was an extreme one.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 19:01
|
|
|
EccoRaven posted:I mean if like tomorrow Keane posts "oh yeah the shield tried to eat me" or something Anon is an obvious vote, but as long as it's explicitly a "pro-town" item then it's really, really weird that it'd be public and also scum. proving its power means hurting the scumteam, and I try to avoid designing setups where scum have to hurt their own team by using their role. the biggest exception to that was Somber's daykill power in Arrentia but that's the only exception, and it was an extreme one. Option 1: Item says it will protect Keane from a night kill. Item does not protect Keane from a night kill. Option 2: Item says that it will Roleblock someone. Item only Roleblocks town, unsuccessful on scum. Option 3: Item says that you don't know what it will do. Item tells your role to scum. That took ten seconds of thinking. What the hell, Ecco?
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 19:05
|
|
|
merk posted:Option 1: quote:Option 2: quote:Option 3: It's really, really different merk, and it's super flipping weird that you're not even willing to consider it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 19:06
|
|
|
My item could backfire but I think it would be obvious and town should know immediately if this is the case.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 19:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 18, 2024 08:03 |
|
|
I mean really merk, Anon uses a power that (hypothetically please do not feel the need to clarify either way, keane!) gives keane a one-shot BP. if keane were to say so and then die at night, bam, Anon is probably scum, easy vote. and that's the difference between a public and private power! if keane posted day 2 saying "oh someone gave me a thing that says I am 1-shot bp but idk who," and then he died that night, we'd go "oh hm well that sucks, I wonder who did it?" A public role is always accountable for their actions and until we see the items are obviously bunk it doesn't feel right to vote her despite it. It especially doesn't seem right to completely and totally dismiss that aspect of her role as if it's totally comparable to a private power when it's just not. CCKeane posted:My item could backfire but I think it would be obvious and town should know immediately if this is the case. yes exactly.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 19:10
|
|