|
Mills posted:I love Ixt but put me down as a maybe please until I see the quality of future sign-ups. I'm awesome, so you should definitely play. Yay Ixt! You're back!
|
#
¿
Feb 18, 2015 05:01
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 24, 2024 01:44 |
|
|
Meh, I'm over it.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 18, 2015 06:28
|
|
|
Tremendous Taste posted:##vote no lynch I declare TT confirmed town. The last couple of games I've played with him he hasn't done his no lunch joke D1 and he was scum.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 24, 2015 11:19
|
|
|
Tremendous Taste posted:think of melville I would prefer not to.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 24, 2015 22:47
|
|
|
Lumpen posted:I really don't want to get a vote on me, and considering that Puntification put so much tough pressure on me, I change the subject and take this opportunity to shift my focus off Puntification, who has posted their way out of the bottom of the stack. Can it wait? I'm interstate for work and don't really have time to post. I'll be back home tomorrow.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 26, 2015 01:54
|
|
|
Rascyc posted:Deadline is in ~51 hours! 
|
|
#
¿
Feb 26, 2015 02:43
|
|
|
Yay, I'm here! Catching up now.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2015 02:42
|
|
|
Mills posted:emphasis mine I agree with Mill's read on Exact here.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2015 02:43
|
|
|
EXAKT Science posted:However I don't think I'm being all that awkward this game, and I think the way you're trying to push me right now is ridiculous. ##vote Mills Why does ridiculous = scummy? Does Exact ever explain this?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2015 02:44
|
|
|
wall monitor posted:Kay, lemme rephrase and elaborate. I dont agree with this read on Punt. He might have been suspicious of 100 for the same post as WM, but he seems to me to have thought about why and explained that in some detail. It doesn't read as a "me too" post at all. I also disagree with the notion that agreeing with other posts is a generically scummy behaviour.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2015 02:57
|
|
|
Puntification posted:Not really but he disappeared and I think he's getting replaced anyway. Well thats a shame, I like Exact.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2015 02:58
|
|
|
Lumpen posted:I completely agree that agreeing with wall monitor and jumping on his reads instead of coming up with something original constitutes Scummy behavior. It strikes me, as well, as something a Scum would try to do since a manufactured read might come off as awkward, but that by jumping on someone else's opinion on can participate while still staying under the radar. That, combined with Puntification's extreme lurking, leads me to change my vote. What? You agree with WM's post, that agreeing with someone's post is scummy? There is so much cognitive dissonance going on here that I have a hard time believing that anyone who is being genuine in their posting can think this way. ##vote Lumpen
|
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2015 03:03
|
|
|
Lumpen posted:Now look at this picture of my baby. Completely adorable.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2015 03:13
|
|
|
Tremendous Taste posted:I'm going to shoot someone tonight Shoot TT.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2015 03:21
|
|
|
Lumpen posted:valk, read this post and the one directly above it together. I think you'll get it. I urge you to consider the entirety of my posting, if your alignment leads you to wish to avoid a mislynch. I did. My opinion still stands.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2015 03:23
|
|
|
Lumpen posted:I read it, and like you, I found it uncompelling. I asked for a case attempt specifically to highlight the speciousness of the vote. I feel confident that a Scum casing me only makes them self look worse. Can you elaborate how you think Punt argues in bad faith? I agree with his case.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2015 03:25
|
|
|
Lumpen posted:A Scum argues in bad faith by nature. If you agree with the case then I can only urge you to read more closely and critically. If I am mislynched, it will be you who failed to act correctly on the evidence. Ok, so I still dont understand what parts of Punt's arguments were in bad faith, since your reply doesn't explain it to me. He made a case on you and I agree with it. I'm asking you to elaborate on why you think the case is bad, so that I can see your perspective as well. Can you do this?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2015 03:44
|
|
|
Who's around?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2015 05:47
|
|
|
Well if no one else shows up, this is a no lynch.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2015 05:50
|
|
|
Only doing this to avoid a no lynch ##vote Punt
|
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2015 05:58
|
|
|
Grandicap posted:If Punt flips scum, fv is town, if not, this is a bad post. It would be if this was the only time I'd backed Punt.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2015 06:00
|
|
|
Puntification posted:How does punt argue in bad faith? A scum argues in bad faith by nature. Punt is scum is not the proposition or conclusion of his arguments they are axiomatic to them, he is working backwards from his position that I am scum to make his arguments, I do like the irony that his arguments are about people arguing in bad faith because one of us definitely is. I agree that Lumpen was posting in bad faith. I dislike his claim that his case was a trap. His argument is that he made a scummy post because the only people who would comment on that are scum. Then when two people commented on it (Punt and myself) he only thinks one of us are scum. Why would scum be the only ones to comment on a bad case?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 3, 2015 11:39
|
|
|
Lumpen posted:Of those 4 suspects, given that Punt didn't get lynched due to Mills preferring DHD, I suggest lynching DHD. Lumpen, why is DHD your top choice to vote? What does Mills have to do with it?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 3, 2015 11:52
|
|
|
Ernie. posted:Thick as in any cases I'd make would have to be incredibly conceited. Not thick as in chock-full of content. Is Mills lurking? It's a relatively quiet game overall, so I didn't really think he was. Why do you think he is?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 3, 2015 11:56
|
|
|
Hal Incandenza posted:I agree about Mills. I have NO IDEA what you are talking about with 8bux though. I admit I have like no meta feel at all there, but you seem to feel awfully strong about this one. This strikes me as bizarre. Hal, are you saying you have no idea how 8bux usually plays?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 3, 2015 11:59
|
|
|
Mills posted:I read Punt as town. I tried to defend Punt, no one would listen, I wasn't going to vote for him so Both 8bux and DHD have one vote here, so why does Mills vote for 8bux instead of his preferred option of DHD? Jumping on a lurker lynch over a player he would prefer to vote. Considering that Mills held up the lynch on Punt specifically to vote DHD on D1 this seems strange. ##vote mills
|
|
#
¿
Mar 3, 2015 12:03
|
|
|
Hal Incandenza posted:Yes, that is actually clearer, thank you! Do you need to know what is normal to comment on Ernie's original point that 8bux isn't posting much and was commenting on replacements rather than gameplay?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 3, 2015 22:11
|
|
|
Mills, why did you vote 8bux?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 5, 2015 02:23
|
|
|
Hal Incandenza posted:because Ernie wanted him to Why can't you let him answer for himself?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 5, 2015 02:29
|
|
|
I'd like people to look at Wall Monitor's posts. They are all only about players that other people are expressing opinions about, and they are not detailed or updating as the game changes. His posts's on 100 Years are the most obvious in this aspect. This is his initial vote on 100 from D1. wall monitor posted:100 yrs spends time talking about what scum would/wouldn't do, maybe it's a bit early in the day to really read into stuff much, but my intuition pings that as scum via a sort of 'Hey guyyyys, scum totally wouldn't do X, right' vibe It's an ok reason for D1, but his read hasn't developed on 100 as more content is available. Given that 100 is by far posting the most amount of content in the game I think that WM's opinion is faked. He is ignoring ream's of content to just sit on his gut D1 case. wall monitor posted:
wall monitor posted:I'm here! Sorry for being quiet. wall monitor posted:one fourth gut, three fourths stuff that happened day 1 I don't see a natural progression of thoughts here from WM. He's just made a decision that 100 is who he is going to push and is sticking to it without commenting on actual game content. ##vote WM
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2015 04:08
|
|
|
What is the case on Ernie?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2015 04:09
|
|
|
Lumpen posted:I would vote Ernie or Hal if either proves a viable consensus lynch candidate in the next 2 hours. Could you give me your thoughts on WM? You were correct last time the 3 of us played together.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2015 04:15
|
|
|
Lumpen posted:He was an early vote on Puntification D1. I think Punt remains most Scummy, and if that turns out right, it makes wall monitor likely Town. This bother's me Lumpen. Your opinion on players seems very strongly tied to who they want to vote and less about how they are posting -- although that might just be the emphasis from how you are posting. Do you normally make your alignment calls this way?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2015 04:29
|
|
|
wall monitor posted:gently caress, vote me out if that's what it takes, I just really don't want to go another day without euphemizing someone This is an overreaction to one vote.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2015 04:29
|
|
|
Lumpen posted:Does that make sense to you? I note that you seem very eager to find fault with me this game, but you approach it in an unusually indirect way, for example defending Puntification repeatedly and second guessing my read of wall monitor. I dont think this is a fair representation. I asked my question because I was trying to understand your logic, especially because we haven't had a lynch yet. Like, I understand feeling more positive about someone because they think similarly to you, but I consider this alongside their other posts. Your opinions seem to give more weight to their agreement with your opinion than any other aspects of their play, or at least, that is how your posting is coming across to me. Your comments about me I think explain part of my issue. You are so sure Punt is scum that it is colouring your read's of other players, and I think to your detriment. Earlier you said I was "enabling" Punt, which is not true. I merely have a different opinion to you, however you see that as a conspiracy between us.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2015 04:46
|
|
|
WM, is there more to your opinion on 100 Years than just your original case from D1? If so, can you elaborate?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2015 04:51
|
|
|
No one seems to be very chatty. ##vote Ernie
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2015 05:01
|
|
|
DuckHuntDog posted:And since it is in the open: That's a good point. Hurt, want to explain your comment?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 9, 2015 11:11
|
|
|
I think Kumba is scum. He is content lurking too, more so even than Hal in my opinion. He doesn't explain his opinions and his vote on Ernie's seems opportunistic in retrospect. The only case he has made was on 100, which he has now backed away from. He has mentioned Lumpen briefly and then yesterday he had this comment Kumbamontu posted:I would vote Lumpen or dhd or ernie, I don't have a strong opinion on anyone else and even these aren't super strong There is no other mention of DHD or Ernie's in his post history and he attempts to qualify these opinions by saying they aren't "super strong" giving himself the chance to back away from them when they turn out to be a mislynch. He then goes on to vote Ernie for the day, with no further explanation. ##vote Kumba
|
|
#
¿
Mar 9, 2015 11:34
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 24, 2024 01:44 |
|
|
Also, I don't know if anyone else feels the same way, but I feel like the deadlines are too long. It's easy to leave the thread and forget about it because you don't have to worry about it for 3 or 4 days.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 9, 2015 11:36
|
|