|
On February 21 2012 12:14 wherebugsgo wrote:Show nested quote +On February 21 2012 12:12 redFF wrote:
If i made you think i was town doesn't that make me good town?
/food for thought
2 players have been on the 2 major wagons of early day 1, chaoser and kita. Betting there's one scum in there. Are you talking to me? Bad news for you: Nothing you've done has made me think you're town. Good news for you; Nothing you've done has made me think you're scum. Bad news for you: Everything you've done so far has made me think you're bad.
♫ You're so vain, I bet you think this post is about you ♫
|
On February 21 2012 12:16 wherebugsgo wrote:Show nested quote +On February 21 2012 12:15 BloodyC0bbler wrote:On February 21 2012 12:09 VisceraEyes wrote:On February 21 2012 12:03 BloodyC0bbler wrote:On February 21 2012 11:59 VisceraEyes wrote:On February 21 2012 11:49 BloodyC0bbler wrote:On February 21 2012 11:42 Jackal58 wrote:
Dear redFF and WBG
You both suck.
Sincerely,
Jackal58 I endorse this statement fully and from the bottom of my heart I thank you for letting me know I am not insane. Why are we debating Policy lynches this early into the day? Seriously? This isn't a game with a player like 2010 bill murray who spams while being a dick, this isn't a game with a mod hating spammer named showtime. Instead we have for the most part a fairly solid crew devoid of spammy trolls. If you want to lynch someone for being bad, wait till they start being bad / scumlike, dont lynch them for shits and giggles. Policy lynching people on retarded reasoning is worse than RNG votes for early discussion. Cut the nonsense out. Anyone who keeps talking about it from this post on be warned. as a side note, VE since you are making moderate sense for the first time ever I have to give you props for impressing me two games in a row. /salute What are your thoughts on redFF BC? I'm almost convinced that he's just bad and not scum, but I'd like your thoughts before I act on it. Honestly I think he may be suffering from something like a bat to the back of the head. That or a level of arrogance unseen since showtime. As it stands now short of recommending a terrible idea and being a retarded troll (which is a smiteworthy offense if he keeps it up) I see him more as someone to mock / ignore than take seriously. I know I am moderately guilty of this via my last few posts, however anyone continuing the trend of useless discussion / just trading insults with redff are most likely not playing with town interests in heart. There are a few players already guilty of this obviously. I am currently more intrigued at the people who have let policy discussion run so damn rampant for even this short a duration of a game who (in my mind) should know better. Come on guy....COME ON. You know what I'm asking. Do you think he's scum? Also, I thought we were well beyond policy-discussion - I've put forth a scum-candidate and several people have joined the wagon (with little to no reasoning)....and some (and by some I mean WBG) have even gone on to defend him - citing meta resources that point to badTownRedFF. I mean, did you miss all this in reading? Why are you trying to color this all as policy discussion? What's up yo? its what? 5 hours into the day? I would like to believe redff isn't this horrendous as scum to be caught this quickly. However that is wifom with someone of his experience. The only read I have on him as of now is Bad. Bad town or bad mafia. Hell, I think chaoser is also bad for defending posting town reads as a viable move at this stage in the game. It is only at all useful if people are posting clear scum reads along with clear town reads to make them fully accountable rather than "contributing" without doing much. As for coloring it up to policy discussion, the main point you first raised (I will re-read to see what your entire argument is in exact detail so i stress the first point i saw) was his push on tyrran via policy of being bad. Factor in the mass level of general annoyance with him via his recent behaviour outside of game it is not outside the realms of possibility people are "policy" pushing him based on him being a total wad. Okay BC, we're in agreement on two things: redFF is playing badly chaoser is playng badly. Now tell us kindly, what does that imply about these two players? Easy answers bro.
They're both better than you?
|
On February 21 2012 12:18 redFF wrote:Show nested quote +On February 21 2012 12:14 wherebugsgo wrote:On February 21 2012 12:12 redFF wrote:
If i made you think i was town doesn't that make me good town?
/food for thought
2 players have been on the 2 major wagons of early day 1, chaoser and kita. Betting there's one scum in there. Are you talking to me? Bad news for you: Nothing you've done has made me think you're town. Good news for you; Nothing you've done has made me think you're scum. Bad news for you: Everything you've done so far has made me think you're bad. ♫ You're so vain, I bet you think this post is about you ♫
maybe I should post that nice collection of couples therapy quotes
it'd probably give the thread a laugh. Whatcha think?
|
On February 21 2012 12:12 redFF wrote:
If i made you think i was town doesn't that make me good town?
/food for thought
2 players have been on the 2 major wagons of early day 1, chaoser and kita. Betting there's one scum in there.
You've done nothing this game that has made me think you're town except for the last line of this post. Everything else has been red as fuck to me (no pun intended). I was referring to WBG's quotes from other games when you were, in fact, actually town.
The last line is exonerating enough, however, to earn my
##Unvote redFF
...so at least there's that. Please stop spamming. This is your only warning.
[b]Re: Jackal/[b]
DAAAAYYYUUUUMMMM....
Nosrslytho, who's scum guy? I want drunk Jackal's opinion to compare it with sober Jackal's opinion later XD
|
On February 21 2012 12:19 Jackal58 wrote:Show nested quote +On February 21 2012 12:16 wherebugsgo wrote:On February 21 2012 12:15 BloodyC0bbler wrote:On February 21 2012 12:09 VisceraEyes wrote:On February 21 2012 12:03 BloodyC0bbler wrote:On February 21 2012 11:59 VisceraEyes wrote:On February 21 2012 11:49 BloodyC0bbler wrote:On February 21 2012 11:42 Jackal58 wrote:
Dear redFF and WBG
You both suck.
Sincerely,
Jackal58 I endorse this statement fully and from the bottom of my heart I thank you for letting me know I am not insane. Why are we debating Policy lynches this early into the day? Seriously? This isn't a game with a player like 2010 bill murray who spams while being a dick, this isn't a game with a mod hating spammer named showtime. Instead we have for the most part a fairly solid crew devoid of spammy trolls. If you want to lynch someone for being bad, wait till they start being bad / scumlike, dont lynch them for shits and giggles. Policy lynching people on retarded reasoning is worse than RNG votes for early discussion. Cut the nonsense out. Anyone who keeps talking about it from this post on be warned. as a side note, VE since you are making moderate sense for the first time ever I have to give you props for impressing me two games in a row. /salute What are your thoughts on redFF BC? I'm almost convinced that he's just bad and not scum, but I'd like your thoughts before I act on it. Honestly I think he may be suffering from something like a bat to the back of the head. That or a level of arrogance unseen since showtime. As it stands now short of recommending a terrible idea and being a retarded troll (which is a smiteworthy offense if he keeps it up) I see him more as someone to mock / ignore than take seriously. I know I am moderately guilty of this via my last few posts, however anyone continuing the trend of useless discussion / just trading insults with redff are most likely not playing with town interests in heart. There are a few players already guilty of this obviously. I am currently more intrigued at the people who have let policy discussion run so damn rampant for even this short a duration of a game who (in my mind) should know better. Come on guy....COME ON. You know what I'm asking. Do you think he's scum? Also, I thought we were well beyond policy-discussion - I've put forth a scum-candidate and several people have joined the wagon (with little to no reasoning)....and some (and by some I mean WBG) have even gone on to defend him - citing meta resources that point to badTownRedFF. I mean, did you miss all this in reading? Why are you trying to color this all as policy discussion? What's up yo? its what? 5 hours into the day? I would like to believe redff isn't this horrendous as scum to be caught this quickly. However that is wifom with someone of his experience. The only read I have on him as of now is Bad. Bad town or bad mafia. Hell, I think chaoser is also bad for defending posting town reads as a viable move at this stage in the game. It is only at all useful if people are posting clear scum reads along with clear town reads to make them fully accountable rather than "contributing" without doing much. As for coloring it up to policy discussion, the main point you first raised (I will re-read to see what your entire argument is in exact detail so i stress the first point i saw) was his push on tyrran via policy of being bad. Factor in the mass level of general annoyance with him via his recent behaviour outside of game it is not outside the realms of possibility people are "policy" pushing him based on him being a total wad. Okay BC, we're in agreement on two things: redFF is playing badly chaoser is playng badly. Now tell us kindly, what does that imply about these two players? Easy answers bro. They're both better than you?
Jackie poo you never answered my question
since you know redFF better than I do, would you lynch him today?
|
On February 21 2012 12:19 wherebugsgo wrote:Show nested quote +On February 21 2012 12:18 redFF wrote:On February 21 2012 12:14 wherebugsgo wrote:On February 21 2012 12:12 redFF wrote:
If i made you think i was town doesn't that make me good town?
/food for thought
2 players have been on the 2 major wagons of early day 1, chaoser and kita. Betting there's one scum in there. Are you talking to me? Bad news for you: Nothing you've done has made me think you're town. Good news for you; Nothing you've done has made me think you're scum. Bad news for you: Everything you've done so far has made me think you're bad. ♫ You're so vain, I bet you think this post is about you ♫ maybe I should post that nice collection of couples therapy quotes it'd probably give the thread a laugh. Whatcha think?
If it has anything to do with the game at all, then do it. If not, make a new thread for everyone to laugh at me in!
|
On February 21 2012 12:20 wherebugsgo wrote:Show nested quote +On February 21 2012 12:19 Jackal58 wrote:On February 21 2012 12:16 wherebugsgo wrote:On February 21 2012 12:15 BloodyC0bbler wrote:On February 21 2012 12:09 VisceraEyes wrote:On February 21 2012 12:03 BloodyC0bbler wrote:On February 21 2012 11:59 VisceraEyes wrote:On February 21 2012 11:49 BloodyC0bbler wrote:On February 21 2012 11:42 Jackal58 wrote:
Dear redFF and WBG
You both suck.
Sincerely,
Jackal58 I endorse this statement fully and from the bottom of my heart I thank you for letting me know I am not insane. Why are we debating Policy lynches this early into the day? Seriously? This isn't a game with a player like 2010 bill murray who spams while being a dick, this isn't a game with a mod hating spammer named showtime. Instead we have for the most part a fairly solid crew devoid of spammy trolls. If you want to lynch someone for being bad, wait till they start being bad / scumlike, dont lynch them for shits and giggles. Policy lynching people on retarded reasoning is worse than RNG votes for early discussion. Cut the nonsense out. Anyone who keeps talking about it from this post on be warned. as a side note, VE since you are making moderate sense for the first time ever I have to give you props for impressing me two games in a row. /salute What are your thoughts on redFF BC? I'm almost convinced that he's just bad and not scum, but I'd like your thoughts before I act on it. Honestly I think he may be suffering from something like a bat to the back of the head. That or a level of arrogance unseen since showtime. As it stands now short of recommending a terrible idea and being a retarded troll (which is a smiteworthy offense if he keeps it up) I see him more as someone to mock / ignore than take seriously. I know I am moderately guilty of this via my last few posts, however anyone continuing the trend of useless discussion / just trading insults with redff are most likely not playing with town interests in heart. There are a few players already guilty of this obviously. I am currently more intrigued at the people who have let policy discussion run so damn rampant for even this short a duration of a game who (in my mind) should know better. Come on guy....COME ON. You know what I'm asking. Do you think he's scum? Also, I thought we were well beyond policy-discussion - I've put forth a scum-candidate and several people have joined the wagon (with little to no reasoning)....and some (and by some I mean WBG) have even gone on to defend him - citing meta resources that point to badTownRedFF. I mean, did you miss all this in reading? Why are you trying to color this all as policy discussion? What's up yo? its what? 5 hours into the day? I would like to believe redff isn't this horrendous as scum to be caught this quickly. However that is wifom with someone of his experience. The only read I have on him as of now is Bad. Bad town or bad mafia. Hell, I think chaoser is also bad for defending posting town reads as a viable move at this stage in the game. It is only at all useful if people are posting clear scum reads along with clear town reads to make them fully accountable rather than "contributing" without doing much. As for coloring it up to policy discussion, the main point you first raised (I will re-read to see what your entire argument is in exact detail so i stress the first point i saw) was his push on tyrran via policy of being bad. Factor in the mass level of general annoyance with him via his recent behaviour outside of game it is not outside the realms of possibility people are "policy" pushing him based on him being a total wad. Okay BC, we're in agreement on two things: redFF is playing badly chaoser is playng badly. Now tell us kindly, what does that imply about these two players? Easy answers bro. They're both better than you? Jackie poo you never answered my question since you know redFF better than I do, would you lynch him today?
Not at 5 hours in.
Did I mention Toad is scum?
|
After reading toad's filter I am inclined to agree with jackal and wouldn't mind a dead amphibian at the end of the day.
|
On February 21 2012 12:28 Jackal58 wrote:Show nested quote +On February 21 2012 12:20 wherebugsgo wrote:On February 21 2012 12:19 Jackal58 wrote:On February 21 2012 12:16 wherebugsgo wrote:On February 21 2012 12:15 BloodyC0bbler wrote:On February 21 2012 12:09 VisceraEyes wrote:On February 21 2012 12:03 BloodyC0bbler wrote:On February 21 2012 11:59 VisceraEyes wrote:On February 21 2012 11:49 BloodyC0bbler wrote:On February 21 2012 11:42 Jackal58 wrote:
Dear redFF and WBG
You both suck.
Sincerely,
Jackal58 I endorse this statement fully and from the bottom of my heart I thank you for letting me know I am not insane. Why are we debating Policy lynches this early into the day? Seriously? This isn't a game with a player like 2010 bill murray who spams while being a dick, this isn't a game with a mod hating spammer named showtime. Instead we have for the most part a fairly solid crew devoid of spammy trolls. If you want to lynch someone for being bad, wait till they start being bad / scumlike, dont lynch them for shits and giggles. Policy lynching people on retarded reasoning is worse than RNG votes for early discussion. Cut the nonsense out. Anyone who keeps talking about it from this post on be warned. as a side note, VE since you are making moderate sense for the first time ever I have to give you props for impressing me two games in a row. /salute What are your thoughts on redFF BC? I'm almost convinced that he's just bad and not scum, but I'd like your thoughts before I act on it. Honestly I think he may be suffering from something like a bat to the back of the head. That or a level of arrogance unseen since showtime. As it stands now short of recommending a terrible idea and being a retarded troll (which is a smiteworthy offense if he keeps it up) I see him more as someone to mock / ignore than take seriously. I know I am moderately guilty of this via my last few posts, however anyone continuing the trend of useless discussion / just trading insults with redff are most likely not playing with town interests in heart. There are a few players already guilty of this obviously. I am currently more intrigued at the people who have let policy discussion run so damn rampant for even this short a duration of a game who (in my mind) should know better. Come on guy....COME ON. You know what I'm asking. Do you think he's scum? Also, I thought we were well beyond policy-discussion - I've put forth a scum-candidate and several people have joined the wagon (with little to no reasoning)....and some (and by some I mean WBG) have even gone on to defend him - citing meta resources that point to badTownRedFF. I mean, did you miss all this in reading? Why are you trying to color this all as policy discussion? What's up yo? its what? 5 hours into the day? I would like to believe redff isn't this horrendous as scum to be caught this quickly. However that is wifom with someone of his experience. The only read I have on him as of now is Bad. Bad town or bad mafia. Hell, I think chaoser is also bad for defending posting town reads as a viable move at this stage in the game. It is only at all useful if people are posting clear scum reads along with clear town reads to make them fully accountable rather than "contributing" without doing much. As for coloring it up to policy discussion, the main point you first raised (I will re-read to see what your entire argument is in exact detail so i stress the first point i saw) was his push on tyrran via policy of being bad. Factor in the mass level of general annoyance with him via his recent behaviour outside of game it is not outside the realms of possibility people are "policy" pushing him based on him being a total wad. Okay BC, we're in agreement on two things: redFF is playing badly chaoser is playng badly. Now tell us kindly, what does that imply about these two players? Easy answers bro. They're both better than you? Jackie poo you never answered my question since you know redFF better than I do, would you lynch him today? Not at 5 hours in. Did I mention Toad is scum?
yes but you never voted him.
Why's that?
|
put down a vote if hes scum don
|
On February 21 2012 12:30 wherebugsgo wrote:Show nested quote +On February 21 2012 12:28 Jackal58 wrote:On February 21 2012 12:20 wherebugsgo wrote:On February 21 2012 12:19 Jackal58 wrote:On February 21 2012 12:16 wherebugsgo wrote:On February 21 2012 12:15 BloodyC0bbler wrote:On February 21 2012 12:09 VisceraEyes wrote:On February 21 2012 12:03 BloodyC0bbler wrote:On February 21 2012 11:59 VisceraEyes wrote:On February 21 2012 11:49 BloodyC0bbler wrote:
[quote]
I endorse this statement fully and from the bottom of my heart I thank you for letting me know I am not insane.
Why are we debating Policy lynches this early into the day? Seriously? This isn't a game with a player like 2010 bill murray who spams while being a dick, this isn't a game with a mod hating spammer named showtime. Instead we have for the most part a fairly solid crew devoid of spammy trolls. If you want to lynch someone for being bad, wait till they start being bad / scumlike, dont lynch them for shits and giggles.
Policy lynching people on retarded reasoning is worse than RNG votes for early discussion. Cut the nonsense out. Anyone who keeps talking about it from this post on be warned.
as a side note, VE since you are making moderate sense for the first time ever I have to give you props for impressing me two games in a row. /salute What are your thoughts on redFF BC? I'm almost convinced that he's just bad and not scum, but I'd like your thoughts before I act on it. Honestly I think he may be suffering from something like a bat to the back of the head. That or a level of arrogance unseen since showtime. As it stands now short of recommending a terrible idea and being a retarded troll (which is a smiteworthy offense if he keeps it up) I see him more as someone to mock / ignore than take seriously. I know I am moderately guilty of this via my last few posts, however anyone continuing the trend of useless discussion / just trading insults with redff are most likely not playing with town interests in heart. There are a few players already guilty of this obviously. I am currently more intrigued at the people who have let policy discussion run so damn rampant for even this short a duration of a game who (in my mind) should know better. Come on guy....COME ON. You know what I'm asking. Do you think he's scum? Also, I thought we were well beyond policy-discussion - I've put forth a scum-candidate and several people have joined the wagon (with little to no reasoning)....and some (and by some I mean WBG) have even gone on to defend him - citing meta resources that point to badTownRedFF. I mean, did you miss all this in reading? Why are you trying to color this all as policy discussion? What's up yo? its what? 5 hours into the day? I would like to believe redff isn't this horrendous as scum to be caught this quickly. However that is wifom with someone of his experience. The only read I have on him as of now is Bad. Bad town or bad mafia. Hell, I think chaoser is also bad for defending posting town reads as a viable move at this stage in the game. It is only at all useful if people are posting clear scum reads along with clear town reads to make them fully accountable rather than "contributing" without doing much. As for coloring it up to policy discussion, the main point you first raised (I will re-read to see what your entire argument is in exact detail so i stress the first point i saw) was his push on tyrran via policy of being bad. Factor in the mass level of general annoyance with him via his recent behaviour outside of game it is not outside the realms of possibility people are "policy" pushing him based on him being a total wad. Okay BC, we're in agreement on two things: redFF is playing badly chaoser is playng badly. Now tell us kindly, what does that imply about these two players? Easy answers bro. They're both better than you? Jackie poo you never answered my question since you know redFF better than I do, would you lynch him today? Not at 5 hours in. Did I mention Toad is scum? yes but you never voted him. Why's that?
Because we have 39 hours left and I'm not anal retentive about votes like you are.
|
On February 21 2012 12:09 wherebugsgo wrote:Show nested quote +On February 21 2012 12:04 chaoser wrote:If you notice though, that specific quote from Ace was towards the players of that game ASKING others for their LIST of town (and scum) reads in a no flip game. It was basically a game that was easy to manipulate and a situation where EVERYONE was giving out reads like woah. That is different from this case because it is only me giving my read. So if mafia wants, they can try to manipulate me and that's about it. Your votes can't criss cross your Town reads or you'll be called out by any decent Scum reading the thread. You shouldn't give your Town reads early because the Mafia can see what players don't have strong support, leading to the easy sheepish behavior by the Town to lynch the person with the least friends. I don't really see a problem because I don't plan to criss cross my reads with my votes (why would a townie need to do this) without explaining my change in reads first. The second point, again, doesn't matter since it's only my read and so mafia really can't tell who has "Strong" support or not. Either way, there are ways for mafia to gauge "support" aside from seeing people's town reads. Just by looking at voting threads, one can usually deduce who is being supported and who isn't. So that quote doesn't apply to this situation at all. Ace's opinion is completely relevant here because the person with the least support = redFF and he's getting bandwagoned to fuck as much as I love to call him terrible, if he actually is town no one is going to defend him anyway and so you have no idea whether or not we're actually doing a good thing here. Imagine VE being scum and you just called him town. You give him credence and reliability if he's scum. If he actually is town we don't actually gain anything except an opinion of yours, that, if you are town, can be manipulated. Certainly it's manipulable regardless of VE's real alignment. If I'm not being clear enough: If I were scum, I'd love for people to do what town-Ace hates.
I'm not cocky enough to think that people will take my townie read at face value and will be highly regarded. As you can see, many people in the game don't care much for my thoughts at the moment anyway. RedFF is being voted on cause he's been scummy/playing shitty, not because I'm giving credulousness to VE.
Ace's opinion is completely relevant here because the person with the least support = redFF and he's getting bandwagoned to fuck
At this point, it's only a few hours into day one and there's only like 4 votes on him, hardly what I'd call someone being "bandwagoned to fuck", especially with people saying they want to move off his lynch. I doubt we're going to sit on him and just waste the day. Do you?
I still don't think you've made a good case for why my giving a town read on VE was a bad move. Let's say we agree to disagree and move on.
Toad, what do you think about Jackal saying you're scum. And what do you think about the recent developments regarding RedFF? Does he still deserve a lynch, especially if we can't find anyone else to lynch by the end of the day?
|
EDIT:
I still don't think you've made a good case for why my giving a town read on VE was a bad move at 5 hours into the game. Let's say we agree to disagree and move on
|
On February 21 2012 12:32 chaoser wrote:Show nested quote +On February 21 2012 12:09 wherebugsgo wrote:On February 21 2012 12:04 chaoser wrote:If you notice though, that specific quote from Ace was towards the players of that game ASKING others for their LIST of town (and scum) reads in a no flip game. It was basically a game that was easy to manipulate and a situation where EVERYONE was giving out reads like woah. That is different from this case because it is only me giving my read. So if mafia wants, they can try to manipulate me and that's about it. Your votes can't criss cross your Town reads or you'll be called out by any decent Scum reading the thread. You shouldn't give your Town reads early because the Mafia can see what players don't have strong support, leading to the easy sheepish behavior by the Town to lynch the person with the least friends. I don't really see a problem because I don't plan to criss cross my reads with my votes (why would a townie need to do this) without explaining my change in reads first. The second point, again, doesn't matter since it's only my read and so mafia really can't tell who has "Strong" support or not. Either way, there are ways for mafia to gauge "support" aside from seeing people's town reads. Just by looking at voting threads, one can usually deduce who is being supported and who isn't. So that quote doesn't apply to this situation at all. Ace's opinion is completely relevant here because the person with the least support = redFF and he's getting bandwagoned to fuck as much as I love to call him terrible, if he actually is town no one is going to defend him anyway and so you have no idea whether or not we're actually doing a good thing here. Imagine VE being scum and you just called him town. You give him credence and reliability if he's scum. If he actually is town we don't actually gain anything except an opinion of yours, that, if you are town, can be manipulated. Certainly it's manipulable regardless of VE's real alignment. If I'm not being clear enough: If I were scum, I'd love for people to do what town-Ace hates. I'm not cocky enough to think that people will take my townie read at face value and will be highly regarded. As you can see, many people in the game don't care much for my thoughts at the moment anyway. RedFF is being voted on cause he's been scummy/playing shitty, not because I'm giving credulousness to VE. Show nested quote +Ace's opinion is completely relevant here because the person with the least support = redFF and he's getting bandwagoned to fuck At this point, it's only a few hours into day one and there's only like 4 votes on him, hardly what I'd call someone being "bandwagoned to fuck", especially with people saying they want to move off his lynch. I doubt we're going to sit on him and just waste the day. Do you? I still don't think you've made a good case for why my giving a town read on VE was a bad move. Let's say we agree to disagree and move on. Toad, what do you think about Jackal saying you're scum. And what do you think about the recent developments regarding RedFF? Does he still deserve a lynch, especially if we can't find anyone else to lynch by the end of the day?
I care about your opinion, same as I care about the opinion of the majority of the players in this game.
As town shouldn't it be your priority to get people to care about your opinion? You just said you think people don't care much for your thoughts. Even if it's only a few hours into the game you think that's a good thing for a townie? I think it's great for scum to not listened to, and in fact that makes you look a lot scummier. You're perceptive about how others view you and yet you don't seem to care all that much.
At this point, it's only a few hours into day one and there's only like 4 votes on him, hardly what I'd call someone being "bandwagoned to fuck", especially with people saying they want to move off his lynch. I doubt we're going to sit on him and just waste the day. Do you?
It might be early in the day but that doesn't prevent bandwagons from starting.
The one lesson I learned from all the games in which I watched a townie die day 1 is that you have to stop the bandwagon's momentum as soon as you believe that it is picking up steam for the wrong reasons. In fact, at times it matters less what you think about the subject and more so what you think of the players who are pushing. A great example would be Some Mafia Game or Steamship. In Steamship, for one, I screamed for hours about how Kenpachi and sinani could not possibly be scum and completely missed the people on their wagons who pushed them with no scrutiny. I could tell even at only 3 or 4 votes that those bandwagons were going badly but I did not do the correct things to stop them. Perhaps this game will be different. I don't know what redFF is simply based on reading his posts, but based on how he's been voted I don't feel confident about that lynch. (and ofc his meta)
Finally, you probably know this, but as it's early morning in Europe I doubt Toad will be posting any time soon.
|
I care about your opinion, same as I care about the opinion of the majority of the players in this game.
As town shouldn't it be your priority to get people to care about your opinion? You just said you think people don't care much for your thoughts. Even if it's only a few hours into the game you think that's a good thing for a townie? I think it's great for scum to not listened to, and in fact that makes you look a lot scummier. You're perceptive about how others view you and yet you don't seem to care all that much.
I think this is a misrepresentation of what I meant. I was being humble (as many more people should be in this game right now), not saying I don't care about others not respecting my reads. Also, there's a difference, in my mind, on giving townie reads and scum reads. I care A LOT more when I give my scum read. My townie read is more a footnote for others to gauge what my thoughts are.
|
EDIT:
I think this is an extremely malicious misrepresentation of what I meant.
|
Imagine VE being scum and you just called him town. You give him credence and reliability if he's scum. If he actually is town we don't actually gain anything except an opinion of yours, that, if you are town, can be manipulated. Certainly it's manipulable regardless of VE's real alignment.
You gave this example of how my giving a town read would be bad.
I'm not cocky enough to think that people will take my townie read at face value and will be highly regarded. As you can see, many people in the game don't care much for my thoughts at the moment anyway. RedFF is being voted on cause he's been scummy/playing shitty, not because I'm giving credulousness to VE.
My response saying nothing about me not caring what other people think about my reads. Rather it's that, at the moment, I don't think your example applies (people are leaving the Red lynch) and why I don't think your example applies (I'm not cocky enough to think your example would apply + what's currently happening via trends in the thread)
As town shouldn't it be your priority to get people to care about your opinion? You just said you think people don't care much for your thoughts. Even if it's only a few hours into the game you think that's a good thing for a townie? I think it's great for scum to not listened to, and in fact that makes you look a lot scummier. You're perceptive about how others view you and yet you don't seem to care all that much.
I never said I don't care about what other people think about my opinions. I merely don't think the fact that just because it is me saying something, people should give it credulence. If I give good effort and give what I think is a good case, I sure as hell expect people to listen. Me giving a throwaway townie read at 5 hours in isn't really a "case". It's for the benefit of town as a gauge.
|
On February 21 2012 12:15 BloodyC0bbler wrote:Show nested quote +On February 21 2012 12:09 VisceraEyes wrote:On February 21 2012 12:03 BloodyC0bbler wrote:On February 21 2012 11:59 VisceraEyes wrote:On February 21 2012 11:49 BloodyC0bbler wrote:On February 21 2012 11:42 Jackal58 wrote:
Dear redFF and WBG
You both suck.
Sincerely,
Jackal58 I endorse this statement fully and from the bottom of my heart I thank you for letting me know I am not insane. Why are we debating Policy lynches this early into the day? Seriously? This isn't a game with a player like 2010 bill murray who spams while being a dick, this isn't a game with a mod hating spammer named showtime. Instead we have for the most part a fairly solid crew devoid of spammy trolls. If you want to lynch someone for being bad, wait till they start being bad / scumlike, dont lynch them for shits and giggles. Policy lynching people on retarded reasoning is worse than RNG votes for early discussion. Cut the nonsense out. Anyone who keeps talking about it from this post on be warned. as a side note, VE since you are making moderate sense for the first time ever I have to give you props for impressing me two games in a row. /salute What are your thoughts on redFF BC? I'm almost convinced that he's just bad and not scum, but I'd like your thoughts before I act on it. Honestly I think he may be suffering from something like a bat to the back of the head. That or a level of arrogance unseen since showtime. As it stands now short of recommending a terrible idea and being a retarded troll (which is a smiteworthy offense if he keeps it up) I see him more as someone to mock / ignore than take seriously. I know I am moderately guilty of this via my last few posts, however anyone continuing the trend of useless discussion / just trading insults with redff are most likely not playing with town interests in heart. There are a few players already guilty of this obviously. I am currently more intrigued at the people who have let policy discussion run so damn rampant for even this short a duration of a game who (in my mind) should know better. Come on guy....COME ON. You know what I'm asking. Do you think he's scum? Also, I thought we were well beyond policy-discussion - I've put forth a scum-candidate and several people have joined the wagon (with little to no reasoning)....and some (and by some I mean WBG) have even gone on to defend him - citing meta resources that point to badTownRedFF. I mean, did you miss all this in reading? Why are you trying to color this all as policy discussion? What's up yo? its what? 5 hours into the day? I would like to believe redff isn't this horrendous as scum to be caught this quickly. However that is wifom with someone of his experience. The only read I have on him as of now is Bad. Bad town or bad mafia. Hell, I think chaoser is also bad for defending posting town reads as a viable move at this stage in the game. It is only at all useful if people are posting clear scum reads along with clear town reads to make them fully accountable rather than "contributing" without doing much. As for coloring it up to policy discussion, the main point you first raised (I will re-read to see what your entire argument is in exact detail so i stress the first point i saw) was his push on tyrran via policy of being bad. Factor in the mass level of general annoyance with him via his recent behaviour outside of game it is not outside the realms of possibility people are "policy" pushing him based on him being a total wad.
I'm mulling over this post.
The first thing I noticed about it is that it still doesn't answer my question. I mean, yeah. Okay. I get it. It's early in the game. But you don't even have a read on the guy? Regardless of the fact that he has almost 25% of the posts since the game started? I realize that's a gross exaggeration, but you see what I'm getting at - you should have more of a read on him than "bad" in my opinion.
The next thing I noticed is that you respond to my soft accusation of you coloring the discussion surrounding red as 'policy discussion' by boiling down the argument against him I've made to "his push on tyrran via policy is bad". I get that he's kinda a tool outside this thread, but my argument has to do with his actions/decisions in THIS thread. If anyone is voting for him on policy based on his behavior out-of-thread, that's their thing...but that's absolutely not why I'm voting for him, and that's absolutely not what the discussion for the last few pages has been about. Is it possible that people are voting him on policy? Sure I guess. Has that been the subject of discussion, like, ever? Not so much. This is why I said you "colored" the discussion recently as "policy discussion"...because by my estimation, we've been talking about lynching red because he's scum, and you come in and say "why are we still talking about policy-lynch?"
I mean, am I missing something here?
|
Blazinghand
United States25550 Posts
On February 21 2012 13:06 VisceraEyes wrote:Show nested quote +On February 21 2012 12:15 BloodyC0bbler wrote:On February 21 2012 12:09 VisceraEyes wrote:On February 21 2012 12:03 BloodyC0bbler wrote:On February 21 2012 11:59 VisceraEyes wrote:On February 21 2012 11:49 BloodyC0bbler wrote:On February 21 2012 11:42 Jackal58 wrote:
Dear redFF and WBG
You both suck.
Sincerely,
Jackal58 I endorse this statement fully and from the bottom of my heart I thank you for letting me know I am not insane. Why are we debating Policy lynches this early into the day? Seriously? This isn't a game with a player like 2010 bill murray who spams while being a dick, this isn't a game with a mod hating spammer named showtime. Instead we have for the most part a fairly solid crew devoid of spammy trolls. If you want to lynch someone for being bad, wait till they start being bad / scumlike, dont lynch them for shits and giggles. Policy lynching people on retarded reasoning is worse than RNG votes for early discussion. Cut the nonsense out. Anyone who keeps talking about it from this post on be warned. as a side note, VE since you are making moderate sense for the first time ever I have to give you props for impressing me two games in a row. /salute What are your thoughts on redFF BC? I'm almost convinced that he's just bad and not scum, but I'd like your thoughts before I act on it. Honestly I think he may be suffering from something like a bat to the back of the head. That or a level of arrogance unseen since showtime. As it stands now short of recommending a terrible idea and being a retarded troll (which is a smiteworthy offense if he keeps it up) I see him more as someone to mock / ignore than take seriously. I know I am moderately guilty of this via my last few posts, however anyone continuing the trend of useless discussion / just trading insults with redff are most likely not playing with town interests in heart. There are a few players already guilty of this obviously. I am currently more intrigued at the people who have let policy discussion run so damn rampant for even this short a duration of a game who (in my mind) should know better. Come on guy....COME ON. You know what I'm asking. Do you think he's scum? Also, I thought we were well beyond policy-discussion - I've put forth a scum-candidate and several people have joined the wagon (with little to no reasoning)....and some (and by some I mean WBG) have even gone on to defend him - citing meta resources that point to badTownRedFF. I mean, did you miss all this in reading? Why are you trying to color this all as policy discussion? What's up yo? its what? 5 hours into the day? I would like to believe redff isn't this horrendous as scum to be caught this quickly. However that is wifom with someone of his experience. The only read I have on him as of now is Bad. Bad town or bad mafia. Hell, I think chaoser is also bad for defending posting town reads as a viable move at this stage in the game. It is only at all useful if people are posting clear scum reads along with clear town reads to make them fully accountable rather than "contributing" without doing much. As for coloring it up to policy discussion, the main point you first raised (I will re-read to see what your entire argument is in exact detail so i stress the first point i saw) was his push on tyrran via policy of being bad. Factor in the mass level of general annoyance with him via his recent behaviour outside of game it is not outside the realms of possibility people are "policy" pushing him based on him being a total wad. I'm mulling over this post. The first thing I noticed about it is that it still doesn't answer my question. I mean, yeah. Okay. I get it. It's early in the game. But you don't even have a read on the guy? Regardless of the fact that he has almost 25% of the posts since the game started? I realize that's a gross exaggeration, but you see what I'm getting at - you should have more of a read on him than "bad" in my opinion. The next thing I noticed is that you respond to my soft accusation of you coloring the discussion surrounding red as 'policy discussion' by boiling down the argument against him I've made to "his push on tyrran via policy is bad". I get that he's kinda a tool outside this thread, but my argument has to do with his actions/decisions in THIS thread. If anyone is voting for him on policy based on his behavior out-of-thread, that's their thing...but that's absolutely not why I'm voting for him, and that's absolutely not what the discussion for the last few pages has been about. Is it possible that people are voting him on policy? Sure I guess. Has that been the subject of discussion, like, ever? Not so much. This is why I said you "colored" the discussion recently as "policy discussion"...because by my estimation, we've been talking about lynching red because he's scum, and you come in and say "why are we still talking about policy-lynch?" I mean, am I missing something here?
I would characterize that is BC's second attempt to dodge. I still don't liked redFF and i don't like the fact that he stopped carrying about his policy lynch. Why is that? I don't like Tyrran and I don't see how Tyrran's current set of posts makes him look town to redFF
|
Blazinghand, what are your thoughts about what's happening between WBG and chaoser right now?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
