EPT
On February 23 2012 06:11 VisceraEyes wrote:
No BH. This has nothing to do with him being uncharismatic or mad for no reason...at least for me. BC came right out of the gates with scumminess.
Show nested quote +
On February 21 2012 13:06 VisceraEyes wrote:
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?
On February 21 2012 12:15 BloodyC0bbler wrote:
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.
On February 21 2012 12:09 VisceraEyes wrote:
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?
On February 21 2012 12:03 BloodyC0bbler wrote:
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.
On February 21 2012 11:59 VisceraEyes wrote:
/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.
On February 21 2012 11:49 BloodyC0bbler wrote:
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.
On February 21 2012 11:42 Jackal58 wrote:
Dear redFF and WBG
You both suck.
Sincerely,
Jackal58
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?
No BH. This has nothing to do with him being uncharismatic or mad for no reason...at least for me. BC came right out of the gates with scumminess.
1) you quoted the wrong guy
2) i meant to say "uncharacteristic" but autocorrect is an ass
-------------->Blazinghand <--------------
I anticipate this will earn me lots of town credit and you guys will be like "wow blazinghand what a fortuitous voteswitch, that makes you a good person" and send me chocolates and stuff but you don't have my address so I won't get any which is really actually good since I'm trying to lose weight
