|
On September 28 2012 21:11 Alsn wrote:
Bleh, and now I realised that that's a pretty bad summary of what I wanted to say.
Summary of my case:
I feel that Z-BosoN is attacking people for the sake of attacking them and in a way that seems to be discouraging healthy discussion. As pointed out by my argument he seems to want debears to just shut up and not share his thoughts.
Him attacking SDM for a post obviously made just as a "Hello, let's have a nice game" type of post before heading off to bed just reinforces this idea to me that he is accusing people for dubious reasons.
So. Why have you not FoS'd debears then?
|
@corrosion
I'm actually working in Korea so I don't enjoy so much free time  . But a big national holiday is coming this week end so I should be able to participate to the thread and finish to read all the guides.
@everyone
This also means party time ! I'm currently headed to get drunk all night so you shouldn't be hearing from me until tomorrow 12.00 pm KST.
Also I'm accepting Kush explanation for calling Darth a townie but it would be better for him to refrain calling someone a townie or a scum without explanations later on...
|
On September 28 2012 21:13 DarthPunk wrote:Show nested quote +On September 28 2012 20:21 Alsn wrote:
you essentially say that he should have kept his mouth shut instead of calling you out Where does he 'essentially say this' Here: The issue at hand is why you are bothering to defend him (and now kush) instead of letting them defend themselves.
What I'm opposing here is the idea that debears did something inherently wrong in calling out Z-BosoN. It's like he's implying that SDM/kush are let off the hook by debears calling out Z-BosoN. I think Z-BosoN(or anyone else for that matter) should be perfectly capable of pointing out later that he(we) does not consider SDM/kush to be off the hook regardless of whether or not debears is accusing him of something.
|
On September 28 2012 21:18 Djodref wrote:@corrosionI'm actually working in Korea so I don't enjoy so much free time . But a big national holiday is coming this week end so I should be able to participate to the thread and finish to read all the guides. @everyone This also means party time ! I'm currently headed to get drunk all night so you shouldn't be hearing from me until tomorrow 12.00 pm KST. Also I'm accepting Kush explanation for calling Darth a townie but it would be better for him to refrain calling someone a townie or a scum without explanations later on...
Wow. Really? That was not an explanation at all. It was a slip, and now everyone believes his weak as shit explanation.
Anyway this is obviously going nowhere. And it is becoming a distraction at this point.
##Unvote
##FoS: Kush
|
On September 28 2012 21:14 DarthPunk wrote:Show nested quote +On September 28 2012 21:11 Alsn wrote:
Bleh, and now I realised that that's a pretty bad summary of what I wanted to say.
Summary of my case:
I feel that Z-BosoN is attacking people for the sake of attacking them and in a way that seems to be discouraging healthy discussion. As pointed out by my argument he seems to want debears to just shut up and not share his thoughts.
Him attacking SDM for a post obviously made just as a "Hello, let's have a nice game" type of post before heading off to bed just reinforces this idea to me that he is accusing people for dubious reasons. So. Why have you not FoS'd debears then? Uh, what? For what? I admit I haven't looked all that closely on debears posting since I mostly looked at his filter to try and figure out what Z-BosoN was referring to, but as far as I can see he has done three things so far, he has pointed out that he doesn't agree with your tunneling of kush. I find that a reasonable thing to say, although not overwhelmingly useful other than as a reminder to you that there are other players in this game(which you have obviously noted by now since you are questioning me!) 
His other two arguments of note are against Z-BosoN which is basically the conversation line which I base my case upon, as well as calling out Djodref as someone who posts a lot but says little. The latter also seems perfectly reasonable from where I'm standing and as you must have noticed, I'm against Z-BosoN on the subject of the former.
|
On September 28 2012 21:23 Alsn wrote:Show nested quote +On September 28 2012 21:13 DarthPunk wrote:On September 28 2012 20:21 Alsn wrote:
you essentially say that he should have kept his mouth shut instead of calling you out Where does he 'essentially say this' Here: Show nested quote +The issue at hand is why you are bothering to defend him (and now kush) instead of letting them defend themselves. What I'm opposing here is the idea that debears did something inherently wrong in calling out Z-BosoN. It's like he's implying that SDM/kush are let off the hook by debears calling out Z-BosoN. I think Z-BosoN(or anyone else for that matter) should be perfectly capable of pointing out later that he(we) does not consider SDM/kush to be off the hook regardless of whether or not debears is accusing him of something.
No. That is not what he said. He said that debears shouldn't defend Kush and SDM. You know why? Because if they are mafia and a townie is defending them they are less inclined to defend themselves and therefore we have less to go on. Z - Boson does not say he shouldn't be called out or that people shouldn't make cases. He is calling out someone for doing something scummy. The rest is your interpretation, which is somewhat of a stretch.
Debears has done something similar. And yet you don't FoS debears.
On September 28 2012 13:24 debears wrote:
Our main goal is to lynch mafia. Yes, kush has said some scummy things. However, I'm not gonna go around parading this early saying "kush is scum. Kush is scum. OMFG".
Also, let the man defend himself instead of trying to rally everyone active behind your cause so early. If he is scummy, the votes will come.
Debears calls me out for trying to consolidate town onto my top scum read. Something which is clearly pro-town. He soft defends Kush and tries to shut down the discussion 'Until he can defend himself'
And you say Z -BoSoN tried to limit discussion??
Also your interpretation is just that. And is not one I share.
|
On September 28 2012 21:31 Alsn wrote:
he has pointed out that he doesn't agree with your tunneling of kush.
I find it astonishing that you 'interpret' debears' post that way in context of your view of Z-Boson.
The way in which you paraphrase things whilst obscuring the truth/ put your own angle on things has me very concerned.
|
On September 28 2012 21:35 DarthPunk wrote:Show nested quote +On September 28 2012 21:23 Alsn wrote:On September 28 2012 21:13 DarthPunk wrote:On September 28 2012 20:21 Alsn wrote:
you essentially say that he should have kept his mouth shut instead of calling you out Where does he 'essentially say this' Here: The issue at hand is why you are bothering to defend him (and now kush) instead of letting them defend themselves. What I'm opposing here is the idea that debears did something inherently wrong in calling out Z-BosoN. It's like he's implying that SDM/kush are let off the hook by debears calling out Z-BosoN. I think Z-BosoN(or anyone else for that matter) should be perfectly capable of pointing out later that he(we) does not consider SDM/kush to be off the hook regardless of whether or not debears is accusing him of something. No. That is not what he said. He said that debears shouldn't defend Kush and SDM. You know why? Because if they are mafia and a townie is defending them they are less inclined to defend themselves and therefore we have less to go on. Z - Boson does not say he shouldn't be called out or that people shouldn't make cases. He is calling out someone for doing something scummy. The rest is your interpretation, which is somewhat of a stretch. Debears has done something similar. And yet you don't FoS debears. Show nested quote +On September 28 2012 13:24 debears wrote:
Our main goal is to lynch mafia. Yes, kush has said some scummy things. However, I'm not gonna go around parading this early saying "kush is scum. Kush is scum. OMFG".
Also, let the man defend himself instead of trying to rally everyone active behind your cause so early. If he is scummy, the votes will come.
Debears calls me out for trying to consolidate town onto my top scum read. Something which is clearly pro-town. He soft defends Kush and tries to shut down the discussion 'Until he can defend himself' And you say Z -BoSoN tried to limit discussion?? Also your interpretation is just that. And is not one I share. I do not agree that that's what Z-BosoN was trying to do, but fair enough, you are allowed to draw your own conclusions. I already explained in my initial case what I thought the difference was, but I'll state it again. The main difference to me was that debears seemingly wanted to stop us from completely tunneling kush and only kush, which at the time seemed like a stupidly easy case for scum to sheep onto with low/no risk. Many of us know kush posts very scummy, there's no denying that. This also means that it would be very detrimental for town to tunnel vision him too hard since there's a good chance he's just being his normal self.
That being said we should of course not just let him off the hook. If kush does not want to play in a manner which helps town, there's no reason to just forgive him and move on to someone else. But like I already explained in my post about kush(and that you now acknowledge yourself) spending all of D1 arguing about him would get us nowhere if he flips green, and him flipping scum based on only meta and the fact that he used the word "townie" instead of "player" - while possible - does not seem all that likely to me.
Maybe I'm reading too much into it, but I still feel that Z-BosoN was acting in a manner which had a much more "bullying" tone than what debears was. As such I would like him to explain himself before I let it go.
|
On September 28 2012 21:38 DarthPunk wrote:Show nested quote +On September 28 2012 21:31 Alsn wrote:
he has pointed out that he doesn't agree with your tunneling of kush. I find it astonishing that you 'interpret' debears' post that way in context of your view of Z-Boson. The way in which you paraphrase things whilst obscuring the truth/ put your own angle on things has me very concerned. Astonishing how? I would like you to explain what's so amazingly pro-town about tunneling kush from the very beginning. I find the risks of that approach to be very high from a town perspective.
There are two scenarios:
A) He flips green, and unless he during the day completely changed his character we will have almost no way of distinguishing who among the people who pushed for his lynch were scum and who were town.
B) He flips scum, at this point I just don't find that likely enough to risk A) happening.
That fact alone is enough for me to see that post of debears as entirely reasonable, since both of you at the time were basically calling out kush for every single post he was making(for good reason, but not if that's the only thing you are doing).
|
On September 28 2012 22:03 Alsn wrote:Show nested quote +On September 28 2012 21:38 DarthPunk wrote:On September 28 2012 21:31 Alsn wrote:
he has pointed out that he doesn't agree with your tunneling of kush. I find it astonishing that you 'interpret' debears' post that way in context of your view of Z-Boson. The way in which you paraphrase things whilst obscuring the truth/ put your own angle on things has me very concerned. Astonishing how? I would like you to explain what's so amazingly pro-town about tunneling kush from the very beginning. I find the risks of that approach to be very high from a town perspective. There are two scenarios: A) He flips green, and unless he during the day completely changed his character we will have almost no way of distinguishing who among the people who pushed for his lynch were scum and who were town. B) He flips scum, at this point I just don't find that likely enough to risk A) happening. That fact alone is enough for me to see that post of debears as entirely reasonable, since both of you at the time were basically calling out kush for every single post he was making(for good reason, but not if that's the only thing you are doing).
I was not just looking at Kush. I was looking at the reactions to my case on kush also, Namely debears. As far as I am concerned Kush is scum and therefore it is best for town to lynch him. I like to focus on one thing at a time. Especially when he is incredibly scummy and has SCUM SLIPPED It is a common scum hunting technique and has been recommended in Several postgames. Obviously It was not to the exclusion of all others because I am now looking at you and debears. If there was nothing to go on I would have changed tac. Turns out he is scum. So I try and get him lynched. Savvy?
On September 28 2012 22:03 Alsn wrote:
That fact alone is enough for me to see that post of debears as entirely reasonable, since both of you at the time were basically calling out kush for every single post he was making(for good reason, but not if that's the only thing you are doing).
So you don't find Kush likely to flip scum? good to know. Z -Boson hardly called out kush. I made a case. I was not tunnelling. (but I see that is the misconception you are trying to present) If by some miracle he flips green there is still a lot of info to go off. Your premise iswrong and thus your conclusions are wrong.
I was calling out Kush for good reason? and at the same time Debears was entirely reasonable in shutting that down?
##FoS ALSN
|
|
|
On September 28 2012 20:21 Alsn wrote:Show nested quote +On September 28 2012 15:36 Z-BosoN wrote:On September 28 2012 14:43 debears wrote:
@darth
When did I say stop going after him? I said wait for him to respond.
You can be convinced he's scum, but you're making a huge deal out of it early in the game. multiple red texts with the word scum. Got your point.
I'm not defending him as much as I'm trying to tell you that you are going overboard right now. You don't have to rush in annointing him scum.
@z-boson
If you haven't realized yet, I played with SDM last game. I know where he stands with lurker policy. If you haven't noticed, darth doesn't like them either. Why? Cuz they usually go nowhere fast.
Why are you so focused on lurker discussion when there are other things going on?
Nice FOS btw. I make a case on you and you fail to respond to half of it. I don't care who you've played with. You make it a point to say your view on lurkers. You defend him for absolutely no reason, when his views implicitly contradict yours. If you were townie, I wouldn't think this to be a priority for you. I am not focused on lurker discussion, I am focused on the inconsistency you've presented. The issue of "Lurker policy" is not what is at hand. The issue at hand is why you are bothering to defend him (and now kush) instead of letting them defend themselves. It feels extremely forced right now, as townies are supposedly scouring the thread for blood. That's why the FOS. Regarding your "case", it seems to me like the only think you've got going is my general usefulness. And I already said it in form of a question, but now I'll answer it more bluntly so you can't dismiss it: I am instigating discussion. Read all my posts and see if that's what I'm trying to accomplish. Z-BosoN, you say you are instigating discussion, yet you attack debears for sharing his views on your attack against SDM? In fact, you go as far as to say that debears is in the wrong for even joining the discussion? I find his concerns quite legitimate since your attack on SDM's introduction post seem quite forced to me. Thus I can perfectly understand how he would call you out for it, yet you explain yourself with an inconsistency? Even worse, you are essentially encouraging a player to not say anything at all on a subject while that's actually very good for town! Debears defending someone - and I'd like to state for the record that I do not agree that that was what he was doing, it seems much more to me like he was attacking you than defending SDM/kush. Him taking a stance like that is contrary to what you would like us to believe actually very pro-town, since if/when one of them flips, he is on record as saying that. Your own argument however, essentially summed up with the following lines from the post quoted above: Show nested quote +The issue at hand is why you are bothering to defend him (and now kush) instead of letting them defend themselves. It feels extremely forced right now, as townies are supposedly scouring the thread for blood. That's why the FOS. That argument right there is what I'm talking about, you essentially say that he should have kept his mouth shut instead of calling you out, yet at the same time saying town should be out for blood, which is exactly what he has been doing in my view. So in essence, you are actually encouraging people to not chime in on things they find odd. Intentional or not, that's just very anti-town behaviour. Also, you might say that debears did the same thing I am not accusing you of in the following quote: Show nested quote +On September 28 2012 14:43 debears wrote:
@darth
...
I'm not defending him as much as I'm trying to tell you that you are going overboard right now. You don't have to rush in annointing him scum. The difference here is that debears is just pointing out that he thinks Darth is rushing to a conclusion and that he shouldn't tunnel vision so hard. You, Z-BosoN used the "let him defend himself!" argument almost as a way to shut debears up. I find that very scummy, so FoS Z-BosoN.In particular, I would like you to clarify why you felt the need to bash SDM's introductory post. It does not strike me as very odd that one would like there to be more than just lurker policy to talk about after declaring that he is going to be away from the thread for quite some time(sleep + uni would probably mean something like 15+ hours). Is it so wrong to wish for there to be other things to discuss? It seems to me you are just jumping on anything you can find in order to try and look town. Give us some real analysis, give us some proper motivations behind your posting that isn't contradictory.
Alsn, you are getting a very wrong impression of what I'm trying to do. Of course initially my attacks will seem forced, but it's day one, where there are few posts to go on. You are also stretching a lot of your interpretations on my posts.
That argument right there is what I'm talking about, you essentially say that he should have kept his mouth shut instead of calling you out, yet at the same time saying town should be out for blood, which is exactly what he has been doing in my view. So in essence, you are actually encouraging people to not chime in on things they find odd. Intentional or not, that's just very anti-town behaviour.
No, I "essentially" said that In my opinion it made more sense for him to attack SDM rather than to defend him. I also said that his defense felt very "forced" and unnecessary as a townie. You can agree and you can not agree, but saying I told him to "shut up" and am discouraging conversation is indeed a stretch.
In particular, I would like you to clarify why you felt the need to bash SDM's introductory post. It does not strike me as very odd that one would like there to be more than just lurker policy to talk about after declaring that he is going to be away from the thread for quite some time(sleep + uni would probably mean something like 15+ hours). Is it so wrong to wish for there to be other things to discuss? It seems to me you are just jumping on anything you can find in order to try and look town. Give us some real analysis, give us some proper motivations behind your posting that isn't contradictory.
What the fuck? I bashed it because I wanted him to respond to it, and I did not like his post. Again, you are stretching. He gave off the feeling that he loathed lurker policy discussion, and stated implicitly that people shouldn't lurk. I agree with both of these statements, but I don't like the way he said it (i.e. "fuck lurker policy, I hate it so much that I'll be gone for the next 15 hours"), and thus I questioned him for it. I didn't make a case, I didn't even make a FOS. I don't know why people are bitching so much about an attack against someone who said that he has to "go to the university".
The underlined part is a bunch of crap. The "contradiction" you spotted is completely far-fetched, basing itself on the fact that I wanted debear to shut up, which as I've explained above is also a stretch.
If your case against me is what you call "real analysis", then I could have the time of my life making cases, as I can just twist everything people say and use it as arguments for a case.
|
On September 28 2012 15:42 DarthPunk wrote:
Z-Boson. What are your thoughts on Kush?
I don't know what to think of him yet. Some of your arguments on him seem too much like tunnel vision. The scumslip you pointed out could very well be a scumslip, but it's also something a townie might say, and not worth basing strong arguments off of. But the ones that I agree that I'll find weird about him are:
1) His constant implicit "I'm town! I'm town!" messages.
2) His "HA! I actually wanted you to FOS me". When he called you an asshole because you said you were gonna FoS him. This strikes me as false, as from his posts he genuinely seemed angry about your remarks on him.
Especially no.2). I don't see the town motivation for baiting a FoS from you. He has to explain himself in this regard.
|
@Alsn
Reading your trade-off with DP and your cases against me, I find two things:
a) You have a tendency to heavily misinterpret posts and intentions, AND use them as arguments.
b) You say you like Logic, but you don't seem to read carefully enough. Logic with information is useless.
I mean this, especially in the part where you said I was calling kush out along DP, which is clearly a lie.
For the love of God, if you are town, don't keep this up. I understand we are still in day one and we don't have much to go on, but still. The last thing I need is another austincc that will warp everything I say in a "scum would do this" way.
|
I'm awake. Catching up now.
First impression is I really don't like Kush's early play.
Reading everything more in depth now.
|
On September 28 2012 22:39 DarthPunk wrote:Show nested quote +On September 28 2012 22:03 Alsn wrote:On September 28 2012 21:38 DarthPunk wrote:On September 28 2012 21:31 Alsn wrote:
he has pointed out that he doesn't agree with your tunneling of kush. I find it astonishing that you 'interpret' debears' post that way in context of your view of Z-Boson. The way in which you paraphrase things whilst obscuring the truth/ put your own angle on things has me very concerned. Astonishing how? I would like you to explain what's so amazingly pro-town about tunneling kush from the very beginning. I find the risks of that approach to be very high from a town perspective. There are two scenarios: A) He flips green, and unless he during the day completely changed his character we will have almost no way of distinguishing who among the people who pushed for his lynch were scum and who were town. B) He flips scum, at this point I just don't find that likely enough to risk A) happening. That fact alone is enough for me to see that post of debears as entirely reasonable, since both of you at the time were basically calling out kush for every single post he was making(for good reason, but not if that's the only thing you are doing). I was not just looking at Kush. I was looking at the reactions to my case on kush also, Namely debears. As far as I am concerned Kush is scum and therefore it is best for town to lynch him. I like to focus on one thing at a time. Especially when he is incredibly scummy and has SCUM SLIPPED It is a common scum hunting technique and has been recommended in Several postgames. Obviously It was not to the exclusion of all others because I am now looking at you and debears. If there was nothing to go on I would have changed tac. Turns out he is scum. So I try and get him lynched. Savvy? Show nested quote +On September 28 2012 22:03 Alsn wrote:
That fact alone is enough for me to see that post of debears as entirely reasonable, since both of you at the time were basically calling out kush for every single post he was making(for good reason, but not if that's the only thing you are doing). So you don't find Kush likely to flip scum? good to know. Z -Boson hardly called out kush. I made a case. I was not tunnelling. (but I see that is the misconception you are trying to present) If by some miracle he flips green there is still a lot of info to go off. Your premise iswrong and thus your conclusions are wrong. I was calling out Kush for good reason? and at the same time Debears was entirely reasonable in shutting that down? ##FoS ALSN Given the evidence so far no, I don't, and frankly I don't see why that's so hard to believe. Given his history, it should be easy to see for anyone that while he has different town and scum metas(as pointed out by Hapahauli in the obs QT of NMMXVII), his comments so far this game is entirely in line with the way he usually posts during D1. Basically just writing up whatever is on his mind. That to me doesn't really increase or decrease the chances of him flipping either way(but the setup of the game says all else being equal, 75% of the players are green, 25% are scum)
Yes, you called him out for good reason because his arguments(like so many times before this game) make little to no sense. But right now the only thing I really agree actually points to him being scum is what you call his scum slip. I just do not agree with you of just how damning that statement is. The first thing that sprang to mind when I saw you quoting that was simply that townie was an odd word to use, why not use player? But a confirmed scum slip? Come on, it's not like he said something that is entirely outside the realm of possibility for a town player to say. "Townie" wouldn't be the word I'd use, but I just can't see it as that obvious a scum slip. I'll accept that you are not necessarily wrong for thinking so however.
Given that there are no other developments then sure, I'll admit that there's at least a higher chance of kush being scum than a random lurker being scum. But I would really like it if we could at least try to get better odds than that. Best case scenario for me would be actually having everyone talk, present cases and opinions and if no one else presents themselves as scummy, then and only then will I roll the dice on kush. Remember, there are 3 scum, not only one. Who knows, if he's scum as you say, he might look even scummier by lynch time.
The case being what it is with kush, I can see now that what you were doing wasn't tunneling per se. However, I think you are doing the very thing you are accusing me of doing where you say debears was trying to "shut down" the case against kush. Like I've said several times now, that's not at all how I interpreted it, only that we shouldn't limit ourselves to a single discussion topic which at the time I felt debears was trying to suggest. Something that I happen to agree with.
On September 28 2012 22:39 DarthPunk wrote:I made a case. I was not tunnelling. (but I see that is the misconception you are trying to present) If by some miracle he flips green there is still a lot of info to go off. Your premise iswrong and thus your conclusions are wrong. This statement makes little sense to me. You say you were not tunneling, which I can now appreciate as probably true, but up until recently was not clear at all to me(and probably not to anyone else either). You had made quite a lot of posts in a row with kush as the only topic, as well as trying to convince others in the thread that he absolutely, 100%, no doubt whatsoever must be scum. I didn't find it unreasonable that someone would point that fact out to you. My "premise" was simply that if I find an argument reasonable, someone else trying to poke holes in that argument might not have the same motivations as myself, thus they are suspicious.
The bolded line is ridiculous however, especially in context with the sentence before it. What makes you so sure that we would have "a lot of info to go off" in the case of everyone tunneling kush and us lynching him?
My A) vs. B) scenario that you are referring to was dependent on the hypothetical scenario of everyone tunneling kush(which I already explained seemed to be where things were going at the time). I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and say that you misunderstood what I was trying to say instead of deliberately using a red herring to try and discredit me. With that in mind, based on your willingness to put yourself out there, I have a slight town read on you.
|
Darthpunk
1 You ask people what they think of me, Then when they don't tell you the exact answer you want to hear, you accuse them of defending me.
What you meant was
agree with me about kush or I will FOS you.
2 Did anyone notice how I went from DEFINITELY SCUM to a "distraction" instantly and without reason?
On September 28 2012 21:23 DarthPunk wrote:Show nested quote +On September 28 2012 21:18 Djodref wrote:@corrosionI'm actually working in Korea so I don't enjoy so much free time . But a big national holiday is coming this week end so I should be able to participate to the thread and finish to read all the guides. @everyone This also means party time ! I'm currently headed to get drunk all night so you shouldn't be hearing from me until tomorrow 12.00 pm KST. Also I'm accepting Kush explanation for calling Darth a townie but it would be better for him to refrain calling someone a townie or a scum without explanations later on... Wow. Really? That was not an explanation at all. It was a slip, and now everyone believes his weak as shit explanation. Anyway this is obviously going nowhere. And it is becoming a distraction at this point. ##Unvote##FoS: Kush
@darthpunk
Why did you unvote me if you are certain I am scum?
He explains his strategy:
I like to focus on one thing at a time.
So why have you already FOSed 3 different people?
3 Darth's scumstrat is not so much to flame but to provoke.
If there was nothing to go on I would have changed tac. Turns out he is scum. So I try and get him lynched. Savvy?
This is from the post in which he FOSes Alsn. Not even his most inflamatory statement but pay close attention to his tone in his posts. Specifically, "Savvy?" Condescending, intimidating, irritating. He wants you to get pissed.
4 @Darthpunk at the end of newbie 26, marv said scum's biggest mistake was not nightkilling me. So your supposition that scum would never nightkill me is in itself ridiculous. It was an indirect flame, suggesting I play bad, and that's all that post was.
|
|
|
Sorry for making my introduction then disappearing. The game began late at night, and I had to sleep + attend university this morning. I'm reading up on all of this and will make my conclusions shortly.
|
On September 28 2012 23:10 Z-BosoN wrote:Show nested quote +On September 28 2012 20:21 Alsn wrote:On September 28 2012 15:36 Z-BosoN wrote:On September 28 2012 14:43 debears wrote:
@darth
When did I say stop going after him? I said wait for him to respond.
You can be convinced he's scum, but you're making a huge deal out of it early in the game. multiple red texts with the word scum. Got your point.
I'm not defending him as much as I'm trying to tell you that you are going overboard right now. You don't have to rush in annointing him scum.
@z-boson
If you haven't realized yet, I played with SDM last game. I know where he stands with lurker policy. If you haven't noticed, darth doesn't like them either. Why? Cuz they usually go nowhere fast.
Why are you so focused on lurker discussion when there are other things going on?
Nice FOS btw. I make a case on you and you fail to respond to half of it. I don't care who you've played with. You make it a point to say your view on lurkers. You defend him for absolutely no reason, when his views implicitly contradict yours. If you were townie, I wouldn't think this to be a priority for you. I am not focused on lurker discussion, I am focused on the inconsistency you've presented. The issue of "Lurker policy" is not what is at hand. The issue at hand is why you are bothering to defend him (and now kush) instead of letting them defend themselves. It feels extremely forced right now, as townies are supposedly scouring the thread for blood. That's why the FOS. Regarding your "case", it seems to me like the only think you've got going is my general usefulness. And I already said it in form of a question, but now I'll answer it more bluntly so you can't dismiss it: I am instigating discussion. Read all my posts and see if that's what I'm trying to accomplish. Z-BosoN, you say you are instigating discussion, yet you attack debears for sharing his views on your attack against SDM? In fact, you go as far as to say that debears is in the wrong for even joining the discussion? I find his concerns quite legitimate since your attack on SDM's introduction post seem quite forced to me. Thus I can perfectly understand how he would call you out for it, yet you explain yourself with an inconsistency? Even worse, you are essentially encouraging a player to not say anything at all on a subject while that's actually very good for town! Debears defending someone - and I'd like to state for the record that I do not agree that that was what he was doing, it seems much more to me like he was attacking you than defending SDM/kush. Him taking a stance like that is contrary to what you would like us to believe actually very pro-town, since if/when one of them flips, he is on record as saying that. Your own argument however, essentially summed up with the following lines from the post quoted above: The issue at hand is why you are bothering to defend him (and now kush) instead of letting them defend themselves. It feels extremely forced right now, as townies are supposedly scouring the thread for blood. That's why the FOS. That argument right there is what I'm talking about, you essentially say that he should have kept his mouth shut instead of calling you out, yet at the same time saying town should be out for blood, which is exactly what he has been doing in my view. So in essence, you are actually encouraging people to not chime in on things they find odd. Intentional or not, that's just very anti-town behaviour. Also, you might say that debears did the same thing I am not accusing you of in the following quote: On September 28 2012 14:43 debears wrote:
@darth
...
I'm not defending him as much as I'm trying to tell you that you are going overboard right now. You don't have to rush in annointing him scum. The difference here is that debears is just pointing out that he thinks Darth is rushing to a conclusion and that he shouldn't tunnel vision so hard. You, Z-BosoN used the "let him defend himself!" argument almost as a way to shut debears up. I find that very scummy, so FoS Z-BosoN.In particular, I would like you to clarify why you felt the need to bash SDM's introductory post. It does not strike me as very odd that one would like there to be more than just lurker policy to talk about after declaring that he is going to be away from the thread for quite some time(sleep + uni would probably mean something like 15+ hours). Is it so wrong to wish for there to be other things to discuss? It seems to me you are just jumping on anything you can find in order to try and look town. Give us some real analysis, give us some proper motivations behind your posting that isn't contradictory. Alsn, you are getting a very wrong impression of what I'm trying to do. Of course initially my attacks will seem forced, but it's day one, where there are few posts to go on. You are also stretching a lot of your interpretations on my posts. Show nested quote +That argument right there is what I'm talking about, you essentially say that he should have kept his mouth shut instead of calling you out, yet at the same time saying town should be out for blood, which is exactly what he has been doing in my view. So in essence, you are actually encouraging people to not chime in on things they find odd. Intentional or not, that's just very anti-town behaviour. No, I "essentially" said that In my opinion it made more sense for him to attack SDM rather than to defend him. I also said that his defense felt very "forced" and unnecessary as a townie. You can agree and you can not agree, but saying I told him to "shut up" and am discouraging conversation is indeed a stretch. Show nested quote +In particular, I would like you to clarify why you felt the need to bash SDM's introductory post. It does not strike me as very odd that one would like there to be more than just lurker policy to talk about after declaring that he is going to be away from the thread for quite some time(sleep + uni would probably mean something like 15+ hours). Is it so wrong to wish for there to be other things to discuss? It seems to me you are just jumping on anything you can find in order to try and look town. Give us some real analysis, give us some proper motivations behind your posting that isn't contradictory. What the fuck? I bashed it because I wanted him to respond to it, and I did not like his post. Again, you are stretching. He gave off the feeling that he loathed lurker policy discussion, and stated implicitly that people shouldn't lurk. I agree with both of these statements, but I don't like the way he said it (i.e. "fuck lurker policy, I hate it so much that I'll be gone for the next 15 hours"), and thus I questioned him for it. I didn't make a case, I didn't even make a FOS. I don't know why people are bitching so much about an attack against someone who said that he has to "go to the university". The underlined part is a bunch of crap. The "contradiction" you spotted is completely far-fetched, basing itself on the fact that I wanted debear to shut up, which as I've explained above is also a stretch. If your case against me is what you call "real analysis", then I could have the time of my life making cases, as I can just twist everything people say and use it as arguments for a case. Fine, I'll withdraw my concerns about your attack on debears. Given what you yourself and DP has said I admit that I might have oversimplified my initial read on your motivations.
I still don't find your attack on SDM to be justified though. Simply disliking the way someone states something seems like a very odd reason to attack someone. Especially since I still find what he said to be very reasonable. In your final paragraph you say you don't like the way he said it, yet when you explain what you thought he said, you are basically bending his words. He never said he would leave because he hated talking about lurker policy. He said he had to leave(for that long) and that it was his hope that there were other things to talk about. Those two things are very different and the latter is not at all unreasonable to me. He's in a time zone where that statement makes perfect sense, why would you jump on it so aggressively?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
