|
On October 02 2012 11:43 gonzaw wrote:
If you have a case against me please post it/link to it.
I seriously haven't seen anything resembling a serious accusation from you against me, other than that "you softly bussed iapmerfection" and "he's wishy-washy"
Oh, so you're ignoring the thread, except when it's convenient? More scumtell-ish-ness. Keep handing me evidence. Certainly, if you're going to make personal attacks, which you did, you should be basing them off the person's posting, which should imply you've read it well enough to know it's there.
|
@Crossfire: You know, the fact that you forgot it's plurality lynch and not majority lynch actually makes you look worse, since you parked your vote on iamperfection and left. If you were scum maybe you thought there would be a NL so you thought iamperfection was safe before disappearing.
If anything that makes him more likely to be town, gonzaw. Scum would probably know the voting rules considering they have teammates...
|
On October 02 2012 11:54 JingleHell wrote:Show nested quote +On October 02 2012 11:43 gonzaw wrote:
If you have a case against me please post it/link to it.
I seriously haven't seen anything resembling a serious accusation from you against me, other than that "you softly bussed iapmerfection" and "he's wishy-washy" Oh, so you're ignoring the thread, except when it's convenient? More scumtell-ish-ness. Keep handing me evidence. Certainly, if you're going to make personal attacks, which you did, you should be basing them off the person's posting, which should imply you've read it well enough to know it's there.
God dammit you are annoying.
On October 02 2012 00:45 JingleHell wrote:Show nested quote +On October 02 2012 00:40 Keirathi wrote:On October 02 2012 00:36 JingleHell wrote:On October 02 2012 00:31 austinmcc wrote:
Why exactly do you find that performance embarrassing, and how is it driving you to play the way you are this game? Is it just the constant pushing of Grush and trying to get people on that lynch? I led several rather key mislynches. As town. Pushing Grush was about the least embarrassing part of my performance, because frankly, he's useless. I do wish he'd died earlier in the game, though. I don't remember all the specifics at this point off the top of my head, but almost every time I convinced people on someone, it made the overall situation worse. Clearly, if I make too much case out of too little, it doesn't serve the town , so I'm letting things solidify in my mind and in the thread a bit more before going into hardcore push people mode, because once I do that, there's a tendency for someone to get lynched. Being in a town-leader-ish position is only good if I don't also get nominated as the scumteam's MVP as town for it. How long, exactly, do you plan to wait? Theres only 7.5 hours until the deadline. How long do I plan to wait to go into hard-push mode on someone? Until I'm reasonably confident in my assessment. I'm not going to suddenly play differently just to make you happy, so deal with it. If you really want someone slammed into the floor, take a case and run with it, and slam someone into the floor. Don't wait for a scapegoat to lead the case. At any rate, my favorite target right now would probably be Gonzaw, between the stuff I've already pointed to, his wishy-washy voting everywhere, and his public "Oh, the person who's most interested in me is going to be my placeholder vote, I'll be back some time after the deadline, which might make that person look scummy if they decided to push". That's survivor play, not town-win play. In fact, speaking of such, ##Vote Gonzaw
That bolded part was the only one I noticed....and really you expect me to respond to that? I don't even know what to respond to.
The only other point I've seen floating around was how I wasn't helping consolidate the lynch on one target and apparently wanted other people to "lead the bandwagon" for me.
Again, I don't know what to respond to because that's true. I can't consolidate a lynch into a target I don't know in 5 minutes. I didn't have time to properly read the filters of iamperfection/Jingle/Mementos/etc to decide who of them to lynch and consolidate on, so yeah, I just put all I had onto the table, and asked other people to take it into account and do something with it.
Oh yeah, I forgot about this one:
I'm seriously starting to get paranoid about Gonzaw. He wants other people to weigh in before he commits to a course of action, he posts in a way intended to spark arguments, he doesn't give a shit who gets lynched, and he spreads suspicion around like icing on a cake.
I don't have any defense about it other than "it's wrong".
I did want people to weigh in before committing to a course of action. A more proper way of wording it would be "I wanted the guys I was suspicious of to post more to figure out their alignment and figure out which one of them is scum...and of course other townies weighing in would be good too".
I don't know how I "post in a way intended to spark arguments"....but even if I did you say I'm doing it on purpose? Fuck if I knew I had that ability I'd have taken advantage of it by now and dominated all my scum games with it
"He doesn't give a shit who gets lynched" is wrong too, don't know what else you want me to say unless you give specific examples
"He spreads suspicion around like icing on a cake" again is wrong too. Unless you substitute "suspicion" with "acknowledgement of odd/scummy play to analyse", in which case it would be correct.
So...yep, hopefully you either stop this bullshit altogether or try to come up with a proper structured case that people can respond to and weigh in their opinion (those that haven't done so already).
Try not to spam and don't spend 100% of your time and effort trying to "catch the obvious scum gonzaw!" because it will waste your and everybody's time.
|
EBWOP:
By "come up with a proper structured case" I mean one that at least tries to have good points and has specific examples of stuff you want to prove, but more than that takes into account my general play, contributions, etc and doesn't just completely ignore them (like people did in Can't Believe when they FoSed me).
|
I'm not the one trying to create clutter here, you're the one who's acting like I should convince YOU that you're scum, when all I need is to get other people to vote for you. You flipping red will speak for itself. Keeping me engaged in an argument where all you want to do is insult me is clearly a good thing for you, as scum.
If you want to ignore me, except to throw insults around in an effort to make me look bad so people won't see it and agree, please, just ignore me, it's much better for the thread. That's what I'll be doing for a while, at least until you show some actual reasoning.
|
I'm acting like you should do something useful with your time.
I know I'm town so I know your case is wrong. However you don't know that, so I try to make you figure out if it's wrong, or at least try to make you do something with it.
I.e make a case that people can understand and read and do something that contributes to town (as long as nobody sheeps you  ) instead of attacking me in every single post of yours and spending 90% of your time posting "let's lynch gonzaw tomorrow" without any further contributions.
However, I know I'm town and I think you are town, so as long as nobody thinks you are scum then I'm completely fine with everybody ignoring your case against me and I'm completely fine with discrediting you for that purpose (as long as you don't shit up the thread).
Anyways, I'll try and look at Nisani and Mementos better in the morning, and maybe Drazerk and S&B.
I still fully intend that thing about S&B, he should really step up his game.
Crossfire, I'd also like more contributions, specially who you think is scum/suspicious or at least who you have doubts on. Try to take some initiative.
|
On October 02 2012 10:59 Crossfire99 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 02 2012 10:22 GreYMisT wrote:On October 02 2012 09:59 Crossfire99 wrote:
So, I'm glad that iamperfection died, but I thought this was a majority lynch. I mean even the op says it is a simple majority lynch. Shouldn't it have been a no lynch? I've never been good with the lynch type names. They OP explains the rules for the lynch Just so you know, I read the op and still thought is was majority lynch with the definition you gave. If you are refering to the thread you linked, I figured the voting rules there didn't really apply because your rules had some differences.
On September 29 2012 01:55 GreYMisT wrote:
This game is a simple majority lynch. Whoever has the most votes at the end of the day will be lynched.
|
Okay, first things first,
Gonzaw, I don't find ghost scummy at the moment. One, my mind still lumps iamperfection, ghost, and nisani together based on their early conduct. That is almost certainly not all scum, as it would imply that most or all of the scumteam played a super passive D1 and didn't try to defend iamperfection. iamperfection flipped scum. Out of the remaining two, ghost looks better to me, so that's one reason I'm not finding him scummy.
Two, I am still suspicious of Keirathi. I like that ghost's re-entrance to the thread was actually reading some people or a person, and how he plays out his suspicions. He sort of questions Keirathi without accusing him right at the start, talks to Keirathi, draws out more information. THEN he posts his case, which includes how Keirathi responded to those questions concerning his scumread on Nisani and the way Keirathi has been pushing Nisani. That felt like a townie way to start a case.
Three, not everyone can be scum. We've flipped one. Probably have 2-3 left, regardless of any third party. I have some actual suspicions on active players - keirathi and a couple others (coming soon™), but there are also a number of players I'm just unsure of. I need to see more of nisani. I need to see more of snb. I need to see more of you to be sure. That's too many scumreads or nulls for me to want to add others.
Next up, general thoughts:
We (read: you 4) got a scum lynch with only 4 votes. This makes me think that (1) there are less than 4 scum, as a team that big could probably drum up more than 4 votes; (2) we have some inactive players that are scum. Keirathi's concerns about plurality lynch and the way votes were spread was good. That was worth some townie points to me. And the concerns are real, spread out votes allow an easy swing into the candidate they want. Yet that didn't happen. Based on that, I'm wholly speculating a team of less than 4 scum, but more than 2 scum (kp = scum/2 which makes me think it's > 2 scum). So 3 scum, with 1 dead. I assume all 3 wouldn't have been inactive, so I spitball that there's 1 inactive scum and 1 more active scum remaining.
I agree with HiroPro here:On October 02 2012 12:02 HiroPro wrote:Show nested quote +
@Crossfire: You know, the fact that you forgot it's plurality lynch and not majority lynch actually makes you look worse, since you parked your vote on iamperfection and left. If you were scum maybe you thought there would be a NL so you thought iamperfection was safe before disappearing.
If anything that makes him more likely to be town, gonzaw. Scum would probably know the voting rules considering they have teammates... I guess there's the possibility no scum player knew the voting rules, but it seems unlikely. ESPECIALLY since the vote was on one of their teammates, so they ought to have been looking for ways to save iamperfection. Crossfire not strongly town for me, but mildly town based on the vote stuff in particular.
Minor read:
Worried about Drazerk. I have no problem with his general play and posting, I find it fun to have some color in games, even if it makes things a little more difficult. But my gut feeling about Drazerk's play is that while he may dick around in his posts and words, he doesn't often dick around with his ACTIONS. In PTP3 as scum he used his powers to take out the SK, to hit me as I was figuring things out. From what I remember of Holy Roman, he used the powers he was given to try and win. From what I remember of Aperture 1, he got caught early but still tried to wiggle himself to survival. Overall, I get the sense that Drazerk has fun with the games, but still plays in such a way that he can win.
Here are his votes yesterday:On September 30 2012 14:00 Drazerk wrote:
##vote Keirathi
I'll be honest only a survivor / third party / idiot would back off a case that early with that little pressure against it.
Now I'm going to go to bed.
Early vote on keirathi, for reasoning that he explained as to survivor/third party, but still not towards "idiot"
Then snbOn October 01 2012 04:29 Drazerk wrote:
##unvote:
##Vote: strongandbig
We have played this game of cat and mouse for far too long. You know how I act and you know how I play so why would you try to bring me down for something like that when you know its my standard play unless you think you could shift the lynch early because you know how easy it is to form a band wagon on myself.
I have found a scum.
Screw Keirathi discussion I was doing his job for him.
For...not knowing how Drazerk plays, or not reacting to Drazerk in the way Drazerk thought snb would react? Bastard 2 apparently "proves" how snb is scum this game. After dropping snb, we get
On October 02 2012 05:12 Drazerk wrote:
There is no way this is actually a town Austin lol
##Unvote:
##vote: austinmcc
On October 02 2012 05:16 Drazerk wrote:
That statement is so retarded I can't put it past a town version of you
Drazerk was in PTP3, which is one of the games I did the same thing. I looked back to find what it was, and realized that I hadn't voiced my read in that game as strongly as I did in others (LV on Hyaach, Newbie..XVI on Suki from obs).
Here was my mention in-game:On August 26 2012 03:16 austinmcc wrote:
Almost 100% convinced that Mementoss is town based on one thing he said, and I seem to have good luck when I get that feeling. That's it. Not nearly as forceful as I remembered. I was really worried about Drazerk until I went back and reread that, because I thought I'd laid it out in game or in obs or post-game or ANYWHERE. But I didn't, so I guess Drazerk might not have seen me do that.
But he leaves his vote on me, doing nothing, for the remainder of the day. Even if he went to sleep shortly thereafter, there was enough time to see that I've done this in the past as town, or to look at other targets more likely to be lynched. Instead, Drazerk basically gives three throwaway votes during D1. I view that as scummy. Some of his posts strike me as town (Does something feel off with the JH lynch, directing people towards Bastard 2 somehow reads town to me), but the votes don't.
Gonna be mildly active this afternoon, but not like yesterday. Need to actually get some work done. Gonzaw, do you still think ghost might be scum? Even if you look at the full roster of players?
|
United Kingdom31255 Posts
Aperture 1 was fun...
A good lesson on shooting people 5 seconds then claiming you need to kill town to win.
|
Okay, first things first: I don't have time to make thorough analysis and stuff (for instance carefully read filters, etc)
Second things second: I'll try to post my mild thoughts here (again, take into account I haven't reread filters).
I'm working on a uni project right now, I'm gonna eat and go to uni, and I'll come back after the deadline, so I have no time to put into this.
Anyways, to austin:
Hmm, I guess ghost's actions read town to many. Okay, I'll drop that (unless someone finds something else). I'd still like him to chime in and comment on people other than Keirathi, and to answer my question.
I'm getting better vibes out of Crossfire since his interactions with me and other townies seem genuine this N1, at least that's the guy feeling I get.
This leaves me with 4 guys: Nisani, Mementos, Drazerk, S&B.
There's this little voice in the back of my mind that tells me "Drazerk and S&B are bussing each other to disrupt everything in the thread and cause shitstorms and then when one of them flips the other one plays the 'a confirmed scum wanted me dead therefore I'm town' card; just like that Toad-vs-VE feud from LI".
None of them did anything to contribute to town, except maybe Drazerk at some points, but it is still entirely possible he can be scum, since his vote on austin was uber-bad and he just left his vote there and didn't care about the lynch at all (e.g he just posted random videos and left his vote on someone it seemed he didn't even think was scum until the deadline).
S&B did absolutely nothing other than complain against Drazerk.
Mementos is looking better than them, yes, based on him being the "first one to attack iamperfection". At least I can give him the benefit of the doubt over Drazerk/S&B because of that.
Nisani didn't do much, and even though he did seem like a "bored townie" to me when I mentioned him earlier, some scum may be able to emulate that behaviour (and Nisani may be one of them) so he's not completely off the hook.
That list is not definitive (like my previous ones) but it's the one I'll be working with on D2 if I'm still alive and nothing out of the ordinary happens (like claims, etc).
Little thing about Keirathi:
Yes, I agree that there are some "weird" things with him, like that rationalization of his plan he did, and the way he acted towards the deadline wanting to avoid lynching iamp and Drazerk.
But meh, considering the rest of his play I can see it coming from a town Keirathi that just didn't read iamp well. Everybody makes mistakes.
|
United Kingdom31255 Posts
gonzaw I am the king of bussing if anything S+B flipping scum would make me look worse
|
On October 03 2012 02:29 Drazerk wrote:
gonzaw I am the king of bussing if anything S+B flipping scum would make me look worse
ehem
|
United Kingdom31255 Posts
I tried to take the mafia KP and shoot scum with it...
|
On October 03 2012 02:44 Drazerk wrote:
I tried to take the mafia KP and shoot scum with it...
i've done this as well
back on topic, i'll make a post about stuff later
|
United Kingdom31255 Posts
|
On October 03 2012 02:44 Drazerk wrote:
I tried to take the mafia KP and shoot scum with it...
There was a UG game where I actually shot a scumbuddy at night.
He was confirmed scum by a lynched DT, so we thought "What the hell you'll get lynched tomorrow anyways" and decided to kill him at night. Next day was a NL and the next day we won the game with a misslynch.
...good times.
|
Sorry I've been less than up to my standards. Been busy, whatever. /shrugs.
A few thoughts:
1. Because the vote was so close and there were so few ppl on iamperfection, it would not have looked bad for scum to be somewhere else and any scum on iamperfection could relatively easily have switched to avert his lynch. If there was scum on him it was sub-optimal play. Scum do stupid things; I got hammered by my teammates once while I was off playing dota. But in the balance I propose looking away from the iamperfection voters for now.
2. Drazerk's whole play is based around the premise "I refuse to try and look or be townie, so fuck you for trying to analyze me." We should kill him, it's the only sensible town response to that play. Also I think he's scum because he jumps around on votes without a care in the world, and because of that circular reasoning thing from before. Still, I'm not as sure about him as I have been in the past.
3. Getting medium bad vibes from jingle, but I can't put my finger on why.
4. Nisani looks pretty useless - his reasoning for voting Drazerk is pretty dumb IMO and it seems like he's doing some stupidly weak pressure. Like the best he came up with was "too many null reads".
5. I can't remember the last time Austin was scum, any help?
Laters
|
Concerning Mementoss Gonzaw, he and keirathi are sort of right up there with each other for the people I'm considering for active scum.
It's a couple little things:
(1) His comments on me feel slightly forcedOn October 01 2012 00:29 Mementoss wrote:Austinmcc Show nested quote +On September 30 2012 15:44 austinmcc wrote:
...
I appreciate things getting off to a nice start, but really? Was I the only person who assumed that Keirathi didn't actually have some giant scumread on Mattchew? Given the reasons that he decided to vote mattchew (amg mattchew has used the term town and hasn't claimed a role that doesn't exist), I don't see the unvote as scummy. Vote for weak reasons, unvote for weak reasons.
Drazerk you ACTUALLY think it's anti-town to do that? The fact that austinmcc can't see what drazerk is trying to say is mind boggling since austinmcc is not a noob. It was pretty clear to anyone reading the thread that Keirathia plan was done in the incorrect way as I went into above and as mattchew explained a bit further in his post. Also, austinmcc thinks this is getting off to a good start?? It seems pretty dead to me. On top of this weird misconception, his explanation for why the unvote is not scummy is lackluster. Vote has a lot more power than actually getting someone lynched. He's also asking sarcastic rhetorical questions, in which the answers are fairly fucking obvious. The lack of logic here is scummy, and trying to make drazerk look bad without reason to/ target the easiest player to target day 1 in this game, makes me think austinmcc is scum. ##Vote: Austinmcc I can't see what Drazerk is saying. I think the game is getting off to a good start. I don't explain why the unvote isn't scummy well enough for mementoss's liking. I lack logic. I am trying to make Drazerk look bad.
I addres some of those points here:On October 01 2012 01:09 austinmcc wrote:The good start bit is relative to other recent games. It may seem dead, but, comparatively, this game started much quicker.So you don't see Keirathi's early play as scummy, you find it poorly executed town play. I didn't find it scummy and asked Drazerk whether he actually does, which was not a rhetorical question (The other ones, sure, but the final question to Drazerk is for realsies). You even want "more explanation" from Drazerk in the future, which is what I wanted because I didn't see Keirathi's entrance as third party. I know that Drazerk gave some comments on why an uninvested survivor would give up so easily, but look at his actual vote: Show nested quote +On September 30 2012 14:00 Drazerk wrote:
##vote Keirathi
I'll be honest only a survivor / third party / idiot would back off a case that early with that little pressure against it.
Now I'm going to go to bed. The vote lays out survivor/third party/idiot. What makes Drazerk sure it's the first two and not the third? I'm wondering why, if it can be any of the three, he's so focused on the third party options. Maybe I'm just paranoid, but Drazerk and third party have a history in themed games, and want to know why he's zoning in on third party options rather than what would appear to be bad townie. It's not that I can't see what Drazerk is saying, but I want to know where that option for Keirathi's play went.
See GSL Open II for slow start, which I'd just been killed in. See Drazerk's vote for an option that Keirathi was an "idiot," yet he never really addressed why he was dismissing that option and finding Keirathi to be third party. At least not that I've seen.
Note also that in this post I say I didn't find Keirathi's conduct scummy. I say this. I didn't find Keirathi's early play scummy.
(2) On October 01 2012 07:23 Mementoss wrote:
@Gonzaw I think that it is still weird that austin completely switches stances on the Drazerk/keirathi squabble after I make that comment calling him scummy. I asked him why he came to flip flop on the issue and hasn't answered the question yet. Leaving my post on him, the way he commented on the situation seemed really weird for me. By the time mementoss posts this, I was finding Keirathi scummy because of the EXPLANATION that he was giving for his mattchew vote/unvote:+ Show Spoiler +I look further into Keirathi On October 01 2012 03:18 austinmcc wrote:Keirathi, I'm a little troubled by this when I look back through your explanation: Show nested quote +On September 30 2012 13:01 Keirathi wrote:Of course my case is bad. I certainly don't think you are scum for something so...inconsequential. But this thread needed to move past setup speculation and into people giving real, meaningful opinions and thoughts that they can be held accountable for. Although, I was hoping that other people would weigh in on it before you responded ##Unovte When you unvote, you specifically note that you want real, meaningful opinions that people can be held accountable for. So you're interested in getting discussion going in general. Show nested quote +On September 30 2012 14:20 Keirathi wrote:
Matt took my case seriously, and gave a solid response. I don't need to wait for other people to come into the thread to tell me that. No reason to leave my vote on him anymore, it accomplished my goal. This seems to not match up. If you wanted people to give opinions, how was your goal accomplished when only Mattchew responded? Show nested quote +On September 30 2012 14:22 Drazerk wrote:
You need other people to comment on something before you dismiss it especially when the only person commenting was the person the case was built around. Show nested quote +On September 30 2012 14:26 Keirathi wrote:
That doesn't make any sense. Why do I need someone else's opinion on my case to make up my own mind about how well Matt defended himself? Now you seem to be responding to Drazerk that you were only concerned with Mattchew and not other people's opinions. The initial justification says you wanted opinions, now you don't even want them. Show nested quote +On September 30 2012 15:10 Keirathi wrote:
Here was my thought process: I started reading the thread, and I saw the last few posts all speculating about the setup in a closed setup game. And I'll admit, I even threw my own comment out there. Then I realized that setup speculation wasn't doing anything to actually benefit town. So I went back and looked for who started the discussion, and it was you. Then I looked back at your earlier posts, remembered you seem to roll scum a lot, and you were doing a thing that I've personally used to identify scum. Back to wanting discussion. Why the two inconsistent explanations? You may think this has been covered ad nauseum, but some of your explanations aren't really matching up. On October 01 2012 05:03 austinmcc wrote:Show nested quote +On October 01 2012 04:15 Keirathi wrote:@austin: On September 30 2012 16:14 Keirathi wrote:
I think the misconception here is that people seem to think that I wanted my case on Matt to generate discussion about Matt. That's not really the case. I just wanted to generate discussion, period. If that discussion was about Matt? Great. About me? Great. About people who jumped in to defend or attack one or the other of us? Still great.
Anything besides trying to guess how many scum there are. *snip*
Again, I didn't need my case on Mattchew to generate discussion about HIM. I would have happily discussed it with other people if they came into the thread before he responded, but once he did and I was satisfied with his response (plus my meta check through his games), I really had no reason to leave my vote there. I'm certainly not sure that he's town or anything, but his response was townie enough that I unvoted. Here's a question for you, though. What's my scum motivation for doing that? There's just a little disconnect there between wanting discussion and being happy to discuss Mattchew with others and then "why do I need someone else's opinion on my case." Like...if your case was meant as a tool to get discussion, then it doesn't matter much what mattchew says or how he responds, because your primary concern is discussion and not his alignment. His response gives you a starting point for MORE discussion, asking people how they feel about his response, etc. Scummy motivation? Just look at your explanation, that you wanted to stop setup speculation and move into something else, generate discussion, because it would help town. RAWR, i am keirathi, the hero who saved town from a slow game, scum would never do that, feed me your town cred!
Ymmv, but I'm pretty clearly focused on Keirathi's explanations for the entire thing, not the ease at which he unvoted, which is what I was initially defending/not finding scummy:I appreciate things getting off to a nice start, but really? Was I the only person who assumed that Keirathi didn't actually have some giant scumread on Mattchew? Given the reasons that he decided to vote mattchew (amg mattchew has used the term town and hasn't claimed a role that doesn't exist), I don't see the unvote as scummy. Vote for weak reasons, unvote for weak reasons. I'm not concerned with the vote/unvote in the posts that have happened between mementoss's case and this, I'm concerned with Keirathi's explanation for the whole Mattchew shebang, that he wanted opinions yet stopped before he got them, and then stated he didn't need anyone else's opinion.
So I don't get mementoss's post:On October 01 2012 07:23 Mementoss wrote:
@Gonzaw I think that it is still weird that austin completely switches stances on the Drazerk/keirathi squabble after I make that comment calling him scummy. I asked him why he came to flip flop on the issue and hasn't answered the question yet. Leaving my post on him, the way he commented on the situation seemed really weird for me.
we may just disagree that I completely switched stances. Which is fine. I said I didn't find Keirathi's early play scummy. After looking at his explanation further, I did. I'm probably splitting hairs in trying to separate the vote/unvote from the explanation, but that's because I still don't find the vote/unvote with ease scummy, but I DO find the explanation scummy. They point in different ways for me.
But the bolded part here gets stuck in my head. I don't see any post concerning me "flip flopping." I don't see a comment in his initial vote on me about that. I don't see a comment at any point while I'm going back and forth with Keirathi about me flip flopping. This is the first time I see it, and I have no idea what it's referencing. This is ODD. It gives off scummy vibes, because it indicates that mementoss misremembers what he was calling me out for (not focused on actually calling me out, more focused on just making a case), or, the more paranoid option, that this is part of some planned attack and there's a post that should have come, calling me a flip-flopper, but never did. Neither option gives me a townie feeling.
(3) Then he's got this post as well:On October 02 2012 03:49 Mementoss wrote:Show nested quote +On October 02 2012 01:43 austinmcc wrote:On October 02 2012 01:15 Mattchew wrote:
austin why arent you voting iamperfection with me? Oh noes, I forgot. ##Vote: iamperfectionSorry about that. ##Unvotesnip This exchange read extremely weird for me, especially since before this austimccn has never mentioned Iamperfection. That post does read weird, because he's reading it seriously. Like I said to keirathi, + Show Spoiler +On October 02 2012 04:12 austinmcc wrote:Show nested quote +On October 02 2012 03:53 JingleHell wrote:On October 02 2012 03:49 Mementoss wrote:On October 02 2012 01:43 austinmcc wrote:On October 02 2012 01:15 Mattchew wrote:
austin why arent you voting iamperfection with me? Oh noes, I forgot. ##Vote: iamperfectionSorry about that. ##Unvotesnip This exchange read extremely weird for me, especially since before this austimccn has never mentioned Iamperfection. You know, that's actually an intriguing point. Mind explaining, austin? Found Mattchew's question to be real but posed in a silly way (What is your read on iamperfection?). Gave him a real answer, but started with a silly beginning. On October 02 2012 04:34 austinmcc wrote:Show nested quote +On October 02 2012 04:22 Keirathi wrote:On October 02 2012 04:12 austinmcc wrote:On October 02 2012 03:53 JingleHell wrote:On October 02 2012 03:49 Mementoss wrote:On October 02 2012 01:43 austinmcc wrote:On October 02 2012 01:15 Mattchew wrote:
austin why arent you voting iamperfection with me? Oh noes, I forgot. ##Vote: iamperfectionSorry about that. ##Unvotesnip This exchange read extremely weird for me, especially since before this austimccn has never mentioned Iamperfection. You know, that's actually an intriguing point. Mind explaining, austin? Found Mattchew's question to be real but posed in a silly way (What is your read on iamperfection?). Gave him a real answer, but started with a silly beginning. I could buy that answer, but it still doesn't explain why after your Vote+Unvote, you kept talking about iamperfection like you wanted to lynch him. On October 02 2012 01:43 austinmcc wrote:
Why am I voting iamperfection over others?
*snip*
Why am I lynching iamperfection over the other two? *snip* That was your first mention of him, and you seemed to be saying that you thought he was the scummiest of the 3 "lurker" and that one of them was almost certainly scum. But immediately afterwards, you started talking about JH and in your next post, you hopped on the JH wagon. Oh, no. It was meant as a silly response and vote, not that I'm finding him more scummy than the others. That question isn't "Why am I voting iamperfection? Let me tell you!" It was "Why am I joining you in voting for iamperfection when these other two look almost the same?" Not actually hopping on the wagon.
Mattchew's question looked silly. I gave a silly answer. I am sometimes silly in thread. But mementoss pulls this up later:On October 02 2012 08:58 Mementoss wrote:
Also @gonzaw, austin is most likely town for what?
Sheeping onto iamperfection when mattchew told him to? Trying to counterwagon a last minute switch onto keirathi?
Dude, either your out of it this game or scum not sure.
Read my vote/unvote. I'm not sheeping onto iamperfection because Mattchew asks me to. I vote him as a JOKE, unvote him, and then ask why I should be lynching iamperfection over ghost/nisani, and why I find the three to be similar. I do not know how this is interpreted as me jumping on a wagon. If I were jumping on a wagon, I wouldn't unvote and ask why I was lynching one instead of the other two. I was joking and then seriously asking mattchew why he was on iamperfection over others.
Again, it's this weird disconnect where mementoss doesn't quite seem to be reading my responses. Or he just dislikes my responses but never really voices that when they come out. I misread him in Rock Band as scum when he was town, and I'm not getting as strong a scum read here, but flip flop posts that don't actually exist, not really reading my posts but continuing to just poke at me don't result in a townie feel.
This quip stuck out to me as well, just as very interesting:On October 02 2012 09:25 Mementoss wrote:
If your town mafia will kill you night 1 anyways lol.
(Mementoss, why is Gonzaw the N1 kill? I'd like to see your reasoning behind this statement)
Beyond that, I agree with all three of these:Mementos:
He didn't do anything at all throughout D1. Same heuristic here as well, he hasn't been part of any discussion even though he was active (like when ghost asked him a question).
He didn't heavily push iamperfection so his vote on him doesn't mean anything, specially since unvoting him would not change anything.
Still, it doesn't seem right that he'd bus his scummate that early and never try to shift attention to some other townie, so I'll keep that in mind.
I remember him being around a good bit, I remember some posts of his, but I'm not sure that I would if he didn't attack me. He kind of blended in, and there were some major points (Mattchew trying to drum up iamperfection lynch, the JH discussion, the ghost/keirathi bit at the end) where he's just not seeming concerned. But yet he didn't move off of iamperfection, and attacked him early, and also responded to keirathi about iamperfection's meta.
A lot of his posts on me just confuse me. They don't give me a townie vibe, but he's picking up on things that I would probably pick up on as well. The joke-vote looks really odd when it's just text and I didn't put a disclaimer as to what I was doing. But it feels like he's detached from actually pushing me, just like he was detached from pushing iamperfection. And that "flip-flopping" comment...I can't figure out where that comes from. Am I being overly paranoid thinking there was some sequence of posts he thought he'd made?
I'm still more sold on Keirathi as the active scum. But mementoss is my secondary candidate, and if I'm being purely speculative, one of the people I could most see being third party. It's the only way I can really rectify my read based on his general play AND the fact that he voted for scum. So I want to keep an eye on him even though he voted iamperfection.
|
On October 03 2012 03:11 strongandbig wrote:
5. I can't remember the last time Austin was scum, any help?
Never been scum. I just always seem to look scummy D1.
|
JH, what are your reads on Keirathi and mementoss?
Also, I'm trying to follow this spat between you and Gonzaw. You think the early vote on iamperfection and then unvote was a bus attempt that he gave up on? I see a lot of quick responses, but I don't see a coherent summation of why you're finding him scummy based on what he's done.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
