|
On November 04 2012 02:42 debears wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2012 02:39 Rad wrote:On November 04 2012 02:31 debears wrote:On November 04 2012 02:30 Rad wrote:On November 04 2012 02:27 debears wrote:On November 04 2012 02:26 Rad wrote:On November 04 2012 02:20 debears wrote:On November 04 2012 02:16 Rad wrote:On November 04 2012 02:13 debears wrote:On November 04 2012 02:07 Alsn wrote:
[quote]Again, that isn't even what he said. He said he wanted you to post less fluff and more content. How is that a vote to make you post less?
Also, if you're explaining away fluff as sparking conversation I don't know what to say, how is posting a bunch of fluff productive? Either people find you scummy for it(bad if you're town, it lessens your credibility) or people will actually reply with fluff themselves(even worse). How much fluff do you actually see in my filter? Quote it and put it in a spoiler. Then take my quotes that look like they are accomplishing something. and put them in another spoiler. I want to see how much you think his fluff argument holds true. That's quite a lot of work you're asking from him and doesn't really help town much, does it? It's all going to be subjective at that point, he might say "this is fluff" and you can just argue that it's not. If we want to determine how much fluff you've given so far, we can check your filter and determine for ourselves. Give me a percentage of fluff in my filter then. If your going to accuse me of something, at least make is specific. This "you're posting so much fluff" is doing nothing. That's your best reasoning on me so far. What good does this percentage do except make some arbitrary point to argue about endlessly? "50% fluff, scum!!!" "only 25% fluff, clearly not a scum tell!" I'm trying to figure out what you expect to come from such a number. If you're scum and you want alsn to waste time coming up with this percentage, clearly you don't think it'll be damning. Nothing to come out of this number except WIFOM on both sides of the argument. Stop bitching and just give me a damn percentage. Holy shit. I'm not gonna freak out. I already admitted I had fluff Answer the question about what good can come from coming up with a percentage. So I know where my fluff rating stands. So I can determine whether you are being genuine or not based on what I feel Your "fluff rating"? O.o Anyway, my issues were with your reasoning for wanting alsn to spend time doing something that doesn't help town at all. If you could think of reasons why it would help town, great, I was hoping to hear them from you, but you're stuck on just pushing the wasting of time to happen. Get on Alsn if you really want this huge waste of time to happen, not me (I wasn't the one pushing the fluff idea on you), but if you don't give a good answer as to why your "fluff rating" matters to town, I'll consider this you just pushing people to waste time. Again, as I stated before, if you're scum, you clearly don't think your fluff percentage will be a bad thing against you, so it's worthless to even look up at this point. Because I'm town and I'm trying to figure out who's scum. Attacking someone without specific reasoning means you can back out on your argument easier later. Saying "you're posting a lot of fluff" is a very ambigious statement. Why don't you want to just give me a percentage? It's a very simple request. Off the top of your head
Why do you keep asking me to? I don't give a shit one way or the other at this point about your percentage of fluff. I care that you want people to spend their time looking into your fluff percentage. If you're town, why do you want people to waste their time and dirty up the thread with this fluff percentage that wouldn't mean a damn thing (because you'd be town, so it doesn't even matter if your fluff % is 100%)? If you're scum, I can totally see the motivation in this.
|
On November 04 2012 02:44 Clarity_nl wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2012 02:42 debears wrote:On November 04 2012 02:39 Rad wrote:On November 04 2012 02:31 debears wrote:On November 04 2012 02:30 Rad wrote:On November 04 2012 02:27 debears wrote:On November 04 2012 02:26 Rad wrote:On November 04 2012 02:20 debears wrote:On November 04 2012 02:16 Rad wrote:On November 04 2012 02:13 debears wrote:
[quote]
How much fluff do you actually see in my filter?
Quote it and put it in a spoiler. Then take my quotes that look like they are accomplishing something. and put them in another spoiler. I want to see how much you think his fluff argument holds true. That's quite a lot of work you're asking from him and doesn't really help town much, does it? It's all going to be subjective at that point, he might say "this is fluff" and you can just argue that it's not. If we want to determine how much fluff you've given so far, we can check your filter and determine for ourselves. Give me a percentage of fluff in my filter then. If your going to accuse me of something, at least make is specific. This "you're posting so much fluff" is doing nothing. That's your best reasoning on me so far. What good does this percentage do except make some arbitrary point to argue about endlessly? "50% fluff, scum!!!" "only 25% fluff, clearly not a scum tell!" I'm trying to figure out what you expect to come from such a number. If you're scum and you want alsn to waste time coming up with this percentage, clearly you don't think it'll be damning. Nothing to come out of this number except WIFOM on both sides of the argument. Stop bitching and just give me a damn percentage. Holy shit. I'm not gonna freak out. I already admitted I had fluff Answer the question about what good can come from coming up with a percentage. So I know where my fluff rating stands. So I can determine whether you are being genuine or not based on what I feel Your "fluff rating"? O.o Anyway, my issues were with your reasoning for wanting alsn to spend time doing something that doesn't help town at all. If you could think of reasons why it would help town, great, I was hoping to hear them from you, but you're stuck on just pushing the wasting of time to happen. Get on Alsn if you really want this huge waste of time to happen, not me (I wasn't the one pushing the fluff idea on you), but if you don't give a good answer as to why your "fluff rating" matters to town, I'll consider this you just pushing people to waste time. Again, as I stated before, if you're scum, you clearly don't think your fluff percentage will be a bad thing against you, so it's worthless to even look up at this point. Because I'm town and I'm trying to figure out who's scum. Attacking someone without specific reasoning means you can back out on your argument easier later. Saying "you're posting a lot of fluff" is a very ambigious statement. Why don't you want to just give me a percentage? It's a very simple request. Off the top of your head Well I'm glad you cleared that up. Anyway, you want your number so badly? 35% fluff. Can we move on now? I feel like we reversed 12 hours and we're talking about Cheese's joke.
Ok. Finally. I have 65% content in a large filter according to you, which arguably is more contribution to the thread than most. This is why the fluff argument is invalid. See my point Rad?
That is all.
Now, scumhunting coming
|
On November 04 2012 02:37 debears wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2012 02:36 Alsn wrote:
I refuse to answer pre-game stuff on principle. Please don't bring it up again. Very well. It still seems he's uneager to engage with me. He pretty much just sat on the sidelines when you and I were going at it
@ debears
Regarding your first argument with Alsn, I didn't want to take part of it because I thought it was not really important. Just the usual stuff to get the game started. I also wanted to discuss about policy because I thought I had a good point while everybody was inclined to enforce the "Lynch a Lurker" policy.
Also, right now, we are on the same side regarding sylver, so I'm not going to focus on you. Does it seem reasonable to you ?
|
On November 04 2012 02:42 debears wrote:
Why don't you want to just give me a percentage? It's a very simple request. Off the top of your head With the amount you have posted, just because the percentage is low now doesn't mean that it was low earlier. At the time when sylver actually voted for you I'd say the amount of fluff posts you had made was among the highest in the game(possibly only rivalled by Cheese, but I seriously don't want to look it up).
I'm inclined to agree with Rad that if you're truly setting a scum trap, it's useless at this point. Although interestingly Clarity actually felt the need to respond to it despite the lack of sense you've been making lately(pre-game speculation being the crowning achievement I'd say).
|
On November 04 2012 02:35 Clarity_nl wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2012 02:33 Djodref wrote:On November 04 2012 02:27 Clarity_nl wrote:
I'd just like to point out that da0ud dissapeared off the face of the earth, and I'm not happy about this at all. @ ClarityIt's 1.30 am in Hong Kong and it's Saturday night  I guess he might be out... I would be partying if I was not sick  Perhaps... I guess I just like it when people mention they're leaving and will be back in X time. That way when you question them, it'll look weird if they say "be back in 12 hours guys!" without addressing the fact that you're questioning them.
@ Clarity
Why are you concerned about daoud not being in the thread but not about sylver ?
|
@ Djodref
Because I made a post questioning da0ud, and he conveniently dissapeared right after. I wasn't aware of his timezone though.
Everyone was discussing sylver to death. It's really dodgy that he's dissapeared AGAIN but I got told to have more focus in my posts, so that's what I'm trying to do.
|
On November 04 2012 02:46 debears wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2012 02:44 Clarity_nl wrote:On November 04 2012 02:42 debears wrote:On November 04 2012 02:39 Rad wrote:On November 04 2012 02:31 debears wrote:On November 04 2012 02:30 Rad wrote:On November 04 2012 02:27 debears wrote:On November 04 2012 02:26 Rad wrote:On November 04 2012 02:20 debears wrote:On November 04 2012 02:16 Rad wrote:
[quote]
That's quite a lot of work you're asking from him and doesn't really help town much, does it? It's all going to be subjective at that point, he might say "this is fluff" and you can just argue that it's not. If we want to determine how much fluff you've given so far, we can check your filter and determine for ourselves. Give me a percentage of fluff in my filter then. If your going to accuse me of something, at least make is specific. This "you're posting so much fluff" is doing nothing. That's your best reasoning on me so far. What good does this percentage do except make some arbitrary point to argue about endlessly? "50% fluff, scum!!!" "only 25% fluff, clearly not a scum tell!" I'm trying to figure out what you expect to come from such a number. If you're scum and you want alsn to waste time coming up with this percentage, clearly you don't think it'll be damning. Nothing to come out of this number except WIFOM on both sides of the argument. Stop bitching and just give me a damn percentage. Holy shit. I'm not gonna freak out. I already admitted I had fluff Answer the question about what good can come from coming up with a percentage. So I know where my fluff rating stands. So I can determine whether you are being genuine or not based on what I feel Your "fluff rating"? O.o Anyway, my issues were with your reasoning for wanting alsn to spend time doing something that doesn't help town at all. If you could think of reasons why it would help town, great, I was hoping to hear them from you, but you're stuck on just pushing the wasting of time to happen. Get on Alsn if you really want this huge waste of time to happen, not me (I wasn't the one pushing the fluff idea on you), but if you don't give a good answer as to why your "fluff rating" matters to town, I'll consider this you just pushing people to waste time. Again, as I stated before, if you're scum, you clearly don't think your fluff percentage will be a bad thing against you, so it's worthless to even look up at this point. Because I'm town and I'm trying to figure out who's scum. Attacking someone without specific reasoning means you can back out on your argument easier later. Saying "you're posting a lot of fluff" is a very ambigious statement. Why don't you want to just give me a percentage? It's a very simple request. Off the top of your head Well I'm glad you cleared that up. Anyway, you want your number so badly? 35% fluff. Can we move on now? I feel like we reversed 12 hours and we're talking about Cheese's joke. Ok. Finally. I have 65% content in a large filter according to you, which arguably is more contribution to the thread than most. This is why the fluff argument is invalid. See my point Rad? That is all. Now, scumhunting coming
He made up a number to get you to shut up about it.
I'm not done with this until you give me a good reason you would want anyone to:
a) Go through all your posts (large filter already), separate them into fluff and non fluff
b) Come up with an exact percentage of your fluff.
If you're town, you wouldn't want anyone to waste their time doing either of the above because it wouldn't matter at all. Scum hunting town is ultimately wasting time in the end. Only you know if you're town, so as town, you would want people to not scum hunt you. You don't have to worry about any fluff case alsn has until it has put you at risk of being lynched.
If you're scum, it makes sense to want to make people waste their time.
Explain your motivation.
|
On November 04 2012 02:18 Mr. Cheesecake wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2012 02:11 Djodref wrote:On November 04 2012 01:55 Mr. Cheesecake wrote:On November 04 2012 01:47 Djodref wrote:On November 04 2012 01:33 Mr. Cheesecake wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On November 04 2012 01:20 Djodref wrote:
@ sylverfire
I don't know debears alignment. I'm already saying it in the post where I vote against you.
I think town players should not use their vote to cast suspicion upon someone. Town players should build cases to convince everybody to lynch the player they find the most suspicious.
You have the right to be suspicious of debears. But I think you have to bring better reasons to persuade us to do so. If you think that casting suspicion upon him is enough and expect other players to build a case against debears for you, then I would say that you are mafia.
Why did you use the word townies instead of players ?
So, you say that town players shouldn't vote as a pressure move / attract suspicion to someone? You used your vote last game on Inig as vote pressure: On October 26 2012 09:16 Djodref wrote:Show nested quote +On October 26 2012 08:34 Inigmaticalism wrote:
Right now I dont have any scum reads, only town reads which Ive already said in earlier posts. So I would lynch one of the lurkers probably. Also, Djo you seem to be the only one really going after me, so while your asking everyone what they think of me, you should answer your own question. what you you think of me?
-Should be back to post something in around 6-7 hours. I have already my eyes on you and I think that your posts lack content and scumhunting. You are my top scumread right now. Let's assume that the lurkers are going to get modkill today, who would you like to lynch ? Vote-pressuring you ## Vote Inig Same with Nack: On October 28 2012 22:44 Djodref wrote:
We still have no insight from Nackht at all. He has only said that he was sure that Kush was scum.
I'm not sure about Cheese anymore. I'm null on him right now. His case shows good scumhunting efforts, even if they go in the wrong direction. Him using a "djo attempt to discredit me" paragraph in his case is a towntell for me because it shows that he has natural sense of innocence (in opposition of the usual self-culpability). If he still believes I am scum after my answers to his case, I want him to look for my potential scumbuddies. No by association by the way because I am town and anyway you should wait for me to flip to start this kind of thing.
I want dandel to decide if I am scum or SK and bring consequent proofs to his case.
I'm very very wary of Nackht. He has given us nothing (expect him being sure that Kush was scum) so far and I don't understand why a town replacement would be retaining info like he does. The other thing speaking against him is that I don't have a strong scumread at the moment and it makes the probability for the lurkers to be mafia higher. So I hope that we have a modkill on Roco today.
I'm going to vote pressure him to make nackht talk. Keeping this vote on him until he gives us a complete assessment of what is going on here according to him. He promised it but he has just given us a "lol" so far.
##Vote nackhtjogger
You obviously believe in vote pressure to cast suspicion from a townie perspective. I have no problem with people using their vote to pressure people into talking or whatever reason they have if they state a reasonable explanation for a pressure vote. My problem with sylverfire post is that the initial reasons he gave for his vote were that debears filter was fluffy and that he cast a quick FoS on Alsn. Then he said that he also wanted to cast suspicion upon debears. He never said that he was using his vote as a pressure vote in the first place. The regrettable thing is that other people said this before he could defend himself. According to me, if you think that a player is suspicious enough to vote against him, you should persuade other players to vote for him, which sylverfire has failed to do imho. But I might not understand exactly the meaning of "cast suspicion", I see this expression as quite pejorative. - He never said anything about the FoS on Debears, I did. He just said that his reaction was odd to Alsn. - In you're post about Inig, your explanation was "lack of content / scumhunting" ---> hardly a reason. Especially to have other people vote for him. Same with Nack, nobody else voted for him and you didn't persuade anyone else to do so. - In both instances, your prime goal was to cast suspicion. Get people interested in what Inig was doing, get people interested in what Nack was lurking about. Your logic is backward this game. @ CheeseFoS on debears ? Where did I say that ? It's bolded. Sylver never said anything about the FoS on Alsn from Debears, but you seem to think he did.
Yes, I did. I couldn't get any reads out of it, but I mentioned it.
In my first post:
I don't kno wwhat to think about Alsn or debears. Could be one of the two is scum, need to see more from them on this topic. Don't like debears fluff.
You, on my posting times
Closest thing to around 14:00 was at 13:30 and that was only once the entire game. Very odd timing from him
TL Went down. Delayed me writing up my intro post. Also, it's friday, so I stay up later because I don't have work the following morning. And I was out friday evening. (For reference, I am EDT.)
Also, I was DEAD by D2. You have no sample size. Seriously, wild conspiracy theory gets us nowhere. It's scummy to post arguments that have no merit. I'm still attacking you because you continue to flail around with no useful reasons.
But these are particularly useless:
Go get laid for me brotha!
Nice. Townie points for you lol
Ninjad
Nvm on the peace out
But it's more on the number of one-liners you post. Like, your entire fucking filter. You constantly post multiple times within 5 minutes of each other. It's just unnecessary.
The biggest red flag to me was:
On November 03 2012 11:39 debears wrote:
Btw to all obs
I will attempt to reach the fabled 30 pg filter
If your 30 page filter looks like this, debears, how the is anyone supposed to process it as information? You write twenty sentences per page of filter. That's what I'm complaining about. You can put more than one sentence into a post. Please do, for the sake of the town.
Alright, enough about the fluff. I simply have asked a favor.
As for the continued Vote on debears:
At this point, I'm more concerned about you making up conspiracy theories about me. You OMGUS voted me (not surprising) but you're standing by it for really weird reasons. I'm not the only one calling them weird. Making up weird reasons about me is not getting us anywhere. I am finding it 1% more scummy with each straw you grasp at. Maybe you're overreacting because you're a scum in a bind? I find it strange, and suspicious.
|
@Sylver
Do you consider me a good lynch candidate based on activity?
and I have put more than one sentence in a post. My most important posts have more than 1. Those are the key
|
It occurs to me I haven't really addressed Djodref's vote on me much. It seems to me like Djo is sheeping. Debears asks him what he thinks and he basically replies "Oh, I would have focused on him for a different reason but sure, he's scummy"
On November 04 2012 00:06 Djodref wrote:Show nested quote +On November 03 2012 23:59 debears wrote:
@Djo
What do you think of my points on Sylver? Well, I have voted for sylver before you for a different scumslip so I definitively agree Anyway they are good points, the scumslip you have found is better than mine, his vote on you is quite unfounded and he has also totally forgot to mention me jumping on Cheese in his post. I think the chances for him to be scum are great.
I feel like the you vs cheese argument went pretty bland. You were like "hey look he was being funny in the QT" (which I hadn't read. And I don't really feel like going through it, it's a monster.) And then it didn't amount to much of anything.
|
@ sylverfire
How can I be sheeping when I voted you before debears ?
I'm still thinking that you should better have used a FoS rather than a vote but I understand now what you wanted to do when you said "I want to cast suspicion on him with my vote".
I didn't like at all how your explanation for your slip.+ Show Spoiler +On November 04 2012 02:21 Djodref wrote:@ CheeseShow nested quote +On November 03 2012 14:44 sylverfyre wrote:
Holy shit, this flavor. What.
If we're gonna lynch a lurker, I'd rather it be early game than late, at least. But I think that we have more... dedication among the townies this game.
<snip> Show nested quote +On November 04 2012 01:08 sylverfyre wrote:
<snip>
I'm not saying townies will be more dedicated this game. I'm saying PLAYERS will be more dedicated this game. <snip>
Is this not denial ? On a side note, regarding my seriousness in this game, it's because I don't want to play like last game where everybody was suspicious of me. But it doesn't work out so well 
|
On November 04 2012 03:03 debears wrote:
@Sylver
Do you consider me a good lynch candidate based on activity?
and I have put more than one sentence in a post. My most important posts have more than 1. Those are the key
We're picking out lynch candidates already? Weren't you the one who said we should vote our big scumtells first? I'm not ready to call you a lynch candidate. It's nowhere near lynch time, we still have more than 24 hours. We still haven't seen a lot from some players.
|
On November 04 2012 03:15 sylverfyre wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2012 03:03 debears wrote:
@Sylver
Do you consider me a good lynch candidate based on activity?
and I have put more than one sentence in a post. My most important posts have more than 1. Those are the key We're picking out lynch candidates already? Weren't you the one who said we should vote our big scumtells first? I'm not ready to call you a lynch candidate. It's nowhere near lynch time, we still have more than 24 hours. We still haven't seen a lot from some players.
Just answer the question.
If you were considering lynch candidates, would you consider me based on my activity?
|
On November 03 2012 20:22 Djodref wrote:Show nested quote +On November 03 2012 15:30 sylverfyre wrote:@ObzyI'm casting suspicion with my vote. I find it far more effective than FOS, which can be more difficult to keep track of. Votes, the mod will keep track of for us. I understand he's the most active person. If that was 3 pages of posts with useful content, I'd have no issue. It's like 2 pages of fluff and 1 page of content, and the 1 page of content could be condensed if he didn't jam the "post" button after finishing a sentence, when he fully intends to immediately write another one. @Rad - you were friggin brilliant D2/N2 last game. It's a shame you used your only bullet N1.  @ sylverfyreSo let me sum up the situation. You join the thread and directly vote for debears mainly because there is a lot of fluff in it. Then you say that you are voting him to "cast suspicion with your vote". I'm sorry but I'm voting somebody when I find them suspicious, not to cast suspicion on him. Do you know who is voting innocent players to cast suspicion on them ? Mafia. (Not sure if debears is innocent in this case, I have seen things I don't really like in his filter) I'm taking this for a scumslip and the most suspicious thing I have seen in this thread so far. ##Vote sylverfire
@ ClarityIt answers your question
Casting suspicion with your vote early D1 is standard play. Ask your coach about it if you don't believe me.
On November 04 2012 02:19 Alsn wrote:
Seriously debears, you're being extremely stubborn. At this point I'm leaning that you're either very strongly town where the only reasoning for your actions would be that you feel scum is bullying you into stopping. Or you're scum and are being afraid that if you change your mind people will find you scummy.
At this point I'd like it if you focused your attention somewhere else than towards explaining yourself so that I can make an informed decision on which is more likely.
That's a good point. I'm going to lay off on tunneling debears. It's wasting a lot of time, and I feel like I'm missing the forest for the trees at this point (to the point of making a mistake about Djo voting me before debears.
##Unvote
|
Clarification:
Voting for suspicion rather than FOS (especially day 1) is one of many "standard plays" - it's not the only way to play.
|
I would not consider you (or anyone) a lynch candidate purely due to high activity levels. Ever.
|
On November 04 2012 02:05 Mr. Cheesecake wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2012 02:01 Djodref wrote:I would like to add a point regarding sylver's scumslip. Please take note how he reacted to it. On November 04 2012 01:08 sylverfyre wrote:
/snip
And finally, on your final point:
I'm not saying townies will be more dedicated this game. I'm saying PLAYERS will be more dedicated this game. Why? The game filled up instantly and we don't have anyone from last game who lurked like crazy except for da0ud (who was on vacation, and is presumably more available now. I hope.) We have no Roco69 players this game, even da0ud has posted some content now. I don't think we'll have a day 1 lynch with anything less than 9 votes cast.
Your scumslip is grasping at straws and making up scum tells is really bad for town. Leaving my vote on you.
/snip
He denies the fact that he used the word "townies". In my opinion, a town player would have said "I've used the word townies but I meant players, I've slipped, my bad". Last game, I've accepted my slip and explained why I've slipped. I think it is mafia reaction to deny it like that. He's not denying using the word townies. He's denying the connotation of the word townies. There is no motivation for anyone to outright deny that they used a word, because, well, it's written in stone.Show nested quote +On November 04 2012 01:59 debears wrote:
@CC
What do you think of Djo's seriousness attitude this game?
His personality seems different from last game in that regard, where he seemed much more amicable Top scumread atm (Woa, is this last game already?) He's still smileydjo, but seasoned with something I can't recognize this game. He's contradicting his own town play and, previously, trying to nitpick at me for little to no reason.
@ Cheese
The word "townies" doesn't connote as "players". Kush helped me to understand this in my very first game on these forums. People don't use townies when they can use players. The meaning is different. It is a slip, so now we have to decided if it is a scumslip or not.
The way sylver reacted to it makes me thing that it is a scumslip indeed.
|
@Slyver
Then why did you say this?
The biggest red flag to me was:
On November 03 2012 11:39 debears wrote:
Btw to all obs
I will attempt to reach the fabled 30 pg filter
If your 30 page filter looks like this, debears, how the is anyone supposed to process it as information? You write twenty sentences per page of filter. That's what I'm complaining about. You can put more than one sentence into a post. Please do, for the sake of the town.
If activity is not something you lynch on, then why is my inference of activity the biggest red flag for you?
|
Ebwop
The biggest red flag to me was: Show nested quote +On November 03 2012 11:39 debears wrote:
Btw to all obs
I will attempt to reach the fabled 30 pg filter If your 30 page filter looks like this, debears, how the is anyone supposed to process it as information? You write twenty sentences per page of filter. That's what I'm complaining about. You can put more than one sentence into a post. Please do, for the sake of the town.
|
On November 04 2012 03:30 Djodref wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2012 02:05 Mr. Cheesecake wrote:On November 04 2012 02:01 Djodref wrote:I would like to add a point regarding sylver's scumslip. Please take note how he reacted to it. On November 04 2012 01:08 sylverfyre wrote:
/snip
And finally, on your final point:
I'm not saying townies will be more dedicated this game. I'm saying PLAYERS will be more dedicated this game. Why? The game filled up instantly and we don't have anyone from last game who lurked like crazy except for da0ud (who was on vacation, and is presumably more available now. I hope.) We have no Roco69 players this game, even da0ud has posted some content now. I don't think we'll have a day 1 lynch with anything less than 9 votes cast.
Your scumslip is grasping at straws and making up scum tells is really bad for town. Leaving my vote on you.
/snip
He denies the fact that he used the word "townies". In my opinion, a town player would have said "I've used the word townies but I meant players, I've slipped, my bad". Last game, I've accepted my slip and explained why I've slipped. I think it is mafia reaction to deny it like that. He's not denying using the word townies. He's denying the connotation of the word townies. There is no motivation for anyone to outright deny that they used a word, because, well, it's written in stone.On November 04 2012 01:59 debears wrote:
@CC
What do you think of Djo's seriousness attitude this game?
His personality seems different from last game in that regard, where he seemed much more amicable Top scumread atm (Woa, is this last game already?) He's still smileydjo, but seasoned with something I can't recognize this game. He's contradicting his own town play and, previously, trying to nitpick at me for little to no reason. @ CheeseThe word "townies" doesn't connote as "players". Kush helped me to understand this in my very first game on these forums. People don't use townies when they can use players. The meaning is different. It is a slip, so now we have to decided if it is a scumslip or not. The way sylver reacted to it makes me thing that it is a scumslip indeed.
I was trying to say that inactivity wouldn't be a problem. On the part of the entire town. I was looking at the player list, and the speed at which people signed up for the game, and making that judgement. I guess it could be construed as a slip to say townies. But if the entire player base is active, then the town doesn't need to worry about lurker policy, do they?
I said townies, because Inactivity isn't a problem for scum. They won last game because of it. Inactivity is a problem for town, town is the only faction that needs to worry about it. I don't think it will be a problem this game - I'm forecasting we aren't going to have any massive lurk problems (like Roco).
Maybe it was a slip, but I think it reflects exactly what I was thinking at the time. (Inactivity = problem for townies. Low inactivity = good for townies)
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
