|
@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
|
On November 04 2012 01:58 Alsn wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2012 01:49 debears wrote:On November 04 2012 01:39 Alsn wrote:On November 04 2012 01:13 debears wrote: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. There wasn't a long wait for the last few signups - everyone here seems pretty pumped to play some mafia seriously. I don't think lurker policy lynch will come up at all. You said townies. That's very different than saying the town or players. Very, very different. It means that you either 1) Think the people being active are townies 2) Know that the people being active are townies There is no other reason for using townies to describe those of us who are showing activeness and dedication Also, you voted me, meaning you voted for someone who you think is townie based on the above. That is scummy as shit debears, even if we hypothetically assume the two most active players are scum, it would still mean that town on the whole is being active and not lurking. I think your argument is bad and your insistence that his statement is a scum slip is far fetched imho. Eh. I think it's very odd to say that townies have good dedication, and I'm one of the guys showing dedication, yet he votes me. Also, what do you think of this part of his post alsn? I kinda expected a bit more... substance in the thread by now. For a guy who hadn't posted anything, why is he calling all the actives out for substance? What good does that do? That part of his post, sure, I agree that it's somewhat a silly statement. It doesn't change the fact that you had been acting very strangely and quite counter-productive to town interests. From where I'm sitting his vote was merited. Especially in light of the fact that he said he meant it as a strong FoS as opposed to a rock solid reason for why you absolutely must be scum. You OMGUSing him most certainly doesn't damage his case. Also, it's unfortunate that I'm indirectly helping him defend himself, but at this point I simply find you/Djod more scummy than him and I figured the chance of him being scum was lower than the risk of you guys getting off the hook if I had stayed silent and just watched. It seems that from the latest developments that other people had the same thought.
So, in essence, you think that a vote to tell someone to post less is productive?
Being active =/ acting strangely or counter productive
I was sparking conversation dude
OMGUS is warranted when I find him scummy
|
On November 04 2012 02:01 Rad wrote:
@debears
At one point in last game, djo said something like "debears, you know my scum play is better than this!" Think it was right before he was lynched. What's your take on djo's past scum game and his play this game?
I don't really want to read much into his past scum game or his first town game, besides his general personality.
HIs last game was much more indicative of how I believe he will play from now on. And I do think he is acting different off the top of my head. I'll have to research though before I can say definitively.
|
ebwop
the reason why about his first 2: he was playing the noob card and was his first time playing both sides
|
On November 04 2012 02:04 Alsn wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2012 01:58 debears wrote:On November 04 2012 01:44 Alsn wrote:On November 03 2012 23:44 debears wrote:
1) Sylver had obviously been following the thread before this post, yet he posts it AFTER I leave the thread. This is especially alarming considering he suddenly accuses and votes me for terribad reasoning
2) It's a big post, showing that he had it written for a while
You say it's a big post and that it must have taken a while to write, yet you don't even acknowledge the possibility that maybe that's why you weren't around any more? Because it had taken him a lot of time to write it and you had simply left at that point? Given your point 2) I don't see how you can at the same time accuse him of deliberately waiting until you were gone. Alsn, you don't find the timing convenient at all? It seems he had covered the whole thread at that point. What's the best way to discredit someone? Waiting til they aren't there to argue with you The fact that you keep bringing this up made me go look it up. Seriously, he posted his case 6 minutes after you posted your good night post. If he was truly being deliberate about wanting you to be gone, don't you think he would've waited a little longer? I didn't even realise how massive a contradiction your points 1) and 2) were until now. You are seriously suggesting that he had typed up his introduction post, figured if he was going to frame you as scum that it would be best to sit and F5 spam until you left, and then immediately post it? That's about the most far fetched conspiracy theory I've ever heard.
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=374466&user=73803
here's his filter from last game
Closest thing to around 14:00 was at 13:30 and that was only once the entire game. Very odd timing from him
|
On November 04 2012 02:08 Rad wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2012 02:03 debears wrote:On November 04 2012 02:01 Rad wrote:
@debears
At one point in last game, djo said something like "debears, you know my scum play is better than this!" Think it was right before he was lynched. What's your take on djo's past scum game and his play this game? I don't really want to read much into his past scum game or his first town game, besides his general personality. HIs last game was much more indicative of how I believe he will play from now on. And I do think he is acting different off the top of my head. I'll have to research though before I can say definitively. I only bring it up at this point because you were suggesting a difference between last game (town) and this game (unknown). I feel like he's pretty confident in his scum play due to his claim about it last game. I think you could bring in some interesting insight on that point since you're the one he made that final appeal to before his lynching. His last game was, well, pretty terrible yeah? If he's town this game, I'd think he'd want to try to take things a bit differently because he even admitted last game that he thought he was scummy, and didn't really blame us for the mislynch. Differences between last game and this game probably won't say much because of that.
It's a fine line to walk with his meta. If I am going to use meta this game on Djo, it's gonna be from last game. The newbie card from his first two make his style less predictable.
|
On November 04 2012 02:07 Alsn wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2012 02:01 debears wrote:On November 04 2012 01:58 Alsn wrote:On November 04 2012 01:49 debears wrote:On November 04 2012 01:39 Alsn wrote:On November 04 2012 01:13 debears wrote: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. There wasn't a long wait for the last few signups - everyone here seems pretty pumped to play some mafia seriously. I don't think lurker policy lynch will come up at all. You said townies. That's very different than saying the town or players. Very, very different. It means that you either 1) Think the people being active are townies 2) Know that the people being active are townies There is no other reason for using townies to describe those of us who are showing activeness and dedication Also, you voted me, meaning you voted for someone who you think is townie based on the above. That is scummy as shit debears, even if we hypothetically assume the two most active players are scum, it would still mean that town on the whole is being active and not lurking. I think your argument is bad and your insistence that his statement is a scum slip is far fetched imho. Eh. I think it's very odd to say that townies have good dedication, and I'm one of the guys showing dedication, yet he votes me. Also, what do you think of this part of his post alsn? I kinda expected a bit more... substance in the thread by now. For a guy who hadn't posted anything, why is he calling all the actives out for substance? What good does that do? That part of his post, sure, I agree that it's somewhat a silly statement. It doesn't change the fact that you had been acting very strangely and quite counter-productive to town interests. From where I'm sitting his vote was merited. Especially in light of the fact that he said he meant it as a strong FoS as opposed to a rock solid reason for why you absolutely must be scum. You OMGUSing him most certainly doesn't damage his case. Also, it's unfortunate that I'm indirectly helping him defend himself, but at this point I simply find you/Djod more scummy than him and I figured the chance of him being scum was lower than the risk of you guys getting off the hook if I had stayed silent and just watched. It seems that from the latest developments that other people had the same thought. So, in essence, you think that a vote to tell someone to post less is productive? Being active =/ acting strangely or counter productive I was sparking conversation dude OMGUS is warranted when I find him scummy 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.
|
On November 04 2012 02:08 sylverfyre wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2012 01:56 debears wrote:On November 04 2012 01:40 sylverfyre wrote:
You're reading what you want to read.
Remember that I spent last game mostly obsing, and it was depressing watching town lose because of inactivity when 2 out of 3 scum had blatantly labelled scum. I said what I said because I don't WANT that to happen this game. And I don't think any of these 9 players will do that. Just because "oh, I'm the most active" doesn't mean you're the only one contributing.
I am expecting a better game this time, and predicting that we aren't going to need to enact a policy lynch on lurking, or have town suffer from excessive lurking. Why are you trying to read more into what I said anyway?
Maybe I said townies because I am scum. Maybe I said townies because I'm town. You can't read into it - it's just a dumb WIFOM loop.
Or maybe, I'm just talking about the whole friggin game and you're reading WAY TOO MUCH into arbitrary word choice.
(technically, even scum are "part of the town" when it comes to posting voting and lynching) I reiterate: Your vote is both OMGUS and backed up by arbitrary "scum tells".
Also it's interesting that you're defending your own "make them post with pressure" while OMGUS voting me. You know your OMGUS vote is doing here? Nothing. It's just keeping my pressure on you, because they remove any reason.
(Press F5 to check thread again)
I liked "Confidence" a whole hell of a lot better than "Useless." Useless reeks of hostility. Last game literally has nothing to do with voting me for "fluff" when I do have content. You weren't active. You hadn't posted anything. That's no content up to the point you vote for me in my view. The "townies showing dedication" comment is not WIFOM at all. WIFOM is whether a scum would make a certain action (nks for example) The townies comment is about you contradicting what you said You either thought or know that the actives are townies, based on your word choice. You vote one of the actives Yeah I have my vote on you because I find your inital post pretty scummy. I'm keeping my vote on you because I want to pressure you back. OMGUS? Sure. Warranted if I find you scummy? Hell yes. And about useless. It reeks of "hostility". Does it reek of scumminess? If not, your just trying to cast suspicion on me for bullshit reasons I come to thread. I see it has exploded by like 10 pages. Then when I more closely examine those 10 pages, I see a lot of fluff. I was disappointed, and I expressed as much. I was calling out the actives for posting a lot of garbage. It isn't condusive to scumhunting to post "LOL" as the entire content of a post. It fills up filters and threads with emptyness. Hostility breeds a bad environment for town be free to speak their minds, a bad environment for scumhunting. I'm not saying you're scum by saying you're hostile, but I'm saying hostility isn't going to help town. Case in point: Nack was being pretty hostile. In the end, he had the right reads, but had a very hard time convincing people of them because he was so hostile. Bad for town.
I can see your point. But I am being completely arrogant like Nackht? I'm being aggressive (hostile), but is it within reason?
|
On November 04 2012 02:14 Mr. Cheesecake wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2012 02:08 sylverfyre wrote:On November 04 2012 01:56 debears wrote:On November 04 2012 01:40 sylverfyre wrote:
You're reading what you want to read.
Remember that I spent last game mostly obsing, and it was depressing watching town lose because of inactivity when 2 out of 3 scum had blatantly labelled scum. I said what I said because I don't WANT that to happen this game. And I don't think any of these 9 players will do that. Just because "oh, I'm the most active" doesn't mean you're the only one contributing.
I am expecting a better game this time, and predicting that we aren't going to need to enact a policy lynch on lurking, or have town suffer from excessive lurking. Why are you trying to read more into what I said anyway?
Maybe I said townies because I am scum. Maybe I said townies because I'm town. You can't read into it - it's just a dumb WIFOM loop.
Or maybe, I'm just talking about the whole friggin game and you're reading WAY TOO MUCH into arbitrary word choice.
(technically, even scum are "part of the town" when it comes to posting voting and lynching) I reiterate: Your vote is both OMGUS and backed up by arbitrary "scum tells".
Also it's interesting that you're defending your own "make them post with pressure" while OMGUS voting me. You know your OMGUS vote is doing here? Nothing. It's just keeping my pressure on you, because they remove any reason.
(Press F5 to check thread again)
I liked "Confidence" a whole hell of a lot better than "Useless." Useless reeks of hostility. Last game literally has nothing to do with voting me for "fluff" when I do have content. You weren't active. You hadn't posted anything. That's no content up to the point you vote for me in my view. The "townies showing dedication" comment is not WIFOM at all. WIFOM is whether a scum would make a certain action (nks for example) The townies comment is about you contradicting what you said You either thought or know that the actives are townies, based on your word choice. You vote one of the actives Yeah I have my vote on you because I find your inital post pretty scummy. I'm keeping my vote on you because I want to pressure you back. OMGUS? Sure. Warranted if I find you scummy? Hell yes. And about useless. It reeks of "hostility". Does it reek of scumminess? If not, your just trying to cast suspicion on me for bullshit reasons I come to thread. I see it has exploded by like 10 pages. Then when I more closely examine those 10 pages, I see a lot of fluff. I was disappointed, and I expressed as much. I was calling out the actives for posting a lot of garbage. It isn't condusive to scumhunting to post "LOL" as the entire content of a post. It fills up filters and threads with emptyness. Hostility breeds a bad environment for town be free to speak their minds, a bad environment for scumhunting. I'm not saying you're scum by saying you're hostile, but I'm saying hostility isn't going to help town. Case in point: Nack was being pretty hostile. In the end, he had the right reads, but had a very hard time convincing people of them because he was so hostile. Bad for town. I duly apologize for some of my one liners last night, I just couldn't stop laughing at Djo's accusation hence the LOL. And yeah, I agree that most of the fluff wasn't really doing much. In terms of hostility = anti-town, I would say so at this level. Look at people like Kush who are genuinely hostile regardless of alignment, and get lynched/shot right away.
Kush is hostile in a different way as town. The problem is that people assume hostility = anti-town.
Look at marv's games. He's a boss at hostility as town
|
On November 04 2012 02:15 Alsn wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2012 02:08 debears wrote:On November 04 2012 02:04 Alsn wrote:On November 04 2012 01:58 debears wrote:On November 04 2012 01:44 Alsn wrote:On November 03 2012 23:44 debears wrote:
1) Sylver had obviously been following the thread before this post, yet he posts it AFTER I leave the thread. This is especially alarming considering he suddenly accuses and votes me for terribad reasoning
2) It's a big post, showing that he had it written for a while
You say it's a big post and that it must have taken a while to write, yet you don't even acknowledge the possibility that maybe that's why you weren't around any more? Because it had taken him a lot of time to write it and you had simply left at that point? Given your point 2) I don't see how you can at the same time accuse him of deliberately waiting until you were gone. Alsn, you don't find the timing convenient at all? It seems he had covered the whole thread at that point. What's the best way to discredit someone? Waiting til they aren't there to argue with you The fact that you keep bringing this up made me go look it up. Seriously, he posted his case 6 minutes after you posted your good night post. If he was truly being deliberate about wanting you to be gone, don't you think he would've waited a little longer? I didn't even realise how massive a contradiction your points 1) and 2) were until now. You are seriously suggesting that he had typed up his introduction post, figured if he was going to frame you as scum that it would be best to sit and F5 spam until you left, and then immediately post it? That's about the most far fetched conspiracy theory I've ever heard. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=374466&user=73803here's his filter from last game Closest thing to around 14:00 was at 13:30 and that was only once the entire game. Very odd timing from him That 13:30 post also happened to be... drumroll please. His introductory post.
You do have a point there lol :/
|
On November 04 2012 02:16 Rad wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2012 02:13 debears wrote:On November 04 2012 02:07 Alsn wrote:On November 04 2012 02:01 debears wrote:On November 04 2012 01:58 Alsn wrote:On November 04 2012 01:49 debears wrote:On November 04 2012 01:39 Alsn wrote:On November 04 2012 01:13 debears wrote: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. There wasn't a long wait for the last few signups - everyone here seems pretty pumped to play some mafia seriously. I don't think lurker policy lynch will come up at all. You said townies. That's very different than saying the town or players. Very, very different. It means that you either 1) Think the people being active are townies 2) Know that the people being active are townies There is no other reason for using townies to describe those of us who are showing activeness and dedication Also, you voted me, meaning you voted for someone who you think is townie based on the above. That is scummy as shit debears, even if we hypothetically assume the two most active players are scum, it would still mean that town on the whole is being active and not lurking. I think your argument is bad and your insistence that his statement is a scum slip is far fetched imho. Eh. I think it's very odd to say that townies have good dedication, and I'm one of the guys showing dedication, yet he votes me. Also, what do you think of this part of his post alsn? I kinda expected a bit more... substance in the thread by now. For a guy who hadn't posted anything, why is he calling all the actives out for substance? What good does that do? That part of his post, sure, I agree that it's somewhat a silly statement. It doesn't change the fact that you had been acting very strangely and quite counter-productive to town interests. From where I'm sitting his vote was merited. Especially in light of the fact that he said he meant it as a strong FoS as opposed to a rock solid reason for why you absolutely must be scum. You OMGUSing him most certainly doesn't damage his case. Also, it's unfortunate that I'm indirectly helping him defend himself, but at this point I simply find you/Djod more scummy than him and I figured the chance of him being scum was lower than the risk of you guys getting off the hook if I had stayed silent and just watched. It seems that from the latest developments that other people had the same thought. So, in essence, you think that a vote to tell someone to post less is productive? Being active =/ acting strangely or counter productive I was sparking conversation dude OMGUS is warranted when I find him scummy 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.
|
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 
Djo, that's a damned if you do, damned if you don't line of thinking. I don't have a problem that he explained it that way since town or scum would do that. However, his original word choice and contradiction with it was scummy
|
On November 04 2012 02:22 Alsn wrote:
I'd say the latter half of your filter is mostly you defending yourself, which isn't fluff in the slightest. However off the top of my head I remember you addressing the fucking observers at one point, and sylver certainly wasn't wrong in saying that you've seemed almost deliberate in "splitting" your posts such that your thoughts are less condensed.
Of course my thoughts weren't condensed early d1. People were in and out. There's not much to go on. I was simply reacting to other's posts and giving my thoughts. I did condense my thoughts on Obsy and Sylver cuz there's something to go on there.
I had jokes. so what? They are easy to distinguish and they are one line. Honestly if you have a hard time determining that....well idk lol
|
On November 04 2012 02:25 Alsn wrote:
Djod, I'd say you should just play like you want to play, within reason. Spending too much time thinking about what other people will think about you is what scum do.
That is a great point. Djo why are you so concerned about not being suspicious?
|
On November 04 2012 02:26 Rad wrote:Show nested quote +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:On November 04 2012 02:01 debears wrote:On November 04 2012 01:58 Alsn wrote:On November 04 2012 01:49 debears wrote:On November 04 2012 01:39 Alsn wrote:On November 04 2012 01:13 debears wrote:
[quote]
You said townies. That's very different than saying the town or players. Very, very different.
It means that you either
1) Think the people being active are townies
2) Know that the people being active are townies
There is no other reason for using townies to describe those of us who are showing activeness and dedication
Also, you voted me, meaning you voted for someone who you think is townie based on the above. That is scummy as shit debears, even if we hypothetically assume the two most active players are scum, it would still mean that town on the whole is being active and not lurking. I think your argument is bad and your insistence that his statement is a scum slip is far fetched imho. Eh. I think it's very odd to say that townies have good dedication, and I'm one of the guys showing dedication, yet he votes me. Also, what do you think of this part of his post alsn? I kinda expected a bit more... substance in the thread by now. For a guy who hadn't posted anything, why is he calling all the actives out for substance? What good does that do? That part of his post, sure, I agree that it's somewhat a silly statement. It doesn't change the fact that you had been acting very strangely and quite counter-productive to town interests. From where I'm sitting his vote was merited. Especially in light of the fact that he said he meant it as a strong FoS as opposed to a rock solid reason for why you absolutely must be scum. You OMGUSing him most certainly doesn't damage his case. Also, it's unfortunate that I'm indirectly helping him defend himself, but at this point I simply find you/Djod more scummy than him and I figured the chance of him being scum was lower than the risk of you guys getting off the hook if I had stayed silent and just watched. It seems that from the latest developments that other people had the same thought. So, in essence, you think that a vote to tell someone to post less is productive? Being active =/ acting strangely or counter productive I was sparking conversation dude OMGUS is warranted when I find him scummy 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
|
On November 04 2012 02:29 Rad wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2012 02:25 debears wrote:On November 04 2012 02:25 Alsn wrote:
Djod, I'd say you should just play like you want to play, within reason. Spending too much time thinking about what other people will think about you is what scum do. That is a great point. Djo why are you so concerned about not being suspicious? This one's obvious guys. You were both in last game. He was town and looked more scummy than anyone else right up to getting lynched for it. Obviously if he's town here he wouldn't want to have that happen again. This is a bad WIFOM line of questions.
Rad, scum naturally care more about being suspicious. If you're townie, you know your motives are true, so it's way easier to defend yourself if people find you suspicious. It gives off a feeling of a guilty conscience on him right now
|
On November 04 2012 02:30 Rad wrote:Show nested quote +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:On November 04 2012 02:01 debears wrote:On November 04 2012 01:58 Alsn wrote:On November 04 2012 01:49 debears wrote:
[quote]
Eh. I think it's very odd to say that townies have good dedication, and I'm one of the guys showing dedication, yet he votes me.
Also, what do you think of this part of his post alsn?
[quote]
For a guy who hadn't posted anything, why is he calling all the actives out for substance? What good does that do? That part of his post, sure, I agree that it's somewhat a silly statement. It doesn't change the fact that you had been acting very strangely and quite counter-productive to town interests. From where I'm sitting his vote was merited. Especially in light of the fact that he said he meant it as a strong FoS as opposed to a rock solid reason for why you absolutely must be scum. You OMGUSing him most certainly doesn't damage his case. Also, it's unfortunate that I'm indirectly helping him defend himself, but at this point I simply find you/Djod more scummy than him and I figured the chance of him being scum was lower than the risk of you guys getting off the hook if I had stayed silent and just watched. It seems that from the latest developments that other people had the same thought. So, in essence, you think that a vote to tell someone to post less is productive? Being active =/ acting strangely or counter productive I was sparking conversation dude OMGUS is warranted when I find him scummy 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
|
Also
@Alsn
What do you think of Djo's pregame comments
On November 02 2012 13:37 Djodref wrote:I'll tunnel you this time debears ! Whatever read I have on you, I shall conclude with the opposite 
when compared to his lack of jumping on me earlier and even now. It seems like he doesn't want to engage with me. Why?
1) If he's town, he must think I'm town and doesn't want to mislead everyone
2) If he's scum, he knows I'm town and wants to avoid arguing with me since it would put him in the spotlight
I find that, if Djo was town, he would follow up on his pre game comments since it'd be in good fun and since he wouldn't know whether I'm mafia or not
|
On November 04 2012 02:34 Alsn wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2012 02:31 debears wrote:
So I know where my fluff rating stands. So I can determine whether you are being genuine or not based on what I feel
Here's the thing. I don't have a problem with you posting some fluff, the problem is that you keep rationalising it as if somehow we shouldn't pay any attention to it. It's the same kind of behaviour I meant with regards to how you responded to my 99% lie post. You keep acting as if we need to forgive anything we find scummy about you as "look guys, I'm pro-town, don't worry about anything".
I want you to acknowledge the content more than the fluff. The fluff is a null read by itself. If i have no content with fluff, then we have a problem. But I have content, which means the fluff is null
|
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
