This is hardly a wagon, anyway.
Newbie Student Mafia XVIII - Page 56
Forum Index > TL Mafia |
![]()
Fecalfeast
Canada11355 Posts
This is hardly a wagon, anyway. | ||
![]()
Fecalfeast
Canada11355 Posts
##vote mderg | ||
![]()
Fecalfeast
Canada11355 Posts
On January 06 2016 06:47 Fecalfeast wrote: Other than the weird, totally not GB-like, voting with his scumread I think GB looks towny enough. So no, I'm not going to hop on the GB train until someone dunks him with a case. My initial scumread on GB was based solely on his vote and is really my only reason to be scumreading him. This is hardly a wagon, anyway. it's totally a wagon now that I actually look at the voting thread. | ||
![]()
Fecalfeast
Canada11355 Posts
![]() but it's literally in his diagram | ||
![]()
Fecalfeast
Canada11355 Posts
yeah gb might be town | ||
Fidei86
United Kingdom2116 Posts
His first read on GB makes no sense At #237 he notes that people are quick to jump on GB, for reasons that he agrees with "his opening was fishy", but he doesn't like it because it "feels too easy". So the opening is scummy, but people pointing that out is fishy? Huh? His second read on GB is based on a falsity Day 2 he votes GB initially (#741) for absolutely shit reasons - GB quoted Irish's reads accurately, and tried to do some NK WIFOM. Mderg then said that GB had NOT given Irish's reads correctly (which GB had) and voted for him. When called out on it, he tried to say that GB had cherry picked votes, which he HADN'T. This is just a read based on a factual innaccuracy, but instead of admitting the mistake, he doubles down. He parrots other people's reasons for voting His Scott vote at #455 was for reasons that had already been set out by others (set out helpfully by Irish at #441). On top of that, he also says that he's going to "park his vote" there, which is pretty scummy as it indicates a lack of conviction and looks to be leaving himself room to change later. He doesn't actually change his vote, despite not really saying anything about scott through the rest of the day. When he finally explained his GB read after the #741 issue, he basically just summarised what people had said previously about GB. Then at #815 he calls out Kmatt's case, but says that he agrees with some of it and that GB is scum anyway. His posts are responsive and reactive. Most of his posts throughout his filter are responses to other posts. It's a classic scum technique of appearing active, while actually not contributing anything. See, for example, #599, #587, although really most of his filter fits the pattern. His only long posts have come recently, and they seem to have mostly been an explanation of his own play in past games ... big help. LYNCH mderg. Please. ##vote: mderg | ||
mderg
Germany1740 Posts
On January 06 2016 06:59 Fecalfeast wrote: so the only person who hasn't made any posts this day phase is mderg who totally bailed after I started asking him stuff. ##vote mderg You do realize that I'm from a different part of the world than you and most humans need something called sleep? I do know that you have your reasons to vote me but this makes me a bit sad. People should already know my opinion about gb ##vote glowingbear | ||
mderg
Germany1740 Posts
On January 06 2016 07:18 Fidei86 wrote: This wagon on GB gives me the super heebie-jeebies. There are too many people jumping onto it too easily and with too little explanation. I think we should be lynching mderg instead, for the following reasons: His first read on GB makes no sense At #237 he notes that people are quick to jump on GB, for reasons that he agrees with "his opening was fishy", but he doesn't like it because it "feels too easy". So the opening is scummy, but people pointing that out is fishy? Huh? His second read on GB is based on a falsity Day 2 he votes GB initially (#741) for absolutely shit reasons - GB quoted Irish's reads accurately, and tried to do some NK WIFOM. Mderg then said that GB had NOT given Irish's reads correctly (which GB had) and voted for him. When called out on it, he tried to say that GB had cherry picked votes, which he HADN'T. This is just a read based on a factual innaccuracy, but instead of admitting the mistake, he doubles down. He parrots other people's reasons for voting His Scott vote at #455 was for reasons that had already been set out by others (set out helpfully by Irish at #441). On top of that, he also says that he's going to "park his vote" there, which is pretty scummy as it indicates a lack of conviction and looks to be leaving himself room to change later. He doesn't actually change his vote, despite not really saying anything about scott through the rest of the day. When he finally explained his GB read after the #741 issue, he basically just summarised what people had said previously about GB. Then at #815 he calls out Kmatt's case, but says that he agrees with some of it and that GB is scum anyway. His posts are responsive and reactive. Most of his posts throughout his filter are responses to other posts. It's a classic scum technique of appearing active, while actually not contributing anything. See, for example, #599, #587, although really most of his filter fits the pattern. His only long posts have come recently, and they seem to have mostly been an explanation of his own play in past games ... big help. LYNCH mderg. Please. ##vote: mderg Haven't actually read this, yet. But what I bolded is just factually wrong. | ||
mderg
Germany1740 Posts
On January 06 2016 01:51 NocturneMage wrote: EBWOP - poorly worded phrasing And I think particularly with Noon's claim on mderg's scum meta being reflected in this game. Just saying, if you're checking my scum meta, you should also check my town meta. | ||
Fidei86
United Kingdom2116 Posts
On January 03 2016 00:55 mderg wrote: I don't like this post at all. You're simply using his reads to vote without giving it any real thought. You're also ignoring pretty much all of his other reads this game. That's not town play. ##vote GB This is your post. So it's not so much that you said that the reads were wrong, but that they were misleading. I just don't see how you could think that. GB posted all of Irish's scum reads, which was the basis of GB's post. | ||
mderg
Germany1740 Posts
On January 06 2016 07:18 Fidei86 wrote: This wagon on GB gives me the super heebie-jeebies. There are too many people jumping onto it too easily and with too little explanation. I think we should be lynching mderg instead, for the following reasons: His first read on GB makes no sense At #237 he notes that people are quick to jump on GB, for reasons that he agrees with "his opening was fishy", but he doesn't like it because it "feels too easy". So the opening is scummy, but people pointing that out is fishy? Huh? His second read on GB is based on a falsity Day 2 he votes GB initially (#741) for absolutely shit reasons - GB quoted Irish's reads accurately, and tried to do some NK WIFOM. Mderg then said that GB had NOT given Irish's reads correctly (which GB had) and voted for him. When called out on it, he tried to say that GB had cherry picked votes, which he HADN'T. This is just a read based on a factual innaccuracy, but instead of admitting the mistake, he doubles down. He parrots other people's reasons for voting His Scott vote at #455 was for reasons that had already been set out by others (set out helpfully by Irish at #441). On top of that, he also says that he's going to "park his vote" there, which is pretty scummy as it indicates a lack of conviction and looks to be leaving himself room to change later. He doesn't actually change his vote, despite not really saying anything about scott through the rest of the day. When he finally explained his GB read after the #741 issue, he basically just summarised what people had said previously about GB. Then at #815 he calls out Kmatt's case, but says that he agrees with some of it and that GB is scum anyway. His posts are responsive and reactive. Most of his posts throughout his filter are responses to other posts. It's a classic scum technique of appearing active, while actually not contributing anything. See, for example, #599, #587, although really most of his filter fits the pattern. His only long posts have come recently, and they seem to have mostly been an explanation of his own play in past games ... big help. LYNCH mderg. Please. ##vote: mderg Ok, done reading this. 1) what I meant was if everyone just piled on gb for that without any counterwagon, it would be unlikely that he's scum. 2) factually wrong 3) the vote parking should be pretty obvious in context. I said that I wasn't sure to be back before deadline. If you think my reasons for scumreading GB are simply repeating what others have said, you're free to think that but it doesn't change the reality. Of course I took into consideration what others have said but I also gave my own reasons and I've been talking about not liking GB before. 4) I've actually heard something similar quite a few times. I don't hide that a lot of my posts are reactive but that's just how it is. | ||
disformation
Germany8352 Posts
Vote Count - Day 3 GlowingBear (5): NocturneMage, GiygaS, Kmatt, nooniansoong, mderg mderg (2): Fecalfeast, Fidei86 Not Voting (1): GlowingBear At this time, GlowingBear is slated to be lynched. Day 3 ends in on Wednesday, Jan 06 10:00pm GMT (GMT+00:00). The voting thread is here. Only votes there will be counted. | ||
mderg
Germany1740 Posts
On January 06 2016 07:40 Fidei86 wrote: This is your post. So it's not so much that you said that the reads were wrong, but that they were misleading. I just don't see how you could think that. GB posted all of Irish's scum reads, which was the basis of GB's post. I feel like you're arguing about semantics. Of course he wrote down Irish's reads but he simply listed them down and picked the one that was more suitable for him. | ||
Fidei86
United Kingdom2116 Posts
On January 06 2016 07:49 mderg wrote: I feel like you're arguing about semantics. Of course he wrote down Irish's reads but he simply listed them down and picked the one that was more suitable for him. That was the point of his post - discussing Irish's scum reads.. | ||
mderg
Germany1740 Posts
On January 06 2016 07:50 Fidei86 wrote: That was the point of his post - discussing Irish's scum reads.. I don't think so. If he had wanted to discuss those reads, he should and would have done so in a completely different manner. | ||
![]()
Fecalfeast
Canada11355 Posts
you're scum for no good reasons, remember? | ||
Fidei86
United Kingdom2116 Posts
| ||
mderg
Germany1740 Posts
On January 06 2016 08:05 Fidei86 wrote: He literally said the reason he was not dead was because Irish was right in one of his scum reads. Then he gave Irish's scum reads. Exactly that plus he simply decided it had to be giygas and voted him. | ||
mderg
Germany1740 Posts
| ||
Fidei86
United Kingdom2116 Posts
On January 06 2016 08:04 Fecalfeast wrote: ew fidei stop that you're scum for no good reasons, remember? ? | ||
| ||