Rereading this thread has been intellectually enlightening. I've found a lot of things I previously missed or looked at differently. Forgive me for the stream of consciousness quote-commenting. It should be rare if doesn't stay the most convenient way of doing things. I would've reformatted, but 1) I'm lazy, and 2) this post illustrates my linear though process, concluding with reflection.
KK was right. I use complex wording to often...
In post 12, Om of the Nom wrote:Hey, after this game is finished, I may make some avatars for some people. Do any of you guys want an avatar? They feature corny puns, deliberately crude drawings, deliberate misspellings and MS paint quality.
Troll successful.
Yea. Obviously the Brain, being antitown and/or scum, needs an incentive to be motivated to try. We should vote him next.
In post 32, 2birds1stone wrote:Om of the Nom wrote:2b1s could have made a scumslip by trying to link himself to me using incorrect information.
Or maybe I was just making a poorly-worded flippiant comment?
Unvote
Vote: Om of the Nom
I think I'm serious this time, but I'm not sure.
Serious junk needs explanation. And commitment. Missing here.
In post 36, 2birds1stone wrote:Staeg wrote: In post 31, Om of the Nom wrote:2b1s could have made a scumslip by trying to link himself to me using incorrect information.
I doubt it. I do dislike his fetish for not answering questions that actually matter.
unvote
Vote: 2b1s
What about the meta thing? You're picking on comments I made in flippiant posts, but if you want a serious answer, I don't think you need to know someone's scum meta to know their town meta or vice versa.
OotN, you tried to cast doubt on my towniness based on a flippiant post from me.
That trips my scumdar, hard.
There we go. Commitment AND explanation, here. Late. And seems like an attempt to make a lot out of nothing. Not necessarily scummy earlygame.
In post 37, Om of the Nom wrote:Also I don't like how he both A) Assumes confirmed town status even when he's not, and B) Votes someone for voting a (supposedly) confirmed person, and then proceeds to vote a basically confirmed person.
EDIT: Well hey, to each his own. I'm not scum though.
Nice red herring of a defense. And you really missed 2b's indication that those posts you find scummy aren't serious. That therefore constitutes a misrep. Intentional? You tell me, Om.
Unacceptable backtracking.
In post 60, 2birds1stone wrote:
I'm sorry, taking flippiant posts seriously is generally a scumtell, and when just out of RVS, 'generally scumtells' become '100% scumtells' until someone does something to put the 'generally scumtell' in its proper place.
Or in other words, "I actively work to make big deals out of small things earlygame". That is optimal protown play, so I'm satisfied now.
In post 63, Staeg wrote: In post 61, Psyche wrote:Ooh, this guy has theoretical background.
The three pages complete write now will only serve as fodder for pareidolia - the biased perception of vague and trivial stimuli as significant — that will lead to further pareidolia, and maybe something more later on.
Om's a really nice guy, but your buddying (+1, Psyche!) seems less harmless. So far, you give off slightly more scummy vibes. But I don't think buddying is a valid scumtell anyhow (everyone, not just scum, seeks political capital in this game, and often unconsciously), so I'm probably just rationalizing an emotional uneasiness with your posts, which may or may not be a valid source of knowledge.
Blah, blah.
tl;dr: I got nothing, but I'ma make somethin'.
Why did both chrimi and psyche (re)enter the thread without saying anything that has something to do with anything? There was a fair bit of stuff to comment on.
Good point. I guess I wasn't in a thinking mood and instead felt like stoking my intellectual ego and trolling Chrimi. Which I defend as a form of reaction-fishing.
Chrimi, however, did not even that and showed no active intent to search for scum.
In post 65, Om of the Nom wrote:@2b1s: No, Chrimi doesn't normally act like this, but the games I'm playing with him are ongoing so I can't say much. However, meta side his posts are lackluster and full of nothing. Discussion has already started happening and he has provided nothing to further it.
UNVOTE:
VOTE: Chrimi
Also "buddying" basically means acting in a certain way to another player to try and get them on your side.
This seems to suggest that Chrimi's passiveness is shown by meta to be a consistent trait of hers (and thus not indicative of anything about her alliance). Bfore I comment further, could you tell me if this explanation is correct.
@Staeg: You basically just did the exact same thing.
OH. HE GOT YOU THERE. But this addendum is so short and snarky as to be ineffectual. Maybe purposely ineffectual as to preempt any attack that may arise.
If Om is scum, this here might be an association tell. I don't lynch off of association tells, but I do develop hypotheses that help direct future and actually reliable research (i.e., select people to tunnel) by them. Just like with speculative science.
Just to note: My reads on Staeg and on Om are mutually exclusive. My advocacy regarding one player has nothing to do with the other until I say so.
In post 68, Chrimi wrote:In fact
VOTE: Om
For hating me as soon as I join the game.
Pooppost.
In post 69, Chrimi wrote: In post 41, Om of the Nom wrote:Okay, things of note so far relating to 2b1s:
I would be voting 2b1s right now, but a quick count of votes reveals he's at L-1 already.
2b1s has also voted 4 times throughout 2 pages.
During RVS.
2b1s is pushing a case on me based on something that can be read in multiple ways.
2b1s is being highly hypocritical.
You keep forgetting that stuff really doesn't matter during RVS, correct?
See what kind of stuff you're giving me to 'comment' on? It's terrible.
Two minutes later, a post with reasoning. But this is construed less to attack than to defend Chrimi's own behavior. Still passive, not vote justifying.
In post 72, 2birds1stone wrote:Well, this is awkward.
Chrimi does look a tad scummy.
However, I don't think he's scum with Om of the Nom.
I really want Om of the Nom to be scum, because, well, calling scum out on page two would be awesome.
However, I do like the whole 'two L-2 wagons' thing we've got going here.
Woah, wait? Om of the Nom, that seems a somewhat... oppurtunistic [to use an overused adjective] wagon. Like, you didn't take to Chrimi's wagon until Psyche votes him and I ask about his meta?
Of course, this could well be confirmation bias.
Mmmm...definitely confirmation bias. But possibly valid, nonetheless. Weak, though.
In post 74, Om of the Nom wrote:Yep man, that confirmation bias. There's nothing wrong with it if you look at it without biased eyes.
Also I called out the scumteam within 150 posts in my newbie game.
At first I thought this was inane VI junk ova here, but now I understand the context — 2b recently announced a desire to call out scum D1. So the addendum is just silly banter.
In post 75, Staeg wrote: In post 65, Om of the Nom wrote:@2b1s: No, Chrimi doesn't normally act like this, but the games I'm playing with him are ongoing so I can't say much. However, meta side his posts are lackluster and full of nothing. Discussion has already started happening and he has provided nothing to further it.
UNVOTE:
VOTE: Chrimi
Also "buddying" basically means acting in a certain way to another player to try and get them on your side.
@Staeg: You basically just did the exact same thing.
No, there wasn't anything that I could actually comment on without ruining the intent of the OP, while there was stuff for chrimi/psyche to comment on (namely, 2b1s' attack on you and my attack on him).
The OP? The mod?
Ignoring that, okayyy. I was going to attack you for basically posting fillery parroty stuff, but this excuse is valid, since I remember having a thought process like this regarding Chrimi. But now you need to be more protown and immediately start talking about what's going on (and in more detail). So I can get a read on you.
In post 76, Staeg wrote: In post 70, Om of the Nom wrote:Oh wow, I wasn't expecting it to be this easy.
Calling it now, 2b1s and Chrimi scumteam.
Nice OMGUS btw.
Yeah, I can go with this.
Psyche is still "welp" atm.
Fillery parroty filth. Post-previous post. Mmm. Read obtained.
In post 77, Chrimi wrote: In post 75, Staeg wrote:
No, there wasn't anything that I could actually comment on without ruining the intent of the OP, while there was stuff for chrimi/psyche to comment on (namely, 2b1s' attack on you and my attack on him).
Still looked stupid to me *shrug*
Looks like Om still jumping on things. If you guys were all clashy with your whole 2b1 thing, why jump on mine as soon as I decide not to comment on it because of how stupid it seems to me?
Pretty good point there, actually.
Not actually a direct expression of any opinion about the game.
/re-reads this wall,
Thoughts:
For reasons I'm about to elaborate on, 2b is confirmed town.
Om is actually scummy. Then Chrimi/Staeg.
Town
Me
2b
Scummy
Om
Chrimi
Staeg
Like I'm Supposed to Know
PBrain (lol)
Kamikiri or whatever
I probably need to codify my reasons, but they are all here. Guys, please ensure you answer any accusations/questions presented here, so the game can PROgress. Feel free to tell me if this formatting deeply irks you.
You can't step in the same river twice.
