Mini 1625: Redemption (Game Over)

[droog]

fair enough

[droog]

you're a troll
i like you

[Whomping Willow]

I'm half troll actually

[Flames682]

88 by Flames is bad aswell, but not as bad as I remember, "pressure votes are bad", feels like a sketchy deflection and chest puffing to get the vote off himself, if he'd said something along the lines, "your votes aren't pressure votes because you've declared you'll remove them when the person posts" I'd find it more believable, but there's no questioning or attempt to analyse it, just "lol pressure don't work on me". The "Anyway" look forced, like he's trying hard to sound casual and relaxed, and the sucks, none of the annoyed town vibes from other player's, just picking an easy target. Having typed that out, it is actully as bad as I remember. Follows it with an immediate attempt to discredit, and 94 does absolutely nothing, says nothing, stands for nothing, just a post for a post's sake.

1. Pressure votes are bad, especially if they're just voting someone who hasn't posted. It's not more likely to make them post.

2. If you're going to analyze one word of everyone's posts the whole game, don't.

3. You're right about post 94, it was absolutely blank.

1. So why not talk about the part where it's on those who haven't posted? That's the relevant part.

2. Do I show any signs of doing this? I analysed one word of one of your posts, if you're scum you have to think about how every post you write comes accross, if a word looks forced or uncharacteristic, it's scummy.

3. It had words, those words just didn't achieve anything, and didn't look like they were trying to achieve anything.

1. Because istott's votes were pressure votes on people who didn't post, and I assumed that he would know that I was talking about that. I don't have to spell everything out in my posts.

2. The word "anyway" was overanalyzed, and if you do it in one post, then it's likely you'll do it somewhere else.

3. It was me reading the thread and posting some notes while reading.

[Whomping Willow]

88 by Flames is bad aswell, but not as bad as I remember, "pressure votes are bad", feels like a sketchy deflection and chest puffing to get the vote off himself, if he'd said something along the lines, "your votes aren't pressure votes because you've declared you'll remove them when the person posts" I'd find it more believable, but there's no questioning or attempt to analyse it, just "lol pressure don't work on me". The "Anyway" look forced, like he's trying hard to sound casual and relaxed, and the sucks, none of the annoyed town vibes from other player's, just picking an easy target. Having typed that out, it is actully as bad as I remember. Follows it with an immediate attempt to discredit, and 94 does absolutely nothing, says nothing, stands for nothing, just a post for a post's sake.

1. Pressure votes are bad, especially if they're just voting someone who hasn't posted. It's not more likely to make them post.

2. If you're going to analyze one word of everyone's posts the whole game, don't.

3. You're right about post 94, it was absolutely blank.

1. So why not talk about the part where it's on those who haven't posted? That's the relevant part.

2. Do I show any signs of doing this? I analysed one word of one of your posts, if you're scum you have to think about how every post you write comes accross, if a word looks forced or uncharacteristic, it's scummy.

3. It had words, those words just didn't achieve anything, and didn't look like they were trying to achieve anything.

1. Because istott's votes were pressure votes on people who didn't post, and I assumed that he would know that I was talking about that. I don't have to spell everything out in my posts.

2. The word "anyway" was overanalyzed, and if you do it in one post, then it's likely you'll do it somewhere else.

3. It was me reading the thread and posting some notes while reading.

1. Well do you think he's town for it? I'm assuming so since you didn't attempt to question it at all

2. Maybe, maybe not

3. And yet you had nothing relevant to say in your notes?

[Flames682]

I don't think he's town or scum yet. And according to you I had nothing relevant, so I guess not.

PS. It was an over-analyzation.

[GGG]

Crazy I notice you are voting for him because you want him lynched rather than you believe him to be scum. Do you and really anyone on the wagon feel he is actually scummy?

Um, if you want someone to be lynched, you think they're scum.

This should be the case but lots of time people will vote and lynch someone because they are anti-town rather than because they are scummy. The whomp wagon is an example of this hence the question to crazy of why did he want him lynched?

[Flames682]

Crazy I notice you are voting for him because you want him lynched rather than you believe him to be scum. Do you and really anyone on the wagon feel he is actually scummy?

Um, if you want someone to be lynched, you think they're scum.

This should be the case but lots of time people will vote and lynch someone because they are anti-town rather than because they are scummy. The whomp wagon is an example of this hence the question to crazy of why did he want him lynched?

Posting nothing but votes is quite scummy imo.

[Originalchris]

Lots of over-analyzation from whomp after droog says he will unvote only after whomp contributes. Anyways, (am I forcing this anyways, or am I being casual with my anyways? Anyways...) I'm not sure why other people's posts are not relevant, but whomp's wall post is. Relevant to what exactly? Were your random troll votes relevant, or does relevance only occur when you say so?

Anyways, I maintain my stance that RVS pressure wagons are mostly useless (pressure them into answering what exactly?), and anyways, that I highly dislike lurkers, despite whether it is in any way(s) original or not. Maybe you can read it again and dislike it more whomp. Anyways, I wonder why you dislike it so much? Are you planning on lurking anytime (or anyway) soon? I plan on not letting you FYI.

[Originalchris]

Aside from that, congrats on joining the game.

[GGG]

Lots of over-analyzation from whomp after droog says he will unvote only after whomp contributes. Anyways, (am I forcing this anyways, or am I being casual with my anyways? Anyways...) I'm not sure why other people's posts are not relevant, but whomp's wall post is. Relevant to what exactly? Were your random troll votes relevant, or does relevance only occur when you say so?

Anyways, I maintain my stance that RVS pressure wagons are mostly useless (pressure them into answering what exactly?), and anyways, that I highly dislike lurkers, despite whether it is in any way(s) original or not. Maybe you can read it again and dislike it more whomp. Anyways, I wonder why you dislike it so much? Are you planning on lurking anytime (or anyway) soon? I plan on not letting you FYI.

Crazy I notice you are voting for him because you want him lynched rather than you believe him to be scum. Do you and really anyone on the wagon feel he is actually scummy?

Um, if you want someone to be lynched, you think they're scum.

This should be the case but lots of time people will vote and lynch someone because they are anti-town rather than because they are scummy. The whomp wagon is an example of this hence the question to crazy of why did he want him lynched?

Posting nothing but votes is quite scummy imo.

Why? I don't see it as alignment indicative at all.

[GGG]

Don't know why it quoted OCs post.

[Naomi-Tan]

UNVOTE: Right now a lynch would tell us nothing about other players really, I wanna play this argument out right now and see how it reflects on people, as it may be used as a town tool.

[istott]

To be honest, I don't see it as "scum indicative", but as scummy behaviour.
After his posting, I now believe that whomp is town. I'm not sure, but still.
Riddleton still hasn't posted, but has started posting again in some of his previously absent games.
Riddleton, what is happening?

[Munkir]

UNVOTE: Whomping Willow

[Naomi-Tan]

Whomping Willow@

Page 3- Not much notable here, crazypianist I lean town on-ish, pressuring seems genuine.

Can you expand on your thoughts on Crazy Paint?

Revisiting 82 by Originalchris I hate it even more than I did when I first read it, ironically it was completely unoriginal, the droog L-1 thing had already been covered, the lurker speech was pointless, just looks like him trying to look like he's doing work, plus he had commentary on the game yet accompanied it with no meaningful vote."An RVS wagon adds no pressure but I'm going to RVS instead of voting the pony I'm questioning", doesn't ring sincere to me, and the statement about RVS wagons was bad enough on it's own.

When I red that I thought it had nothing to do was RVS, though I was confused about the confirmed line of thought. Seems weird all this roleclaiming day 1, but the weirdest part is, why would Chris say kuror0 is confirmed, there has already been a neighbour claim, so it would seem weird to get a 4 person neigh, but 1 is saying confirmed, while the other is saying unconfirmed which looks REALLY strange.

I would Aruge that flames in post 92 was asking good questions, the type of questions that fire discussion/gain information, then again it could also been seen as fishing for weakness in players, trying to find a flaw to attack, which I don't really like the idea of.

Finally, at the end of post; post 136 you went and voted for chris, but you only mentioned him once as a mid sorta comment, rather than at the end like a bold statement, could you perhaps expand on that point as I personally feel that he isn't really doing anything and looking like he is contributing without saying much, but your RVS statement doesn't speak to me much. so I'd like more.

Tag fixed
~Mod

[Naomi-Tan]

UNVOTE: Whomping Willow

Why did you unvote?

[GuyInFreezer]

VC 1.02

crazypianist1116 (1):

GGG

Whomping Willow (2):

Flames682, crazypianist1116

droog (1):

Flubbernugget

kuror0 (1):

Originalchris

Riddleton (1):

istott

Originalchris (1):

Whomping Willow

Not Voting:

AWA, kuror0, Riddleton, droog, Naomi-Tan, Munkir

The deadline is Nov. 28, 9:40 AM EST.
Countdown: (expired on 2014-11-28 09:40:00)

[crazypianist1116]

UNVOTE: willow

I need to think and read some more for now. What does PL mean?

[Flames682]

policy lynch

[crazypianist1116]

Ok this is most likely a stupid question but why can i see titles under peoples names they surely can't be correct can they?

If so then I think I'm seeing something I'm not suppose to see

I'm going to leave this here and see what other people think since nobody commented on it at the time. Munkir's subtitle is Townsperson. He seems inexperienced enough for this post to be a legitimate question. If he weren't town, he wouldn't have asked the question, seeing the contradiction with his own role.

That being said the rest of his posts have virtually no content and I would have had him on my leaning scum list. Not sure how to feel.

[istott]

I did comment on that, but I did not realise the implications. Hmmmm.

[Riddleton]

Completrly forgot about this sorry!

[Riddleton]

Lemme check my role pm again. Am I scum? I really hope I'm scum! [/amnesia]

[istott]

UNVOTE: riddleton
And here I thought you were flaking.