In post 285, implosion wrote:
I really have no idea why you're calling my posting pattern scummy.
@town - can you follow my line of reasoning? I ask because I want to see if Implosion is the only one not understanding me.
What I get from what you're saying is he's only posting when it's convenient for him to post yes?
Yep.
Also that from 247 - 261 he addresses a significant number of issues, but ignores the ones I've raised with him. The most he responds to me is by giving an explanation for why he hasn't posted in a while.
Apologizing for not posting for a while would have been a fine explanation - had he directed it at me. Instead, to me, it feels like he tried to slip an explanation under the radar without having to directly confront me on anything. THAT felt more scummy than the post pattern itself.
I think you're looking into that a bit to much and overthinking I don't think that's what he was going for that seems way to smart
I do think you're town though for all this
Super busy day at work so I'm behind, but I agree with this sentiment.
NN30 sees himself as the focus of questioning / investigation and assumes that his target is considering his posts foremost when responding (assumes active neglect vs just not noticing / not caring). It reflects a stance wherein he believes everyone should be responding first and foremost to him; a responsibility seeking rather than a responsibility avoiding posture. He thinks his questions are super important and should always be answered, and that any avoidance of those questions is scum. Scum are happy to appear contributory, but this goes past simple appearance into active investigation attempt.
It's a 'Not considering equally plausible alternatives' fallacy, but this expression of the fallacy is much more likely to come from town than from scum, imo.
tl;dr active followup / active attempts to solve ergo leans towny.
I am reasonably pleased with what LUV posted over night and appreciate that he's taking a more active role in the game.
I need to find time to ponder Grendel more.
I still want a response from Penguin to my earlier question. Especially now that LUV made a big contribution post.
Posted: Thu Oct 06, 2016 9:58 am
by eagerSnake
I mean I told you guys this a while ago
Posted: Thu Oct 06, 2016 10:01 am
by Shadow_step
@Zoro, let's wagon Penguin.
There seems to be more potential in this.
VOTE: PP
Posted: Thu Oct 06, 2016 10:18 am
by PenguinPower
In post 303, Zoronos wrote:Especially now that LUV made a big contribution post.
Um...a play by play of what's happened is hardly a contribution post.
What was your earlier question?
Posted: Thu Oct 06, 2016 10:22 am
by Zoronos
In post 226, Zoronos wrote:Penguin - Let's make the assumption of Bad Town for the moment, if only because I don't feel like digging into this more and would like to see what he contributes based on actual gameplay.
Who does that leave as your top scum read, other than LUV? (Again, putting LUV's unhelpfulness aside. Looking Actual scummy posting in thread)
I asked before LUV made his big post, but question remains relevant enough.
I guess with the secondary follow up - Your initial case on LUV was that he was non-contributory / not helping solve, do you feel that is still the case now that he wrote a [wall of words]? (Seems like your answer is Yes but I don't want to put words in your mouth)
In post 226, Zoronos wrote:Penguin - Let's make the assumption of Bad Town for the moment, if only because I don't feel like digging into this more and would like to see what he contributes based on actual gameplay.
Who does that leave as your top scum read, other than LUV? (Again, putting LUV's unhelpfulness aside. Looking Actual scummy posting in thread)
I asked before LUV made his big post, but question remains relevant enough.
I guess with the secondary follow up - Your initial case on LUV was that he was non-contributory / not helping solve, do you feel that is still the case now that he wrote a [wall of words]? (Seems like your answer is Yes but I don't want to put words in your mouth)
Original question: Gamma.
Follow up: I'd like to see LUV take a hard stance on something before I'm going to consider moving elsewhere.
In post 226, Zoronos wrote:Penguin - Let's make the assumption of Bad Town for the moment, if only because I don't feel like digging into this more and would like to see what he contributes based on actual gameplay.
Who does that leave as your top scum read, other than LUV? (Again, putting LUV's unhelpfulness aside. Looking Actual scummy posting in thread)
I asked before LUV made his big post, but question remains relevant enough.
I guess with the secondary follow up - Your initial case on LUV was that he was non-contributory / not helping solve, do you feel that is still the case now that he wrote a [wall of words]? (Seems like your answer is Yes but I don't want to put words in your mouth)
Original question: Gamma.
Follow up: I'd like to see LUV take a hard stance on something before I'm going to consider moving elsewhere.
I was going to write a whole bunch of :words: on my opinion on Gamma, but going to hit Save Draft on that one for the moment.
Why Gamma?
Posted: Thu Oct 06, 2016 11:01 am
by PenguinPower
I get bad feels from him.
Spoiler:
In post 129, Gamma Emerald wrote:It's RVS. Sure it's kinda dumb not to make up a silly reason to vote, but I would wait a bit before condemning him to the gallows.
In post 132, Gamma Emerald wrote:VOTE: Implosion
Serious vote. He doesn't talk about LUV at all but then votes him. Trying to flashwagon are we?
In post 172, Gamma Emerald wrote:Legit it was the exact thing he was mislynched for. I'm hoping he'll contribute this time, but I understand if he doesn't.
If he was mislynched for his play before, why do you think he's doing the exact same thing this time around?
He obviously hasn't learned the lesson.
Letting him go way to easy. If I was scum!LUV, I would love Gamma. If I was scum!Gamma...buddying successful.
In post 281, Gamma Emerald wrote:Also boring: are you satisfied with my explanation of the thing between me and Grendel?
Why does he care so much?
In post 287, Gamma Emerald wrote:I said the bit about OMGUS because I figured someone else would accuse me of it.
Only thing I really need to address is the OMGUS thing: it was a joke. And also, weren't you in Newbie 1739 too? Didn't you see Doom pull the exact same pre-defense shit?
Posted: Thu Oct 06, 2016 11:17 am
by Gamma Emerald
I think I just contradicted myself. I was being sarcastic was what I meant by "it being a joke".
Posted: Thu Oct 06, 2016 11:17 am
by PenguinPower
In post 313, Gamma Emerald wrote:Only thing I really need to address is the OMGUS thing: it was a joke. And also, weren't you in Newbie 1739 too? Didn't you see Doom pull the exact same pre-defense shit?
Um...so...what you are asking me to do is take a newbie's, in their first game, meta, and apply what they did, in an entirely different setup with entirely different players, and attribute it to your comment; and, then read that comment as town? That about right?
In post 285, implosion wrote:
I really have no idea why you're calling my posting pattern scummy.
@town - can you follow my line of reasoning? I ask because I want to see if Implosion is the only one not understanding me.
What I get from what you're saying is he's only posting when it's convenient for him to post yes?
Yep.
Also that from 247 - 261 he addresses a significant number of issues, but ignores the ones I've raised with him. The most he responds to me is by giving an explanation for why he hasn't posted in a while.
Apologizing for not posting for a while would have been a fine explanation - had he directed it at me. Instead, to me, it feels like he tried to slip an explanation under the radar without having to directly confront me on anything. THAT felt more scummy than the post pattern itself.
I think you're looking into that a bit to much and overthinking I don't think that's what he was going for that seems way to smart
I do think you're town though for all this
Super busy day at work so I'm behind, but I agree with this sentiment.
NN30 sees himself as the focus of questioning / investigation and assumes that his target is considering his posts foremost when responding (assumes active neglect vs just not noticing / not caring). It reflects a stance wherein he believes everyone should be responding first and foremost to him; a responsibility seeking rather than a responsibility avoiding posture. He thinks his questions are super important and should always be answered, and that any avoidance of those questions is scum. Scum are happy to appear contributory, but this goes past simple appearance into active investigation attempt.
It's a 'Not considering equally plausible alternatives' fallacy, but this expression of the fallacy is much more likely to come from town than from scum, imo.
tl;dr active followup / active attempts to solve ergo leans towny.
I am reasonably pleased with what LUV posted over night and appreciate that he's taking a more active role in the game.
I need to find time to ponder Grendel more.
I still want a response from Penguin to my earlier question. Especially now that LUV made a big contribution post.
Translation - Nn30 is cute, he's trying, ++town points.
I'm still wary of implosion. Since I'm not getting any traction with him at the moment, I'll drop it and see if I have anything to contribute to the other wagons occurring right now.
Posted: Thu Oct 06, 2016 11:28 am
by PenguinPower
In post 318, Gamma Emerald wrote:So what are you more concerned with: the contradiction or my actions?
Why can't I be concerned with all of it? Still...waiting for LUV to do...something.
Posted: Thu Oct 06, 2016 11:29 am
by Gamma Emerald
Well you should probably ignore the contradiction because I pointed it out. As for my actions, what are you seeing in them?
Posted: Thu Oct 06, 2016 11:30 am
by Zoronos
In post 319, nn30 wrote:Translation - Nn30 is cute, he's trying, ++town points.
I'm still wary of implosion. Since I'm not getting any traction with him at the moment, I'll drop it and see if I have anything to contribute to the other wagons occurring right now.
Earnest effort to solve with evidence of a town mindset, sure. Reducing that to 'trying' is a bit reductive but w/e.
I also didn't say "you are wrong Implosion is town", I said your current case is not alignment indicating. Basically, you're hanging your hat on the rack for the wrong reason. Not necessarily that it's on the wrong rack. By all means, continue exploring and if I have something to contribute, I'll pipe up.
Follow up: I'd like to see LUV take a hard stance on something before I'm going to consider moving elsewhere.
Gamma strikes me as the kind of person that likes to be 'technically correct'. As soon as he pounced on my 'Ascetic is like Miller' with a 'Well actually...', I figured that I was dealing with someone that placed a high value on conversational point scoring over communication of intent.
This kind of play annoys me, however, I feel that it is less likely to come from scum because it's an inherently antagonistic stance. He didn't call me scum for thinking about Ascetic in terms of being like Miller since they were both negative utility; he just called me wrong and insinuated that I was bad. That's a stance that engenders bad feelings from me towards him, and as scum that's not in favor of his win condition (since negative perception aka anti-charisma means I'm more likely to interpret other things he says negatively, and thus more likely to vote him). Basically, either his personality is so in favor of winning internet arguments that he's willing to lower his chances of winning for it, or he's town being contentious for the sake of being contentious.
Even though he's voting me now, he hasn't brought that up at any point in his reasoning (others have, but w/e). That suggests it's just a personality thing for him. Ergo, town mindset.