What site did you play at?
Personally I treat all games the same. Mods tend to give safe claims so breaking the game doesn't occur.
Myko: I would only think you were serious if you were voting the guy.
In post 27, Ki-Gi wrote:Your vote was opportunistic because you tried to back it up with (poor) reasoning. His vote seemed random, blatantly without justification. It's scum motivation vs. WIFOM, I pick the former as more likely to be scum. My question could gain insight into the wagon to better understand his post (if it was to be answered), so I can therefore see if I'm missing something about it that makes it scummier.
In post 48, MattP wrote:Ftr on that note farside I think myko is actually scum
In post 47, Anatole Kuragin wrote:In post 42, Anatole Kuragin wrote:Ki-Gi, do you think it's likely that scum would drop a second-vote-on-wagon vote without explanation like that?
In post 43, Ki-Gi wrote:I don't think it's likely, no. Which is why I especially don't like Flubber's wagon.
You said you don't think it's likely that scum would drop the second vote on a wagon without explanation, which is what Matt did.
In post 63, Anatole Kuragin wrote:farside, how many scum have you got with random, completely unqualified and unexplained votes?
In post 62, MattP wrote:I don't currently think ki is scum but it would be nice to also think he was town
In post 70, Anatole Kuragin wrote:In post 68, farside22 wrote:In post 63, Anatole Kuragin wrote:farside, how many scum have you got with random, completely unqualified and unexplained votes?
My vote is not random or a shock I would say.
But please keep asking pointless questions that give you no alignment info.
It's not pointless - you still haven't explained why you are voting for me. Why are you trying to avoid explaining the vote?
Anatole Kuragin wrote:Farside, If you were town you should welcome the opportunity to explain scumreads or perceived motives - not just ignore the chance to reason out a possible wagon as a gotcha for a point that is irrelevant.
In post 76, Anatole Kuragin wrote:I said I didn't understand what you were asking. Your question at the top of the last page does not follow any known human language syntax.
I then explained I was trying to get the first couple pages sussed out by asking questions. What isn't answered?
In post 80, Anatole Kuragin wrote:I saw his post about Matt earlier, and asked if he thought the way Matt (who he was and is voting) would be likely to vote in such a bold way (no other text, or explanation) as the second vote on a wagon if he was scum. I asked this because I think that reduces the chances of it being a scum vote. Ki-Gi even said himself he didn't think it would be likely when addressing the question in a more general manner.
That has nothing to do with what you're arguing.
In post 84, Ki-Gi wrote:In post 83, farside22 wrote:Oh and for a shit and giggle reference I did vote for messiah in Bel's game for no reason and he was scum.
What is the point of this. What. Why. Because it seems like an underhanded way to justify your random vote while still making it clear that you don't actually mean anything by it.
In post 63, Anatole Kuragin wrote:farside, how many scum have you got with random, completely unqualified and unexplained votes?
In post 89, MattP wrote:I'm busy right now but I've been keeping an eye on the thread and I think you're wasting time and harming town with your vindictive tone towards farside, Anatole. Maybe this is a time for self reflection and a drop of humility, even if she is being aggressive towards you
In post 95, Anatole Kuragin wrote:In post 93, Ki-Gi wrote:In post 90, Anatole Kuragin wrote:In post 85, farside22 wrote:In post 80, Anatole Kuragin wrote:I saw his post about Matt earlier, and asked if he thought the way Matt (who he was and is voting) would be likely to vote in such a bold way (no other text, or explanation) as the second vote on a wagon if he was scum. I asked this because I think that reduces the chances of it being a scum vote. Ki-Gi even said himself he didn't think it would be likely when addressing the question in a more general manner.
That has nothing to do with what you're arguing.
You realize your question did not refer to Matt right?
He also stated it wasn't a big scum tell, also not sure why your up in arms over my vote with explanation while questioning ki for his vote with the rational of being a second vote without a reason.
What is the difference between the first vote for no reason push?
Your vote still has no explanation at all.
And yes, I was asking a question to Ki-Gi in reference to Matt originally. I think I would know better than you. Ki-gi seemed to understand the question fine when I asked it - you are the only one who did not.
That's not true, I thought you were referring to Flubber when you were referring to Matt, which made me answer yes as opposed to no.
Your answer shows to me what you would think of the situation without confbias, do you disagree?
Anatole Kuragin wrote:This is what happens when I'm bored at work all day because there are no support tickets to deal with.
In post 114, mykonian wrote:In post 89, MattP wrote:I'm busy right now but I've been keeping an eye on the thread and I think you're wasting time and harming town with your vindictive tone towards farside, Anatole. Maybe this is a time for self reflection and a drop of humility, even if she is being aggressive towards you
You aren't the only one, anatole. Don't worry. I think this happens every game.
This is very quick though, I don't know if a debate like this around Farside ever exploded on page 3 or so.
In post 80, Anatole Kuragin wrote:I saw his post about Matt earlier, and asked if he thought the way Matt (who he was and is voting) would be likely to vote in such a bold way (no other text, or explanation) as the second vote on a wagon if he was scum. I asked this because I think that reduces the chances of it being a scum vote. Ki-Gi even said himself he didn't think it would be likely when addressing the question in a more general manner.
That has nothing to do with what you're arguing.
In post 125, MattP wrote:With all the love in the world for you guys, farside and anatole, can you both check the syntax of your posts before posting them because I've spent way too much time trying to parse through them and we're only on page 5
In post 60, Anatole Kuragin wrote:a) I know people who say bruh
b) farside, that's why I'm asking questions - to flesh out and contextualize the game so far
In post 42, Anatole Kuragin wrote:Ki-Gi, do you think it's likely that scum would drop a second-vote-on-wagon vote without explanation like that?
In post 150, Anatole Kuragin wrote:What do you find interesting about the flubbernugget wagon?
In post 156, Anatole Kuragin wrote:Too many players ask leading questions that give too much away, give scum an out in answering, or assume an answer from the beginning. None of these are particularly useful when trying to understand players' motivations. I'd rather just ask you guys what you were/are thinking. I'm not trying to look "important" whatever that means - I'm trying to piece together reads and you and farside are being particularly reluctant in response.
Anatole Kuragin wrote:In post 151, farside22 wrote:In post 42, Anatole Kuragin wrote:Ki-Gi, do you think it's likely that scum would drop a second-vote-on-wagon vote without explanation like that?
Anatole why did you ask the question this way if it's not a scum tell to you?
I was trying to break down why KiGi was voting Matt when at worst his vote was null.
In post 152, farside22 wrote:In post 150, Anatole Kuragin wrote:What do you find interesting about the flubbernugget wagon?
Can I say what I find interesting about the whole thing!?!?
Like I've been asking all day? Sure.
In post 33, Anatole Kuragin wrote:In post 26, MattP wrote:In post 25, Ki-Gi wrote:To try and better understand the wagon.
He voted the same person I did
When I did it you decided I wasn't town
But when he did it your stance is that his wagon is a bad wagon
I don't understand the cause of the discrepancy, and I don't see how your question gains you insight into the legitimacy of the wagon
Why did you vote him?
In post 47, Anatole Kuragin wrote:In post 42, Anatole Kuragin wrote:Ki-Gi, do you think it's likely that scum would drop a second-vote-on-wagon vote without explanation like that?
In post 43, Ki-Gi wrote:I don't think it's likely, no. Which is why I especially don't like Flubber's wagon.
You said you don't think it's likely that scum would drop the second vote on a wagon without explanation, which is what Matt did.
In post 61, farside22 wrote:VOTE: Anatole
Matt: some of ki's post come off a bit vi. I maybe wrong but typically i see town concerned with quick wagon's more then scum.
*scoff's at myko brah tell*
Myko: how many scum you got with language tells?
In post 63, Anatole Kuragin wrote:farside, how many scum have you got with random, completely unqualified and unexplained votes?
In post 70, Anatole Kuragin wrote:In post 68, farside22 wrote:In post 63, Anatole Kuragin wrote:farside, how many scum have you got with random, completely unqualified and unexplained votes?
My vote is not random or a shock I would say.
But please keep asking pointless questions that give you no alignment info.
It's not pointless - you still haven't explained why you are voting for me. Why are you trying to avoid explaining the vote?
In post 78, Anatole Kuragin wrote:Farside, If you were town you should welcome the opportunity to explain scumreads or perceived motives - not just ignore the chance to reason out a possible wagon as a gotcha for a point that is irrelevant.
In post 81, Anatole Kuragin wrote:I just find it weird that you're willing to drop an apparently serious vote with intention to make a case later, rather than the logical order of making a case first.
In post 91, Anatole Kuragin wrote:In post 89, MattP wrote:I'm busy right now but I've been keeping an eye on the thread and I think you're wasting time and harming town with your vindictive tone towards farside, Anatole. Maybe this is a time for self reflection and a drop of humility, even if she is being aggressive towards you
Why shouldn't I question her voting without explanation?
In post 97, Anatole Kuragin wrote:In post 94, MattP wrote:In post 91, Anatole Kuragin wrote:In post 89, MattP wrote:I'm busy right now but I've been keeping an eye on the thread and I think you're wasting time and harming town with your vindictive tone towards farside, Anatole. Maybe this is a time for self reflection and a drop of humility, even if she is being aggressive towards you
Why shouldn't I question her voting without explanation?
When I read through your posts regardless of content they came off as vindictive. I care much less about what you are doing in your posts. Do you currently believe that farside is even scummy?
Pursuing a case without any reasoning at all, discouraging questioning players and their motives are the scummiest traits that have been displayed so far. I'm trying to let her explain why she's playing like this before I make up my mind.
In post 103, Anatole Kuragin wrote:In post 100, Ki-Gi wrote:I corrected myself later to say that I think in some cases (not all) that an unexplained second-vote-on-wagon is not a scum action. That's all.
I think farside's logic is terrible but I don't see how that makes her scum.
I understand that, KiGi and it's one of the reasons I'm not still trying to argue anything about that quote with you. Farside on the other hand, is trying to make it seem scummy even though the two people involved with the question are past it.
In post 130, Anatole Kuragin wrote:I'm not sure on Ki-Gi yet.
In post 156, Anatole Kuragin wrote:Too many players ask leading questions that give too much away, give scum an out in answering, or assume an answer from the beginning. None of these are particularly useful when trying to understand players' motivations. I'd rather just ask you guys what you were/are thinking. I'm not trying to look "important" whatever that means - I'm trying to piece together reads and you and farside are being particularly reluctant in response.
Anatole Kuragin wrote:Why are you putting the burden on everyone else to generate content, Csareo?
Beli, what do you mean?
In post 168, Flubbernugget wrote:Okay. Sorry for the afk. Should get some real content out later tonight.
VERY IMPORTANT QUESTION:
Has anyone played with Csareo before??
In post 175, Csareo wrote:@Farside, what is a null tell? Is that even possible?
In post 180, Anatole Kuragin wrote:In post 174, Csareo wrote:Look up guys
There is a dumbass in our midst, and he's here to troll
I would not mind policy lynching this asshole. He'll say stupid shit that will get him scum read and we'll spend 5 pages arguing about whether that is just his meta.
I can confirm that flubber's meta is to act like a douchebag.
VOTE: carstereo
In post 207, mykonian wrote:I'm not confused by the game as a whole just by some players choices.
Yes, I've seen people like anatole. idk, personalities do that.It's more that then allignment at this point, I think.
Good luck with your day
In post 209, Anatole Kuragin wrote:Sorry I was rude in my last posts, Farside. I was in a bad mood last night.
But I echo my statement by asking what the fuck are you talking about re: trying to make my posts look like your posts?
In post 215, Anatole Kuragin wrote:I mocked your case against me because it was really bad. You just quoted posts and interpreted them poorly, mostly stuff that has already been argued or explained in a way that makes it clear you didn't understand them at all.
This frustrates me because you don't like me asking questions that help me understand people's reasoning, yet you clearly misunderstand posts frequently and just roll with it.
Which makes more sense?
In post 225, Anatole Kuragin wrote:He's not just contradicting himself - he's trying to make cases based on contradictions as well. He is changing his opinions based on who he wants to lynch.
Wants to lynch flubber because he's an easy, absent target - let's do a policy lynch
Trying to argue against Ki-Gi - policy lynches are for scum
In post 277, Ki-Gi wrote:In post 274, farside22 wrote:My vote on ki is simple. He isn't scum hunting. His post are stabs at people on things they say and keeps himself out of conversations completely.
Aka: playing the sideline scum game.
Your "conversations" with AK is nothing but running in circles and never concluding anything decent, so really I care enough about the townto avoidgetting involved with them. My stabs at people actually reveal shit that help me with my reads. You just confuse people with questions that couldn't possibly reveal alignment and then continue to bother them when they call you out for it. I would OMGUS you but I just think you're weak town. If your scum and just want me to think that, then good job.
In post 293, Anatole Kuragin wrote:it is not clear to me either
In post 299, Anatole Kuragin wrote:In post 295, farside22 wrote:In post 293, Anatole Kuragin wrote:it is not clear to me either
What did you think of ki's reaction to my vote?
His response isn't alignment indicative and makes decent points.
If you're trying to vote someone for not scumhunting, why wouldn't you hold Belisarius, TSO, Myko, etc. to the same standard? He's doing more than they are to actually have some presence in the town.
In post 305, Belisarius wrote:In post 304, Flubbernugget wrote:You don't think in any way that VCA analysis comment can't backfire in any way if your vote doesn't flip the way you want it to?
Sure it can. I'm fine with the risk.
In post 314, Belisarius wrote:In post 307, farside22 wrote:Based on meta?
Based on the little leprechaun who perches on my shoulder and whispers secrets into my ear.
Mostly just stuff about Ray Liotta's secret second life as a masked crime fighter, but sometimes I get something useful. Sometimes.
In post 317, Belisarius wrote:In post 315, farside22 wrote:Stay out of the tunnel far
I'm not tunnelling per se, I'd also be OK with a Kuragin lynch, because I'm a huge hypocrite who shitposts while scumreading another player for shitposting.
In post 274, farside22 wrote:My vote on ki is simple. He isn't scum hunting. His post are stabs at people on things they say and keeps himself out of conversations completely.
Aka: playing the sideline scum game.
In post 274, farside22 wrote:My vote on ki is simple. He isn't scum hunting. His post are stabs at people on things they say and keeps himself out of conversations completely.
Aka: playing the sideline scum game.
In post 280, farside22 wrote:In post 277, Ki-Gi wrote:In post 274, farside22 wrote:My vote on ki is simple. He isn't scum hunting. His post are stabs at people on things they say and keeps himself out of conversations completely.
Aka: playing the sideline scum game.
Your "conversations" with AK is nothing but running in circles and never concluding anything decent, so really I care enough about the townto avoidgetting involved with them. My stabs at people actually reveal shit that help me with my reads. You just confuse people with questions that couldn't possibly reveal alignment and then continue to bother them when they call you out for it. I would OMGUS you but I just think you're weak town. If your scum and just want me to think that, then good job.
You never said anything about my questions before this.
Why did you not voice that before I voted you?
You also said nothing about the argument between me and Anatole other then to come in and agree that anatole's question was misleading so....?
In post 436, Espressojet wrote:Matt, can you please explain to me why you would like Flubber lynched?
Espressojet wrote:In post 439, MattP wrote:In post 438, Espressojet wrote:Ok, sounds good.
Well besides me just being indignant, doesn't it make more sense for you to independently form an opinion given the extreme lack of effort that goes into it and then discuss with me? It seems pretty all-around more helpful for all parties.
I wanted to hear YOUR opinion
In post 447, xRECKONERx wrote:In post 425, MattP wrote:I'd like a flubber lynch
That, I can do.
VOTE: flubbernugget
Again, this is a known quality when you play with SSK. What qualifies it as "too hard"?In post 427, farside22 wrote:I feel like SSK is lurking too hard.
In post 450, xRECKONERx wrote:Why tomorrow? Why not today?
In post 457, xRECKONERx wrote:In post 452, farside22 wrote:In post 450, xRECKONERx wrote:Why tomorrow? Why not today?
Finishing up things on my desk. I may get it done tonight but I'm never sure how my night is going to go.
So you meanliterallytomorrow as in 24 hours from now, not tomorrow as in Day Two
In post 505, MattP wrote:I think I'm down to 7 scum candidates left