Open 730: Donner Party [Terminado]

[Korina]

MathDino is being prodded.
He has 24 hours to reply, or he will be replaced and graylisted.

[Sando]

Wait AP, who is A, B & C in this crocodile escapade?

A = CJ, B = Otter, C = Unreal?

1) I voted LuckyOtter for meta reasons. Everything was fine then.

2) LuckyOtter then explains why my vote on him was wrong.

3) Then UnrealSeal comes along. He votes LuckyOtter, but for reasons different for what I put forward, reasons which I feel come from not reading LuckyOtter's explanation on why my vote was wrong.

4) I voted UnrealSeal and told him I didn't understand his vote, and that LuckyOtter already provided what I had asked of him.

5) UnrealSeal then tells me he voted LuckyOtter for being deflective in his answer.

6) Finding his answer satisfactory, I switched back.

I added numbers for readability and ability to reference.

My main issue is around (2), did you think it fair enough from Otter or did you not think it a reasonable explanation?

When you say deflective from Otter, you're saying that this progression happened:
a) CJ accuses Otter of being unengaged compared to his town-game
b) Otter says "yo no-one engaged me"*
c) CJ accepts unengaged explanation
d) Unreal says "yo that's no excuse, that's deflection"*
e) CJ accepts Unreals deflection point.
(*artistic liberties taken)

Yet:

I don't think Lucky is being deflective in his answer.

This despite what actually happened:

Otter's answer seems deflective and that's my big problem with it.

then very next post:

Darn I see your point.

VOTE: LuckyOtter

I think saying that Unreal voted for different reasons is not really a reasonable statement, you made a case, Otter responded, Unreal thought the response wasn't good enough. To say his point is unrelated isn't really fair... I also think the language of "I see your point" is an indication you agree with it, when I think you're implying in (6) that you merely thought it was good enough to warrant an unvote, rather than agreeing with it.

You're flip-flopping alllll over the place with the deflection point.

[ceejayvinoya]

But that's not agreement. That's me saying I understood him. I "saw" his point. I didn't say "I agree with you" or "hey, you're actually right".

[Sando]

But that's not agreement. That's me saying I understood him. I "saw" his point. I didn't say "I agree with you" or "hey, you're actually right".

Even if I follow your logic (which I disagree with, but semantics I guess), you then voted someone who you'd made a case on who had then made a convincing argument to you about why your case was weak.

If Otter convinced you your unengaged case was weak, and you didn't agree with Unreal's reasoning (only agreed it was reasonable town-argument if unconvincing to you), then why did you go back to voting Otter? You expressed 1 reason for voting Otter, Unreal expressed another, apparently Otter convinced you the first wasn't reasonable and you never agreed that Unreals was reasonable...yet you then vote Otter? For what reason?

[ceejayvinoya]

I really don't like the vibe I'm getting from Marsh. He seems way too frantic and desperate for town validation

So because I'm not as lethargic as you, I'm scummy? I'm always top poster on my forum, every game (unless I die early of course, but even there lol). And "desperate for town validation"? Elaborate on that please.

If you want a link to a game on my forum, http://www.sc2mafia.com/forum/showthrea ... ht=spirits. My newbie game: viewtopic.php?t=76171&start=875.

Does anyone know BlackStar's meta, or have a link to a game he was in to give me?

@BlackStar I want reaction to #140, please. Going to bed now, good morning people

Im not lethargic. And you're scummy because you're freaking out and flopping around all over the place hoping that people will stop being suspicious with you. You're moving your vote in order to have it line up with the general consensus and you're extremely defensive. I didn't even ask about your meta or past games and you offered it up because you're so desperate for people to stop scum reading you lol

I already said in 173 that I wasn't fully satisfied with Otter's answer. Sigh.

[ceejayvinoya]

Didn't mean to quote that no idea how that happened

[Marshmallow Marshall]

What is your read on BlackStar? What is your read on Manatee, and why do you think he's being townread by some people? I don't get how anything he did was AI.

Nothing conclusive on Blackstar/Manatee, but I fancy the former as town for now. Why someone reads someone as X? I have no idea. Ask them.

Some of my reads are pure gut. Some are meta-based. Some are a mix of both, and some are for specific reasons. I currently am most interested in CJV as his disappearance under pressure is a semi-meta reason for me to further SR him.

Ok, sounds good.

[Sando]

You did read my post 92? I specifically said he wasn't being engaged. Otter's 105 is okay to me. What do you think is wrong about it?

and then:

Explain to me like I'm a 5th grader on why Otter's answer was bad because I still don't get it.

There's a hell of a lot of lineball word-game-interpretations here that you're asking me to all fall on your side for. "Not fully satisfied" after hard-defending that post and attacking someone calling it out and then asking why his post was bad. "Darn I see your point" isn't agreement, it's just acknowledgement, etc.

You also then do this:

Right now my problem with you here @Otter, is that in our previous game, your first few votes actually makes sense and are progressive.

So I was kinda disappointed when I saw these.

Mind telling me why Marsh is a good wagon atm?

(context, CJ quotes LuckyOtter voting Marsh and I've removed it for brevity).
Then do this:

I think MM is likely scum. As for if they're the same alignment, I dunno.

VOTE: Marshmallow

For reference, I believe this is your only other reference to MM (other than asking Otter why he's voting MM):

In fact, looking at your examples, they actually don't apply. Idk why MM agrees with you.

Please tell me you just set a trap and you got MM

So Otter was scummy for lack of progression onto MM and then you do the same?

[Marshmallow Marshall]

Spoiler:

Can we lynch this guy already?

Not yet. I mean, I don't fancy lynching people for being annoying (Disclaimer: MM is

not

even annoying to me, but I'm talking in general). I like lynching people because they make sense -to me- as scum OR if they're confusing enough that lynching them either provides more info or prevents them from going to LyLo. Obviously none of these is the case here, so I would rather get CJV whom I do think is scum.

Now someone asked about the scum motivation about CJV's behaviour, and I say what's the TOWN!motive behind voting someone who did the same thing you did, only it was about your own talk which you both interpreted in a way that is different to how a 3rd person did.

Let me try and phrase it another way: Person A says they like amphibians such as crocodiles. Person B says amphibians' skin being used to produce bags, shoes, belts and what not in inhumane. Person C points out amphibians' skin is not used for that and accuses B of being ignorant. Person A then reiterates that

crocodile skin

is indeed used for such production. Person C points out B said "amphibians" and crocodiles aren't amphibians. Now obviously B was mislead by A's statement (who was also under the impression his initial statement was correct still). C restates his point that crocodiles aren't amphibians, and A goes "Oh! Got ya! I agree B is actually at fault".

Now, how does

ignorant

A fault B for following A's doubly-confessed-to-be intended meaning? If it slipped my mind that crocodiles are actually reptiles not amphibians then I cannot point a finger at the other guys who thought the same when we

both

have been pointed out to be at wrong. I mean, we're both wrong.. we both made the same mistake, and it was I who started it even, so if he's ignorant I must be as much ignorant if not even more.

Sounds too complicated? Here's a much simpler example: There's a claimed but not yet mod-confirmed IC. I vote them and push them claiming I don't believe their claim. Someone else does the same. The mod comes in to confirm they are indeed an IC. I switch my vote to the other person because "they wanted to lynch the IC". How does that work?

So, what I think is CJV voting Lucky there is a projection of his own alignment. In his mind it is "I'm scum so he must be too". Let's not forget this is multi-ball, so if CJV is the SK he thinks Lucky is Mafia and vise versa.

Very clever, but I think most people looked at it the wrong way.

I voted LuckyOtter for meta reasons. Everything was fine then.

LuckyOtter then explains why my vote on him was wrong.

Then UnrealSeal comes along. He votes LuckyOtter, but for reasons different for what I put forward, reasons which I feel come from not reading LuckyOtter's explanation on why my vote was wrong.

I voted UnrealSeal and told him I didn't understand his vote, and that LuckyOtter already provided what I had asked of him.

UnrealSeal then tells me he voted LuckyOtter for being deflective in his answer.

Finding his answer satisfactory, I switched back.

Why people had trouble comprehending this, idk.

Why did you switch back though? You said that Seal's answer was good. Also, what are your reads now?

[Marshmallow Marshall]

I voted UnrealSeal and told him I didn't understand his vote, and that

LuckyOtter already provided what I had asked of him.

UnrealSeal then tells me he voted LuckyOtter for being deflective in his answer.

Finding his answer satisfactory,

I switched back

.

So, if Lucky "already provided what you had asked of him", why did you "switch back" to him then? Did you agree that Lucky was "being deflective in his answer" to Unreal? And do you think that is reason enough when he had "already provided what

you

had asked of him"?

I switched back because that was where my vite was earlier, and I wasn't really content with Lucky's answer.

It's like I asked a guy to bring me 5 apples and instead he brings me only 4.

I don't think Lucky is being deflective in his answer. I stopped voting Unreal because I understood why he was scumreading Lucky. It's up to the two of them to sort that out.

So, right now, what is your read on Otter and why?

[Marshmallow Marshall]

But that's not agreement. That's me saying I understood him. I "saw" his point. I didn't say "I agree with you" or "hey, you're actually right".

Then why did you switch back...???

[ManateeDude]

Sando v ceejay feels heavy T v T atm. Im gutreading both of them as town because of their tone.

[Marshmallow Marshall]

Sando v ceejay feels heavy T v T atm. Im gutreading both of them as town because of their tone.

So you believe the entire thing with Ceejay is a huge misunderstanding?

[ManateeDude]

Sando v ceejay feels heavy T v T atm. Im gutreading both of them as town because of their tone.

So you believe the entire thing with Ceejay is a huge misunderstanding?

It just turned into a dumb fight I can't see scum initiating

VOTE: MM

This feels very pure atm

[ceejayvinoya]

Wait wtf did you just hammer Marsh

[Korina]

Votecount 1.FINAL

Marshmallow Marshall(

DED!

)

~ BlackStar(14), Mathdino(1), ejjinami(17), Not_Mafia(6), LuckyOtter(8), ceejayvinoya(18), ManateeDude(17)

-- STOP, HAMMER TIME

ceejayvinoya(2)

~ AP(17), Marshmallow Marshall(56)

Not_Mafia(1)

~ Sando(13)

LuckyOtter(1)

~ UnrealSeal(8)


Not Voting (1): shizune(1)

With 12 alive it takes 7 to lynch.

Day 1 deadline is in RIGHT NOW

MOD REMINDERS

Flip coming soon. Thread’ll remain unlocked till then.

[ceejayvinoya]

Oh you're so pure lmao

[ManateeDude]

Fuuuuuck

[Korina]

MM may continue posting until their role is flipped btw

Twilight posting is also fine with me, all rules still apply though

[ceejayvinoya]

I'm still laughing lols

[ManateeDude]

Welp. I hope this flips scum.

[Not_Mafia]

MM may continue posting until their role is flipped btw

Twilight posting is also fine with me, all rules still apply though

Twilight is the time between a hammer and mod coming to the thread, not whatever this is

[Korina]

For me, twilight is the time from hammer / eod till mod posts flip and/or flavor and locks thread for the night.

[ManateeDude]

MM may continue posting until their role is flipped btw

Twilight posting is also fine with me, all rules still apply though

Twilight is the time between a hammer and mod coming to the thread, not whatever this is

R u the mod?

[ceejayvinoya]

So Otter was scummy for lack of progression onto MM and then you do the same?

Okay. Back. Otter leaned scummy to me because I assumed that his lack of engagement here compared to our previous game was suspicious.

Marsh leaned scummy to me because he agreed with AP's example which isn't even applicable.