In post 93, xwing wrote:
i will agree for now..
for me, naked votes are NAI this early too..
@gamma ^
what do you think?
Leaves room for backing out.
Nullread.
Not a read.
Maybe it's just the wording but doesn't sound that he's convinced they're townreads.
Nullread on dann.
Not a read.
In post 95, xwing wrote:@sasha - strongly agree on dann read
Strongly agrees on a nullread.
When picking between them I feel sasha is more deserving of the vote because I expect less from an entry post than a regular post from someone following along from the beginning.
Not that I'm excusing xwing but at least he/she can say he/she missed the real time context of being here. What's sasha's excuse?
for the "leaves room for backing out" argument, i think i can see why it can be scummy, but i think i type this way because my reads will not be static, and i expect them to change over the course of time..especially given the very early read of those posts..
also thanks bujaber for playing devil's advocate, but i dont really have an excuse..i read (skimmed) everything before i posted and nothing stuck out (as can be seen on the first sentence of my first post)..so i just replied to posts that i can relate with, sorta like a "yup im here" post..
In post 155, Flubbernugget wrote:Yeah last time I played with xwing I scum read them for being to passive and they greened
Yup. I'm very interested in hearing what is so different about their play here. I actually wasn't keen on holding his read to the standard of another game we were all in, I am not a meta guy, but he himself mentioned that game and said town her could do better.
In post 60, JunkoChan wrote:I always believed that naked votes during RVS are Status quo for noob mafia
I naked vote in RVS frequently as either alignment. It's no big deal.
for me, naked votes are NAI this early too..
In post 71, BuJaber wrote:Gamma is null at best and slightly scummy for not following the game closely enough.
It's not the subject of the vote that I take issue with. It's that it's naked after Dann said he thinks scum are more inclined to post reasons with their votes than not.
This puts him at L-2. Those are two blind votes on a bandwagon that has no substance.
VOTE: xwing because that was the L-2, but still
FoS
ing Doughboy.
what if it's L-2? why does it concern you? does it mean you find the other votes are not blind?
also, why FoS doughboy (henceforth shortened as DB) among all the other voters?
My point is that you two just posted naked votes and no other game content, which
1) takes an oppurtunity to jump on a wagon that seems like it's going to lynch, clearly to try and appear town, and
2) doesn't post any game advancing content for us to try to read them by.
Previous voters did
a)not naked vote, or
b)were on a wagon that just started developing.
do you seriously think someone is going to get lynched on page 2 or 3?
putting trivium in L-2 is giving us game advancing content..do you agree or disagree?
if i put a jokey reason during my RVS vote, would my L-2 vote still have pinged you?
are you scum? VOTE: goldenparadox
Ehh. Just because a wagon forms on someone very quickly, doesn't necessarily mean the person being wagoned is town.
Example I can cite: the beginning of Newbie 1893.
i like the bolded above, and taking note..i did like trivium's reaction to his wagon though..
conversely disliking goldenparadox and nikk slots on their reactions to it..
feeling dubious on egix slot for initially agreeing with golden and voting my slot, then backtracking..
Notice how in the other game, xwing was thinking more critically and not just agreeing with stuff, and furthermore it was based on a smaller (but still comparable) number of previous posts. Here he seems to be lacking that element of original thought, and that's what I'm disappointed by.[/quote]
sorry to disappoint you egix..
i will try to make you proud!! ^_^
In post 167, Gamma Emerald wrote:Also I find the way the swing wagon formed interesting. A lot of people expressed interest, then they all joined up to vote.
In post 169, Persivul wrote:[snip]
Because scum already know the answers, hence they don't really need to analyze it as closely as town. VOTE: Gamma
LMAO it's been a while since this argument was used on me. I don't think you actually believe this tbh, and are just spouting trite garbage.
not sure about the others, but i semi-believe this argument, and have seen someone use it to out scum..
why do you think this argument is garbage?
with my stance on percy's slot, are you still inclined to think im town? why or why not?
Mhm, I think I found the scum from the xwing wagon, the way you care none for which of us is lynched tell me both are equal in your eyes. This also indicates xwing is town, which I wasn't sure of yet.
Also, why does he see the need to justify himself in his previous post? VOTE: Persivul
assuming percy is not scum, who else on the wagon would you most suspect? you can order them too (if there's more than one you suspect)..
In post 181, Gamma Emerald wrote:Mhm, I think I found the scum from the xwing wagon, the way you care none for which of us is lynched tell me both are equal in your eyes. This also indicates xwing is town, which I wasn't sure of yet.
What does it indicate to you about sashaddin?
Probably town too
Also noting Persivul is pushing the same logic but didn’t see fit to respond to my vote
<Embrace The Void>
“A flipped coin doesn't always land heads or tails. Sometimes it may never land at all...”
The fact that pushing you to L-1 would make you vulnerable to lolhammers and quickhammers. We've only started, I didn't my position was strong enough on you to push this hard, contextually.
Now that your wagon has thinned, I can vote a bit more at peace. I'll reread you in our previous game to see how you compare when I have time though.
In post 190, Gamma Emerald wrote:I noted that a lot of people expressed interest in voting xwing before voting. Vote order doesn’t matter that much because of that.
The fact that pushing you to L-1 would make you vulnerable to lolhammers and quickhammers. We've only started, I didn't my position was strong enough on you to push this hard, contextually.
Now that your wagon has thinned, I can vote a bit more at peace. I'll reread you in our previous game to see how you compare when I have time though.
i find this a bit contradictory..when you initially voted for me, you said you didnt care (your vote placed me to L-1)..but this statement means you do care..
And I also feel like out of all the people to reference Schadds game you fleshed it out the least. Could be because you were last to back off, but then that leads to asking why you were a holdout.
when you initially voted for me, you said you didnt care (your vote placed me to L-1
)..but this statement means you do care..
That didn't happen, that is what I didn't want to happen.
I see you more towny now, your previous game gives me quite the same vibe for now.
UNVOTE: Xwing
i read back and looked at the votes, mb, L-1 never did happen indeed..
but the way you phrased your vote was weird..
what did you mean by "not caring" then?
pedit: @flubbs, i'd like to hear your case on percy please..
In post 220, xwing wrote:what did you mean by "not caring" then?
I (didn't) care ... about the L-1 since that was not the case anymore. My vote had less impact (4th I think) instead of sixth. But I was still suspicious of you.
And I also feel like out of all the people to reference Schadds game you fleshed it out the least. Could be because you were last to back off, but then that leads to asking why you were a holdout.
From 156 I thought you were not a meta guy. Your answer surprises me. This is not what I expected.
I'd like to answer about the "holdout" but I don't understand the meaning. English is not my first language, sorry
(wink for bujaber)
