screl1 wrote:AGar wrote:
You seem to be missing the point. It was an OMGUS vote. But you can't have a random vote and an OMGUS vote in the same vote, which is what you're trying to do. You brought up that DP might be OMGUS-ing, but you more think he's random voting. WHY bring up the OMGUS? No one else had so much as mentioned it beyond the RVS, it wasn't something being used against DP. It looks to me like you're trying to buddy up to him by preemptively clearing him of OMGUSing, because otherwise there is no reason to bring up OMGUS.
Feel free to correct me, but from my understanding an OMGUS vote that early on is a random vote, not a serious vote. Since I was analyzing everyone else I figured I might as well tack an analysis on him. Two types of votes - random and serious, this was random. And who needs to buddy up to clear a vote in the beggining? And is OMGUS voting something that needs clearing up? Seems like you are grasping at straws.
OMGUS. Oh My God U Suck. It's a reactionary vote to a player who has voted for you. It is a way of voting without really putting a reason behind it, but it is anything but random. Null tell on it's own, but sometimes players are attacked for it. No one needs a buddy to clear up a vote, but the idea that you DID clear it as random strikes me as peculiar, because the only person who even mentioned OMGUS was me in a joke post after DP had posted his vote.
screl1 wrote:
AGar wrote:In case you haven't read the thread in full (which it strikes me as you didn't) I have admitted that in the moment of that argument, I thought MS was scum for what we were arguing about. When I think someone is scum, I pressure them until they break. In regards to vote-hopping, I random voted DavidParker, called out AWA for being scummy, found MS scummier, stayed on that vote for a while, then when I re-read my argument and realized it wasn't part of the game, I retracted and moved to who I found the scummiest (being you). Pointing the most fingers, I've casted 3 serious votes, and brought up suspicion of DavidParker. That might be the most out of anyone, but I'm hardly calling out everyone, and at least I've been willing to fully commit to my suspicions, not hand out worthless FoSes when I have no vote on anyone. Would you rather I tunneled in on players so I miss how scummy you and your partners are? And I'm not using your post timing as my sole reason to suspect you, l have plenty of others too. Like the mis-representations and false claims. Where have I made claims like "I never said that... oh wait... yes I did"? I just iso'd myself to be sure, and I don't see it at all.
Instead of typing a paragraph I am going to use bullets to get my point across in a more concise manner.
1.) Like I have said already, I thought you were supposed to use FOSs until you were certain and FOSs were saved for the beggining when you are not sure. Clearly I was mistaken and now I am voting.
2.) Not sure what you mean by tunneling - care to explain?
3.) Using a post time at all is worthless
4.) What does it mean to iso yourself?
5.) To respond to your last question allow me to answer with a few quotes from you.
AGar wrote:
Wait what? Where did I call bandwagons a scummy move? I said AWA's hesitation about bandwagons was scummy.
AGar wrote:Ah ok. Yes, this did transpire.
1) To me, FOSing is all but worthless if you have no vote cast. It means you aren't willing to commit to anything, regardless of what the stakes are. It screams "I'm going to fence-sit right now and not be bold!"
2) Tunneling - focusing in only one player and ignoring the rest of the actions of the town while you poke and prod at them.
3) No it really isn't. It can be a decent scum tactic if done right because it can cause a post to be lost between the cracks.
4) Isoing is looking at all of one players posts alone. There's a dropdown menu at the bottom of the page that allows you to select a player and see all of that individual's posts without anyone else's interfering.
5) You really should keep quotes in context when you try and build a case, because what you've done is completely misrepresent the conversation. I never backtracked on a single word in that transcription. Here it is in full (each post is it's own quote because I can't embed quote pyramids beyond 5 posts and this takes more. I edited posts down to only the parts that pertain to this conversation (took out quotes and parts directed at other people):
Post #
56:
screl1 wrote:TheButtonmen
He started by voting for Michel joining with copper to create a bandwagon. Button then voted AWA to appease Agar because joining in on the bandwagon was a scum move. He did not answer Michel’s question and said that it will distract from game and lead to ‘noise’. Although I agree the question is irrelevant, there is nothing else to discuss right now so is there an ulterior motive behind joining michel’s first vote? Is there a negative past history between these two? Just makes me curious but I do not think it has to deal with being scummy in this game… not yet at least
Wasn't addressed at me, I didn't put too much thought into it, just made mental notes of where screl stood.
Post #
61
TheButtonmen wrote:
A) Bandwagons aren't scummy.
B) Bullocks about appeasing AGar, I voted AWA because he's scum.
C) You agree the question is irrelevant but want to discuss it, that makes no sense.
D) No history why do you ask?
E) This game has had truck loads of scummyness already.
Point A is the most important part of this, because it starts the confusion on my end later down the road.
Post #
62
screl1 wrote:
A.) I agree - AGar was calling it a scummy move
B.) That is just what it looks like to me
C.) Was just curious if you didn't like him from some past game or something and that is why you joined that bandwagon
E.) Agreed
Again, look at A. It goes from "bandwagons aren't scummy" to "I agree - AGar was calling it a scummy move" At this point, I am confused, because I do not recall saying bandwagons were scummy, instead the exact opposite.
Post #
63
AGar wrote:
Wait what? Where did I call bandwagons a scummy move? I said AWA's hesitation about bandwagons was scummy.
I had quoted the exchange between TBM and screl and snipped all but #62's point A in the quote, because that was what I needed to address.
Post #
69
screl1 wrote:
You were not calling all bandwagons scummy, but you did say, “I'm gonna move my vote, because your fear of a bandwagon mislynching someone in the early game is really scummy.” Again, alcohol and distractions got in the way.
I was trying to say that you (Agar) were calling Button’s bandwagon views scummy
, right after this happened Button unvoted, voted for AWA who you (Agar) had just voted for.
This was his response, clarifying. I just realized that I misread this, inserting AWA instead of Button in the bolded line (emphasis is mine). I never actually said Button's bandwagon views were scummy, I never even addressed TBM prior to my run in with MichelSableheart; instead I had said that AWA was. I must have spotted AWA's name in the line already (eyes drawn to capital letters) and had placed it there. Either way, I thought I had this clarified, and I understood what he was trying to portray.
Post #
70
AGar wrote:
Ah ok. Yes, this did transpire.
I follow the quotes up with this, meaning to say "Yes, I did find AWA's bandwagon views scummy."
So don't try and misrepresent the conversation.
For the record, this is the last time I will explain anything for you. If you don't know the definition of something, use the wiki to find it. There are newbie games for a reason, and they have an IC whose purpose is to educate you on terminology and practices of the site. If other players wish to assist you, that's their call, but if you just want to jump in, don't expect everything to be taught to you.
@Copper - I'm going to assume we've played together. Would love to find out the heads of the hydra whenever you feel comfortable revealing them, if that point ever comes (honestly no idea at the moment). I don't think I've been more vote happy in this game than any others I've played in the past. The big difference may be that I partook in the RVS this game, which is something I don't usually do, but I was honestly too lazy to formulate 11 questions that I would be able to benefit from information wise.
After the incident between MS and myself, I did reconsider a vote on AWA. I also checked and saw he was on V/LA, and that his stance on bandwagons was likely a null-tell. Between those two factors, I decided that my time would be better suited pursuing screl, who had given an opportunity for me to push and prod at him with his 3 FoS post and his general attitude and actions like the clearing of DP's RVS vote.
I've noticed something about DavidParker's votes.
Vote #1: AGar. Post #21. Post #20 was my RVS vote on him.
Vote #2: MichelSableheart. Post #48. Post #44 was my vote on MichelSableheart in the heat of our argument.
Vote #3: Screl1. Post #73. Post #60 was MichelSableheart asking why Screl had FoSed the three active players in the game.
Vote #4: Merlin. Post #117. Post #116 was MichelSableheart's vote on Merlin.
Aside from his first vote on me, all of his votes have followed either someone else casting the vote, or someone else calling that player out. We have yet to see him go on his own on anything. His one post of content, Post #
93 shows him echoing opinions given by other players in the game save for his remark about TBM. No, the remark about AWA doesn't count for anything in my eyes, as he simply re-hashed AWA's posts and gave no input on them. It had been echoed by several people about mine and MS's argument being useless, and MS had said Copper's post was good. The idea about Screl's 3 FoS post had already been brought up as suspicious.
DP - Start playing the game seriously, and start posting thoughts of your own to some extent. I want to know your top two suspects, and why, and hopefully see at least 1 (if not more) reason that isn't a re-hash of what someone else has said.
Merlin (promised activity 12 hours ago. I'll give him another 4 before I begin to feel like he isn't coming back) is lurking, but so is MME (who came in, dropped a vote on DP without full explanation, and left on Wednesday. It is now Saturday.), and Guthrie (who got to the edge of his prod as well, then promised activity - This was on Tuesday, 3 days 12 hours ago).
IdiotKing is being replaced.
TBM is just shy of 72 hours out of the thread (60) and he has simply posted one-liners, and hasn't actually followed through on most of what he has said (things like there being truckloads of scumminess in the game: I would like to see him point it out).
Interestingly, TBM and MME votes are sitting on DP... Hmm. Makes me think.
