In post 190, OhGodMyLife wrote:Having just read up on my phone I'm torn between a vote for Amrun or Matthews. Pretty certain Hohum is town from tone and my impeccable gut. Also thinking Alex is town because the arguments leveled at him have seemed more interested in making him look bad than actually trying to determine his alignment.
Falcon, despite agreeing with you re: amtun's question I'd still like to see an answer to it
Nothing very significant. I saw your name being mentioned here and there in old games that I've read, don't remember which, saw you posting in the forums and when your name showed up on the playelist, I immediately recognized it.
F-16, any thoughts on the rest of the game? What do you think of Runnerman? What do you think of Jake?
Yeah, these last few pages were pretty terrible. I'm convinced Jake is town from them, however. UNVOTE:
hohum's reaction is bizarre, but I'm finding it hard to tell whether I'm just disliking the general arrogance or if I'm actually finding it scummy. I think this is probably the best vote for now: VOTE: Amrun
In post 190, OhGodMyLife wrote:Also thinking Alex is town because the arguments leveled at him have seemed more interested in making him look bad than actually trying to determine his alignment.
How does the quality of the arguments against someone determine their alignment?
In post 207, JKMatthews wrote:Yeah, these last few pages were pretty terrible. I'm convinced Jake is town from them, however. UNVOTE:
hohum's reaction is bizarre, but I'm finding it hard to tell whether I'm just disliking the general arrogance or if I'm actually finding it scummy. I think this is probably the best vote for now: VOTE: Amrun
In post 190, OhGodMyLife wrote:Also thinking Alex is town because the arguments leveled at him have seemed more interested in making him look bad than actually trying to determine his alignment.
How does the quality of the arguments against someone determine their alignment?
Alex - what do YOU think of the game?
I don't know right now. Same boat I guess.
I'm finding it difficult to see scum or town between Jake, HoHum and Amrun's reactions. How are you getting a town read on Jake from the last couple of pages?
I'm going to have to reread. I want to hear from Runningman too, and I definitely want to hear more from F-16.
Because my scum read was based entirely off of his crappy ISO then subsequent "No fuck you, my ISO's good". Now he's actually generated content and seems to be doing genuine scumhunting.
hohum and Amrun are seeming much more vague... I think one of them has to die today.
Yeah, Falcon, get your shit together.
Amrun appeared to have genuine scumhunting at heart despite the weird way of showing it. I'm leaning more towards villager with a peculiar but somewhat understandable playstyle.
amrun help me out with something thats been bugging me. how the fuck did you get the definition for chainsaw wrong while criticizing others for being wrong. You absolutely don't need a flip to chainsaw someone.
Robbed of a scummy for what had to be the best unvote in mafiascum history.
the whole game is dumb and we don't know why we're good at it and nobody knows what is going on and we're all going to have to accept that
OGML - interested to hear what you say here... when do you expect to have a computer?
And do you suddenly feel like Amrun's questions have more purpose?
In post 190, OhGodMyLife wrote:Also thinking Alex is town because the arguments leveled at him have seemed more interested in making him look bad than actually trying to determine his alignment.
How does the quality of the arguments against someone determine their alignment?
I keep looking at this and trying to figure out where you could honestly interpret what I said as being about the quality of the arguments, and not about the content. But I can't. You're just twisting it for your scum purposes.
In post 217, JKMatthews wrote:And do you suddenly feel like Amrun's questions have more purpose?
Not really, I just suddenly felt like you have a way better chance of flipping scum.
In post 218, OhGodMyLife wrote:I keep looking at this and trying to figure out where you could honestly interpret what I said as being about the quality of the arguments, and not about the content. But I can't. You're just twisting it for your scum purposes.
Umm, what's the difference of the content of arguments and their quality?
My point was:
B seems scummy.
A makes a bad (in terms of content, quality, whatever you want to call it) argument against B.
B seems less likely to be scum because...?
That's what I didn't understand...
In post 218, OhGodMyLife wrote:Not really, I just suddenly felt like you have a way better chance of flipping scum.
Fair enough. Care to explain why? Just that one point?
A) OMGL makes a standard post about Alexcellent saying that he thinks the arguments against him are more about finding fault with his play than determining alignment. (FTR, even though I am currently voting alex, I've been playing a little close to my chest and I thin this is a good comment from OMGL.) JKM misrepresents this post poorly, but essentially what he's doing even if it's a genuine misunderstanding is detracting from OMGL's discrediting of the cases against Alex. This is a deflection because it encourages attention away from JKM and into Alex. This one isn't super gross because I can see this also coming from town JKM, but it exists.
B) JKM's response to OMGL's vote switch away from me and onto JKM is what is so gross. It feels really slimey.
For reference, the comment being discussed is this:
In post 190, OhGodMyLife wrote:Also thinking Alex is town because the arguments leveled at him have seemed more interested in making him look bad than actually trying to determine his alignment.
How is asking "why does bad arguments against Alex make Alex himself more townie?" misrepping anything? I was asking for clarification of logic that I thought was faulty... explain the misrep to me.
Amrun, OGML changes his vote from you to me without explanation. I say I'm both interested in hearing the reason why, and asking if his read on you has changed. Where's all this slimy deflection you speak of?
He never said the arguments against Alex were bad. I explained it pretty clearly before and I don't know how to explain it any more.
For the latter, what you said was, essentially, that OMGL had "suddenly" changed his opinion, discrediting both his change in opinion and his possibly credible reasons for changing his vote. Your intent to look like you are just asking perfectly reasonable questions was not successful. You were poisoning the well, subtly making OMGL for switching his vote onto you without actually commenting on his alignment. It's very careful. It's very crafty. And what's more, this is a general trend in the game following just about every vote on you.