Trouble in The Cougar's Den (Game over!)

davesaz · Post Post #250 (ISO) » Sat Oct 17, 2015 9:30 am

Why BpC?

TellTaleHeart · Post Post #251 (ISO) » Sat Oct 17, 2015 9:34 am

In post 190, PeregrineV wrote:
In post 130, BipolarChemist wrote:my immediate thought is that it seems like some throwing under the bus. haven't really read into their other posts yet, but from skimming, I've found long in the past (like 2 years i think?) that Drixx tends to talk himself in circles no matter the alignment and it seems like that trend is continuing. I'd probs vote them but IDK where the vote count is at right now

I'm translating this as
"My immediate though it that it seems like scum BotLane is throwing ReasonablyRational under the bus, but from skimming Reasonably Rational's posts, his style is not alignment indicative. I would probably vote ReasonablyRationale, except it may be the hammer vote, I don't want to be responsible for his lynch."

I'm I reading it wrong?

Vote: BiPolarChemist

In post 193, HerryPanther wrote:If anyone has specific questions for me about the first 8 pages, fire away. Otherwise, I think the BPC wagon is something I can get on board with. I agree with the heart of Pere's 190 -- I thought BPC's 130 felt scummy, his main point was ambiguous and it looks like he's trying to draw associative tells without a whole lot to go on. A whole lot of noise, not a lot of substance.

UNVOTE:
VOTE: BiPolarChemist

-Herr

In post 194, Heartless wrote:we're wagoning bpc b/c of the non-opinion presented as an opinion in Post 130 and waiting on a vote count to vote this early. these are textbook "fly under the radar" maneuvers scum use to navigate early game situations. if you think that's "weak," push someone who you think is clearly scummier. and use words.

Heartless · Post Post #252 (ISO) » Sat Oct 17, 2015 9:35 am

In post 251, TellTaleHeart wrote:
In post 190, PeregrineV wrote:
In post 130, BipolarChemist wrote:my immediate thought is that it seems like some throwing under the bus. haven't really read into their other posts yet, but from skimming, I've found long in the past (like 2 years i think?) that Drixx tends to talk himself in circles no matter the alignment and it seems like that trend is continuing. I'd probs vote them but IDK where the vote count is at right now

I'm translating this as
"My immediate though it that it seems like scum BotLane is throwing ReasonablyRational under the bus, but from skimming Reasonably Rational's posts, his style is not alignment indicative. I would probably vote ReasonablyRationale, except it may be the hammer vote, I don't want to be responsible for his lynch."

I'm I reading it wrong?

Vote: BiPolarChemist

In post 193, HerryPanther wrote:If anyone has specific questions for me about the first 8 pages, fire away. Otherwise, I think the BPC wagon is something I can get on board with. I agree with the heart of Pere's 190 -- I thought BPC's 130 felt scummy, his main point was ambiguous and it looks like he's trying to draw associative tells without a whole lot to go on. A whole lot of noise, not a lot of substance.

UNVOTE:
VOTE: BiPolarChemist

-Herr

In post 194, Heartless wrote:we're wagoning bpc b/c of the non-opinion presented as an opinion in Post 130 and waiting on a vote count to vote this early. these are textbook "fly under the radar" maneuvers scum use to navigate early game situations. if you think that's "weak," push someone who you think is clearly scummier. and use words.

-.-
Damn.

davesaz · Post Post #253 (ISO) » Sat Oct 17, 2015 9:36 am

Please compare the strength of that case vs. the strength of the case on RR.

Heartless · Post Post #254 (ISO) » Sat Oct 17, 2015 9:43 am

Haha, good one old sport. You had me going there. For a second, I thought you were planning on not reading the thread and asking me to spoon feed you.

ika · Post Post #255 (ISO) » Sat Oct 17, 2015 9:50 am

TTH!

HIIIII

Heartless · Post Post #256 (ISO) » Sat Oct 17, 2015 9:57 am

ika, you already got your helping of sarcasm for today. Get back in line.

ika · Post Post #257 (ISO) » Sat Oct 17, 2015 9:58 am

In post 256, Heartless wrote:ika, you already got your helping of sarcasm for today. Get back in line.

Who said i was joking about anything at this point?

Heartless · Post Post #258 (ISO) » Sat Oct 17, 2015 10:08 am

Nobody. :S

Is that a riddle?

ika · Post Post #259 (ISO) » Sat Oct 17, 2015 10:13 am

In post 258, Heartless wrote:Nobody. :S

Is that a riddle?

Yes it is, this is your homework tonight, report back to me tomorrow with you 10 page report on your findings

BotLane · Post Post #260 (ISO) » Sat Oct 17, 2015 10:14 am

Where's my sarcasm?

-Ank

Heartless · Post Post #261 (ISO) » Sat Oct 17, 2015 10:18 am

It's in the seat of Anti's pants. Reach in there and see if you can find it.

ika wrote:
In post 258, Heartless wrote:Nobody. :S

Is that a riddle?

Yes it is, this is your homework tonight, report back to me tomorrow with you 10 page report on your findings

Alright-y. ^_^

(I'll stop spamming now.)

davesaz · Post Post #262 (ISO) » Sat Oct 17, 2015 10:42 am

Actually, that was a serious question. I have an opinion and want to read you by seeing if your opinion makes sense or not.
Obviously it would not make sense to state my opinion first, since you can sheep it to avoid suspicion.

Heartless · Post Post #263 (ISO) » Sat Oct 17, 2015 10:55 am

ooooo..........

yikes

Heartless · Post Post #264 (ISO) » Sat Oct 17, 2015 11:13 am

the "fear" we would "sheep" comes off as pretty disingenuous.

i mean... by the fact that i voted the bpc wagon and tth is trying to get support for it, it should be pretty obvious which wagon we like better. if your question is trying to get at a read on rr, 1) you could've straight up asked and 2) that read is still developing so... no.

Heartless · Post Post #265 (ISO) » Sat Oct 17, 2015 11:42 am

...and before someone comes in and pisses me off by saying something about "defensiveness" yes i am defensive.

i'm defensive that someone who has shown zero evidence of reading the thread is now asking a dumb question and coming at it with this completely unwarranted authoritative attitude.

BotLane · Post Post #266 (ISO) » Sat Oct 17, 2015 11:44 am

In post 151, Heartless wrote:
In post 143, BotLane wrote:
In post 104, Heartless wrote:VOTE: Aeronaut

In post 105, Heartless wrote:ns is another great vote.

Not understanding either of these, anti. I scumread Aeronaut for 106, but I was dead null on him before that and have a slight town read on NS currently. What exactly am I missing?

-Ank

aero announcing that he's reading the thread on page 5 is scum awkward entrance. but yeah... 106 is scummy too so my good vote just got better.

ns read's hard to explain, but it's mostly Post 71. calling the early exchange a "travesty" by itself feels off because it doesn't really feel... like an appropriate thing to say? (not sure if "appropriate" is the the right word there). hyping a future post is also ehhhhhhhhh :\
needling ika on a ceph townread isn't really doin' much for me either and also makes me go ehhhhhhhhh :\

what are you townreading about ns?

Gut based on his posts up to that point.

-Ank

BotLane · Post Post #267 (ISO) » Sat Oct 17, 2015 11:47 am

In post 158, Reasonably Rational wrote:Ank: That's probably because I'm absolute positive about MY opinion on things, but I don't know what Drixxs thoughts were because he simply didn't speak with me before me made those posts. From my knowledge of him, he clearly feels there's at least notable vidence of a scum slip somewhere in there, but I don't really see it. Mountains of molehills, etc.

...And why exactly did you need to make absolutely sure that we knew that when you talked about it? The problem isn't that you mentioned it at all; the problem is that you put a lot of weight behind the dissonance despite appearing to be confident in your opinion outside it.

-Ank

Heartless · Post Post #268 (ISO) » Sat Oct 17, 2015 11:50 am

In post 266, BotLane wrote:Gut based on his posts up to that point.

your gut's full of shit

BotLane · Post Post #269 (ISO) » Sat Oct 17, 2015 11:50 am

In post 159, ika wrote:
In post 142, BotLane wrote:
In post 81, ika wrote:ok i read up and my policy on RR is to jsut have them on my ignore side cus i dont care to read wall posting.

Spiffeh stuff is fine and wha i would expect form a [role here]

other then that nothign much i care to reead up on right now

You're really scaring me, ika.

-Ank

what is scary?

You're not giving me the impression that you care about anything besides whatever setup spec you're trying to do at all. I remember you putting stock into setup spec when it'll do a lot towards solving the game, but I have a very hard time believing that any pro-town slot would have the same type of insight into the gamestate on day one to go that rout.e

-Ank

BotLane · Post Post #270 (ISO) » Sat Oct 17, 2015 11:51 am

In post 268, Heartless wrote:
In post 266, BotLane wrote:Gut based on his posts up to that point.

your gut's full of shit

Why do you think I post so much in here?

-Ank

davesaz · Post Post #271 (ISO) » Sat Oct 17, 2015 11:58 am

So you don't have a read on RR but can scumread BPC after a couple of posts strongly enough to push a wagon? Interesting...

I reread

(today)

the early RR material and in addition to the well thought out case on the slot, it was very similar to the early part of a Drixx scum game I was town in.
VOTE: Reasonably Rational

BotLane · Post Post #272 (ISO) » Sat Oct 17, 2015 12:09 pm

re page 9: Vedith gets a free scumread.

BotLane · Post Post #273 (ISO) » Sat Oct 17, 2015 12:09 pm

In post 220, ika wrote:God i come back to read up and i get more and more amused by it

Come on, ika. You're better than this.

-Ank

BotLane · Post Post #274 (ISO) » Sat Oct 17, 2015 12:12 pm

In post 236, Teridax wrote:Guys. How hard is it to differentiate me from mastin?

I'm trying to make sense of this game, but it feels s disjointed. I think we need a wagon.

How many votes does someone have to get before you consider it a wagon, exactly? Four is more than enough by my standards (RR wagon) and there is enough on the table about and from them to be able to get some sort of conclusion about anything about it.

-Ank