Blitz 9: KATSUKI'S MADNESS PREQUEL-DICE OF FATE-GAME OVER

[Ythan]

Y

e

a

h

t

h

e

h

i

v

e

o

n

l

y

w

a

n

t

s

w

h

a

t

'

s

b

e

s

t

f

o

r

y

o

u

.

[Spiffeh]

kanye townreads are arbitrary and unwarranted and I don't get them.

[Ythan]

I

w

o

u

l

d

n

'

t

l

y

n

c

h

K

a

n

y

e

w

i

t

h

o

u

t

a

r

e

a

s

o

n

a

n

d

I

d

o

n

'

t

h

a

v

e

a

r

e

a

s

o

n

.

[MattP]

A large reason I was scumreading you was a perceived contradictory in your posting (which you've responded to). I also felt like you were posting things that made it seem like you were keeping up with the game but the things you were posting were just pretty unhelpful and la-di-da. To a lesser extent I expect more from you based on meta. But I never advocated your lynch because I wanted to see what you would do on your own time. I think your play recently has been good.

I still don't know what ONEVOICE means, I'm guessing you're saying that you find it off that we both seemed to have the same thought process and I didn't townread you for it? I do remember making note of your post re: syryana when I read it. I just didn't care about it a major amount at the time - you very peripherally pointed out issue with syryana's wall. I think it was pretty clear syryana's wall was bad. I didn't feel there was so much weight to us both pointing that out since it felt so obvious.

[Ythan]

ONEVOICE feels forced.

[MattP]

But then when called out says he was intending to vote texcat but then iso'd him and changed his mind? That's some weird contradictory shenanigans

I do this all the time and I think I've done it with texcat this game so why is it scummy for him and not for me?

I love when people do this

I have no idea what you're talking about. Please quote your post so I can vote you for it.=

[MattP]

Is this like a gay hive mind cult thing?

please don't be discriminatory

I'm gay so it's all gravely

[MattP]

gravy*

o:

[Nachomamma8]

please don't drink

[Nachomamma8]

For a second, I was confused because I thought gravelly had two ls. Then I realized I was being dumb.

[Spiffeh]

@Matt

Lynching the miller claim is something I'd expect scum to hop on for an easy stance to have with little explanation so dave and texcat can be scum.

Also every D1 miller claim I have encountered on this site has been town so we're not lynching LLD.

PEdit: them

Actually jk texcat's post 137 reminds me of a recent blitz game where she was town.

This game is a null fest so far

I did it in Cougar's Den too
Bottom line it's a bad reason to scum read Iecerint

[MattP]

What you just quoted isn't the same as the sort of contradiction I was pointing out for iecerint

[Spiffeh]

Lynching the miller claim is something I'd expect scum to hop on for an easy stance to have with little explanation so dave and texcat can be scum.

Also every D1 miller claim I have encountered on this site has been town so we're not lynching LLD.

Both of these stances are fairly shallow: lynching Miller claims based on policy is not "easy" when policy lynches haven't been a thing for very long now, and calling suspicion of a player scummy without actually looking into a player's suspicions is dumb.

Calling LLD town because she claimed Miller is as terrible as calling her scum because she claimed Miller.

I was calling the stance easy, not making the push itself (which you'll notice neither of them actually do). It gives them an easy place to find their footing early on (especially when neither of them were any part of other discussions) that people wouldn't necessarily find scummy. It's something to hide behind as everyone else goes after each other.
I don't get your second sentence.

LLD hasn't given me a reason to question it so I don't really care.

[MattP]

Not that it matters because iecerint already resolved the discrepancy I thought had happened, but I'm just saying that your quoted posts are entirely different than the point I was originally making irt iecerint

[Iecerint]

I still don't know what ONEVOICE means, I'm guessing you're saying that you find it off that we both seemed to have the same thought process and I didn't townread you for it? I do remember making note of your post re: syryana when I read it. I just didn't care about it a major amount at the time - you very peripherally pointed out issue with syryana's wall. I think it was pretty clear syryana's wall was bad. I didn't feel there was so much weight to us both pointing that out since it felt so obvious.

It is odd that you would both fail to townread me and scumread me for detachment secondary to having the same precept as me. And you know I'm not buddying you because I expressed the idea before you did.

If anything, if you already had negative attitudes about me at that point (did you?), I think reading a post from me that matched your unexpressed thought process would make you reconsider your thought process. But it didn't do that, either.

[Spiffeh]

What you just quoted isn't the same as the sort of contradiction I was pointing out for iecerint

Eh I guess reading back on it, it kinda looks like he stuck that in to make it seem like he was thinking critically/engaged with the game. Is that what you were going for?

If not I still don't get it.

[Iecerint]

ONEVOICE feels forced.

Point to where it makes you feel.

[Iecerint]

What you just quoted isn't the same as the sort of contradiction I was pointing out for iecerint

Eh I guess reading back on it, it kinda looks like he stuck that in to make it seem like he was thinking critically/engaged with the game. Is that what you were going for?

If not I still don't get it.

His contradiction was based on a false assumption -- namely, that I still had not read the game when I talked about texcat. That's false because I had read the game at that point.

I think this was pretty clear in context because I mean mollie/nacho criticized me from the perspective of it being a shoddy post-read post.

[Iecerint]

Spiffeh is probably town, though.

[MattP]

I still don't know what ONEVOICE means, I'm guessing you're saying that you find it off that we both seemed to have the same thought process and I didn't townread you for it? I do remember making note of your post re: syryana when I read it. I just didn't care about it a major amount at the time - you very peripherally pointed out issue with syryana's wall. I think it was pretty clear syryana's wall was bad. I didn't feel there was so much weight to us both pointing that out since it felt so obvious.

It is odd that you would both fail to townread me and scumread me for detachment secondary to having the same precept as me. And you know I'm not buddying you because I expressed the idea before you did.

If anything, if you already had negative attitudes about me at that point (did you?), I think reading a post from me that matched your unexpressed thought process would make you reconsider your thought process. But it didn't do that, either.

Uh? When I say your posting has been detached I am saying that you haven't been pushing / pressuring anyone and your stances have been easy? I think calling syryana's wall scummy is easy, regardless of whether or not I did it too (and at least I explained why his wall was bad and engaged him)

I just entirely disagree with your point here. Maybe beat me to the punch on some scumreading (or even maybe some scum

hunting

) that involves complex thinking and I'll think you're town for it.

[MattP]

@Spiffeh

Wowza, Iec. I don't remember you going OMGUS on RVS votes before. This is kinda weird.

[...]

And now I'm stuck because I don't know what's scummier...

-Iec placing a vote after just not reading at all and seeing that it was just a stupid RVS vote

I do not understand your thought process. This is not how I would respond to a vote like mine.

I was intending to vote texcat

because one of his votes seemed like peppy but also without following up, which is like wanting to participate but finding it stressful, but then I read his other posts and I think there are simpler explanations.

I read the enlarged as "I was intending to vote texcat [when I had voted Starbuck]" and because of that my response was "When you voted Starbuck you had said you had not yet read the thread"

Iecerint responded by saying that he intended to vote texcat at some point in time following his vote on Starbuck

That was the discrepancy

[Iecerint]

MattP is the scummiest player right now I think. I can't explain his perspective to myself without coming up with alternate justifications for his actions. My thinking on this point should be clear in my previous posts.

VOTE: MattP

pedit: I did not explain why the wall (a few other posts in that area, too -- his TOWN/NULL/SCUM list made my stomach hurt) was scummy because I did not know why the wall was scummy. I just knew that there was something wrong with it. I posted as soon as I perceived it. Your subsequent post read like it was explaining the reason for my feelings to myself (which made me feel pretty good, in real-time).

[MattP]

Iecerint responded by saying that he intended to vote texcat at some point in time following his vote on Starbuck

after he then actually had a chance to read the thread

[MattP]

ha

[duckcake]

ha