I guess we know who doesn't read in this game. First off, my disagreement with Sick's analysis has nothing to do with Persivul dodging the question. I don't know why you're bringing that up as some kind of counter to my disagreement with Sick. If it wasn't a counter, then there was no reason for you to quote that part. Go reread what I wrote, then come back with a coherent argument. Secondly, as to your point about Persivul answering the question, no. It shows you probably just skimmed the whole 1v1 between Persivul and I where I CLEARLY said I didn't think his "answer" in post 165 was a logical one compared to Chumba's question in post 162 and explained why by lining the two up. Lastly, if we're being technical here about "gaps", then actually Sick's explanation for his wagon contradiction was explained by him in post 9. But even then, let's say that Sick took too long to answer the question, in my eyes, that's still better than not answering the question at all like Persivul.In post 322, MechaGoomba wrote:Most of your previous posts were complaining because you didn't see an explanation, and also because you believed Persy was dodging the question. But the gap between 124 where the question was raised and 165 where the answer was provided is not actually that large. There's a much bigger gap between the start of the game and 138 where Sick explained his contradiction, yet you're not pushing him.In post 316, Saru wrote:I don't agree with that analysis though as stated in my previous posts.
This is what's wrong with this game so far. Too many people are just looking at their newbie list of actions that do or don't feel townie, and completely disregarding the motivations behind those actions.In post 326, Saru wrote:However, let's use your point about Persivul actually answering the question in post 165 and let's say that it was a logical answer to the question, and that makes you satisfied with both Sick and Persivul in regard to their explanations. If we take that point, and apply it to the fact that Sick was willing enough to keep answering the question presented by Persivul and others over and over until it was finally cleared up, that reads as more townie to me as opposed to someone like Persivul who answered the question in one post, but wasn't willing to repeat it in more clear terms for us n00bs who obviously didn't see his answer clear enough. Why wouldn't Persivul just keep repeating his answer in a more clear way for these people instead of refusing to answer, and creating more confusion around it? Creating confusion is never a townie thing to do. I don't care how frustrated you are with the situation. Adjusting your explanation to fit other people's understanding is never a bad thing, and that's what Sick pretty much did and what Persivul didn't do.
This is a bad wagon.In post 325, GreyICE wrote:Sickofit1138 (3): Snork, species, Kappy
I saw this tooIn post 328, Persivul wrote:This is a bad wagon.In post 325, GreyICE wrote:Sickofit1138 (3): Snork, species, Kappy
OK expert mafia player, then please give me your motivation behind allowing confusion to run rampant about your answer. Let us n00bies know why we're so wrong. Please do. I really want to learn master. Please.In post 327, Persivul wrote:This is what's wrong with this game so far. Too many people are just looking at their newbie list of actions that do or don't feel townie, and completely disregarding the motivations behind those actions.In post 326, Saru wrote:However, let's use your point about Persivul actually answering the question in post 165 and let's say that it was a logical answer to the question, and that makes you satisfied with both Sick and Persivul in regard to their explanations. If we take that point, and apply it to the fact that Sick was willing enough to keep answering the question presented by Persivul and others over and over until it was finally cleared up, that reads as more townie to me as opposed to someone like Persivul who answered the question in one post, but wasn't willing to repeat it in more clear terms for us n00bs who obviously didn't see his answer clear enough. Why wouldn't Persivul just keep repeating his answer in a more clear way for these people instead of refusing to answer, and creating more confusion around it? Creating confusion is never a townie thing to do. I don't care how frustrated you are with the situation. Adjusting your explanation to fit other people's understanding is never a bad thing, and that's what Sick pretty much did and what Persivul didn't do.
Youdon't careabout frustration?Seriously?You damn well better start caring, and learn to distinguish between town frustration, scum frustration, and fake frustration, if you want to be any good at this game.
But of course, I don't expect you to read my n00b posts. You're too good for that.Didn't like that Sick was so quick to put up scenarios for lynching either him or Persivul, but that came off as frustrated townie more than anything.
Um, I thought you meant you disagreed with Persy's analysis. I mean, if you disagree with Sick's analysis that Persy is scum, then, well, why are you voting for Persy?In post 326, Saru wrote:disagreement with Sick's analysis
Yes, in 272 you said that. Then, in 300 I explained that you had misunderstood what he was saying. If you have reasons you don't like that explanation, I'd like to hear them.In post 326, Saru wrote:I CLEARLY said I didn't think his "answer" in post 165 was a logical one compared to Chumba's question in post 162 and explained why by lining the two up
[sarcasm] Your 316 created confusion by having ambiguity over whether it was Sick or Persy that you disagreed with. After you saw that I was confused, rather than clarify, you took a cheap shot at me by claiming that I was not reading. Therefore, you are mafia. [/sarcasm]In post 326, Saru wrote: Creating confusion is never a townie thing to do. I don't care how frustrated you are with the situation.
[...]
What if Persivul simply chose to explain to Shady in a way that Shady could understand? Wouldn't that help dissipate the confusion?
[sincerity] Please, just take a step back. Go do something else, stop thinking about this game, come back with a fresh perspective later. You're angry, you're confbiasing hard, and you're not getting anywhere. [/sincerity]Saru wrote: But of course, I don't expect you to read my n00b posts. You're too good for that.
Responses in bold. With all that being said, UNVOTE: Persivul and VOTE: Kappy and yes, that puts him at L-2. Once again, tread carefully. I've seen enough out of Persivul at this point and not enough out of Kappy. Hopefully you have good internet in Kansas, Kappy.In post 331, MechaGoomba wrote:Um, I thought you meant you disagreed with Persy's analysis. I mean, if you disagree with Sick's analysis that Persy is scum, then, well, why are you voting for Persy?In post 326, Saru wrote:disagreement with Sick's analysis
I disagree with Sick that Persivul backing out of the wagon was scum because he backed out for the same reason I did: reaction testing and finding the reaction to be fairly townie.
Yes, in 272 you said that. Then, in 300 I explained that you had misunderstood what he was saying. If you have reasons you don't like that explanation, I'd like to hear them.In post 326, Saru wrote:I CLEARLY said I didn't think his "answer" in post 165 was a logical one compared to Chumba's question in post 162 and explained why by lining the two up
Your explanation looks fine, but the fact that you have to come in and give that explanation for Persivul while Persivul refused to do it himself didn't sit right with me, going back to my confusion argument. Look at Sick and Shady for example.
[sarcasm] Your 316 created confusion by having ambiguity over whether it was Sick or Persy that you disagreed with. After you saw that I was confused, rather than clarify, you took a cheap shot at me by claiming that I was not reading. Therefore, you are mafia. [/sarcasm]In post 326, Saru wrote: Creating confusion is never a townie thing to do. I don't care how frustrated you are with the situation.
[...]
What if Persivul simply chose to explain to Shady in a way that Shady could understand? Wouldn't that help dissipate the confusion?
Sure, I took a cheap shot at you, but I also gave an explanation next to it to help clarify what I meant. Regardless of how frustrated I was, I chose to clarify regardless. If you didn't like the clarification or didn't understand it, then go read the first bold line of this post.
Communication is a two way street. Both the speaker and the listener bear blame when miscommunication happens. To blame the listener ("you're not reading") when you're the speaker and blame the speaker ("creating confusion") when you're the listener is untenable.
And regardless of who's to blame, miscommunication isnot alignment indicative.
Miscommunication is fine, when it first happens. But allowing it to exist for as long as Persivul did (and actually still exists for some people: Sick and Shady, although that's not his fault), is not a townie thing to do. Period. When I'm the speaker, I do blame the listener for not reading correctly if they misunderstand, but I STILL choose to explain in another way as I'm doing with you. I can blame the speaker for creating confusion if I'm the listener if they don't provide an explanation in the first place.
EBWOP:[sincerity] Please, just take a step back. Go do something else, stop thinking about this game, come back with a fresh perspective later. You're angry, you're confbiasing hard, and you're not getting anywhere. [/sincerity]Saru wrote: But of course, I don't expect you to read my n00b posts. You're too good for that.
[sarcasm]Wow, you think just because you're an expert mafia player you can tell me to step away? Ok, master, I'm sorry, I'll step away.[/sarcasm] I'm not angry, it's a joke.
OK. Your argument against me is that I'm not proactively acting townie enough.In post 330, Saru wrote:OK expert mafia player, then please give me your motivation behind allowing confusion to run rampant about your answer. Let us n00bies know why we're so wrong. Please do. I really want to learn master. Please.
I don't usually go this far back in a replace-in or catchup, but the wording here piqued my interest. Definitely keeping an eye on karnos. Mizzy mentioned this later as well.In post 56, karnos wrote:UNVOTE:
In all seriousness, I don't see a good target for a serious vote yet. I don't think kappy is in danger of being quick-lynched, but I don't want to be implicated if it does somehow happen while I am away.
No. By allowing confusion to run rampant, it can distract from scummy play. If scum wasn't playing townie enough, they might choose to divert attention away from themselves by some means. It could be by lurking, creating confusion, etc. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. IOW, it can backfire.In post 341, Persivul wrote:OK. Your argument against me is that I'm not proactively acting townie enough.In post 330, Saru wrote:OK expert mafia player, then please give me your motivation behind allowing confusion to run rampant about your answer. Let us n00bies know why we're so wrong. Please do. I really want to learn master. Please.
Scum has as much - possibly more - motivation to appear townie.
So, your point on me is NAI.
... Persivul, that is quite possibly the WIFOMest argument I've ever heard anyone make.In post 341, Persivul wrote: OK. Your argument against me is that I'm not proactively acting townie enough.
Scum has as much - possibly more - motivation to appear townie.
So, your point on me is NAI.
No need to apologize, I should have been more clear. Sorry about that.In post 345, MechaGoomba wrote:... Persivul, that is quite possibly the WIFOMest argument I've ever heard anyone make.In post 341, Persivul wrote: OK. Your argument against me is that I'm not proactively acting townie enough.
Scum has as much - possibly more - motivation to appear townie.
So, your point on me is NAI.
Saru, for what it's worth, I'm sorry. I tend to react poorly when I get the impression that people are dismissing me, and because of that, I crossed a line.
I still don't agree with your Persivul read, but I see your reasoning. I hope we'll be able to discuss this again once there's more information: as it is now, everything I have to say has been said.
Point out where it's wrong.In post 345, MechaGoomba wrote:... Persivul, that is quite possibly the WIFOMest argument I've ever heard anyone make.In post 341, Persivul wrote: OK. Your argument against me is that I'm not proactively acting townie enough.
Scum has as much - possibly more - motivation to appear townie.
So, your point on me is NAI.