[Game Over] Newbie 1784 - Escape Room

[nancy]

Cool, I caught scum on page 6. 146 is what a guilty conscience looks like, btw.

[TesXX]

Cool, I caught scum on page 6. 146 is what a guilty conscience looks like, btw.

No, I made 146 because 142 didn't make sense.
Thanks for answering my question by the way.

[Loopdan]

Whatever. It's obvious I'm VT anyway from this whole stupid thing.

Explain why you felt it necessary to state anything other than "I am not BP."

[nancy]

Explain why you think I give a shit about your pedantry.

[Loopdan]

Your VT claim is not consistent for someone who is concerned with teaching new players how to play.

[nancy]

It was already obvious anyway so what do you want from me? Cool I made shit tier plays are you happy? This whole BP/not-BP strat is garbage and look, the game is stalled as a result. Congrats.

[nancy]

Cool, I caught scum on page 6. 146 is what a guilty conscience looks like, btw.

No, I made 146 because 142 didn't make sense.
Thanks for answering my question by the way.

I assume you're being ironic? I believe I've answered the question in previous posts, but your post also answers the question. (Think about why for a minute if you're not sure how that is.) But to elaborate on how I caught you, the post betrays your guilty conscience. The question doesn't come from a Town mindset as I understand it and doesn't lead anywhere except back unto itself. The way that you phrased it combined with the way that it comes out of nowhere (I didn't even explicitly call you scum, for instance) tell me that you have an active sense of guilt (which only scum can have) and were trying overly hard to pose the question in the way that a townie might pose it. The end result just comes off stilted and awkward.

[nancy]

Red sauce is simmering. I take store-bought jars of sauce and add ingredients to them until the flavor is entirely changed. This time, I added sauteed onion, garlic, thyme, hand-crushed rosemary, oregano, and Parmesan cheese to it, among other things I'm likely forgetting. I don't have an open bottle of red wine (I'm a riesling fellow) so I'm giving that a pass tonight.

I just had a tomato-base pasta sauce with diced garden vegetables, sundried tomato and baby spinach, topped with Parmesan. Uh-mazing. I don't drink though, hehe. I was always a chardonnay dyke, when I did. If you like Riesling try the Waipara West (NZ), if you find a seller that imports. Thank me later.

[nancy]

This person has been staring at that noose for hours, not uttering a single word.

UNVOTE: nancy
VOTE: bjc0303

Ew

Care to elaborate on the ew?

[Chronicle]

Care to elaborate on the ew?

Pretending to be proactive and generating content, but really that's a useless vote.

I also disliked it when you voted bjc.

[nancy]

If you're at the stage in the game where you don't have anyone you're scumreading heavily or don't have any wagons you want to actively push at that time, it's generally a fine idea to push on people who are absent or lurking in an effort to get them to contribute to the game. With that in mind, do you have any problems with the post? What did you dislike about my vote on bjc?

[Chronicle]

If you're at the stage in the game where you don't have anyone you're scumreading heavily or don't have any wagons you want to actively push at that time, it's generally a fine idea to push on people who are absent or lurking in an effort to get them to contribute to the game. With that in mind, do you have any problems with the post? What did you dislike about my vote on bjc?

My point still stands. Why push someone who hasn't even posted in this game yet when there are so many others to interact with? You don't even have to push a wagon, but interactions with anyone else would generate some sort of contact or reaction.

Engaging with someone who hasn't even made an entry seems counter productive. There is nothing to gain, you can't even ask him a question when you don't know any of his stances. Any vote or wagon on him just seems empty and baseless.

And I disliked your bjc for the exact same reasons.

[MiniDeathStar]

March 27, 2017 - 8:55 AM (GMT)

Day 1

I'm really, really sorry if I've made a mistake with the votecount. I have such a splitting headache
that I can barely tell bold text apart.

StealthyNoodle (L-3)

: Chronicle, Pine

Srceenplay (L-3)

: TesXX, Loopdan

Loopdan (L-4)

: Srceenplay

TesXX (L-4)

: nancy

bjc0303 (L-4)

: StealthyNoodle

Not voting:

bjc0303, WhyMafia

With 9 alive it takes 5 to lynch.

Deadline for Day 1 actions:

April 9, 2017 - 3:00 PM (GMT)

You have (expired on 2017-04-09 15:00:00) to discuss and decide on a lynch.

Vote Count 1.02

[nancy]

If you're at the stage in the game where you don't have anyone you're scumreading heavily or don't have any wagons you want to actively push at that time, it's generally a fine idea to push on people who are absent or lurking in an effort to get them to contribute to the game. With that in mind, do you have any problems with the post? What did you dislike about my vote on bjc?

My point still stands. Why push someone who hasn't even posted in this game yet when there are so many others to interact with? You don't even have to push a wagon, but interactions with anyone else would generate some sort of contact or reaction.

Engaging with someone who hasn't even made an entry seems counter productive. There is nothing to gain, you can't even ask him a question when you don't know any of his stances. Any vote or wagon on him just seems empty and baseless.

And I disliked your bjc for the exact same reasons.

It's productive for the very reason that the intent (and it's up to you to parse whether or not the vote was truly made with this intent or was just an easy vote) is to bring that person into the game. You can interact with people in thread without voting them, but you can't interact with someone who isn't in the thread at all. It's kind of an on-principle thing. If it's only one vote it won't be particularly effective, but it's the principle of "get in here and help us catch scum or you die" that matters, and if a wagon forms and that slot is in fact lurking rather than absent, they are forced to engage in the thread where they otherwise could've continued to lurk. Does that make sense?

[StealthyNoodle]

Care to elaborate on the ew?

Pretending to be proactive and generating content, but really that's a useless vote.

In his current state, he's only making it easier for scum. He might or might not be scum himself, but being inactive isn't the way to prove your innocence.

Engaging with someone who hasn't even made an entry seems counter productive. There is nothing to gain, you can't even ask him a question when you don't know any of his stances.

So you'd rather trust someone who won't respond to your questions then, than someone who does? You're just proving my point here, mate.

[StealthyNoodle]

I have such a splitting headache
that I can barely tell bold text apart.

Blows. Get well soon!

[Srceenplay]

VOTE: Whymafia

[TesXX]

Cool, I caught scum on page 6. 146 is what a guilty conscience looks like, btw.

No, I made 146 because 142 didn't make sense.
Thanks for answering my question by the way.

I assume you're being ironic? I believe I've answered the question in previous posts, but your post also answers the question. (Think about why for a minute if you're not sure how that is.) But to elaborate on how I caught you, the post betrays your guilty conscience. The question doesn't come from a Town mindset as I understand it and doesn't lead anywhere except back unto itself. The way that you phrased it combined with the way that it comes out of nowhere (I didn't even explicitly call you scum, for instance) tell me that you have an active sense of guilt (which only scum can have) and were trying overly hard to pose the question in the way that a townie might pose it. The end result just comes off stilted and awkward.

Alright.
So if I'm scum, make a post with how a town player would answer it.

[Chronicle]

It's productive for the very reason that the intent (and it's up to you to parse whether or not the vote was truly made with this intent or was just an easy vote) is to bring that person into the game. You can interact with people in thread without voting them, but you can't interact with someone who isn't in the thread at all. It's kind of an on-principle thing. If it's only one vote it won't be particularly effective, but it's the principle of "get in here and help us catch scum or you die" that matters, and if a wagon forms and that slot is in fact lurking rather than absent, they are forced to engage in the thread where they otherwise could've continued to lurk. Does that make sense?

Does a wagon really force them to come into this thread? If he's been avoiding this game, sure.

He hasn't come online since this game started. It's a lazy push. I understand the rationale behind voting a lurker to encourage content, but surely you can see this vote will not accomplish that.

In his current state, he's only making it easier for scum. He might or might not be scum himself, but being inactive isn't the way to prove your innocence.

Voting him won't work like a prod would, and will not magically get him back.

So you'd rather trust someone who won't respond to your questions then, than someone who does? You're just proving my point here, mate.

Stop putting words in my mouth. I never said I would trust someone who wouldn't respond to my questions. I said trying to engage someone who hasn't even entered the game will not help us progress the game.

If you are town, stop being lazy with your vote. A bjc is useless when he was last online 12 hours before this game started.

Or if you're scum just trying to look proactive in finding scum, go ahead.

[Chronicle]

VOTE: Whymafia

Why?

[nancy]

So if I'm scum, make a post with how a town player would answer it.

I'm sorry, I'm not sure I understand what you're asking of me. What is the connection between you being scum and how a Town slot would answer? Answer what? Could you try rephrasing maybe?

Does a wagon really force them to come into this thread? If he's been avoiding this game, sure.

He hasn't come online since this game started. It's a lazy push. I understand the rationale behind voting a lurker to encourage content, but surely you can see this vote will not accomplish that.

Well, what I've trying to push you towards looking at not strictly whether the you like the vote, but whether you like the

post

. I got hints of you reading into that in 159, but I wanted to see whether you just thought that voting lurkers on policy was bad or whether you were reading into Noodle's motivation and finding it lacking.

It looks like you have done this somewhat after all, which is great. But I'd also encourage you to question Noodle on it rather than just come to the conclusion that it's a bad post. Noodle may very well not have realized that bjc hadn't come online since the game started (I certainly didn't), for instance, or may just not have thought it through very well, or may have been following a thought process that hadn't occurred to you, or something else entirely. The only way to know for sure (granted, he could always be scum and lie, so you can't

really

know for sure) is to question him.

Start a dialogue, create content. You think his push is lazy, but what does that mean about his alignment? Both Town and scum can be lazy, and both Town and scum can make good or bad posts. So what you really have to figure out here is how Noodle's post indicates one alignment or the other.

[StealthyNoodle]

He hasn't come online since this game started. It's a lazy push.

A bjc is useless when he was last online 12 hours before this game started.

Why the heck would he go online just to lurk? It would simply weaken his position as scum. Your reasoning makes no sense.

trying to engage someone who hasn't even entered the game will not help us progress the game.

He entered the game at the moment he accepted his role. He might be flaking, he might be lurking. And hopefully he'll show up to speak his mind about that sooner or later.

If you are town, stop being lazy with your vote.

Stop shoving people around. Again, if I feel like someone's more fit for the vote, I'll gladly change my mind.

[StealthyNoodle]

Well, what I've trying to push you towards looking at not strictly whether the you like the vote, but whether you like the post. I got hints of you reading into that in 159, but I wanted to see whether you just thought that voting lurkers on policy was bad or whether you were reading into Noodle's motivation and finding it lacking.

It looks like you have done this somewhat after all, which is great. But I'd also encourage you to question Noodle on it rather than just come to the conclusion that it's a bad post. (I certainly didn't), for instance, or may just not have thought it through very well, or may have been following a thought process that hadn't occurred to you, or something else entirely. The only way to know for sure (granted, he could always be scum and lie, so you can't really know for sure) is to question him.

Start a dialogue, create content. You think his push is lazy, but what does that mean about his alignment? Both Town and scum can be lazy, and both Town and scum can make good or bad posts. So what you really have to figure out here is how Noodle's post indicates one alignment or the other.

Insight. And thanks.

Noodle may very well not have realized that bjc hadn't come online since the game started

I knew.

[Chronicle]

Why the heck would he go online just to lurk? It would simply weaken his position as scum. Your reasoning makes no sense.

Same if he were town? Him not posting in this thread is therefore not alignment indicative, as you have previously implied.

He entered the game at the moment he accepted his role. He might be flaking, he might be lurking. And hopefully he'll show up to speak his mind about that sooner or later.

Convenient how you just snipped out the whole part about putting words in my mouth while replying to me.

Stop shoving people around. Again, if I feel like someone's more fit for the vote, I'll gladly change my mind.

Your vote is wasted on a slot that hasn't even logged in since the game started, and you voting him will not pop him an email telling him to check in on this game and post his thoughts.

And when he does finally catch up, he will post his thoughts accordingly. Your one vote doesn't do anything. It will not spur any sort of reaction, it does not give him any sort of incentive to pay more attention to this game, because he is not ignoring this game. Because he hasn't even logged in yet.

Your vote does not do anything. His inactivity thus far is not alignment indicative.

[Chronicle]

Well, what I've trying to push you towards looking at not strictly whether the you like the vote, but whether you like the post. I got hints of you reading into that in 159, but I wanted to see whether you just thought that voting lurkers on policy was bad or whether you were reading into Noodle's motivation and finding it lacking.

What's the difference between the vote and the post? I dislike both of them. I have nothing against voting lurkers if your case is that they are scum coasting, but Noodle's vote on bjc just read as pointless and empty, one I'd from newbscum. An easy push on a lurker to appear active in looking for scum.

quote="In post 170, nancy"]It looks like you have done this somewhat after all, which is great. But I'd also encourage you to question Noodle on it rather than just come to the conclusion that it's a bad post. Noodle may very well not have realized that bjc hadn't come online since the game started (I certainly didn't), for instance, or may just not have thought it through very well, or may have been following a thought process that hadn't occurred to you, or something else entirely. The only way to know for sure (granted, he could always be scum and lie, so you can't really know for sure) is to question him.[/quote]
I highly doubt there was a substantial thought process behind that vote. bjc hasn't even posted anything yet.