|
Day 1
Feb 27, 2010 2:54:07 GMT -5
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Feb 27, 2010 2:54:07 GMT -5
I meant the possibility that Ed could be 3rd party, Meeko.
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 27, 2010 5:10:29 GMT -5
Post by BillMc on Feb 27, 2010 5:10:29 GMT -5
Bloody hell - what a lot of posts for a friday night - were the olympics that boring?
Meeko, whether it is a 1,2,3 point vote you are accountable for your vote - saying you are placing a vote to be less accountable is anti-town. This whole discussion between Meeko and Ed does feel orchestrated - Meeko, to me, is coming across as a frustrated townie who can't get his head around the voting system. Ed does appear to be pushing his buttons - tho that is Ed's style - tho possibly he was hoping continued pressure on Meeko would force a claim. The flurry of votes on Meeko before his claim needs to be re-examined - reading longs threads on the blackberry is not good for the eyes. FCOD's Conspiracy3 reference does kinda ping me - and does fall under a "scum wouldn't do that (would they?)" repeat.
Pending a re-read:
Vote: 1st. FCOD 2nd. Ed 3rd. no one
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 27, 2010 8:01:46 GMT -5
Post by special on Feb 27, 2010 8:01:46 GMT -5
Ed. Let's Change subjects. It is rare we can agree on something. But I think we can. FCOD. We Simulposted on telling FCOD about Conspiracy 3. I think that should speak for itself. ......... FWIW : Unvote All3 point vote FCOD
I think the planets aligned here, and I think it is too good to pass up. Huh? What on Earth does it mean other than you and I were both on line and remember Conspiracy? HOw does it lead to any suspicion of FCOD? Your reason for voting him is because you and I posted a response to him at the same time? really?
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 27, 2010 8:03:05 GMT -5
Post by special on Feb 27, 2010 8:03:05 GMT -5
I appeal to everyone that has more experience than me. That is going to be a lot of people here. How far gone am I on this? FCOD says this : All I have to say is that it seems like Ed and Meeko are going back and forth at each other a lot and it feels staged to me. At the time, Ed and I were still going after each other. As we take a breather, we both read what FCOD has said. And then we both simulpost, rejecting FCODs premise. We both reject that we are in collaboration. How would scum approach this? They would have no need for the knee jerk reaction. They would not reject the premise, they would ignore it, and take the vote in stride as they know a further gone townie also got a vote in the exchange. Yet a Knee jerk reaction is what we had. I think this goes a long way in proving we are both town. Scum already know this, if it is true. As I said, I have nothing left to lose. I believe FCOD is Scum. Lurking Scum. I believe that Ed is town. I know I am town. As much as I'd love proof that I am Town. All this proves is that I posted at the same time as you.
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 27, 2010 8:14:12 GMT -5
Post by special on Feb 27, 2010 8:14:12 GMT -5
Meeko, I'm not getting your case on FCOD> It seems as if you've taken the fact that you and I rejected that we are collaborating (We know this, but no one else could) and determined that fCOD is wrong. Therefore he must be Scum. You also, somehow seem to believe that I no longer think you are Scum because....While I know I am not a Scumbuddy of yours, I have no idea if you are collaborating with someone else.... @red Thanks for pointing out my error on DayEnd. I read Sunday and thought Saturday. @peeker, I too was bothered by mental guys vote for Meeko, though, to be honest, I've often experienced the feelings he's expressed. @bill, it almost appears that you are voting FCOD for thinking that the exhange between Meeko and myself is orchestrated, and that pings you. Then, you're voting for me because you think the xchange between Meeko and myself could be orchestrated or, maybe, I'm just playing the game the way I usually play it? Did I caputure the essence of the reasons behind your vote? Because, honestly, they stink of opportunism and contradiction.
|
|
Meeko
FGM
I raccoon it's time to play Mafia
Posts: 2,474
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day 1
Feb 27, 2010 8:30:40 GMT -5
Post by Meeko on Feb 27, 2010 8:30:40 GMT -5
One gets the sense Ed is trying a tad too hard here.
Look, I should die because of my role Alone. I know this.
That should not mean that everything, EVERYTHING that happened to me while I was still alive should be given a pass.
And frankly, I feel that is exactly what will happen.
----
----
Despite stating many times over that my 2 point vote was connected to being day 1, it still got a lot of heat. A LOT OF HEAT.
Players are on me because of ""Accountability"". We know where I stand on all of that.
Would Scum go down the line of Accountability as I have?
The issue is this, there are BETTER reasons to place a vote on someone than for accountability reasons. I doubt Scum would reveal a real reason for their vote. I doubt they would pick such a toxic reason as accountability. I doubt they would give a reason at all.
On a Mislynch, there is NO time when you should let a 3 point vote pass, and vote the one point voter.
There is a reason why the Mod gave us Borda. Other people have stated using 1 point vote as FOS. Apparently, these people know that 3 does not equal 1.
.
If I was standard vanilla Town, I feel that this game would still lynch me here. If I was ANY power town role, I feel this game would still lynch me here.
I may not get Borda.
But town doesn't get how to win.
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 27, 2010 9:08:49 GMT -5
Post by The Real FCOD on Feb 27, 2010 9:08:49 GMT -5
Meeko, what are you smoking?
I played in Conspiracy 3, so yes I am very aware that you and Ed staged your Day One arguing in that game. Let's say you're both scum in this game. Would it not be a PERFECT play to repeat your Day One affair? Because, you know, scum would never do that.
You claim that because you simulposted about it, it disproves it. What? Don't the scum have a 24-hour strategy board? If anything, simulposting makes me MORE suspicious of you. Scum can synchronize their actions because they can discuss it away from the town.
And how exactly does it prove that I am scum? Because I pointed out that you two are arguing a lot or because I think it's scummy? Does not compute...
--FCOD
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 27, 2010 9:41:02 GMT -5
Post by peekercpa on Feb 27, 2010 9:41:02 GMT -5
Bloody hell - what a lot of posts for a friday night - were the olympics that boring <snipped> this was better than the first cup of coffee. seriously, bill cracks me up. i look forward to his posts almost as much as the next episode of office. ed see the problem i have with mg is twofold. one, the whole anti-town=scum. but this is even worse. second, i don't think he's scum but he's acting anti town so i will vote to lynch him anyways. that's some pretty tortured reasoning. last i looked town needs to get rid of non town, not folks we don't agree with or are crosswise with or are acting in a manner that is not consistent within our self defined manner of acceptability. and to be honest with you to see ed arguing with anyone doesn't even grab my attention much any more. i really think that he would argue with the mirror if he could program it to talk.
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 27, 2010 10:04:56 GMT -5
Post by peekercpa on Feb 27, 2010 10:04:56 GMT -5
from meekos claim
Summary: 1. Each Night, you must protect someone from threats by encasing them in repulsive electricity or kill them by shocking them. 2. If you protected someone the previous Night, the electricity will kill that Night. If you killed someone last Night, the electricity will protect the next Night. The first Night is your choice. 3. You cannot target yourself.
can someone help me with this especially 2.? i mean i kind of parse it as heads, tails, heads, tails but the sentence structure is kind of odd.
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 27, 2010 10:24:31 GMT -5
Post by shaggy on Feb 27, 2010 10:24:31 GMT -5
Hey everyone, Well as promised last night, I reread and here are my thoughts on a few people and then my vote. Now with SisterC I do find this curious. You know, someone says something like this in every game, I swear. Discussing/debating anything game related is not a waste of our time. Ever. The more we discuss and debate, the more chance someone will let something scummy slip. I'm not going to argue that point, no. On the other hand, sometimes an offhand comment on a less-fruitful topic is exactly the tell that someone was looking for. I'm just saying. Talking is good for us. Silence helps Scum. I seldom get involved in policy discussions, though I can usually follow them a little better than I have so far this game, but I think by now my general feeling on Lynch All Liars is pretty well-established. Now I know this isn’t much for day one, but I do find it interesting that on one hand it is yes we should be involved in policy talk or what ever, but then on the other hand you say you tend not to. Something just seems really odd to me about that. Peek voted cause you did not get involved at first, which is fair enough but not overly a scum tell, the part for me as I said is the whole we need discusion, but I am not into the whole day one discusions essentially. Seems kinda odd to me. Now in regards to this: At this point, I am really tempted to vote for Meeko. Not because I believe he is scum, but because at this point I feel like he has become the scum teams biggest asset. We have three or four players spending time interacting with Meeko (including me) that could probably be more fruitfully spent taking just a cursory look at several other players. I just have to say in that instead of voting him, why not spend the time your self-looking at those others? I mean if no one else is, then as town it is our duty to step up and due it ourselves, not just pass it off for another day. Since the more we do that the more we creep closer to loosing. I understand the feeling, I get it myself, but that should not stop us from examining others. Yes we can handle a mislynch or 2, but that does not mean we have to or should just be like, "oh well let's just mislynch today and worry about hunting the others tomorrow." Which I maybe way off and I usually am, but this kinda almost seems like that is what is being implied. I am not so supicious of his Paul vote since if you look at his post before that one, you will find his reasons for his vote. So it was confusing that he did not put them in his vote post, but they were there. The last person I have to comment on would be Drainbead . Cause of this: So it's more of a meta-gamey reason than anything else? The reason I ask is mainly because I'm finding it difficult to sink my teeth into this game, so I've been lurking a bit more than I'm normally accustomed to. It's not keeping my nose clean as much as it is being completely unsure on how to get it dirty just yet. I also generally find it difficult to have any coherent analysis on Day One in general, especially since Day One of the last few games I've been in have pretty much involved "Should we lynch peeker?" It's actually kinda nice to see that not being the case in this one...although given that you've been Town every time this has happened, it probably means you're Scum now. Anyway, I'm rambling, but I was curious as to what you meant by clean-noser, since I thought maybe I could have been placed in that pile. Or the lurker pile, but I'm working on getting out of that one. Gonna try to get a vote down soon, but I'm actually going to be busy with RL stuff (company outing tonight) so I can't promise anything, especially since I see no really good case against anyone right now, and nothing so far that leads me to make my own. I'll try a re-read in a few hours and see if anything jumps out at me. Now what perks my ears is that normally I am not big into lynch the lurker at all, but when someone self professes to be lurking, that kinda always rubs me the wrong way. I mean basically saying, “Hey guys I am a lurking here.” Something about that just seems odd. Now I know you said it is cause you have a hard time getting the game, but here is the thing, unless you talk and ask about those things you do not get, then you will never learn and understand them. So when you do not understand to me that is when you should be more talkative then less talkative. Just like and maybe it is me, but something about “unsure how to get dirty just yet.” Rubs me the wrong way. I mean I understand you are going to make mistakes and your going to get your hands or your nose dirty but trying to find ways for it to happen? Why would you seem to be saying your are trying to find ways to appear as dirty? As town we should not be concerned with how we appear, just scum would be. The last part of this that I get suspicious of would be when you say you may not make a vote. I get suspicious of this, cause well it is day one, so all cases are weak, as long as there is at least some case to it that is fine. I just mean no one will vote if you expect to only vote if you find fort Knox of a strong case on day one. I am sure there has to be someone or something that can pek your interest to make a vote. So based on these things I am going to for now: First vote Drainbead Second vote SisterC Thrid vote MentalG First vote for admiting to be a lurker and trying to find ways to appear "dirty". As I said this just really gets my scumdar going off. Seconed for the fact that I am not really convinced you are scum but I do see what apears to me to be some inconsistancies in the posts. Third for minor pings in not liking that people are only looking at one player, and yet so are you. This is not overly a scum tell, and that is why I have you only as a 3rd place vote. Anyways could be way off and totally missing the target here but for me these would be the people I find pinging me and why. So for now I am happy with these votes.
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 27, 2010 10:37:32 GMT -5
Post by shaggy on Feb 27, 2010 10:37:32 GMT -5
from meekos claim Summary: 1. Each Night, you must protect someone from threats by encasing them in repulsive electricity or kill them by shocking them. 2. If you protected someone the previous Night, the electricity will kill that Night. If you killed someone last Night, the electricity will protect the next Night. The first Night is your choice. 3. You cannot target yourself. can someone help me with this especially 2.? i mean i kind of parse it as heads, tails, heads, tails but the sentence structure is kind of odd. Maybe it is just me here, but does this not almost seem like if he does protect them, he has a chance that it back fires and kills them. Also if it works and they are protected then the next night they get killed by the electricity. Could be way off and hopefully we can get some claryfication but it almost reads like that to me.
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 27, 2010 10:39:18 GMT -5
Post by MentalGuy on Feb 27, 2010 10:39:18 GMT -5
At this point, I am really tempted to vote for Meeko. Not because I believe he is scum, but because at this point I feel like he has become the scum teams biggest asset. We have three or four players spending time interacting with Meeko (including me) that could probably be more fruitfully spent taking just a cursory look at several other players. <snipped all to fuck> this i can get down with. it proves my point how scum are currently playing.. ok i'll vote for someone even though i don't think they are scum but because it is just irking me or insert some other blather. oh they may be town but they are helping scum so much that we have to eliminate them. boo hoo. fuck if you are town nut it up and get past it for gods sake. yaknow this is a slam dunk for me. unvote allvote 3 pts mentalthat's about the most fucked up thing i have ever read. "they are most likely not scum but i'll entertain a vote to fucking lynch them anyways". sheeps and peeps and. btw. now you can begin to see the power of borda. peeker, do you believe I am scum? If so, fine then you have put your vote where it should be. If not, then you are doing the same thing you have accused me of doing. My objective in this game is for a Town win. I know that the way to do that is to eliminate all the scum. I felt that continuing with Meeko was going to be a serious impediment to that. I do not see what is all that different between my vote and votes for lurkers or other policy votes. In any of the cases you are voting to get rid of players that you feel are not helping the Town to a win. I am not sure what you mean by me now seeing the power of the Borda. You are voting exactly the way I have advocated a Town player should vote. A single 3 point vote. I feel that if you were to now put a 2 point vote on someone, you could possibly be contributing to the lynch of someone you felt was less scummy than I was. In light of Meeko's claim I am going to Unvote: Meeko Even though I feel Meeko's claim is probably legit, I still had to think about whether to unvote or not. The same problems with Meeko's play are still there. The primary problem being that Meeko tends to be more concerned with what happens to him in the game than what would be best for the team. And I am also concerned that Meeko's play will be a continuing distraction for Town. That said, I am willing to give things a chance to calm down and see what happens. I will also apologize if I mislead people into thinking the Day ended today. I made a mistake. I thought it did end today. Now I have the problem of not having a vote on anyone and end of Day is even closer. Due to me being away during the day today, it will probably be tonight before I revote. After refreshing the thread in a separate tab, I now see that Shaggy has given me a third place vote. You make reasonable points Shaggy. There are certain arguments I do find it hard to ignore. Sometimes I should try to ignore things and spend some time looking at others. I will say that I went from just being tempted to vote to an actual vote when I considered that Meeko was playing to protect himself over having Town win. I will ask you the same thing I am asking others with multiple votes. It looks as if DrainBead is the person that looks scummiest to you right now. If it were near end of Day and SisterCoyote were in the lynch lead by 1 point, would you remove your vote from Sister so that Drain would be lynched? If not, why not?
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 27, 2010 10:49:27 GMT -5
Post by BillMc on Feb 27, 2010 10:49:27 GMT -5
After re-reading After I made that last post, I thought about it and decided that even if Meeko is Town, he hasn essentially admitted that he is playing for himself and not the Town. That is not an attitude that will help Town to victory. I hope Meeko is scum or third party, but even if he is not I am still happy to Vote: (3 points) Meeko I really don't like this vote - tho it is the sort of vote that Pleo would lay down. @ BillMc, Total Lost: I didn't realize that you guys were in the game until I was refreshed by Cookies' list. Is that a lurker jibe? Or are you just skimming? As for my vote, I think I'm happy as they are If FCOD is scum, and Meeko and Ed are town, then there is little to be gained from FCOD's comment. If FCOD and Ed are scum.....Ed pretty much started the whole "borda is bad" discussion, FCOD's first vote was on Ed, second on Meeko, trying to buy some town cred? If FCOD is town, ED is scum, Ed could be trying to gain town cred via restaging his C3 argument with Meeko knowing Meeko is town. Of course, both FCOD and Ed could be town.
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 27, 2010 11:03:41 GMT -5
Post by MentalGuy on Feb 27, 2010 11:03:41 GMT -5
Shaggy, it seems to me that he alternates between being a compulsory vig and a compulsory doc. One Night he is one, the next Night the other, and so on.
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 27, 2010 11:05:18 GMT -5
Post by peekercpa on Feb 27, 2010 11:05:18 GMT -5
yes, i find suggesting voting for a player that you don't think is scum but because they are a pita is scummy.
and regarding the borda count. the whole point i was trying to make is that until someone is six votes clear a single unvote and vote can switch the lynch. so anyone that is within six votes of the lead is at risk.
let me make the math a little easier. assume just for computational purposes that scum are the square root of the population and that we are dealing with first place votes. if there are 9 players and 3 are scum potentially there are 27 first place votes with scum having one third of them. with 16/4 there are 48 potential votes with scum controlling one quarter. with 25/5 scum control one fifth. now this works with any voting mechanism. but with borda it gets exacerbated because unless all town are voting perfectly they potentially are putting one and two pointers on a townie. in this game it is mitigated by the fact that we don't have to have a full slate. also, i think that there is something psychological that goes on when say someone has 3 first place votes. in a normal game that just equals 3, no biggie. in this instance however it equals 9.
holy cow batman 9 votes that's a crapload.
take a chill pill robin it's just three.
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 27, 2010 11:06:12 GMT -5
Post by shaggy on Feb 27, 2010 11:06:12 GMT -5
@ MG Well since I am not afraid of being held accountable for my actions and I obviously feel he is my number one vote...er else I would not vote that way. Then yes I have no quams unvoting in that case. Yes I may take flack for it, if I am wrong and if it leads to a mislynch but for me, I need to do what I think is best for us all. And if I feel that is lynching who I think is most scummy, then I should be able to take the heat that comes with that. Do not dole out the heat if you can not take it your self, I say.
Think about it in your hypothetical situation, I have concern for examble with others for some apearances of inconsistancy, what would that say if I were to be giulty of the same thing? Which essentially what I would be doing by helping lynch Sister for having her as my number 2. I said before and will again after the fact I feel i would be just as accountable as any other, and with her as number 2 for me, that means I am suspicious of her but not enough to warrent a lynch of her, as compared to him. If anything I feel it would be well with in your rights to be more suspicious if I left it on, as then I would be helping lynch someone I felt was not scummy enough to warrent lynching.
Am I wrong? Maybe but I will do what I feel is best for us all, and if that lands me in hot water, then so be it. As I said I have no problems being held accountable for my actions or anything I say.
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 27, 2010 11:09:22 GMT -5
Post by shaggy on Feb 27, 2010 11:09:22 GMT -5
Shaggy, it seems to me that he alternates between being a compulsory vig and a compulsory doc. One Night he is one, the next Night the other, and so on. The part I get tripped on is "If you protected someone the previous Night, the electricity will kill that Night. " Like what deos that mean? does it kill someone else or is it who they protected the night before?
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 27, 2010 11:46:06 GMT -5
Post by Drain Bead on Feb 27, 2010 11:46:06 GMT -5
shaggy, my hope was that I got a vote down before last night, but that I might be unable to until now due to RL issues, not that I wouldn't be able to get a vote down at all. I can see how you could have misinterpreted what I said, though.
Damn, lot of stuff to go through from one night. And I have the same issue parsing Meeko's claim as you do--I thought it read that if you choose to protect someone, they die the next Night. But then I followed that out to its logical conclusion. Because the role says that only the first Night is Meeko's choice as to whether to kill or protect, and it alternates from there on out, if the lightning killed the protected party the second Night, Meeko would be able to pick a target again. Ditto if he killed on Night One. Since the only Night Meeko can choose whether to kill or protect is the first Night, it seems to make sense that his role functions in the way he described. Your actions are pretty subtle, though--taking things that could be misinterpreted, and twisting them in a way that creates doubt in others.
Vote: 3 point vote for peeker , for the inconsistency pointed out by Sister Coyote earlier. Vote: 1 point vote for shaggy , recognizing that what I'm seeing above could be a function of OMGUS, but noting my suspicion of it.
I need to find a post on re-read for the 2 point vote, something pinged me earlier but I forget where it is.
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 27, 2010 11:46:55 GMT -5
Post by Drain Bead on Feb 27, 2010 11:46:55 GMT -5
WTF is up with the tags?
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 27, 2010 11:48:00 GMT -5
Post by peekercpa on Feb 27, 2010 11:48:00 GMT -5
Shaggy, it seems to me that he alternates between being a compulsory vig and a compulsory doc. One Night he is one, the next Night the other, and so on. The part I get tripped on is "If you protected someone the previous Night, the electricity will kill that Night. " Like what deos that mean? does it kill someone else or is it who they protected the night before? ding ding ding, we have a winner. that was screwing with me as well. also, the whole "last" and "previous" seems discongruent. but it is pede so crap it could be nothing. i mean if it was a story pm then i'd be all over it like maple syrup (the real stuff not the abominations that are available) on pancakes.
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 27, 2010 11:50:47 GMT -5
Post by Drain Bead on Feb 27, 2010 11:50:47 GMT -5
Alright, I've reconsidered my position on paul, I still feel his swipe at meeko was scummy, but there are scummier things going on at this point. Also, everything else he has said has not pinged me. So I'm willing to wait, and re-evaluate later. unvote paulwhoisaghost @ Meeko: The number of votes that you cast on someone does not reflect a proportion of accountability, since every vote counts towards the lynch. 3 does not equal 2 in terms of voting, but if you contribute to a mislynch then culpable none the less. Here's an hypothetical example of why: Say in a traditional game where there isn't voting differences that you are voting for a player who is tied for the lead. You then unvote that player, you become accountable for the lynch of the other player. According to your 2 not equal 3 logic, you had no votes so you are not accountable ( 1 not equal 0). But this is not the case, had you not unvoted, that player wouldn't then be in the lead. Secondly, your me first style of play is pro-scum. Town players do not need to survive to win. Town players should attempt to survive and directly avoid scummy behavior only so that they do not out-scum the scum team and distract from proper lynches. I am having a hard time telling if you are a guy who is making mistakes, or if you are scum contributing to the noise. vote Meeko (3 points) @ Dirx: You appear scummy to me, you have said before that you go into lurk-mode when you are scum, you appear to me to be flying pretty low right now. @ BillMc, Total Lost: I didn't realize that you guys were in the game until I was refreshed by Cookies' list. Votes bleached by me. This is what jumped out at me earlier. Skeezix unvotes a person he initially thought and still thinks was Scummy for his vote on the person that he then votes for. So did you think that paul vs. Meeko was a scumfight? Otherwise, what this post boils down to me is "I think you're Scummy for voting for this guy who I think is Scum." Vote: 2 point vote for Skeezix
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 27, 2010 11:52:13 GMT -5
Post by Drain Bead on Feb 27, 2010 11:52:13 GMT -5
And I'll try the tags again on my first two votes. I wonder if it's the fact that I was posting from the Quick Reply box that time...
Vote: 3 point vote for peeker , for the inconsistency pointed out by Sister Coyote earlier. Vote: 1 point vote for shaggy , recognizing that what I'm seeing above could be a function of OMGUS, but noting my suspicion of it.
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 27, 2010 11:53:25 GMT -5
Post by Drain Bead on Feb 27, 2010 11:53:25 GMT -5
And I'll try the tags again on my first two votes. I wonder if it's the fact that I was posting from the Quick Reply box that time... Vote: 3 point vote for peeker [/color], for the inconsistency pointed out by Sister Coyote earlier. Vote: 1 point vote for shaggy [/color], recognizing that what I'm seeing above could be a function of OMGUS, but noting my suspicion of it.[/quote] Yeah, it's gotta be the Quick Reply box. Vote: 3 point for peeker Vote: 1 point for shaggy
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 27, 2010 11:53:40 GMT -5
Post by Drain Bead on Feb 27, 2010 11:53:40 GMT -5
Fuck it, I give up.
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 27, 2010 12:01:07 GMT -5
Post by peekercpa on Feb 27, 2010 12:01:07 GMT -5
hey, pede can we get an official vote count, please. and i certainly would not dare to edict to our wonderful mod but it might be wise to update this frequently over the next 30 hours or so because it looks to be highly fluid at this point
and drain you are going to have to help me. where in the world was i inconsistent. i have already pointed out where sis snipped a quote and arrived at a bad conclusion. skim much?
but one thing i will add about skimming and this is just personal. as a townie i tend to skim a hell of a lot more than i do as scum. as scum i have to find the needle in the proverbial hay stack to justify that which i know to be false. as town i just kind of read for context.
my two cents.
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 27, 2010 12:02:48 GMT -5
Post by peekercpa on Feb 27, 2010 12:02:48 GMT -5
second belly laugh of the day. seriously, you guys make the weekends entertaining.
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 27, 2010 12:03:45 GMT -5
Post by peekercpa on Feb 27, 2010 12:03:45 GMT -5
i think og is telling you indirectly that your vote is unwise and wrong. therefore, he will not allow it to occur.
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 27, 2010 13:06:36 GMT -5
Post by special on Feb 27, 2010 13:06:36 GMT -5
Here is Bill's initial stated reason for voting for FCOD and myself (bolding mine): \ This whole discussion between Meeko and Ed does feel orchestrated - Meeko , to me, is coming across as a frustrated townie who can't get his head around the voting system. Ed does appear to be pushing his buttons - tho that is Ed's style - tho possibly he was hoping continued pressure on Meeko would force a claim. The flurry of votes on Meeko before his claim needs to be re-examined - reading longs threads on the blackberry is not good for the eyes. FCOD's Conspiracy3 reference does kinda ping me - and does fall under a "scum wouldn't do that (would they?)" repeat. Pending a re-read: Now, remember, FCOD's comment about Conspiracy (which Meeko and I mentioned initially, not FCOD) is preciously that the discussion between Meeko and myself was staged. Bill's stated concern (though how a Scum Ed would orchestrate a discussion with a frustrate d Town Meeko, I don't know. Here are the questions I posed to Bill regarding his vote @bill, it almost appears that you are voting FCOD for thinking that the exhange between Meeko and myself is orchestrated, and that pings you. Then, you're voting for me because you think the xchange between Meeko and myself could be orchestrated or, maybe, I'm just playing the game the way I usually play it? Did I caputure the essence of the reasons behind your vote? Because, honestly, they stink of opportunism and contradiction. So, I've asked him about the inconsistency, especially of both voting for FCOD and agreeing with him, but also of thinking I'm playing the way I usually do, but am still Scum. As for my vote, I think I'm happy as they are If FCOD is scum, and Meeko and Ed are town, then there is little to be gained from FCOD's comment. If FCOD and Ed are scum.....Ed pretty much started the whole "borda is bad" discussion, FCOD's first vote was on Ed, second on Meeko, trying to buy some town cred? If FCOD is town, ED is scum, Ed could be trying to gain town cred via restaging his C3 argument with Meeko knowing Meeko is town. Of course, both FCOD and Ed could be town. There really aren't answers, but an analysis that basically states the 4 possibilities that exist for alignment of myself and FCOD. Of course, his analysis is cursory and weak, and, shall I say opportunistic? Let's break it down: 1. FCOD= Scum, Ed=Town, Bill states there's no reason for FCOD to make his comment. No reason? really? Maybe Scum wants to focus attention on the interaction? Maybe he wants to place 2 votes that will slide under the radr. Maybe he realizes he's pushing Meeko closer ot lynch while......wait for it.....taking on less accountability by voting him 2nd 2. FCOD=Scum, Ed= Scum. Bill mention that I started the Borda is Bad discussion (How is that relevant? Is it a Scummy thing to do?) and FCOD is trying to earn Town Cred by busing me. 3. FCOD=Town, Ed=Scum, Bill states that I am just re-staging my argument from C3 with Meeko. This ignores his won point that I'm playing the way I usually do, which is picking up on inconsistencies and possible Scum motivations and then investigating it to see what I think. 4.FCOD=Town, Ed=Town, Bill ignores this possibility. He ignores that maybe I am just plaiyng the way I usually do and FCOD saw the same things he appeared to in the interaction between Meeko and myself. At this point, though I'm a bit hesitant to believe Meeko's claim (especially since he easily could be a Vig toNight and I've gone after him pretty hard) I'm going to Unvote: Meeko Vote: Bill for 3 points
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 27, 2010 13:15:27 GMT -5
Post by shaggy on Feb 27, 2010 13:15:27 GMT -5
I do just have to respond and comment on this: shaggy, my hope was that I got a vote down before last night, but that I might be unable to until now due to RL issues, not that I wouldn't be able to get a vote down at all. I can see how you could have misinterpreted what I said, though. Bleached Might I just point one thing out. The reason for the vote was this and I quote: First vote for admiting to be a lurker and trying to find ways to appear "dirty". As I said this just really gets my scumdar going off. Bleached Now specifically about the vote, you said So me then saying I am mildly suspicious and get the odd ping because you seem to may not get it in, is not miss caracterizing at all. So claiming I miss characterized you is kinda wrong. Since you did say you will try but may not. Now you have voted and so I do admit that suspicious is gone and no longer valid. However the point is I personally would say I did not miss characterize, since I never said you said you would not, but rather that you may not, which is pretty much what you did say. However the bigger thing is while yes I made a comment about placing a vote, that was not why I voted you for at all. It was a point of interest and I felt worth making a peanut gallery comment about, but not worth voting for. The first 2 paragraphs of my comments were the real reasons why I voted. Something you seem to have over looked and just responded to the latter. Just wanted to set the record staright here for why I voted and what I did and did not say.
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 27, 2010 13:17:00 GMT -5
Post by shaggy on Feb 27, 2010 13:17:00 GMT -5
The part I get tripped on is "If you protected someone the previous Night, the electricity will kill that Night. " Like what deos that mean? does it kill someone else or is it who they protected the night before? ding ding ding, we have a winner. that was screwing with me as well. also, the whole "last" and "previous" seems discongruent. but it is pede so crap it could be nothing. i mean if it was a story pm then i'd be all over it like maple syrup (the real stuff not the abominations that are available) on pancakes. Do I get a scooby treat or a hero cookie for being the winner? LOL...sorry could not help but make the comment.
|
|