Open 667: Day 3
-
-
Börk Börk
-
-
Börk Börk Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 221
- Joined: October 30, 2016
- Location: Börkden
Seeing four pages here already, I got my hopes up that there would be some proper discussion to pick apart and use to scumhunt. But alas, it's a whole lot of fluff and alt fishing.
VOTE: pepchoninga for contributing almost nothing useful despite having the highest postcount. Because that's not useful at all, and yet artificially inflating one's postcount can prove to be useful as a false argument against one's lynch at a later stage.-
-
Börk Börk Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 221
- Joined: October 30, 2016
- Location: Börkden
-
-
Börk Börk Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 221
- Joined: October 30, 2016
- Location: Börkden
Give me a good reason to do so.In post 95, keyenpeydee wrote:@Bork, Can you quote things that looked 'useful' to you?-
-
Börk Börk Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 221
- Joined: October 30, 2016
- Location: Börkden
Says the person who has contributed fuck-all to the discussion.In post 98, keyenpeydee wrote:
Your posts are unbelievable and fake.In post 97, Börk Börk wrote:
Give me a good reason to do so.In post 95, keyenpeydee wrote:@Bork, Can you quote things that looked 'useful' to you?
Asking someone to quote someone else's useful posts is both the laziest and least useful thing anyone has done so far.
Why?
We have four pages. If you're looking for content to make reads off then go find it yourself. I've explained my read, and I feel that there is no need to back it up with evidence, especially when the request is phrased in sich a way that puts the accused individual in a more positive light. This just makes me think that you two are scumbuddies.
And why isn't it useful? Because you can do your own scumhunting without piggybacking me.-
-
Börk Börk Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 221
- Joined: October 30, 2016
- Location: Börkden
After two posts of his, one of which was confirming his spot?In post 100, Creature wrote:Feeling better about a Snarky lynch.-
-
Börk Börk Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 221
- Joined: October 30, 2016
- Location: Börkden
Yes, I've played one game on this site and that's it.In post 107, keyenpeydee wrote:@Bork, are you to new to mafia?
Which doesn't make any of what I say any less valid.-
-
Börk Börk Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 221
- Joined: October 30, 2016
- Location: Börkden
Instead of posting fluff and relying on someone else to produce content, you could have tried to do so yourself. That's why I voted you, and it's completely backed up by evidence.In post 105, Pepchoninga wrote:
Ok, I will take this as a "Bye RVS vote"In post 93, Börk Börk wrote:Seeing four pages here already, I got my hopes up that there would be some proper discussion to pick apart and use to scumhunt. But alas, it's a whole lot of fluff and alt fishing.
VOTE: pepchoninga for contributing almost nothing useful despite having the highest postcount. Because that's not useful at all, and yet artificially inflating one's postcount can prove to be useful as a false argument against one's lynch at a later stage.
Your post is absolutely bad for these reasons: In those 4 pages, we have started a conversation. This conversation is full of fluff. And it was untill we got somethings real to discuss about. Creature seemed to want to give a good thing for us to prodice content but he basically ended the topic himself. There is nothing for us to do except keep posting until we have something real to talk about. And your vote is exactly that. Using the not producing content as an argument for a lynch in the first 4 pages is bad.
It is beneficial to mafia to produce posts which lack content and distract town from keeping the game moving, as in the end town will have less time to dedicate to scumhunting. Therefore my case on you is also directly related to scummy behaviour, and not just policy.-
-
Börk Börk Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 221
- Joined: October 30, 2016
- Location: Börkden
Oh, and where are your solid arguments and valid points? Oh wait. Nowhere. At least I'm making an effort, wen beyond simply defending myself.In post 121, Pepchoninga wrote:
It doesn't make it any less valid but it also doesn't make it any more believable. It's rushed and you really have no solid thing to go off from in that vote.In post 120, Börk Börk wrote:
Yes, I've played one game on this site and that's it.In post 107, keyenpeydee wrote:@Bork, are you to new to mafia?
Which doesn't make any of what I say any less valid.-
-
Börk Börk Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 221
- Joined: October 30, 2016
- Location: Börkden
The alt talk is scummy because it make you look like you're moving the discussion forward, while not actually doing so, as alt fishing has no direct correlation to scumhunting. It's especially bad early on in the game, when we NEED some solid discussion. So it's scummy behaviour.In post 103, keyenpeydee wrote:
Says the one who's throwing scum reads based on shit posts. You clearly and obviously refused to do it because 'your basing your reads on non-game related talks (shit posts)' and that's what makes it so fake and unbelievable.In post 99, Börk Börk wrote:
Says the person who has contributed fuck-all to the discussion.In post 98, keyenpeydee wrote:
Your posts are unbelievable and fake.In post 97, Börk Börk wrote:
Give me a good reason to do so.In post 95, keyenpeydee wrote:@Bork, Can you quote things that looked 'useful' to you?
Asking someone to quote someone else's useful posts is both the laziest and least useful thing anyone has done so far.
Why?
We have four pages. If you're looking for content to make reads off then go find it yourself. I've explained my read, and I feel that there is no need to back it up with evidence, especially when the request is phrased in sich a way that puts the accused individual in a more positive light. This just makes me think that you two are scumbuddies.
And why isn't it useful? Because you can do your own scumhunting without piggybacking me.
You also refused to quote some 'helpful' posts because there's 4 pages and can't seem to see a helpful post to solidify your reads against me and you also try to make me appear scum by being a fucking lazy scumass person.
VOTE: Bork
Why do you think bringing the alt talk make me scum?
And the fact that your main defense here seems to be ad hominem attacks against me (i.e. 'fucking lazy scumass person') rather than my content just serves to solidify my point that you're not producing good content right now.
Also, for someone who claims to be 13, you sure use a lot of profanity. Just saying. Calm down a bit.-
-
Börk Börk Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 221
- Joined: October 30, 2016
- Location: Börkden
You make a fair point. However here I'm choosing to differentiate between 'being scum' and 'being scummy'. I'll say that you are correct about your fluff posting not necessarily meaning that you are scum. But regardless of whether you are scum or not, the outcome of delaying the transition out of RVS ultimately favours scum. Hence it is a scummy action.In post 126, Pepchoninga wrote:
While your thinking is good, you need to understand that fluff doesn't mean scum. No, scum don't always try to make fluffy posts to distract town. They try to act like a town would, this includes scumhunt and all the other stuff, but they also manipulate town into an opinion. You cannot say someone is scum of the saying that they don't produce content in RVS. Content in RVS is hardly produced. The first players to say something strange or out of the ordinary is what creates the content, hence gets the game started. No, you don't have evidence. Evidence is you quoting a post and explaining what you feel is scummy about it.In post 123, Börk Börk wrote:
Instead of posting fluff and relying on someone else to produce content, you could have tried to do so yourself. That's why I voted you, and it's completely backed up by evidence.In post 105, Pepchoninga wrote:
Ok, I will take this as a "Bye RVS vote"In post 93, Börk Börk wrote:Seeing four pages here already, I got my hopes up that there would be some proper discussion to pick apart and use to scumhunt. But alas, it's a whole lot of fluff and alt fishing.
VOTE: pepchoninga for contributing almost nothing useful despite having the highest postcount. Because that's not useful at all, and yet artificially inflating one's postcount can prove to be useful as a false argument against one's lynch at a later stage.
Your post is absolutely bad for these reasons: In those 4 pages, we have started a conversation. This conversation is full of fluff. And it was untill we got somethings real to discuss about. Creature seemed to want to give a good thing for us to prodice content but he basically ended the topic himself. There is nothing for us to do except keep posting until we have something real to talk about. And your vote is exactly that. Using the not producing content as an argument for a lynch in the first 4 pages is bad.
It is beneficial to mafia to produce posts which lack content and distract town from keeping the game moving, as in the end town will have less time to dedicate to scumhunting. Therefore my case on you is also directly related to scummy behaviour, and not just policy.-
-
Börk Börk Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 221
- Joined: October 30, 2016
- Location: Börkden
Ah, sorry, I forgot to include that in my post. UNVOTE:In post 133, Pepchoninga wrote:
Scum do admittedly enjoy staying in RVS, but also me not screaming for an escape of RVS isn't scummy. I also did try to get a discussion out of the bold Creature comment, but he ultimately shut this topic 'till a later time.In post 132, Börk Börk wrote:
You make a fair point. However here I'm choosing to differentiate between 'being scum' and 'being scummy'. I'll say that you are correct about your fluff posting not necessarily meaning that you are scum. But regardless of whether you are scum or not, the outcome of delaying the transition out of RVS ultimately favours scum. Hence it is a scummy action.In post 126, Pepchoninga wrote:
While your thinking is good, you need to understand that fluff doesn't mean scum. No, scum don't always try to make fluffy posts to distract town. They try to act like a town would, this includes scumhunt and all the other stuff, but they also manipulate town into an opinion. You cannot say someone is scum of the saying that they don't produce content in RVS. Content in RVS is hardly produced. The first players to say something strange or out of the ordinary is what creates the content, hence gets the game started. No, you don't have evidence. Evidence is you quoting a post and explaining what you feel is scummy about it.In post 123, Börk Börk wrote:
Instead of posting fluff and relying on someone else to produce content, you could have tried to do so yourself. That's why I voted you, and it's completely backed up by evidence.In post 105, Pepchoninga wrote:
Ok, I will take this as a "Bye RVS vote"In post 93, Börk Börk wrote:Seeing four pages here already, I got my hopes up that there would be some proper discussion to pick apart and use to scumhunt. But alas, it's a whole lot of fluff and alt fishing.
VOTE: pepchoninga for contributing almost nothing useful despite having the highest postcount. Because that's not useful at all, and yet artificially inflating one's postcount can prove to be useful as a false argument against one's lynch at a later stage.
Your post is absolutely bad for these reasons: In those 4 pages, we have started a conversation. This conversation is full of fluff. And it was untill we got somethings real to discuss about. Creature seemed to want to give a good thing for us to prodice content but he basically ended the topic himself. There is nothing for us to do except keep posting until we have something real to talk about. And your vote is exactly that. Using the not producing content as an argument for a lynch in the first 4 pages is bad.
It is beneficial to mafia to produce posts which lack content and distract town from keeping the game moving, as in the end town will have less time to dedicate to scumhunting. Therefore my case on you is also directly related to scummy behaviour, and not just policy.
You seem to agree with what I'm saying, yet your vote is still on me because you think that I delayed us getting out of RVS?-
-
Börk Börk Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 221
- Joined: October 30, 2016
- Location: Börkden
If you find Indigo to be the scummiest person at present then vote for Indigo. You made a valid point about him earlier, which is definitely making me consider following your vote. However I think I'll revote someone tomorrow morning, after I've given it some thought. Since I don't think it would be beneficial for me to make an impromptu vote right now.In post 139, Vijarada wrote:who should i be voting, bork? i think you should vote indigo with me.-
-
Börk Börk Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 221
- Joined: October 30, 2016
- Location: Börkden
I still want to lynch Keyen for being an irritating kid, but that's independent of any scumreads. Another fishy aspect of what he's doing is being wishy-washy with his vote on me. Makes a case that he evidently believes in and then shortly afterwards, when it's clear that nobody has followed his vote, he takes it away, instantly changes his opinion, and is keen to move along so that he can avoid all scrutiny for his voting.
Having thought about it, I don't really know whether I want to hop onto the Indigo wagon so soon. Considering how many posts he's made, I don't think it's even possible to have a solid case. While this doesn't invalidate Vijarada's point, I am a bit confused as to why he's pushing his case this much. However overall it's a town-like action, as it attracts people's attention and therefore scrutiny.-
-
Börk Börk Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 221
- Joined: October 30, 2016
- Location: Börkden
-
-
Börk Börk Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 221
- Joined: October 30, 2016
- Location: Börkden
10/10 for selectively reading the parts of my post which you can use against me. Maybe you didn't notice, but I made yet another point against him right after I acknowledged that he was an irritating kid.In post 180, Creature wrote:I thought town were supposed to lynch mafia members, not irritating kids.-
-
Börk Börk Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 221
- Joined: October 30, 2016
- Location: Börkden
The fact that Keyen is discrediting my case by calling me a newbie, and the fact that this is hissoledefence, is just proof that he's caught scum who has no idea what to do.
Please lynch him. Even if he somehow turns out to be a bad town player instead, at least we'll have a significantly more enjoyable game.-
-
Börk Börk Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 221
- Joined: October 30, 2016
- Location: Börkden
How about you get your head out of your ass and read my other posts where I'm scumreading him. Like seriously, are you stupid or something?In post 214, Indigo wrote:
This is a horrible reason to lynch someone. "I think Keyen might just be town but at least if he flips town when we lynch him we wont have to deal with him". This needs to die with fire, you dont lynch someone because you dont like their playstyle or because you rather not deal with them.In post 203, Börk Börk wrote: Please lynch him. Even if he somehow turns out to be a bad town player instead, at least we'll have a significantly more enjoyable game.
UNVOTE:
VOTE: Bork-
-
Börk Börk Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 221
- Joined: October 30, 2016
- Location: Börkden
I was merely saying that there is yet another added benefit to lynching Keyen, namely that we won't have to play with him. Perhaps my phrasing was a tad crude, but nonetheless, as I stated in my previous posts, try and find a legitimate scumread instead of cherry-picking my posts for a way to lynch me.In post 227, Indigo wrote:
Im not voting Bork because of bad reasoning, im voting Bork because she said if keyen flips town at least we are rid of him. That serves two purposes for her. 1) No matter how he flips she wont look bad, that is scum logic she used 2) Wanting to lymch someone that you think may flip town is against your wincon if you are town.In post 215, Vijarada wrote:And yet you're voting Bork because his vote has bad reasoning, not for any other reason (like any reason he's scum). The irony.
I bet you she will respond with something like "no, i scumread him" when she admitted he might flip town which isnt a scumread.
I know you would LOVE to get me lynched, for what reason? I dont know but you are close to getting on my scum list.
Also that final paragraph is hilarious. 'If you keep trying to lynch me then I'll say you're scum'-
-
Börk Börk Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 221
- Joined: October 30, 2016
- Location: Börkden
You're operating under the assumption that I'm aware that Keyen reacts badly under pressure. Fact is, I neither know nor care. He's scum, I'm pushing my case on him, and regardless of how he reacts under pressure, he's still scum. The two don't correlate and your case on me is bad.In post 230, Gamma Emerald wrote:
I SRed him for this post. One time when I was scum and Keyen was town (this setup no less), I pushed Keyen fairly hard because he reacted poorly under pressure. This kinda looks like similar play.In post 203, Börk Börk wrote:The fact that Keyen is discrediting my case by calling me a newbie, and the fact that this is hissoledefence, is just proof that he's caught scum who has no idea what to do.
Please lynch him. Even if he somehow turns out to be a bad town player instead, at least we'll have a significantly more enjoyable game.-
-
Börk Börk Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 221
- Joined: October 30, 2016
- Location: Börkden
-
-
Börk Börk Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 221
- Joined: October 30, 2016
- Location: Börkden
-
-
Börk Börk Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 221
- Joined: October 30, 2016
- Location: Börkden
To be totally honest, I don't think this is a case of lack of interest. I'm interested enough in this game, but I don't really have much else to say. I feel like doing a full analysis of everyone at this stage would be pointless, not to mention tl;dr; trying to convince people to move their votes would be pointless because I've already laid out my reasoning, and telling people to move their votes for the sake of it isn't really my style; and re-reading the game from scratch only to end up either repeating stuff others have already said or only making one or two very minor new points is... you guessed it... pointless.
I think we just need increased activity from a few more people and a more convincing bunch of wagons, and then we'll get going. Day one isn't really the most amazing part of a game.-
-
Börk Börk Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 221
- Joined: October 30, 2016
- Location: Börkden
-
-
Börk Börk Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 221
- Joined: October 30, 2016
- Location: Börkden
If we get a bit closer to the deadline and still don't have a proper wagon going then I'd be totally on board with this plan. Assuming enough other people are on board as well.In post 274, Creature wrote:Bah, I'll reveal what was my strategy:
We lynch the most unreadable players D1 and D2, so at LyLo we have players that we can read and go like "I'm pretty confident that guy is town, no paranoia" or "well, he's playing like he does as scum, so must be scum"-
-
Börk Börk Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 221
- Joined: October 30, 2016
- Location: Börkden
-
-
Börk Börk Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 221
- Joined: October 30, 2016
- Location: Börkden
-
-
Börk Börk Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 221
- Joined: October 30, 2016
- Location: Börkden
KIn post 333, Vijarada wrote:Look this game is stagnated af. Everyone list their top two scumreads and we'll lynch the one most widely scumread, k? Mine are indigo and pepchoniga
Mine are Keyen and Indigo.-
-
Börk Börk Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 221
- Joined: October 30, 2016
- Location: Börkden
-
-
Börk Börk Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 221
- Joined: October 30, 2016
- Location: Börkden
-
-
Börk Börk Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 221
- Joined: October 30, 2016
- Location: Börkden
-
-
Börk Börk Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 221
- Joined: October 30, 2016
- Location: Börkden
-
-
Börk Börk Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 221
- Joined: October 30, 2016
- Location: Börkden
-
-
Börk Börk Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 221
- Joined: October 30, 2016
- Location: Börkden
Your push on Creature seems policy-based, and there's not much more to it. Why would I policy lynch when I have scumreads?In post 398, Pepchoninga wrote:
You are convinced about this lynch, bur not Creature? I call you bullshit.In post 374, Börk Börk wrote:VOTE: indigo
- second highest scumread
- we're literally getting nowhere with this day
- indigo is lurking and hence not even useful
- seems to be a relatively agreed-upon lynch which we can actually get a wagon on
-This is L-1, M'kay?-
-
Börk Börk Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 221
- Joined: October 30, 2016
- Location: Börkden
-
-
Börk Börk Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 221
- Joined: October 30, 2016
- Location: Börkden
-
-
Börk Börk Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 221
- Joined: October 30, 2016
- Location: Börkden
You make a fair point. I think this is just happening because at this point nobody wants to make too much of an effort with this game.In post 435, Vijarada wrote:i mean creature's played terribly, gamma's been terrible, pepcho makes me want to bash my head against a wall, chilledtea comes in and says "vij is scum" and despite being THE BIGGEST WAGON, EVERYBODY BELIEVES HIM FOR NO REASON all of your gameplay is horrifically anti-town and i'm done with this crap.-
-
Börk Börk Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 221
- Joined: October 30, 2016
- Location: Börkden
-
-
Börk Börk Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 221
- Joined: October 30, 2016
- Location: Börkden
Vijarada, I feel like I ought to clarify this, I took my vote off Indigo/chilledtea because I wanted to listen to chilledtea and make most of my judgement of Indigo's slot based on the current slot holder. I did this because it's day one and on principle alone I prefer to avoid deciding that someone is 100% scum because, especially when it's only halfway through the day, as it was when I unvoted, it's just not that clear. I think a slot holder can make a big difference, and while I'm not totally townreading the slot due to Indigo's actions, I feel that chilledtea's demeanour and general helpfulness merited an unvote on my part. Especially since he replaced in when the slot was L-1.-
-
Börk Börk Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 221
- Joined: October 30, 2016
- Location: Börkden
-
-
Börk Börk Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 221
- Joined: October 30, 2016
- Location: Börkden
-
-
Börk Börk Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 221
- Joined: October 30, 2016
- Location: Börkden
Jesus Christ, if we were in a situation that merited lynching someone then I would policy lynch you asap.In post 600, CloudKicker wrote:nvm its in the role pm, who even reads the wins condition duh-
-
Börk Börk Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 221
- Joined: October 30, 2016
- Location: Börkden
-
-
Börk Börk Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 221
- Joined: October 30, 2016
- Location: Börkden
-
-
Börk Börk Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 221
- Joined: October 30, 2016
- Location: Börkden
-
-
Börk Börk Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 221
- Joined: October 30, 2016
- Location: Börkden
-
-
Börk Börk Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 221
- Joined: October 30, 2016
- Location: Börkden
-
-
Börk Börk Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 221
- Joined: October 30, 2016
- Location: Börkden
Okay, sorry, not retarded. If I call him stupid is that any beter?In post 649, SnarkySnowman wrote:VOTE: cloudkicker fuck you and your quick hammer
@bork don't call someone retarded :/-
-
Börk Börk Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 221
- Joined: October 30, 2016
- Location: Börkden
Let me try and use your logic on you so you can see for yourself how bad your case is.In post 642, CloudKicker wrote:#629 really shouldnt have existed, this is really a scumtell
This guy used 'really' twice. This is scummy, as it suggests that he is desperate for town to believe him. Additionally, it is scummy because it shows that he needs to try and convince himself of his argument, because he knows he's bullshitting. He felt the need to add that second 'really' just to make sure that everyone saw his case as legit.
VOTE: CK omg I'm scumreading you exclusively off one post, but I am obviously right because my ego is too inflated to hear other people's logic.
UNVOTE:
I'll reserve my vote for now, but I hope this proves something.-
-
Börk Börk Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 221
- Joined: October 30, 2016
- Location: Börkden
-
-
Börk Börk Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 221
- Joined: October 30, 2016
- Location: Börkden
'you could still be town' sounds like a scummy defense. So when I flip town you can cover your ass by going 'oh, but I said she might be town'.In post 654, CloudKicker wrote:
My last post on you is far from the only reason why ive been scumreading you, also everything i said is true, you could still be town thoIn post 653, Börk Börk wrote:
Let me try and use your logic on you so you can see for yourself how bad your case is.In post 642, CloudKicker wrote:#629 really shouldnt have existed, this is really a scumtell
This guy used 'really' twice. This is scummy, as it suggests that he is desperate for town to believe him. Additionally, it is scummy because it shows that he needs to try and convince himself of his argument, because he knows he's bullshitting. He felt the need to add that second 'really' just to make sure that everyone saw his case as legit.
VOTE: CK omg I'm scumreading you exclusively off one post, but I am obviously right because my ego is too inflated to hear other people's logic.
UNVOTE:
I'll reserve my vote for now, but I hope this proves something.-
-
Börk Börk Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 221
- Joined: October 30, 2016
- Location: Börkden
-
-
Börk Börk Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 221
- Joined: October 30, 2016
- Location: Börkden
-
-
Börk Börk Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 221
- Joined: October 30, 2016
- Location: Börkden
-
-
Börk Börk Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 221
- Joined: October 30, 2016
- Location: Börkden
The content of your posts is debatable at best. Sure, you throw down a vote occasionally, but you provide one or two sentences explaining it and then don't bother pushing it further. So what's the point of even voting?In post 697, SnarkySnowman wrote:
Bork, my 19 posts have more content than your 54. I did read you town but this screams "GOD PLEASE I NEED ANOTHER MISLYNCH"In post 696, hapahauli wrote:Good fucking god there were two no lynches?
And your activity seems to come up in bursts of one short post every two days. It's like you signed up for this game and then just decided that you couldn't be bothered ay more.-
-
Börk Börk Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 221
- Joined: October 30, 2016
- Location: Börkden
Bit of a noob question, but: Would it be advantageous for us to make a second L-1 wagon, or should I avoid that? I would be happy to vote for Snarky in order to even the wagons out, but maybe that would be a bad thing somehow. And understandably we're at a point in the game where scum would be more happy to quickhammer one of the wagons. Technically if today I brought Snarky to L-1 and then someone quickhammered, maybe that would be a good indicator of scum? I don't know. Probably overthinking this.-
-
Börk Börk Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 221
- Joined: October 30, 2016
- Location: Börkden
-
-
Börk Börk Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 221
- Joined: October 30, 2016
- Location: Börkden
@hapahauliI don't disagree with your case, because from a certain standpoint it makes sense, especially the part about him generally being passive. However I wouldn't necessarily read his interactions with Vij as scummy, since if I had my vote on someone and then they said something that made sense, I wouldn't tell them that it doesn't make sense simply because I also think they're scum.
I don't agree with your townread on CK because:
1) Pushing the game forward isn't something that I'd label as inherently town behaviour. I'd say it's more dependent on one's general playstyle, i.e. active vs passive.
2) What makes one's attitude to a NL scummy? Again, I didn't read that as alignment-indicative.
3) Eeeeh... I can sort of agree with this point, I guess.-
-
Börk Börk Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 221
- Joined: October 30, 2016
- Location: Börkden
-
-
Börk Börk Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 221
- Joined: October 30, 2016
- Location: Börkden
I think Cloud is scum because his reasoning for why I'm scum was shitty and sounded fake. Why? Because it basically amounted to picking at wording and at the fact that I posted a post with additional inforight aftera previous one, even though that's basically my posting style. Scumreads picking exclusively at syntax or wording of a few posts are shit and should be ignored.
I think Snarky's lack of posting is worse for a couple of reasons. For one, literally nobody gave a damn D1 and D2, and it's rather surprising thatnobodynoticed. I'd expect at least one person (other than me) to call it out. That slightly hints to me that perhaps his scumbuddy was trying to distract from it, because lurking is normally something noticeable. Secondly, he makes votes, which would give a lot of people the illusion that he's being active and voting, but at the same time he doesn't really push his votes, so he can't be scrutinised that much if whoever he's voting for flips town.
Why are they both worse than Gamma? Firstly, I wouldn't say they'rea lotworse than him, but I just don't think scum would be that obvious/nonchalant. Like, I just get the impression that he can't be bothered with the game and is half-assing his posts, which makes him kinda lynchbait. I just feel like scum would be making more of an effort to get things done in a setup such as this where being lynchbait as scum is especially bad.
-