MSH wrote:
One reason I was extra wary of OGML's claim, is that I am a musician with connections to San Francisco. The fact that I am related to both themes has made me more distrustful to those that aren't. Related to this is my remark about Robin Williams being an actor in a musician related theme.
Ugh. If people are thinking this way, check page 1 for the very clear wording: "This game has a loose Musician theme." Loose. If all roles were musicians, then it wouldn't be loose.
Destructor wrote:
Rogueben, I'm not seeing this as malicious. I'm trying to imagine how Xtoxm's answer to MM original question would have been significantly different to his re-articulated one. How is this questions "leading and pointed"?
I have a thought on this, but I want Ben to answer it beforehand.
NN wrote:
What I see as defensive OMGUS is not in itself scummy, but it contributes to my evaluation of the conversation being distancy. It provides an opportunity to attack but fails to get others drawn into a potential wagon. I'm really not interested in the specifics of the discussion, just the overall sense of distancing.
I really cannot see where you are coming from here.
Vollkan is voted by Xtoxm. Vollkan tries to tease out Xtoxm's reasoning (on the vote and other things), upon the realisation that it's currently as clear as mud. Xtoxm's answers are sub-par, so Vollkan has to keep asking questions.
Sure, it is not moving anywhere quickly (in no small part because X's answers were effectively leading me round in circles), but I don't get why that emerges as distancy. I know that distancing debates often take a similar form (usually kid-glove attacks with strong language but little momentum), but I don't think you can rightly label the debate as distancy, when it ought to have been apparent that I was trying to force Xtoxm to elaborate.
Scumdar, as promised:
[here is my
previous scumdar for convenience]
CKD - Less to go on than most other people, due to his D1 absence. I think he made a reasonable explanation of what happened in the basement. The fact that he deemed OGML to be pro-town is something I see as a null-tell (if the situation was as he described, then scum-CKD would need to take a positive position wrt OGML). His main suspect seems to be Niv, which is interesting because CKD had little suspicion of Niv in his initial scumdar (Niv was lumped into the {Everybody else} bracket). The attacks against Niv's vagueness and wagoning make sense. CKD's play strikes me as overwhelmingly non-suspect and, thus, he gets a 50.
destructor (nee LML, nee Sensfan) - SensFan was someone I had problems with on D1. LML is, of course, complete nothing for content. One quibble I have with destructor is that the rationale behind is condorcet is rather unclear. He hasn't outline why he most suspects Ben, or why he would place me in second place, for instance. There's an accountability problem here. I don't see this as scummy, but it worries me. 65
Gaspar - Following my previous scumdar, he made a theory-level objection to my posts. I see this as a nullity. His justification of his OGML vote on the basis that he thought MBL had info causes me some frustration. It's a 'sufficient' explanation, and MBL's bombast language was playing with fire, but I wonder how reasonable it is to presume knowledge. It's a very convenient explanation - player A uses powerful language, so player B scum follows player A and asserts that she thought that A had info. I don't think this is what happened here, but it is the reason why I am frustrated about this - it's effectively a cop-out from responsibility. Ultimately, I think Gaspar has been making a good contribution. 55.
More to follow shortly.
