As I have argued elsewhere, anybody who claims Miller, because of the potential for such a claim to be made by scum fearing investigation (regardless of how viable a strategy may be), is going to draw more attention than your average player.DGB wrote: Given your opinion, which is (surprising to me) shared by many others, how is the bolded part of your statement true? In particular, what kind of scrutiny are we speaking of here, if a player follows the 'rule' of claiming very early?
In short, the player is placed in the limelight.
Objectively speaking, I think it's a valid argument.DGB wrote: In fact, some players are suggesting that placing ABR under scrutiny for his claim is to distract from your wagon. Korts, for example, is actively trying to silence me. Your opinion?
I don't like the word 'defensive', and my suspicion of Neko has increased because of its use, but it was not the basis for my vote.skander wrote: Wait so was it serious or not? Did you vote neko since you didn't like the word 'defensive' or was it to amuse yourself?
And whilst I was amused by my vote, the purpose of my vote was not self-amusement.
We all should understand that the plausible advantgae for scum in a miller claim is that it innoculates them against cop investigation.skander wrote:Bold mine. If they are not a viable strategy for scum why isn't it a town tell?voll wrote: My reasoning, if you want it, is basically that a Miller claimis not a viable strategy for scum- it prevents them from keeping their fake-claim options open and is guaranteed to place them under heightened scrutiny. Moreover, it ensures that the scenario doesn't arise of cop. claiming a guilty, only to be met with a truthful miller claim.
Of course, ABR could still be scum.And I don't think Miller claims are a towntell.But I am nonetheless of the view that millers should claim early.
I don't think that it is a net positive for scum, however, because of the disadvantages I identified. I am not suggesting that smart scum will not miller claim. What I am saying is that it is basically a null-tell; that there is no objective advantage for scum in claiming miller.
elvis_knits wrote:I'm still interested in this, vollkan:
Were you saying you weren't taking the wagon on you seriously, even though you got to L-2?elvis_knits wrote:I can tell some of it's joking, but all of it? You're not at all serious about anything you're saying? You are not taking the wagon seriously when you are at L-2?vollkan wrote:EK is also treating me as serious.EK wrote: As far as I can tell, the only reason vollkan thinks korts is scum, is because korts is voting vollkan. And that's no a good reason to be that sure.
Some time has passed and you're still at L-2. Do you take it seriously now?
I deny the premise of your question - that I have never been serious.EK wrote: Oh, Vollkan, you're L-1 now. Taking it seriously?
Since I am at L-1, however, I shall spill the beans (or, 99% of the beans)
Some of you may know that in recent times I flirted with being a start-of-game-self-voter. Self-voting was getting stale and leading to the same inevitable debates and dividing lines, so I decided I would experiment with a playstyle variation (surely some of you must have notice that I haven't been myself this game?
)To go back and review with absolute seriousness:
Reaction to my initial vote. Looks/ed to me like standard random-stage behaviour from Korts. I'm assuming here that Korts would not be dumb enough to consider an OMGUS random-vote actually suspectKorts 7 wrote:OMGUS, OMGUS
also, you're obviously scared about my vote. Did I hit a nerve, scum?
Then we get post 24:
And, again, my assumption was that "obvious scumreaction" was typical hyperbole.Korts wrote: elvis is a good wagon and I'd join if vollkan hadn't made an obvious scumreaction in his first post.
Things became more interesting for me on the receipt of Charter's 29:
It's ambiguous. Is he playing the random game, or really trying to wagon?charter wrote:This is actually really true. I hadn't actually read the other random votes before laying the perfect trap.Korts wrote:elvis is a good wagon and I'd join if vollkan hadn't made an obvious scumreaction in his first post.
unvote, vote vollkan
I respond in 31 with:
Essentially, my attempt to see where this leads: if hyperbole from Charter, I would have expected something silly in reply.voll wrote: Charter-Korts = obv scumteam
Then ROFL joins the wagon, eloquent and informative as ever.
39 makes things more interesting yet: Korts seems to making an actual argument for my OMGUS being scummy, based on reading in a defensiveness
44: ABR steps in to defend me. Buddying in potentia.
52&56: What's interesting to me here is, firstly, that in 52 Neko seems to be admitting the prospect of me just being silly, but by 56, after EK has argued that some defensiveness would be understandbale, he says that " I just think vollkan's reactions are a bit much, especially following a random vote with joke reasons". He seems to be capable of recognising that Korts' vote is an obvious joke, so obvious that I am faulted for *apparently* not picking up on that fact. And, yet, he dismisses, with no basis, the prospect that maybe I am also just being random - which, in the circumstances, reeks of opportunism. Add to this my general suspicion of people who attack others for defensiveness, and the basis for my Neko vote is more fully fleshed out.
As with her remarks on defensiveness above, EK is also taking everything as seriousEK in 58 wrote: As far as I can tell, the only reason vollkan thinks korts is scum, is because korts is voting vollkan. And that's no a good reason to be that sure.
*sigh* Keep in mind I live on the other side of the globe from most of you.Charter wrote: He keeps his cool? Please, he's barely posting.
Posting times, in my time:
Mon Mar 02, 2009 12:32 am
Mon Mar 02, 2009 4:09 pm
Mon Mar 02, 2009 4:11 pm
Tue Mar 03, 2009 8:49 pm
Thu Mar 05, 2009 9:17 am
I don't think that's unreasonable, do you?
