Open 143: Jungle Republic (Game Over!) before 787

[dejkha]

Actually, I should probably cool it down with the Emp talk. Hewitt tends to have the urge to leave games when I get started with Emp and Zwet.

Vote Count

Dust 2 - AshMC1984, Empking
AA23 1 - Gorckat
Empking 1 - dejkha
zwetschenwasser 1 - Mixologist
Khamisa 1 - Percy

[Empking]

Wait, what? How is that remark scummy? Could you explain your reasoning?
?

You're highly buddying up to Dej because there's no way in hell that was a compelling argument.

Dust: The recently finished Pie game.

[Dust]

In tandem with some of the last games you've posted in, Dej's argument makes a lot of sense, Empking. Scanning over games like Open 131, or Mushroom Kingdom II, you don't actually do much to help the town, and I could certainly understand his position if I had also had 50+ games with you.

On the other hand, other than Dej's almost unhealthy obsession with lynching you, I don't see much wrong with the just finished Pie game, considering he got nightkilled Night One. His main problem, and what I feel is the source of your accusation of bad play on his part, is the fact that he is absolutely dedicated to lynching you, and doesn't pay attention to much of what you say, which I feel is a mistake.

That said, I think that Empking definitely has some problems with his play style, but nothing to warrant persecution on the level that Dej has suggested.

Percy, what are your thoughts on the game? Acemarksman, if you could answer as well, it'd be appreciated.

[Empking]

In tandem with some of the last games you've posted in, Dej's argument makes a lot of sense, Empking. Scanning over games like Open 131, or Mushroom Kingdom II, you don't actually do much to help the town, and I could certainly understand his position if I had also had 50+ games with you.

Any you know I'm town in those games, how?

On the other hand, other than Dej's almost unhealthy obsession with lynching you, I don't see much wrong with the just finished Pie game, considering he got nightkilled Night One.

And that doesn't really matter because? Considering it made town suspicious of him and stopped him from scum hunting.

[dejkha]

On the other hand, other than Dej's almost unhealthy obsession with lynching you, I don't see much wrong with the just finished Pie game, considering he got nightkilled Night One. His main problem, and what I feel is the source of your accusation of bad play on his part, is the fact that he is absolutely dedicated to lynching you, and doesn't pay attention to much of what you say, which I feel is a mistake.

Would you try to make sense of a blabbering child or "special" kids that love their helmets? I don't have the patience for that kind of thing. I mostly just ignore what he says unless it's a question or comment that isn't completely stupid/useless.

[dejkha]

And that doesn't really matter because? Considering it made town suspicious of him and stopped him from scum hunting.

Dust, you should note that, as it turned out, it was actually scum that was "suspicious" of me.

[Dust]

Grr...

I'm starting to understand why Hewitt would want to leave a game because of this nonsense.

Can we get some other relevant, non-biased information on this game? I can't see this going anywhere...

[AA23]

That said, I think that Empking definitely has some problems with his play style, but nothing to warrant persecution on the level that Dej has suggested.

Percy, what are your thoughts on the game? Acemarksman, if you could answer as well, it'd be appreciated.

@Dust - Emp suggested you were buddying up to Dej and you immediately in post 52 distanced yourself - I'm having trouble seeing it as a natural choice over a tactic

Second part of the above quote. This isn't a get well seminar, and while I can understand wanting everyone to participate, this is day one and less than five pages - - people don't need to be coaxed. Why not just share your own opinion? It seems like you're trying to establish yourself as some sort of town leader in this sense by forcing a directorial approach to your scum hunting. It's too early for that.

If it's your style and your'e just getting excited, it's all good, I would jsut say you're diggin and should ease up - - otherwise, I reagard your seemingly manufactured distancing of Dej, and your attempt to direct the town as scummy.

For instance - in addition to uneccessarily coaxing people to post (still kind of pushy, man...) - - you stated your reasons for starting a discussion of meta.....

Can we get some other relevant, non-biased information on this game? I can't see this going anywhere...

Meta, good or bad, is biased - - is it not now hypocritical for you to have tried to lead the town into conversations you now "grr" to?

FoS - Dust

-----------------------------------------------------------------

[AA23]

EBWOP - - I don't write slang like "diggin" - - it's the keyboard....and there's a few typos.

[AceMarksman]

Vote: dust

I have seen dust in other games (not on this site) playing as scum, and in every one where he is scum, he starts

exactly

like this. Things to note: stifling of the RVS, which he supports when he's town, being quick to FoS but slow to vote etc.

[AceMarksman]

Mod, note my sig. I'll try to post some, but I'll be rather inundated

[dejkha]

Vote: dust

I have seen dust in other games (not on this site) playing as scum, and in every one where he is scum, he starts

exactly

like this. Things to note: stifling of the RVS, which he supports when he's town, being quick to FoS but slow to vote etc.

There's no rule to linking to games outside of the site is there? Can you link to those games?

[Dust]

This does tend to be my style, although leading the town is not something I normally enjoy doing. If other people stepped up to the plate and started striving towards discussion, I wouldn't butt heads with them because they were doing so. In fact, I'd appreciate the help in working towards easier conversation.

Keep in mind that I made my first decision about Dej's points against Empking before actually reading the games they presented to me for evidence as to why the other was a bad player. After having read the articles, that conclusion, somewhere in the middle, is the choice I came too. Compare before I read the games and after I read the games for an interpretation on how my opinion changed.

My own opinion, right now, is that Dej and Empking have presented enough of their metas against each other, and turning this game into a brawl between the pair of them is neither productive or pro-town, because biases from previous games are overwhelming the actual validity of the meta arguments they offer. The metas they had against each other were perfectly relevant to start, but then they began using them as their own little personal argument, which wasn't even rooted in this game. I wasn't expecting the pair to go off on a page's worth of tirades against each other, hence the 'Grr...' when I realized that I'd led us into a brick wall.

And, on the issue of addressing things to Percy and Acemarksman, the idea was to open up this game to other players within it, and get a fresh idea out. The play of Dej and Empking wasn't exactly conducive to letting other members in to have an opinion, so opening it up to people who hadn't posted yet seemed like a viable idea. 'Pushing' wasn't so much the verb behind that action as 'Prompting'.

[Dust]

The site that Ace is referring to has a policy against letting its members link it out. It's a locally run and operated site.

I would know, O.o'. I run it.

And Ace doesn't understand my scum meta. XP

[dejkha]

Well, then obviously I can't take his word for it. No to mention how I doubt any player would give themselves away so easily.

[zwetschenwasser]

Vote: dust

You start off the game by killing discussion-gleaning phase. Bad cookie!

[Khamisa]

Random Vote: zwetschenwasser

Do you think it's scummy to say that an RVS shouldn't be conducted? What would you prefer as an alternative? Do any of you have interesting meta on other players?

Yes, because a random voting stage IS useful. There need be no alternative. I don't like meta. I can understand if you don't want to random vote, but you shouldn't attempt to bar everyone from random voting.

FoS: Dust

Empking has put everything very laconically so far. I kind of like it.

[dejkha]

Vote: dust

You start off the game by killing discussion-gleaning phase. Bad cookie!

He didn't kill anything. That alone started discussion, as you can see.

[AA23]

Prompting or pushing - - both are too early

You say you need help and nobody is stepping up to the plate - - I'm saying it's too early, and you've attempted to make said plate on your own - - there's a distinct difference. People fall into leadership roles at times, it's never attempted, the way you're suggesting.

Though, you admit you're stepping up to the plate as you say - - which is trying to be the town leader - - hence I find it a bit scummy. As scum, one might try to do what you're doing in an attempt to build your own immunity.
--------------
on the point of Dej - you suggest a poor informed decision on him because you hadn't read into the meta's yet - - both your "buddying" (so to speak) and distancing were based on generic meta, and his signature, niether of which have anything to do with what you're saying inspired your distancing.
--------------
How did you not see a brick wall? Meta discussion brings nothing but. If the meta is negative, you get this situation you "grr" to - - if the meta is positive, you can call them out on buddying or favortism - - yet another attempt to cover bases.

How do I know you could play both sides of the fence? You did so with your emp position, your dej position, you position on discussing meta, and your response to me answering your question on RVS - -

You're trying to manufacture leadership, but fall into becoming a follower - - that's scummy.

You ask a question - I answer it - someone votes me for my answer - you join in and express suspicion toward me

You form an opinion on Emp and follow Dej - - Emp points it out - - you back away

You make a meta conversation - - and now you hypocritically back away from it for the very reasons you should have known better for.

You're a follower stepping up to (as you put it) a leadership plate. That plate is for leaders, and you're seeming like scum.

Vote:Dust

[AA23]

And I agree with Dej - - -

Zwet, conversation was not killed

[Dust]

I think you're either misunderstanding or misrepping a lot of what I was trying to accomplish with my actions.

First and foremost, my goal was discussion-sparking. Read closer to my first sentence: I do not like leading the town. What I do like is being able to discuss things quickly. When I describe my style, what I refer to is my tendencies to spark a lot of discussion, then discuss.

You seem to be paralleling my actions to scummy tendencies. I disagree. I think it's perfectly legit to start discussion independently, which in some situations may look like leading the town, and then fall back to a less leaderly role once all players are engaged and have something to discuss. I myself cannot direct you to any examples of town meta where I have done this, since my other games on this site are not yet finished. However, if you look in Newbie Game 757, you'll see an example of similar play to this, although my role has yet to be confirmed in the game. My entrance is on page 14, for all interested.

As for the argument that I should have known better, how was I supposed to know that we'd have two players who really did absolutely hate each other? Meta discussion can be productive: it gives us clues on differences in play style. Their discussion, while it arose from meta, stopped being useful because it was taken to a heightened extreme that strayed from the original point: I believe Dej is actually advocating for Empking's jusr based on meta, no? That's not the way I wanted things to go at all. Meta, as you say, breeds meta discussion. It shouldn't be bringing about lynch discussion. This lead to the 'Grr...' comment: frustration about how meta discussion seemed to be going in the wrong direction. Besides, I wouldn't call someone out on good or bad meta normally. Look at the start of the Dej/Empking meta session. Did I call them out on that? Nope. Didn't get mad at it until they started really going at it. The same thing would apply to a positive meta situation: not bad when someone gives good meta, and just leaves it at that, but when a pair of players look like they need to get a room because they're getting so buddy-buddy, that's when it would warrant calling out.

I apologize for the text block, but do you see what I'm saying there?

And why is it too early for prompting? I mean, really, what harm does it do the town?

[dejkha]

I'm not really seeing the Dust case here. If there's one thing I've learned from my time playing Mafia, it's that buddying isn't really a scumtell anymore. In fact, I've found that scum tend to not communicate so much with each other in the thread. They comment on each other here and there and maybe throw in a few questions to avoid suspicion, so buddying isn't really a tell, but distancing can be. But even that is only a tell if they're distancing themselves from someone that may be lynched.

[AA23]

so you state that you don't like leading, but had admitted you stepped up to the plate to do so, and in post 70 say you'll step down from trying to be a leader when things are rolling - - I don't think there is misrep there - - can you at least clarify further?
--------------------
You've once again wavered on a position and have played both sides of the fence. Talking meta, will innevitably bring out favortism, or bias of any sort - - you state you have an issue with this - thus, you contradict yoruself and your whole reason for bringing it up!!! -

Then you state that it wasn't meant to be a scum hunting/lynching convo - - if that's the case, and it's meant to be a crapshoot conversation, why be against the RVS? Are you not also contradicting yourself there, too?
----------------------
And you make the statement that you want to start conversation independently, but that's not the case when you seem to hold off on contributing in exchange for presenting conflicting and hypocritical ideals on your part, and ask otehr people to participate - - that's the exact opposit of being independent so yes, pushing and prompting is early and unecessary, especially if you're trying to be independent.
--------------------

You say you don't want to be a leader and don't intend to / / / yet admit you're trying to take the role and will "Fall back to a less leaderly role" as you put it

You don't like RVS for the very reasons you seem to not like meta talk - - why exchange the two and turn your back on it when it goes south?

---------
To clarify - don't worry about stepping down from a "leaderly role" - - you're not there.

Please make a STATEMENT - - I am more than happy to take my vote off of you if you clarify and explain, I assure you that.

To calrify and explain - - do you mind actually making a decision on something? You seem to be hypocritically flip flopping in leadership roles, positions on meta talk etc.

[AA23]

Dej - I'm not calling him out on buddying at all - - - It was his attempt to distance himself at a whim simply upon SUSPICION of buddying up.

I'm primarily picky about him being hypocritical, and a people pleaser.

Emp calls him out on possibly buddying, he proactivly distances

He starts meta talk to avoid pointless RVS - - yet turns his back on the very conversation he starts

He asks a straight forward question, I answer it, and he only finds suspicion in me when someone votes me? Pretty thin.

And his idea of leadership roles and flip flopping on whether or not he has one is very sketchy - - saying he isn't, admitting he is, saying he doesn't intend to, admitting he intends to step down when the time is right - - - all the while, he isn't even up successfully

I find it tres sketchy

[gorckat]

@Gorckat - - If you re-read my response, can you please explain how me answering a question exactly how it was asked is buddying up? I was asked about what my opinion on the matter was - my answer gave an opinion on both sides, and my choice was in the post itself (no vote).

Felt like fence-sitting and non-comment on a theory issue. Easy for scum to do and appear pro-active.

@Everyone - - Why is meta being brought up so soon on Zwet and Emp? It's only fair to let each game be it's own, and they'll dig their own holes all by themselves (besides, as I understand it, Zwet has been trying to spruce up his gameplay, and successfully at that)

I just completed a game with both (as well as Ace). zwet's erratic behavior and Emp's lylo lurking arguably cost the town the game. (My case as scum against Ace was awesome, however )

So their metas have been harmful in the past. Why let them dig a whole for themselves if they're town?

And dej covers this pretty well, actually. (I'm catching up right now), although his fixation might be counter-productive.

No to mention how I doubt any player would give themselves away so easily.

It's called a "tell". Everyone has them. Figuring out your own makes you better. In this case, you should be thanking Ace. I'm willing to give his info some merit,if he can share how many games he's observed these behaviors, and how many games don't match, as well as their order of occurrence.

You're trying to manufacture leadership, but fall into becoming a follower - - that's scummy.

You ask a question - I answer it - someone votes me for my answer - you join in and express suspicion toward me

Post numbers?

I need to go back and re-hash everything again, but my initial feeling is AA23 trumping up stuff looking for a lynch...scummy.