To summarise my feelings so far:
I'm disappointed in Boxman. I felt his "return" post was minimalistic, almost designed to be so. The way he ended it:
Boxman wrote:For now, I believe these were the two most major issues?
I don't like this at all. Feels like he
knows
he's trying to skate by with minimal contributions, and get our approval for his level of participation. I don't like lurker lynches day 1, but I'm not letting him off the hook unless he turns things around dramatically.
I'm
very
uncomfortable with Netopalis. Whilst his position on random wagons is consistent with other games, he's coming across as far too concerned about the Boxman wagon. Bits like:
Netopalis wrote:Well, I was watching Boxman's sig, and it didn't include this game until he posted on here, which lends credibility to the "Forgot about the game" thing.
show that he was paying way more attention to Boxman than I'd expect. Over-reacting and over-defensive, and tunnelling in on frankly irrelevant issues. I agree with elvis in that most of his behaviour is only demonstrably scummy, as opposed to anomalous, if Boxman is scum too, but I have to say I'm uneasy about him regardless.
mathcam wrote:Neto's eventual vote on Boxman will prove interesting if Boxman turns up scum.
That it will. Flipping from arguing against the wagon to being on it on the basis of just a little more lurking feels contrived.
A lot of what's been happening recently is people arguing with Neto, and generally I don't have much to add to it: where I disagree, it's on generalised theory of play basis, rather than anything I find suspicious, and I don't think we need much more deconstruction of disclosure policy etc. But right now, we need to resolve the Boxman situation, one way or the other.
