Open 187- Silence of the Yams! Over!

[Ectomancer]

Now Badger, let me show you how to demonstrate inconsistency.

follow with an OMGUS combining a backtracking excuse with an attack based on my not commenting on 8 posts within a day.

Parts - Do you think that taking 24 hours to post is lurking?

These are two different excuses for the same action, though at first glance you may think they are the same. They are not.

Taking 24 hours to post can be a function of not being on the site. While they may not come to the site deliberately in order to avoid posting, they could also simply be inactive.

Not commenting on 8 posts in a day is quite a bit different. What this means is he logged in, saw 8 posts there and then

deliberately makes a decision not to post

. That right there is the definition of lurking, and Badger's 2 posts have me convinced that he came, he saw, he left and didnt post again until I voted for him.

[Parts]

I don't care whether this is consistent over his game history or not. His reasoning followed fine for this game and that's all I'm judging on.

[ElectricBadger]

I was noticing your gaps between posting in other games, actually. 24 hours doesn't seem at all unacceptable to you, which indicates voting me for doing so is fabricating a case.

Undercut... So you weren't intending to actually lurk when you made that post, despite specifically saying so?

[ElectricBadger]

Not commenting on 8 posts in a day is quite a bit different. What this means is he logged in, saw 8 posts there and then

deliberately makes a decision not to post

. That right there is the definition of lurking, and Badger's 2 posts have me convinced that he came, he saw, he left and didnt post again until I voted for him.

You're now attempting to claim that not posting every time I log onto the game is lurking? That's equally hypocritical; you've passed over games repeatedly while posting on others.

And yes, I did look in at one point and decided not to post - I was giving you a chance to push your case on Parts, which you failed to do. Distracting from that would have been counterproductive. Spamming is no more help to town than lurking.

Also, Parts, consistency within a game means little. Fabricating a false case is scummy.

[ElectricBadger]

I don't care whether this is consistent over his game history or not. His reasoning followed fine for this game and that's all I'm judging on.

Also:

Unvote Ecto, Vote Parts

Because I always vote the second person to post on the third page.

...do you see how ridiculous the logic of ignoring contradictions is? If all you care about is that statements are consistent within the game, not that they're true, scum can use almost any moronic reason to kill off townies.

[Ectomancer]

And yes, I did look in at one point and decided not to post - I was giving you a chance to push your case on Parts, which you failed to do. Distracting from that would have been counterproductive. Spamming is no more help to town than lurking.

The question is not whether anyone ever reads a game without posting. The question was, did you vote me for lurking and then begin to lurk yourself? By definition and your own admission, you did just that. Your motivation for doing so isn't in question, simply the fact that you did and have spent a few posts denying it while trying to call the vote on you OMGUS because you said you weren't lurking.

Now, there are actual good arguments you could make, you just aren't making them and I'm not inclined to help you.

Do you see no inconsistency in complaining about only 8 posts in one post, and then saying you didn't want to spam in another? Aren't those opposite concerns?

[XScorpion]

Some games take me longer than others, but my record is placing a serious vote on the 2nd post of the entire game.

How the hell did you manage that? Did the first poster claim "I am scum please vote me out" or something? Please link me to this game.

[Ectomancer]

I'll try to find it, but in his first post, a player voted the only other player he knew in the game and stated that was his reason. I immediately voted him for trying to remove the one player who might know his scumtells. (I guess technically that counts as RVS kicking off the game? Mafialosophy question there haha)

[XScorpion]

Yeah that's kind of a stupid reason. Anyone can go and look through people's games... is ElectricBadger not showing us that right now?

[Ectomancer]

Hey Badger, in your post where you vote Parts you seem to want us to believe you are being sarcastic. Can you give your current take on Parts?

unvote

There really was nothing wrong with Badger not posting, but games have to be started. I'm rather dissatisfied with his method of attack and he contradicts himself in defense. I would say that he is definitely a player of interest today.

[kunkstar7]

Do you see no inconsistency in complaining about only 8 posts in one post, and then saying you didn't want to spam in another? Aren't those opposite concerns?

6

Wait wait wait, when did Badger complain about there only being eight posts? It seemed to me that you were the one complaining.

[Ectomancer]

Yeah that's kind of a stupid reason. Anyone can go and look through people's games... is ElectricBadger not showing us that right now?

This post passed way above my head. Rephrase and make the focus clear? If you mean the reason I made a serious vote in that game is a stupid reason, I would say that questioning the motivations of a player is hardly stupid, and though anyone could re-read older games, it does not in fact recreate the experience of actually interacting with said player, making the player who

has

more likely to pick up on subtle clues in their play.

What is Badger not showing us?

[Ectomancer]

Do you see no inconsistency in complaining about only 8 posts in one post, and then saying you didn't want to spam in another? Aren't those opposite concerns?

6

Wait wait wait, when did Badger complain about there only being eight posts? It seemed to me that you were the one complaining.

The game isn't that long you know...

Hm...so you attempt to distract with the FOS thing - but you're not willing to actually push it, which is essentially the entire reason that FOS' are considered scummy...

follow with an OMGUS combining a backtracking excuse with an attack based on my not commenting on 8 posts within a day.

This really how you want to start out the game, Ecto?

[XScorpion]

OK I will try this again.
Voting someone because they voted for someone they knew is no better than random voting. Obviously questioning motivations isn't stupid, but we're talking RVS here. Motivations are rarely serious. I've made a first post/vote in a game against the only person I knew, but I wasn't scum.
Any scumtells made by a given player in a given game will have been revealed through re-reads. Any scumtells that player would make that were not in said game will not be known to his friend either. I agree that it would be better to be able to interact, but it's not impossible to determine someone's play style with enough re-reading.

ElectricBadger is showing us that anyone can go and look through people's games.


Clear enough for you?

[kunkstar7]

Hm...so you attempt to distract with the FOS thing - but you're not willing to actually push it, which is essentially the entire reason that FOS' are considered scummy...

follow with an OMGUS combining a backtracking excuse with an attack based on my not commenting on 8 posts within a day.

He didn't complain, he was saying that you attacked him for not commenting on eight posts. That isn't complaining, you just seem to be trying to twist his words for your use.

[Ectomancer]

OK I will try this again.
Voting someone because they voted for someone they knew is no better than random voting. Obviously questioning motivations isn't stupid, but we're talking RVS here. Motivations are rarely serious. I've made a first post/vote in a game against the only person I knew, but I wasn't scum.
Any scumtells made by a given player in a given game will have been revealed through re-reads. Any scumtells that player would make that were not in said game will not be known to his friend either. I agree that it would be better to be able to interact, but it's not impossible to determine someone's play style with enough re-reading.

ElectricBadger is showing us that anyone can go and look through people's games.


Clear enough for you?

Here is your link.

viewtopic.php?t=10297&start=0

You're pretty funny. You do realize that was a different game, and the post was a way to start that game? That's what this is about, starting games. Can you tell me why you are arguing about a vote in another game? Can you tell me what ElectricBadger looking at other players games has to do with an argument concerning a game that was played and over with? Can you tell me what

either

of those has to do with this game?
The point I made was that you don't need an RVS and provided an example as backing material.
Can you tell me exactly what you are doing except trying to be contrary? Why don't you choose an argument from

this

game hey?

[Ectomancer]

Hm...so you attempt to distract with the FOS thing - but you're not willing to actually push it, which is essentially the entire reason that FOS' are considered scummy...

follow with an OMGUS combining a backtracking excuse with an attack based on my not commenting on 8 posts within a day.

He didn't complain, he was saying that you attacked him for not commenting on eight posts. That isn't complaining, you just seem to be trying to twist his words for your use.

Read the game.
He did in fact complain that there were only 8 posts and I just quoted it. Nowhere in Ectomancer's posts is there any mention of this 8 post number until after he made it, but seeing as I had to quote Badger for you to see this post in the first place, I suppose you'll need me to demonstrate that I didn't say it. Only I cant quote what wasn't said, so you'll have to read all my posts.
Read the game.
I posted the 8 post quote and the 24 hour quote to demonstrate a contradiction and to give a basis for my suspicion that he visited the thread and decided to lurk. He then admitted that he visited the game, didnt see anything to post about and left. That is the definition of lurking, which is what I voted him over. (well actually I voted him for being a hypocrite)
Going back and attacking me for a post that both demonstrated basis for my reasoning and then also resulted in the other player admitting that they did exactly what I accused them of is definitely scummy as hell.

vote Kunkstar7

[XScorpion]

Except that your example had a RVS despite your post.
The point I'm trying to make here is that RVS votes are intended to be catalysts for discussion, not pieces of evidence that indicate scum.

I love the RVS.

Very crafty, trying to post but still heavily lurking. How about actually talking to people or doing something constructive?

[CSL]

Because I was offline...

I shall be V/LA starting around 11:30pm EST, lasting until the 28th. Access to the internet on Christmas Day, and the day after will be limited.

Re-reading the short portions that I missed.

[Ectomancer]

Yeah I commented on that

If there is evidence, it's not an rvs vote
But if you mean the random vote isn't meant to be scum evidence in itself, you're right. It isn't, but the extra little comments people toss in? Those are the seedlings of discussion and as long as there is at least a thread of logic to follow, you go with it until the game matures.

Im going to try to take a break until some of the others show up. I'm beginning to do the opposite of lurking, which can be nearly as bad.

[CSL]

Unvote

Interesting. Badger is contradicting himself, and lurking.

Vote: Badger

You should tell us what you're attempting to hide from us.

[don_johnson]

The "Next Most Recent" Vote Count:

Xscorpion- kunkstar7 (1)
Parts- Cat, ElectricBadger (2)
Cat-
kunkstar7- Xscorpion, ectomancer (2)
ectomancer-
ElectricBadger- CSL (1)
CSL-

Not Voting- Parts

Prodding Cat.

[ElectricBadger]

There really was nothing wrong with Badger not posting

The question is not whether anyone ever reads a game without posting. The question was, did you vote me for lurking and then begin to lurk yourself?

He then admitted that he visited the game, didnt see anything to post about and left. That is the definition of lurking, which is what I voted him over.

Perhaps you should provide your definition of lurking, because you're contradicting yourself a lot, and you seem to be upset that I would read the game without posting...which a profile check on you shows you do yourself often, posting in one game while not posting in others within several hours or days. It's also a ridiculous notion, as posting every time I read the thread would lead to my putting up 50+ new posts on a slow work day.

Do you see no inconsistency in complaining about only 8 posts in one post, and then saying you didn't want to spam in another? Aren't those opposite concerns?

This is a ridiculous misinterpretation. You voted me for not posting; I explained that finding nothing needing my response over the course of 8 posts wasn't lurking. I'd love more conversation - it probably would have given me something to respond to - but putting up posts of rambling spam isn't going to help the game, and is in fact likely to stifle investigation and let lurkers pass unnoticed.

Quality vote on kunkstar for seeking clarification of your argument, btw, bullying and refusing to explain is very pro-town.

Hey Badger, in your post where you vote Parts you seem to want us to believe you are being sarcastic. Can you give your current take on Parts?

My last sentence was sarcastic, I would call my vote on Parts more tongue in cheek.

I don't care whether this is consistent over his game history or not. His reasoning followed fine for this game and that's all I'm judging on.

Parts doesn't care about careful consideration of truth or logic, just a narrow window of observation. He's either a very bad scumbuddy (your comment about FOS followed by a lack of pressure looks like coaching) or he's very bad town. I wouldn't mind seeing him swing, but you'd be better.

Unvote Parts, Vote Ecto

Interesting. Badger is contradicting himself, and lurking.

You should tell us what you're attempting to hide from us.

Nearly a quote from Ecto's accusations and post 61...I shall interpret this as '

too lazy to read the game and investigate, but someone mentioned lurking so must post something

'. The hypocrisy is even more astounding than Ecto.

CSL, how do you define lurking and in what way does my behavior match that and yours not? Since you're voting me for contradicting myself and lurking, it would be ironic if you were doing either, let alone both.

And

tell what I'm attempting to hide

? What does that even mean?

[Ectomancer]

Wow, that post is full of fail.

There is no inconsistency in position in those quotes. You see, when you say there is a contradiction, its kind of imperative that you point it out. There is no contradiction to calling you out for lurking when you admitted yourself that you came, you read, you left. There is also no contradiction to saying there was nothing

wrong

with your lurking either. You did it. I proved you did. I validated the vote I made on you. The logical progression existed and when we are, you know, only 8 posts into the game, that is all that matters. The game underfoot, I unvoted. There is no way I would take a simple "case" like that to lynch.

Your subsequent behavior, on the other hand, is a far different story. You are lashing out with misreps on cases and players with little logic except it serves to either defend yourself or attack those who don't appear to be on your side.

Once again, complaining on one hand that there was only 8 posts and nothing to comment on, and on the other saying you didn't want to spam up the thread is utterly contradictory. "Hey, why didn't you spit?" "I didn't want to flood the yard"
Also, where is this investigation that you didn't want to hinder at that point? Your excuse doesn't apply to the game.

Quality misrep on the Kunkstar vote. Now we see you don't bother to argue facts. You seem in fact to primarily rely on emotional projection. There was no "clarification" requested by Kunkstar. He directly attacked me, characterizing my quotes of you as "twisting your words to suit my purpose". Can you explain how you twist words by directly quoting?
No, Kunkstar decided to avoid the facts of the matter in order to make a slanderous comment. The facts are there. I called you for lurking, I posted the quotes you made denying it to show a contradiction in your excuses for not posting, and then you admitted that you did exactly what I said you did. He had to go out of his way to find something to complain about, so while we are talking about scumbuddies, Kunkstar looks very much like yours.

Pretty funny that because Parts didn't agree with you, suddenly he's narrow-minded and a scumbuddy or just a bad player? I find Parts to be careful and a bit non-committal while still making his position known. Cautious scum may play the same, but

so would cautious town

.

Are you concerned you will have problems with Parts later in game and so need to slander him now? This is probably one of the most suspicious things you have done this game, as Parts reads to me as neutral as he can be.

[ElectricBadger]

Second request - please give your definition of lurking.

I believe, from your above statement, that you define lurking as reading the game but not posting irregardless of how often one posted previously. Which is a unique interpretation, to say the least. I would go with a more general definition:

A person who fails to make conversation or say anything of interest. Commonly used as a derogatory term for someone quiet or untalkative.

...which I certainly did not do.

I think your claim is that we were both lurking, but that doing so isn't a scum tell...but you voted me for it and made a huge issue of the fact, rather than clarifying your position - which you would have known is a much different definition than anyone else's, and not at all hypocritical in general view.

So no...you're just backtracking. Good try, though.

Spamming refers to content as well as quantity. There was nothing productive for me to add to the conversation, so I didn't add anything unproductive. If you expect me to post every time I turn on my computer you're going to be sorely disappointed. I explained that I was observing whether you would actually push your case on Parts, as it strikes me as very odd to coach a player on their scum tells. I was hardly going to say what I was waiting to see; that's moronic. I was also waiting for a response to our condemnation of your intention to lurk. You finally dismissed the tell just a couple hours before I posted, and by that point I inferred you were going to ignore the charge of lurking or backtrack through actions.

To build on your silly metaphor, it's more like "Hey, why didn't you spit?" "It's rude and annoying."

As for Parts - do you find it good play to ignore someone who is using hypocrisy to push a lynch? And no, he's not scum because he disagreed with me. He's scummy because you were coaching him, and he's bad because he saw the contradiction but chose to ignore it - not a good move for scum or town, just lousy play. Interesting you again dismiss his play and jump to his defense, though.

Waiting to hear from other players...also, don't expect much if any posting from me until after Christmas.