I'm going to try to consolidate the rest of my comments into more readable chunks.
In post 106, Mehdi2277 wrote:I'm concerned since A. they're not on someone I think is scummy and B. I completely disagree with the reasoning. On the blatant wagoning it's more of the fact he unvoted someone he was trying to pressure. The other thing is the fact Jal is leading the wagon so I just think of her as a bit better then who followed her on to it.
This is a common fallacy. It doesn't make Jal less scummy, in the least.
In post 107, Jal wrote:I'm going to clarify by what I meant by negative reactions. I more-so meant how divided the reactions are. I didn't expect it to start some sort of big conversation on it, and I'm very much intrigued there is.
This is scum code for: "Yay! We're getting bogged down in details! hehehe"
In post 107, Jal wrote: In post 104, Mehdi2277 wrote:You're pushing something as a scum tell without explaining how it occurs more commonly from scum.
I'm pushing someone for doing shit all, and yeah, some scum love to sit back and do shit all. You have to pressure people to learn what they are and him suddenly coming in and posting content (and only related to himself still) isn't helping to achieve town status either. You're trying to argue that sometimes some people like to do some things regardless of alignment. That isn't really an argument against my push.
Jal does one of my favorite scum tells here. Not gonna say what it is, obv, but LOL this is 2ez
In post 107, Jal wrote: In post 104, Mehdi2277 wrote:Want to contradict more? Since my post on that came right after you said scum love to defend people a lot (and I'm the main defender so who else would that refer to).
Main Defender = scum, how?
Really curious as to
where I said that
.
Like I said before, the "you can't prove I said that!" is very scummy, mostly because it's written like "look! hey, all you other people! pay attention! Mehdi is misrepping me by saying I said something I didn't actually explicitly say! scummy of her to do so, amirite?!!"
That's one of [WS]-type scum's main defenses (a certain category of scumhunting I have, don't worry about it for now) and she's showing it in spades here. There are only about 5 players on site who are this easy to spot doing it, but Jal is one of those. And it's fucking hilarious when they don't even realize they're doing it. Hopefully Jal will learn not to do it, this time... (she didn't all the other times I've lynched her as scum... 100% success record on that, btw).
Unrelatedly:
In post 110, StrangerCoug wrote: In post 96, Xisiqomelir wrote:@StrangerCoug
: I read all of Dirty Dealing, so I sort of see where you're coming from. Do you think your perceptions of that game are more or less instructive from modding it rather than playing it? I'm having trouble phrasing this but I mean could you pick up on things more subtle than salamence faking a post-restriction?
Not really. If I pay much attention to anything other than the players' votes or the players talking to me, I make much of the same kinds of mental notes as a player (e.g. so and so's in trouble, so and so's really a driving force in this game). I find that modding
INHIBITS
picking up on tells. Players do not give the mod the same expectation to have an eye for detail as they do other players—you are really expected to keep an accurate vote count, post it regularly, make sure you process role actions right, and that's it. It's a bit like getting away with cheating from a test in theory—in practice, you're not doing the work and you don't learn how to come up with the answer yourself.
I agree with this. I often neglect to read along with the games I'm modding, opting only to stay on top of the vote counts. Since I already know the answers, I don't really have to look for them, so it's not the same feeling. I often don't even remember a lot of the main events in games I've modded.
I think I'll begin to change that in the future. I'll take more of an active role in observing the game, as opposed to just running it solely.
Anyway, back to Jal-scum.
In post 111, Jal wrote: In post 105, Baby Spice wrote:Jal, as the post itself should indicate, by going back through the completed mini game queue.
If the wagon is on scum, then history shows about 50% of the time it has scum on it.
Just the first wagon mind you. I never checked the others that occurred day 1.
I'd like to see these stats compiled. You keep throwing around different sort of stats. Is there a post on this or what? You haven't answered the rest of my questions regarding this also.
"There's no proof that I'm scum! You can't prove the stats exist! They don't exist!" ...
This reminds me of a politician who ignores things they don't want to be true. lmao
In post 111, Jal wrote: In post 105, Baby Spice wrote:My favorite way that people try to put down reasons they don't like. Skip quoting the reason and ask what it is.
That's great, I see that. How is it mispresenting Lurker? How is saying...
In post 66, Jal wrote:I'm glad you read four posts after your last one and decided you didn't need to play the game anymore.
"bull shit misrepresentation" and please don't tell me you took the "read four posts" thing as being literal other than the meaning being he has deliberately chosen not to engage in meaningful conversation. How does this scream scum?
WE MUST GO DEEPER
Nitpicking up there with the best of them, Jal fails to realize that she's actually only
digging her own grave
deeper.
I'll also add that, by this point, I've found out that if Jal is scum, that means Robert and Mehdi are not scum. And possibly Xisolemqr as well. So in case I die, and Jal is flipped scum by that point, don't lynch Robert and Mehdi. I'm less sure about Xis, so keep an eye on him.
Post 119 by Lord Mhork feels exactly like something a Jal scumbuddy would write.
He goes on the scum list too.
