BM, you've clearly never replaced into a game before.
Battle Mage wrote:why would there be something you had to respond to?
were you expecting a heap of criticism to be on you before you arrived?
of course not.
I'm amused that you think the only possible thing I could have to respond to is criticism; it tells a lot about you.
The first time I replaced into a game, a response from my predecesor (it was something along the lines of confirming a night action and giving opinions on a short list of players) was the only thing holding the game up. Other times, I've replaced into games where everyone's opinion on a certain player was being collected, and knowing that let me focus on something during my catch-up read. So in every game I replace into, I make a hello post letting people know that I'm in the process of catching up and that they should let me know if there's something I need to respond to. I find it eases the transition, and more often than not there is something that a replacement needs to respond to.
Think about this: have you ever been asked a question in one of your games? I think it's safe to assume you have. What happens if you have to be replaced without answering the question? In some cases, it's trivial, so nothing needs to happen. Otherwise, people ask your replacement. RR is being replaced in this game. Do you really think his replacement won't have to deal with a lot of questions based on RR's claims and actions?
Battle Mage wrote:
The natural protown thing to do, would be to come into the game and say who you think is suspicious. Why would someone protown want to waste time defending themselves from people who are probably scum themselves?
I couldn't say who I thought was suspicious. Hadn't read the game for several weeks and didn't remember anything about it except the long, pointless argument that made me stop reading. As I've pointed out, I made this post before I reread, so I didn't have anything to base a suspicion on yet. The natural protown thing to do is avoid saying you suspect somebody until you've actually read the game.
As for the second sentence, I've pointed out that I wasn't defending myself. The assumption that any given player in the game is "probably scum themselves," again, says a lot about you.
Battle Mage wrote:
Much better would be to look for yourself and make judgements.
The wagon thing revealed that you were looking for an escape from your starting wagon. The fact that you are still there doesnt absolve you-it just means that you havent risked leaving it yet, or you are still hoping for someone to hammer Kison.
Nah, it just means asking for an argument indicated a willingness to listen to reason. You should try it sometime. Stating that I wouldn't change my mind no matter what evidence is presented would have been kinda insane.
It's also interesting that you think there's some kind of risk in taking my vote off of Kison; honestly, what makes you think I'd need this elaborate ruse, particularly so soon after I replaced in, to change my vote? You took your vote off of him not long ago without a problem.
BM is clearly making some typically bad newbie arguments. He certainly has an ironic amount of overdefensiveness (saying I looked "like someone trying to latch onto someone with alot of suspicion, in order to lynch someone protown" when I asked one of the two people voting him what their case was; since when was two votes a lot of suspicion and since when was asking for the reason for someone's vote latching onto their target?). I don't know that he's more likely to be newbie scum than newbie town, though; I've seen overdefensive town newbies before (heck, I've been an overdefensive town newbie before). Is there a case against him besides "he makes bad arguments," or are the people voting him just reacting to that?
