Really, the fact that Burning Love asked Epitaph "who do you think is the most likely scum at this point?" bothers me a lot. Epitaph's last post (besides the one immediately preceding this post in which Epitaph responded) was all about how no one is really standing out to him as very scummy or very townie. I don't like these psychiatric questions from Burning Love ("how does that make you feeeeel?")
Also, BL refers to Epitaph in his question to ZazieR:
Burning Love wrote:@ZazieR: What do you think about Epitaph's defending of Ropis? Would you rather have him defend Ropis, or Ropis defend himself? Why?
This question seems almost juvenile. To me, it seems like he's trying to form some sort of scum-buddy connection that is (IMO) very absent from the actual posts. I don't even think that Epitaph "defended" Ropis in the first place. He basically said "Too early to tell either way." How is that a defense? Yes, he unvoted him, but he in no way said that Ropis's name was "cleared" in his book - he just wanted to hinder a possible bandwagon for the (sound) reasoning that there was a lack of evidence. It might just be that I'm letting my thoughts run away with me, but I just can't get over Burning Love's last post. Guess I'll need him to respond before I can say anymore.
Deuxieme Octopus wrote:Really, the fact that Burning Love asked Epitaph "who do you think is the most likely scum at this point?" bothers me a lot. Epitaph's last post (besides the one immediately preceding this post in which Epitaph responded) was all about how no one is really standing out to him as very scummy or very townie. I don't like these psychiatric questions from Burning Love ("how does that make you feeeeel?")
Also, BL refers to Epitaph in his question to ZazieR:
Burning Love wrote:@ZazieR: What do you think about Epitaph's defending of Ropis? Would you rather have him defend Ropis, or Ropis defend himself? Why?
This question seems almost juvenile. To me, it seems like he's trying to form some sort of scum-buddy connection that is (IMO) very absent from the actual posts. I don't even think that Epitaph "defended" Ropis in the first place. He basically said "Too early to tell either way." How is that a defense? Yes, he unvoted him, but he in no way said that Ropis's name was "cleared" in his book - he just wanted to hinder a possible bandwagon for the (sound) reasoning that there was a lack of evidence. It might just be that I'm letting my thoughts run away with me, but I just can't get over Burning Love's last post. Guess I'll need him to respond before I can say anymore.
These questions may be irritating, but they are a good way to get everyone's opinions and show more about them. But what makes them even better is that it shows if someone clearly contradicts himself or blatently defends someone else. So they have some use, I don't see how you're so vehemently opposed to them.
As I said, Epitaph, it's not the nature of the questions alone that bothers me, it's the way they're presented. He doesn't make any sort of analytical claims himself, he expects all of us to do it for him. It's the least incriminating way to get the information you want, and I think the responses and discussions that normally follow this type of questioning usually end up being borderline semantics. If Burning Love apparently doesn't feel ready to say something of analytical value as of yet, so be it. But don't assign to everyone else a task you couldn't accomplish yourself. None of the questions or concerns relate back to him, and I just see it as a clever way to spark "discussion" without being directly responsible.
Deuxieme Octopus wrote:As I said, Epitaph, it's not the nature of the questions alone that bothers me, it's the way they're presented. He doesn't make any sort of analytical claims himself, he expects all of us to do it for him. It's the least incriminating way to get the information you want, and I think the responses and discussions that normally follow this type of questioning usually end up being borderline semantics. If Burning Love apparently doesn't feel ready to say something of analytical value as of yet, so be it. But don't assign to everyone else a task you couldn't accomplish yourself. None of the questions or concerns relate back to him, and I just see it as a clever way to spark "discussion" without being directly responsible.
Meh, I see your point but it doesn't bother me quite as much as it does you.
But this made me read over Burning Love's post again and you're right about the fact that he offered no analysis of his own. Other than that Ropis's post looked scummy and that's been said before. Alright so question to Burning Love: what do you think of Deuxieme Octopus's assessment of your questions?
Epitaph wrote:Also, lobstermania has not given a clear opinion on the situation and this bothers me.
fos: lobstermania
I'm still confused why everyone voted for Porkens. ZazieR's vote I can understand, being an omgus. But Broncofaninmd, and especially Ropis....I'm not sure why they all chose Porkens. Both votes, especially being back to back (to back) seem sketchy. I'd like to hear something from Broncofaninmd.
Also. Why is Duexieme Octopus guilty for not band-wagoning a band-wagoner?
I haven't given a clear opinion yet because nothing is clear yet.
Lobstermania wrote:I'm still confused why everyone voted for Porkens. ZazieR's vote I can understand, being an omgus. But Broncofaninmd, and especially Ropis....I'm not sure why they all chose Porkens. Both votes, especially being back to back (to back) seem sketchy.
You say you're confused by the votes of Bronco and Ropis... Ropis has already admitted to voting for Porkens just to get on an opposing bandwagon, and Bronco's vote was an OMGUS (Porkens voted for Bronco a few posts before the end of page 1) Hopefully this clears that up.
Unless you are saying you think there is something below the surface going on... (cue: eerie ghost noises)
Ropis wrote:I didn't start the bandwagon, and I didn't drop the hammer - I figured 3rd vote was a safe place to be.
@afatchic: What do you think of that statement?
its def. scummy since he acknowledged that he was making the third vote, and thought about it to make sure it wouldn't be bad, then voted.
anyways.... not really loving Burning Love's first post. not reallly for the same reasons as....(forgot who it was that didn't like them).... but in my view, it looks like he is making a post, without actually giving much of his own thoughts. this is his first post of the game, and yet he really doesn't address many of the current issues and his own thoughts on them, but instead asks everyone else their opinions. i like when people do this, but when its followed by some of their own thoughts or something.
Anyway...
FOS Burning love
, i would vote you, but im almost positive that we already caught our first scum, so no need to change votes.
afatchic wrote:Anyway... FOS Burning love, i would vote you, but im almost positive that we already caught our first scum, so no need to change votes
How can you be so positive? Ropis has made one scummy move so far, and that is hopping on a bandwagon, then rationalizing it as being "safe." Sure this is pretty scummy, but is it really enough for you to make such a bold declaration? Obviously I find it scummy enough to leave my vote on him, but if you convince someone else to put a vote on him, i will unvote. There is no reason to put someone at L-1 on page 3. Basically, I am in no way ready to decide on a lynch-victim, and I'm surprised that you are so quickly.
No its not the vote that has be convinced, but his explanation for the vote. the vote in itself is scummy, but not that bad in a newbie game. but when he said he did it hoping to push a quick lynch on her so he wouldn't be lynched is extremely scummy. most all of his defense thus far sound like scum to me.
afatchic wrote:No its not the vote that has be convinced, but his explanation for the vote. the vote in itself is scummy, but not that bad in a newbie game. but when he said he did it hoping to push a quick lynch on her so he wouldn't be lynched is extremely scummy. most all of his defense thus far sound like scum to me.
afatchic wrote:No its not the vote that has be convinced, but his explanation for the vote. the vote in itself is scummy, but not that bad in a newbie game. but when he said he did it hoping to push a quick lynch on her so he wouldn't be lynched is extremely scummy. most all of his defense thus far sound like scum to me.
Quick conclusions like this lead to town losses.
when he flips scum, im going to re-quote this post for you, then vote you.
Lobstermania wrote:I'm still confused why everyone voted for Porkens. ZazieR's vote I can understand, being an omgus. But Broncofaninmd, and especially Ropis....I'm not sure why they all chose Porkens. Both votes, especially being back to back (to back) seem sketchy.
You say you're confused by the votes of Bronco and Ropis... Ropis has already admitted to voting for Porkens just to get on an opposing bandwagon, and Bronco's vote was an OMGUS (Porkens voted for Bronco a few posts before the end of page 1) Hopefully this clears that up.
Unless you are saying you think there is something below the surface going on... (cue: eerie ghost noises)
Got it. It seems especially scummy that Ropis placed a premeditated, non-omgus vote (ie, bandwagon) on page one.
FoS.
I will definitely consider placing a vote on Ropis now. Is this really the decision-making we want going on in our town?
afatchic wrote:No its not the vote that has be convinced, but his explanation for the vote. the vote in itself is scummy, but not that bad in a newbie game. but when he said he did it hoping to push a quick lynch on her so he wouldn't be lynched is extremely scummy. most all of his defense thus far sound like scum to me.
Quick conclusions like this lead to town losses.
when he flips scum, im going to re-quote this post for you, then vote you.
I like this bluff-calling, accusational play between Epitaph and afatchic. It's like the dialogue in an old Western.
Lobstermania wrote:
FoS.
I will definitely consider placing a vote on Ropis now. Is this really the decision-making we want going on in our town?
I agree with your sentiment, but I don't think you should put a vote on him just yet. Give him a chance to redeem himself, being that there are still so many players we really know nothing about. Sure, Ropis's behavior would warrant a vote under different circumstances, but not when it puts him at L-1, unless you are certain that's who you want to be the Day 1 Lynch. My vote is on him, so obviously, I think he's the most lynch-worthy as of right now. But that doesn't mean I support actually carrying through with a Lynch now. As I said, if he gets another vote without any significant new breakthroughs, I'll probably unvote to protect from an L-1 situation that I don't think we are ready to be in.
Lobstermania wrote:I'm still confused why everyone voted for Porkens. ZazieR's vote I can understand, being an omgus. But Broncofaninmd, and especially Ropis....I'm not sure why they all chose Porkens. Both votes, especially being back to back (to back) seem sketchy.
You say you're confused by the votes of Bronco and Ropis... Ropis has already admitted to voting for Porkens just to get on an opposing bandwagon, and Bronco's vote was an OMGUS (Porkens voted for Bronco a few posts before the end of page 1) Hopefully this clears that up.
Unless you are saying you think there is something below the surface going on... (cue: eerie ghost noises)
Got it. It seems especially scummy that Ropis placed a premeditated, non-omgus vote (ie, bandwagon) on page one.
FoS.
I will definitely consider placing a vote on Ropis now. Is this really the decision-making we want going on in our town?
This post really just makes it seem like you're trying to appease people. And your lack of an opinion up until this point, and now this manufactured one really alarms me.
Well Ropis hasn't posted since about halfway through the 2nd page (granted it's been hardly a day) so I think it's basically a moot point to say much more about him until he gets a chance to respond. I'm also really waiting for Burning Love because I think his last (and only) post really needed some justification.
afatchic wrote:
when he flips scum, im going to re-quote this post for you, then vote you.
Are you really that certain that he is scum?
not possitive, but right now he sure seems like it. and nothing he has done has implied anything different.
Are you just focusing entirely on Ropis's play or are you taking other players into account? You seem like you're going exclusively for Ropis at this point based on little evidence. I don't like it.
t seem like you're trying to appease people. And your lack of an opinion up until this point, and now this manufactured one really alarms me.
fos: lobstermania
"Alarms"? It was at your instigation (post 44) that I said something. And now you say my posts are "manufactured" and it is scummy. I'm trying not to beat a dead horse about Ropis. A lot has been posted to which he hasn't responded. What more do you want me to infer? What is your rush?
I have to side with Lobster on this one. The Ropis situation is basically a dead end until either he responds directly or we move along and allow the other half of the people to become involved, thus prompting more responses from Ropis that we can use in conjunction with his early play.
