WW33 - Walking Dead [GAME THREAD]

[BRickAstley]

Catwalk said he wanted Mattimeo out of the bush in this game... not that he wanted him out of this game.

Damn and I always scored so well on the Reading Comprehension of my yearly tests...

That makes Catwalk seem less like scummy Catwalk and more like usual crazy Catwalk then.

[zakalwe]

I think it also undermines some of your case against Mattimeo, since you were saying he was unreasonable for attacking Goreripper, while giving Catwalk a free pass.

I agree that the laziness/lurking distinction may be a weak point in Mattimeo's case against Goreripper. He could still be right for the wrong reasons, though. And I don't see the malice that you are attributing to Mattimeo. (I will agree that it's a bit unusual to see Mattimeo make an actual case on day 1, but I wouldn't classify it as a lynchworthy offense. )

[BRickAstley]

No, I wasn't saying anything about Mattimeo giving Catwalk a free pass, but actually "you ALSO condemned Catwalk for his post that was pretty bad". Looking back at my post, I think I might have worded that one sentence a little confusingly, because I was addressing both Catwalk and Mattimeo in the same sentence. Attacking Goreripper itself isn't unreasonable, as much as how he did it anyway.

Also, looking back at Mattimeo's post, I suppose that's where I got my false idea about Catwalk's post:

Interesting to note, though, that Catwalk's vote wasn't for 'lurking this game' but 'I want Mattimeo out of the game because he has a tendency to lurk'. Fuck that.

So it looks like Mattimeo has the reading comprehension error and I'm just a bad parrot. While that could be a deliberate action to try and twist Catwalk's words, I don't think it's blatant enough to add that on to why I am voting Mattimeo really. The Goreripper response is enough for me to think that Mattimeo holds guilt at the moment.

The malice isn't written on the outside, it's something I'm reading in to how he built up his case. Maybe it's partially because for ME, I read Goreripper's post in a completely different way, and Mattimeo's opposite treatment of it combined with how he seemed to pick and choose very short snippets of Goreripper's post is just tipping my scumdar off in a way it wouldn't tip others. It still seems more pressable than anything else so far to me though.

[Hashoosh]

Hashoosh, what devil was Brick speaking of? Richard Nixon?

Me, of course.

Hasoosh, do you have any reactions to the thread so far?

Too many Euro/Asia/Aus time zones, lots of thread spam.

As for writing style, that first in the thread last night was not the poster child of posting-sobriety, and I'll leave it at that.

I'm changing my vote from Brick (what's the vote change protocol for days?) to Ryan, who hasn`t been posting much.

[BRickAstley]

Hashoosh, you only have to post your new vote, nothing else is needed to nullify an old vote.

What do you think about some of the other conversations going on in the game so far?

[Catwalk]

Mattimeo lurked lots and lots last game. I love him as a fellow human being, but it was detrimental to the town and I think it played a small role in zakalwe flaking at the last minute and going with a Catwalk / Mattimeo pair rather than a novice / Meiz pair. Saying upfront that I expect him to contribute more is hardly crazy or bad play. He's lurked several games, and most games he hasn't been called out on it. Already he seems to be contributing more in this one, so I don't see what's crazy or lazy about putting a vote on him along with a friendly kick. You people need to get past the idea that everything I say is weedy

Goreripper was commenting on me adding "fluff" to my post by expressing my future headache at trying to figure out power roles and scum possibilities later on. I do agree that fluff should be avoided, but calling me out for making a tiny comment early in the game after I see the full setup for the first time is quite ridiculous.

I still like my vote on Goreripper, on grounds of distancing himself from his vote while attacking me for voting the same person for the same reason but with a bit more conviction. novice, are you not keen on people voting Goreripper or are you just curious about the votes?

[Goreripper]

Well lazy posts do get you lynched it looks like. Hashoosh it is sort of random but people do having feelings and intuitions and crusades so when I am swinging from the skylights with the ironic survivor dangling down it will give some information to go on.

My fans.

OK, I can understand

Mattimeo check in please.

to

Mattimeo do not worry man you show up you are fine.

But I do not see anything here demonstrating

my passionate defense of lazy people.

In fact, just the opposite, you voted someone who hadn't shown up yet.

And then, rather than continuing the trend and voting for the other person who hadn't shown up, you vote for the person who joined you on the "person who hasn't posted" wagon?
You're not making a lot of sense here.

Also, while I appreciate that it's most likely a joke, could we please not do this:

Azarius glad to be back. Maybe. Unless the Game Manager has me on ignore.

Just tends to foster ill will all 'round.

...and it appears I fail at reading comprehension. Completely missed the "the bush" in Catwalk's post, until GoreRipper claimed the line was full of hedging and got me to re-look at it in detail, since I hadn't really attributed 'hedging' to it when I initially read it.
While voting for the lurker really is lazy voting, it is simply lazy, rather than malicious (as I was incorrectly reading Catwalk's motives). So, apologies for misrepresenting your views, Catwalk.

I really can't make much sense of GoreRipper here. He wasn't voting me for lurking, else he would have moved it to Hashoosh, who hadn't shown up at that point. And he shifts the vote to Catwalk, who joined him in voting for a lurker, because Catwalk felt the need to explain why lurking is bad? I don't get it :/

Do you need more explanation? Laziness and lurking are not the same thing and the irony is that I have not been passionate about any thing. Any way I poked you for lurking although I kind of get that is your thing. I could have moved on to Hashoosh but a bad smell is better to follow than no smell at all. Ergo Catwalk.

I think you're grasping for straws Goreripper, voting someone without stating a reason is generally frowned upon and followed with a "Why did you vote for him?". I also don't see a big deal about making a tiny comment about the updated setup info, I couldn't access the wiki page earlier. Voting him with a "check in please" is more scummy as it lets you look active while making no commitment whatsoever to your vote.

Catwalk that is just the thing you had a no commitment whatsoever vote on Mattimeo. And now a nice and easy to excuse vote on me. You have been very follow prone and keep making light uncommitted votes. May be I am biased because the last one of these games I watched closely you were a serial killer but you just sound a lot like you did then.

Re:Goreripper:

How was I lazy, Commodore? Or are you saying his actions were lazy?
Either way, I disagree. I was reading scum on him because he seemed to be putting too much effort into bringing a tell to light, not too little. And, I don't get it for me either - I saw a tell and elaborated as to why I thought it was one, which is lazy how?

and a little bit of this:

OK, I can understand
(Today 03:19)Goreripper Wrote:
Mattimeo check in please.
to
(Today 16:13)Goreripper Wrote:
Mattimeo do not worry man you show up you are fine.
But I do not see anything here demonstrating
(Today 16:13)Goreripper Wrote:
my passionate defense of lazy people.
In fact, just the opposite, you voted someone who hadn't shown up yet.

And then, rather than continuing the trend and voting for the other person who hadn't shown up, you vote for the person who joined you on the "person who hasn't posted" wagon?
You're not making a lot of sense here.

Plus something Zak noted earlier which I couldn't find.

In general, his play hasn't made much sense and has felt very off to me.

Do you need more explanation than above or are you just relieved to follow the weak Mattimeo wagon? I do not like Catwalks intensely noncommittal tone. My lazy comment was explained above.

Zakalwe is making narcissistic notes above. He said I was obvscum in the game where I was not scum and he thought I was an angel in the game where I was a wolf so he is in a tizzy. He has made no commitments but has hinted he will be happy to be the hammer vote if you want a nice easy mislynch.

My vote.

Because Catwalk is a

[Rowain]

Also, looking back at Mattimeo's post, I suppose that's where I got my false idea about Catwalk's post:

Interesting to note, though, that Catwalk's vote wasn't for 'lurking this game' but 'I want Mattimeo out of the game because he has a tendency to lurk'. Fuck that.

So it looks like Mattimeo has the reading comprehension error and I'm just a bad parrot.

You do know that Mattimeo himself realised this error (and mentioned it)?

I'm changing my vote (...) to Ryan, who hasn`t been posting much.

@Gore
I have absolutely no clue what you are saying with those 2 pictures.

[Catwalk]

In my serial killer game I played like a more aggressive townie than usual, hardly wishy washy and uncommitted to votes. Simply put, it was my best strategy to actively hunt for scum. I don't understand how "Mattimeo check in please" and "Mattimeo do not worry man you show up you are fine." is perfectly fine while "I'll put a more serious vote on Mattimeo as I want him out of the bush this game. If he's scum, his lurking tendencies can be fatal to us." is somehow scummy. We are both saying the same thing, I'm emphasizing that I'll be voting him more if he doesn't contributite and you're emphasizing that he's fine. Why the big difference? You're either chasing a false lead or trying to set up a mislynch on the supposedly crazy guy over nothing.

[Hashoosh]

@Rowain, the first is a picture of the 'double down' KFC monstrosity (delicious, delicious abominations) so he's doubling down on his vote. As for the second, it's a girl scout cookie, so maybe Catwalk is a girl scout? I'm really thrown by it as well. I initially thought cream puff, but those have the eponymous cream centre, so that's a no go.

Hashoosh, you only have to post your new vote, nothing else is needed to nullify an old vote.

What do you think about some of the other conversations going on in the game so far?

Good to know!

I think I'm starting to understand how this works. Without knowing the roles beforehand it's a little harder to pin down people's psychoses in this game. Just need to keep up the naive routine and I'll be set