February 19th, 2015, 14:10
Posts: 1,338
Threads: 14
Joined: May 2014
(February 19th, 2015, 09:25)Lewwyn Wrote: (February 18th, 2015, 23:29)dtay Wrote: "Do you vote for someone only to make them post, and then not actually examine what they posted?" - kind of yes, you can't let people lurk. Though I notably just like... think people's examinations of it are bad. Especially the identity confusion arg.
Yeah , but, you're defending him on the basis then of not examining it yourself at all. Basically you're telling us that you don't even care what people write because that's not your goal.
 I can't tell if this is scum or just misguided villager. Either way its bad for village IMO.
That's kind of how I saw it, though I lean more newbie scum mistake than misguided villager. It's certainly not nearly enough to want to lynch him, but I think it's worth noting for future reference if more of the same piles up.
(February 19th, 2015, 12:49)Doctor Saul Wrote: If we're at on lynching a lurker I'd much rather hang Fenn [\color] than Mattimeo
Why is that Saul?
I know you have stated that you don't like Fenn's arguments. I assume then that your dislike of his arguments trumps Matt's inactivity? If you could expound on that it would be great.
I know AdrienIer agrees with me.
(February 19th, 2015, 13:04)AdrienIer Wrote: Maybe, but he's still contributed more than twice as much as Matt. Not that I mind lynching him.
(February 19th, 2015, 13:00)zakalwe Wrote: [color=#FF0000]Fenn
Reason?
Also, not sure why your /color isn't going into the post, even tho its clearly there when I'm on the post screen. Odd. Hopefully it's just a preview bug.
February 19th, 2015, 14:11
Posts: 8,244
Threads: 30
Joined: Jun 2004
(February 19th, 2015, 14:01)BRickAstley Wrote: Yeah but there's still enough play that we shouldn't have to revert to lynch that guy with the lowest postcount. IMO.
It is not only the postcount it is what he posted. His first post was bad and the second a "lynch me if you dare".
I don't have any interest to play a game of communication with someone who deliberately decides to not communicate at all.
I don't want to have to wait if his highness Mattimeo deigns to bless us with a post or not. I think we are much better off with this discussion ending today and not have it the following days.
February 19th, 2015, 14:13
Posts: 1,338
Threads: 14
Joined: May 2014
(February 19th, 2015, 14:07)BRickAstley Wrote: Unless anyone else wants to consider Gaz, Q, or zak, then I suppose it's time to help do Mattimeo in. Let's really hope he's a wolf though, cause if he's not, then we basically gain zero info to go on.
I'm still not convinced of Saul's innocence, but since all I have on him is an overly defensive behavior, similar to dtay's, all I think that really warrants is keeping an eye on him. Mattimeo I almost don't want to lynch, because he died so early last game, but I feel that's a terrible reason to keep him in. Zak I'm TOTALLY down with hanging, but we all know my reasons for that are incredibly petty. (On a side note, I really hope you're scum Zak, so I can put my hands on the rope later :P)
February 19th, 2015, 14:19
Posts: 6,471
Threads: 63
Joined: Sep 2006
Ok, I finally had a chance to re-read every Saul post, though not enough time to read every attack on him.
I'm not too bothered by the 'formula' post, though I admit it's hard to read it without seeing the formula now that Zak pointed it out, even if it's only an ex-post knowable formula. I'm not too bothered by the like 15 defense posts that follow either since Saul was taking lots of heat.
I WAS a little bothered by the claim that dtay was being aggressive early and throwing out wideranging accusations. I know Saul retracted his memory of dtay in an early game (something I agree would be a bold mistake to gambit as scum) but I didn't notice him correct the actual impression.
That's pretty much the only thing I thought was scummy though. I think his case and Zak is pretty simple and understandable, and he's since been either on Zak or Fenn (and avoided moving on to Matt or, earlier, me.)
I'm not trust-zoning him (or anyone yet) but there are 3-4 folks I'd rather lynch.
Also, sorry, phone.
February 19th, 2015, 14:25
Posts: 7,916
Threads: 158
Joined: Jan 2012
(February 19th, 2015, 14:11)Rowain Wrote: It is not only the postcount it is what he posted. His first post was bad and the second a "lynch me if you dare".
I don't have any interest to play a game of communication with someone who deliberately decides to not communicate at all.
I don't want to have to wait if his highness Mattimeo deigns to bless us with a post or not. I think we are much better off with this discussion ending today and not have it the following days.
How is that first post bad? I would agree with him that Dtay's suggestion isn't a good one.
Second post just seems to be more boredom with the Day 1 I would expect from Matt.
Your second paragraph I can agree with. I think he'd give more discussion later on, but if not, it's nipped in the bud now.
February 19th, 2015, 14:26
Posts: 1,778
Threads: 12
Joined: Jun 2013
Am I the only one who sees tension between this:
(February 19th, 2015, 14:13)Jabbz Wrote: I'm still not convinced of Saul's innocence, but since all I have on him is an overly defensive behavior, similar to dtay's, all I think that really warrants is keeping an eye on him.
and this:
Jabbz Wrote:I'd repost it again, but I'm fairly certain you will ignore it again. I made an observation. You and he both jumped as if I'd stuck a flaming brand down your britches. You then went into hyper defensive mode. That made me change my vote from a 100% joke vote on Zak, to a 50% serious vote on Saul. Now its 100%, and you're next.
Seems like a pretty significant dial back, and it's not like I changed my tune on the Saul question in the interim
I guess I stopped voting for Jabbz between these?
Maybe "Now its 100%, and you're next" is coming off more committed to me than jabbz meant it, but do not like this.
Fear cuts deeper than swords.
February 19th, 2015, 14:32
(This post was last modified: February 19th, 2015, 14:33 by Commodore.)
Posts: 17,906
Threads: 162
Joined: May 2011
Tally as of post 286:
9 votes: Mattimeo ( sunrise089, Rowain, Gazglum, AdrienIer, Gaspar, dtay, Fenn, Jabbz, BRickAstley)
2 votes: AdrienIer ( novice)( Qgqqqqq)
1 votes: zakalwe ( Doctor Saul)
1 votes: Fenn ( zakalwe)
1 votes: Doctor Saul ( Lewwyn)
1 votes: sunrise ( Mattimeo)
Voting history:
Half an hour or so to go.
February 19th, 2015, 14:32
Posts: 7,916
Threads: 158
Joined: Jan 2012
Dtay I don't see any tension there. Jabbz's thoughts seem pretty internally consistent.
February 19th, 2015, 14:34
Posts: 226
Threads: 0
Joined: Jul 2013
(February 19th, 2015, 14:10)Jabbz Wrote: (February 19th, 2015, 12:49)Doctor Saul Wrote: If we're at on lynching a lurker I'd much rather hang [color=#FF0000] Fenn [\color] than Mattimeo
Why is that Saul?
I know you have stated that you don't like Fenn's arguments. I assume then that your dislike of his arguments trumps Matt's inactivity? If you could expound on that it would be great.
I've never been able to read Mattimeo right so I don't have any confidence in being able to tell his motives from two posts. It does irritate me that he basically gives us all a FU when we call him on lurking, but that's what he does every game.
At the same time, like Rowain says, why sign up for a game about communication and then lurk game after game after game. It's tempting to policy lynch him for that. but I don't think it's worth doing over zakalwe, and I think the timing and over-explanation from Fenn was worth pursuing over Mattimeo.
That said, Fenn's last post was a step in the right direction and Zak has gotten scummier, so I'm happy to drop this against Fenn for now and watch how he contributes from here.
February 19th, 2015, 14:35
Posts: 10,058
Threads: 82
Joined: May 2012
Fuck, I had no idea the end was so soon. Sorry guys.
Erebus in the Balance - a FFH Modmod based around balancing and polishing FFH for streamlined competitive play.
|
