Newbie 1351: Hyrule's Under Attack.. Interesting..-GAME OVER

[fferyllt]

Deras is...a mystery. He's an X factor. He was here yesterday and he actually voted me when the wagon took off. Do you know where he stands on me presently? Do you know if he actually thinks GM is scum?

Deras, Eye Urn bothered me equally in that respect.

AA's naked survivalism was at least clearly what it was. Their motivations? I don't know.

[Mac]

But that's the entire point of your case.. gone?

I asked you to provide points where I was cheerleading lynches early on, you said ff did (I could only make out Deras which I'd already explained) and you; but my vote was already on you.

What else you got?

[fferyllt]

But that's the entire point of your case.. gone?

I asked you to provide points where I was cheerleading lynches early on, you said ff did (I could only make out Deras which I'd already explained) and you; but my vote was already on you.

What else you got?

The other observation I made is that in my case you didn't do shit to either get others on your side for the lynch - no effort at persuasive case-building, or to get me sorted. You didn't engage me further. I had to pester you to go back and look at my rebuttal. About 250 posts downthread you finally unvoted me. At that point, it was pretty clear that my wagon wasn't going anywhere.

[VisceraEyes]

Just because you say "Hey it's my playstyle" doesn't excuse what I perceive to be a scummy mindset. You say you're "being cautious" and that's why you're cheerleading bandwagons without voting - but I maintain that "being cautious" is a scummy mindset to have, so that doesn't excuse anything. The entire point of my case isn't "gone" you're just writing it off because you think you've explained yourself satisfactorily and you haven't.

[VisceraEyes]

Not to even mention the fact that you blatantly misrepresented my play yesterday. Brazenly and repeatedly taking posts I made out of context in an attempt to make my play look scummy.

[VisceraEyes]

Deras is...a mystery. He's an X factor. He was here yesterday and he actually voted me when the wagon took off. Do you know where he stands on me presently? Do you know if he actually thinks GM is scum?

Deras, Eye Urn bothered me equally in that respect.

AA's naked survivalism was at least clearly what it was. Their motivations? I don't know.

I can easily see a town-aligned Eye "pressuring" me into reading the thread. I may not like his method, but it achieved the goal he said he had, so who am I to judge? My case on Z was admittedly weak, but honestly it was the best I could do

without

reading the thread and he's right, I shouldn't have even bothered.

At least he did something about it. Deras was just hopping onboard town sentiment. And hopped off just as quickly.

[Mac]

Just because you say "Hey it's my playstyle" doesn't excuse what I perceive to be a scummy mindset. You say you're "being cautious" and that's why you're cheerleading bandwagons without voting - but I maintain that "being cautious" is a scummy mindset to have, so that doesn't excuse anything. The entire point of my case isn't "gone" you're just writing it off because you think you've explained yourself satisfactorily and you haven't.

But you say I'm cheerleading and there's one LEGIT bandwagon I may have 'cheered' which wasn't even cheering. I'll be cautious if I wanted. I said yesterday that keeping your cards so close to your chest appears scummy. That's your playstyle. Did I challenge it? Sure I wanted to see where you went with it. but I accepted it.

Not everyone plays mafia the same. I play my way, and you play yours.

[VisceraEyes]

Go ahead dude! I'm not saying you should play like me at all. I'm saying I think you're playing a scummy game this game and I want to lynch you. It's not meant to be demeaning or belittling or whatever you're taking this as. It's me wanting to kill you because I think you're on a different team than me. <3

[Mac]

But that's the entire point of your case.. gone?

I asked you to provide points where I was cheerleading lynches early on, you said ff did (I could only make out Deras which I'd already explained) and you; but my vote was already on you.

What else you got?

The other observation I made is that in my case you didn't do shit to either get others on your side for the lynch - no effort at persuasive case-building, or to get me sorted. You didn't engage me further. I had to pester you to go back and look at my rebuttal. About 250 posts downthread you finally unvoted me. At that point, it was pretty clear that my wagon wasn't going anywhere.

This is also a bit of a misrep. I didn't really build a case that because I wanted to see your reactions and where you would go with it, but I stated why I voted you. You and I both had a Q and A session together both before and after where people could see where we were both coming from.

Then, contrary to your "250 posts later" I had a couple of busy days and didn't post where I interacted only to give brief thoughts. Then I returned, answered your quote and unvoted based on the fact it all revolved around us not understanding each other.

As much as you want to plaster it as "200 posts later" I only posted in about 3 of them. It's not like I ignored you completely.

[Mac]

Go ahead dude! I'm not saying you should play like me at all. I'm saying I think you're playing a scummy game this game and I want to lynch you. It's not meant to be demeaning or belittling or whatever you're taking this as. It's me wanting to kill you because I think you're on a different team than me. <3

Don't worry, you're wrong.

Like I could show you the wrongness and how I do play this but you'd probably get all angry cos it involves meta and I'm scummy anyway and stuff yeah?

As a side note, I don't find it belittling or whatever, just wrong and narrowminded,

[VisceraEyes]

Why would I get all angry? I think meta is fine - I just didn't like you comparing apples with oranges earlier. If you want to show me town-games of yours I'll at least take a gander...but please note what I said earlier that self-referenced meta is virtually meaningless and will likely not change my mind. But feel free to do so for others - don't let my "narrow mind" stop you.

[Mac]

Well you can meta them yourself if you want?

http://forum.mafiascum.net/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=25675 - first newbie game.

http://forum.mafiascum.net/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=25952 - hunt in the dungeon.

other 2 I have completed are scum: one was nightless and one was epicmafia and over after night 2. Feel free to check them out too, but I don't see them being relevant.

don't worry, I'm aware self-meta is meaningless. But I'm saying if you read them it's perfectly acceptable to assume my playstyle is scummy, but it doesn't mean I'm scum. Ya get me?

[VisceraEyes]

Well I'm not wanting to lynch you exclusively on playstyle, but yeah I get you.

[fferyllt]

But that's the entire point of your case.. gone?

I asked you to provide points where I was cheerleading lynches early on, you said ff did (I could only make out Deras which I'd already explained) and you; but my vote was already on you.

What else you got?

The other observation I made is that in my case you didn't do shit to either get others on your side for the lynch - no effort at persuasive case-building, or to get me sorted. You didn't engage me further. I had to pester you to go back and look at my rebuttal. About 250 posts downthread you finally unvoted me. At that point, it was pretty clear that my wagon wasn't going anywhere.

This is also a bit of a misrep. I didn't really build a case that because I wanted to see your reactions and where you would go with it, but I stated why I voted you. You and I both had a Q and A session together both before and after where people could see where we were both coming from.

Then, contrary to your "250 posts later" I had a couple of busy days and didn't post where I interacted only to give brief thoughts. Then I returned, answered your quote and unvoted based on the fact it all revolved around us not understanding each other.

As much as you want to plaster it as "200 posts later" I only posted in about 3 of them. It's not like I ignored you completely.

254 - Is where you pick up pieces of GM's argument - Mon Apr 01, 2013 10:51 am

We go back and forth for a bit.

287 - you put the vote down - Mon Apr 01, 2013 1:21 pm

A few back-and-forths after that ending on April 3.

A couple of "I'm catching up posts on Apr 4 and 6.

517 Then a response to me on April 8, where you unvote.

Ok. Your assertion that you got back to me as soon as feasible fits that.

I guess the reamaining niggle is that it was another case of you following GM, though this time you took it through to a vote.

Really, the only thing you've

done

in this game that wasn't in line with GM's direction was the vote on Carey.

[Mac]

Nope, I've voted Eye Urn. GM hasn't.

[fferyllt]

People I will not vote today, even if it would be as a compromise: VE, ff, Deras
People I would vote today as a compromise only: AA9, Rev
People I would happily vote today: Z,

Fe

, Mac


PEDIT: CAPSLOCK FOREVERRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
DON'T BE A DICKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKK

following.

[Mac]

But that's not why I'm voting him...?

[VisceraEyes]

I'm seeing no evidence of the "cautious, non-voting" playstyle in the first game. I'll say that you drew a lot of ire due to your inactivity in that game which seems to have changed in this game, but you were fairly liberal with your vote.

Verdict: Different enough to be irrelevant.

On to the next.

[Mac]

Also if I could be bothered, I think I could probably make the same case against you and VE but on a more closer level. Just from memory of what I've been thinking, which is you guys are pretty cosy.

p-edit; 90 or so posts for my first vote to go that wasn't RVS. quite a fair bit of time but that's a personal call init. Was also quite reactionary but yeah, I can see why you wouldn't think that.

[fferyllt]

Yeah, we are getting along ok. We're being quite blatant about it, wouldn't you say? Comparing notes, ISO-ing. Asking questions.

[VisceraEyes]

Also if I could be bothered

, I think I could probably make the same case against you and VE but on a more closer level. Just from memory of what I've been thinking, which is you guys are pretty cosy.

p-edit; 90 or so posts for my first vote to go that wasn't RVS. quite a fair bit of time but that's a personal call init. Was also quite reactionary but yeah, I can see why you wouldn't think that.

Like what does the bolded part mean? Do you think she's scum or not? If you think she's scum why couldn't you be bothered to make a case against her for what you perceive to be scummy behavior? Do you perceive it to be scummy behavior? Why?

This is the kind of stuff I'm talking about - you're like encouraging someone to make a case against feryl for her "closeness" or "coziness" with me or whatever, but you're never definitively saying why you think that's suspicious, or whether you'd support a wagon on her.

[VisceraEyes]

Also feryl if you're scum I don't even...

[VisceraEyes]

Please don't be scum. XD

[Mac]

It means it's midnight and I'm too tired to trawl through this. Nothing more, nothing less.

[fferyllt]

Also feryl if you're scum I don't even...

ditto. in spades.