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

[VisceraEyes]

I'm saying she was right in thinking that the fact that she would revote was implicit. It says right in her post that her level of suspicion had not changed - and she was voting for her. Logically speaking, suspcion enough for vote = suspicion enough for vote. It's implied that she'll revote after the thread of "quickhammer shenannies" had passed.

[Mac]

I don't see that personally, because she says that she doesn't want AA hammered at that point. No mention of quickhammers at all at that point.

Anyway, that was then and this is now.

[VisceraEyes]

Yes, and my comment was to her and not to you. YOU ASKED ME what I meant.

[Mac]

And I'm saying that personally I don't agree that it was implied...

[goodmorning]

Allow me to summarize the last 20something posts:
WELL YOU UNVOTED SOMEONE WHO WAS AT L-1
WELL YOU TOO
WELL THAT WAS FOR DIFFERENT REASONS
NUH UH
YUH HUH
NUH UH
YUH HUH
WELL I AGREE WITH ONE SIDE OVER THE OTHER
WELL SHUT UP CAUSE I DON'T
NUH UH
YUH HUH
NUH UH
YUH HUH

Can we not clutter up the thread with this? I agree that it was implied in ff's unvote that she was concerned about a replacement derphammering. Now that we have a consensus from the three highest contributors can we let it go and not make GIF read useless stuff?
(note: the first half of the last sentence is a joke. the last half is serious)

[VisceraEyes]

Do you want to explain why the fuck you're getting into a pointless fucking argument with me? She JUST said it was implied. Are you saying she's lying? That she did NOT imply that she would revote? Is that what you're saying?

Then you're arguing that you didn't pick up the implication. I didn't say ANYTHING ABOUT whether or not you picked up the implication or not. But you can't "disagree that it was implied" when she said not FIVE posts ago that it was implied unless you're calling feryl a liar. Are you calling feryl a liar Mac?

[goodmorning]

Do you want to explain why the fuck you're getting into a pointless fucking argument with me? She JUST said it was implied. Are you saying she's lying? That she did NOT imply that she would revote? Is that what you're saying?

Then you're arguing that you didn't pick up the implication. I didn't say ANYTHING ABOUT whether or not you picked up the implication or not. But you can't "disagree that it was implied" when she said not FIVE posts ago that it was implied unless you're calling feryl a liar. Are you calling feryl a liar Mac?

STAHP

[Mac]

Oh yeah, I'm getting confused about picking up the implication and actually implying. Sorry.

Are you okay? Do you need a paper bag?

This ends here.

[VisceraEyes]

*grumblegrumble*

[VisceraEyes]

How many times does one excuse "sorry I misread that" before one stops taking it as benign skimming and starts taking it as scummy misconstruing?

I intend to answer this question of myself before D2.

[goodmorning]

How many times does one excuse "sorry I misread that" before one stops taking it as benign skimming and starts taking it as scummy misconstruing?

I intend to answer this question of myself before D2.

My personal answer would be that it depends on the player. But GOOD LUCK COMING UP WITH SOME LESS PITHY STATEMENT

[Mac]

I'm going to tell you one thing and one thing only: it's not misreading, it's misunderstanding.

I know your "Mac is scum!" goggles make you think everything I do is scum and blablabla but seriously, misunderstanding like, what, 3/4 posts? It's not that bad.

[VisceraEyes]

Objectively speaking I mean - I don't know any of you cats except the mod.

[VisceraEyes]

I'm going to tell you one thing and one thing only: it's not misreading, it's misunderstanding.

I know your "Mac is scum!" goggles make you think everything I do is scum and blablabla but seriously, misunderstanding like, what, 3/4 posts? It's not that bad.

You've taken virtually EVERYTHING I'VE DONE IN THIS GAME OUT OF CONTEXT! YES IT IS FUCKING BAD. SO SUE ME IF I NOTICE YOU DOING THE SAME SHIT WITH SOMEONE ELSE DUDE!

[Mac]

Objectively speaking I mean - I don't know any of you cats except the mod.

I see.

Hope that doesn't count as another misunderstanding.

[VisceraEyes]

Objectively speaking I mean - I don't know any of you cats except the mod.

I see.

Hope that doesn't count as another misunderstanding.

And for the record, the post you quoted was directed at GM's response - I really need to start quoting shit.

[fferyllt]

How many times does one excuse "sorry I misread that" before one stops taking it as benign skimming and starts taking it as scummy misconstruing?

I intend to answer this question of myself before D2.

Uncharitable interpretations can come from a town PoV, too. due to suspicion, paranoia, and general jumping at shadows. Add in all the cultural differences that happen when people come to a dedicated site to play mafia for more hilarity.

I've been playing with the same 40-50 players game after game after game for 3 or 4 years. In that environment, my personal quirks are well known and I've gotten out of the habit of showing my work to the nth degree. I've drastically upped how much I explain myself in the games I've played here so far, but I'm not terribly surprised that it isn't always enough.

I'll probably start playing a little more opaquely in another game or two. Complete transparency isn't optimal play for town players IMO. But it does make it a lot easier to be town-recognizable when you're an unknown quantity.

[ArcAngel9]

AA9's #1031 is terribad.
"You want to policy lynch? I'll policy lynch you instead!"

Not sure if it's alignment-indicative, though.

Shut up and read through the end GIF!!!

[VisceraEyes]

Tell me who you want me to look into feryl. I've asked you to look into people and you've gone above and beyond, and I feel like I've neglected to oblige you somewhere.

Who does feryl think is the very most scummiest one?

[fferyllt]

I think you had a look at AA9's posts/slot. If not, she'd be good. I was cautious about her initially because I had some concerns about AlexisTay3. Goodmorning and Revenus. Revenus put very little down in the thread, so GiF's gotten an almost spotless slot. Goodmorning has such a different play style that I have trouble reading her, and I worry that I've underestimated her.

[VisceraEyes]

On first readthrough I actually had a town-read on ATay...what were some of your concerns whilst I have a gander?

[fferyllt]

The conspiracy theory stuff didn't really make sense to me. And there was an exchange between him, GM and me that seemed odd, though it could be a plsy-style mismatch.

It starts with 151 including the spoiler. Alexis posted some suspicions about GM and got some strong pushback. He tried to smooth over it in post 155. I called him on it in 157. He did another about face/deflection in 158. I asked him what he thought of GM's hostility but I don't think I got an answer before he replaced out.

[VisceraEyes]

LOL This is why I wanted to do this. Look at these two posts.

Spoiler: WAT

Alexis Tay, at your service. I'm new to the site and and I really love the game, so please teach me a thing or two! I'm really into the whole theory about mafia mostly because I used to mod RL games.

VOTE:

Fropome

Your avatar creeps me out, my friend.

ATay3

I think I should drop my vote against fropome, he's giving me stronger town feels now. I'm usually stuck in church for the whole day on Saturdays, so I didn't have anytime to post, but a brief skimming through I see some differences in how each of the players are focused on advancing the game. I'll post in more detail in a few hours once I get my church stuff settled.

UNVOTE: Fropome

In the first is a vote on Fropome that seems to be your standard RVS vote. Except in the unvote post it he would have us believe that he's unvoting because "he's getting stronger town feels now"....implying that his vote was based on his "read" of the slot rather than the creepiness of his avatar. VERY INTERESTING.

Post 91 is a pretty useless summary post, but it's still relatively early in the game. Something that jumps out at me is his pointing out "associations" that are building between players (Deras/Rev, Frop/GM). Why this strikes me as scummy: he gives no context. Like, players post back and forth all the time and it hardly means anything - that's what we're all here to do. In what way are the associations he's pointing out important? What do they mean with regard to the alignments of the players involved? If nothing (yet) then why bring them up?

Something that jumps out at me in post 104 is this fragment:

I feel that the subsequent discussion between the two of them is definitely something to look back at in later game.

When people say this kind of thing I always think "How do you know either one of them will be alive 'in later game'?"

Something else about that post was the fact that he seems to think EU was attacking GM, and gave him a +1 on "where he's going with this"….except all he was doing was presuming a miscommunication and trying to solve it - and EU even SAYS that he likes GM's vote more than Deras' vote…so did he even read the post in question? Or was he just looking for something to latch onto?

:/

Reading him in context masked a lot, I'm going to pause here so I can do the rest of this at home. This is proving to be more interesting than I thought it would be.

[VisceraEyes]

##Unvote

in the meantime. Srs about doing later.

[fferyllt]

AlexisTay actually reminded me a lot of how I played in Newbie 1319, floating over the game, mostly not getting into it with players, especially day 1. I was scum. Someone actually called me on trying to smooth over an irritable reply I got for an ISO analysis comment. He said it was scummy behavior, but wrote it down to my overall thoughtful, nonconfrontational play style.

Anyway, that was why I tried to push Alexis when he backed down in the face of GM's reaction to his wall post.