↑ Haschel Cedricson wrote:Jesus Christ this thread just keeps on going, doesn't it? Anyhoo, I'm pretty sure my brain glazed over sometime in the last page or two but I do have a couple opinions to bring to the table.
First off, my number one scumread right now is Banakai. There have been a few really weird statements, and they started with his first post:
Banakai wrote:Woody: would you care to explain why you are playing so defensive? As a town usually you just have to accept that one of you are gonna die day 1 probbably, and just try and get as much information as possible even when being voted.[...]
BBT: Do you think there would be any motivation in this game for a scum to tunnel on Woody like you are now?
The first sentence is oddly fatalistic; if somebody is attack you with crappy arguments (like I believe Keyser and BBT were), it is a disservice to the town to NOT be defensive. And what is up with that second question to BBT? It comes across almost like an attempt to bolster a scumbuddy's town cred. Later on I feel he completely misrepresents WW's statement about "not needing to scumhunt within the first hours of the game" and conflates activity with scumhunting, which are obviously not the same. He then goes on to read redFF as town, but then wavers saying that he posted "some questionable things". The problem is, I don't think any of the things he cites are questionable at all; heck, banakai makes the EXACT SAME JOKE he describes as "forced" in post 305. This gives the feeling of somebody trying to set up a reason to later vote for a person they once publicly stated was town. In fact, this is indeed exactly what he does in 317. Also in post 305 he says "The werewolf is probbably not posted enough comments to get noticed by me". Anybody see anything weird about that? Like the attitude that we're only looking for one person and not a partnership?
Now he votes for Boonskiies, citing a reason that does not apply at all, since Boonskiies did not replace Woody. However, even after admitting this, he keeps his vote there! This would be fine, except he doesn't mention any other reasons! Then instead of giving reasons he claims he was going to post them but "[boon] just made a case for himself." Really? An event that happened AFTER your vote can't be your reason for making the vote in the first place; why didn't you post the case you said you already wrote anyways? Is it because you never wrote up a case at all? (I think it's because you never wrote up a case at all.)
There's probably some more stuff but damned if I'm wading through 20 pages to find it again. Nevertheless,
Vote: Banakai
As for notes on the others: I mentioned earlier that Keyser and BBT were both making a really awful case against WW and then had even more awful reactions to people pointing that out. Keyser gives me a sense of sincerity, even though I disagree with a lot of what he says. He did commit my personal pet peeve of answering a question that was targeted to another player, but everything else about him seems fairly genuine for now.
BBT does not give me that impression. His first attack on Woody was disbelief of Woody's claim that he missed the Haschelwagon. I think this was silly, but then BBT doubles down and starts strawmanning. His reaction to redFF's reaction to Woody's claim doesn't seem right to me; there is nothing about redFF's post that comes off as "super fake" to me. What DOES come across as fake, though, is his suspicion of absta. Absta asked for elaboration on the crappy WW case, because elaboration was 100% needed. He also sets up a false dichotomy:
BBT wrote:He goes against me; saying he disagrees with my reasoning and it feels forced. This would imply he thinks I'm scum, no?"
What? No, it doesn't imply that at all. Why would you say it did?
By the by, I find it very hard to believe that he somehow didn't check Woody's join date until post 244.
Right. Moving on.
Bulb is giving a ton of posts that just sort of state what happened, with not a lot of analysis. I also didn't like him stating that "Absta is ww or town." Is there a Scummie for Least Hard-Hitting Analysis? If so, that sentence deserves it. I also don't like his attitude of "We can't keep WW til Lylo; may as well get rid of him now." Other than that, though, what analysis IS there doesn't raise any red flags for me.
redFF is the towniest townie that ever towned a town. Kmd is raising good points; slight townread there. The RC situation baffles me a little; his intro post wasn't the best ever, but I agreed with a lot of parts of it and certainly don't think it merits three votes on its own after so many things have happened in the intervening time. Sure, he's lurking, but so was I. So was TonyMontana. So activity can't account for all of it.
I like Boonskiies post 327 and wish there was some followup there. I do not like his 329 and would like an explanation. Then again I really like his self-vote, so you're alright in my book, Boonskiies.
Absta is a minor scum read due to his statement that Keyser was town near the beginning accompanied by some hedging. I agree with his point about BBT's attacks on Woody being forced, but I disagree with his belief that Woody is scummy for "defending instead of finding scum". I also don't like his reaction to Boonskiies earlier.
I don't have anything specific to say about Zoronos but I found myself agreeing with a lot of the arguments he was posting.
That's it for now.
-----
For the record, I have a pretty strong no-playing-with-hydrae policy, so if one replaces into the game, I will replace out. Usually this isn't a problem, but it has happened before and with Woody's exit I feel everybody deserves a heads-up.
So you started a BS wagon on me because you didn't know it was an open setup!?!? 
