The Syndicate

Cool.

Also I can't vote, poop.

Long Con wrote: ↑Fri Dec 07, 2018 4:38 am
DharmaHelper wrote: ↑Fri Dec 07, 2018 4:20 am Also I can't vote, poop.
What is wrong with this picture:

I checked to see if Tranq had voted by viewing the results and it locked me into that.

BTW I can vote now.

I Voted for Will You Become More

Just as an FYI I'll try to be around on Saturday but I'm not making any promises.

Just some preliminary thoughts:

With a 30 player game things are bound to move fast and get very crowded. I'll try to keep a critical eye but we'll see.

Since this an LC/BR map game, most of the game hasn't even been revealed yet and will be played behind closed doors. Don't take anything off the table ever.

I'm excited to see what's up. Glad we get a N0.

Oh also thank you very much BR/LC for making votes unchangeable.

Tranq wrote: ↑Fri Dec 07, 2018 2:21 pm These poll options seem quite meaningless.

Are people voting randomly or what?

As someone who has played several LC/BR games I don't know if I believe that you believe that anything in the game is meaningless.

Kylemii wrote: ↑Fri Dec 07, 2018 2:52 pm are these things from somethng?

Everything is from something.

Long Con wrote: ↑Fri Dec 07, 2018 11:31 pm
insertnamehere wrote: ↑Fri Dec 07, 2018 7:54 pm
insertnamehere wrote: ↑Fri Dec 07, 2018 4:30 pm
Black Rock wrote: ↑Fri Dec 07, 2018 12:45 am General Rules
7. No reproducing the host PMs in thread..... Or in Map BTSC!

@Black Rock @Long Con

Okay, so no PMs can be reproduced in thread. But does that mean we can roleclaim and infodump in both the thread and in BTSC as long as we don't copy/paste or screenshot host PMs?
still all confuzzled about this
Yeah, you can roleclaim and infodump. We're limiting discussing map coordinates for balance reasons.

Votes will be changeable by default in lynches, subject to mad whims.

Literally unplayable.

Epignosis wrote: ↑Sat Dec 08, 2018 12:15 am I'm going to be voting DDL tomorrow.

The speculation over the roles is an act to get involved.

Now go.

Uh oh bois Epignosis came to play big boi ball

Hey Epi have you voted yet

Long Con wrote: ↑Sat Dec 08, 2018 1:15 am The Tribunal of Judgement has been chosen. Three players will each secretly vote to decide the outcome of tied lynches.

OOPS

Instantly suspicious of anyone who votes to tie any lynch btw.

Oh God no. Shit to read.

Enrique wrote: ↑Sat Dec 08, 2018 4:15 am btw i decided i have a truth meta now

Lynch Enrique

Dragon D. Luffy wrote: ↑Sat Dec 08, 2018 9:06 am I normally don't analyse roles too deeply at once but I'm normally not given a list of 28 roles that I'm supposed to figure out the alignment of so that really incited my curiosity.

Oh word?

Dragon D. Luffy wrote: ↑Sat Dec 08, 2018 9:10 am
Tranq wrote: ↑Fri Dec 07, 2018 2:51 pm
Turnip Head wrote: ↑Fri Dec 07, 2018 2:39 pm
Tranq wrote: ↑Fri Dec 07, 2018 2:21 pm These poll options seem quite meaningless.

Are people voting randomly or what?
The Tribunal of Judgment is from A World Apart, it was three civvies with BTSC plus a lynch switch and pardon. Seems pro-town imo
Sounds good. Why didn't you mention this when you voted?
I actually liked Tranq for this post. He made a good point on TH and I tend to trust people who hunt at super early game when nobody else is hunting. Not gonna put my vote here. Might put on TH.

Oh worddddddddddddddddddddddddddd?

sprityo wrote: ↑Sat Dec 08, 2018 9:24 am
LoRab wrote: ↑Sat Dec 08, 2018 8:27 am OK....I got wifi on the plane...

Can I suggest that we change the vote word from aubergine to something that is not one of the role names? I mean, if the point is to be easily searched, then it seems to me it would make it easier if it were a word that isn't likely to come up. Also, lol to the hosts for putting that in there.

@LC @BR: Is the difference in the map from earlier to current based on a host correction, or based on night 0 activity?
The only difference I noticed was the trees/forest are more pronounced

Jeff Bridges

Tranq wrote: ↑Sat Dec 08, 2018 1:15 pm
LoRab wrote: ↑Sat Dec 08, 2018 8:27 am Can I suggest that we change the vote word from aubergine to something that is not one of the role names? I mean, if the point is to be easily searched, then it seems to me it would make it easier if it were a word that isn't likely to come up. Also, lol to the hosts for putting that in there.
This aubergine thing sounds silly. Why is there a need to have a vote word?

What if the two secret roles are Black Rock and Long Con

Or what if the two secret roles are somewhere on the map and whoever finds them first gets possessed by them

Wild lol

G-Man wrote: ↑Sat Dec 08, 2018 2:19 pm Keep an eye on the folks who darted in here early and, in light of the D0 poll result, pooh-poohed ties on the lynch poll. It’s a subtle way to establish a preemptive cop-out for either train-hopping later (to show they stick to their convictions) or blame-shifting to set up fall guys who tie polls that result in mislynches.

Close lynches and ties (whether mid-phase or at EOD) are valuable sources of information. Granted, that information is best in hindsight after the herd has thinned some.

We may not know who is on the Tribunal but we’re starting out with more civs than baddies (unless this game is extra-double whacky) and there are also two baddie factions, so the odds are against Tribunal being filled with one baddie team.

I'm right here.

To me the only reason a person would vote to tie a lynch that they weren't in danger in is because they are on the tribunal or know who is and they want to save the person that is in the lead during the un-tied period.

Significantly more plausible baddie motives RE: Ties.

Sloonei wrote: ↑Sat Dec 08, 2018 2:31 pm
DharmaHelper wrote: ↑Sat Dec 08, 2018 2:25 pm To me the only reason a person would vote to tie a lynch that they weren't in danger in is because they are on the tribunal or know who is and they want to save the person that is in the lead during the un-tied period.

Significantly more plausible baddie motives RE: Ties.
But what if there's a baddie team with nobody on the tribunal, and hypothetically one of their own is up for a lynch? They'd want to avoid that tie, wouldn't they?

Yeah if someone votes to break ties that's also worth looking at but what I'm saying is if someone votes to cause a tie, and especially if that tie then breaks against whoever they voted for, that's a red flag for me

Anyway I've ranked the people who have currently voted from most to least suspicious as of me typing this post without being linkied into any other votes:

Cbob - "His posting" is a funny but ultimately hollow and wormy way to explain the Colin vote
Chuck - Did not give a reason for his DDL vote which IIRC came close to if not directly after Epi said he'd be voting DDL. Chuck pulling up to the train station early AF to save himself a seat.
Sloonei - Voting for anyone based on other people's reasons for suspecting people is suspicious to me. Make your own points. Stand on your own ground.
TH - Early vote for Sorsha for a hollow, funny reason. Doesn't look serious. Sorsha's not done anything overtly suspicious. Could be buddying/distancing but not worth losing my shit over instantly.
Epi - His DDL vote makes sense, he gave a good reason and was consistent.

Sloonei wrote: ↑Sat Dec 08, 2018 2:39 pm
DharmaHelper wrote: ↑Sat Dec 08, 2018 2:32 pm
Sloonei wrote: ↑Sat Dec 08, 2018 2:31 pm
DharmaHelper wrote: ↑Sat Dec 08, 2018 2:25 pm To me the only reason a person would vote to tie a lynch that they weren't in danger in is because they are on the tribunal or know who is and they want to save the person that is in the lead during the un-tied period.

Significantly more plausible baddie motives RE: Ties.
But what if there's a baddie team with nobody on the tribunal, and hypothetically one of their own is up for a lynch? They'd want to avoid that tie, wouldn't they?
Yeah if someone votes to break ties that's also worth looking at but what I'm saying is if someone votes to cause a tie, and especially if that tie then breaks against whoever they voted for, that's a red flag for me
So you're saying votes are worth looking at in any context. Agreed.

I'm also saying that I'm measurably more critical of tied votes this game now that we know actual players and not random chance are deciding the ties.

S~V~S wrote: ↑Sat Dec 08, 2018 2:36 pm
DharmaHelper wrote: ↑Sat Dec 08, 2018 2:25 pm To me the only reason a person would vote to tie a lynch that they weren't in danger in is because they are on the tribunal or know who is and they want to save the person that is in the lead during the un-tied period.

Significantly more plausible baddie motives RE: Ties.
This, we don't know who is on the tribunal or their affiliation. Pushing a tie is pushing a lynch out of the hands of the voters into the hands of ... whoever.

I would find intentionally pushing a lynch suspish under these circumstances, too.

Did Chuck say why he voted for DDL? I skimmed, I must have missed it. Off to get my dog,squeee!! BBL

Also, have fun with the doggo

ColinIsCool wrote: ↑Sat Dec 08, 2018 2:42 pm [VOTE: CBOB] aubergine no u

Uh oh bois

DharmaHelper wrote: ↑Sat Dec 08, 2018 2:40 pm Anyway I've ranked the people who have currently voted from most to least suspicious as of me typing this post without being linkied into any other votes:

Cbob - "His posting" is a funny but ultimately hollow and wormy way to explain the Colin vote
Colin - "No U" vote was cheeky but still bad.
Chuck - Did not give a reason for his DDL vote which IIRC came close to if not directly after Epi said he'd be voting DDL. Chuck pulling up to the train station early AF to save himself a seat.
Sloonei - Voting for anyone based on other people's reasons for suspecting people is suspicious to me. Make your own points. Stand on your own ground.
TH - Early vote for Sorsha for a hollow, funny reason. Doesn't look serious. Sorsha's not done anything overtly suspicious. Could be buddying/distancing but not worth losing my shit over instantly.
Epi - His DDL vote makes sense, he gave a good reason and was consistent.

Epignosis wrote: ↑Sat Dec 08, 2018 2:44 pm
DharmaHelper wrote: ↑Sat Dec 08, 2018 2:32 pm
Sloonei wrote: ↑Sat Dec 08, 2018 2:31 pm
DharmaHelper wrote: ↑Sat Dec 08, 2018 2:25 pm To me the only reason a person would vote to tie a lynch that they weren't in danger in is because they are on the tribunal or know who is and they want to save the person that is in the lead during the un-tied period.

Significantly more plausible baddie motives RE: Ties.
But what if there's a baddie team with nobody on the tribunal, and hypothetically one of their own is up for a lynch? They'd want to avoid that tie, wouldn't they?
Yeah if someone votes to break ties that's also worth looking at but what I'm saying is if someone votes to cause a tie, and especially if that tie then breaks against whoever they voted for, that's a red flag for me
So...

Your strategy is to examine polls that get made into a tie and polls that do not get made into a tie?

Cool.

I'm not sure what's difficult to grasp about "I'm placing a higher level of scrutiny on votes that result in a tied lynch"

Sloonei wrote: ↑Sat Dec 08, 2018 2:56 pm What do you think of the reason I gave for voting for Tranq, DH? It was your post, after all.

Tranq's post RE: "the poll is meaningless" struck me as disingenuous. Like he wanted to find something to say and wanted to feign ignorance.

It's a suspicious thing to have said on his part, and a good reason to vote for him.

Tranq wrote: ↑Sat Dec 08, 2018 2:58 pm I'm glad you asked, juliets.

Note i said poll options, not polls. LC/BR polls are always important.
A World Reborn's Day 0 poll options were literally meaningless. Players had to choose between Prog and other music genres. Poll options had nothing to do with the lore of the game. The outcome of the poll, however, did.
I did a quick search on these poll options and didn't find anything meaningful, and made my post.

Major Meeeehhhhhhh

Sloonei wrote: ↑Sat Dec 08, 2018 3:04 pm
DharmaHelper wrote: ↑Sat Dec 08, 2018 2:59 pm
Sloonei wrote: ↑Sat Dec 08, 2018 2:56 pm What do you think of the reason I gave for voting for Tranq, DH? It was your post, after all.
Tranq's post RE: "the poll is meaningless" struck me as disingenuous. Like he wanted to find something to say and wanted to feign ignorance.

It's a suspicious thing to have said on his part, and a good reason to vote for him.
My thoughts eggzacktly, but I give him less meh for his explanation just now.

It's less suspicious of you to articulate those reasons instead of parroting me twice.

Turnip Head wrote: ↑Sat Dec 08, 2018 3:28 pm
DharmaHelper wrote: ↑Sat Dec 08, 2018 2:49 pm
DharmaHelper wrote: ↑Sat Dec 08, 2018 2:40 pm Anyway I've ranked the people who have currently voted from most to least suspicious as of me typing this post without being linkied into any other votes:

Cbob - "His posting" is a funny but ultimately hollow and wormy way to explain the Colin vote
Colin - "No U" vote was cheeky but still bad.
Chuck - Did not give a reason for his DDL vote which IIRC came close to if not directly after Epi said he'd be voting DDL. Chuck pulling up to the train station early AF to save himself a seat.
Sloonei - Voting for anyone based on other people's reasons for suspecting people is suspicious to me. Make your own points. Stand on your own ground.
TH - Early vote for Sorsha for a hollow, funny reason. Doesn't look serious. Sorsha's not done anything overtly suspicious. Could be buddying/distancing but not worth losing my shit over instantly.
Epi - His DDL vote makes sense, he gave a good reason and was consistent.

I read this the first time but it's not exactly meaty by your standards. Why requote it?

Added Colin.

Kylemii wrote: ↑Sat Dec 08, 2018 4:05 pm
DharmaHelper wrote: ↑Sat Dec 08, 2018 2:32 pmYeah if someone votes to break ties that's also worth looking at but what I'm saying is if someone votes to cause a tie, and especially if that tie then breaks against whoever they voted for, that's a red flag for me
when did this start? was this always your opinion on ties? i don't remember this coming up before and i feel like it would have, cus i basically do that constantly

In this game. Specifically given the tribunal mechanic. Taking random chance/host discretion out of the ties and making the decision one that the player(s) make (i.e one that can be influenced by in game factors).

Kylemii wrote: ↑Sat Dec 08, 2018 4:22 pm
Sloonei wrote: ↑Sat Dec 08, 2018 4:06 pm
Kylemii wrote: ↑Sat Dec 08, 2018 4:05 pm
DharmaHelper wrote: ↑Sat Dec 08, 2018 2:32 pmYeah if someone votes to break ties that's also worth looking at but what I'm saying is if someone votes to cause a tie, and especially if that tie then breaks against whoever they voted for, that's a red flag for me
when did this start? was this always your opinion on ties? i don't remember this coming up before and i feel like it would have, cus i basically do that constantly
he's talking about tribunal
yeah i've gathered that. it's just that i don't remember ever seeing DH voicing or acting on strong opinions regarding ties before, even in other games where ties weren't randomized.

I dunno if I have or haven't. Except a few times in games wherein I thought ties would be funny. And that one game that we made a 4 or 5 way tie or w/e that was pretty funny.

insertnamehere wrote: ↑Sat Dec 08, 2018 4:43 pm
Sloonei wrote: ↑Sat Dec 08, 2018 4:39 pm
insertnamehere wrote: ↑Sat Dec 08, 2018 4:38 pm
G-Man wrote: ↑Sat Dec 08, 2018 2:39 pm
DharmaHelper wrote: ↑Sat Dec 08, 2018 2:25 pm To me the only reason a person would vote to tie a lynch that they weren't in danger in is because they are on the tribunal or know who is and they want to save the person that is in the lead during the un-tied period.

Significantly more plausible baddie motives RE: Ties.
Knowing more than meets the eye is far from the only reason that ties happen. At EOD it does look suspicious but it happens many times during the day phase as well. Some people have hunches about and reads on people that lead them to tie up the poll. Poll momentum shifts as the day progresses as well. Your post is very short-sighted, reactive, and dismissive. Anyone else posting it and I’d be somewhat suspicious. But you’re you, so I don’t know if the needle moves much.
this post irks me
Why?
it's short-sighted, reactive, and dismissive. Anyone else posting it and I'd be somewhat suspicious. But it's G-Man, so I don't know if the needle moves much.

Fuckin incredible troll.

ColinIsCool wrote: ↑Sat Dec 08, 2018 4:50 pm If I can't check in tomorrow I don't want my vote to be on cbob as a joke, so I am publicly announcing a [VOTE: DDL] aubergine wagon contribution for the foreseeable future.

Yikes.

MacDougall wrote: ↑Sat Dec 08, 2018 5:17 pm I would give DH a town read but I am scorned after Hogwarts. I will never trust another DH as long as I live.

Sloonei though. He's being a real trusty boi.

Oh that reminds me I tried something new in Outpost and I think Hogwarts with those Re-reading list or whatever but 30 players is too much so fuck that lol.

Epignosis wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 12:53 am
Kylemii wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 12:50 am
Epignosis wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 12:48 am
nutella wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 12:47 am Luna's cool for now

Probably gonna move my vote to Colin soon unless he steps it up
Nah.

Lock civilian.
is your lock civilian luna or colin? also why
Colin.

Let's play a game.

You guess why I believe Colin is a lock civilian.

"I picked a name at random and asked you to give me a reason so I could say that's the reason"

Epignosis wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:28 am
Sloonei wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:07 am I've added another town read to my list.

I have a genuine Day 1 suspicion of Colin, but am I little anxious about the ease with which his case gained momentum. His post about bandwagonining DDL is patented shady-nasty business, but I don't know how to feel about the seemingly exaggerated scrutiny it's received. Then again, there's also the fact that we have two scum teams. It's entirely possible for scum to pile on an easy bandwagon that ends up being correct. I'd like for Colin to say things. I'll lay out my own gripes against them so he has more variety to respond to. I was voting for Colin before it was cool, after all.
You qualified your suspicion of Colin as "genuine." If you are a civilian, what else could it be? Why is the adjective necessary?

I know people will roll their eyes, but someone literally did this in the Mafia Universe game I was in, and I backed off on it, and the mafia won.

Fuck that. Fuck adverbs and adjectives and adjuncts.

The bottom line is that you started out with telling us your suspicion of Colin is genuine, but then you talked about how anxious you feel about other people agreeing that he's bad.

After that you have to talk about two bad teams. Who the fuck cares?

Voting Sloonei.

Oof actually a pretty good point

I was nervous about re-doing my ISO list schtick for 30 players but if only 15 participate in the actual game it should be pretty easy.

I'm not overly concerned with DDL's post speculating about role alignments. It's not wrong to suggest that baddies will talk about mechanics rather than gameplay early on, but I don't necessarily get that vibe from DDL. That's not to say I get definitively town vibes from him, but he's shown himself to be a somewhat idiosyncratic player in the past and I've mistakenly held that against him more than once. Also, he's not shied away from gameplay discussion either.

That said, his posts haven't read as surefire civilian to me. Some things:

This gave me vertigo.

Anyway here's me taking a look at Sloonei's post in a bit more detail as to why it fucked me up big time.

Sloonei wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:58 am I'm not overly concerned with DDL's post speculating about role alignments. It's not wrong to suggest that baddies will talk about mechanics rather than gameplay early on, but I don't necessarily get that vibe from DDL. That's not to say I get definitively town vibes from him, but he's shown himself to be a somewhat idiosyncratic player in the past and I've mistakenly held that against him more than once. Also, he's not shied away from gameplay discussion either.

That said, his posts haven't read as surefire civilian to me. Some things:
Dragon D. Luffy wrote: ↑Sat Dec 08, 2018 9:04 am Nutella is fluffing so hard this game I almost think she has a curse.
This is very far off from how I was reading nutella at the moment. Idiosyncrasy and all, I perk up when a player comes out with a stance that is the polar opposite of my own. Doesn't mean he's bad, but it's a thing.

Dragon D. Luffy wrote: ↑Sat Dec 08, 2018 11:20 am Are people really suspecting me for the role stuff?

I just liked the puzzle and wanted to see if I could figure it out.
I don't love this post and could read its tone as "baddie who's been caught for a dumb reason." But it's certainly frustrating to poke your head in on Day 1 and see that people are swarming around you.

Dragon D. Luffy wrote: ↑Sat Dec 08, 2018 5:36 pm I hate this argument about ties. It's full of WIFOM and NAI and general inconclusive waste of time.

Someone tieing a poll could mean literally anything, such as... wanting that person to be lynched.
While I agree with the sentiment, the language of this post feels a little too dismissive of the conversation itself. I like that people talked about ties. It gave us content and produced some new areas of discussion.

Dragon D. Luffy wrote: ↑Sat Dec 08, 2018 5:53 pm Mac is supatowing

Sloonei also feels like supatowning but in a way that's not so hard to fake
Like with nutella before, this stance (on Mac. I have no stance on myself) is totally opposite to mine. DDL is allowed to not agree with me. But I'm taking notice again.

To be clear, I don't scum read DDL at the moment. But Epi named him and I figured I'd share the handful of not-positive reactions I've had to his posts so far. I don't currently foresee myself voting for DDL today, but I'm open to the discussion.

Some helpful color coding before I address specific points:

Green - Positive or Pro-Town statements made about DDL
Yellow - Positive/Pro Town Leaning statements made about DDL
Orange - Negative or Baddie Leaning statements made about DDL
Red - Negative statements made about DDL

And now to specific points I'd like to address:

1. "This is very far off from how I was reading nutella at the moment. Idiosyncrasy and all, I perk up when a player comes out with a stance that is the polar opposite of my own. Doesn't mean he's bad, but it's a thing.

This quote encapsulates the theme of the post as a whole pretty well. Fluffy nonsense that doesn't say anything definitive one way or the other. "DDL could be bad, or he could not, I dunno, he said something different than what I said, so its a thing."

2. "I don't love this post and could read its tone as "baddie who's been caught for a dumb reason." But it's certainly frustrating to poke your head in on Day 1 and see that people are swarming around you."

You "could" read it as bad. You "don't love" it? More fence-sitting language that opens the door a few creaks but stops just short of pulling the trigger. Primo Garbo.

Anyway that's all I got. This post looks like "Hey look everybody over here but maybe don't take this as me pushing a DDL case because fuck if he actually does get lynched I don't want to be held to account. Shit."

Sloonei wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 3:01 am
timmer wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 2:56 am Just reread it. You say you have a case but then the next sentences are all qualifiers and concerns about side angles which serve to weaken it. You spend more time on the side stuff that concern you about it than your actual suspicion. I don't know how else to explain your post to you, lol. I'm heading to bed, g'night. Hopefully you will see things clearly soon.
I said I have a suspicion, but that I also have reservations about the way Colin is being treated in the thread. If it’s messy, it’s because my thought process is unsettled. Because it’s Day 1. You’ve lamented yourself how difficult Day 1 often is. I wasn’t distracted from my suspicion on Colin. I was simply discussing it within the context of the game. I then laid out my case in another post shortly after, but you’re not looking at that because it’s not included in Epi’s (intentionally) bullshit case.

To what end do you think Epignosis has fabricated this case against you?

Spoiler: show

Sloonei wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 3:23 am
DharmaHelper wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 3:03 am Anyway here's me taking a look at Sloonei's post in a bit more detail as to why it fucked me up big time.

Sloonei wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:58 am I'm not overly concerned with DDL's post speculating about role alignments. It's not wrong to suggest that baddies will talk about mechanics rather than gameplay early on, but I don't necessarily get that vibe from DDL. That's not to say I get definitively town vibes from him, but he's shown himself to be a somewhat idiosyncratic player in the past and I've mistakenly held that against him more than once. Also, he's not shied away from gameplay discussion either.

That said, his posts haven't read as surefire civilian to me. Some things:
Dragon D. Luffy wrote: ↑Sat Dec 08, 2018 9:04 am Nutella is fluffing so hard this game I almost think she has a curse.
This is very far off from how I was reading nutella at the moment. Idiosyncrasy and all, I perk up when a player comes out with a stance that is the polar opposite of my own. Doesn't mean he's bad, but it's a thing.

Dragon D. Luffy wrote: ↑Sat Dec 08, 2018 11:20 am Are people really suspecting me for the role stuff?

I just liked the puzzle and wanted to see if I could figure it out.
I don't love this post and could read its tone as "baddie who's been caught for a dumb reason." But it's certainly frustrating to poke your head in on Day 1 and see that people are swarming around you.

Dragon D. Luffy wrote: ↑Sat Dec 08, 2018 5:36 pm I hate this argument about ties. It's full of WIFOM and NAI and general inconclusive waste of time.

Someone tieing a poll could mean literally anything, such as... wanting that person to be lynched.
While I agree with the sentiment, the language of this post feels a little too dismissive of the conversation itself. I like that people talked about ties. It gave us content and produced some new areas of discussion.

Dragon D. Luffy wrote: ↑Sat Dec 08, 2018 5:53 pm Mac is supatowing

Sloonei also feels like supatowning but in a way that's not so hard to fake
Like with nutella before, this stance (on Mac. I have no stance on myself) is totally opposite to mine. DDL is allowed to not agree with me. But I'm taking notice again.

To be clear, I don't scum read DDL at the moment. But Epi named him and I figured I'd share the handful of not-positive reactions I've had to his posts so far. I don't currently foresee myself voting for DDL today, but I'm open to the discussion.
Some helpful color coding before I address specific points:

Green - Positive or Pro-Town statements made about DDL
Yellow - Positive/Pro Town Leaning statements made about DDL
Orange - Negative or Baddie Leaning statements made about DDL
Red - Negative statements made about DDL

And now to specific points I'd like to address:

1. "This is very far off from how I was reading nutella at the moment. Idiosyncrasy and all, I perk up when a player comes out with a stance that is the polar opposite of my own. Doesn't mean he's bad, but it's a thing.
This quote encapsulates the theme of the post as a whole pretty well. Fluffy nonsense that doesn't say anything definitive one way or the other. "DDL could be bad, or he could not, I dunno, he said something different than what I said, so its a thing."

2. "I don't love this post and could read its tone as "baddie who's been caught for a dumb reason." But it's certainly frustrating to poke your head in on Day 1 and see that people are swarming around you."
You "could" read it as bad. You "don't love" it? More fence-sitting language that opens the door a few creaks but stops just short of pulling the trigger. Primo Garbo.

Anyway that's all I got. This post looks like "Hey look everybody over here but maybe don't take this as me pushing a DDL case because fuck if he actually does get lynched I don't want to be held to account. Shit."
I just want you to know that my response to this thread was to roll my eyes and chuck my phone across the room. I won't be responding to it further.

Or, put another way.

These..posts do not register as the consistent mindset of a civilian to me....[They suggest] an attitude of partial investment in the hunt, but with a slight aftertaste of waffles and indecision

Search found 1004 matches