Dragon D. Luffy wrote:SK is serial killer. The fact it needs to fulfill requirements to start killing doesn't change what the role is.
Causality doesn't work that way, but ok, I have a better understanding of why you openly treated the role as SK, I suppose.
Dom wrote:Finnicky Rico-- now that you've started playing, why don't you make a real opinion and not just jump on the hater wagon ?? Sad !
I don't deserve the benefit of teh doubt. I deserve a real argument to be made against me, and none has been made. I am the best there ever was and Dfaraday is the worst . okay, folks? The way he jumped on me here-- hey, maybe I was looking for it, I don't know??
It is inaccurate to say I simply jumped on any wagon. I do have a real, monitor read on you. I think you developed your persona and posting style roughly when the contests and bids for prefect started happening, which was fine: you got inspired by in-game interactions, got creative and developed a "gimmick" a-la-G-Man
(though I'm not sure why you didn't save this one for a more appropriately themed game
).
The problem with how this posting style, at least in my perception, gels with your actual activity has to do with some of the following:
1. It murks the lines between being confrontational with your sussers simply because it's in your persona's bloodstream and actually disapproving or deflecting suspicions in a valid way.
This is a entirely hollow banter reaction to JJJ finding your suss on Bass to be weak.
This is just one example of how blurry the line between 'spittin' Domald' and NO U'ing can get - and frankly, I tend to label NO U'ing Dom as bad Dom. I basically don't spot any player to have suspected you that didn't get this treatment: JJJ and DFaraday most of all, to a lesser extent nutella, Quin, Scotty.
2. Your ratio between full banter posts and meaningful ideas/messages behind the façade has improved over the course of the game, quite in sync with the wave of mixed or negative reactions you received. I'm inclined to read this as trying to patch things up. "Fine tuning! Bad!" I mean, your
very last post is completely devoid of gimmicks. Look how serious you've gotten all of a sudden, when having to vouch for civreading a fallen player (SVS) or being asked repeatedly to state your suspicions.
3. It's not about deserving BTOD or not, it's about
getting it. I think it's safe to say you survived having to duel on Day 2 because of a new wave of players reading kindly into your performance, particularly your antics: "he wouldn't do that if he'd have a team agenda", with opinions as strong as the hunt on you being called BS. On my side, I believe you could very well be experimenting with a new playing angle, after a series of games in which you were either bad all the time or in which you weren't, but wasn't exactly trusted given your baddie legacy and usual style (*raises hand*). This "experimentation" could be happening to simply refresh your style a bit, regardless of alignment, but points 1) and 2) still make me lean on spotting baddie traits from you. Plus, if you're bad, you've obviously done a good enough job to create some "oh, he wouldn't do this if bad" impressions.
I have no way to explain this properly in English, but there's a wretched garbage musical genre in our country called "manele / mynele" in which 70% of the lyrics are "death to my haters and enemies", and, to simply paraphrase, I think a lot of your posts are just that, either in a total bantz way, either with rebuttal intent that comes off, however, as NO U'y or evasive.
Golden wrote:I think this read on SVS is both accurate and genuine.
I'm really feeling good about Dom this game.
"You guys, I'm feeling good about him/her" | X |
"You guys, I have my own read on him/her" | - |
"You guys, I suspect him/her" | - |
I don't have any issue with considering SVS a civ victim (the most remote tinfoil would be that the Turbans thought she could be a dormant baddie opponent), but what part of Dom stating obvious, accurate things about SVS is an alignment indicator?
I could add, in fact, a detail that Dom omitted, which is that SVS is probably still in no-internet limbo. Would this earn me any points? Does it need to?
timmer wrote:So I'm not just not going to try to catch up but rather start fresh from here. I'm sorry if my spontaneous vote strategy confused or offended some people, it made sense to Mr at the time. I figured, many of the people holding back votes will be plotters on bad teams, if one of their own is up for lynch. So since I had no idea about anything, I pushed the #2 and #3 guys up to ry to force baddie to get agitated and sloppy. It made sense at the time
I will observe the day's events and vote with my gut when the time for it comes.
Please try to clarify why you thought making uninformed, yet
relevant (shaping up the dynamic of the main wagons) nominations was the best move, as opposed to other tendencies exhibited by other players, who were just as out of the loop as you, such as: self-voting, sideline voting, voting because the initials match, etc. I'm also open to the concept of teammates holding back, but I'd also like to get a sense of why your move, in contrast, would simply be a civilian
faux-pas, rather than a hidden save move, at a reasonable time for results to change.
MacDougall wrote:Dare I say Jan scumslipped?
Citation needed.
But speaking of Jan, his clumsy posts are starting to land on the thin line between "how derpy can you get" and "can this be a façade".
I'm multiquoting in the morning for over an hour instead of studying. Ah, this ol' mafia feeling... 