In a perfect universe, it would be a degree of zero. In the real world, it would be a minimal degree -- accounting for individual differences (Wilgy will by nature have more fluff than the average player). I'd have guessed more than half of Quin's non-draft day posts were of the fluff sort, because I could not distinctly remember much of anything he'd said. That's why I went digging.
At the end of the day phase, I found myself questioning nutellas voters more than she was herself, poking at arguments that I didn't find completely compelling in her stead. She was present to argue for herself, and I felt she was letting me do it. Upon coming to this realization, I stopped doing so. I considered my suspicion of Quin, that he wasn't putting much meat in his posts. It wasn't substantive. The case against nutella, even if not entirely agreeable, was more substantive. I trusted the people trying to lynch her. I decided to join them.
No it isn't. Multiple players have been accusing Quin of the same thing, but nobody had actually provided a case. They were assertions thrown into the thread. I was among them, because my perception matched theirs. Quin suggested it wasn't accurate, so I took it upon myself to check him on that. If nobody does that and Quin a civilian, then any civilians making that accusation are doing a disservice to their team if they don't make a better effort. I made a better effort.
That took about eight minutes to compile. My energy expenditure is efficient.
Green -- nah. If a player truly does load a post history with junk, it's a bad thing. Whether Quin was truly guilty of that is the question, not whether fluff is perfectly okay.Epignosis wrote: ↑Thu Feb 15, 2018 11:00 pmYou are toying with Quin and telling people why something that's clearly a bad argument against him is a bad argument, but then in the same post, you raise another bad argument that is effectively derived from the first one: That Quin's overall involvement here is not substantive.
Orange -- That is not a condemnation of Quin, but it is an observation which doesn't work in his favor. If I thought he was the best suspect given that, you'd see my vote on him right now. The entire point of that post was to determine whether the arguments against Quin were valid. I determined that they weren't. I presented a separate argument which is, if accepted, a less scathing accusation but an accusation nonetheless. I will continue to read Quin and judge accordingly.
As before: kiss my ass.
