MAD MAX: GAME OVER

#2951

Sloonei wrote:
DrWilgy wrote:
Sloonei wrote:Snipped for brevity
DrWilgy wrote:
Sloonei wrote:
DrWilgy wrote: No baddiedar is different. I have no impulse to vote for you but in a gth scenario I do think you are still bad.

Honestly at this point with how little time ive had to read/contribute all my thoughts are just a gth random mess.
You think this computes over here? "Off the baddiedar" seems to strongly suggest "not a suspect".
And followed up here.
DrWilgy wrote:Nah. Baddies I'd vote for. GTH baddies I still need to think about.

Glorf why is it 5-3 then?
And that was the full conversation on the subject, unless you adressed me without a quote and I missed it.
My suspicion comes down to whether or not I believe you here, and at the moment I do not. But there's still plenty we can pull out from here to work on this some more. Let's look at these words you said:
DrWilgy wrote: No baddiedar is different. I have no impulse to vote for you but in a gth scenario I do think you are still bad.
Why would you have no impulse to vote for me if you GTH me as bad? Am I a suspect or am I not? You claim that your Day 4 vote was based on the strategy of avoiding having your vote align with mine. Ouch, that's pretty damning. Yet I'm not a player you'd vote for? This, once again, does not compute.

But this also still leaves the biggest question I have up in the air, and that is the original point I brought up. You took me off your baddiedar on Night 2 and then later, on Day/Night 4, you tried to say that I'd never been removed as a suspect. "baddiedar" to me just looks like a playful way of saying "suspect". Kinda like how I ask people who they're voting for rather than who they suspect. It's fine to change your mind every once in a while, so I'd make no objection if you removed me on Day 2 and then put me back on on Day 4. But the way you tried to, apparently, backtrack out of this, first by saying it never happened, and then by saying there's a difference between "baddiedar" and your GTH reads. I feel like you were caught in a slip up and then tried to lie about it. If I am wrong I'll make a note of it for future games. I don't think I am wrong.
I'm unsure how this doesn't make sense if you understand the difference between I'd vote for ______ and I suspect _____. Day 2 I would've voted for you. Happily actually. I still need to quote for JJJ what made me think that and will do asap. Day 4, I wouldn't have voted for you, but vote along you? No way.

Tell me when I backtracked? When I stated this never happened. No wait I just checked to make sure I'm not just wrong in the head, I never claimed that you coming off my baddiedar never happened. I did however say you weren't in my good graces. As far as I'm concerned you've always been a suspect for me, but I've only wanted to vote for you day 2 and then after the "If INH flips town, then Wilgy looks bad" claim.
The backtracking is in my interpretation of your actions. I still stand by it. I take "off my baddiedar" to mean that I am not a suspect. You later said I had "never left your bad graces". The language is different, but the sentiment in the former comes back to me as "Sloonei is not a suspect", and in the latter it comes back as "Sloonei is a suspect and always has been." This is a contradiction as I see it. Your response has been to deny that this contradiction exists by explaining that there are categorically different kinds of suspicions in the game, and that I met the parameters for Suspicion Type A, but not for Suspicion Type B. I simply am not buying it. You'll need to sell it to me if you want me to read you as town.

Pointing out another lie in green, and responding to this.

You see this is fine, I can unsterstand this perspective as my manner pf speech wasn't specific. I didn't however state that it never happened and I'm unsure how I backtracked. I didn't go back and say "I didn't mean blank" or "blank didn't happen" I did however express my opinions of you.

I'm not going to sell my suspicion of you to you, it's a waste of time and effort. While I don't believe your suspicion of me is genuine (based on misinformation and over exaggerations which are by nature lies) and you cant believe my genuine suspicion of you (based on my non-clarity of speech), that's just how it's going to be unless one of us is willing to force shift our perspective.

Linki - @Sloonei The post you linked in the above spoiler "You made this post to address what I think you thought was my biggest reason for suspecting you." was the incorrect post. I know why you suspect me and adressed it before the linked post.

#2952

This is too much of a mess to do from phone. Rip me.

#2953

For whatever reason, I'm having a great deal of difficulty following this discussion between Sloonei and DrWilgy. I don't know if it's the quote pyramids messing with my eyes or if one or both sides simply aren't making sense. I'm going to try to work this out myself:

Spoiler: show

Okay, these two posts plainly show DrWilgy saying that Sloonei is not on his "baddiedar". To me that carries a clear implication that he doesn't find Sloonei particularly suspicious. "Baddiedar" may seem like a vague word, but the term still includes "baddie" and to not be "on it" would seem to be close to or the same as "not a baddie". Wilgy has contested this, suggesting that he didn't want to vote for Sloonei but still suspected him.

Let's return to the first post in that spoiler, specifically the highlighted portion. Wilgy was being asked for his view on Sloonei, not whether he'd vote. So this is how that went, reduced into simpler language:

"What is your view of Sloonei?"

"Sloonei is not on my baddiedar."

I struggle to believe that means anything apart from "I don't really suspect Sloonei right now".

So, proceeding from that:

DrWilgy wrote:
Sloonei wrote:
DrWilgy wrote:I actually trust the wagon without Lorab and sloon on it more.

Changed my vote.
Am I back in your bad graces?
You were never out of my bad graces and I still gth you bad. While I didn't want to vote with you, it's better than a tie.

For safe keeping I'll notate my vote record this phase. I was on INH, changed to Indiglo and changed back to INH all within 3 min to prevent a tie.

I can see Sloonei's point. This looks like a contradiction to me. There is a gap between "Sloonei is not on my baddiedar" and "I don't want to vote alongside Sloonei" that I am not sure Wilgy has adequately accounted for.

#2954

I think these three posts contain the lies Wilgy is accusing me of. I've provided links for easy access to context:
1. link

Spoiler: show

2. link

Spoiler: show

3. link

Spoiler: show

DrWilgy wrote:Taking a look at Sloonei and I have some things I found that I didn't respond to before.
Sloonei wrote:Taking a look at Wilgy.
DrWilgy wrote:
a2thezebra wrote:
DrWilgy wrote:
a2thezebra wrote:Voting Ricochet. If anyone's here, ask me questions and I'll ask you questions back. Let's generate some content. Deal?
Where do you read me zeebs?
Null, but GTH good because with what content you have, you haven't given me a reason to think otherwise. Where do you read me?
GTH good.

I have barely read the thread though. What do you think of Mac Declining my invite to team up?
These represent his first real posts in the game. On the one hand I want to like that he's able to produce a GTH read on the spot, but on the other I can't like it too much since he discredits himself by being honest and telling us he hasn't read the thread. This post does nothing for me.

DrWilgy wrote:
a2thezebra wrote:What is your strongest read at the moment, considering that you haven't fully caught up?
Baddie Rico with potential as Mac temmie.

I don't think Rico is the type to lose sight of what would gain him advantage in the game for a policy lynch.

What do you think was the most interesting exchange so far?
He's at least loosely on the Rico bandwagon here. I don't like that, but he did give a reason to feel that way so it's not the worst. What I do like is his question. I thought it was a good early game, looking-to-get-involved type of question. This brief appearance is what I was referencing earlier when I said I gave him an early town read. When he came in here it looked like he was genuinely trying to both get himself involved and get others thinking about things in the game.
DrWilgy wrote:
a2thezebra wrote:DrWilgy, do you have any other gut and/or vibe-based reads you would like to share?
The only other player that I have thought about is Sprityo, whom I gut read as bad.

I like your analysis of Rico. I'd like an answer from Rico as to why he thought to interject here. Not sure if this has been explained yet or not, but I'm not willing to go back and check.

Zebra, how would you respond to me voting Rico right now?

Sloonei, mind telling me the exchange that interested you most?
He lists sprityo as an early baddie read. I'd be interested to hear how that's developed. He also gave me and LoRab gut scum reads. I think he's since dropped the read on me,and his LoRab read seems to have been dependent on Rico being bad as well.

Turns out that his most substantial post in the game to this point is a big one about why LoRab is bad. Interesting. I don't think it's all consistent. For instance, the second to last point he makes in this post indicates that a certain post of LoRab's was directed toward him, when it was really directed at Jay.

So I dunno. There's not much here. There are a few things that give me slight town vibes in his post history but nothing overwhelming. A lack of content is always going to be a concern, so I can't do much with Wilgy right now.
So in regards to the inconsistency that you believe tou saw, the subject of my post was mostly LoRab ignoring my question. The 1 or 2 quotes above the one you claim to be inconsistent is the subject (the question), and the following quotes were to show that the question was ignored.

What are your thoughts on this now that I've explained this error?

[/quote]

Wilgy can add or subtract whatever he likes, but I think this includes most of what he's getting at.

#2955

Snipping a lot of this just to make it easier to look at.

DrWilgy wrote:Pointing out another lie in green, and responding to this.

You see this is fine, I can unsterstand this perspective as my manner pf speech wasn't specific. I didn't however state that it never happened and I'm unsure how I backtracked. I didn't go back and say "I didn't mean blank" or "blank didn't happen" I did however express my opinions of you.

You claimed it never happened when you said I was "never out of your bad graces." You then backtracked when I pointed this out to you and you said "baddiedar is different." I see these two things as you first claiming that my claim never happened, and then backtracking to a more elaborate excuse once I provided evidence that it did indeed happen. You specifically said "blank didn't happen" and then "blank1 doesn't mean blank2". The words are right there in the links. Do you refute this?

I'm not going to sell my suspicion of you to you, it's a waste of time and effort. While I don't believe your suspicion of me is genuine (based on misinformation and over exaggerations which are by nature lies) and you cant believe my genuine suspicion of you (based on my non-clarity of speech), that's just how it's going to be unless one of us is willing to force shift our perspective.

Linki - @Sloonei The post you linked in the above spoiler "You made this post to address what I think you thought was my biggest reason for suspecting you." was the incorrect post. I know why you suspect me and adressed it before the linked post.

I'm not asking you to sell me your suspicion of me, I'm asking me to sell you your version of events in my case against you. I still am not buying it and it still looks very much like you're caught in a scum slip and its subsequent cover up.

I do not feel like progress is being made here. This is the second or third time I've said all of these things.

#2956

don't feel pressured to respond to these things immediately if you're on your phone or struggling for time, wilgy. I'd much rather you take the time to be as clear as possible and not rush to get a post out right away. Do whatchu gotta do.

#2957

maybe sloonei should be trying to find baddies instead of defending himself.

oh wait, considering how he's now suspecting anyone who says anything bad about him, and bending over backwards to discredit any legitimate suspicion coming in his direction, I guess he considers them both the same thing.

I'd like to go on the record saying that I'd be flabbergasted if Wilgy is bad. I'd be nonplussed if Sloonei is.

I'm still confused on why Glorfindel was a complete and utter non-starter today.

Things I'd like to do in the future if I can find the time:
Figure out who exactly distracted everyone from Glorfindel today.
ISO Sloonei, which will be an ordeal.
ISO Dom, so I can back up my gut read of him.

#2958

insertnamehere wrote:maybe sloonei should be trying to find baddies instead of defending himself.

oh wait, considering how he's now suspecting anyone who says anything bad about him, and bending over backwards to discredit any legitimate suspicion coming in his direction, I guess he considers them both the same thing.

I'd like to go on the record saying that I'd be flabbergasted if Wilgy is bad. I'd be nonplussed if Sloonei is.

I'm still confused on why Glorfindel was a complete and utter non-starter today.

Things I'd like to do in the future if I can find the time:
Figure out who exactly distracted everyone from Glorfindel today.
ISO Sloonei, which will be an ordeal.
ISO Dom, so I can back up my gut read of him.

Sure.

#2959

I'm still willing to consider a Glorfindel vote. I had a couple basic, pointed questions for him earlier in the phase that I had a purpose for, but he hasn't been around yet to answer them. I worry that he's low-hanging fruit, but I wouldn't say I read him as a townie as strongly as I have in a few recent games where he was mislynched.

#2960

The issue is we are chasing our tails. The more you respond to me the more I have to go back to the main issue.

I can see why you see inconsistency in my posts. I was not clear between defining "I would vote for you" and "gth you are bad" since day 2 I've gth'd you bad and that never changed. I was considering voting for you that day, but voting Rico or LoRab was more pressing.

Backtracking, however, or claiming things didn't happen I will refute. Not being out of my good graces was true as I still had you gth bad. You weren't someone I'd vote for, but not someone I'd vote with (as explained earlier). Pointing out that baddiedar and not being in good graces was not backtracking, rather explaining my perspective.

The main issue you have with me Sloonei is that you don't know how to define "blank 1 and blank 2". I can tell you all day how these are defined, but if you don't want to believe them it's upto you.

You read the exchange as "wilgy says him claiming I wasn't bad never happened" and "wilgy says being bad isn't being bad"

The way I said it was supposed to translate to "wilgy never said I was gth good" and "wilgy says gth bad isn't the same as vote worthy"

#2961

DrWilgy wrote:The way I said it was supposed to translate to "wilgy never said I was gth good" and "wilgy says gth bad isn't the same as vote worthy"

So when Quin asked you how you felt about Sloonei, and you responded with "he's not on my baddiedar", you meant "I still suspect him but wouldn't vote for him"?

#2962

DrWilgy wrote:The issue is we are chasing our tails. The more you respond to me the more I have to go back to the main issue.

I can see why you see inconsistency in my posts. I was not clear between defining "I would vote for you" and "gth you are bad" since day 2 I've gth'd you bad and that never changed. I was considering voting for you that day, but voting Rico or LoRab was more pressing.

Backtracking, however, or claiming things didn't happen I will refute. Not being out of my good graces was true as I still had you gth bad. You weren't someone I'd vote for, but not someone I'd vote with (as explained earlier). Pointing out that baddiedar and not being in good graces was not backtracking, rather explaining my perspective.

The main issue you have with me Sloonei is that you don't know how to define "blank 1 and blank 2". I can tell you all day how these are defined, but if you don't want to believe them it's upto you.

You read the exchange as "wilgy says him claiming I wasn't bad never happened" and "wilgy says being bad isn't being bad"

The way I said it was supposed to translate to "wilgy never said I was gth good" and "wilgy says gth bad isn't the same as vote worthy"

I suppose so. In all of this, I still don't believe you and there's probably nothing more to be said about it. I think you were caught in a contradiction and tried to cover it up. Thank you for explaining yourself, whether you're being truthful or not. I'm going to keep you as a top suspect until further notice, but I'm willing to cut off this argument here if you are.

#2963

Glorfindel

#2964

Wilgy: current GTH reads on everyone? I'll make a list for you to make it easier if you're on your phone.

Dom
a2thezebra / Epignosis 2.0
Glorfindel
insertnamehere
JaggedJimmyJay
LoRab
motel room
sanmateo / Quin
sprityo / Scotty 2.0
Sloonei

#2965

I am uncomfortable with the current state of the tally -- not so much who the wagons are, but more that the votes have fallen and not budged. There are baddies in there who as far as I can tell seem pretty comfortable to just stand pat, and that means the townies are helping them do so. If we don't start getting this conversation more active, then we're going to end up stuck with these wagons.

I don't feel great about that.

#2966

It's 8 vs. 3 right now. On Day 6 that is a pretty even game by the numbers, but one mislynch changes that significantly. Is everyone here more confident about their reads than I am? I can flatly say that I am stumped at the moment, and the somewhat narrow focus of this day so far hasn't helped that.

My vote is an important one simply because nobody is going to vote for me and it is currently an outlier. If y'all feel good about where your votes lie, then please sell me on them. Sloonei and Wilgy have already done enough of that -- the rest of you I'm all ears. There is nobody left in this game that I would never vote for, and that's a scary admission. I legitimately cannot eliminate anyone from the suspect pool.

#2967

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:I am uncomfortable with the current state of the tally -- not so much who the wagons are, but more that the votes have fallen and not budged. There are baddies in there who as far as I can tell seem pretty comfortable to just stand pat, and that means the townies are helping them do so. If we don't start getting this conversation more active, then we're going to end up stuck with these wagons.

I don't feel great about that.

I'm willing to move my vote. I still have Wilgy as my top suspect but that can definitely change if new things come along. But I'm also not comfortable opening myself up to be lynched without good reason.

I'm reading LoRab right now.

#2968

if LoRab is scum I concede the game to her.

#2969

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:
DrWilgy wrote:The way I said it was supposed to translate to "wilgy never said I was gth good" and "wilgy says gth bad isn't the same as vote worthy"
So when Quin asked you how you felt about Sloonei, and you responded with "he's not on my baddiedar", you meant "I still suspect him but wouldn't vote for him"?

98% correct. The suspicion was light, and quite honestly more of a "I don't trust this person" but mostly "I have no impulse to vote for him" is what I was wanting to express.

Linki
Dom - bad
Epi - bad
Glorf - good
Inh - good
JJJ - good
LoRab - good
Motel - good
Quin - bad
Scotty - bad
Sloonei - bad

Linki linki - I agree, but unfortunately I'm not at the leisure to change my vote for long, nor are my reads on any other player strong enought to vote for.

#2970

DrWilgy wrote:
JaggedJimmyJay wrote:
DrWilgy wrote:The way I said it was supposed to translate to "wilgy never said I was gth good" and "wilgy says gth bad isn't the same as vote worthy"
So when Quin asked you how you felt about Sloonei, and you responded with "he's not on my baddiedar", you meant "I still suspect him but wouldn't vote for him"?
98% correct. The suspicion was light, and quite honestly more of a "I don't trust this person" but mostly "I have no impulse to vote for him" is what I was wanting to express.

Linki
Dom - bad
Epi - bad
Glorf - good
Inh - good
JJJ - good
LoRab - good
Motel - good
Quin - bad
Scotty - bad
Sloonei - bad

Linki linki - I agree, but unfortunately I'm not at the leisure to change my vote for long, nor are my reads on any other player strong enought to vote for.

So I am your strongest read?

Care to explain any of these other bad reads? Quin has been a town read for me since he entered the game. Scotty has gone back and forth. Dom and Epi are the other two who currently suspect me and I am OMGUSing the both of them to varying degrees. What do you make of that?

#2971

Sloonei wrote:if LoRab is scum I concede the game to her.

Does that imply a strong town read? Regardless, why?

#2972

Yolo voting Scotty. What are the general thoughts on him?

I remember suspecting sprityo, but have no mememory of readin anything Scotty has said since joinin the game.

Yeah gimme a moment Sloon.

#2973

Dom:

Prior to Day 6, you made no conclusive (or even inconclusive) read on Sloonei that I can find. You interacted with him a few times, but you never stated a read.

Now you've joined Epignosis immediately on this day with a vote based upon what looks to me like something frivolous. Why?

#2974

DrWilgy wrote:Yolo voting Scotty. What are the general thoughts on him?

I remember suspecting sprityo, but have no mememory of readin anything Scotty has said since joinin the game.

Yeah gimme a moment Sloon.

sprityo was a consensus suspect (5-0 baddie read in the GTH exercise). Scotty has seemed to shed some of that trouble just by making posts. I wouldn't say I feel great about him either.

#2975

I wasn't asked, but:

Dom: Town
DrWilgy: Scum
a2thezebra / Epignosis 2.0: Scum
Glorfindel: Town
insertnamehere: Town
JaggedJimmyJay: Town
LoRab: Town
motel room: Town
sanmateo / Quin: Town
sprityo / Scotty 2.0: Scum

Motel Room should be my next ISO.

I should explain the Dom one. I think his current vote for me is based off conjurations of his mind, but at the moment I am inclined to believe he's sincere about it. That could change at any time. For now it is a reason to be skeptical of him, but when push comes to shove I am inclined to call him town.
In typing this post I have become a little closer to understanding WIlgy's point, but I still feel like there is contradiction in his behavior and a compulsion to cover it up. I'll let this sit with me.

#2976

Sloonei wrote:In typing this post I have become a little closer to understanding WIlgy's point, but I still feel like there is contradiction in his behavior and a compulsion to cover it up. I'll let this sit with me.

I'm at a point where I understand your gripe and perhaps even agree with it, but I also think Wilgy looks genuine right now. Combine that with the fact that four votes are parked on him with very little non-Sloonei conversation, and I'm left feeling uncomfortable.

#2977

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:
Sloonei wrote:if LoRab is scum I concede the game to her.
Does that imply a strong town read? Regardless, why?

I think her thoughts about the game develop very clearly in her posts, from the beginning of Day 1 to right now. There is nothing glaring or anything that strikes me as dishonest in her posts, and plenty of content that appears thoughtful and original. I can pull out examples if I have to.

#2978

Sloonei wrote:
JaggedJimmyJay wrote:
Sloonei wrote:if LoRab is scum I concede the game to her.
Does that imply a strong town read? Regardless, why?
I think her thoughts about the game develop very clearly in her posts, from the beginning of Day 1 to right now. There is nothing glaring or anything that strikes me as dishonest in her posts, and plenty of content that appears thoughtful and original. I can pull out examples if I have to.

Just one example that affects you strongly would be good. I keep looking at her as a player I should suspect more than I do.

#2979

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:
Sloonei wrote:In typing this post I have become a little closer to understanding WIlgy's point, but I still feel like there is contradiction in his behavior and a compulsion to cover it up. I'll let this sit with me.
I'm at a point where I understand your gripe and perhaps even agree with it, but I also think Wilgy looks genuine right now. Combine that with the fact that four votes are parked on him with very little non-Sloonei conversation, and I'm left feeling uncomfortable.

I'd share this feeling, but then I look at the 3 people voting for Wilgy with me. LoRab just earned a town read, Quin has been a town read (albeit a relatively unchallenged one) since he entered the game and I believe his vote is currently more about protecting me than lynching wilgy. Motel Room is the biggest question mark on there.

I think my distrust of Epi and Wilgy right now is clouded by their suspicion of me. I can't look past the suspicion that I have for either of them, but I shouldn't go into a tunnel just yet either. I'm on the fence about Dom.
Scotty should come in here and vote.

#2980

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:
Sloonei wrote:
JaggedJimmyJay wrote:
Sloonei wrote:if LoRab is scum I concede the game to her.
Does that imply a strong town read? Regardless, why?
I think her thoughts about the game develop very clearly in her posts, from the beginning of Day 1 to right now. There is nothing glaring or anything that strikes me as dishonest in her posts, and plenty of content that appears thoughtful and original. I can pull out examples if I have to.
Just one example that affects you strongly would be good. I keep looking at her as a player I should suspect more than I do.

I liked her treatment of the Mac/Rico dynamic. Her initial response was to call it a "pissing contest" and offer no read one way or the other. But she still pursued them both and got involved in the issue, for instancce, in this post.

I also thought the development of her INH and Elohcin reads looked very natural in retrospect. She has recently explained that she's never going to claim to have stronger reads than what she truly does, and I think the truth of this is born out in her post history. She has no problem pointing out moments in the thread that ping her, but she is not quick to pull the trigger on any firm suspicions. She has been too active in reading people for it to strike me as waffling or non-committal. She's taking her time and approaching the game honestly. I like that.

#2981

Jay

LoRab
INH

Quin
Glorfindel
motel room

Dom
Scotty

Epi
DrWilgy

The three in the lowest town tier are town reads that I'm not strongly committed to. Glorfindel has only just earned a tentative town read today, but that came with it's share of doubt. Quin and Motel Room have just been a couple of long-standing town reads who I've not investigated too deeply.

Dom and Scotty are in a similar position to those latter two, but my feelings about their alignments are slightly less favorable at the moment.

#2982

I moved my vote to Epi since WIlgy moved his vote off of me and I'd feel more comfortable if we didn't have a runaway wagon threatening to derail the day.

#2983

Epignosis

#2984

The first thing I took away from reading Wilgy is that I think Lorab is good.

#2985

DrWilgy wrote:The issue is we are chasing our tails. The more you respond to me the more I have to go back to the main issue.

I can see why you see inconsistency in my posts. I was not clear between defining "I would vote for you" and "gth you are bad" since day 2 I've gth'd you bad and that never changed. I was considering voting for you that day, but voting Rico or LoRab was more pressing.

Backtracking, however, or claiming things didn't happen I will refute. Not being out of my good graces was true as I still had you gth bad. You weren't someone I'd vote for, but not someone I'd vote with (as explained earlier). Pointing out that baddiedar and not being in good graces was not backtracking, rather explaining my perspective.

The main issue you have with me Sloonei is that you don't know how to define "blank 1 and blank 2". I can tell you all day how these are defined, but if you don't want to believe them it's upto you.

You read the exchange as "wilgy says him claiming I wasn't bad never happened" and "wilgy says being bad isn't being bad"

The way I said it was supposed to translate to "wilgy never said I was gth good" and "wilgy says gth bad isn't the same as vote worthy"

This is waaaay too reminiscent of how I felt when Sloonei was accusing me for me to even think for a second that Wilgy's scum.

#2986

Sloonei wrote:
insertnamehere wrote:maybe sloonei should be trying to find baddies instead of defending himself.

oh wait, considering how he's now suspecting anyone who says anything bad about him, and bending over backwards to discredit any legitimate suspicion coming in his direction, I guess he considers them both the same thing.

I'd like to go on the record saying that I'd be flabbergasted if Wilgy is bad. I'd be nonplussed if Sloonei is.

I'm still confused on why Glorfindel was a complete and utter non-starter today.

Things I'd like to do in the future if I can find the time:
Figure out who exactly distracted everyone from Glorfindel today.
ISO Sloonei, which will be an ordeal.
ISO Dom, so I can back up my gut read of him.
Sure.

#2987

insertnamehere wrote:
DrWilgy wrote:The issue is we are chasing our tails. The more you respond to me the more I have to go back to the main issue.

I can see why you see inconsistency in my posts. I was not clear between defining "I would vote for you" and "gth you are bad" since day 2 I've gth'd you bad and that never changed. I was considering voting for you that day, but voting Rico or LoRab was more pressing.

Backtracking, however, or claiming things didn't happen I will refute. Not being out of my good graces was true as I still had you gth bad. You weren't someone I'd vote for, but not someone I'd vote with (as explained earlier). Pointing out that baddiedar and not being in good graces was not backtracking, rather explaining my perspective.

The main issue you have with me Sloonei is that you don't know how to define "blank 1 and blank 2". I can tell you all day how these are defined, but if you don't want to believe them it's upto you.

You read the exchange as "wilgy says him claiming I wasn't bad never happened" and "wilgy says being bad isn't being bad"

The way I said it was supposed to translate to "wilgy never said I was gth good" and "wilgy says gth bad isn't the same as vote worthy"
This is waaaay too reminiscent of how I felt when Sloonei was accusing me for me to even think for a second that Wilgy's scum.

I was wrong about you, therefore I am wrong about Wilgy?

#2988

Anyone have 10-20 minutes to go through a quick exercise with me? I have a little idea that might help sort this out. It's not GTH reads. Just one person would be cool; more than that would be preferable.

#2989

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Anyone have 10-20 minutes to go through a quick exercise with me? I have a little idea that might help sort this out. It's not GTH reads. Just one person would be cool; more than that would be preferable.

I am here, but you might be sick of hearing my thoughts by now.

#2990

Dom: Town
a2thezebra / Epignosis 2.0: Town
Glorfindel: Scum
JaggedJimmyJay: Town
LoRab: Scum
motel room: Town
sanmateo / Quin: Town
sprityo / Scotty 2.0: Town
Sloonei: Scum

Runner-up in the scum category: Dom.

I don't like how Lorab and Sloonei have shifted the conversation away from Glorfindel and onto some pretty easy targets. Wilgy is Wilgy, and I myself have mislynched him in the past due to that simple fact. That plus all the replacement shade makes me feel like Sloonei's trying to implement a "Last In, First Out" policy.

The only Sloonei voter that Sloonei doesn't heavily suspect for voting him is Dom, which feels significant to me. I also don't like how buddy buddy he is with Lorab all of a sudden.

I'm pretty confident that all 3 members of ol' Toecutter's Gang can be found in the Lorab, Sloonei, Dom, and Glorfindel pool.

I need to ISO Elo.

#2991

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Anyone have 10-20 minutes to go through a quick exercise with me? I have a little idea that might help sort this out. It's not GTH reads. Just one person would be cool; more than that would be preferable.

I'll be around for the next 20 minutes

#2992

Sloonei wrote:
JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Anyone have 10-20 minutes to go through a quick exercise with me? I have a little idea that might help sort this out. It's not GTH reads. Just one person would be cool; more than that would be preferable.
I am here, but you might be sick of hearing my thoughts by now.

No that's fine. Any thoughts beyond mine are better than just mine.

In no more than one sentence, tell me why the following players are town. Try to do it quickly.

Dom

DrWilgy

Epignosis

linki: you too INH.

#2993

Sloonei wrote:
insertnamehere wrote:
DrWilgy wrote:The issue is we are chasing our tails. The more you respond to me the more I have to go back to the main issue.

I can see why you see inconsistency in my posts. I was not clear between defining "I would vote for you" and "gth you are bad" since day 2 I've gth'd you bad and that never changed. I was considering voting for you that day, but voting Rico or LoRab was more pressing.

Backtracking, however, or claiming things didn't happen I will refute. Not being out of my good graces was true as I still had you gth bad. You weren't someone I'd vote for, but not someone I'd vote with (as explained earlier). Pointing out that baddiedar and not being in good graces was not backtracking, rather explaining my perspective.

The main issue you have with me Sloonei is that you don't know how to define "blank 1 and blank 2". I can tell you all day how these are defined, but if you don't want to believe them it's upto you.

You read the exchange as "wilgy says him claiming I wasn't bad never happened" and "wilgy says being bad isn't being bad"

The way I said it was supposed to translate to "wilgy never said I was gth good" and "wilgy says gth bad isn't the same as vote worthy"
This is waaaay too reminiscent of how I felt when Sloonei was accusing me for me to even think for a second that Wilgy's scum.
I was wrong about you, therefore I am wrong about Wilgy?

The, in my opinion, fallacious reasoning you used against me is the same type of fallacious reasoning you're using against Wilgy. When you lead a mislynch against someone, and then lead another against a person for pretty similar reasons, I think that's worth noting.

#2994

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Dom

DrWilgy

Epignosis

Dom - he's town because he's been pointed and assertive in his accusations, and he has seemed to stay consistent.

DrWilgy - he's town because he's contributed more to the game that it might appear at first, and his defenses seem earnest.

Epignosis - he's town because Zebra seemed genuine in her suspicions throughout her lifespan.

#2995

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:
Sloonei wrote:
JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Anyone have 10-20 minutes to go through a quick exercise with me? I have a little idea that might help sort this out. It's not GTH reads. Just one person would be cool; more than that would be preferable.
I am here, but you might be sick of hearing my thoughts by now.
No that's fine. Any thoughts beyond mine are better than just mine.

In no more than one sentence, tell me why the following players are town. Try to do it quickly.

Dom

DrWilgy

Epignosis

linki: you too INH.

Dom: Stuck to his beliefs/consistency.

Wilgy: Has done nothing other than being Wilgy/easy target.

Epi: Replacement who is often disagreeable and contrarian/easy target.

This is devil's advocate, right?

#2996

insertnamehere wrote:Dom: Town
a2thezebra / Epignosis 2.0: Town
Glorfindel: Scum
JaggedJimmyJay: Town
LoRab: Scum
motel room: Town
sanmateo / Quin: Town
sprityo / Scotty 2.0: Town
Sloonei: Scum

Runner-up in the scum category: Dom.

I don't like how Lorab and Sloonei have shifted the conversation away from Glorfindel and onto some pretty easy targets. Wilgy is Wilgy, and I myself have mislynched him in the past due to that simple fact. That plus all the replacement shade makes me feel like Sloonei's trying to implement a "Last In, First Out" policy.

The only Sloonei voter that Sloonei doesn't heavily suspect for voting him is Dom, which feels significant to me. I also don't like how buddy buddy he is with Lorab all of a sudden.

I'm pretty confident that all 3 members of ol' Toecutter's Gang can be found in the Lorab, Sloonei, Dom, and Glorfindel pool.

I need to ISO Elo.

By all means, talk about Glorfindel. I'm all ears. And note that my vote was on him to start the day.
The highlighted text is complete poppycock. Wilgy has been a top suspect for a while and I voted for him well before he voted for me. If you're trying to reduce it to an OMGUS you are ignoring tons of content in this thread.

The underlined is also poppycock. It's the same argument I made against Dom when he claimed MP was buddying him early on. Having a town read =/= buddying. That's a ridiculous notion.

#2997

insertnamehere wrote:This is devil's advocate, right?

Kind of, yeah.

#2998

insertnamehere wrote:
Sloonei wrote:
insertnamehere wrote:
DrWilgy wrote:The issue is we are chasing our tails. The more you respond to me the more I have to go back to the main issue.

I can see why you see inconsistency in my posts. I was not clear between defining "I would vote for you" and "gth you are bad" since day 2 I've gth'd you bad and that never changed. I was considering voting for you that day, but voting Rico or LoRab was more pressing.

Backtracking, however, or claiming things didn't happen I will refute. Not being out of my good graces was true as I still had you gth bad. You weren't someone I'd vote for, but not someone I'd vote with (as explained earlier). Pointing out that baddiedar and not being in good graces was not backtracking, rather explaining my perspective.

The main issue you have with me Sloonei is that you don't know how to define "blank 1 and blank 2". I can tell you all day how these are defined, but if you don't want to believe them it's upto you.

You read the exchange as "wilgy says him claiming I wasn't bad never happened" and "wilgy says being bad isn't being bad"

The way I said it was supposed to translate to "wilgy never said I was gth good" and "wilgy says gth bad isn't the same as vote worthy"
This is waaaay too reminiscent of how I felt when Sloonei was accusing me for me to even think for a second that Wilgy's scum.
I was wrong about you, therefore I am wrong about Wilgy?
The, in my opinion, fallacious reasoning you used against me is the same type of fallacious reasoning you're using against Wilgy. When you lead a mislynch against someone, and then lead another against a person for pretty similar reasons, I think that's worth noting.

What's fallacious about my reasoning? So far you've just quoted Wilgy's frustration. I've not seen you address my case.

#2999

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:
Sloonei wrote:
JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Anyone have 10-20 minutes to go through a quick exercise with me? I have a little idea that might help sort this out. It's not GTH reads. Just one person would be cool; more than that would be preferable.
I am here, but you might be sick of hearing my thoughts by now.
No that's fine. Any thoughts beyond mine are better than just mine.

In no more than one sentence, tell me why the following players are town. Try to do it quickly.

Dom

DrWilgy

Epignosis

linki: you too INH.

Dom - He's had his own thoughts on things throughout the game and has done nothing that is glaringly suspicious.

DrWilgy - He's being honest and I'm misjudging the alleged scumslip.

Epignosis - Zebra looked really good before subbing out.

#3000

In no more than one sentence, tell my why these players are town:

Sloonei

Scotty

Quin

Who squashed LoRab?