Everyone (or almost everyone) voting for the same person without any significant push to change their mind or present an alternative is a bandwagon IMO. If you see it differently, then you see it differently.Dom wrote:...DharmaHelper wrote:
I was presenting facts, I made no attempt to draw a conclusion from those facts. Though yes, it is possible that people consistently voting together might be working together. Again, in this case I was only presenting factual information and some added observations and analysis, because I figured Rey, having asked for that information in the thread basically, might benefit from it in some way. In fact, I hope everybody benefits from it.
That is not what you were doing.
Analysis, by definition is not a fact. It is an application of facts. It is interpretation. You are trying to say something here. Don't pretend like you're not.
...triceratopzeuhl wrote:Dom wrote:Who would be stupid enough? Why do I think it's possible?DharmaHelper wrote: No, from the post immediately above mine. It was an attempt at a joke. Nobody else commented on it because it was pretty obviously a joke.
I don't understand why a couple people think anybody would be stupid enough to copy-paste quotes from a btsc chatroom
This one doesn't sound like a slip. The last one did.
Because it's happened before. I've played a LOT of games, and I've seen it more than once.
So that's why I thought it was possible. Calm down.
And I said it was strange. I didn't say I wanted ot lynch you. I thought it was a POSSIBLE slip.
DharmaHelper wrote:S~V~S wrote:I did read it. It explains a lot.
And no, it isn't the same. You have been beating us over the head with following your suspicion because everyone elses is just bandwagons, ets, etc. I don't recall trying to make anyone feel dumb or like a lemming if they did not follow my suspicions. Sadly, my suspicions have sucked, lol.
But I see your point.
I am still willing to give you the benefit of the doubt, maybe I see something others are missing.
Hell, at this point whatever suspicion you want to follow, follow it. I'm just considerably tired of the results we've been getting with the current strategy.
Bandwagons?
You're still on about bandwagons?
Really?
DH. Lynch one, yes that was a relative bandwagon.
Day two, we lynched a baddie. there was a bandwagon on rabbit, not Bea.
Day three, we followed up on the results of day two. Wasn't Droopy one of the Rabbit voters?
Yeah that's a follow up on a result. Not really a bandwagon
He also looked strange. Or am I getting my days mixed up? Please correct me if I'm wrong, I read it all in a few hours, really.
Then day four, was a realtive bandwagon. Yes. Vomp was acting incredibly strange for days on end, though.
Please, explain to me where people aren't bringing up suspicions and following up on results and facts.
I think you're overdoing the bandwagon stuff. I don't think you're completely wrong (relative bandwagons, bandwagons on people who didn't get lynched when the person lynched was a baddie)
so yeah.
As for your other comment, Yes, I agree that I was also interpreting the facts that I presented in an analysis. I probably should have seperated the facts portion of my post with the analysis por- Oh wait I did do that. But I should have also made it clear that I was not just presenting cold facts, but additional analysis and conclusions that I drew based on tho- Oh wait I did that too.
Quote:
Again, in this case I was only presenting factual information and some added observations and analysis,
Everything I posted is not me saying "I think X is baddie and on this team and etc etc" I took the voting orders posted by FH, Interpreted them, Organized my interpretation, and posted it. I never said anything in terms of whom I believe is working together, or anything of that nature. I took data, and I collected patterns from the data.
