The Syndicate

Posted: **Sat Dec 02, 2017 1:38 am**

Jimmy and Speed are w/w.

Second lynch train came up and no baddies jumped on.

Posted: **Sat Dec 02, 2017 1:38 am**

Long Con wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2017 1:11 am Took a final look at vote tally. Epignosis is here. Hasn't weighed in or voted yet. Planning to vote late to have the most control over the lynch?

Why? Is Jack in trouble?

I am tired. And cranky. An eight-hour meeting run by someone who said my students will never learn how to read correctly followed by six hours of additional work has left me bereft of patience and any willingness to sit up much longer. I read the five or however many pages accumulated while I was gone and fought sleep in the process.

I am going to vote quite soon and then go to bed. There will be over an hour after that for other people to dictate the lynch however they wish.

Posted: **Sat Dec 02, 2017 1:39 am**

Jackofhearts2005 wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2017 1:27 am
malakim2099 wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2017 1:24 am
Jackofhearts2005 wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2017 1:16 am Switched to Speed.

Why are all my suspects not named Wilgy voting for Wilgy?

Staying far away from that lynch.
Well, I'm voting for him because I didn't like his logic in voting for me. It struck me as lazy piggybacking without real conviction.

I'm just not entirely certain about speedchuck as a lynch candidate.

(But then, when aren't I on your suspect list? Oh, wait, colors. That's right.)
This supposed to convince me you aren't bad with Speed and Jimmy?

No, it's supposed to be humor.

And actually, I think I'm convinced based on your citation of the Pirates game.

*Switching Speedchuck*

Posted: **Sat Dec 02, 2017 1:41 am**

Hey what is Speedchuck like when he's civ?

Posted: **Sat Dec 02, 2017 1:42 am**

3J did not address my gravest concern, which has nothing whatsoever to do with his academics. He voted for Mesk despite calling her good in his exercise, and provided the poorest reason I think I've ever seen him give to justify his vote.

Posted: **Sat Dec 02, 2017 1:44 am**

Kylemii wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2017 1:41 am Hey what is Speedchuck like when he's civ?

On point.
Far less lurky.

Posted: **Sat Dec 02, 2017 1:46 am**

Jackofhearts2005 wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2017 1:44 am
Kylemii wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2017 1:41 am Hey what is Speedchuck like when he's civ?
On point.
Far less lurky.

The second. Not the first. But thank you.
Also dang, when WAS my last civ game before this?

Posted: **Sat Dec 02, 2017 1:47 am**

Epignosis wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2017 1:42 am 3J did not address my gravest concern, which has nothing whatsoever to do with his academics. He voted for Mesk despite calling her good in his exercise, and provided the poorest reason I think I've ever seen him give to justify his vote.

Indeed!

Melk posted zero times between Jimmy town reading her and his rousing pushes to lynch her over Dom.

It was never about getting Melk lynched because townie Jimmy didn't want Melk lynched. There is no townie Jimmy here.

Posted: **Sat Dec 02, 2017 1:49 am**

Jackofhearts2005 wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2017 1:47 am
Epignosis wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2017 1:42 am 3J did not address my gravest concern, which has nothing whatsoever to do with his academics. He voted for Mesk despite calling her good in his exercise, and provided the poorest reason I think I've ever seen him give to justify his vote.
Indeed!

Melk posted zero times between Jimmy town reading her and his rousing pushes to lynch her over Dom.

It was never about getting Melk lynched because townie Jimmy didn't want Melk lynched. There is no townie Jimmy here.

Melk not posting doesn't factor into it. Dom didn't post either.

My thing is that I gave an early reason as to why I thought Melk was good (even if I wavered on it later) that I would have expected 3J to have taken into consideration before voting for her. That didn't happen.

Posted: **Sat Dec 02, 2017 1:50 am**

i think epignosis is bad again guys

Posted: **Sat Dec 02, 2017 1:51 am**

[mention]speedchuck[/mention] on November 9th you made a post claiming that you thought I was being opportunistic with Mesk and stated that your read on me was dependant on Mesk flipping mafia.

Why haven't you brought up that theory again? Or even mentioned me? You seemed pretty certain.

Posted: **Sat Dec 02, 2017 1:51 am**

Novemebr 29th

Posted: **Sat Dec 02, 2017 1:52 am**

Quin wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2017 1:50 am i think epignosis is bad again guys

Why?

Posted: **Sat Dec 02, 2017 1:53 am**

Epignosis wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2017 1:52 am
Quin wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2017 1:50 am i think epignosis is bad again guys
Why?

Why are you treating a GTH read as static?

Posted: **Sat Dec 02, 2017 1:53 am**

Epi, they both enter into it.

If Jimmy thought Dom was bad and Mesk was good, how did those opinions flip?

Dom did nothing good. Mesk did nothing bad.

His opinions at EOD to vote Mesk were 100% false.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote: ↑Wed Nov 29, 2017 12:43 am Hopefully this isn't huge as hell and is legible on mobile.

Gun to head reads results

Spoiler: show

Please let me know if I entered your shit in incorrectly.

Posted: **Sat Dec 02, 2017 1:54 am**

I don't have the strength. I'm going to bed.

JaggedJimmyJay

Posted: **Sat Dec 02, 2017 1:55 am**

speedchuck wrote: ↑Wed Nov 29, 2017 12:06 pmKylemii - BAD
Kyle being scum would depend on Mesk/Lasagne being good, I think. But when Kyle pops in and goes after Mesk, I can'thelp but feel that it's opportunistic. And maybe it's my lack of ISOs, but I don't think that's inconsistent with Kyle's style of play thus far. And then most of today's content has been a meta argument with Dunya that nobody else can follow, and it rubbed me the wrong way. I also had a light scumread on Kylemii last week. So yeah, Imma call it. Despite what I said in one of these other reads, I'll probably ISO someone before directly agreeing to a lynch, but Kyle is a contender.

Amount of correctness (none) aside don't you think this would be a pretty important theory not to forget about in the case that it's something you truly felt when you wrote it?

Posted: **Sat Dec 02, 2017 1:55 am**

Quin wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2017 1:50 am i think epignosis is bad again guys

You really want that "day 3" where we're at each other's throats don't ya?

Posted: **Sat Dec 02, 2017 1:57 am**

Quin wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2017 1:53 am
Epignosis wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2017 1:52 am
Quin wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2017 1:50 am i think epignosis is bad again guys
Why?
Why are you treating a GTH read as static?

What would possibly change anyone's opinion of two inactives between the GTH and CFD?

Posted: **Sat Dec 02, 2017 1:59 am**

Jackofhearts2005 wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2017 1:57 am
Quin wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2017 1:53 am
Epignosis wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2017 1:52 am
Quin wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2017 1:50 am i think epignosis is bad again guys
Why?
Why are you treating a GTH read as static?
What would possibly change anyone's opinion of two inactives between the GTH and CFD?

I'm very persuasive.

Posted: **Sat Dec 02, 2017 1:59 am**

Jackofhearts2005 wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2017 1:53 am Epi, they both enter into it.

If Jimmy thought Dom was bad and Mesk was good, how did those opinions flip?

Dom did nothing good. Mesk did nothing bad.

His opinions at EOD to vote Mesk were 100% false.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote: ↑Wed Nov 29, 2017 12:43 am Hopefully this isn't huge as hell and is legible on mobile.

Gun to head reads results

Spoiler: show

Please let me know if I entered your shit in incorrectly.

Oh. I misinterpreted your post. Right then.

Quin wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2017 1:53 am
Epignosis wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2017 1:52 am
Quin wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2017 1:50 am i think epignosis is bad again guys
Why?
Why are you treating a GTH read as static?

I'm not.

What the hell is the point of "GTH reads" when you don't hold someone accountable for lynching someone he said was good over someone he said was bad when both were in hot water and neither had any additional activity?

Posted: **Sat Dec 02, 2017 2:00 am**

I'm having one more beer. If anybody has anything they want out of me, you've got about ten minutes.

Posted: **Sat Dec 02, 2017 2:01 am**

Epignosis wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2017 1:59 am
Jackofhearts2005 wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2017 1:53 am Epi, they both enter into it.

If Jimmy thought Dom was bad and Mesk was good, how did those opinions flip?

Dom did nothing good. Mesk did nothing bad.

His opinions at EOD to vote Mesk were 100% false.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote: ↑Wed Nov 29, 2017 12:43 am Hopefully this isn't huge as hell and is legible on mobile.

Gun to head reads results

Spoiler: show

Please let me know if I entered your shit in incorrectly.

Oh. I misinterpreted your post. Right then.

Quin wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2017 1:53 am
Epignosis wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2017 1:52 am
Quin wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2017 1:50 am i think epignosis is bad again guys
Why?
Why are you treating a GTH read as static?
I'm not.

What the hell is the point of "GTH reads" when you don't hold someone accountable for lynching someone he said was good over someone he said was bad when both were in hot water and neither had any additional activity?

Only one had an actual case against them. And it sure wasn't Dom.

Posted: **Sat Dec 02, 2017 2:03 am**

It still bugs me when people treat Dom and Mesk as if they were exactly equivalent.

Posted: **Sat Dec 02, 2017 2:04 am**

I'm dropping my vote on speed. he seems worse than Wilgy and more likely to net a mafia

I'll be around and am willing to change if it doesn't seem like a speed lynch is the best thing

Posted: **Sat Dec 02, 2017 2:04 am**

Epignosis wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2017 2:00 am I'm having one more beer. If anybody has anything they want out of me, you've got about ten minutes.

Speed and Jimmy are blantant scumbuddies and we shouldn't split the votes against them.

Posted: **Sat Dec 02, 2017 2:07 am**

Kylemii wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2017 2:03 am It still bugs me when people treat Dom and Mesk as if they were exactly equivalent.

Maybe it was different for you but I've never played with Mesk. To most of us, the lynches were very equivalent.

What do you think of Jimmy reversing his gth reads of Mesk and Dom even though neither posted anything to cause that reaction?

Posted: **Sat Dec 02, 2017 2:09 am**

Epignosis wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2017 1:59 am What the hell is the point of "GTH reads" when you don't hold someone accountable for lynching someone he said was good over someone he said was bad when both were in hot water and neither had any additional activity?

I don't give two thirds of a shit what my GTH reads were. This is weak bullshit. Are you telling me that I am supposed to be mindful of my GTH reads and vote in accordance with them, that I am obliged to do that?

Fuck that shit. Quin mentioned Mesk. I looked at the Mesk posts which did exist and decided that a large percentage of them were of no civilian value. That's a more substantive reason to lynch someone than I saw for Dom, which was the absence of activity altogether.

Posted: **Sat Dec 02, 2017 2:09 am**

Jackofhearts2005 wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2017 2:07 am
Kylemii wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2017 2:03 am It still bugs me when people treat Dom and Mesk as if they were exactly equivalent.
Maybe it was different for you but I've never played with Mesk. To most of us, the lynches were very equivalent.

What do you think of Jimmy reversing his gth reads of Mesk and Dom even though neither posted anything to cause that reaction?

Why are you pretending Mesk didn't have 20some other posts?

Posted: **Sat Dec 02, 2017 2:10 am**

Quin wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2017 2:01 am
Epignosis wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2017 1:59 am
Jackofhearts2005 wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2017 1:53 am Epi, they both enter into it.

If Jimmy thought Dom was bad and Mesk was good, how did those opinions flip?

Dom did nothing good. Mesk did nothing bad.

His opinions at EOD to vote Mesk were 100% false.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote: ↑Wed Nov 29, 2017 12:43 am Hopefully this isn't huge as hell and is legible on mobile.

Gun to head reads results

Spoiler: show

Please let me know if I entered your shit in incorrectly.

Oh. I misinterpreted your post. Right then.

Quin wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2017 1:53 am
Epignosis wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2017 1:52 am
Quin wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2017 1:50 am i think epignosis is bad again guys
Why?
Why are you treating a GTH read as static?
I'm not.

What the hell is the point of "GTH reads" when you don't hold someone accountable for lynching someone he said was good over someone he said was bad when both were in hot water and neither had any additional activity?
Only one had an actual case against them. And it sure wasn't Dom.

Uh...no.

JJJ said "Dom bad Mesk good."

His words, irrespective of whatever "cases" existed or did not exist.

By the end of the Day, 3J helped lynch Mesk. I see no progression toward this. I'm amazed that we're having this conversation, since the only reason he really gave was in a conversation with you:

Quin wrote: ↑Thu Nov 30, 2017 2:09 am
JaggedJimmyJay wrote: ↑Thu Nov 30, 2017 2:08 am
Quin wrote: ↑Thu Nov 30, 2017 2:07 am why aren't we all lynching Lasagne? For a low poster, she actually looks bad.
What's the worst thing you could say about Lasagne?
She has 24 posts, at least 20 of those say nothing but bolster her presence in the thread.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote: ↑Thu Nov 30, 2017 2:20 am
Quin wrote: ↑Thu Nov 30, 2017 2:18 am
JaggedJimmyJay wrote: ↑Thu Nov 30, 2017 2:16 am Mesk514
what about her
I agree with you that the base logic behind a Mesk lynch is similar to that of a Dom lynch, but it's a more substantive option.

So what inspired 3J to call Mesk good and Dom bad? He had the same posts available then as he did when he posted this. Nothing new came into existence.

What is worse for me is that 3J elected to vote Mesk over Dom because...Mesk had more to say? That's shit, and 3J should know it's shit.

Posted: **Sat Dec 02, 2017 2:11 am**

A GTH read exercise does not exist to dictate future votes -- that's the mindset of a mafioso who feels some compulsion to be "consistent". GTH reads provide content for future analysis, real-time perspective on the participants, and stances on every player.

Posted: **Sat Dec 02, 2017 2:12 am**

Kylemii wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2017 1:55 am
speedchuck wrote: ↑Wed Nov 29, 2017 12:06 pmKylemii - BAD
Kyle being scum would depend on Mesk/Lasagne being good, I think. But when Kyle pops in and goes after Mesk, I can'thelp but feel that it's opportunistic. And maybe it's my lack of ISOs, but I don't think that's inconsistent with Kyle's style of play thus far. And then most of today's content has been a meta argument with Dunya that nobody else can follow, and it rubbed me the wrong way. I also had a light scumread on Kylemii last week. So yeah, Imma call it. Despite what I said in one of these other reads, I'll probably ISO someone before directly agreeing to a lynch, but Kyle is a contender.
Amount of correctness (none) aside don't you think this would be a pretty important theory not to forget about in the case that it's something you truly felt when you wrote it?

Maybe if someone had engaged me on it it would have gone somewhere. Maybe if I were scum I would have been more confident and tried to push harder for your lynch.

You people know this. You know I'm more consistent and pushy as scum then town. I may have ruined my whole meta with Pirates mafia, and that's rather upsetting.

But Pirates was still me being more pushy and consistent that this game.

Posted: **Sat Dec 02, 2017 2:13 am**

Scum on my wagon, btw. This crap doesn't just happen.

I almost don't feel like helping you people, but there's my 2 cents. Go buy an old timey hard candy.

Posted: **Sat Dec 02, 2017 2:13 am**

JaggedJimmyJay wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2017 2:09 am
Epignosis wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2017 1:59 am What the hell is the point of "GTH reads" when you don't hold someone accountable for lynching someone he said was good over someone he said was bad when both were in hot water and neither had any additional activity?
I don't give two thirds of a shit what my GTH reads were. This is weak bullshit. Are you telling me that I am supposed to be mindful of my GTH reads and vote in accordance with them, that I am obliged to do that?

Fuck that shit. Quin mentioned Mesk. I looked at the Mesk posts which did exist and decided that a large percentage of them were of no civilian value. That's a more substantive reason to lynch someone than I saw for Dom, which was the absence of activity altogether.

No. Fuck your GTH bullshit if that's how it plays out. What is the point of those things if people aren't supposed to go back and figure out why a person suddenly changed his mind?

"Of no civilian value?" I don't agree with that. Mesk said shit. She even said a thing that gave me a good opinion of her. You didn't bother to take that into consideration, but golly, Quin pointing out how many posts she has is enough to sway your vote?

Dom's posts were "Of no civilian value." He had basically none.

Posted: **Sat Dec 02, 2017 2:14 am**

JaggedJimmyJay wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2017 2:09 am
Jackofhearts2005 wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2017 2:07 am
Kylemii wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2017 2:03 am It still bugs me when people treat Dom and Mesk as if they were exactly equivalent.
Maybe it was different for you but I've never played with Mesk. To most of us, the lynches were very equivalent.

What do you think of Jimmy reversing his gth reads of Mesk and Dom even though neither posted anything to cause that reaction?
Why are you pretending Mesk didn't have 20some other posts?

Because they all took place 6 days prior to you townreading Mesk.

Posted: **Sat Dec 02, 2017 2:14 am**

does anyone feel like they can confidently say they have any idea what's going on in this game?

Posted: **Sat Dec 02, 2017 2:16 am**

hi it's gotta be said my case against lasagne was more than 'lasagne had posts'

Posted: **Sat Dec 02, 2017 2:16 am**

Sloonei wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2017 2:14 am does anyone feel like they can confidently say they have any idea what's going on in this game?

I've been playing a game all day so I haven't been paying attention to anything that's gone on in this game in the past 5 hours.

Posted: **Sat Dec 02, 2017 2:16 am**

JaggedJimmyJay wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2017 2:11 am A GTH read exercise does not exist to dictate future votes -- that's the mindset of a mafioso who feels some compulsion to be "consistent". GTH reads provide content for future analysis, real-time perspective on the participants, and stances on every player.

I am in the future. And I am analyzing you.

I am looking at what you said. You did a 180 when BOTH your bad and good call became serious lynch candidates.

Are you seriously- seriously- going to tell me that if somebody else called Dom bad, Mesk good, and then at the eleventh hour decided for the flimsiest of reasons to vote Mesk instead of Dom, that you would not be digging into that voter?

Posted: **Sat Dec 02, 2017 2:17 am**

also i put my vote back on jay. his ISOs don't sway me much. That's exactly what I'd expect him to do as scum. It's exactly what he always says players, town or scum, should do in the face of pressure. I don't feel like his mesk vote came from a place of sincerity and prior to today I got very little sense that he was trying to solve the game in any capacity.

Posted: **Sat Dec 02, 2017 2:17 am**

Sloonei wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2017 2:14 am does anyone feel like they can confidently say they have any idea what's going on in this game?

Ah, you've cheered me up.

Posted: **Sat Dec 02, 2017 2:17 am**

Sloonei wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2017 2:14 am does anyone feel like they can confidently say they have any idea what's going on in this game?

All the ladies gettin murked.

Posted: **Sat Dec 02, 2017 2:18 am**

Epignosis wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2017 2:13 am
JaggedJimmyJay wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2017 2:09 am
Epignosis wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2017 1:59 am What the hell is the point of "GTH reads" when you don't hold someone accountable for lynching someone he said was good over someone he said was bad when both were in hot water and neither had any additional activity?
I don't give two thirds of a shit what my GTH reads were. This is weak bullshit. Are you telling me that I am supposed to be mindful of my GTH reads and vote in accordance with them, that I am obliged to do that?

Fuck that shit. Quin mentioned Mesk. I looked at the Mesk posts which did exist and decided that a large percentage of them were of no civilian value. That's a more substantive reason to lynch someone than I saw for Dom, which was the absence of activity altogether.
No. Fuck your GTH bullshit if that's how it plays out. What is the point of those things if people aren't supposed to go back and figure out why a person suddenly changed his mind?

"Of no civilian value?" I don't agree with that. Mesk said shit. She even said a thing that gave me a good opinion of her. You didn't bother to take that into consideration, but golly, Quin pointing out how many posts she has is enough to sway your vote?

Dom's posts were "Of no civilian value." He had basically none.

You said something in this thread somewhere about someone else taking their perspectives as gospel -- here you go. One moment that you liked does not determine how I vote.

The point of those things is variable by the people who do anything with them. I use them in interactive analyses more than anything else. Other people might do different things with them. They're multi-faceted.

To be consistent between GTH reads and a vote is the easiest thing there is for anyone who has a reason to give a shit. I don't.

Posted: **Sat Dec 02, 2017 2:20 am**

Epignosis wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2017 2:16 am
JaggedJimmyJay wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2017 2:11 am A GTH read exercise does not exist to dictate future votes -- that's the mindset of a mafioso who feels some compulsion to be "consistent". GTH reads provide content for future analysis, real-time perspective on the participants, and stances on every player.

I am in the future. And I am analyzing you.

I am looking at what you said. You did a 180 when BOTH your bad and good call became serious lynch candidates.

Are you seriously- seriously- going to tell me that if somebody else called Dom bad, Mesk good, and then at the eleventh hour decided for the flimsiest of reasons to vote Mesk instead of Dom, that you would not be digging into that voter?

Your question is loaded, because "flimsy" is the perspective you have injected into it. I may well ask the inconsistency, but it wouldn't be an inspiring cause for a lynch. Civilians have no reason to give a damn about that.

Posted: **Sat Dec 02, 2017 2:21 am**

Jackofhearts2005 wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2017 2:14 am
JaggedJimmyJay wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2017 2:09 am
Jackofhearts2005 wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2017 2:07 am
Kylemii wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2017 2:03 am It still bugs me when people treat Dom and Mesk as if they were exactly equivalent.
Maybe it was different for you but I've never played with Mesk. To most of us, the lynches were very equivalent.

What do you think of Jimmy reversing his gth reads of Mesk and Dom even though neither posted anything to cause that reaction?
Why are you pretending Mesk didn't have 20some other posts?
Because they all took place 6 days prior to you townreading Mesk.

Why are you pretending that multiple separate looks into a post history can yield different perspectives?

Posted: **Sat Dec 02, 2017 2:22 am**

What the heck is going on here

Posted: **Sat Dec 02, 2017 2:22 am**

[mention]Epignosis[/mention] didn't you say you're voting for Jay? It doesn't look like you've voted in the poll

Posted: **Sat Dec 02, 2017 2:23 am**

JaggedJimmyJay wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2017 2:18 am
Epignosis wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2017 2:13 am
JaggedJimmyJay wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2017 2:09 am
Epignosis wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2017 1:59 am What the hell is the point of "GTH reads" when you don't hold someone accountable for lynching someone he said was good over someone he said was bad when both were in hot water and neither had any additional activity?
I don't give two thirds of a shit what my GTH reads were. This is weak bullshit. Are you telling me that I am supposed to be mindful of my GTH reads and vote in accordance with them, that I am obliged to do that?

Fuck that shit. Quin mentioned Mesk. I looked at the Mesk posts which did exist and decided that a large percentage of them were of no civilian value. That's a more substantive reason to lynch someone than I saw for Dom, which was the absence of activity altogether.
No. Fuck your GTH bullshit if that's how it plays out. What is the point of those things if people aren't supposed to go back and figure out why a person suddenly changed his mind?

"Of no civilian value?" I don't agree with that. Mesk said shit. She even said a thing that gave me a good opinion of her. You didn't bother to take that into consideration, but golly, Quin pointing out how many posts she has is enough to sway your vote?

Dom's posts were "Of no civilian value." He had basically none.
You said something in this thread somewhere about someone else taking their perspectives as gospel -- here you go. One moment that you liked does not determine how I vote.

The point of those things is variable by the people who do anything with them. I use them in interactive analyses more than anything else. Other people might do different things with them. They're multi-faceted.

To be consistent between GTH reads and a vote is the easiest thing there is for anyone who has a reason to give a shit. I don't.

I was not demanding that you be consistent. You keep using that word, as if I care that you were inconsistent. I don't. I care more about why you were. Your turnaround against Mesk in favor of Dom came with no substantive reasoning. Rather than challenge people's votes for Mesk (which were weak), you...bought what they were selling?

Sorry- it doesn't add up.

Posted: **Sat Dec 02, 2017 2:23 am**

JaggedJimmyJay wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2017 2:21 am
Jackofhearts2005 wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2017 2:14 am
JaggedJimmyJay wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2017 2:09 am
Jackofhearts2005 wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2017 2:07 am
Kylemii wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2017 2:03 am It still bugs me when people treat Dom and Mesk as if they were exactly equivalent.
Maybe it was different for you but I've never played with Mesk. To most of us, the lynches were very equivalent.

What do you think of Jimmy reversing his gth reads of Mesk and Dom even though neither posted anything to cause that reaction?
Why are you pretending Mesk didn't have 20some other posts?
Because they all took place 6 days prior to you townreading Mesk.
Why are you pretending that multiple separate looks into a post history can yield different perspectives?

what does this mean?

Posted: **Sat Dec 02, 2017 2:24 am**

Also: an absence of posts does have no civilian value. No shit.

The presence of posts with no civilian value is an actual cause for suspicion. Posts that do nothing are more suspicious than nothing that does nothing.

The Syndicate

Mountain Mafia [END]

Re: Mountain Mafia [DAY 4]

Re: Mountain Mafia [DAY 4]

Re: Mountain Mafia [DAY 4]

Re: Mountain Mafia [DAY 4]

Re: Mountain Mafia [DAY 4]

Re: Mountain Mafia [DAY 4]

Re: Mountain Mafia [DAY 4]

Re: Mountain Mafia [DAY 4]

Re: Mountain Mafia [DAY 4]

Re: Mountain Mafia [DAY 4]

Re: Mountain Mafia [DAY 4]

Re: Mountain Mafia [DAY 4]

Re: Mountain Mafia [DAY 4]

Re: Mountain Mafia [DAY 4]

Re: Mountain Mafia [DAY 3]

Re: Mountain Mafia [DAY 4]

Re: Mountain Mafia [DAY 3]

Re: Mountain Mafia [DAY 4]

Re: Mountain Mafia [DAY 4]

Re: Mountain Mafia [DAY 4]

Re: Mountain Mafia [DAY 3]

Re: Mountain Mafia [DAY 4]

Re: Mountain Mafia [DAY 3]

Re: Mountain Mafia [DAY 4]

Re: Mountain Mafia [DAY 4]

Re: Mountain Mafia [DAY 4]

Re: Mountain Mafia [DAY 4]

Re: Mountain Mafia [DAY 3]

Re: Mountain Mafia [DAY 4]

Re: Mountain Mafia [DAY 3]

Re: Mountain Mafia [DAY 4]

Re: Mountain Mafia [DAY 3]

Re: Mountain Mafia [DAY 4]

Re: Mountain Mafia [DAY 3]

Re: Mountain Mafia [DAY 4]

Re: Mountain Mafia [DAY 4]

Re: Mountain Mafia [DAY 4]

Re: Mountain Mafia [DAY 4]

Re: Mountain Mafia [DAY 4]

Re: Mountain Mafia [DAY 4]

Re: Mountain Mafia [DAY 4]

Re: Mountain Mafia [DAY 4]

Re: Mountain Mafia [DAY 3]

Re: Mountain Mafia [DAY 4]

Re: Mountain Mafia [DAY 4]

Re: Mountain Mafia [DAY 4]

Re: Mountain Mafia [DAY 4]

Re: Mountain Mafia [DAY 3]

Re: Mountain Mafia [DAY 4]

Re: Mountain Mafia [DAY 4]