|
Post by Jolyma on Feb 9, 2013 11:18:25 GMT -8
From what I understood of Luv's post, she wasn't concerned either way over FoS or FoI, whereas I have a slight problem with FoI this early in the game. I don't think I've played with Van before, so maybe it's just I'm not used to his style of play. It's also Day 1, and I'm of the camp that lynching on Day 1 is helpful. If we don't, we're left with nothing to go on except the ban results on Day 2, which may or may not be helpful because the rogues might just ban someone randomly over banning someone they think is a threat. It's what, seven hours to Nightfall and we have two votes. I cast my vote because of being in that lynching for info on Day 1 camp, and of the suspicions I have of people, Van was the highest one. Quoting Luv: In short, Van freely handing out "I trust you bro!" made me suspicious, and so there I voted. But what is the difference in thinking that we shouldn't suspect everyone, and someone else saying they trust people? Why is one not worth a comment, and the other worth a vote? Similarly, why is Van worth a vote for trusting, and Sets not when he has FOI'd not one, but two people? I think Van is just goofing off and getting into the flavor, but Sets has said his FOIs are seriously given. (I am not saying here that I think Sets should be voted IMO, just that it doesn't track with the reasoning given for the Van vote). Tae, if you have a rodent problem, I can mail you my terrier mix. Hunting rodents is in his blood. He really likes it when you put them in exercise balls and let them run loose.
|
|
|
Post by DementedDuck on Feb 9, 2013 11:33:12 GMT -8
Could someone else ask Sets why he's voting me cause apparently I'm invisible to him.
|
|
|
Post by Jolyma on Feb 9, 2013 11:35:19 GMT -8
I don't think you're invisible, dear, I just don't think he answers questions.
|
|
Taelac
Officer
Be bold. It makes your enemies hesitate.
Posts: 357
|
Post by Taelac on Feb 9, 2013 11:37:25 GMT -8
Because I have two things going presently...ROMS and Ruby. The guide/tutorial I'm using to learn Ruby includes the statement "We'll let the sky eat it," some cartoon foxes, and a description of arrays as caterpillars that have been stapled down at each end.
It has still been less random and more helpful than some of what's been posted in this thread.
This is the first serious programming effort I've made in mumbleteen years (no, XML and HTML do not count), and instead of finding myself procrastinating on my "homework" by playing ROMS, I find myself wanting to procrastinate on ROMS by doing my "homework."
|
|
Taelac
Officer
Be bold. It makes your enemies hesitate.
Posts: 357
|
Post by Taelac on Feb 9, 2013 11:37:54 GMT -8
That was in answer to Riss.
|
|
|
Post by DementedDuck on Feb 9, 2013 11:43:17 GMT -8
So at the risk of being retaliatory, FoS on Sets. Here's why:
He's winding me up on purpose right now. If he's innocent, I can't see why he'd do that. Anger is a null tell from me so my reaction won't tell him anything about my alignment. If he's a rogue, I see a good reason to do it. I get riled up, I blow up in his face, people vote me for being aggressive because that's what people do. Also, I'm rendered completely useless as a player because I'm too annoyed to play properly.
On top of that, the fact he often refuses to explain things is annoying and unhelpful and I'd be happy voting for him to get him to cut that out anyway.
It may be worth noting that I've had an awful two weeks and am easily irritated. Whatever.
Vote: Sets
|
|
|
Post by Bunnylaroo on Feb 9, 2013 12:25:24 GMT -8
Yeah, I'm sort of seeing Sets' vote and subsequent ignoring of DD as a way to get DD to dissolve into a puddle of rage, but I don't know how that speaks to Sets alignment.
Van appears to be role playing a revolutionary Care Bear (curses phone posting! I should have a image for that) with all the "let's have more trust". Can't tell if that's flavor or genuine strategy, but I'm leaning toward flavor...
Firebolt, don't know if that explanation was directed toward me, but I still don't see how you bridged the gap between "there isn't enough data to give serious FoI or FoS Day 1" to "vote! Based on one post I found wonky!" Or being "pro Day 1 lynch" for that matter. That's like saying " we don't have enough info to make alignment judgements Day 1, but I really think we should kill someone anyway" which doesn't seem to me to be a viable strategy for finding rogues. It works if your goal is to just kill people though. But if it is, then, you know, you're a rogue and stuff.
|
|
|
Post by Jolyma on Feb 9, 2013 13:00:19 GMT -8
I'm sorta finding it interesting though that DD is already using 'I rage, therefore I am'.
|
|
|
Post by DementedDuck on Feb 9, 2013 13:20:19 GMT -8
I'd love for you to find a game where I haven't done that, Joly. It says nothing about my alignment, I'm just in an awful mood lately and if you're really super interested, PM me.
|
|
|
Post by DementedDuck on Feb 9, 2013 13:21:48 GMT -8
Genuine question, Bunny, can you see what Sets' motives would be if he is doing this as an innocent? I tried but I can't.
|
|
Leif
Senior Chatterbox
Posts: 600
|
Post by Leif on Feb 9, 2013 13:22:06 GMT -8
I'm sorta finding it interesting though that DD is already using 'I rage, therefore I am'. I do see the argument that Sets might be deliberately winding up DD. I'm pretty sure in past games as a rogue he's tried to provoke similar reactions, except from Riss or Yasmi. On the other hand DD is getting that out there conveniently early. As easily as DD gets explosive, "If you frustrate me you're a rogue" is a pretty questionable play choice. From what I understood of Luv's post, she wasn't concerned either way over FoS or FoI, whereas I have a slight problem with FoI this early in the game. I can tell how much FoI bothers you by the post after Sets' first FoI where you... didn't mention it at all. From what I understood of Luv's post, she wasn't concerned either way over FoS or FoI, whereas I have a slight problem with FoI this early in the game. Van's posts about "trust" didn't strike me as at all suspicious, and his reference to revolution when questioned about it strikes me largely as roleplaying, which I've got no problem with. The fact that Firebolt seems to be have latched onto Van and not Sets is interesting too me. Mostly as it relates to Firebolt though. The "serious FoS" on day 1 quote seems somewhat at odds with the vote on Van. The discrepancy in her actions and going after Van instead of Sets is the grounds for my vote. Vote: Firebolt
|
|
Leif
Senior Chatterbox
Posts: 600
|
Post by Leif on Feb 9, 2013 13:27:54 GMT -8
Quote fail, but I think it's understandable. Re: 2patch and Sets and Commitment.Sets has an excellent point. Commitment is more than just saying, "Oh he's a rogue" or "He's an innocent". Saying, "I find Sets interesting" or something similar is decidedly noncommittal. It's leaving the door open to take either stance on Sets later. "Oh it's interesting because a rogue wouldn't do that!" or "It was interesting because it was suspicious!" It's a decidedly unhelpful "stance" to take.
|
|
|
Post by DementedDuck on Feb 9, 2013 13:28:29 GMT -8
I'm not calling him a rogue because he frustrates you. If I did that, I'd vote more than half the player base. I'm voting him because I think he's trying to get a rise out of me and I can't see innocent motivation for that.
|
|
|
Post by DementedDuck on Feb 9, 2013 13:28:51 GMT -8
erm, frustrates me* derpderpderp
|
|
|
Post by Setsusa on Feb 9, 2013 14:01:21 GMT -8
The following is my true mindset and is not intended to get a rise out of DD:
Get over yourself.
I'm not going to make you blow up so people go wow he's super mad must be a rogue because that makes no sense without proper context. I will however ignore you, and vote you when all of your posts are about yourself and only yourself.
|
|
Leif
Senior Chatterbox
Posts: 600
|
Post by Leif on Feb 9, 2013 14:20:15 GMT -8
I'm voting him because I think he's trying to get a rise out of me and I can't see innocent motivation for that. While he's sense provided an answer, it's worth pointing out that he's acting the same towards pretty much everyone. He's ignored or provided unclear answers to Bunny, myself, and several others.
|
|
|
Post by Marinated on Feb 9, 2013 14:24:08 GMT -8
Is it bad that I was reading Marinated's vote on Van - as a joke rather than a serious one. >.> The only serious thing about it was the attempt to get some action. This one, however, is serious: Vote: FireboltWell, Mari might be voting based on a light post, but it's still not sitting right with me how Van was all "I trust people!" this early. So given that, I will also Vote: Vantastic She's misquoted DD's comment on my FoS of him as referring to my vote on Van which makes me think she wasn't really interested in why I voted him - in which case why refer to my vote? - and her statement in post 146 about "lynching for info" seemed unnecessary if she was genuinely trying to lynch someone she thought might be a rogue.
|
|
|
Post by Bunnylaroo on Feb 9, 2013 14:27:23 GMT -8
Genuine question, Bunny, can you see what Sets' motives would be if he is doing this as an innocent? I tried but I can't. Genuine answer: No, I can't see a motive, but that doesn't mean he wouldn't do it as an innocent. It could be gut, it could be "to see what happens", it could be drawing names out of a hat. Do I think that's good play for an innocent? No, but Sets does lots of things as an innocent that I don't consider good play. Like the HS "pressure vote on Poppy". That resulted in Poppy getting mad. He did it to me in DC with the random "high FoS" which he refused to explain (he couldn't vote me at the time because of his role). And I was pretty ragey. He was innocent both times. When I said it was a "way to make you dissolve into a puddle of rage", I didn't mean that was his intention, I meant that that is the inevitable result of his refusal to explain himself. I'm pretty sure in past games as a rogue he's tried to provoke similar reactions, except from Riss or Yasmi. He's only had one past game as a rogue, first off, if I recall correctly. And as above, he does it as an innocent too. (pretty sure he was provoking Yasmi in Finest of the Flavors, and he was innocent then). Actually, I found Rogue Sets much more akin to my logic and slightly less likely to be as much of a tool as usual, at least in the early game (and in things that did not relate to Riss). Of course, Sets knows this, so I would fully expect him to change things up if he drew rogue again this game. Firebolt, the bar on my homepage says you're around, can you answer my question please?
|
|
|
Post by Setsusa on Feb 9, 2013 14:32:48 GMT -8
To expand and clarify the above.
It's basically that the past few experience I can recall with DD were me telling him that I am not trying to make him mad, and that I don't care what kind of personality he has because I am not attempting to take advantage of his nature as a person to make him appear angry and somehow a rogue. Like come on man, the first time you did it I wasn't sure if you were serious, the second time I was more or less "Really? We went through this already." Now it's like "Yeah, screw it, I'll just tell him to shut up and ignore this conversation."
That's not to make you mad. It's because I'm not trying to get a rise out of your volatile personality to prove any points, and I'm tired of having this pointless discussion about whether I am or not because we've done it before and you apparently still don't get it.
I apologize if you dislike the way I choose to handle your statement, it was baseless before and now it's annoying. The three words in the above post fairly summarize my thoughts but hopefully this makes it make sense.
Leif notes that I have since provided an answer to DD, but no him? Intristing.
Bunny's statement to Fire makes me laugh. Lurkerbusterforums.
And, I'll keep it in mind that in games where I am a rogue I should make a point of being illogical as possible so I do not coincide with Bunny's logic. Clearly a tell.
|
|
|
Post by Jolyma on Feb 9, 2013 14:33:22 GMT -8
I'd love for you to find a game where I haven't done that, Joly. It says nothing about my alignment, I'm just in an awful mood lately and if you're really super interested, PM me. I didn't say you don't do it. Just that it's Day 1, and you're setting up an excuse to be ragey already. The only other time that I can think that you used that on Day 1, it was because you were a rogue, and you were hoping it would keep people from lynching you for being all ragey. As for being ragey in general, it's not about RL being frustrating, I get that it can be, I get that it is for a lot of people. It's that you still, after all these games, it's that you choose to have that reaction. I tell my kids all the time: If you know, or even THINK, it's being done to get a rise out of you, then don't give in, because it's giving them what they want. In regards to Firebolt, I do find it suspicious that she has latched onto auspicious reasoning that could easily apply to other people, and yet, she has not applied it to other people.
|
|
|
Post by Vantastic on Feb 9, 2013 14:52:14 GMT -8
At this point so early in the game, I trust no one, because with my luck I'd trust a rogue, and then I'd get lead down a dark alley and get whacked with the banstick, or to the noose. I'd rather stick around and help weed them out. But why would a nefarious rogue attempt to lynch(openly) or ban(secretly) someone who believes that gives them FOI and thinks them innocent? Perhaps you are just sowing seeds of suspicion? if something seems odd to me on Day 1, I'll mark it in my notes and keep an eye on it, but short of someone saying "I'm so excited to be a roag I can't wait to ban someone!" I can't really see giving out a serious FoS, or FoI for that matter. it's still not sitting right with me how Van was all "I trust people!" this early. So given that, I will also vote for vantasticAnd Van, why Riss and Phoe? They've both posted some good points. I'd be looking toward some of the quieter members of this revolution. People who aren't rioting in this sort of thing also cause me to look in their direction. You are looking at the quieter people allegedly, but who in particular? What say you about the discrepancy between these two quotes? Is it perhaps that the vagrant impersonator of me, that Setsusa mentioned, has been claiming that he(and perhaps mistakably me) is a rogue excited for banning? It's interesting to me that some people seem more concerned about FoIs than FoSs. For some reason, it seems like there's a higher hesitancy about FoI. Personally I'm more concerned about a Finger of Innocence than a Finger of Suspicion because it's harder to change someone's mind if they're convinced that someone is innocent. And considering that Sets had declared Joly innocent with what maybe 3 posts to her name? That makes me a little worried. And a FOS can be high or medium or low, but it seems that a FOI is just a flat out "You're innocent." My personal view is that everyone gets a FOS to start the game. Because I only know for certain what I am - especially in a roled game, there's all sorts of evil ideas I can come up with for roles that could have someone being flipped, or be working their own game against the rogue team, or have a very different win condition to everyone else playing etc etc. I played TMBTC's game with Computer Lyaka, Rogues, the Joker blowing up the town - as a VAMPIRE where I had to convert people, didn't matter who won. I also played as a rogue with WingsOfWisdom I think it was creating a faked Innocent PM screenshot - and having it believed. So yeah, stating that you find someone to be innocent on Day 1 with less than posts from them? I find it odd. The only place I think that I personally will believe a confirmed innocent is in the Dead Thread. It's why I think a FOI is odd. I question whether it is right for an innocent person to be solely concerned with convincing others that certain people are rogues. Would not an innocent person also consider changing their own mind? The strong aversion to the existence of FoIs is something I suspect to be the trait of a rogue, and for this I watchlisted Phoenix. Riss: The above post is the only post that firebolt could be referring to, with regard to phoenix, when he said that you and phoenix made some good points. Firebolt's inconsistency, the timing of his vote for me after I directed my gaze at Phoenix/Riss, and similar viewpoint shared by Firebolt and Phoenix makes me wonder whether the two are in league with eachother. It is something to note, and think about later.
|
|
Riss
Cabin Person
Posts: 82
|
Post by Riss on Feb 9, 2013 15:04:35 GMT -8
@van: Yeah. I figured out which posts she was referring to, but I want to simply know which points are good and why. Her answer to me was a tad bit vague so I wanted more explanation.
|
|
|
Post by Bunnylaroo on Feb 9, 2013 15:13:12 GMT -8
I'm 15 minutes late and won't be around for deadline, and I'm wishy washy enough on Firebolt and concerned about what looks like a fine bandwagon forming (since many have expressed suspicious leanings, namely Van, Joly, and potentially Riss) that I'm not convinced a rogue would go down that easily Day 1. I'm willing to give it another Day, but if an explanation is not forthcoming, I'll likely be looking that way toMorrow.
Would also like to hear opinions from cala and crazy, since I don't recall much of anything other than check-ins from them.
|
|
Riss
Cabin Person
Posts: 82
|
Post by Riss on Feb 9, 2013 15:19:04 GMT -8
No, I wouldn't vote Firebolt because I'm not sure yet either. I have unexplained questions to be answered first plus I have a nagging feeling on Van. Van mostly because he's trying to gain people's trust without really doing much to earn it. For that I basically watch listed him and in one of his few posts afterwards he did a very retaliatory eyeballs towards (Riss).
|
|
|
Post by Setsusa on Feb 9, 2013 15:24:46 GMT -8
^haha what? No he's not.
|
|
|
Post by firebolt153 on Feb 9, 2013 15:26:52 GMT -8
Went to take a nap to fight off whatever it is I feel coming on and I come back and see my name mentioned a lot. I will try my best to answer questions but it might be a little discombobulated.
|
|
|
Post by DementedDuck on Feb 9, 2013 15:31:33 GMT -8
unvote: Sets I really did intend not to get ragey this game, same as my last two games, but I'm extremely irritable. Sets, if you could do me a favour and try not to do things that are likely to piss me off, I'd really appreciate it. I want to actually enjoy this game. And I don't mean to say that with attitude, I mean I seriously would appreciate it if you could cut me some slack this game. Joly, it's not a case of choosing to react this way. I dislike it as much as anyone else. I just have a temper and I'm impulsive. And that post from you really didn't help so I'm just going to ignore it.
|
|
|
Post by Setsusa on Feb 9, 2013 15:33:19 GMT -8
Yeah, no problem. E-High five.
|
|
|
Post by Crazy Mg on Feb 9, 2013 15:36:15 GMT -8
A low FoS for Sets due to his early FoIs, his question answering and his comments about the Leif bandwagon, I know that he's probably just joking with those, but they just aren't sitting well with me, they make me not want to trust him at all.
How I feel about Sets' comments also makes me wonder about Van. WL.
Bunny, I love you.
|
|
|
Post by Vantastic on Feb 9, 2013 15:36:42 GMT -8
lolwut? Did my impersonator tell you why I'm doing what I'm doing or something? No, I wouldn't vote Firebolt because I'm not sure yet either. I have unexplained questions to be answered first plus I have a nagging feeling on Van. Van mostly because he's trying to gain people's trust without really doing much to earn it. For that I basically watch listed him and in one of his few posts afterwards he did a very retaliatory eyeballs towards (Riss). It's not really that it's a concern for me. The thing I'm concerned with the whole FoI by Sets is that he seems to be giving out over something that really can be done by either alignment. Rogues and innocents both can give traction against early FoI's. I mean if you give an early FoI for a really good reason. That's fine, but these FoI's that he's been giving out can easily get holes shot into them and bring them down as fast that he hands them out. Riss - this post is actually why I watchlisted you, for a similar reason as why I watchlisted Phoenix. Your later post mentioned me, and from what I gathered it seemed as though you were taking a wait-and-see approach toward me - but not specifically naming me for a watchlist. I did not register it as that, and thus I was not at all being retaliatory. Regardless, feel free to watch.
|
|