Um,
here? Although it appears you're convinced that I was deflecting and not actually responding.
Can you specify how this post answered two of my points? Because like I called you out on, nothing in the post was actually related to my case on you (which is why you haven't been able to repeat anything from that post as I've pressured you further).
That means nothing. You can respond to other people and still have tunnel vision on. In fact, those seven posts were actually still about me being scum, either directly or indirectly.
Please explain to me in great detail how the following post is about you being scum:
@Cypher333, Camo is difficult to understand in this game and unfathomably annoying to try to reason with. Just ignore him for now, and if one of his leads catches on, I'm sure other will spell it out in more sense.
Tunneling is defined in my books as what is on the WW master doc, which is what I meant previously:
"Tunnel - Verb. The act of focusing all of your attention on one player while ignoring the rest, even if logic dictates others would be worth your time."
Yes, this is exactly what I've been calling you out on.
I believe that this definition you're referring to is actually one that you made here: "And you're tunnelling by not talking about anyone besides myself (and you made one post buddying TGK, I guess)."
These definitions, although similar, are different. I am not ignoring other options. TGK is the other major lynch option, and I considered the option in my choice to keep my vote on you. I also made a comment on Cypher, which basically said that I was having difficulty following it, which implies that I am not "ignoring the rest".
No no, but you are ignoring other options, because you haven't brought any new ones up DESPITE apparently having one on the backburner. This is tunnelling; there are other options available to you, yet you want to plant your vote and focus all of your attention solely on me as a viable lynch. You expressed that you don't like TGK as an option, and that's fine, but that gives you no excuse to stop talking about other players. Once again, a couple people expressed that they found mordacazir scummy, but you didn't mention him before I called you out on it (and you were active between him being brought into discussion and my calling you out) which is one example of your tunnelling.
No no, you didn't comment on this above. I stated that you have only been paying attention to your arguments and leads about others being scummy, which wouldn't be a bad thing if you didn't just say "I've learned that doing that is a bad thing so I am now giving myself no bias". The one post about TGK is the only post in which you have mentioned anyone else's arguments, so please clarify to me exactly how your statement from earlier is true.
The difference, to be super clear, is that calling you out for tunnelling is you focusing all of your attention on me and not other lynch options. The calling you out here is for a contradiction you made when you talked about how you give your arguments no bias over other people's, despite not reflecting that in your actions.
There is a few details that you have neglected to bring up. Firstly, I am not like you commenting on every thing you can find, especially on Day 1, meaning there is a sample of much less.
OK, that's fine. You do only have 30 posts now (boy, I sure am making you be much more active by pressuring you here than you otherwise would be!).
Is that a, uh, good thing? It's important that players share their thoughts about every lynch option as they are brought up so people can see what's popular and what isn't.
I have posted what is important and on my mind.
Apparently I'm the only important person in this game. D'awww, love you too, bb <3
This links to the second problem with this statistic, which is that it completely ignores "likes". Liking is a major way I like to communicate as it shows that I agree with the person. It means that I am reading along, but don't have anything to input. There is even a lot of occasions when people make comments when I'm asleep that is exactly what I would've said if I was awake.
Please raise your hand if you pay vast swathes of attention to likes. I think Camo probably does, but that's about it besides. I mean, if I'm reading the thread and notice it, I will most likely make a mental note, but I won't write it down.
Here is the huge problem with likes: They are not timestamped, and they are incredibly easy to miss. The people who were actively participating in the thread at the time you went back and liked a load of posts earlier on in the thread will miss your likes, as they had already read the posts without your likes beneath them. This means that if you wait a little while, you can go back and like posts to say that you're contribution while simultaneously flying under the radar hard. I have absolutely no idea what posts you've liked thus far this game, and I have no way to easily check back through the thread and see (whereas with posts I can go on the postings tab on your profile).
Essentially, by liking posts instead of posting a quick one liner saying "this is a really good point and x", you are hiding really hard, trying to fly under the radar, and making it really difficult to see your activity in the game. Common scum tactics.
Thirdly, my posts aren't completely split up. How many of those posts are solely about you? Did you consider that I talk about others in the same post?
A large proportion, actually. I'm low on time so I can't go through and check right now, but actually most of your posts in this game are about a paragraph in length, said paragraph being about me (from what I remember from searching through your posts last night).
Finally, did you consider that I am more conservative than you? I'm not sure if this was the same in Revelation, but I actually am more conservative on Day 1 over other days while I gather reads privately.
bbninjas, why are you withholding information from the town? You're gathering reads privately while using that as an excuse to say that you're not tunnelling. We have no way of knowing that you have any reads or any new scum lead because I envision you being stubborn over it and not sharing your lead with any of us, which is so unbelievably anti-town. As shown with
@Squirtle Squad's interest in this discussion and everyone else's silence (no doubt formulating reads on you and I) I think you're going to find a mob at your door pretty soon with all of these inconsistencies and contentless comments you're making in a frantic attempt at defense AND offense. Sharing your lead is also now in your best interests of self-preservation, so I would like to see it ASAP. Maybe I'll even agree with the lead and start pressuring you less. Maybe I'll use it as more ammo against you if it's a poor lead or in any way contradicting to any of the playstyle shifts you've mentioned below. Only the strength of your lead will dictate this.
Yes, that is the post that kickstarted the argument about if roleplay is distractive or not. Reread the second thing of mine you quoted. You actually used 'distractive' in your response.
I actually used 'distracting' or something
Anyway, that was after the argument had ended -- I even linked the conclusions post in that response to you! I then royally ended it when you tried to continue it in response to what I said by literally saying "the argument has ended, stop talking about it please, I've already talked about the conclusions I've derived from it". That post kickstarted nothing.
I think you're saying that discussion about the argument was part of the argument itself. This is untrue, as having the argument but not analysing it would have been a lot of wasted time.
First off, I'll identify what I think has changed from Revelation. Firstly, I'm posting less than I used to - many of my old posts lacked contribution.
This would be fine if many of your posts in this game also don't lack contribution.
Secondly, on Day 1, I'm letting others who are proficient in pressuring (I am not, imo, proficient) to pressure (as I have discovered this as quite effective Day 1) and then making reads off the pressures.
Who, exactly? Camo? Me? I'm not proficient in pressuring either (though I must say I think I've done a mighty fine job with you here!). Who exactly are you referring to here? It seems like you're just buddying Camo, honestly.
Thirdly, I am (and will be on and after Day 2) trying more effective methods of hunting and making reads over those methods that I blindly used in past WW games.
Such as?
Oh, btw, the reason I have strive to change my playstyle is that it was often getting me lynched early on FOL, because I was full of loopholes. I also talked to Camo a lot while making/hosting ORAS about reads and stuff, so a lot of my opinions stem from those two things.
Funny that you should say that given the huge amount of contradictions you've had in this discussion with me. You never used to have these loopholes, so I think your playstyle shift has actually been negative for you as far as that's concerned.
So, what have I learnt?
- I have learnt that realistically you can't call someone a lurker if they haven't posted overly much Day 1 - a couple of days isn't much of a sample
- I have also learnt that some people appear to be lurking, but are in fact a townie who is gathering reads.
Ok, so for this whole list of reads I plan on going through and talking about how none of these things are translating in your playstyle, because I fully believe they're not. The only thing you've said which you're doing and that you actually are doing is posting less, which is arguably counterproductive (subjective, I know, but bear with). The reason why I deleted all of the points except for those two is that you've already contradicted those two since the tl;dr here:
At this point, I'd like everyone to post their opinions on who is the best lynch for future reference. Just went back to read the thread and noticed a few of my scum reads have been consistently active lurking.
I thought that you can't call anyone a lurker on Day 1, and that people who appear to be lurking are in fact a townie gathering reads?
Also, I'm not going to spend hours scavenging posts showing a difference in playstyle. I'm not that committed to a game.
I mean, that's fair, but also possibly your downfall as far as this very evidence-heavy discussion is concerned.
Anyways, I feel like your argument here is overflowing with WIFOM and isn't really evidence at all.
I will tell you exactly the point of this discussion point:
1) It shows how you are panicking hard under very little pressure (just little ol' me talking to you!). What you say you do and what you actually are doing are directly conflicting, which shows that you are just saying what you think could be good as a means of looking towny and deflecting attention away. If you really were town, you would consider my points more carefully and come up with more objective answers. Your answers are currently full of opinion and fluff.
2) If I can disprove your actions being this "sparkly new town meta" you apparently have, the only other alternative is that it is your scum meta. A playstyle shift to this degree is very significant, especially for a more experience player, and I'm not willing to just drop it at "amelioration derived from a totally different meta". To me, that's not acceptable.
3) People garner all kinds of different derivations from discussions like this, and it allows everyone reading along to get better reads of you and I. You are classically difficult to read (at least for me) so I only see this as a pro-town ting.
I know that you are typically scummy in general. However, I don't recall ever seeing you arguing about something like RP that completely distracted from important parts of Day 1, including RVS. I actually thought you were pro-RVS, although I may be wrong there. Basically, I simply can't imagine how the distraction of RVS can be a pro-town thing.
I'm pro-RVS to the extent of "alright, let's just do it unless there's a clear alternative, since arguing about it will get us nowhere". It IS a necessary phase if we are totally uninformed, but the argument about RP makes us not totally uninformed -- in fact, it gave us more leads than RVS ever would have done in a much shorter amount of time.
In regards to your tunnel vision, yes you do it a lot. However, I think that the combination of weak evidence and tunnel vision is very scummy, out of norm and once again not a pro-town thing.
Your phrasing here makes it sound like I said somewhere "I do tunnel vision a lot". I do not, and never said that. I think many will agree that the evidence against you here is somewhat significant, so your second point is moot.
@Reinforce, what's the deal with subs?
@Ice Espeon still hasn't posted yet, so I think a sub might be due for him at 72 hours.