Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Teproc]

So first I was overexplaining, now it's all about sheeping ? What's next, OMGUS, somehow ? WW is clearly stretching here, though I'm not entirely sure why yet.

This seems a bit like an intentional misrepresentation. 

How so ? You said you found me scummy because I overexplained. So far so good, I can see how you get that read. Then, when it seems like people disagree with that read, you add that I was sheeping. How did I misinterpret anything so far ?

[Witherweaver]

So first I was overexplaining, now it's all about sheeping ? What's next, OMGUS, somehow ? WW is clearly stretching here, though I'm not entirely sure why yet.

This seems a bit like an intentional misrepresentation.

I dont think it was intentional. Is it scummy if it's unintentional?

Well, no

[Witherweaver]

So first I was overexplaining, now it's all about sheeping ? What's next, OMGUS, somehow ? WW is clearly stretching here, though I'm not entirely sure why yet.

This seems a bit like an intentional misrepresentation. 

How so ? You said you found me scummy because I overexplained. So far so good, I can see how you get that read. Then, when it seems like people disagree with that read, you add that I was sheeping. How did I misinterpret anything so far ?

Wasn't it obvious from the beginning that you were jumping on the wagon?  I mean, I even said it:

Well I should say, especially when you're jumping in on a wagon.

It's misrepresenting because you're trying to make some kind of an argument where I'm trying to grasp at things to make a point stand.  People were asking questions and I was responding to them.

[Teproc]

Jumping on a wagon = sheeping ?

So any lynch is composed of a bunch of people sheeping for you ?

[Witherweaver]

Jumping on a wagon = sheeping ?

So any lynch is composed of a bunch of people sheeping for you ?

Did you read your original post?  Did I just make it up or something?

[silverspawn]

You did it again. I thought we were frieeeeeeeeeeeeends 

arghfflllps... I forgot to fix your name in the name file. now it really shouldn't happen again.

Vote: pavovf

Not counting this vote - if you want it to count, revote.

[skip wooznum]

Is it just me or does this ww/teproc fight seem a tad scum vs. scum?

[Seprix]

Is it just me or does this ww/teproc fight seem a tad scum vs. scum?

Probably just you.

[pacovf]

The paranoid in me has been whispering that in my ear for a while now.

The other part is heating up popcorn.

[Witherweaver]

Is it just me or does this ww/teproc fight seem a tad scum vs. scum?

I'm okay with that.  Let's lynch Teproc.

[Teproc]

Jumping on a wagon = sheeping ?

So any lynch is composed of a bunch of people sheeping for you ?

Did you read your original post?  Did I just make it up or something?

Here's the thing : accusing me of overexplaining and sheeping is contradictory. The first one I can see, because I added on to UoS' argument against you was that you didn't vote when you called him scummy. I kind of agreed with hat but much bigger for me was your refusal to respond when first asked about it.

So there you go, overexplaining is indeed something that can be scummy, fine.

Sheeping is taking someone else's argument and just running with it. That's also something scum can do (though I doubt scum!me would), but it's explicitely contradictory with the other thing.

So yes, you are stretching because you feel pressured right now. I'm tempted to think that you are doing that because you want to discredit me, though that seems somewhat simplistic. If you're town though, I'm not sure why you'd do this, as you're a better town player than that.

PPE : 4

[Witherweaver]

You're arguing semantics here.  Your post with the vote on me read like "Yeah Snow is right, I want to vote WW.  But I need better reasons, so let's reiterate his argument, and throw  in this, and this, and this, and yeah now I have a good argument."

[Teproc]

Right, that's the "overexplaining argument", which, again, I can see how town!you could read my vote that way. What I find scummy is how defensive you are of your read on me, to the point that you're looking for standard vague scummy buzzwords like "sheeping" to back it up when pressed on it.

[UmbrageOfSnow]

Is it just me or does this ww/teproc fight seem a tad scum vs. scum?

WW's recent responses seem absurd to me.  Like he's opposed to the very concept of building a case or trying to convince people to vote for wagons you're jumping onto.  It's not just a semantic argument.

And my vote was not primarily about WW questioning me without voting, while we're on that topic.  My vote was a lot closer to the reasoning that teproc articulated, that WW was seeing if he could start something by supporting specious reasoning.  The logic there seems to be nonsense, and I have a hard time believing he's never seen town have an RVS vote become a serious vote.  I have an easy time believing he'd like to encourage town-on-town mutual suspicions over silly things.

Seprix, what's your reasoning about Mail-mi?

[Witherweaver]

Right, that's the "overexplaining argument", which, again, I can see how town!you could read my vote that way. What I find scummy is how defensive you are of your read on me, to the point that you're looking for standard vague scummy buzzwords like "sheeping" to back it up when pressed on it.

That's not even going on, and I don't understand how you're not understanding what I'm saying.

[Witherweaver]

Is it just me or does this ww/teproc fight seem a tad scum vs. scum?

WW's recent responses seem absurd to me.  Like he's opposed to the very concept of building a case or trying to convince people to vote for wagons you're jumping onto.  It's not just a semantic argument.

And my vote was not primarily about WW questioning me without voting, while we're on that topic.  My vote was a lot closer to the reasoning that teproc articulated, that WW was seeing if he could start something by supporting specious reasoning.  The logic there seems to be nonsense, and I have a hard time believing he's never seen town have an RVS vote become a serious vote.  I have an easy time believing he'd like to encourage town-on-town mutual suspicions over silly things.

Seprix, what's your reasoning about Mail-mi?

Yes, let me sit back and twirl my whiskers and watch the world burn.

[chairs]

I just can't even right now.

vote: ww. I feel like this is going to be like the early Joseph games, where if we don't lynch you we just keep going back to "ought we?" and you're as good a choice as any D1 in my mind.

[Teproc]

I just can't even right now.

vote: ww. I feel like this is going to be like the early Joseph games, where if we don't lynch you we just keep going back to "ought we?" and you're as good a choice as any D1 in my mind.

You're in this game ?

I believe this is L-1, have to check.

[pacovf]

Uh L-1 people please don't hammer.

[Witherweaver]

I just can't even right now.

vote: ww. I feel like this is going to be like the early Joseph games, where if we don't lynch you we just keep going back to "ought we?" and you're as good a choice as any D1 in my mind.

Will me flipping town indicate to you that it's a bad wagon?  Because I can save you some time right there: it's a bad wagon.

[UmbrageOfSnow]

WW:  Why have you a couple of times now tried to reduce my reason for voting for you to being about you not voting for me?  Did you find my initial post unclear on that point?  (Non-rhetorical question, I'm serious.)

[Teproc]

Yep, it's L-1. chairs, did you know it was L-1 ?

Obviously don't hammer, need more time to discuss etc.

[Witherweaver]

WW:  Why have you a couple of times now tried to reduce my reason for voting for you to being about you not voting for me?  Did you find my initial post unclear on that point?  (Non-rhetorical question, I'm serious.)

I had thought that was the point.  If I had voted for you instead of saying "Hey, good point here", would you have voted for me?

[Witherweaver]

Yep, it's L-1. chairs, did you know it was L-1 ?

Obviously don't hammer, need more time to discuss etc.

"I don't want to be so obviously driving this mislynch this soon!  Quick!  Where's the reverse?!"

[Witherweaver]

WW:  Why have you a couple of times now tried to reduce my reason for voting for you to being about you not voting for me?  Did you find my initial post unclear on that point?  (Non-rhetorical question, I'm serious.)

I had thought that was the point.  If I had voted for you instead of saying "Hey, good point here", would you have voted for me?

I also didn't carefully read your post where you voted for me, so maybe I made some assumptions.