TWG CLIX: Form your special exclusive groups now! - Game Thread

[ShadoWolfe]

Re: TWG CLIX: Form your special exclusive groups now! - Game Thread

i'm still having a hard time placing him, though as charu's pointed out, he's done this kind of thing before as town-aligned (if we're talking about the same game)

.. Just a small correction here, Charu mentioned that the reasoning for my mislynch last game "we don't like your posts, so you're scum" is similar to the reasoning I'm apparently using on you now. Except, he notes, for the absence of silly logic.

[Gradiant]

Re: TWG CLIX: Form your special exclusive groups now! - Game Thread

I didn't mean pointless like that!

I meant I didn't understand what the point of the arguments were and it seemed like they were just going in circles.

I do think they will be important for the game. I did read it all and am not just dismissing it that's for sure

You say you didn't mean pointless, then imply that they are currently pointless and would be more important later. This phase's lynch will most likely be because of one of these conversations, so you saying this just gives the huge impression you don't want to have to give any actual input

[ShadoWolfe]

Re: TWG CLIX: Form your special exclusive groups now! - Game Thread

Wait, where's the post I made last night addressing inDheart's post "point by point"? Its not showing up on my phone, do you guys see it or did I forget to hit "send" on computer?

[Gradiant]

Re: TWG CLIX: Form your special exclusive groups now! - Game Thread

I really don't like this post.

I agree that pure gut reads aren't very helpful *to other players* and that logic should be used in forming opinions.

But this is TWG. When you're a vanilla townie playing TWG, logic can only take you so far because you don't have any facts to back up the logic. All you have is what you *think* you know, AKA what your gut tells you is the most likely scenario.

The only people who can play TWG without their gut are the people who do not need to use it because they already know. aka the wolves

Robotic posts like your's don't actually really help. we can all figure the mechanics out on our own thank you. What helps is saying your personal opinions about things and your reads

Hell, even here you're talking about shit that came about because of dbp's argument with him

[Gradiant]

Re: TWG CLIX: Form your special exclusive groups now! - Game Thread

Wait, where's the post I made last night addressing inDheart's post "point by point"? Its not showing up on my phone, do you guys see it or did I forget to hit "send" on computer?

553?

[ShadoWolfe]

Re: TWG CLIX: Form your special exclusive groups now! - Game Thread

553?

Idk, I'm on phone but yeah I found it. It had disappeared off tapatalk and I had to open browser to see it

[Gradiant]

Re: TWG CLIX: Form your special exclusive groups now! - Game Thread

Supposed to be longer shift at work today, we'll see if what happened yesterday happens again. I'll be back later

[inDheart]

Re: TWG CLIX: Form your special exclusive groups now! - Game Thread

.. Just a small correction here, Charu mentioned that the reasoning for my mislynch last game "we don't like your posts, so you're scum" is similar to the reasoning I'm apparently using on you now. Except, he notes, for the absence of silly logic.

hey, whatever makes you sleep at night

i think saying "same kind" covers that difference

[Precarious]

Re: TWG CLIX: Form your special exclusive groups now! - Game Thread

Back. Time to get caught up.

I'll be at an event tonight and gone for a few hours, so I'll try to get in as much now as I can. Once I'm back, I'll do a full review/roster run.

[ShadoWolfe]

Re: TWG CLIX: Form your special exclusive groups now! - Game Thread

so yeah, here's you addressing mellon. you're passing this off as justifying your playstyle. that doesn't address this specific instance, particularly why mellon thinks your post feels "forced", which is still a bad quality to have. you picked an argument loser to push in freez and i don't think that reflects well on you here no matter how much you've given "reasoning".

You keep saying that I picked an argument loser to push in Freez, but isn't that contradicting your other stance that their argument was totally neutral before I jumped in?

so supposedly since i'm so behind on this, let's check in with the current state of affairs, eh? most recently you responded to this freez post with this:



plus, if you've supposedly explained the same thing three times, i need only read one explanation because they're all the same, correct? okay, therefore i have the same misgivings.

you say you see a "bad progression of "logic"", except what i've wanted to demonstrate to you by talking out that whole exchange is that your "progression" is on a poor foundation. so i'm siding with freez in that the whole conversation was rather neutral, and you continue to defend your interpretation. perhaps we need to agree to disagree if you're really going to stick to it. but something i see that i can't resolve with that is your minimization of this as a "reaction test". your unvote is supposedly because you saw something you liked in freez's reaction (which is easy enough to go back and claim when all you say at the time is "Fair enough. Unvote.")

Again, if the argument is neutral, how did I pick an argument loser to push? Also, I actually did say at the time why I unvoted, so I can't see how you're accusing me of trying to minimize the push.

, and you did so without responding to the substance of his post at the time. unless you're completely unmoved by being accused of lying, i don't know why you didn't address that at the time. your breadcrumbs are showing my dude

I didn't need to respond to the "substance" of his post, which was basically "no, you're reading me wrong, stop it." His reaction was good, his tone was good, so I got off. I even said it at the time. Also, when he accused me of "lying" (of altering his posts to suit my agenda IIRC) I DID respond, saying that that couldn't havr been the case because all I did was quote his posts, in order.
Your reasoning doesn't hold up no matter which way I look at it, tbh. Also, I'm glad you see breadcrumbs, because wolves don't leave breadcrumbs, they leave a trail of blood. They don't eat bread, they eat villagers.

Maaan, it's so much easier to see the holes in your attack now that I'm all rested and relaxed. What's up, inDheart?

[mellonxcollie]

Re: TWG CLIX: Form your special exclusive groups now! - Game Thread

You say you didn't mean pointless

I already explained to Charu what I meant by that.

The content of the arguments seemed largely "pointless" to me. One example I can give are your large quote train posts that you posted multiple times, yet they didn't really have a solid point and were just Freezin quotes repeated. Or one of the ad hominem attacks.

then imply that they are currently pointless and would be more important later.

Not sure where you're pulling this one from. I said "I do think they will be important for the game. I did read it all and am not just dismissing it that's for sure". The game means the game in general, now and later. and I also explained that I think they are important and should not be dismissed.

If you actually read my post it is pretty clear what I meant just from that but I'll help you out anyway

I'm having a hard time coming up with ideas I have to analyze the interactions, even if it's hard and the arguments are difficult to follow about the exchanges because they seemed a little... pointless? I used .... and a ? here to show that I realize "pointless" might not be the best possible word choice, but it was the best I could think of

Seems like you're completely misinterpreting what I said, perhaps intentionally

It's kinda weird how you jump on every post I make. especially when it seems you need to twist my words in order to make your points.

[inDheart]

Re: TWG CLIX: Form your special exclusive groups now! - Game Thread

You keep saying that I picked an argument loser to push in Freez, but isn't that contradicting your other stance that their argument was totally neutral before I jumped in?

that's not my stance. you picked a loser, because you saw one

[inDheart]

Re: TWG CLIX: Form your special exclusive groups now! - Game Thread

I didn't need to respond to the "substance" of his post, which was basically "no, you're reading me wrong, stop it." His reaction was good, his tone was good, so I got off. I even said it at the time. Also, when he accused me of "lying" (of altering his posts to suit my agenda IIRC) I DID respond, saying that that couldn't havr been the case because all I did was quote his posts, in order.

i mean this post. the only response i see to this is the one i said, the "fair enough"

Ok

First of all in the context of the conversation these quotes:






was made when the conversation was at a neutral stance. Nobody had voted for me, nobody was going after me at that point, this was just me typing out my thoughts about Gradiants reaction and trying to think it out. But thank you for cherry picking my quotes to suit your own ends.




is it a wagon if theres only one vote? is it hoping on the wagon if i dont even vote for him? never mind all that, is it hoping on the wagon if im not even attacking him?



bruh just for you i didnt use punctuation in this entire post. get rekt by your ocd

[botchi246]

Re: TWG CLIX: Form your special exclusive groups now! - Game Thread

is it a wagon if theres only one vote? is it hoping on the wagon if i dont even vote for him? never mind all that, is it hoping on the wagon if im not even attacking him?

this whole wagon thing.

it is consider hopping on a wagon if you are hoping to start a wagon. you do not have to vote for him, but your posts can indicate who you would be ok with lynching (lol ofc). Even if you are not attacking him, the previous sentence applies here. It really just depends on your intentions.

"Hey, guy #1 said stuff about this guy #2. I agree with guy #1, so i dont like #2." -jumpnig on wagon

"Hey, guy #1 said stuff about this guy #2. I agree with guy #1 but i dont want to judge #2 until i have made my own conclusions." -not jumping on the wagon

just examples ( i think they work)

[botchi246]

Re: TWG CLIX: Form your special exclusive groups now! - Game Thread

^ directed at freezinice not indheart

also the only reason i broke that wagon thing down above was because indheart posted that quote and brought it back to my attention