safariguy5 wrote:I'm trying to decide how much of the discussion revolving around jak is just his playstyle and how much is actually questionable.
I will say that any role that is vote manipulative is more likely town in my book. However, questioning a claimed investigative as being unhelpful and scummy is too big a leap in my book.
Let's look at gregwolf's Day 2 posts. I'm going to ignore his Day 1 posts because they tend to be jokey in nature and not necessarily a good gauge of activity.
gregwolf121 wrote:well i can't add to the others interpretation of the night scene, but i hope its a good sign that no ones dead
Fluff. I doubt anyone barring edoc the mod can really interpret anything particularly useful out of that scene.
agreed it was gregwolf121 wrote:well i agree that we shouldn't rush a no lynch, but i also think its a bad idea to vote jak at this point, cause his wagon growing to big to fast, but what we need to look into are cases, true jak needs to explain a bit more, but i don't recall there being any other major leads yesterday, i should go back and check though.
Agreeing that a no lynch is bad given the day is young is pretty much a given. Says he notices bandwagonning on the initial jak pressure but doesn't call anyone out via a FOS or vote them.
no i didn't FOS or vote any because in my opinion none were at that levelgregwolf121 wrote:first off sorry for inactivity internet is nonexistant in my apartment, but terminology wise i believe saint means holy, thus good, and ill need time to catch up so i won't vote, and yeah
Game meta/speculation and an inactivity check.
gregwolf121 wrote:well first off haven't been posting because i got swamped by college, but now that its calmed down a bit ill put in my two cents, from what i remember of my reading the biggest case, ie the most arguing is centered around jak, now i don't remember all the specific arguements but i would agree that jak your not always responding to them, it seems to me that you claim/reply enough to take the edge off the criticism but the root of the problem still exists, right now jak seems the scummiest to me.
so i shall vote jak
Now this one is the real offender.
First, admission of skimming. Second, restating what aage just posted. Third a bandwagon vote based on feelings of scumminess that is basically implied to be supported by aage's post. Which is to say supported by really nothing. Which makes it a clear bandwagon vote. Seriously greg, you're an old player, you really should be better than this.
skimming maybe but i did read all the posts, didn't necessarily study them out or read the entire day before i posted, i read what had been added since i last looked at the thread and went with what i remembered of the discussion before, and i think honesty is the best policy so no i haven't been spending a lot of time on the thread, i generally get on once a day, internet willing, and read what has been posted and add what i think needs be said, i do see the part where you link what i said to copying aage, wasn't mine intention, just cause two scientists get the same result on a test doesn't mean one copied the other, it means they went through the same process and arrived at the same result, as i was reading and thinking back on what had been said, jak is the only one that has stood out to me, my reason for the vote was as i said that in my opinion jak has only only claimed enough to take off the edge but the problem/concerns are still thereunvote vote gregwolf
F1fth wrote:
As for Safari's points on gregwolf, I agree on all counts -- especially about the extremely weak bandwagon vote. Greg, you know you don't need to remember when you can just read the last few pages, right? Saying you can't remember just doesn't fly, nor does voting based on your lapse of memory. Vote Gregwolf
i wasn't voting on a memory lapse i voted on what stood out to me from what i remembered of the discussion. i feel that some remembrance of the day is needed cause it has been more than a few pages, i could reread all the previous pages but i didn't think it necessary
in general i feel that my post was misunderstod, my reason for voting jak is that
gregwolf121 wrote:well first off haven't been posting because i got swamped by college, but now that its calmed down a bit ill put in my two cents, from what i remember of my reading the biggest case, ie the most arguing is centered around jak, now i don't remember all the specific arguements but i would agree that jak your not always responding to them, it seems to me that you claim/reply enough to take the edge off the criticism but the root of the problem still exists, right now jak seems the scummiest to me.
so i shall vote jak
so to explain, wasn't posting alot cause of college, reason 5 papers due in a week, wasn't fun and don't want to ever have to do it again, by biggest case and arguing, i would say around 60% of the posts for day 2 are about jak, meaning hes in the limelight, as i said i don't remember every grievance that was brought up but what i do recall is that none were fully answered, at least to my taste.