RE: Murder By The Book - Day 1: Murder on the Disoriented Express
03-21-2014, 04:19 AM
Veronica Bryant here with some commentary on the current 'lynching' situation.
First off, I'd like to congratulate Slorange for his sportsmanship. This group is so bloody-minded I predict using them as a simile to comment on the behavior of congress for YEARS to come. Thanks for the metaphor-fodder (metafodder?) in advance, guys.
But seriously, real props to Slorange for calling out people for not knowing his personal quirks. It takes guts to restate your position every game despite knowing it'll end in people rehashing the same arguments over and over at you. I know I'd get sick of it, but that's because I just don't have his strength of character.
Next on the list of heroes, our controversial friend Akumu. Well, I'll just let the cartoon I sketched up in their honor speak for itself.
![[Image: tumblr_n2q7nzwFGY1s1b1gto1_500.png]](https://24.media.tumblr.com/df91aa937a2749f069ead92bed22102c/tumblr_n2q7nzwFGY1s1b1gto1_500.png)
Btw, for people obsessed with how much I'm posting, that counted for a thousand words.
[Takes cup of tea and dims lights to signal switch into more serious tone]
Garuru, you call out people on eberron's bandwagon. But far more than not commenting on Pala's vote until later, I take issue with your lack of comment on Akumu (other than in a question to eberron on why they were voting them), a.k.a. the very reason the bandwagon began. Your evaluation of those two votes as being Bad Votes, while true, is intensely superficial and perhaps intentionally ignorant of the argument which the wagon stemmed from.
[swirls tea in glass like it's wine or some shit] But frankly, I'm not sure I agree with Pala's claim that Garuru is 'defending' eberron. Their wagon had 4 votes early d1 and the game had stalled a little. We well know that such early wagons on new faces rarely go directly towards a lynch. Usually people pursue others on the wagon and other lynches are explored. While the original lynch may indeed get killed at the end of the day, Garuru 'defended' eberron at the time when it was in fact safest and most natural to do so.
I'd say the real point of the post was to try and kick off fresh lynches that it'd look better to be on, especially since he chose to vote a player who I doubt would give a stunning argument in response to pressure. And he drops it immediately after questioning by Pala (I suppose I can't dislike both of them, can I? Then again, they are being eerily nonconfrontational with each other), with nary a second thought or vote to anyone else on the bandwagon he thought was so scummy.
I don't agree with Schazer's views on Akumu. I see 'em as being focused on one person but refusing to analyze all the people supposedly 'leaving [them] alone' in their suspicions of eberron. If you want them dead, surely you have some opinion on the people making arguments that contradict that? The rationales of the people leaving their lynch? No? You'd rather restate your idea that we instead wail for the people who haven't spoken yet? Well, I'm restating my point here, but I think that's just ludicrous.
(By the way, Solaris, I see my heart's trust has been betrayed once more. I gave you a wax-sealed missive to be delivered unto these people regarding my lack of internet which you swore to me between kisses you would faithfully deliver. [pours contents of flask into tea] Yet I see that your promises that you had changed were all for naught. Was it that harlot again--no, do not tell me. I am sure I would prefer my made-up story over the one you'll give me.)
Anyways, other than that I like Schazer's post. I like Gnauga's post too. (This is not contradictory, because I like Schazer's post as a post made by Schazer, not as perfect advice for whom to lynch that I will follow to the letter.) Solaris seems alright as well.
Granola's standpoint that we should lynch a player who has expressed no real opinion solely because of 'relations data' is at best a satire of these types of lynches.
Sotek's post is iffy, but I can appreciate tiredness.
I'm not sure which I dislike more; Garuru's focus on individual Bad Votes instead of looking at wider connections on arguments or Akumu's tunneling an easy lynch to the same end. Or perhaps their stunning lack of interaction? For god's sake, Akumu, the man's inevitable assertion that eberron was new (someone would have done it eventually) is what temporarily dissuaded your pet lynch. Yet you're more interested in people who aren't even here.
Gentle readers, what's more intentionally uncontroversial than posts which only contain exhortations for others to post more? After all, who can take issue with that? They don't even bother to offer new analyses on the posts their target has made since they voted them, causing me to wonder if they truly want eberron dead or if they just feel their vote is currently in a safe place and do not wish to risk moving it.
vote: Akumu
First off, I'd like to congratulate Slorange for his sportsmanship. This group is so bloody-minded I predict using them as a simile to comment on the behavior of congress for YEARS to come. Thanks for the metaphor-fodder (metafodder?) in advance, guys.
But seriously, real props to Slorange for calling out people for not knowing his personal quirks. It takes guts to restate your position every game despite knowing it'll end in people rehashing the same arguments over and over at you. I know I'd get sick of it, but that's because I just don't have his strength of character.
Next on the list of heroes, our controversial friend Akumu. Well, I'll just let the cartoon I sketched up in their honor speak for itself.
Btw, for people obsessed with how much I'm posting, that counted for a thousand words.
[Takes cup of tea and dims lights to signal switch into more serious tone]
Garuru, you call out people on eberron's bandwagon. But far more than not commenting on Pala's vote until later, I take issue with your lack of comment on Akumu (other than in a question to eberron on why they were voting them), a.k.a. the very reason the bandwagon began. Your evaluation of those two votes as being Bad Votes, while true, is intensely superficial and perhaps intentionally ignorant of the argument which the wagon stemmed from.
[swirls tea in glass like it's wine or some shit] But frankly, I'm not sure I agree with Pala's claim that Garuru is 'defending' eberron. Their wagon had 4 votes early d1 and the game had stalled a little. We well know that such early wagons on new faces rarely go directly towards a lynch. Usually people pursue others on the wagon and other lynches are explored. While the original lynch may indeed get killed at the end of the day, Garuru 'defended' eberron at the time when it was in fact safest and most natural to do so.
I'd say the real point of the post was to try and kick off fresh lynches that it'd look better to be on, especially since he chose to vote a player who I doubt would give a stunning argument in response to pressure. And he drops it immediately after questioning by Pala (I suppose I can't dislike both of them, can I? Then again, they are being eerily nonconfrontational with each other), with nary a second thought or vote to anyone else on the bandwagon he thought was so scummy.
I don't agree with Schazer's views on Akumu. I see 'em as being focused on one person but refusing to analyze all the people supposedly 'leaving [them] alone' in their suspicions of eberron. If you want them dead, surely you have some opinion on the people making arguments that contradict that? The rationales of the people leaving their lynch? No? You'd rather restate your idea that we instead wail for the people who haven't spoken yet? Well, I'm restating my point here, but I think that's just ludicrous.
(By the way, Solaris, I see my heart's trust has been betrayed once more. I gave you a wax-sealed missive to be delivered unto these people regarding my lack of internet which you swore to me between kisses you would faithfully deliver. [pours contents of flask into tea] Yet I see that your promises that you had changed were all for naught. Was it that harlot again--no, do not tell me. I am sure I would prefer my made-up story over the one you'll give me.)
Anyways, other than that I like Schazer's post. I like Gnauga's post too. (This is not contradictory, because I like Schazer's post as a post made by Schazer, not as perfect advice for whom to lynch that I will follow to the letter.) Solaris seems alright as well.
Granola's standpoint that we should lynch a player who has expressed no real opinion solely because of 'relations data' is at best a satire of these types of lynches.
Sotek's post is iffy, but I can appreciate tiredness.
I'm not sure which I dislike more; Garuru's focus on individual Bad Votes instead of looking at wider connections on arguments or Akumu's tunneling an easy lynch to the same end. Or perhaps their stunning lack of interaction? For god's sake, Akumu, the man's inevitable assertion that eberron was new (someone would have done it eventually) is what temporarily dissuaded your pet lynch. Yet you're more interested in people who aren't even here.
Gentle readers, what's more intentionally uncontroversial than posts which only contain exhortations for others to post more? After all, who can take issue with that? They don't even bother to offer new analyses on the posts their target has made since they voted them, causing me to wonder if they truly want eberron dead or if they just feel their vote is currently in a safe place and do not wish to risk moving it.
vote: Akumu