Excal: I wouldn't say I have something against Otter. I sure as hell wouldn't call this a crusade. I saw something that seemed to me to be uncharacteristic for him and I voted for him to see how he'd respond. That's it. Alex is actually the one who seized on this vote and made a big case out of it. Otter's conduct since the vote has actually done a lot to make him look worse, but I'll get to that in a minute. The original Otter post that I was responding to was simply this:
EDIT: ninja'd by the Rat. I sort of agree that more time could be useful in this situation since we have to divide it between two lynches, but I also think the brief time limit could work in our favor. It forces everyone to snap to action and I think this slightly more brutal game style could help town out. I'll mention, however, that as we approach the Rat-lynch deadline, it may be the case that a few more hours will seem really helpful and desired and in that case I will vote to extend. Until and unless that becomes the case, though, I'd just as soon stick with the short days. Don't take more time for granted.
That's it. Fairly benign in that he does offer some tentative support for the idea of an extension, but the bolded sentence jumped out to me as odd. So I voted Otter to see how he'd react. I haven't got some kind of vendetta against the guy, and it was never my intent to build a case solely off of this. Yet, reading Alex's posts, that's what you'd assume I'm doing. I find it very peculiar that both of them leap on my phrasing (which was admittedly bad) and take pains to avoid ever addressing the question of whether a 24-hour cycle is logistically feasible.
As for what I want out of Otter now....some kind of rationale for why he voted for me in the first place would've been nice. "A Cid train is fine too?" What the hell? Seriously, Otter, that's the kind of thing you'd smack someone else for doing. He did drop something resembling a reason in an earlier post...
There's a temptation to OMGUS Corwin and/or El Cid for, respectively, voting me for being around and voting me for not wanting a time extension. Alex covered the Cid issue pretty well in my mind, as well as CPU, who... is playing so phenomenally poorly that I think he must not realize we're out of the jokephase. In which case he needs to read the actual topic and realize that we don't have time for that.
That's taken from a long post (mostly about CPU) on page four. OMGUS, Otter? Brilliant. He does refer to Alex's arguments, yes, and he's been agreeing with those ever since--and both of them do a damned good job of finding things I didn't actually say to use against me. First off, here's Otter at the bottom of page five:
What's more, the Extend vote has already passed now. Politicizing the Extension decision isn't just a waste of time, it smacks of a scum attempt to divert everyone's attention. Are you seriously, as Alex suggested, using this as a litmus test? You're saying townies always vote extend at the start of every day no matter what so there can be MORE DISCUSSION, while only scum would suggest that we go right for the discussion and get it done with in less than the maximum number of possible hours?
Nope, that's not what I'm suggesting. Maybe you should pay atention to what I'm actually saying instead of what Alex is saying
about me? The entire quote above is nothing but you putting words in my mouth, Otter, as I'm sure you know. I never said anything of the sort. I know you can do better than strawman arguments, Otter, so please try. It was never my intent to politicize the extension--yet, in responding to my post, you and Alex have done a pretty good job of doing just that yourselves, well past the time when the matter has actually been settled. Seriously, my initial Otter vote was made before the extension issue was settled--and yet in this paragraph he's carrying on as though I were still harping about it now. If I'm doing so, it's only in response to him. Go back and reread my posts. Pretty much everything I've said since the extension
was passed has been self-defense against people...yet, above, Otter says I'm making attempts to politicize the issue even after it's been settled? As near as I can tell, you and Alex have gone to the most effort to politicize the extension since it's been passed. An open question to the group as a whole: does this seem wonky to anyone other than me?
From a response to VSM:
If he let us extend it to week-long days, would you vote for that? By Cid's reasoning, surely you would if you were a townie, because a week of discussion is much more than a day of discussion, and more discussion helps town! This is bogus, though, because we don't NEED that much time.
You're right, that is bogus--
because no one here actually said it. Nor would they. A week? Be serious, Otter. I think you've been in some debate classes, and you've probably been unfortunate enough to see a few political debates, so you should be aware of this, but: slippery slope arguments make everyone on both sides look stupid. I don't suppose you could stop using them? If you can't make your point without this kind of exaggeration, you haven't got much of one to begin with. Kudos on the question mark in particular. It nicely captures the spirit of enthusiasm I demonstrated in pushing this phantom argument.
Alex/Otter: No one asked for a bloody week here. Another day, real-time. That comes down to twelve hours for each half of day one. Do you mind telling me why each of you find it necessary to so grossly misrepresent my support of the extension (which both of you accept!) in every post you make regarding me? My initial Otter post was poorly worded, and I stand by that being the cause of some of the confusion here. If you don't believe me, I don't much blame you, but that's pretty much what happens when I divide my attentions at work (which is one reason why I usually don't do it). I think both of you have been pretty dodgy in your pursuit of me, though, Otter in particular for sloppy logic leaps and hyperbole represented as fact.
Also...I maintain that 24 hours for one game-day isn't sufficient for logistical reasons (at least while there are this many still in the game). Given the diverse schedules our players have, I believe more time is a simple necessity for everyone to weigh in. Neither of you spend much time actually addressing this point. Do you really think twenty-four hours is enough for us to rush through the first kill? I know you guys
want the group to work that efficiently. That's been made abundantly clear and I don't think I can disagree with the sentiment. But...I find it very odd that both of you avoid the bare-bones matter of who can post when in favor of continually exaggerating my words to make me look like some kind of extension-obsessed loonie. If someone's flying off the handle, it's not me.
Note: If either of you keep hammering home the same points in response to this paragraph without actually addressing the matter as a logistical issue, you're going to look VERY bad indeed. Right now you just look misguided. Anyway, I think the Otter quotes above speak for themselves. He could very well be a townie trying to pressure someone else to get a read on them. But I'm not inclined to give much leeway for arguments as bad as the ones I've quoted here. All I wanted was a reaction. Well, it seems I got one.
Okay...I need to sleep soon, but I'll stick around for a couple minutes to see if anyone responds. What time are we looking at for the Ratkill? Because if it's me, I insist that my inquisitors here give me a chance to roleclaim first (even if it has to be done from work!)
