EPThes probably phone reading and posting which is suboptimal
TL Mafia XLVIII - Page 2
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
annul
United States2841 Posts
hes probably phone reading and posting which is suboptimal | ||
|
annul
United States2841 Posts
On December 05 2011 07:32 vaderseven wrote: What do you think about some of the players positions or contributions Annul (spefically the redFF/Palmar situation, Corrupt, and Radfield). still waiting for palmar to return from sleepland before judging further. but right now it looks like a bunch of nothing. ask me near the end of day 1 what i think if you are still curious because [something i wont mention to not give people ideas] might happen and if it does, it probably will change my mind. but for now it all seems ok to me. hm, you know, i answer this question in order... so when i look at corrupt's filter and i see this gem, i begin to wonder maybe i am wrong above about redff: On December 05 2011 02:56 Corrupt wrote: This is not going to be easy... so many suspicious people already. On December 05 2011 04:22 Corrupt wrote: I pictured TruthBringer as one of the good guys, so I'm being suspicious about prplhz.. On December 05 2011 04:26 redFF wrote: you said "so many suspicious people already" yet you now say you are only suspicious of prplz? note nowhere did corrupt say he was ONLY suspicious of prplhz. he said he was suspicious of him. perfectly consistent with his first post. redff then severely mischaracterizes what corrupt says. interesting. its corrupts first game and he is so noob that he thinks redff nailed him or that he did something wrong, when the only thing he did wrong was not attack redff for fallacious argumentation. of course pure noobs can be red too but i mean right now he just looks like a pure noob acting like a pure noob. as for radfield, although i <3 people who defend me (of course), the shit he does makes sense in a red framework. his filter is full of "hey X player, what do you think of Y?" which is great until you realize he isnt taking positions at all, only trying to get other people to take positions. his strategical posts make no sense to me, either. if hes red then it makes sense to read his no lynch story as being like "i wonder if this will stick to the wall" and he throws it up.... if it sticks, awesome for him; if not, he can just say "im only asking a strategy question guys calm down" etc so im not saying hes red but a light FOS is in order, for sure; his actions fit a red framework. | ||
|
annul
United States2841 Posts
but the ratio of "hey X, Y?" to "i think Z" is very high | ||
|
annul
United States2841 Posts
##vote drazerk | ||
|
annul
United States2841 Posts
##vote soap | ||
|
annul
United States2841 Posts
| ||
|
annul
United States2841 Posts
but this is wifom in purest form | ||
|
annul
United States2841 Posts
as for scum motivations... who the fuck knows? "i bet i can get away with this because nobody would expect it" i wouldnt do a move like that | ||
|
annul
United States2841 Posts
| ||
|
annul
United States2841 Posts
| ||
|
annul
United States2841 Posts
| ||
|
annul
United States2841 Posts
##unvote consider now a vote on radfield. he has 3 pages of posts right now and almost all of them are either him playing poorly ("RNG sucks. therefore RNG vote on prplhz!") or him trying to elicit answers from other players and providing very little of his own. i mean recently i see him say things like "corrupt isn't good enough of a kill target for a lynch but we should waste vigs on him though!" ... does this make any sense? its like set up for him to be able to take both sides of the shit and whatever alignment corrupt flips into he has a way out of it and an air of supporting his death. equivocation = red. passivity = red. | ||
|
annul
United States2841 Posts
On December 06 2011 01:13 Palmar wrote: I think you're bullshitting. i say the same to you lol | ||
|
annul
United States2841 Posts
| ||
|
annul
United States2841 Posts
if either of you are actually day vigs youre all fucking retarded for doing this. and since i doubt you are both this collectively stupid i have to assume this is an elaborate troll. | ||
|
annul
United States2841 Posts
| ||
|
annul
United States2841 Posts
On December 06 2011 01:54 redFF wrote: that was fucking stupid. | ||
|
annul
United States2841 Posts
if youre serious that was retarded | ||
|
annul
United States2841 Posts
| ||
|
annul
United States2841 Posts
if soap actually flips anything nonred i'm instavoting palmar and not unvoting | ||
| ||
