|
and read node's filter
this was very easy. two posts. first post defends shady and calls out kush; second post retreats from this defense slightly and continues to argue against kush.
considering node's only two posts match what i have been arguing all along............. i like this guy.
the big question now is what it is about these two posts that caused 8 people to drop their pants and go all in on this guy. like, i read the posts... what is there exactly that people are seeing? this doesnt make sense. 8 votes on him so i have to assume with a normal mafia count that there are at least some towns on him.... why?
|
|
|
On October 02 2012 12:01 iamperfection wrote:Show nested quote +On October 02 2012 11:56 annul wrote:
and read node's filter
this was very easy. two posts. first post defends shady and calls out kush; second post retreats from this defense slightly and continues to argue against kush.
considering node's only two posts match what i have been arguing all along............. i like this guy.
the big question now is what it is about these two posts that caused 8 people to drop their pants and go all in on this guy. like, i read the posts... what is there exactly that people are seeing? this doesnt make sense. 8 votes on him so i have to assume with a normal mafia count that there are at least some towns on him.... why? when did shady push anything? How could a town player reading the thread think shady is town because he pushed something after his trolling. what did shady push?
....nowhere did i mention shady pushing anything?
|
On October 02 2012 12:04 Sharrant wrote:
I think the point Perfection was making is that Node mentioned both of those things.
..... no he didn't?
if i am just 100% blind or something please quote where he said this, but i am re-reading his two posts a lot and i see nothing of this sort
|
okay, i see now where you get that from.
On October 01 2012 17:40 Node wrote:
I don't think Shady Sands is scum -- at least, not given what we've seen so far. His "trolling" antics were silly, but they weren't scummy. If he were scum, I don't think he would've dropped the trolling pretext so quickly, and I certainly don't think he would be willing to reappear and start pushing targets.
i interpreted this part to be future-predictive, not past-indicative. like he is saying "i dont expect this to happen." note the difference in verb tense between the two clauses: "i don't think he would've dropped" (past tense) vs "i don't think he would be willing to reappear" (future tense)
|
On October 02 2012 12:11 austinmcc wrote:Show nested quote +On October 02 2012 12:10 annul wrote:okay, i see now where you get that from. On October 01 2012 17:40 Node wrote:
I don't think Shady Sands is scum -- at least, not given what we've seen so far. His "trolling" antics were silly, but they weren't scummy. If he were scum, I don't think he would've dropped the trolling pretext so quickly, and I certainly don't think he would be willing to reappear and start pushing targets.
i interpreted this part to be future-predictive, not past-indicative. like he is saying "i dont expect this to happen." note the difference in verb tense between the two clauses: "i don't think he would've dropped" (past tense) vs "i don't think he would be willing to reappear" (future tense) It makes no sense for node to have defended shady based on what he might do in the future. if you interpret it that way, it's not a defense, it's speculation about future actions that shady might take
THAT specific sentence fragment is speculative. the rest of it is obviously a defense
|
|
|
On October 02 2012 12:18 austinmcc wrote:
So unless you like that point, Node's defense was "His trolling antics were silly, but they weren't scummy."
i never said it was a good defense. but you are not seriously going to argue that it is not "A" defense, right?
|
huh well, lets read coag's filter
|
On October 02 2012 12:33 austinmcc wrote:
How are you going to say that node defended shady, which you liked because it matched what you were doing all day.
no. his attacking kush is what i have been doing all day.
|
i don't like what i see in boson's filter. he jumps around like a pinball and has very strange logic for doing so (if he has any at all).
|
i am going to see if this works.
##unvote
##vote z-boson
|
i agree shady is not the kill. he will be modkilled/replaced and we can get a better read off his replacement anyway.
however, node is not the kill either. look at boson's filter compared to node's. that's the kill i think.
|
On October 02 2012 12:52 kushm4sta wrote:
annul we got less than 10 minutes lol..z boson is not happening
we have 22 minutes. node got 8 votes in 12. anything can happen.
|
riiiiiight.
##unvote
##vote shady sands
|
On October 02 2012 13:08 Shady Sands wrote:
Just stepped off plane.
## Vote Node since I'm not scum and even though I have no idea whether node is scum or not it makes more sense to lynch the person who might be scum than the person who I know is not scum.
take picture of airport departure board please (that shows the current time etc) and post it. you do this and youll be believed and unvoted.
|
|
|
this gave us little to no information, too, which is the worst part.
|
On October 02 2012 13:25 VisceraEyes wrote:
That's not the worst part. The worst part is we lynched a townie. That's just a bad, expected, forseeable part.
i will lynch green 100% of the time IF doing so will net us multiple reds.
On October 02 2012 13:25 VisceraEyes wrote:
The worst part is that we didn't fucking lynch scum annul.
lol
|
On October 02 2012 13:35 mkfuba07 wrote:
So did this net us multiple reds?
On October 02 2012 13:24 annul wrote:
this gave us little to no information, too, which is the worst part.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
