|
On December 20 2012 04:28 Mr. Wiggles wrote:Eywa, I like you style, screw the haters. One question though: You make this post: Show nested quote +On December 19 2012 23:51 Eywa- wrote:
I would like to examine the current situation and weigh in on mathematics. Generally speaking, there is a 75% or higher chance that if we kill someone on the first day that we will end up in a worse predicament than we currently are. I understand that our streets have been taken over by scum at night, but fear is not a reason to lose all our civil rights and obligations. As a productive member of society and an established citizen of this town, I plead that we take it easy today and allow our local police force to run their investigations before we strike. Saying that you'd like us to consider going for a no-lynch on Day 1 and just waiting for Day 2, so that we can possibly get a check in, or at the very least have something to talk about. Later, you come in with your analysis of Palmar, which is cool that you made it, but after re-reading, one thing that stuck out to me was that a majority of the posts and behaviour of Palmar that you draw on comes from before you made your no-lynch post. In-between your no-lynch post and your analysis, you were called out by a couple players for not commenting on the game (which I disagree with, but whatever). So, the analysis came after that. So, my question to you, is when did you become suspicious of Palmar? The timing of the post combined with the posts you draw from don't really fit when put into the context of your no-lynch post. You ask to no-lynch, then later you make a post saying Palmar is scum, which is fine, because you can change your mind, but your analysis is all based on stuff Palmar did before your no-lynch post, so if you found it to be so scummy, why didn't it strike you before? So, to me, it looks like you made your no-lynch post, got shut down, then went back and looked for someone to make a case on. What gives?
this is the dumbest thing i have ever read.
|
On December 20 2012 04:28 Mr. Wiggles wrote:Eywa, I like you style, screw the haters. One question though: You make this post: Show nested quote +On December 19 2012 23:51 Eywa- wrote:
I would like to examine the current situation and weigh in on mathematics. Generally speaking, there is a 75% or higher chance that if we kill someone on the first day that we will end up in a worse predicament than we currently are. I understand that our streets have been taken over by scum at night, but fear is not a reason to lose all our civil rights and obligations. As a productive member of society and an established citizen of this town, I plead that we take it easy today and allow our local police force to run their investigations before we strike. Saying that you'd like us to consider going for a no-lynch on Day 1 and just waiting for Day 2, so that we can possibly get a check in, or at the very least have something to talk about. Later, you come in with your analysis of Palmar, which is cool that you made it, but after re-reading, one thing that stuck out to me was that a majority of the posts and behaviour of Palmar that you draw on comes from before you made your no-lynch post. In-between your no-lynch post and your analysis, you were called out by a couple players for not commenting on the game (which I disagree with, but whatever). So, the analysis came after that. So, my question to you, is when did you become suspicious of Palmar? The timing of the post combined with the posts you draw from don't really fit when put into the context of your no-lynch post. You ask to no-lynch, then later you make a post saying Palmar is scum, which is fine, because you can change your mind, but your analysis is all based on stuff Palmar did before your no-lynch post, so if you found it to be so scummy, why didn't it strike you before? So, to me, it looks like you made your no-lynch post, got shut down, then went back and looked for someone to make a case on. What gives?
No lynch was never going to happen (even if it is a good play in some situations), it was simply a post for me to bide my time to look at the players and see what they can come up with. I can't drop the role play until I come out with a solid argument. I determined the scum with certainty and I analysed how every single one of his posts just ooze of scum. Once that was done, I could drop the initial act and get the town behind lynching a scum.
|
On December 20 2012 04:22 Stutters695 wrote:
So because I asked a question after you went to bed and didn't rehash it throughout the night until I got an answer I'm a dummy. If I post about you all night I'll be accused of posting fluff again and thus you'll think I'm scum. I hadn't forgotten about you, this is the first post I've gotten time to do since I just got off work. It seems to me like you want me to be scum more than you're trying to find scum.
Is this your defence?You post WIFOM to justify yourself for not posting?
It's not about you not posting ABOUT me, it's about you not responding to the points you're accused of: Namely ignoring debears questions directed at me (or not reading the thread), and quickly changing focus to Morbidius when pressured.
|
11589 Posts
On December 20 2012 04:34 Eywa- wrote:Show nested quote +On December 20 2012 04:28 Mr. Wiggles wrote:Eywa, I like you style, screw the haters. One question though: You make this post: On December 19 2012 23:51 Eywa- wrote:
I would like to examine the current situation and weigh in on mathematics. Generally speaking, there is a 75% or higher chance that if we kill someone on the first day that we will end up in a worse predicament than we currently are. I understand that our streets have been taken over by scum at night, but fear is not a reason to lose all our civil rights and obligations. As a productive member of society and an established citizen of this town, I plead that we take it easy today and allow our local police force to run their investigations before we strike. Saying that you'd like us to consider going for a no-lynch on Day 1 and just waiting for Day 2, so that we can possibly get a check in, or at the very least have something to talk about. Later, you come in with your analysis of Palmar, which is cool that you made it, but after re-reading, one thing that stuck out to me was that a majority of the posts and behaviour of Palmar that you draw on comes from before you made your no-lynch post. In-between your no-lynch post and your analysis, you were called out by a couple players for not commenting on the game (which I disagree with, but whatever). So, the analysis came after that. So, my question to you, is when did you become suspicious of Palmar? The timing of the post combined with the posts you draw from don't really fit when put into the context of your no-lynch post. You ask to no-lynch, then later you make a post saying Palmar is scum, which is fine, because you can change your mind, but your analysis is all based on stuff Palmar did before your no-lynch post, so if you found it to be so scummy, why didn't it strike you before? So, to me, it looks like you made your no-lynch post, got shut down, then went back and looked for someone to make a case on. What gives? No lynch was never going to happen (even if it is a good play in some situations), it was simply a post for me to bide my time to look at the players and see what they can come up with. I can't drop the role play until I come out with a solid argument. I determined the scum with certainty and I analysed how every single one of his posts just ooze of scum. Once that was done, I could drop the initial act and get the town behind lynching a scum.
No, what you did was post useless shit, then come out with a bunch of posts taken out if context read with supreme confirmation bias.
I am not impressed.
##Vote Eywa
|
On December 20 2012 04:43 yamato77 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 20 2012 04:34 Eywa- wrote:On December 20 2012 04:28 Mr. Wiggles wrote:Eywa, I like you style, screw the haters. One question though: You make this post: On December 19 2012 23:51 Eywa- wrote:
I would like to examine the current situation and weigh in on mathematics. Generally speaking, there is a 75% or higher chance that if we kill someone on the first day that we will end up in a worse predicament than we currently are. I understand that our streets have been taken over by scum at night, but fear is not a reason to lose all our civil rights and obligations. As a productive member of society and an established citizen of this town, I plead that we take it easy today and allow our local police force to run their investigations before we strike. Saying that you'd like us to consider going for a no-lynch on Day 1 and just waiting for Day 2, so that we can possibly get a check in, or at the very least have something to talk about. Later, you come in with your analysis of Palmar, which is cool that you made it, but after re-reading, one thing that stuck out to me was that a majority of the posts and behaviour of Palmar that you draw on comes from before you made your no-lynch post. In-between your no-lynch post and your analysis, you were called out by a couple players for not commenting on the game (which I disagree with, but whatever). So, the analysis came after that. So, my question to you, is when did you become suspicious of Palmar? The timing of the post combined with the posts you draw from don't really fit when put into the context of your no-lynch post. You ask to no-lynch, then later you make a post saying Palmar is scum, which is fine, because you can change your mind, but your analysis is all based on stuff Palmar did before your no-lynch post, so if you found it to be so scummy, why didn't it strike you before? So, to me, it looks like you made your no-lynch post, got shut down, then went back and looked for someone to make a case on. What gives? No lynch was never going to happen (even if it is a good play in some situations), it was simply a post for me to bide my time to look at the players and see what they can come up with. I can't drop the role play until I come out with a solid argument. I determined the scum with certainty and I analysed how every single one of his posts just ooze of scum. Once that was done, I could drop the initial act and get the town behind lynching a scum. No, what you did was post useless shit, then come out with a bunch of posts taken out if context read with supreme confirmation bias. I am not impressed. ##Vote Eywa
I'm afraid that, having a vote come from my second highest suspect is not really that surprising... More on that later, I will have a case ready for you before the end of the day.
|
On December 20 2012 04:43 yamato77 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 20 2012 04:34 Eywa- wrote:On December 20 2012 04:28 Mr. Wiggles wrote:Eywa, I like you style, screw the haters. One question though: You make this post: On December 19 2012 23:51 Eywa- wrote:
I would like to examine the current situation and weigh in on mathematics. Generally speaking, there is a 75% or higher chance that if we kill someone on the first day that we will end up in a worse predicament than we currently are. I understand that our streets have been taken over by scum at night, but fear is not a reason to lose all our civil rights and obligations. As a productive member of society and an established citizen of this town, I plead that we take it easy today and allow our local police force to run their investigations before we strike. Saying that you'd like us to consider going for a no-lynch on Day 1 and just waiting for Day 2, so that we can possibly get a check in, or at the very least have something to talk about. Later, you come in with your analysis of Palmar, which is cool that you made it, but after re-reading, one thing that stuck out to me was that a majority of the posts and behaviour of Palmar that you draw on comes from before you made your no-lynch post. In-between your no-lynch post and your analysis, you were called out by a couple players for not commenting on the game (which I disagree with, but whatever). So, the analysis came after that. So, my question to you, is when did you become suspicious of Palmar? The timing of the post combined with the posts you draw from don't really fit when put into the context of your no-lynch post. You ask to no-lynch, then later you make a post saying Palmar is scum, which is fine, because you can change your mind, but your analysis is all based on stuff Palmar did before your no-lynch post, so if you found it to be so scummy, why didn't it strike you before? So, to me, it looks like you made your no-lynch post, got shut down, then went back and looked for someone to make a case on. What gives? No lynch was never going to happen (even if it is a good play in some situations), it was simply a post for me to bide my time to look at the players and see what they can come up with. I can't drop the role play until I come out with a solid argument. I determined the scum with certainty and I analysed how every single one of his posts just ooze of scum. Once that was done, I could drop the initial act and get the town behind lynching a scum. No, what you did was post useless shit, then come out with a bunch of posts taken out if context read with supreme confirmation bias. I am not impressed. ##Vote Eywa
i will not stand for a vote on the one person who has made a proper case.
look elsewhere
i will defend Eywa for the rest of day1 if need be.
|
On December 20 2012 04:43 yamato77 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 20 2012 04:34 Eywa- wrote:On December 20 2012 04:28 Mr. Wiggles wrote:Eywa, I like you style, screw the haters. One question though: You make this post: On December 19 2012 23:51 Eywa- wrote:
I would like to examine the current situation and weigh in on mathematics. Generally speaking, there is a 75% or higher chance that if we kill someone on the first day that we will end up in a worse predicament than we currently are. I understand that our streets have been taken over by scum at night, but fear is not a reason to lose all our civil rights and obligations. As a productive member of society and an established citizen of this town, I plead that we take it easy today and allow our local police force to run their investigations before we strike. Saying that you'd like us to consider going for a no-lynch on Day 1 and just waiting for Day 2, so that we can possibly get a check in, or at the very least have something to talk about. Later, you come in with your analysis of Palmar, which is cool that you made it, but after re-reading, one thing that stuck out to me was that a majority of the posts and behaviour of Palmar that you draw on comes from before you made your no-lynch post. In-between your no-lynch post and your analysis, you were called out by a couple players for not commenting on the game (which I disagree with, but whatever). So, the analysis came after that. So, my question to you, is when did you become suspicious of Palmar? The timing of the post combined with the posts you draw from don't really fit when put into the context of your no-lynch post. You ask to no-lynch, then later you make a post saying Palmar is scum, which is fine, because you can change your mind, but your analysis is all based on stuff Palmar did before your no-lynch post, so if you found it to be so scummy, why didn't it strike you before? So, to me, it looks like you made your no-lynch post, got shut down, then went back and looked for someone to make a case on. What gives? No lynch was never going to happen (even if it is a good play in some situations), it was simply a post for me to bide my time to look at the players and see what they can come up with. I can't drop the role play until I come out with a solid argument. I determined the scum with certainty and I analysed how every single one of his posts just ooze of scum. Once that was done, I could drop the initial act and get the town behind lynching a scum. No, what you did was post useless shit, then come out with a bunch of posts taken out if context read with supreme confirmation bias. I am not impressed. ##Vote Eywa
This is possibly the dumbest vote I've seen in a long time.
|
Nice wall of text, Wiggles. You got something to hide behind it?
I don't even see what the point of your post is. It looks to me like you like to discuss things with Eywa, how about you post something for us aswell?
Seriously, l2paragraph.
|
On December 20 2012 04:31 iamperfection wrote:Show nested quote +On December 20 2012 04:28 Mr. Wiggles wrote:Eywa, I like you style, screw the haters. One question though: You make this post: On December 19 2012 23:51 Eywa- wrote:
I would like to examine the current situation and weigh in on mathematics. Generally speaking, there is a 75% or higher chance that if we kill someone on the first day that we will end up in a worse predicament than we currently are. I understand that our streets have been taken over by scum at night, but fear is not a reason to lose all our civil rights and obligations. As a productive member of society and an established citizen of this town, I plead that we take it easy today and allow our local police force to run their investigations before we strike. Saying that you'd like us to consider going for a no-lynch on Day 1 and just waiting for Day 2, so that we can possibly get a check in, or at the very least have something to talk about. Later, you come in with your analysis of Palmar, which is cool that you made it, but after re-reading, one thing that stuck out to me was that a majority of the posts and behaviour of Palmar that you draw on comes from before you made your no-lynch post. In-between your no-lynch post and your analysis, you were called out by a couple players for not commenting on the game (which I disagree with, but whatever). So, the analysis came after that. So, my question to you, is when did you become suspicious of Palmar? The timing of the post combined with the posts you draw from don't really fit when put into the context of your no-lynch post. You ask to no-lynch, then later you make a post saying Palmar is scum, which is fine, because you can change your mind, but your analysis is all based on stuff Palmar did before your no-lynch post, so if you found it to be so scummy, why didn't it strike you before? So, to me, it looks like you made your no-lynch post, got shut down, then went back and looked for someone to make a case on. What gives? this is the dumbest thing i have ever read.
You're aggressive and bad, thanks for clearing that up.
|
On December 20 2012 04:54 Mr. Wiggles wrote:Show nested quote +On December 20 2012 04:31 iamperfection wrote:On December 20 2012 04:28 Mr. Wiggles wrote:Eywa, I like you style, screw the haters. One question though: You make this post: On December 19 2012 23:51 Eywa- wrote:
I would like to examine the current situation and weigh in on mathematics. Generally speaking, there is a 75% or higher chance that if we kill someone on the first day that we will end up in a worse predicament than we currently are. I understand that our streets have been taken over by scum at night, but fear is not a reason to lose all our civil rights and obligations. As a productive member of society and an established citizen of this town, I plead that we take it easy today and allow our local police force to run their investigations before we strike. Saying that you'd like us to consider going for a no-lynch on Day 1 and just waiting for Day 2, so that we can possibly get a check in, or at the very least have something to talk about. Later, you come in with your analysis of Palmar, which is cool that you made it, but after re-reading, one thing that stuck out to me was that a majority of the posts and behaviour of Palmar that you draw on comes from before you made your no-lynch post. In-between your no-lynch post and your analysis, you were called out by a couple players for not commenting on the game (which I disagree with, but whatever). So, the analysis came after that. So, my question to you, is when did you become suspicious of Palmar? The timing of the post combined with the posts you draw from don't really fit when put into the context of your no-lynch post. You ask to no-lynch, then later you make a post saying Palmar is scum, which is fine, because you can change your mind, but your analysis is all based on stuff Palmar did before your no-lynch post, so if you found it to be so scummy, why didn't it strike you before? So, to me, it looks like you made your no-lynch post, got shut down, then went back and looked for someone to make a case on. What gives? this is the dumbest thing i have ever read. You're aggressive and bad, thanks for clearing that up.
you just asked a person why are they scum hunting. Ya im the bad one.
|
11589 Posts
On December 20 2012 04:52 wherebugsgo wrote:Show nested quote +On December 20 2012 04:43 yamato77 wrote:On December 20 2012 04:34 Eywa- wrote:On December 20 2012 04:28 Mr. Wiggles wrote:Eywa, I like you style, screw the haters. One question though: You make this post: On December 19 2012 23:51 Eywa- wrote:
I would like to examine the current situation and weigh in on mathematics. Generally speaking, there is a 75% or higher chance that if we kill someone on the first day that we will end up in a worse predicament than we currently are. I understand that our streets have been taken over by scum at night, but fear is not a reason to lose all our civil rights and obligations. As a productive member of society and an established citizen of this town, I plead that we take it easy today and allow our local police force to run their investigations before we strike. Saying that you'd like us to consider going for a no-lynch on Day 1 and just waiting for Day 2, so that we can possibly get a check in, or at the very least have something to talk about. Later, you come in with your analysis of Palmar, which is cool that you made it, but after re-reading, one thing that stuck out to me was that a majority of the posts and behaviour of Palmar that you draw on comes from before you made your no-lynch post. In-between your no-lynch post and your analysis, you were called out by a couple players for not commenting on the game (which I disagree with, but whatever). So, the analysis came after that. So, my question to you, is when did you become suspicious of Palmar? The timing of the post combined with the posts you draw from don't really fit when put into the context of your no-lynch post. You ask to no-lynch, then later you make a post saying Palmar is scum, which is fine, because you can change your mind, but your analysis is all based on stuff Palmar did before your no-lynch post, so if you found it to be so scummy, why didn't it strike you before? So, to me, it looks like you made your no-lynch post, got shut down, then went back and looked for someone to make a case on. What gives? No lynch was never going to happen (even if it is a good play in some situations), it was simply a post for me to bide my time to look at the players and see what they can come up with. I can't drop the role play until I come out with a solid argument. I determined the scum with certainty and I analysed how every single one of his posts just ooze of scum. Once that was done, I could drop the initial act and get the town behind lynching a scum. No, what you did was post useless shit, then come out with a bunch of posts taken out if context read with supreme confirmation bias. I am not impressed. ##Vote Eywa This is possibly the dumbest vote I've seen in a long time.
Look at his defense and then come back and tell me I don't have my vote placed in scum. He OMGUS'd me hardcore.
|
On December 20 2012 04:53 Vivax wrote:
Nice wall of text, Wiggles. You got something to hide behind it?
I don't even see what the point of your post is. It looks to me like you like to discuss things with Eywa, how about you post something for us aswell?
Seriously, l2paragraph.
???
I'll talk to who I want. If you can't be bothered to read 8 lines, that's your bad.
Let me state things simply.
Eywa: We should consider a no lynch. (Implying there's no strong scum candidates)
Other people: No Eywa, that's bad, we're gonna kill you if you don't post reads! (Even though he did)
Eywa: Ok, here's a case on Palmar!
Was wondering what the turnaround was, and if he only posted a case because he was pressured.
Hope that's short enough for you to read.
|
tell me yamato what specifically you don't like about his case?
|
On December 20 2012 04:55 iamperfection wrote:Show nested quote +On December 20 2012 04:54 Mr. Wiggles wrote:On December 20 2012 04:31 iamperfection wrote:On December 20 2012 04:28 Mr. Wiggles wrote:Eywa, I like you style, screw the haters. One question though: You make this post: On December 19 2012 23:51 Eywa- wrote:
I would like to examine the current situation and weigh in on mathematics. Generally speaking, there is a 75% or higher chance that if we kill someone on the first day that we will end up in a worse predicament than we currently are. I understand that our streets have been taken over by scum at night, but fear is not a reason to lose all our civil rights and obligations. As a productive member of society and an established citizen of this town, I plead that we take it easy today and allow our local police force to run their investigations before we strike. Saying that you'd like us to consider going for a no-lynch on Day 1 and just waiting for Day 2, so that we can possibly get a check in, or at the very least have something to talk about. Later, you come in with your analysis of Palmar, which is cool that you made it, but after re-reading, one thing that stuck out to me was that a majority of the posts and behaviour of Palmar that you draw on comes from before you made your no-lynch post. In-between your no-lynch post and your analysis, you were called out by a couple players for not commenting on the game (which I disagree with, but whatever). So, the analysis came after that. So, my question to you, is when did you become suspicious of Palmar? The timing of the post combined with the posts you draw from don't really fit when put into the context of your no-lynch post. You ask to no-lynch, then later you make a post saying Palmar is scum, which is fine, because you can change your mind, but your analysis is all based on stuff Palmar did before your no-lynch post, so if you found it to be so scummy, why didn't it strike you before? So, to me, it looks like you made your no-lynch post, got shut down, then went back and looked for someone to make a case on. What gives? this is the dumbest thing i have ever read. You're aggressive and bad, thanks for clearing that up. you just asked a person why are they scum hunting. Ya im the bad one.
I asked a person why they imply there's no good scum lynch, then later make a post about why to lynch someone based primarily upon things that were posted before he implied there was no good scum lynch. Learn to read.
|
On December 20 2012 04:57 yamato77 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 20 2012 04:52 wherebugsgo wrote:On December 20 2012 04:43 yamato77 wrote:On December 20 2012 04:34 Eywa- wrote:On December 20 2012 04:28 Mr. Wiggles wrote:Eywa, I like you style, screw the haters. One question though: You make this post: On December 19 2012 23:51 Eywa- wrote:
I would like to examine the current situation and weigh in on mathematics. Generally speaking, there is a 75% or higher chance that if we kill someone on the first day that we will end up in a worse predicament than we currently are. I understand that our streets have been taken over by scum at night, but fear is not a reason to lose all our civil rights and obligations. As a productive member of society and an established citizen of this town, I plead that we take it easy today and allow our local police force to run their investigations before we strike. Saying that you'd like us to consider going for a no-lynch on Day 1 and just waiting for Day 2, so that we can possibly get a check in, or at the very least have something to talk about. Later, you come in with your analysis of Palmar, which is cool that you made it, but after re-reading, one thing that stuck out to me was that a majority of the posts and behaviour of Palmar that you draw on comes from before you made your no-lynch post. In-between your no-lynch post and your analysis, you were called out by a couple players for not commenting on the game (which I disagree with, but whatever). So, the analysis came after that. So, my question to you, is when did you become suspicious of Palmar? The timing of the post combined with the posts you draw from don't really fit when put into the context of your no-lynch post. You ask to no-lynch, then later you make a post saying Palmar is scum, which is fine, because you can change your mind, but your analysis is all based on stuff Palmar did before your no-lynch post, so if you found it to be so scummy, why didn't it strike you before? So, to me, it looks like you made your no-lynch post, got shut down, then went back and looked for someone to make a case on. What gives? No lynch was never going to happen (even if it is a good play in some situations), it was simply a post for me to bide my time to look at the players and see what they can come up with. I can't drop the role play until I come out with a solid argument. I determined the scum with certainty and I analysed how every single one of his posts just ooze of scum. Once that was done, I could drop the initial act and get the town behind lynching a scum. No, what you did was post useless shit, then come out with a bunch of posts taken out if context read with supreme confirmation bias. I am not impressed. ##Vote Eywa This is possibly the dumbest vote I've seen in a long time. Look at his defense and then come back and tell me I don't have my vote placed in scum. He OMGUS'd me hardcore.
what the fuck are you talking about?
|
On December 20 2012 04:57 Mr. Wiggles wrote:Show nested quote +On December 20 2012 04:53 Vivax wrote:
Nice wall of text, Wiggles. You got something to hide behind it?
I don't even see what the point of your post is. It looks to me like you like to discuss things with Eywa, how about you post something for us aswell?
Seriously, l2paragraph. ??? I'll talk to who I want. If you can't be bothered to read 8 lines, that's your bad. Let me state things simply. Eywa: We should consider a no lynch. (Implying there's no strong scum candidates) Other people: No Eywa, that's bad, we're gonna kill you if you don't post reads! (Even though he did) Eywa: Ok, here's a case on Palmar! Was wondering what the turnaround was, and if he only posted a case because he was pressured. Hope that's short enough for you to read.
who gives a shit why.
He was asked to give reads and did so in good form i believe. Do you really think he is the best chance to flip scum?
|
On December 20 2012 05:00 iamperfection wrote:Show nested quote +On December 20 2012 04:57 Mr. Wiggles wrote:On December 20 2012 04:53 Vivax wrote:
Nice wall of text, Wiggles. You got something to hide behind it?
I don't even see what the point of your post is. It looks to me like you like to discuss things with Eywa, how about you post something for us aswell?
Seriously, l2paragraph. ??? I'll talk to who I want. If you can't be bothered to read 8 lines, that's your bad. Let me state things simply. Eywa: We should consider a no lynch. (Implying there's no strong scum candidates) Other people: No Eywa, that's bad, we're gonna kill you if you don't post reads! (Even though he did) Eywa: Ok, here's a case on Palmar! Was wondering what the turnaround was, and if he only posted a case because he was pressured. Hope that's short enough for you to read. who gives a shit why. He was asked to give reads and did so in good form i believe. Do you really think he is the best chance to flip scum?
No, I don't think he has the best chance to flip scum right now. What he did looked weird to me and I wanted to talk about it. Do you think scum can't make a case? His case on Palmar is decent, but it's mostly just pointing out the same posting habit over and over. Post by post analysis sucks, what he said in there could be summarized in a paragraph or two. So, I don't think he's town purely by virtue of making a case, unlike you.
Asking people questions and poking them makes them easier to read.
|
11589 Posts
On December 20 2012 04:59 wherebugsgo wrote:Show nested quote +On December 20 2012 04:57 yamato77 wrote:On December 20 2012 04:52 wherebugsgo wrote:On December 20 2012 04:43 yamato77 wrote:On December 20 2012 04:34 Eywa- wrote:On December 20 2012 04:28 Mr. Wiggles wrote:Eywa, I like you style, screw the haters. One question though: You make this post: On December 19 2012 23:51 Eywa- wrote:
I would like to examine the current situation and weigh in on mathematics. Generally speaking, there is a 75% or higher chance that if we kill someone on the first day that we will end up in a worse predicament than we currently are. I understand that our streets have been taken over by scum at night, but fear is not a reason to lose all our civil rights and obligations. As a productive member of society and an established citizen of this town, I plead that we take it easy today and allow our local police force to run their investigations before we strike. Saying that you'd like us to consider going for a no-lynch on Day 1 and just waiting for Day 2, so that we can possibly get a check in, or at the very least have something to talk about. Later, you come in with your analysis of Palmar, which is cool that you made it, but after re-reading, one thing that stuck out to me was that a majority of the posts and behaviour of Palmar that you draw on comes from before you made your no-lynch post. In-between your no-lynch post and your analysis, you were called out by a couple players for not commenting on the game (which I disagree with, but whatever). So, the analysis came after that. So, my question to you, is when did you become suspicious of Palmar? The timing of the post combined with the posts you draw from don't really fit when put into the context of your no-lynch post. You ask to no-lynch, then later you make a post saying Palmar is scum, which is fine, because you can change your mind, but your analysis is all based on stuff Palmar did before your no-lynch post, so if you found it to be so scummy, why didn't it strike you before? So, to me, it looks like you made your no-lynch post, got shut down, then went back and looked for someone to make a case on. What gives? No lynch was never going to happen (even if it is a good play in some situations), it was simply a post for me to bide my time to look at the players and see what they can come up with. I can't drop the role play until I come out with a solid argument. I determined the scum with certainty and I analysed how every single one of his posts just ooze of scum. Once that was done, I could drop the initial act and get the town behind lynching a scum. No, what you did was post useless shit, then come out with a bunch of posts taken out if context read with supreme confirmation bias. I am not impressed. ##Vote Eywa This is possibly the dumbest vote I've seen in a long time. Look at his defense and then come back and tell me I don't have my vote placed in scum. He OMGUS'd me hardcore. what the fuck are you talking about?
On December 20 2012 04:49 Eywa- wrote:Show nested quote +On December 20 2012 04:43 yamato77 wrote:On December 20 2012 04:34 Eywa- wrote:On December 20 2012 04:28 Mr. Wiggles wrote:Eywa, I like you style, screw the haters. One question though: You make this post: On December 19 2012 23:51 Eywa- wrote:
I would like to examine the current situation and weigh in on mathematics. Generally speaking, there is a 75% or higher chance that if we kill someone on the first day that we will end up in a worse predicament than we currently are. I understand that our streets have been taken over by scum at night, but fear is not a reason to lose all our civil rights and obligations. As a productive member of society and an established citizen of this town, I plead that we take it easy today and allow our local police force to run their investigations before we strike. Saying that you'd like us to consider going for a no-lynch on Day 1 and just waiting for Day 2, so that we can possibly get a check in, or at the very least have something to talk about. Later, you come in with your analysis of Palmar, which is cool that you made it, but after re-reading, one thing that stuck out to me was that a majority of the posts and behaviour of Palmar that you draw on comes from before you made your no-lynch post. In-between your no-lynch post and your analysis, you were called out by a couple players for not commenting on the game (which I disagree with, but whatever). So, the analysis came after that. So, my question to you, is when did you become suspicious of Palmar? The timing of the post combined with the posts you draw from don't really fit when put into the context of your no-lynch post. You ask to no-lynch, then later you make a post saying Palmar is scum, which is fine, because you can change your mind, but your analysis is all based on stuff Palmar did before your no-lynch post, so if you found it to be so scummy, why didn't it strike you before? So, to me, it looks like you made your no-lynch post, got shut down, then went back and looked for someone to make a case on. What gives? No lynch was never going to happen (even if it is a good play in some situations), it was simply a post for me to bide my time to look at the players and see what they can come up with. I can't drop the role play until I come out with a solid argument. I determined the scum with certainty and I analysed how every single one of his posts just ooze of scum. Once that was done, I could drop the initial act and get the town behind lynching a scum. No, what you did was post useless shit, then come out with a bunch of posts taken out if context read with supreme confirmation bias. I am not impressed. ##Vote Eywa I'm afraid that, having a vote come from my second highest suspect is not really that surprising... More on that later, I will have a case ready for you before the end of the day.
|
Watch out, Yamato. If you post too much Santa won't visit you.
|
11589 Posts
On December 20 2012 05:07 Vivax wrote:
Watch out, Yamato. If you post too much Santa won't visit you.
Third time I've been attacked for this post count restriction I made before the game started.
Are you guys fucking stupid or something?
I don't see the point in mentioning it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
