EPTThemed Game Mafia - Page 2
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
marvellosity
United Kingdom36161 Posts
| ||
|
marvellosity
United Kingdom36161 Posts
| ||
|
marvellosity
United Kingdom36161 Posts
On February 14 2013 23:12 iamperfection wrote: the wagon of justice feels better about kurumi's contributions(aggressiveness and speaking some sense) the wagon of justice now puts its full weight behind a stutters lynch. lets see if we can make him "catch up ". ## vote stutters It is hard to ascertain whether this 'wagon of justice' is truly a belief that Stutt-utt-utters is of evil intent, or merely rough and tumble. Stutt-utt-utters is a gentleman who often does not carry through on his word. I have talked about this in previous watering holes. On January 30 2013 05:11 SuckMyTopdeck wrote: Oh, and I don't make too much of Stutters yet. He kinda seemed interested in the posts that he has made. And he does this not-following up shit all the time in any game. Therefore, what this particular gentleman finds most interesting about this turn of events is the willingness of Mr. D. Ion to join in this endeavour. Verily, he drank and smoked with me in the establishment from which I pull this snippet of discourse from, therefore it is quite curious that he feels Stutt-utt-utters has a high chance of being of evil intent here. Perhaps I was too hasty in casting judgement upon gonzaw. While it remains true, as the esteemed Sir BlazingHand told, that gonzaw only became interested in our discourse after significant pressure, it remains the case that if gonzaw truly holds good intentions, then he had no other course open to him. Perhaps the esteemed Sir BlazingHand remembers an occasion in a different establishment, many moons ago, called "Area 53". In that watering hole, the esteemed Sir was convinced I held bad intentions, and yet when I displayed good intentions, remained convinced I was evil. And yet, at that time, I was of pure intent! Therefore this gentleman will allow the time to peruse whether gonzaw wishes to continue discourse when eyes do not bore into him. ##Unvote: gonzaw Of the gentlemen that hide in the shadows, I find one to be of particular interest, he known as Hassybaby. On February 14 2013 01:00 Hassybaby wrote: Good afternoon gentlemen, I hope you're all well I've been reading everything while at my internship, and this comment caught my eye: Justify this, because that's the last thing that a townie should be worried about imo On February 14 2013 02:09 Hassybaby wrote: Dammit Keir, I wanted him to answer. Oh well... On February 14 2013 02:57 Hassybaby wrote: That's cool. I haven't played with Dandel before and wanted to get his thought process. Felt like an easy way to get it Anywho, it's irrelevant now. For the record, I'm also voting instant majority and...well I'll wait a bit about the other thing. May need your guys' help with something to do with my role Truly, this gentleman can not discern the positive intent with the limited discourse from Hassybaby thus far. The discourse given here is irrelevant, and apparently without aim. Does Hassybaby truly wish to discover the thought process of Mr. D. Ion, or does he merely wish to appear as if it is so? The gentleman has retreated back into the shadows. It is this gentleman's opinion that Hassybaby wishes to appear as a man of good intentions, but is masking his true, darker side. ##Vote: Hassybaby In my leather notebook, I made another note of mention with my elegant quill: On February 14 2013 03:19 Keirathi wrote: Right, I agree that Dandel hasn't done much towards proving his innocence if he does in fact believe that that should be your #1 priority as a townie. But I was only commenting on Hassy's statement, not whether Dandel was "practicing what he preached". jcarlsoniv spoke of the difference of intent and actions of Mr. D. Ion, and yet gentleman Keirathi took it upon himself to give a defence of his own discourse. And yet, jcarlson was making a point about Mr. D. Ion, not Keirathi himself. It is certainly curious that gentleman Keirathi felt the desire to defend his conversation at this point. | ||
|
marvellosity
United Kingdom36161 Posts
On February 15 2013 00:34 iamperfection wrote: so stutters has a meta where he doesn't do anything? pretty useful meta if he were scum. i say we force him to contribute or he should die a most horrible death. This gentleman says we lynch people who look as though they have evil intent, we do not close our eyes and urinate in the dark. | ||
|
marvellosity
United Kingdom36161 Posts
On February 15 2013 00:42 Oatsmaster wrote: Marv, you are saying + Show Spoiler + ##Vote: Stutters wrong. Get it right next time :D And yet for reasons that I do not understand, you do not heed my words of wisdom. Why not? | ||
|
marvellosity
United Kingdom36161 Posts
For example, I am still interested in why Mr. D. Ion imagined it a fine idea to vote for Stut-utt-ers when, as mentioned, he was in the previous establishment where I made Stut-utt-ers' usual behaviour quite apparent. Mr. D. Ion, you seem willing to declare many of evil intent, and yet without rigorous discussion or rationality. Why is this so? | ||
|
marvellosity
United Kingdom36161 Posts
On February 15 2013 00:51 iamperfection wrote: referring to dandel in that post ? Mr D. Ion was referring to gentleman Keirathi. | ||
|
marvellosity
United Kingdom36161 Posts
On February 15 2013 01:13 iamperfection wrote: 1 to 10 marv how confident are you in hasbaby Perhaps 7, sir, give or take. | ||
|
marvellosity
United Kingdom36161 Posts
On February 15 2013 01:41 Keirathi wrote: Speaking of which: ##Vote: Oatsmaster This is the second time you've made a bullshit "read" with terrible reasoning. If you were town, you would be voting/giving town reads for real reasons, not something you just made up that sounded good. Also, while I'm on the subject of Oats, a question for Marv: (From the post-game of LVIII) So why is it that when Oats does this same thing (asking irrelevent questions that serve no direction or purpose), you give Oats a town read? Hello, gentleman Keirathi. Simply enough, young Oats and Djodref are not the same gentleman. | ||
|
marvellosity
United Kingdom36161 Posts
Truly it can be argued that young Oats does not make arguments rigorously or perhaps even correctly; yet I have not seen the evil intentions that I have been able to discern before. | ||
|
marvellosity
United Kingdom36161 Posts
On February 15 2013 01:36 austinmcc wrote: Maaaaaaaan, Keirathi beating people to comments again. I was trying to find a post of Hassy's in chaos to get a filter  I do remember Hassy being more active there, which isn't hard, but mainly remember him making some comments concerning current thread events that were in line with what I was thinking. Especially D1, there was a lot of spam about how we should vote to swap/lynch that game, and he made a few posts that just felt thought out concerning what he preferred. Here, there's an absence of that entirely. You can summarize his posts in 2 bullet points basically, and one of those is just that he seems to have something concerning his role that he wants to discuss at an unknown time in the future. Given that you were also in the establishment in a different universe, do you agree or disagree with this assessment, sir? Or perhaps you disagree with my own assessment of the gentleman named Hassybaby? Verily, when I see similarities in behaviour between establishments and differences, I prefer to concentrate on the differences, rather than speculating whimsically that a certain gentleman may have changed his discourse. | ||
|
marvellosity
United Kingdom36161 Posts
On February 15 2013 02:12 austinmcc wrote: ohai marv. Hassy was an active participant in D1, see above. He felt less active during other day. D1 there also required a bit more planning, as we pretty much had to decide how to play that game on D1, whereas D1 here is just "okay instant majority." If I take the setup posts out, there's still meat there. Questioning foolishness, questioning darkfire, generally keeping track of things. It's absent here. Gotta admit though, I haven't played with hassy much, and don't think I've played with scum hassy. That's one reason I don't want to lynch based purely on differences between Parallel and here...that's not really a sample size of his play that I can trust. I'd rather be able to judge his posts and his decisions. If there isn't anything in that bucket to go off of, I'd be down to lynch him tomorrow I guess, but this is just a blind lynch at this point. My apologies, sir - my conversation was directed at gentleman Keirathi, not your fine self. | ||
|
marvellosity
United Kingdom36161 Posts
| ||
|
marvellosity
United Kingdom36161 Posts
On February 15 2013 04:58 randombum wrote: Anyways, oats is looking worse in my eyes. Just read his filter, its all pointless questions and argumentative writing, and it's full of random "Let's join this wagon" vote switching. Marv seems to be taking the easy way out and calling out a lurker. Do "vets" normally stay this quiet during day 1 so they don't stand too much for N1, or is he just coasting? The rest of the lurkers are pretty annoying too. Hello, potential friend. I have a question - do you think all lurkers are likely to be town? | ||
|
marvellosity
United Kingdom36161 Posts
On February 15 2013 06:00 Dandel Ion wrote: I have it on good faith that he's just absent. He does that sometimes, this silly willy. That said I'm out for the night. Might miss deadline. I assume then, Mr. D. Ion, that you are happy with your vote to remove Stutters from the establishment, despite his recent willingness to discourse with the rest of us gentleman? | ||
|
marvellosity
United Kingdom36161 Posts
On February 15 2013 06:13 Stutters695 wrote: God damnit, all Marv makes me think.of with all this gentlemen talk is THE GENTLEMEN from How I Met Your Mother. It is my cunning plan, sir, to distract all you fine gentlemen from relevant discourse with thoughts of poorly made 'television' shows. | ||
|
marvellosity
United Kingdom36161 Posts
On February 15 2013 06:16 randombum wrote: No, I'm pretty sure out of all the lurkers there's bound to be at least mafia. Since have the people in the game are lurking. Would you like to re-word that question. I had hoped the implication of my question was clear. Do you think it is a good idea to try to discern who between the quiet ones have evil intent, and which have good intent? Assuming the answer to my question is yes, I would like for you to tell me why doing so is 'taking the easy way out'. | ||
|
marvellosity
United Kingdom36161 Posts
On February 15 2013 06:27 randombum wrote: Your question was basically "is it good to catch mafia among lurkers". Of course the answer is yes, but the way you are going about couldn't really be called strong play. You basically chose one, said that's not like him, and nothing else. Outside of your silly non-nessecary writing style your only contribution to the game was calling out a lurker. Something that anybody could do. For a supposedly great player you have not said anything about anybody else all game. Perhaps you should go over the records of my discourse more thoroughly, as you are incorrect on all counts. The gentleman Keirathi gives me slightly warmer feelings than previously with his question to austin about his case. | ||
|
marvellosity
United Kingdom36161 Posts
On February 15 2013 06:29 iamperfection wrote: Maybe you should try harder then. I'm very easy to read However u think your case makes it more likely that your town since scum no better than to come after me. Except the gentleman named thrawn, or perhaps a gentleman named Hapahauli? I'm curious why you think this, sir. | ||
|
marvellosity
United Kingdom36161 Posts
| ||
| ||
