|
On April 02 2013 10:46 risk.nuke wrote:Show nested quote +On April 02 2013 10:43 VisceraEyes wrote:
Can you point out where I've been talking about "the dangers of voting"? I'm pretty sure all I've talked about was how Lazer's and RoL's policies were retarded and unfair respectively. Will you please god damn stop tunneling? The thread have talked about it, I assume you read the thread?
How can I be tunneling in a game that's not even 6hrs old? Nothing else is even happening for me to look at otherwise risk. If you think I should be looking at other scummy shit, feel free to point me in the right direction, but your scummy shit is the only scummy shit I've seen in the thread.
|
On April 02 2013 10:59 risk.nuke wrote:
If I was scum I could just have claimed I believe strongly in the Kenpachi rule and talked about it's high accuracy and incriminated RoL for it. I would legitly look as if I were scumhunting and doing stuff at the same time as I would be pushing my mafia agenda.
Instead I told the truth of what I believed in which made me look worse. Why did I do that, because I am mafia and retarded or because I am town and interested in finding scum, not just looking like I'm trying to find scum.
This is my point entirely. You told "the truth". Why? If your intention was really to "fish for reactions" then why did you tell me the truth at all? It's as if you KNOW I'm town and didn't want to look scummy for saying something as asinine as "RoL is scum because he contested VE's town-claim".
The fact that it "looks worse" now is completely irrelevant because at the time, you had no way of knowing whether telling the truth would look good or bad. What you did know, however, is that telling the truth would completely invalidate your "totally legit scumhunting tactics". So why do it?
|
On April 02 2013 11:07 risk.nuke wrote:
Viscera. Tunneling isn't about time, it's about not having an open mind. You lashed out at me instantly and agressively for the smallest thing so clearly you're looking at me as if I am scum and are trying to find things things that are scummy about me to confirm that belief. Aka tunneling.
You want REAL scummy shit. Everyone that's not posting are scummier then those who are posting.
For 2, I personally think Hopeless1der look very uninterested in finding scum.
But this isn't the case at all. I voted for you. In my vote post I even outline where I tried to consider a town motivation. I'm TRYING to keep an open mind, but you keep slamming it shut with appeals and bullshit. Like what do you mean "aggressively"? I've kept a cool head about this whole thing. You're the one freaking out bro, not me.
|
How is that lashing out or aggressive at all? The post in question:
On April 02 2013 10:37 risk.nuke wrote:
For a group of people who just talked about the dangers of voting in a instant hammer game you guys are being pretty fucking reckless with your voting. I'm not sure if i have 3 or 4 votes on me now but all it takes in one or two careless players to come in and sheep and I loose my head.
This looks to me like the bolded statement and the italicized statement are referring to the same people...people voting for risk.nuke. As I'm voting for risk.nuke, I was curious as to how the bolded statement applied to me. That's not lashing out at all, it's questioning the motivation of your posting. It's not aggressive at all, it's inquisitive.
|
The one pretending to have a thick accent is obviously a smurf, and the roleplay is annoying. Axle seems to be an acolyte of Chezinu...not sure if that's a good thing or a bad thing yet.
RoL I'm going to come across as pesky but I've got to ask: why are you harping on my play last game and providing posts like your last one? It doesn't seem to be in the spirit of keeping the thread tidy, and it doesn't provide any insight into what you think of their alignment.
Your vote on risk is uninspired too. You essentially sheeped the reasoning I gave and added nothing. Do you buy his explanation that he was "reaction fishing" and I ruined it?
|
Axel you never gave your own comment on risk.nuke. When I looked for your thoughts on risk this is what I found.
On April 02 2013 13:18 AxleGreaser wrote:
Axle on Risk.
I think Risk is under quite a bit of pressure. I think Risk has rather plausibly (given his time zone) claimed the need to go to sleep. I am left wondering what the Risk voters think they should do right now... and little intrigued none of them seem to be doing that.
Apart from that, for now Risk is big boy, risk can look after himself. As I don't know if Risk is town or scum for sure, now is the time for me to watch and decide if Risk is scummy, or are the people pushing him scummy and trying to look useful by parking their votes on him.
Nowhere in any of this are your thoughts on anything risk.nuke has posted, his interactions with anyone in the thread - there's literally no original thought in there aside from "I believe risk's claim that he went to sleep".
Instead of getting all up in RoL's grill for voting for risk, why don't you provide your thoughts on risk's play. Twice in this snip alone you sprinkle doubt on the pushers of the risk wagon. Do you think he's town getting the shaft? Are you suspicious of people pushing risk.nuke as your post seems to allude to?
|
Hi guys I'm reading. I have a feeling I'm not gonna like something I read, anyone wanna tell me what it is to lessen the impact reading it has?
|
Psh try again Cheese Ghor a badass.
|
On April 03 2013 00:42 Mr. Cheesecake wrote:
Jesus you guys are active while I'm asleep.
##Unvote
I don't think we should lynch Risk today. How I got +2 to my pressure vote is beyond me.
-znipplez-
Found it. Cheese you unvoted and said "Gee golly guys I never really wanted to lynch risk and I'm confused by the extra votes that aren't mine" when reading could have told you everything you needed to know about the extra votes. You don't comment on any of the content against risk, simply discredit the wagon by saying the other votes were merely "+2" to your vote...which is very obviously not the case. And so I ask.
Why do you not want to lynch risk today specifically?
|
On April 03 2013 01:23 Mr. Cheesecake wrote:Show nested quote +On April 03 2013 01:20 VisceraEyes wrote:
Psh try again Cheese Ghor a badass. But I thought I was your designated badass?
No you're just a sexy beast.
|
It's interesting that you bring up Hopeless.
risk.nuke's read on Hopeless is actually not bad. Not bad enough for me to
##Unvote: risk.nuke
What I find interesting about Hopeless is how he's cheerleading the risk.nuke lynch while never himself being on the risk.nuke wagon. He excuses it with "Well I just didn't want the day to end early" or whatever, but risk.nuke now only has 2 votes on him out of 5 needed to lynch.
The interesting thing about Hopeless is that while he's cheerleading the risk.nuke lynch, he's voting for Ghor. Why?
On April 03 2013 00:34 Hopeless1der wrote:
so...you want to polarize the lynch between your initial scumread and somone who you say "won't comment" on your initial scumread. Why not just push to get risk lynched?
|
Hopeless if you really felt that way your vote would be on risk.nuke. You're accusing Ghor of being risk's "scumbuddy" because he's not voting for risk. What the hell are you doing? Not voting for risk. You say Ghor is attacking Sylencia in lieu of pushing risk.nuke. What are you doing? Attacking Ghor in lieu of pushing risk.nuke. Your play is wholly and completely contradictory and scummy as sin. Do you have anything to say for yourself?
|
On April 03 2013 01:32 Hopeless1der wrote:
-snipples-
Ghor is annoying as all hell and his intentions behind voting sylencia do not match with his scum read on risk.nuke. He wants sylencia to commit to some type of a read on risk and when he refuses to do so, calls him scum for it. No where does he validate why this is scummy. Combine that with what appears to be a trolling smurf hellbent on behaving like a caveman, and I think he's a good choice for lynch.
But see this post tells a different tale. This post tells of a D1 in which Hopeless1der is leading a Ghor lynch with reasoning.
|
##Vote: Hopeless1der
*brofist risk.nuke*
We cool dawg. For now.
|
For what it's worth I'm with Ghor here. Your scumslip was not really a scumslip and added nothing to the conversation about risk.nuke's play.
|
And what do you think of me for also not agreeing with your assessment of the "scumslip" Hopeless? Because I think it's bogus too. Am I scum just trying "to sweep it under the rug"?
|
You heard it here first people...risk.nuke/Ghor/VE scumteam in 9 player game.
God can you imagine how fucked you guys would be? LYLO D2 LMAO
|
A three man scumteam is laughable in a 9 player game Hopeless, yes /sarcasm.
/facepalm
|
6v3 - Mislynch
5v3 - NK
4v3 <-LYLO
In order to avoid LYLO on DAY TWO we'd have to lynch scum on D1. That makes game incredibly unbalanced. We're looking for 2 people not 3.
|
No I didn't. You didn't use the [/humor] tags. l2BB bro.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
