EPT[M][N] Les Mafia - Page 15
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
marvellosity
United Kingdom36160 Posts
| ||
|
marvellosity
United Kingdom36160 Posts
##Vote: BlazingHand less QQ, more pewpew | ||
|
marvellosity
United Kingdom36160 Posts
On May 21 2013 09:04 goodkarma wrote: I definitely can. If I were to not PM peek and then later look and find out I'm scum, I wouldn't have bias in my posts until after that point. And that's very relevant to your case at hand, and what originally made you so irked, no? This is very much about you not believing that claim, so don't pretend it isn't. My play here is a little different from my prior games, and I've already highlighted those differences. I've also shown you how meta analyzing me based on my prior scumgames is pretty bad. That leaves my reads, so I'd like to ask you: what about them do you disagree with? That is my strength, and where the discussion should be. In particular, I'd be interested in hearing what you have to say about what I recently posted about Dandel. This is all missing the point. You claim that by not looking at your PM, you'd be playing for town. So, in The Game, where you were town, you had a set of principles you followed, that you didn't follow this game. Therefore your contention is that you playing for town is different from knowing you're town and that it explains the differences between the game where you read your town role PM and the game that you were merely playing in town's interests. And this point is nothing to do with your scumgames, which I've not attempted to draw parallels too? So I have no idea what that part was about anyways. | ||
|
marvellosity
United Kingdom36160 Posts
On May 21 2013 09:04 s0Lstice wrote: Marv, do you believe that GK didn't check his role PM? don't know. | ||
|
marvellosity
United Kingdom36160 Posts
On May 21 2013 09:07 s0Lstice wrote: also, Marv I'd like to hear about this some more: It's players like s0lstice we need to keep our eyes on. from the QT with iamp. What exactly is your read on me? Similar to iamp, you're in the murky middle. You're almost the definition of murky middle. You've not been massively townie, but you've not set scumbells off particularly either, and often these dudes are scum. If I was forced to choose an alignment for you right now, I'd say town, but I'm not very decisive about it. | ||
|
marvellosity
United Kingdom36160 Posts
On May 21 2013 09:16 s0Lstice wrote: To make this post... You have to have a solid opinion on whether he actually checked his role PM or not at the time you made it, correct? sorry, I don't understand what that post has to do with GK checking his role PM? | ||
|
marvellosity
United Kingdom36160 Posts
On May 21 2013 09:19 s0Lstice wrote: Oh, whoops, quoted the wrong post Marv, my bad. This is the one I meant: oh ninjad. Well as per my post last page, he's either claiming to be town, or that he didn't read his role PM and that he was playing for town. so whatever really. | ||
|
marvellosity
United Kingdom36160 Posts
On May 21 2013 09:27 s0Lstice wrote: What I'm saying is this. If you believe that GK did not check his PM, then you really can't treat anything he did before he said that as alignment indicative, right? Therefore, you should not be citing posts before that point. If you believe GK lied and did check the PM, then you should be calling for his lynch at the top of your lungs because there is no town motivation to lie about that. Ergo, if you are citing his posts that came before he said he didn't check his PM, an opinion is required on whether he was being truthful or not. you're not reading, or understanding, because i explained this in one of my responses to GK already. On May 19 2013 13:07 goodkarma wrote: If you want to lynch me, suit yourself. Just know this: Day 1 I don't check my role PM. So you're basically random lynching. I've resolved to do my best to help town, regardless of alignment, day one. Even as scum, if I were to lynch a teammate I figured I'd just be removing a liability. It was the fruit of all the bitterness of having people down my throat every day one as town. And if you don't believe me, check hydra mini mafia II obsQT. The only reason I knew my alignment early there was because of my partner peaked. I've honestly become very tired of putting up with this shit every day one. So feel free to lynch me. I've put it out there. I'll check my alignment closer to the deadline... And hopefully you'll have enough sanity to go after the obvious people that should be looked into for lynching (BH / JarJar) instead of the guy that's being a tryhard. his contention is that he was playing for town. ergo, i'm going to draw comparisons between how i expect him to behave when he's playing for town and 'knows' he's town or whatever. basically 1) if he's lying about his role PM he should die 2) if he's telling the truth, he still didn't behave like i'd expect a town GK (or a GK 'resolving to do his best to help town') to do, which was my original point. it's really not complicated. | ||
|
marvellosity
United Kingdom36160 Posts
On May 21 2013 09:33 s0Lstice wrote: I kinda feel like Marv should have had an opinion on whether he was lying or not, if he was fuming about it. The quote I just posted implies that Marv thinks posts prior to GKs claim are alignment indicative-->so he therefore must think he is lying-->and therefore should really be telling us to lynch the liar for lying. I think not reading your role PM goes completely against the spirit of the game and I find it absolutely disgusting. In Red Team I joined Hapa's policy lynch on OO for a while when he said he didn't read his role PM without saying much about it before leaving it alone and not talking about it. I'm not wasting my time thinking about something that's basically the height of unsportsmanship. | ||
|
marvellosity
United Kingdom36160 Posts
On May 21 2013 09:39 marvellosity wrote: I think not reading your role PM goes completely against the spirit of the game and I find it absolutely disgusting. In Red Team I joined Hapa's policy lynch on OO for a while when he said he didn't read his role PM without saying much about it before leaving it alone and not talking about it. I'm not wasting my time thinking about something that's basically the height of unsportsmanship. well, maybe the 2nd height, after posting post-death. | ||
|
marvellosity
United Kingdom36160 Posts
On May 21 2013 09:43 s0Lstice wrote: So you didn't think at all about whether he was lying or not? Just got angry about it? It was good enough to policy lynch there, but not here? stop asking me stupid questions, it's really irritating. | ||
|
marvellosity
United Kingdom36160 Posts
| ||
|
marvellosity
United Kingdom36160 Posts
| ||
|
marvellosity
United Kingdom36160 Posts
On May 21 2013 09:56 WaveofShadow wrote: Ok you're right. Missed it 'cause posting. I'm actually kinda surprised at that read...you compare him to iamp? You didn't find iamp towny despite him masoning you? Also why the fuck are all of my scumreads avoiding me. /sort of sarcasm Where the fuck are GK and Dandel ragerageragerageragerage no no, I meant iamp's read on him in his will post. | ||
|
marvellosity
United Kingdom36160 Posts
On May 21 2013 10:03 WaveofShadow wrote: Oh lol I knew that was weird. Alright carry on. Man since you're around I feel like we should discuss something but I don't know if I have anything left to ask you. I need a break from this. That's fine, bed time is around now for me anyways ^_^ | ||
|
marvellosity
United Kingdom36160 Posts
On May 21 2013 10:03 s0Lstice wrote: WoS, since marv is doing the electronic equivalent of sticking his fingers in his ears and going 'nah nah nah nah can't hear you'...I'll ask you. Are you following my reasoning here? Making a post painting GK in a bad light that cites posts that come prior to his claim of not reading his role PM requires SOME opinion on whether he checked his role PM. Citing those posts carries with it an assumption that GK was being truthful in his claim. I'm just not seeing how one could pursue GK without considering it, as it directly affects whether certain of his posts are alignment indicative. Why are you lying? I answered that question, I just stopped when you started asking me dumb questions about my reactions in Red team. | ||
|
marvellosity
United Kingdom36160 Posts
On May 21 2013 10:11 s0Lstice wrote: I wouldn't have asked you the question I just asked him  But you can go now. /ignore? really? just lol i have a very low tolerance for stupidity. anyway i'll draw you a little tree GK's claim. If false -----> lynch If true ------> lynch if analysis lines up with lynching him Now I'm not going to spend time thinking about whether he's telling the truth, because it's dumb. So to lynch GK, I have to work on the 'If true' part of the equation, because the If False one is already dealt with. Now go back and read my posts and actually understand the analysis instead of nitpicking on something completely irrelevant. Assume we're working on the 'If true' tree, which is part of my argument. | ||
|
marvellosity
United Kingdom36160 Posts
On May 21 2013 17:08 Blazinghand wrote: You don't really think I'm scum, though, and you don't want to say it-- you can't. That's okay, though. I'll see if I can't do something to make your belief justified. You'd have done something by now, that's the point. You promised awesomeness 24 hours ago! That's a long delay. You've whined about why couldn't there be 2 town masons (there could! but it's irrelevant) and generally not done what I'd expect a town BH to do in this respect, which is to be the towniest town of townington. Your play has tonnes of similarities to mine, BH, and if I'd made a slip that wasn't a slip as town, I'd be shitting fucking townie rainbows in the thread because GODDAMNIT motherfucking marvellosity (insert BH as appropriate) is not getting lynched for something so fucking stupid, and motherfucking marvellosity is gonna catch the god-damn mafia and you'll all bloody see how townie I am. Instead all we see is this apathetic whining and resignation to die with a "last will". Yuk. | ||
|
marvellosity
United Kingdom36160 Posts
| ||
|
marvellosity
United Kingdom36160 Posts
On May 21 2013 11:02 s0Lstice wrote: I think that may have ended up being a violent agreement. I see exactly what you are saying Marv, but I was concerning myself with his claim and you weren't. That was the rub. Alright, ok. Although I'm not sure we fully understand each other, but hopefully we understand enough that you don't need to argue with me about it anymore. The reason I was annoyed is because whatever you're getting at, it means literally nothing for my alignment or anything else I can think of, it's a semantics/viewpoint issue (which you seem to understand?). At any rate, the only thing I take from it is that you probably look a bit more townie for picking such a weird fight with me. | ||
| ||
