"##" Mafia - Page 210
Forum Index > TL Mafia |
marvellosity
United Kingdom36156 Posts
| ||
Koshi
Belgium38797 Posts
Still. My tunnel on SnB makes me believe he knows this because they discussed it in scum QT. | ||
Koshi
Belgium38797 Posts
On November 06 2013 00:32 strongandbig wrote: As for who is scum. Here's the thing. I kind of still think one of the charger roles is scum, and here's why. Night 1, when rayn "accidentally" sent the wrong power to Marv. The whole time, he acted as though he always knew that the "-1" power was the "helpful" power and the "+1" power was the "harmful" power. I really don't think this was the natural/intuitive assumption. The vast majority of the time, numbers in roles refer to the ability or strength of the role. How many KP you can block as medic or jailor; how many KP you deal as a vig; how many targets you can choose for any role, but especially as eg a list checker or other multiuse role. Like, if I was a scumteam with that power, I would be really worried about making a 1/2 KP vig into a real vig, powering up a list checker, or making a role that said "target 1 player to watch/detect/doctor/etc". Plus, even if you only talk about costs, it could just as easily be worded as "your starting power level is X + the number of people who Twerk" or even as "you gain 1 power for each person who twerks." The fact that rayn used the increase power on Marv and then immediately started walking it back makes means he knew it was the "harmful" power to Marv. The only way he could have known that is if there is a scum charge-up power role. So is it marv/Koshi/Prome/Oats? | ||
marvellosity
United Kingdom36156 Posts
On October 29 2013 00:09 Oatsmaster wrote: Sorry man Seuss, I have problems explaining myself coherently The Prome and WoS was something I was thinking about. Reading through Seuss's filter. Found this interesting. Oats isn't usually apologetic to people like this. | ||
marvellosity
United Kingdom36156 Posts
| ||
Oatsmaster
United States16627 Posts
On November 06 2013 01:05 marvellosity wrote: Reading through Seuss's filter. Found this interesting. Oats isn't usually apologetic to people like this. Again, you point out absolutely useless shit in order to make me look bad. Do I do this as scum? Why would I be more likely to do this as scum rather than town? How does me apologizing to Seuss make me scumteam with him? | ||
marvellosity
United Kingdom36156 Posts
You literally just got caught in White Flag for playing yourself down as mafia. It's not your natural interactions with people to apologise (see the post you just made), it's your natural inclination to be aggressive. Which makes me think you're scumbuddies. | ||
Oatsmaster
United States16627 Posts
On November 06 2013 01:13 marvellosity wrote: Your anger is totally unwarranted and only makes you look worse. You literally just got caught in White Flag for playing yourself down as mafia. It's not your natural interactions with people to apologise (see the post you just made), it's your natural inclination to be aggressive. Which makes me think you're scumbuddies. Yeah but how is me apologizing for something I talked about before postgame in recent games? Dude if Im scumbuddies with Seuss, Its ALL FAKE. FAKE. why would I apologize for something FAKE. How is it alignment indicative at all? How is me apologizing = me playing advanced newbie card? Did you even see the context of that post? | ||
Koshi
Belgium38797 Posts
On November 06 2013 01:12 Oatsmaster wrote: Again, you point out absolutely useless shit in order to make me look bad. Do I do this as scum? Why would I be more likely to do this as scum rather than town? How does me apologizing to Seuss make me scumteam with him? Dat marv such a noob. I would never point out something silly like that. + Show Spoiler + On November 04 2013 04:56 Koshi wrote: Yeah I forgot about the whole Oats saying Sorry to Seuss thingie. That's also why I thought they were scum together way before I made my case on Seuss. | ||
Oatsmaster
United States16627 Posts
On November 06 2013 01:13 marvellosity wrote: Your anger is totally unwarranted and only makes you look worse. ARE YOU KIDDING? So when you bring up useless shit I cant get angry but when I bring up useless shit you can? | ||
Koshi
Belgium38797 Posts
| ||
Oatsmaster
United States16627 Posts
| ||
marvellosity
United Kingdom36156 Posts
On November 06 2013 01:15 Oatsmaster wrote: Yeah but how is me apologizing for something I talked about before postgame in recent games? Dude if Im scumbuddies with Seuss, Its ALL FAKE. FAKE. why would I apologize for something FAKE. How is it alignment indicative at all? How is me apologizing = me playing advanced newbie card? Did you even see the context of that post? Yes, the context is that he was finding you suspicious for the way you post. Your reaction to Seuss? You apologise. Your reaction to me when I'm suspicious of you? You start swearing and calling me useless. | ||
Koshi
Belgium38797 Posts
On November 06 2013 01:16 Oatsmaster wrote: Nice job koshi. Real fucking useful. Hey, I am totes on your side. SnB and Kush last scummers. | ||
Oatsmaster
United States16627 Posts
On November 06 2013 01:17 marvellosity wrote: Yes, the context is that he was finding you suspicious for the way you post. Your reaction to Seuss? You apologise. Your reaction to me when I'm suspicious of you? You start swearing and calling me useless. I called you useless? quote pls. | ||
marvellosity
United Kingdom36156 Posts
| ||
Koshi
Belgium38797 Posts
| ||
Koshi
Belgium38797 Posts
| ||
marvellosity
United Kingdom36156 Posts
| ||
Oatsmaster
United States16627 Posts
On November 06 2013 01:17 marvellosity wrote: Yes, the context is that he was finding you suspicious for the way you post. Your reaction to Seuss? You apologise. Uh no actually the context is him finding me LESS suspicious because he reread. On October 29 2013 00:02 Seuss wrote: That was just one example of unexplained logic, but sure. That's the only other example. I felt there were more but that was due to my final point. I find your posting style hard to follow so a lot of what I felt were non-sequitur arguments were, on further review, consistent. Here. Yeah. So I apologized because I am making it hard for people to read my posts. Oh shit. Oh shit. Marv lied. Oh shit. | ||
| ||