EPTWhite Flag Mafia
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
Laughing Jack
Finland50 Posts
| ||
|
Laughing Jack
Finland50 Posts
Thepoof why do you want to lynch Pandain & Oak and Pandain first? | ||
|
Laughing Jack
Finland50 Posts
On October 31 2013 18:42 Tehpoofter wrote: Because its part of Grack's master plan of course. More seriously I'm not comfortable putting up a vote for either currently and want to see how the day plays out more because as of now I don't have any good reads. Cool, but GUN TO YOUR HEAD, KILL SOMEONE OR YOU DIE WHO DO YOU PICK! | ||
|
Laughing Jack
Finland50 Posts
##Vote: JarjarDrinks | ||
|
Laughing Jack
Finland50 Posts
On October 31 2013 22:00 JarJarDrinks wrote: Hey all. First off I'll add my name to the very much against random lynching list for the exact reasons Oats posted. Also, I'm suspicious of the people pushing for it. Most notably hzflank because he only said he was for it after people brought it up. Like, even though it's only a 30% chance, if I'm scum and someone talks about random lynching my first thought is probably something like "Oh god, what if one of us gets chosen? There'd be nothing we could do." So he makes his post saying he'd be for a RNG lynch to show everyone that he's not afraid of it. Even going as far as sayingHow in the world could his odds actually be worse than random? Even if he had no scumhunting skill whatsoever, it would be @ worst equal to random. Jarjar doesn't bring up anything new but just says he's against randomlynching, However most of the post is just fluff about what rng-lynching is to make it seem like his saying more then "Yeah I agree". And it's very certainly fluff because he doesn't reach a conclusion with it. It's scummy to try to make yourself look more townie then you are. His hzflank vote is really weak. He says he wants to lynch hzflank for being one of the rng-supporters but provides no reasoning other then that others seemed to lynch him. It's a very un-townie park-vote. He's still not contributing but just talking about rng-lynching trying to make supporters look scummy for supporting it. | ||
|
Laughing Jack
Finland50 Posts
On November 01 2013 01:53 JarJarDrinks wrote: What do you mean I don't bring up anything new? I'm the first person to bring up that supporting RNG lynch is scummy. Whether or not you agree w/ it, it's something new. And who really cares if I brought up something new? I commented on the main topic of conversation. And what exactly do you mean by "he doesn't reach a conclusion with it"? What conclusion could I have reached? No, oats said why we shouldn't rng. You just talked some general reasoning for why scum/town would or wouldn't want to rng. You said townies shouldn't want to do it and that scum wouldn't want to do it. A lot of people were confused to what you actually ment. And that was because you didn't type it with any conclusion in mind. You could had reached a conclusion by for example saying. I believe scum wouldn't do this because the risk it pose to themselves are high, so rng supporters are town. or I believe townies wouldn't do this because it's bad play so rng supporters are scum. Regardless if what you choose is true or not picking one side means you believe in it or are pretending to believe in it. Picking neither means you're full of fluff. But fine, so what do you mean by rng is scummy, which was what you were first to bring up?, Is it that it is bad townplay and scummy because of it. Then how was it you and not Oats who brought that up? | ||
|
Laughing Jack
Finland50 Posts
| ||
|
Laughing Jack
Finland50 Posts
On October 31 2013 23:19 Laughing Jack wrote: I believe scum wouldn't do this because the risk it pose to themselves are high, so rng supporters are town. or I believe townies wouldn't do this because it's bad play so rng supporters are scum. Those were examples on how to have a conclusion and not my thoughts. I know well they are not black and white, and both teams might support rng for different reasons. It gives town nothing to bring it up if that's what you're going to say. Like saying, "mkfuba could be scum... but he could also be town" -Wow I contributed. | ||
|
Laughing Jack
Finland50 Posts
| ||
|
Laughing Jack
Finland50 Posts
| ||
|
Laughing Jack
Finland50 Posts
What do you two think about the current votes? | ||
|
Laughing Jack
Finland50 Posts
| ||
|
Laughing Jack
Finland50 Posts
On November 01 2013 16:22 Grackaroni wrote: I don't really like your vote and I think you should vote Oats, who is coincidentally my top scum read. It's all in the filter. I wanted you to answer the questions that wasn't in your filter, the others were examples. Sorry I expected you to figure that out by yourself, should I assume you didn't because you're lazy or because you genuinely didn't figure it out? Can you get back to me on the other topics. Like if you had the power to select three people that everyone had to vote between, who would you pick? I am contributing, I just shut down something that could had become ten or more pages of nothing concrete, you're welcome. And the very post you're commenting on is trying to generate discussion. You on the other hand. Your biggest impact on this game have been getting randomly generated to be lynched. And I'm starting to think Oats will be a good lynch for today. | ||
|
Laughing Jack
Finland50 Posts
Cool, and why would you want to see them spotlighted over others? I think Odin is a terrible pick really. Since he's not been around, why did you pick him? | ||
|
Laughing Jack
Finland50 Posts
On November 01 2013 17:52 Grackaroni wrote: Because he's active in another game and still hasn't shown up in this one. Alright, well I'm starting to agree with you on Oats, I think it's a pretty bad sign, that after I came and broke up your attacks on him and asked him to talk about something else he didn't, but has just been hanging around doing nothing. Which indicates he's pretty content with doing nothing as long as he doesn't need to defend himself. | ||
|
Laughing Jack
Finland50 Posts
| ||
|
Laughing Jack
Finland50 Posts
On November 01 2013 19:18 Oatsmaster wrote: SO I CAN HAVE A READ ON YOU. Do you insist on being as infuriating as possible? Do you know how to play the game? At this point, I dont think so. Well here is the thing, I've asked you questions, and your response have been "I'm not going to answer those why don't YOU answer them yourself. And then I said that your behaviour was suspicious and you say, What about YOUR behaviour? See a pattern? Maybe you don't. You seem pretty slow since you think what you're making is actually legit arguments. Your behaviour is suspicious and when I called you out for it, you just got mad and attacked my behaviour. I don't understand how you think that my play justifies yours? The only motivation I can conclude from that is that your goal is to blend in, and as a scum thinking you're blending in you actually don't understand why you look suspicious. | ||
|
Laughing Jack
Finland50 Posts
On November 01 2013 19:37 Oatsmaster wrote: What questions? I dont see anything. On November 01 2013 16:12 Laughing Jack wrote: Your sacrifice is noted, What do you two think about the current votes? On November 01 2013 16:18 Laughing Jack wrote: No, Are you happy with them? Do you think anyone's vote suck, do you think my vote suck? How would you like the votes to be, who do you want pressured?, is Pandain really your top scumread? Plenty to talk about. | ||
|
Laughing Jack
Finland50 Posts
On November 01 2013 18:05 Laughing Jack wrote: Alright, well I'm starting to agree with you on Oats, I think it's a pretty bad sign, that after I came and broke up your attacks on him and asked him to talk about something else he didn't, but has just been hanging around doing nothing. Which indicates he's pretty content with doing nothing as long as he doesn't need to defend himself. | ||
|
Laughing Jack
Finland50 Posts
On November 01 2013 19:39 Grackaroni wrote: Yeah I'm ok with getting rid of Laughing Jack. This might be difficult for you but try to use your head. I'd love to hear what kind of backwards logic makes you want to lynch me. | ||
| ||
