EPT[I] [S] Shadow Mini Mafia - Page 3
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
gonzaw
Uruguay4911 Posts
| ||
|
gonzaw
Uruguay4911 Posts
First of all: Damn you Prome you post so weird ;_; Anyways, yeah I'll vote Foolishness. None of his 3 posts make sense to me as town Foo, not a single one. You can play the "aw aww he has too little posts we can't do anything until he posts more!" card all you want but I call bullshit. It's his move now to convince me (us) into changing our votes. ##Vote: Foolishness I got a little interested in VE. At first I found him a little suspicious (when he didn't do much and started shouting and stuff). Then I found him a little bit less suspicious (explaining himself regarding Prome, and some reactions), but now I'm more torn to the suspicious side. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=439137¤tpage=15#293 You asked a question, and we both answered. But look at the language Wave uses versus mine...I've bolded what I think is an apologetic tone, like he feels bad even for entering discussion. And goes on to ask a completely irrelevant question of Hapa...I mean, I'm not sure exactly "fluffy" means as it pertains to finding scum, but Wave's post seems to fit the bill more than mine does in this particular instance as far as I can see I don't really feel good about VE "painting" WOS suspicious here, yet ignoring it. Okay, maybe he thinks WOS is super town, but that post of his was too "fluffy". The question is: Why couldn't Prome think that too? If VE thought WOS post was too fluffy or scummy, yet he doesn't think WOS is scum (apparently), what stops Prome from reading WOS's posts, find it fluffy/whatever, but not think WOS is scum, and focus on VE instead? Hmm, okay that above wasn't so much suspicion as something that sparked my interest (I kind of think town VE wouldn't really make that somewhat complex thinking regarding Prome's intentions perhaps). I'm more interested in VE's interactions with Foo': On January 21 2014 15:57 VisceraEyes wrote: So Foolish, do you think I'm making mountains of molehills? I've garnered two votes already, and since you didn't vote for me I'm left thinking that you must just disagree with my points? On January 21 2014 16:01 VisceraEyes wrote: Dude I just went on a rant about someone that is neither of the players you just mentioned. Are you scum Foolish? AGAIN? That kind of pressure, coupled with that kind of "conclusion", makes me think VE now thinks Foo is scum. Okay. Then marv, and kita, and me come and all shit on Foo. Then VE does absolutely nothing and backtracks that "strong" reaction against Foo (specially in a confusing way I couldn't really understand): On January 22 2014 01:16 VisceraEyes wrote: Morning guys. Marv no, I don't think it's the same kind of Prome that I'm used to seeing. What it reminds me of is that game I was the mayor and lynched the piss out of Prome D1. He was a lurky little shit that game, but I caught him on something very similar to what I noticed this game. Like I think it's awful that I have to ask this, but did you read my post on him? That being said, I at least dig one of his targets. I asked Foolish about his thoughts on this same matter and what I got is "lol you and Hapa townies" which is definitely NOT what I was after. He answered my question as if he'd read the exchange between us, but left me with a feeling that he hadn't actually read anything at all. If I see one more person say they're going to ignore my posts, I won't be responsible for the outcome. You have been warned. VE didn't post anything in between to change his mind. Foo didn't post anything in between to change his mind. Actually, other guys posted lots of stuff against Foolishness saying how he can be scum. So....why does VE backtrack? VE never mentions Foolishness again. | ||
|
gonzaw
Uruguay4911 Posts
On January 21 2014 15:41 Foolishness wrote: This game just got a whole lot easier. ##Vote: WaveOfShadow Vote with no justification whatsoever. Remember, this is Foo' we are talking about (not FourFace) On January 21 2014 15:45 Foolishness wrote: Wait. Wait. If you are going to ignore it, why did you respond to it? Pointless response, when he should....you know...explain why he's voting (in a "serious" manner) that guy. On January 21 2014 15:59 Foolishness wrote: You and Hapa are two townies that are arguing with each other over nothing. Random town reads on guys for no reason. Again, fails to contribute on anything else, specially his vote and apparently "super obvious scum read that makes this game solved for me" Also this should cover it: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=439137¤tpage=18#359 | ||
|
gonzaw
Uruguay4911 Posts
On January 22 2014 06:31 kitaman27 wrote: Could you explain to me how these two posts differ? Not sure I follow. The posts differ....ehmm..because they have different letters and words? You said you voted Foo' ONLY because of his activity (that's what I understood). That's kind of lame, compared to everything else said. Then you have people like Holy or austin saying "Leave Foo alone! You can't do anything until he posts more!". That is what I call bullshit. Anyways kita, I'd like a response for this: On January 22 2014 01:59 gonzaw wrote: Anyways Ehmm, I'm not really convinced by this. Yes, I cherry picked, and knew it is kind of pointless. I could have just said "read all his filters", but I needed to at least quote 1 or 2 posts (for those that can't be arsed to read his filters). You can easily read his filters (they are short) and come to the conclusion yourself. I'm wondering though, if you think the guide is wrong or something? You don't mention. Do you realize the differences between "scum Foo trolly start" and "town Foo trolly start"? Why do you insinuate his start this game is his "town trolly start" and not scum? If you vote him based on activity that's actually more lame. Town Foo isn't super active as marv either. | ||
|
gonzaw
Uruguay4911 Posts
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=439137¤tpage=16#318 This post seems odd to me. He just gets into the thread, and yet seems angry for some reason? He seems angry at Hapa I dunno why. Most of his post revolves around some small unimportant shit. He "pressures" Hapa because he didn't accuse Foo for Foo's town read on him, and because Hapa apparently backed down his "pressure" of sandro. I mean, those are valid concerns to pressure, but the way Holy does is odd as hell. He pushes it like it's some super awesome case. He addresses Hapa like he's cornered scum. don't understand why this conversation was ended around here. We absolutely should be pushing everyone and not letting them ignore posts and accusations directed at them. It's a team game where we have to demonstrate our townieness to each other. Why should we let a player not participate in the game just because he gets better later when in fact we have the potential to learn more about his alignment today? This sentiment was echoed by hapa BUT THEN TOTALLY CONTRADICTED AS WELL. I don't understand the mindset behind this. You suggest we find his alignment by way of pressure but then give into the sentiment of other players of which you do not know the alignment of and say that we should not pressure him because he won't respond instead of taking the initiative of your confirmed alignment to yourself and pressuring sandroba yourself. This isn't something a townie mindset does at all. I'm interested to hear your reasoning before I put my vote down on you though because there's no reason being hasty. There are 2 things I find scummy about this: 1)He's super pissed of for no reason at all (I mean...read his all-caps sentence). A townie wouldn't be this pissed off on their 1st post against someone they haven't interacted with at the moment, and someone that didn't fuck up or did anything wrong (Hapa was actually pretty active by then, and apparently "pro-town", so why get so angry at him?). Unfounded anger and aggressiveness are mafia traits, either because he feels angry or mad at being scum, or because it's a scum agenda he's pushing. 2)The bolded bit seems too extreme to me, and also includes the fastest backpedalling I've seen. He considers Hapa not caring about sandro anymore. I mean, he even got that wrong (Hapa's "pressure sandro" is actually a line of reasoning to pressure WOS and kita; Hapa doesn't think himself that everybody should vote and pressure sandro until his head explodes or something). Saying that "This isn't something a townie mindset does at all" makes no sense. But then he doesn't keep that up and backpedals saying he doesn't want to be "hasty" or some shit. This post reads all wrong to me. Also, should I point the obvious contradictions?: We absolutely should be pushing everyone and not letting them ignore posts and accusations directed at them. It's a team game where we have to demonstrate our townieness to each other. Why should we let a player not participate in the game just because he gets better later when in fact we have the potential to learn more about his alignment today? On January 21 2014 23:07 Holyflare wrote: Why Foolishness over sandroba? They have both posted nothing. Your goal is clearly to lynch a lurker today so why are you going to ignore the rest of what has happened on day 1 when your intentions are already set in stone? On January 22 2014 05:51 Holyflare wrote: Realistically though, what is your opinion of Gonzaw's style? I haven't played with him before and I'm not in right now so can't check up on it. Why is he spending so much time on foolishness? On January 22 2014 06:13 Holyflare wrote: I do not want to participate in a discussion based on a person with 4 posts, it is futile. Foolishness has posted nothing and gonzaw is spending his entire time focusing on that person .... I have no attitude towards foolishness other than my dislike for his unexplained reads. It's not scummy, it's not towny, I want to know his reasonings before I take my read further. Could he be scum? Yes. Could he be town? Yes. I do not know and cannot know until he posts, so of course my attitude to him would be a net null read. For someone so HELLBENT on not letting any lurker go by and pressure them, he sure does let lurker Foolishness go by without pressuring him. Foo has some (founded) accusations against him, and he's lurking. Based on Holy's previous post, this is all good and dandy isn't it! Well, apparently not, since he refuses to acknowledge anything being said about Foo', and clearly states that he doesn't want to participate in a "futile" discussion where he has no "attitude towards foolishness" and is relentlessly going against him for doing what he actually said we should be doing (i.e pressuring the lurkers and not letting them go by even if they get "good later on" and stuff?) This makes no sense in context with his previous post. Also, apparently he thinks that these kind of contradictions "isn't something a townie mindset does at all" (which is what he did to Hapa before). So basically, he is calling himself scum. There's also the fact he thinks it's fine to pressure sandro but not Foolishness, and doesn't state many reasons for that. From his perspective there should be no difference between sandro and Foolishness (they are 2 lurkers who barely post and nobody knows much about them), however in Holy's posts there is a clear difference between them, where he wants to deflect attention from Foo and into sandro. Anyways, I don't want to get too much carried on, but right now i'm leaning towards Foo and Holy being scum, with VE coming up third. I'm open to discussions, and people throwing their ideas (and more importantly, their votes) based on this. I still want to keep my vote on Foo' first, and keep him up for lynch (unless other stuff happens). | ||
|
gonzaw
Uruguay4911 Posts
On January 22 2014 06:54 austinmcc wrote: Can't speak for holy, but with me, it's that given the full menu of anything anyone could be doing, discussion of Foolishness's alignment doesn't seem like a good idea to me. I don't personally feel confident about reading THOSE 3-4 posts as alignment indicative, and don't feel comfortable with reading Foolishness right now. I don't understand anyone else feeling like the BEST read they can get on some scummy dudes is Foolishness. Mainly though, it seems like...good material for scum to post on. Weigh in that he's town, scum, a crocodile, whatever. You can say whatever you want about Foolishness, discuss his alignment until you're blue in the face, but really it comes down to "I think this thing about these 3-4 trolly/nothingposts." Given that, I think it's a more productive topic for scum (they get to post, give reads, but I don't anticipate anyone being lynched later on based primarily/heavily on whatever stance they took on Foolishness right at this second), than it is for town. That's why I don't think discussion should be centered on Foolishness, or heavily concerned with him. I care somewhat about him and his posting, but mainly it feels like a topic that allows mafia to freely post and keep discussion on Foolishness. The thing is, that when it comes down to Foo', his 3-4 posts are indeed alignment indicative. I also feel, that if Foo is town, unless there is a huge town mob against him they wouldn't really think about going against him. I mean, Town Foo is Town Foo, he'll get those scummers. Would you, as scum, freely go against a Town Foo, for Town Foo later to catch you and crucify you? If Foo is somehow town, then he did leave himself open for scum to have "good material to post on", but I don't think a scummer would feel so confident on going against him like he'd do any random lurker from any other random game. Also, at the very worst, follow this maxim: Sheep marv  Anyways....I kind of feel biased towards this whole "scum Foo" thing, maybe with my VE and Holy reads as well (which interestingly are related to the Foolishness thing as well). I would appreciate new takes on those 2 from other people. | ||
|
gonzaw
Uruguay4911 Posts
On January 22 2014 07:11 austinmcc wrote: The only game I've played with town Foolishness, I was scum. He and marv flung shit at each other for a while, we/I stoked the fires heavily, and we won a flawless victory. I have never seen miraculous town foolishness, and I'm also an idiot sometimes, so yeah...I'm happy to go against Foolishness as scum. ESPECIALLY in an all-vanilla game, if someone is really a problem you can shoot them and never worry about a doc or getting watched or anything else. I actually like point 2 on holy's post about hapa (the backpedaling) and kinda sorta like the contradictory NO LURKERS --> why you guys voting this lurker/that lurker/any lurker stuff. Mainly still just want to see him and hapa chatting in a vacuum right now though. Hmm, yeah, I tend to overexaggerate my "accusations". I don't really think Holy is 100% confirmed scum or something, but he's getting too suspicious, "careless" and "senseless" by the minute (also apparently he has some vendetta or something against me for some reason....?). Which game are you talking about? I think maybe you are talking about Personality Mafia 2? I put that filter in the links I posted before. I don't want them chatting in a vacuum actually, that rarely gives anything meaningful. Hapa will ask questions, Holy will rationalize his actions and come up with excuses or justifications, and you'll end up "Hmm, so what was the purpose of this?" and gain no significant read on any of them. At least I don't care much for that kind of stuff, I ignore it most of the time. On January 22 2014 06:40 kitaman27 wrote: Are you saying that your vote isn't for activity? If you trying to say that you case has merit, rather than you're voting him because he hasn't produced content, than I think you might be mafia. You can't honestly tell me that you're confident about your vote. Activity is something that, yes is a little bit suspicious, but I dunno how much suspicious would be in Foo's case. Right now though, he is way too inactive so the more time passes the more scummy his inactivity alone appears. (Pre-Edit: Speaking of the devil )I'm voting him for the reasons I posted, both in that "halfassed" post I made, and my big one. Yes, I think all of those combined have some merit. I think your guide is irrelevant to this game. Maybe it would be a nice post game thought, but you can't apply it yet. You're a math guy. Surely you understand the concept of sample size. How can you be confident about your meta read based on a couple of intro posts? My "guide" is a meta case against Foo. You can't just ignore it and say it's "a nice post game thought". Please comment on it. If you can, read 1 town filter and 1 scum filter from the ones I posted, and see if you then agree with what I said or not. Sample size has little to do with catching scum. The only case where it matters is if the guys has a 40 page filter, where you can safely just say "yeah he town". A guy can have a single post in the entire game, and it can be the scummiest thing in the universe that instantly makes you want to tunnel him to death, or the guy can have 10 pages worth of filter and you can find nothing at all inside of it to figure out his alignment. I mean, yeah, it matters, but you can do away with it. | ||
|
gonzaw
Uruguay4911 Posts
| ||
|
gonzaw
Uruguay4911 Posts
marv, so, whachu think 'bout Holy and VE-babe? Do you think my suspicions are founded, or that I'm being blinded by my "Foolishness" bis? Actually that question can go for anyone. Voting either Prome or WOS seems like tossing a coin up in the air. The reasonings used to vote for them (by Foo and others), are at best "ehh, perhaps?" to me (Prome's 1st post is obviously WIFOM, so can't really say it's a for or against him). I need to look at bigger trends in behaviour, and interactions of them with others before making a good solid read on either Prome or WOS, or hell even VE and that kind of players. | ||
|
gonzaw
Uruguay4911 Posts
WOS made some pointless questions as well (like that one I mentioned before) Hapa made some obvious try-hard questions early on (like some of his questions about kita's vote on sandro). kita did also make those kind of questions Dunno if you can get alignment-indicative stuff out of them. Maybe you can, but I'm not that convinced about kita's. Feel free to continue with your reasoning or pressure if you want though, it doesn't hurt. | ||
|
gonzaw
Uruguay4911 Posts
Edit Do you think my suspicions are founded, or that I'm being blinded by my "Foolishness" bias? Actually that question can go for anyone. | ||
|
gonzaw
Uruguay4911 Posts
On January 22 2014 07:46 marvellosity wrote: I think you're more warranted on Holy than you are on VE, gonzaw. You're right that Holy did seem unnecessarily angry/fierce in that post you pointed out, and that is scummy VE I'm much more inclined to agree with Foolish on. I don't really see anything in his play that I find particularly scummy. He's pretty impetuous and involved gonzaw do you think kita's questioning of you is warranted? No-one seems at all interested and if you aren't then I'm gonna have to rethink this :/ I initially found it weird. Although, I was kind of okay with this response of his: On January 22 2014 03:10 kitaman27 wrote: I guess it has to do with the fact that the meta analysis was applied to a player with three posts, which I wouldn't be very confident in based on the sample size. If you come to the conclusion that a town Foolishness will eventually attempt to have a helpful attitude and start to scumhunt, yet you think a vote on him until the point where he does so is lame, I'm not sure what you are trying to accomplish. If you prefer a wait and see attitude, then why not save your meta post until he has something to go by and then come to a conclusion then? His "questioning" of me, seemed mostly based on the fact that I made that huge post out of the blue with "seemingly" no purpose at all. Don't really remember him calling me scummy or something. I kind of ignored his later jabs/responses at me though. I tend to think I can recognize scum wanting to get on my ass to lynch me and stuff and I didn't get that feeling with kita. I did get a tiny bit of that feeling with Holy for instance. Dunno, I guess I have other stuff to focus on. Well, okay, if VE isn't particularly scummy then I'll ask him to answer: VE, so what happened to your Foo' read bro? | ||
|
gonzaw
Uruguay4911 Posts
 Hmm, okay, I think we might get a little bit off track with all the discussions, questions, and shit going on. Personally, I want these: 1)Foolishness to do something more (I'm not very much convinced by his post. I read the Champion's Game as well marv). Notice how there's a lack of defense for his "horrible" posts. 2)Get some consensus on Holy based on what I posted 3)I guess some real talk about who to lynch this D1, not just fleeting questions and suspicions. | ||
|
gonzaw
Uruguay4911 Posts
On January 22 2014 07:55 marvellosity wrote: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=439137¤tpage=22#439 came after http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=439137¤tpage=22#435 and other posts where gonzaw talked about VE in quite some detail and also touched on Holy and WoS. In short gonzaw was not only tunnelling fool but spreading his tentacles about with quite a bit of thought Oh you'd like that wouldn't you?  | ||
|
gonzaw
Uruguay4911 Posts
I guess I'll have to use my tentacles on austin now. | ||
|
gonzaw
Uruguay4911 Posts
Okay, I'll just wait for Foo' to come back then... .....zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz | ||
|
gonzaw
Uruguay4911 Posts
Or maybe you don't have enough info to decide that yet? | ||
|
gonzaw
Uruguay4911 Posts
On January 22 2014 07:19 Foolishness wrote: The following 3 people are all in the ? category. Marvellosity and Holyflare in particular because for all that they have said I don't feel they have really contributed much. Even as I'm writing this I'm thinking back, "what has marvellosity or holyflare done this game", and I cannot remember a single post they have made. That's a bad sign. Anything mafia indicative off the bat? No so much, but then seem to be here without actually being here. What do you think about what I posted about Holy? What do you think of him defending you so much from me? What about people saying "D1 is marv's weakest cycle"? Marv initially voted and went after you. Is that alignment-indicative at all? Or are you just going to ignore it? In fact, are you going to ignore people going against you (even your town read kita)? You know, there are cases and shit written about you. Gonzaw is only questionable and not mafia because of his recent vote on me. As kitaman properly pointed out, gonzaw brought up a lot of new information about the case on me. That's good and productive. But as he also pointed out, gonzaw just kinda did nothing with it. "Oh here you go I did some research, now don't mind me anymore let me go be trolly and lurk some more" is that kinda vibe I got from that. It's weird that I'm more town when I'm voting you than when I am not. From your POV you are town, how come when I AM voting you I am townier than when I am not? I'd like to know if you can justify that "vibe" you got from me. I tend to be very specific about my activity levels, in fact to not arouse those "he's lurking" accusations. If I go to sleep/work/see a football match/etc I state so. I guess you can say I can lie about it like BH does, but do you believe that? What about this post is good? He says generic things that anybody can say. Also the "Let's do something" seems incredibly forced. What does he hope to accomplish by saying that? I don't know (most likely he's mafia) and it feels like he's trying very hard to sound like he's vested in the game (when all he would have to do is just post whatever his thoughts are). On January 21 2014 15:41 Foolishness wrote: This game just got a whole lot easier. ##Vote: WaveOfShadow From these 2 posts of yours, I seem to be getting conflicted feelings. On your 2nd one, you are SUPER SURE WOS is scum (that's the only reason to post what you did). On the first post of yours, you seem way less sure he's scum (if it weren't for that "most likely he's mafia" caption, I would have thought they were just fleeting suspicions and nothing beyond that). Also......yeah....you could have posted this when you made that vote couldn't you? Kind of anti-town to post the reasoning for your vote 12 hours after you make it don't you think? | ||
|
gonzaw
Uruguay4911 Posts
@marv: + Show Spoiler + Well marv, funnily enough I have another "wacky" annecdote I had while rereading the thread that made me think kita is town. When I started reading the thread, I thought Hapa made little sense in his pursue of kita and kita's "joke" vote of sandro. Then kita made this post and I completely agreed with it at the time: On January 21 2014 12:16 kitaman27 wrote: If you start calling people scummy and vote for someone off their first post, people won't take you serious later on. I certainly wouldn't do something like that! The person I find scummiest so far is probably Hapa. The reason to random vote sandroba is because he is incredibly lazy and notorious for getting away without posting on day one. Hapa appears to identify that it would be a good idea to try to apply pressure to a slow starter, yet later suggests that he can't understand my objective. Rather than trying to contribute to the pressure, he is satisfied with asking serious questions such as "Why is he a great vote?", when I think it is pretty obvious that there isn't any content in the thread to justify it. Then you notice kita stops mentioning Hapa at all basically. I mean, you could think of that as mafia behaviour! He thought someone was scum and never mentioned him again! But then again, the same thing happened to me. Hapa got townier and townier so I just stopped noticing him and paying attention to him (and started noticing VE, WOS, Foo, etc), which mirrors kita's thread behaviour. Kind of funny, something you could see as super scummy behaviour actually makes him town... ...I hope I'm not wrong. If he's scum he's eerily good at getting inside my head O_o | ||
|
gonzaw
Uruguay4911 Posts
On January 22 2014 08:53 Holyflare wrote: When I ran through the thread people were calling hapa "pro-town" yada yada, the stuff you were all saying was "lovely hapa please show us the way" so when I see the things that stand out, like accepting free town reads yet pushing a question on something different then I will of course pressure it There is a difference between "Everybody thinks this guy is so townie, but how can they be so sure? These things stand out i'll pressure him" and "Hmm, wait this guy kind of contradicted himself about sandro and didn't ask Foo about his town read on him. HE IS SCUM HE MUST DIE UNLESS HE EXPLAINS HIMSELF" (dramatization). The way I write is no different from how I have written in any game. In fact, you spent so much time looking into Foolishness' filter for his 4 posts but you have written at much more length about me and haven't bothered to check how I write, why is that? I already know about Foo's games for a while (been using the meta argument against him for a while now). And his filters are pretty short and I know what to expect in each (I've played with him in several of those). I know nothing about you, what to expect, etc, and I think I had enough in this thread to go check your meta. If you think it's important, sure, I'll go check your other games when I have time later. There is no anger in my typing, I use caps lock for emphasis on points I deem important. If I was angry I would be swearing. You also mention me backpeddling, yet, you don't understand why? If a player contradicts themself in such a gross fashion then there is a thought process behind it, somewhere. The action itself is scummy but the thought process (as revealed by hapa in his reply to me) was not. There is nothing wrong with being hesitant about a piece of information you display to the thread. Hmm, I'll check your other games for the "anger" thing. It's more unneeded aggression than anger, or being needlessly confrontational. You know your "contradiction" holds no water right? It makes no sense for you to get such heavy suspicions on him solely based on something that doesn't even exist and is apparent just by reading his post. The remaining quotes are so heavily taken out of context and misconstrued that I find it hard to believe that you follow the train of thought you have written. I quite clearly state that no player should go unpushed and many people had already mentioned foolishness by name and directed questions at him. If there was no response what further pressure can you possibly add at that point? The answer is quite clearly none and that is why I find it hard to believe that you would invest so much time into pushing and researching foolishness for 4 posts. Yeah, this post you have here doesn't make me think that at all: On January 21 2014 23:07 Holyflare wrote: Why Foolishness over sandroba? They have both posted nothing. Your goal is clearly to lynch a lurker today so why are you going to ignore the rest of what has happened on day 1 when your intentions are already set in stone? I hadn't even made my "big" post, and you had already started defending Foo and trying to put attention on sandro. You even go to great lengths to basically try and guess what's on my mind by saying stuff like "Your goal is clearly to lynch a lurker today" when I had said nothing at all basically. If there was no response what further pressure can you possibly add at that point? You mean besides making a (IMO strong) meta case against him that shows you why he's scum? Marv and kita just parked their votes on him, marv pressuring him a little bit. I can't see how you can think that at all. Also: Your return post stated you would ignore the rest of the thread apart from discussion about marv and foolishness, I simply said that foolishness had not posted but neither had sandroba so I was curious why you had picked one lurker over the other. At what point do I mention pressure on either of them is bad? It's implicit. I say I want Foo lynched, I give reasoning for it, I "pressure" him. You then start defending Foolishness (like that time you basically said "That's surely the reason why he voted WOS of course!"), while also ignoring my actual arguments against him. In my 1st post, I ONLY said "foolishness should be the D1 lynch". You somehow extended that into "Foolishness is a lurker, so I'll just randomly choose him as the D1 lynch" and went with that apparently? Although I get the feeling this has more to do with you trying to antagonize me at that time rather than sandro, or maybe even Foo'. Your Hapa "case" still doesn't make sense, and how you'd aggressively/confrontationally/etc call him scum over something that: 1-Is not true 2-Even if it was true it'd be null as fuck You going against me is still somewhat suspicious in my mind, since you defend Foo and my attack/pressure/etc on him without even addressing it at all (i.e you never mention my actual "case" at all, whether it has 4 posts or not, you just mention it as "futile" way later). Hmm, I'll try reading those games of yours. | ||
| ||
