|
On February 05 2014 03:30 Alakaslam wrote:Show nested quote +On February 05 2014 03:02 jaybrundage wrote:On February 05 2014 02:56 Alakaslam wrote:On February 05 2014 02:54 jaybrundage wrote:
Here's an idea alakaslam how about you answer my questions. I really don't care about your FoS your actions are the scummiest thing going on in the thread atm. What page are they on? I have caught up so I must have missed them. I disregarded anything related to my phone crap prior to now, if you or anyone want those flaming piles of dog feces explained I am here for a bit. There in the post you quoted. I was writing my response to your question and then I saw your terrible vote switch and I added that to my post seems pretty self explanatory. Show nested quote +On February 05 2014 03:19 jaybrundage wrote:
I saw this. It was a trap bull a mile away. Its reallly dumb. You still haven't answered my question of why you initially voted lonemeow Show nested quote +On February 05 2014 03:19 jaybrundage wrote:
I saw this. It was a trap bull a mile away. Its reallly dumb. You still haven't answered my question of why you initially voted lonemeow And you still need answers? I am looking for reactions! And here you are asking questions you know the answer to, then getting upset when I don't bother because I know you know. Come now.
Your getting a bit frustrating. If your not gonna read my post properly then don't play mafia. What was the initial reason you voted lonemeow. This was before your "Imma create a trap for zee scumzies" plan and you voted for oats.
|
What about all the other stuff on Oats cakeman? Him pushing Koshi was one of the weaker points brought against him.
|
On February 05 2014 03:40 cakemanofdoom wrote:I don't have that much of a problem with oats right now. I get his case on Koshi, I also thought fairly early on that Koshi posted a random policy to generate discussion, and that the policy was easy to disagree with because that's how you get discussion past unanimous agreement. Koshi did post some analysis on people's reactions though, not sure why oats kept going on him for not making use of the discussion he generated. + Show Spoiler +On February 04 2014 23:37 Koshi wrote:
That's not how it works, it's not because what people say is not interesting at that moment that if won't be interesting at all anymore.
1) LM said he was not going to vote for something just based on filter size but on filter content. This shows future commitment to the game. This is a town answer. But in 24 hours we can also use this to pressure him to give reads, or at least his town answer looks bad when he doesn't follow up. But I trust he will.
2) Balla same story. Instantly said yay let's do this and was worried about other people low content spam and not himself. Good + follow up ensured.
3) Jonny was angry and is still angry. There is no reason for that at all and I put him scummy. I also read his post better and found previously quoted post that does not make sense at all.
↨
4) Hopeless said something and then fucked off. This is scummy and it is not my fault that he did this. If we lynch somebody we lynch Hopeless.
5) Suki her post was actually a wtf moment. The underlined part of previous sentence was my confusion.
I think the rest of the people made similar comments but that's what my post generated. But nothing on it's own was scummy.
Also I wasn't in let's solve this game right now mode yesterday right before bed. Then again, Koshi also declared that he was pretty much gonna do nothing for a while and let us talk, which kinda annoys me. I'd like him talking with us. So basically, I don't mind oats's aggression towards Koshi. I personally just want Koshi to stop that lurking thing. Oats having a townread on LM doesn't make sense to me, but the fact that he's been here and giving opinions (with justifications sometimes) makes him look a bit better than people who are just gone. Like sidesprang. Or hopeless. Where are they? Oh yeah, to anyone wondering about my post on LM, that was in response to suki asking me what I thought about him. And LM's posts since then make him look rather worse among lurky people,
What's with this blatant contradiction, which is it?
|
Reread LM and decided he doesn't look that bad, forgot to delete that part. The first red part was about oats, not LM.
|
Ok. Checks out ^_^ but still. There's tons about oats that you just dismissed in the 2 cases on him.
|
Other things about oats feel more weird than scummy. Like with his insisting that you post your opinion first, I can imagine town doing that (I would probably have trouble reading someone who sheeped me) even if I'd prefer if he were open with his thoughts.
Oats's contradiction with his stance on koshi's policy doesn't seem scummy to me. It's a bit hard to explain, I think it sorta makes sense for him to disagree with the policy, and assume that it was bad enough that it was meant to make scum slip while attacking it. Him saying that Koshi's policy was bad is a required step of explaining his thought process. Then again, I'm also not sure why he thinks town isn't just as likely to attack the policy if it's so bad.
So yeah, I'm not convinced oats is mafia, but a response from him would be nice.
And I really wanna get the super quiet people posting before lynching oats.
|
On February 05 2014 03:42 jaybrundage wrote:Show nested quote +On February 05 2014 03:30 Alakaslam wrote:On February 05 2014 03:02 jaybrundage wrote:On February 05 2014 02:56 Alakaslam wrote:On February 05 2014 02:54 jaybrundage wrote:
Here's an idea alakaslam how about you answer my questions. I really don't care about your FoS your actions are the scummiest thing going on in the thread atm. What page are they on? I have caught up so I must have missed them. I disregarded anything related to my phone crap prior to now, if you or anyone want those flaming piles of dog feces explained I am here for a bit. There in the post you quoted. I was writing my response to your question and then I saw your terrible vote switch and I added that to my post seems pretty self explanatory. On February 05 2014 03:19 jaybrundage wrote:
I saw this. It was a trap bull a mile away. Its reallly dumb. You still haven't answered my question of why you initially voted lonemeow On February 05 2014 03:19 jaybrundage wrote:
I saw this. It was a trap bull a mile away. Its reallly dumb. You still haven't answered my question of why you initially voted lonemeow And you still need answers? I am looking for reactions! And here you are asking questions you know the answer to, then getting upset when I don't bother because I know you know. Come now. Your getting a bit frustrating. If your not gonna read my post properly then don't play mafia. What was the initial reason you voted lonemeow. This was before your "Imma create a trap for zee scumzies" plan and you voted for oats.
I was looking for reactions then as well. Were people going to ask for clarification or paint it scummy? But no one reacted so I went with a more blatant route.
|
You seem to be only looking at suki's case. I'm referring to these.
1.On February 05 2014 02:36 Balla24 wrote:Oatsmaster might be scum. Show nested quote +On February 04 2014 15:32 Oatsmaster wrote:
Koshi scum for suggesting a really bad policy about post counts and nothing else. It feels like bait for scum to jump on but there is no followup. I was asking him about this because it's a super weird thing to think about as town. I didn't think that, if others did let me know.
2.
On February 05 2014 02:36 Balla24 wrote:
The JB town read as your first post was pretty random. Random town reads is generally scummy as they are easier to give than scum reads. Sure he semi-explained it, but "pushing the thread forward" isn't exactly the best reason to townread someone and try to stifle discussion with that.
3.
On February 05 2014 02:36 Balla24 wrote:
Then this cakeman/hopeless question business. It was revealed that Oats thought/thinks LM and I are town. It was also revealed that he didn't really see anything in either of the two that was interesting. Super empty fake participation question in that case.
##vote Oatsmaster
|
1. On February 05 2014 03:40 cakemanofdoom wrote:
I don't have that much of a problem with oats right now. I get his case on Koshi, I also thought fairly early on that Koshi posted a random policy to generate discussion, and that the policy was easy to disagree with because that's how you get discussion past unanimous agreement.
What I thought seems similar enough to what oats said, bait for scum to jump on. Any discussion can be viewed as a way to bait scum into revealing themselves. I don't quite agree that attacking Koshi's policy would be sign of mafia, but oats should explain that himself.
2. Yeah, that's weird. not enough to make oats seem worse than people who just aren't here, imo.
3. He might have just wanted you to talk so he could read you or something.
But really, oats should just respond to the cases against him himself.
|
The problem I have with Oats right now is that his vote is still on me even though he just had 8 hours the chance to talk to me and in that time he went from calling my first post utter crap to everything is utter crap except my first post...
I prefer to lynch Jonny atm. Nothing he says connects to each other.
He starts saying he wants to lynch all lurkers multiple times and that my "Policy" was a good conversation starter.
On February 03 2014 10:10 JonnyLaw wrote:
Three of them were lurkers in our games. We're lynching them d1 if they do nothing.
On February 04 2014 07:54 JonnyLaw wrote:
40 posts is an arbitrary number that doesn't mean anything. It worked okay as a conversation starter but on Wednesday are you going to be sitting around counting people's posts since the game started?
Somewhere Jonny must have read that I was actually serious about going to actually count the number of posts and then lynch somebody for it while I said that I wasn't going to do that. So normally Jonny shouldn't be going on about it then?
On February 05 2014 00:38 JonnyLaw wrote:
You posted something stupid that you admittedly don't want to follow through with in the end. If we take away everyone talking about your first post then maybe we'd have better content instead of discussion about post counts.
This is his come back post in the thread many hours after he said my policy was all about the numbers. I have so many problems with every sentence in that post.
You posted something stupid that you admittedly don't want to follow through with in the end.
What is this? Am I scum for posting something stupid? Am I scum for not following up my stupid plans? I think it is pretty townie to not follow up stupid shit. Why is he trying to make me not following up stupid shit look scummy?
If we take away everyone talking about your first post then maybe we'd have better content instead of discussion about post counts.
Why is Jonny being frustrated with me about the fact that all the content is being shit content? I type in the start of the game "guys let's be nice and post a lot" and the guy replies with 'Fuck being nice because people are lazy and lynch all lurkers" but then keeps going on and on about "there is no content" . THERE IS ALWAYS CONTENT.
Then there is Jonny and his talk about LM:
On February 04 2014 07:54 JonnyLaw wrote:
And what the fuck is that vote? Lonemeow's said the most sensible thing since this game started.
On February 04 2014 10:20 JonnyLaw wrote:
I agreed with his second post and dismissed the other one. That first one is an excuse for lurking. I dunno if that's scummy or not. Let's see how LM proceeds from here. Maybe I have a soft spot from him hosting one of our newbie games.
[QUOTE]On February 04 2014 11:14 JonnyLaw wrote:
LM hasn't given us quality or quantity yet. He says one thing then does another. It's early in the game for me to demand more quality of his posting. At least as far as considering lynching him.
[QUOTE]On February 04 2014 11:48 JonnyLaw wrote:
At this point LM's first post was shit but says nothing about his alignment until other actions take place in the game.
Koshi on the other hand created two pages of shit posting. This allowed LM and other LM like people to pop in, say nothing and fuck off out of here acting as though they participated in the game.[/QUOTE]
Just look at the progression:
"How do you dare to vote LM, he said the most sensible thing in this thread"
"LM his second post was really good, I didn't consider the other ones"
"LM can be lynched"
"LM posted like shit early game, but it really was Koshi his fault"
It literally goes from this guy posted incredible pro town towards everything this guy posted was shit. And there is a post right after Jonny said "I can lynch LM" where Jonny give his scummy list and I am on top of the scummy list and not LM.
This is the post that Jonny found protown at first but then said it was scummy btw:
+ Show Spoiler +On February 04 2014 07:40 LoneMeow wrote:Show nested quote +On February 04 2014 07:38 Koshi wrote:
Also. Mr. Stray Kitten. Just say what you think whenever you think it. Well, for starters I don't quite agree with your "minimum post count" thing. I'll support a lurker lynch if it's necessary, but based on amount of content, not number of posts.
Which on itself is indeed a pro-town post. The problem just lied that LM right after this post said that he was going to do hardcore lurking and the posts didn't add up... Which Jonny still doesn't understand. And somebody needs to figure out what Jonny means with the "first post" and the "second post" etc, because I am pretty sure it doesn't add up as well.
|
Damned this is not finished yet. I mispressed the send button.
|
Koshi!
Lampshades everywhere!
|
The problem I have with Oats right now is that his vote is still on me even though he just had 8 hours the chance to talk to me and in that time he went from calling my first post utter crap to everything is utter crap except my first post...
I prefer to lynch Jonny atm. Nothing he says connects to each other.
He starts saying he wants to lynch all lurkers multiple times and that my "Policy" was a good conversation starter.
On February 03 2014 10:10 JonnyLaw wrote:
Three of them were lurkers in our games. We're lynching them d1 if they do nothing.
On February 04 2014 07:54 JonnyLaw wrote:
40 posts is an arbitrary number that doesn't mean anything. It worked okay as a conversation starter but on Wednesday are you going to be sitting around counting people's posts since the game started?
Somewhere Jonny must have read that I was actually serious about going to actually count the number of posts and then lynch somebody for it while I said that I wasn't going to do that. So normally Jonny shouldn't be going on about it then?
On February 05 2014 00:38 JonnyLaw wrote:
You posted something stupid that you admittedly don't want to follow through with in the end. If we take away everyone talking about your first post then maybe we'd have better content instead of discussion about post counts.
This is his come back post in the thread many hours after he said my policy was all about the numbers. I have so many problems with every sentence in that post.
You posted something stupid that you admittedly don't want to follow through with in the end.
What is this? Am I scum for posting something stupid? Am I scum for not following up my stupid plans? I think it is pretty townie to not follow up stupid shit. Why is he trying to make me not following up stupid shit look scummy?
If we take away everyone talking about your first post then maybe we'd have better content instead of discussion about post counts.
Why is Jonny being frustrated with me about the fact that all the content is being shit content? I type in the start of the game "guys let's be nice and post a lot" and the guy replies with 'Fuck being nice because people are lazy and lynch all lurkers" but then keeps going on and on about "there is no content" . THERE IS ALWAYS CONTENT.
Then there is Jonny and his talk about LM:
On February 04 2014 07:54 JonnyLaw wrote:
And what the fuck is that vote? Lonemeow's said the most sensible thing since this game started.
On February 04 2014 10:20 JonnyLaw wrote:
I agreed with his second post and dismissed the other one. That first one is an excuse for lurking. I dunno if that's scummy or not. Let's see how LM proceeds from here. Maybe I have a soft spot from him hosting one of our newbie games.
On February 04 2014 11:14 JonnyLaw wrote:
LM hasn't given us quality or quantity yet. He says one thing then does another. It's early in the game for me to demand more quality of his posting. At least as far as considering lynching him.
On February 04 2014 11:48 JonnyLaw wrote:
At this point LM's first post was shit but says nothing about his alignment until other actions take place in the game.
Koshi on the other hand created two pages of shit posting. This allowed LM and other LM like people to pop in, say nothing and fuck off out of here acting as though they participated in the game.
Just look at the progression:
"How do you dare to vote LM, he said the most sensible thing in this thread"
"LM his second post was really good, I didn't consider the other ones"
"LM can be lynched"
"LM posted like shit early game, but it really was Koshi his fault"
It literally goes from this guy posted incredible pro town towards everything this guy posted was shit. And there is a post right after Jonny said "I can lynch LM" where Jonny give his scummy list and I am on top of the scummy list and not LM.
This is the post that Jonny found protown at first but then said it was scummy btw:
+ Show Spoiler +On February 04 2014 07:40 LoneMeow wrote:Show nested quote +On February 04 2014 07:38 Koshi wrote:
Also. Mr. Stray Kitten. Just say what you think whenever you think it. Well, for starters I don't quite agree with your "minimum post count" thing. I'll support a lurker lynch if it's necessary, but based on amount of content, not number of posts.
Which on itself is indeed a pro-town post. The problem just lied that LM right after this post said that he was going to do hardcore lurking and the posts didn't add up... Which Jonny still doesn't understand. And somebody needs to figure out what Jonny means with the "first post" and the "second post" etc, because I am pretty sure it doesn't add up as well.
Some lone posts I find troubling:
On February 04 2014 12:05 JonnyLaw wrote:
I'd say it could feel like bussing scum buddy.
This is about JayB and Sidesprang. Never to be mentioned again.
On February 04 2014 12:41 JonnyLaw wrote:
Anyway, I'm not waffling on anything. I'm trying to figure out the game. If you have firm convictions this early you're an idiot or a god.
When people say "I am not waffling" they are waffling. Also, did people think he was waffling? I don't even see where he was waffling. That's what they call inherent guilt. He looks at his own posts and sees the flaws in them, or at least he thinks they are there.
##vote: JonnyLaw
|
On February 05 2014 04:39 Alakaslam wrote:
Koshi!
Lampshades everywhere!
Explain plz.
|
I think you are misrepresenting a lot of what jonnylaw said there Koshi and oftentimes ignoring the context of his posts. I'll just leave it at that for now cause i brb t_T
|
Jonny was responding to me copy pasting my spread sheet in the thread where i said he was waffling
|
Oh ok. Yeah I thought it had to come from somewhere but just couldn't see what.
|
On February 05 2014 04:56 Balla24 wrote:
I think you are misrepresenting a lot of what jonnylaw said there Koshi and oftentimes ignoring the context of his posts. I'll just leave it at that for now cause i brb t_T
Please point out where Koshi is misrepresenting and/or ignoring context.
|
We still need hopeless1der to get in here and start posting he has made 2 posts with virtually no content.
Sidesprang you as well what do you think of the cases that have been brought forth.
I shall return my town friends.
|
On February 05 2014 04:40 Koshi wrote:Show nested quote +On February 04 2014 12:41 JonnyLaw wrote:
Anyway, I'm not waffling on anything. I'm trying to figure out the game. If you have firm convictions this early you're an idiot or a god. When people say "I am not waffling" they are waffling. Also, did people think he was waffling? I don't even see where he was waffling. That's what they call inherent guilt. He looks at his own posts and sees the flaws in them, or at least he thinks they are there. ##vote: JonnyLaw
For what it's worth, I suspect he was responding to this:
On February 04 2014 12:24 jaybrundage wrote:
9. JonnyLaw Pretty waffly at the start. He is posting but he doesn't seem to have firm convictions. He didn't liike Balla early but he has played with baller 3-2 times with him being scum so his suspicion is warrented. He hasn't produced much content tho he just seems like going with the flow
Really wish people would quote when they respond so the context would be in their filters.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
