|
Canada11355 Posts
So CR is saying that "Let me make that retroactively true" is the important part of the post while batsnacks is saying "I am mafia" is the important part.
I personally think saying "i am mafia" after "everything I say is serious" is suspect but sarcasm on the internet is a tricky beast
|
On September 16 2014 11:18 Chairman Ray wrote:Show nested quote +On September 16 2014 11:16 batsnacks wrote:On September 16 2014 11:10 Chairman Ray wrote:On September 16 2014 11:06 batsnacks wrote:On September 16 2014 11:01 Chairman Ray wrote:On September 16 2014 10:30 batsnacks wrote:On September 16 2014 10:22 Chairman Ray wrote:On September 16 2014 10:13 batsnacks wrote:On September 15 2014 18:19 Palmar wrote:
Lynching a smurf is always good though. On September 15 2014 19:06 Palmar wrote:
Because policy lynches are dumb. I didn't really think that much about those two posts, the sarcasm was consistent with a few other of his early posts. But then he posted these two: On September 16 2014 05:21 Palmar wrote:On September 16 2014 05:20 VisceraEyes wrote:
[quote]
I'll tell you before end of day. It probably won't be you if you're serious. i am always serious. Everything I've said this game should be taken seriously. On September 16 2014 05:23 Palmar wrote:On September 16 2014 05:21 BloodyC0bbler wrote:
#vote Palmar
Basically just claimed mafia in thread, good enough for me. We must make your post retroactively true. I am mafia. Claiming mafia sarcastically is still claiming mafia. Also that was two consecutive posts. That's pretty much like claiming mafia two posts in a row. What do you mean by this? Those bottom two quotes were one right after the other. In one post he says we should take everything he says seriously, in the next post he claims mafia. That's like claiming mafia twice imo. On September 16 2014 10:27 StorrZerg wrote:On September 16 2014 09:19 Chairman Ray wrote:On September 16 2014 08:14 StorrZerg wrote:care to explain? Its hard to omgus you if you don't give a reason. On September 16 2014 07:38 Chairman Ray wrote:On September 16 2014 07:33 raynpelikoneet wrote:
Storr calls Palmar and kush scum which makes him town until D3. His reasoning not bother you at all? You seem to be fishing for an answer. why are you so hesitant to present your reasoning? On September 16 2014 07:39 Chairman Ray wrote:On September 16 2014 07:34 marvellosity wrote:
yea not interested in storr right now.
even if we ignore palmar, dunno why i'd ever lynch storr over batsnacks.
or someone like poofter. Yeah, I could go for a batsnacks lynch as well. Idk about poofter though, I'd rather go for Lord Tolkien, who's 2 posts are vastly more scummy than poofter's. Seems like a light defense on my prime suspect, Yet why does he seem "town" to you? Sure you might call his actions atm not alignment indicative because he hasn't done anything. Yet, he hasn't done anything so why is pressuring him a bad idea... I disagree that Lord Tolkien is "vastly more scummy" he calls me out, which I ignore. part of this has to do when we have played together in RL. (something something him being very easy to lynch day 1 cause of easy read, and lack of defending himself) This was an attempt to generate discussion early on in the day. I don't find that post scummy. regardless, they both have been pretty inactive, yet i find it hard to believe you have such a strong feeling over one of them with out any bases, or willingness to explain. (i eagerly await your response) I'll rescind my read on you since it's not that strong and people don't seem to want to lynch you anyways. I find Lord Tolkien scummy because his entry into the game is joking about lynching himself and that's all he's done so far. I've seen mafia do this so often where they just joke about being mafia, and then tune out the rest of the day. Wouldn't be surprised if that's the case here. Ok fair enough. now that seems to be a dead end till he posts. Now palmer joked that he was mafia, would you read him the same way then? I don't read it as Palmer claiming he's mafia. I read it as Palmer saying he never claimed mafia in a condescending way. He literally said "I am mafia." He could have been condescending without saying "I am mafia." So if Palmer worded it in another way, you would feel differently about him? You mean like, if he said "Mafia, I am" instead of "I am mafia"? No I'd feel exactly the same even if he changed the words. I think you know what I mean.
That might be a little too optimistic of you. Are you trying to ask me if Palmer had said something completely different from what I voted him for, would I still be voting him? How am I supposed to answer that?
|
On September 16 2014 11:20 batsnacks wrote:Show nested quote +On September 16 2014 11:18 Chairman Ray wrote:On September 16 2014 11:16 batsnacks wrote:On September 16 2014 11:10 Chairman Ray wrote:On September 16 2014 11:06 batsnacks wrote:On September 16 2014 11:01 Chairman Ray wrote:On September 16 2014 10:30 batsnacks wrote:On September 16 2014 10:22 Chairman Ray wrote:On September 16 2014 10:13 batsnacks wrote:On September 15 2014 18:19 Palmar wrote:
Lynching a smurf is always good though. On September 15 2014 19:06 Palmar wrote:
Because policy lynches are dumb. I didn't really think that much about those two posts, the sarcasm was consistent with a few other of his early posts. But then he posted these two: On September 16 2014 05:21 Palmar wrote:
[quote]
i am always serious.
Everything I've said this game should be taken seriously. On September 16 2014 05:23 Palmar wrote:
[quote]
We must make your post retroactively true.
I am mafia. Claiming mafia sarcastically is still claiming mafia. Also that was two consecutive posts. That's pretty much like claiming mafia two posts in a row. What do you mean by this? Those bottom two quotes were one right after the other. In one post he says we should take everything he says seriously, in the next post he claims mafia. That's like claiming mafia twice imo. On September 16 2014 10:27 StorrZerg wrote:On September 16 2014 09:19 Chairman Ray wrote:On September 16 2014 08:14 StorrZerg wrote:care to explain? Its hard to omgus you if you don't give a reason. On September 16 2014 07:38 Chairman Ray wrote:
[quote]
His reasoning not bother you at all?
You seem to be fishing for an answer. why are you so hesitant to present your reasoning? On September 16 2014 07:39 Chairman Ray wrote:
[quote]
Yeah, I could go for a batsnacks lynch as well.
Idk about poofter though, I'd rather go for Lord Tolkien, who's 2 posts are vastly more scummy than poofter's. Seems like a light defense on my prime suspect, Yet why does he seem "town" to you? Sure you might call his actions atm not alignment indicative because he hasn't done anything. Yet, he hasn't done anything so why is pressuring him a bad idea... I disagree that Lord Tolkien is "vastly more scummy" he calls me out, which I ignore. part of this has to do when we have played together in RL. (something something him being very easy to lynch day 1 cause of easy read, and lack of defending himself) This was an attempt to generate discussion early on in the day. I don't find that post scummy. regardless, they both have been pretty inactive, yet i find it hard to believe you have such a strong feeling over one of them with out any bases, or willingness to explain. (i eagerly await your response) I'll rescind my read on you since it's not that strong and people don't seem to want to lynch you anyways. I find Lord Tolkien scummy because his entry into the game is joking about lynching himself and that's all he's done so far. I've seen mafia do this so often where they just joke about being mafia, and then tune out the rest of the day. Wouldn't be surprised if that's the case here. Ok fair enough. now that seems to be a dead end till he posts. Now palmer joked that he was mafia, would you read him the same way then? I don't read it as Palmer claiming he's mafia. I read it as Palmer saying he never claimed mafia in a condescending way. He literally said "I am mafia." He could have been condescending without saying "I am mafia." So if Palmer worded it in another way, you would feel differently about him? You mean like, if he said "Mafia, I am" instead of "I am mafia"? No I'd feel exactly the same even if he changed the words. I think you know what I mean. That might be a little too optimistic of you. Are you trying to ask me if Palmer had said something completely different from what I voted him for, would I still be voting him? How am I supposed to answer that?
Easy, point at this post:
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=22952782
Thats what BC was referring to in the first place.
|
CR what do you expect to happen with your vote on tolkein? Seems pretty futile to me.
|
On September 16 2014 11:27 Hopeless1der wrote:
CR what do you expect to happen with your vote on tolkein? Seems pretty futile to me.
What if I did this:
##unvote
##vote: Lord Tolkien
|
Canada11355 Posts
On September 16 2014 11:30 batsnacks wrote:Show nested quote +On September 16 2014 11:27 Hopeless1der wrote:
CR what do you expect to happen with your vote on tolkein? Seems pretty futile to me. What if I did this: ##unvote
##vote: Lord Tolkien
*clicks voting thread*
F5...
F5...
You tricky bastard
|
cool story bro. devil's advocate aside, my question still stands.
|
On September 16 2014 11:33 Hopeless1der wrote:
cool story bro. devil's advocate aside, my question still stands.
Because you think tolkien won't get lynched? He has like 2 posts 50% of which are definitely not pc. Completely disregarding everything about CR except his vote, I do not understand why you think the vote is futile.
|
Canada11355 Posts
hopeless wonder is your current vote on palmar because of his policy contradiction, his 'sarcastic' mafia claim, or something else entirely? You said it was because he should know better than to contradict himself. Is that still where you are at?
|
On September 16 2014 11:36 batsnacks wrote:Show nested quote +On September 16 2014 11:33 Hopeless1der wrote:
cool story bro. devil's advocate aside, my question still stands. Because you think tolkien won't get lynched? He has like 2 posts 50% of which are definitely not pc. Completely disregarding everything about CR except his vote, I do not understand why you think the vote is futile.
Anyone can get lynched, but CR isnt doing anything with his vote as best I can tell, that's why im asking him about it.
On September 16 2014 11:36 Fecalfeast wrote:
hopeless wonder is your current vote on palmar because of his policy contradiction, his 'sarcastic' mafia claim, or something else entirely? You said it was because he should know better than to contradict himself. Is that still where you are at?
My vote on Palmar is still for essentially being deliberately obtuse. I think he knew it was a contradiction and he posted it anyways.
|
Canada11355 Posts
I think that's all I needed to jump on the bandwagon.
##vote: Palmar
|
On September 16 2014 11:27 Hopeless1der wrote:
CR what do you expect to happen with your vote on tolkein? Seems pretty futile to me.
Maybe he'll see that there's pressure on him and he'll start contributing. Who do you think I should vote instead?
|
Fecal do you think palmar is mafia? Or are you just looking for a wagon
|
On September 16 2014 11:20 batsnacks wrote:Show nested quote +On September 16 2014 11:18 Chairman Ray wrote:On September 16 2014 11:16 batsnacks wrote:On September 16 2014 11:10 Chairman Ray wrote:On September 16 2014 11:06 batsnacks wrote:On September 16 2014 11:01 Chairman Ray wrote:On September 16 2014 10:30 batsnacks wrote:On September 16 2014 10:22 Chairman Ray wrote:On September 16 2014 10:13 batsnacks wrote:On September 15 2014 18:19 Palmar wrote:
Lynching a smurf is always good though. On September 15 2014 19:06 Palmar wrote:
Because policy lynches are dumb. I didn't really think that much about those two posts, the sarcasm was consistent with a few other of his early posts. But then he posted these two: On September 16 2014 05:21 Palmar wrote:
[quote]
i am always serious.
Everything I've said this game should be taken seriously. On September 16 2014 05:23 Palmar wrote:
[quote]
We must make your post retroactively true.
I am mafia. Claiming mafia sarcastically is still claiming mafia. Also that was two consecutive posts. That's pretty much like claiming mafia two posts in a row. What do you mean by this? Those bottom two quotes were one right after the other. In one post he says we should take everything he says seriously, in the next post he claims mafia. That's like claiming mafia twice imo. On September 16 2014 10:27 StorrZerg wrote:On September 16 2014 09:19 Chairman Ray wrote:On September 16 2014 08:14 StorrZerg wrote:care to explain? Its hard to omgus you if you don't give a reason. On September 16 2014 07:38 Chairman Ray wrote:
[quote]
His reasoning not bother you at all?
You seem to be fishing for an answer. why are you so hesitant to present your reasoning? On September 16 2014 07:39 Chairman Ray wrote:
[quote]
Yeah, I could go for a batsnacks lynch as well.
Idk about poofter though, I'd rather go for Lord Tolkien, who's 2 posts are vastly more scummy than poofter's. Seems like a light defense on my prime suspect, Yet why does he seem "town" to you? Sure you might call his actions atm not alignment indicative because he hasn't done anything. Yet, he hasn't done anything so why is pressuring him a bad idea... I disagree that Lord Tolkien is "vastly more scummy" he calls me out, which I ignore. part of this has to do when we have played together in RL. (something something him being very easy to lynch day 1 cause of easy read, and lack of defending himself) This was an attempt to generate discussion early on in the day. I don't find that post scummy. regardless, they both have been pretty inactive, yet i find it hard to believe you have such a strong feeling over one of them with out any bases, or willingness to explain. (i eagerly await your response) I'll rescind my read on you since it's not that strong and people don't seem to want to lynch you anyways. I find Lord Tolkien scummy because his entry into the game is joking about lynching himself and that's all he's done so far. I've seen mafia do this so often where they just joke about being mafia, and then tune out the rest of the day. Wouldn't be surprised if that's the case here. Ok fair enough. now that seems to be a dead end till he posts. Now palmer joked that he was mafia, would you read him the same way then? I don't read it as Palmer claiming he's mafia. I read it as Palmer saying he never claimed mafia in a condescending way. He literally said "I am mafia." He could have been condescending without saying "I am mafia." So if Palmer worded it in another way, you would feel differently about him? You mean like, if he said "Mafia, I am" instead of "I am mafia"? No I'd feel exactly the same even if he changed the words. I think you know what I mean. That might be a little too optimistic of you. Are you trying to ask me if Palmer had said something completely different from what I voted him for, would I still be voting him? How am I supposed to answer that?
I take my question back. I think I understand why you're voting him now.
|
On September 16 2014 11:48 Chairman Ray wrote:Show nested quote +On September 16 2014 11:27 Hopeless1der wrote:
CR what do you expect to happen with your vote on tolkein? Seems pretty futile to me. Maybe he'll see that there's pressure on him and he'll start contributing. Who do you think I should vote instead?
I dont care who you vote for, I just want to feel like theres some value added instead of the "oh i has a vote" *plop* feeling I have right now.
|
On September 16 2014 11:56 Hopeless1der wrote:Show nested quote +On September 16 2014 11:48 Chairman Ray wrote:On September 16 2014 11:27 Hopeless1der wrote:
CR what do you expect to happen with your vote on tolkein? Seems pretty futile to me. Maybe he'll see that there's pressure on him and he'll start contributing. Who do you think I should vote instead? I dont care who you vote for, I just want to feel like theres some value added instead of the "oh i has a vote" *plop* feeling I have right now.
I'm looking at Damdred right now and I think that's what he thinks you did with your vote on Palmar. And I think that I think what he thinks. You know what I'm saying?
|
On September 16 2014 11:56 Hopeless1der wrote:Show nested quote +On September 16 2014 11:48 Chairman Ray wrote:On September 16 2014 11:27 Hopeless1der wrote:
CR what do you expect to happen with your vote on tolkein? Seems pretty futile to me. Maybe he'll see that there's pressure on him and he'll start contributing. Who do you think I should vote instead? I dont care who you vote for, I just want to feel like theres some value added instead of the "oh i has a vote" *plop* feeling I have right now.
I gave a case on Lord Tolkien and I voted him. What more do you want? Why do you care so much about my vote and nobody else's?
|
I think so  . I'm also pretty sure I'm supporting the leading wagon, so they are not the same thing like you are implying.
|
On September 16 2014 12:00 Chairman Ray wrote:Show nested quote +On September 16 2014 11:56 Hopeless1der wrote:On September 16 2014 11:48 Chairman Ray wrote:On September 16 2014 11:27 Hopeless1der wrote:
CR what do you expect to happen with your vote on tolkein? Seems pretty futile to me. Maybe he'll see that there's pressure on him and he'll start contributing. Who do you think I should vote instead? I dont care who you vote for, I just want to feel like theres some value added instead of the "oh i has a vote" *plop* feeling I have right now. I gave a case on Lord Tolkien and I voted him. What more do you want? Why do you care so much about my vote and nobody else's?
Your vote sticks out as strange because of the timing and lack of discussion besides 1 post with storr. Your case is also based on one post and has as much depth to it as tolkein's filter.
|
On September 16 2014 12:03 Hopeless1der wrote:Show nested quote +On September 16 2014 12:00 Chairman Ray wrote:On September 16 2014 11:56 Hopeless1der wrote:On September 16 2014 11:48 Chairman Ray wrote:On September 16 2014 11:27 Hopeless1der wrote:
CR what do you expect to happen with your vote on tolkein? Seems pretty futile to me. Maybe he'll see that there's pressure on him and he'll start contributing. Who do you think I should vote instead? I dont care who you vote for, I just want to feel like theres some value added instead of the "oh i has a vote" *plop* feeling I have right now. I gave a case on Lord Tolkien and I voted him. What more do you want? Why do you care so much about my vote and nobody else's? Your vote sticks out as strange because of the timing and lack of discussion besides 1 post with storr. Your case is also based on one post and has as much depth to it as tolkein's filter.
The lack of discussion and lack of depth of my case can be explained by lack of substance in Lord Tolkein's filter. The lack of substance in Lord Tolkein's filter can be explained by how nobody is voting or pressuring him.
I think the solution might be to start voting and pressuring him.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
