|
On February 28 2015 09:08 prplhz wrote:8 Show nested quote +On February 28 2015 08:59 VayneAuthority wrote:
prphlz is 100% town its not even a question, find something else kelsier. its obvious as fuck Can you explain this read?
you might not be aware of it but your tone and posting habits are incredibly different then titanic. I know meta isn't the end all but I struggle to see you suddenly upping your effort and focus for a 2nd consecutive scum game, that's the logical conclusion.
|
I'm here. Reading & chilling.
|
United Kingdom10443 Posts
|
I'm not sure what is worse, trefl's horrible intro or rso's overly defensive response.
|
19
On February 28 2015 09:36 KelsierSC wrote:Show nested quote +On February 28 2015 09:33 prplhz wrote:17 On February 28 2015 09:30 KelsierSC wrote:On February 28 2015 09:25 prplhz wrote:13 On February 28 2015 09:24 raynpelikoneet wrote:On February 27 2015 22:28 prplhz wrote:
I think I see where you and Oatsmaster and raynpelikoneet are coming from[...] ????????????? I mean I can see why you would vote for Trfel. Mafia reads aren't real so they have to make them up. They can make mistakes/panic. That's why it seems scummy Like your language just seems wrong. You can see where we're coming from implies we made cases or had opinions and you're justifying your scum read. But now it feels like you are backtracking. "I see why your voting". Then you say you assume oats has a hard to follow reason..but how can you get where he js coming from...especially as you didn't even know his hard to follow reason Guy #1: "I don't like it when my nuts get trapped in a dutch oven" Guy #2: "I can understand that" Guy #3: "How can you understand that when I didn't explain why I don't like it when my nuts get trapped in a dutch oven?" This is literally the conversation I think we're having. No because oats didn't say anything. You said you got where he was.coming from. Then you said you assumed he had a hard to follow opinion. So how can you get it? Less dodging
I never said "I get it".
Take the part where I said "I get where [they] are coming from". Replace it with "I understand why they would think he is scum" (as in, "I think he is scummy so I understand why someone else would think he is scummy too"). If you don't accept that what I meant by the first line can be expressed by the second line then vote me or whatever. If you accept it, then start talking to me about the second line.
I'm really not dodging, I just spent like 15 posts explaining this to you. Quite literally, most of my filter is talking to you about it so I'm not dodging. If you want to see me dodge then let me know.
|
Quick meta-god-read says trefl's probably town.
|
Though, does anyone have any links to games with trefl in it besides the one he posted?
|
|
|
United Kingdom10443 Posts
On February 28 2015 09:48 prplhz wrote:19 Show nested quote +On February 28 2015 09:36 KelsierSC wrote:On February 28 2015 09:33 prplhz wrote:17 On February 28 2015 09:30 KelsierSC wrote:On February 28 2015 09:25 prplhz wrote:13 On February 28 2015 09:24 raynpelikoneet wrote:On February 27 2015 22:28 prplhz wrote:
I think I see where you and Oatsmaster and raynpelikoneet are coming from[...] ????????????? I mean I can see why you would vote for Trfel. Mafia reads aren't real so they have to make them up. They can make mistakes/panic. That's why it seems scummy Like your language just seems wrong. You can see where we're coming from implies we made cases or had opinions and you're justifying your scum read. But now it feels like you are backtracking. "I see why your voting". Then you say you assume oats has a hard to follow reason..but how can you get where he js coming from...especially as you didn't even know his hard to follow reason Guy #1: "I don't like it when my nuts get trapped in a dutch oven" Guy #2: "I can understand that" Guy #3: "How can you understand that when I didn't explain why I don't like it when my nuts get trapped in a dutch oven?" This is literally the conversation I think we're having. No because oats didn't say anything. You said you got where he was.coming from. Then you said you assumed he had a hard to follow opinion. So how can you get it? Less dodging I never said "I get it". Take the part where I said "I get where [they] are coming from". Replace it with "I understand why they would think he is scum" (as in, "I think he is scummy so I understand why someone else would think he is scummy too"). If you don't accept that what I meant by the first line can be expressed by the second line then vote me or whatever. If you accept it, then start talking to me about the second line. I'm really not dodging, I just spent like 15 posts explaining this to you. Quite literally, most of my filter is talking to you about it so I'm not dodging. If you want to see me dodge then let me know.
I'm already voting you.
I've made my conclusions on this known. It seemed like you were making up reasons to get onboard and now you're backtracking. Also how can you get where oats is coming from, but then say he has a hard to follow reason, which he never gives. I think you're caught. But I'll let others give their views or whatever.
Id like your read on other people
Oats and robik specifically
|
20
On February 28 2015 09:36 raynpelikoneet wrote:Show nested quote +On February 28 2015 09:33 raynpelikoneet wrote:On February 28 2015 09:31 prplhz wrote:16 On February 28 2015 09:28 raynpelikoneet wrote:
If i have to waste one more post on this you are dead prplhz.
Why Oatsmaster? You literally said you "think you see where Oatsmaster is coming from".
so explain, what was the point? I could just as well have said "I agree with you guys that Trfel is scummy". That would mean the exact same thing I meant in my post. Can you quote Oats' post(s) from which you get this?
Actually no. First of all, I'm pretty sure I didn't read it in an Oatsmaster post, I think rsoultin mentioned it. Anyway, he voted for Trfel in the voting thread before my post but I didn't see that until just now. I thought I knew he had done it because someone mentioned it in the thread (but I can't figure out where even though it's just one page from Trfel's big post until the post of mine you have a problem with). Maybe I misunderstood something rsoultin talked to Oatsmaster about regarding Oatsmaster's read on Palmar or something like that.
|
On February 28 2015 09:53 KelsierSC wrote:Show nested quote +On February 28 2015 09:48 prplhz wrote:19 On February 28 2015 09:36 KelsierSC wrote:On February 28 2015 09:33 prplhz wrote:17 On February 28 2015 09:30 KelsierSC wrote:On February 28 2015 09:25 prplhz wrote:13 On February 28 2015 09:24 raynpelikoneet wrote:On February 27 2015 22:28 prplhz wrote:
I think I see where you and Oatsmaster and raynpelikoneet are coming from[...] ????????????? I mean I can see why you would vote for Trfel. Mafia reads aren't real so they have to make them up. They can make mistakes/panic. That's why it seems scummy Like your language just seems wrong. You can see where we're coming from implies we made cases or had opinions and you're justifying your scum read. But now it feels like you are backtracking. "I see why your voting". Then you say you assume oats has a hard to follow reason..but how can you get where he js coming from...especially as you didn't even know his hard to follow reason Guy #1: "I don't like it when my nuts get trapped in a dutch oven" Guy #2: "I can understand that" Guy #3: "How can you understand that when I didn't explain why I don't like it when my nuts get trapped in a dutch oven?" This is literally the conversation I think we're having. No because oats didn't say anything. You said you got where he was.coming from. Then you said you assumed he had a hard to follow opinion. So how can you get it? Less dodging I never said "I get it". Take the part where I said "I get where [they] are coming from". Replace it with "I understand why they would think he is scum" (as in, "I think he is scummy so I understand why someone else would think he is scummy too"). If you don't accept that what I meant by the first line can be expressed by the second line then vote me or whatever. If you accept it, then start talking to me about the second line. I'm really not dodging, I just spent like 15 posts explaining this to you. Quite literally, most of my filter is talking to you about it so I'm not dodging. If you want to see me dodge then let me know. I'm already voting you. I've made my conclusions on this known. It seemed like you were making up reasons to get onboard and now you're backtracking. Also how can you get where oats is coming from, but then say he has a hard to follow reason, which he never gives. I think you're caught. But I'll let others give their views or whatever. Id like your read on other people Oats and robik specifically
On February 28 2015 09:18 prplhz wrote:10 Show nested quote +On February 28 2015 09:14 KelsierSC wrote:On February 28 2015 09:13 prplhz wrote:On February 28 2015 09:10 KelsierSC wrote:On February 28 2015 09:07 prplhz wrote:7 On February 28 2015 09:04 KelsierSC wrote:On February 28 2015 08:57 prplhz wrote:On February 28 2015 07:54 KelsierSC wrote:
I'm waiting for prplhz to respond to my question.
6 There's really not much to it. "I think I see where you and Oatsmaster and raynpelikoneet are coming from" What I mean is. I think I see why you are voting him, I think I see the reason he is scum. You had made a one liner and I thought it was "alright", not good but it had the gist of "that's a weirdly serious first post" which I agreed with. Oatsmaster and raynpelikoneet hadn't explained their reads but that doesn't mean I cannot see they would think Trfel is scum. Hmm I guess that makes sense. Oats did actually vote him I didn't see that And you just saw that just now? I didn't mention in my post that Oatsmaster had voted. ...bolded How else would you know oats thought trefl was scum as he didn't mention him in the thread... That was my whole point 9 I don't get it. I'm scum because I think Oatsmaster thinks Trfel is scum even though Oatsmaster hasn't said so in the thread? How does that make me scum? Because in that case you are making up reasons to justify your scum read on trfel. Do you seriously think scum just intentionally straight up invent reads? What would I even gain from inventing an Oatsmaster read on Trfel in that situation?
If I was scum just looking to get on board, why would I feel the need to invent an Oatsmaster read? Don't you think I would have thought it sufficient to just mention you, rsoultin, and raynpelikoneet? There is literally no reason to invent an Oatsmaster read for me in that situation. With all due respect to Oatsmaster he's not exactly someone you name drop to get things done on this forum. It's completely ridiculous to claim that I would straight up intentionally invent an Oatsmaster read so I could "get onboard" when there were other, better people to sheep if that's what I wanted to do.
##Vote KelsierSC
|
22
There, one more read for you.
|
22
On February 28 2015 09:37 VayneAuthority wrote:Show nested quote +On February 28 2015 09:08 prplhz wrote:8 On February 28 2015 08:59 VayneAuthority wrote:
prphlz is 100% town its not even a question, find something else kelsier. its obvious as fuck Can you explain this read? you might not be aware of it but your tone and posting habits are incredibly different then titanic. I know meta isn't the end all but I struggle to see you suddenly upping your effort and focus for a 2nd consecutive scum game, that's the logical conclusion.
Can you explain the bolded part? How is it different? Not looking for a giant analysis but a couple paragraphs should be easily doable.
|
United Kingdom10443 Posts
On February 28 2015 09:59 prplhz wrote:Show nested quote +On February 28 2015 09:53 KelsierSC wrote:On February 28 2015 09:48 prplhz wrote:19 On February 28 2015 09:36 KelsierSC wrote:On February 28 2015 09:33 prplhz wrote:17 On February 28 2015 09:30 KelsierSC wrote:On February 28 2015 09:25 prplhz wrote:13 On February 28 2015 09:24 raynpelikoneet wrote:On February 27 2015 22:28 prplhz wrote:
I think I see where you and Oatsmaster and raynpelikoneet are coming from[...] ????????????? I mean I can see why you would vote for Trfel. Mafia reads aren't real so they have to make them up. They can make mistakes/panic. That's why it seems scummy Like your language just seems wrong. You can see where we're coming from implies we made cases or had opinions and you're justifying your scum read. But now it feels like you are backtracking. "I see why your voting". Then you say you assume oats has a hard to follow reason..but how can you get where he js coming from...especially as you didn't even know his hard to follow reason Guy #1: "I don't like it when my nuts get trapped in a dutch oven" Guy #2: "I can understand that" Guy #3: "How can you understand that when I didn't explain why I don't like it when my nuts get trapped in a dutch oven?" This is literally the conversation I think we're having. No because oats didn't say anything. You said you got where he was.coming from. Then you said you assumed he had a hard to follow opinion. So how can you get it? Less dodging I never said "I get it". Take the part where I said "I get where [they] are coming from". Replace it with "I understand why they would think he is scum" (as in, "I think he is scummy so I understand why someone else would think he is scummy too"). If you don't accept that what I meant by the first line can be expressed by the second line then vote me or whatever. If you accept it, then start talking to me about the second line. I'm really not dodging, I just spent like 15 posts explaining this to you. Quite literally, most of my filter is talking to you about it so I'm not dodging. If you want to see me dodge then let me know. I'm already voting you. I've made my conclusions on this known. It seemed like you were making up reasons to get onboard and now you're backtracking. Also how can you get where oats is coming from, but then say he has a hard to follow reason, which he never gives. I think you're caught. But I'll let others give their views or whatever. Id like your read on other people Oats and robik specifically Show nested quote +On February 28 2015 09:18 prplhz wrote:10 On February 28 2015 09:14 KelsierSC wrote:On February 28 2015 09:13 prplhz wrote:On February 28 2015 09:10 KelsierSC wrote:On February 28 2015 09:07 prplhz wrote:7 On February 28 2015 09:04 KelsierSC wrote:On February 28 2015 08:57 prplhz wrote:On February 28 2015 07:54 KelsierSC wrote:
I'm waiting for prplhz to respond to my question.
6 There's really not much to it. "I think I see where you and Oatsmaster and raynpelikoneet are coming from" What I mean is. I think I see why you are voting him, I think I see the reason he is scum. You had made a one liner and I thought it was "alright", not good but it had the gist of "that's a weirdly serious first post" which I agreed with. Oatsmaster and raynpelikoneet hadn't explained their reads but that doesn't mean I cannot see they would think Trfel is scum. Hmm I guess that makes sense. Oats did actually vote him I didn't see that And you just saw that just now? I didn't mention in my post that Oatsmaster had voted. ...bolded How else would you know oats thought trefl was scum as he didn't mention him in the thread... That was my whole point 9 I don't get it. I'm scum because I think Oatsmaster thinks Trfel is scum even though Oatsmaster hasn't said so in the thread? How does that make me scum? Because in that case you are making up reasons to justify your scum read on trfel. Do you seriously think scum just intentionally straight up invent reads? What would I even gain from inventing an Oatsmaster read on Trfel in that situation? If I was scum just looking to get on board, why would I feel the need to invent an Oatsmaster read? Don't you think I would have thought it sufficient to just mention you, rsoultin, and raynpelikoneet? There is literally no reason to invent an Oatsmaster read for me in that situation. With all due respect to Oatsmaster he's not exactly someone you name drop to get things done on this forum. It's completely ridiculous to claim that I would straight up intentionally invent an Oatsmaster read so I could "get onboard" when there were other, better people to sheep if that's what I wanted to do. ##Vote KelsierSC
I'm not saying it was intentional. I think you had to make up a read and made a mistake
Voting me is some pathetic faje display of indignation.
Why ate you reluctant to give the reads I asked for
|
24
On February 28 2015 10:02 KelsierSC wrote:Show nested quote +On February 28 2015 09:59 prplhz wrote:On February 28 2015 09:53 KelsierSC wrote:On February 28 2015 09:48 prplhz wrote:19 On February 28 2015 09:36 KelsierSC wrote:On February 28 2015 09:33 prplhz wrote:17 On February 28 2015 09:30 KelsierSC wrote:On February 28 2015 09:25 prplhz wrote:13 On February 28 2015 09:24 raynpelikoneet wrote:On February 27 2015 22:28 prplhz wrote:
I think I see where you and Oatsmaster and raynpelikoneet are coming from[...] ????????????? I mean I can see why you would vote for Trfel. Mafia reads aren't real so they have to make them up. They can make mistakes/panic. That's why it seems scummy Like your language just seems wrong. You can see where we're coming from implies we made cases or had opinions and you're justifying your scum read. But now it feels like you are backtracking. "I see why your voting". Then you say you assume oats has a hard to follow reason..but how can you get where he js coming from...especially as you didn't even know his hard to follow reason Guy #1: "I don't like it when my nuts get trapped in a dutch oven" Guy #2: "I can understand that" Guy #3: "How can you understand that when I didn't explain why I don't like it when my nuts get trapped in a dutch oven?" This is literally the conversation I think we're having. No because oats didn't say anything. You said you got where he was.coming from. Then you said you assumed he had a hard to follow opinion. So how can you get it? Less dodging I never said "I get it". Take the part where I said "I get where [they] are coming from". Replace it with "I understand why they would think he is scum" (as in, "I think he is scummy so I understand why someone else would think he is scummy too"). If you don't accept that what I meant by the first line can be expressed by the second line then vote me or whatever. If you accept it, then start talking to me about the second line. I'm really not dodging, I just spent like 15 posts explaining this to you. Quite literally, most of my filter is talking to you about it so I'm not dodging. If you want to see me dodge then let me know. I'm already voting you. I've made my conclusions on this known. It seemed like you were making up reasons to get onboard and now you're backtracking. Also how can you get where oats is coming from, but then say he has a hard to follow reason, which he never gives. I think you're caught. But I'll let others give their views or whatever. Id like your read on other people Oats and robik specifically On February 28 2015 09:18 prplhz wrote:10 On February 28 2015 09:14 KelsierSC wrote:On February 28 2015 09:13 prplhz wrote:On February 28 2015 09:10 KelsierSC wrote:On February 28 2015 09:07 prplhz wrote:7 On February 28 2015 09:04 KelsierSC wrote:On February 28 2015 08:57 prplhz wrote:On February 28 2015 07:54 KelsierSC wrote:
I'm waiting for prplhz to respond to my question.
6 There's really not much to it. "I think I see where you and Oatsmaster and raynpelikoneet are coming from" What I mean is. I think I see why you are voting him, I think I see the reason he is scum. You had made a one liner and I thought it was "alright", not good but it had the gist of "that's a weirdly serious first post" which I agreed with. Oatsmaster and raynpelikoneet hadn't explained their reads but that doesn't mean I cannot see they would think Trfel is scum. Hmm I guess that makes sense. Oats did actually vote him I didn't see that And you just saw that just now? I didn't mention in my post that Oatsmaster had voted. ...bolded How else would you know oats thought trefl was scum as he didn't mention him in the thread... That was my whole point 9 I don't get it. I'm scum because I think Oatsmaster thinks Trfel is scum even though Oatsmaster hasn't said so in the thread? How does that make me scum? Because in that case you are making up reasons to justify your scum read on trfel. Do you seriously think scum just intentionally straight up invent reads? What would I even gain from inventing an Oatsmaster read on Trfel in that situation? If I was scum just looking to get on board, why would I feel the need to invent an Oatsmaster read? Don't you think I would have thought it sufficient to just mention you, rsoultin, and raynpelikoneet? There is literally no reason to invent an Oatsmaster read for me in that situation. With all due respect to Oatsmaster he's not exactly someone you name drop to get things done on this forum. It's completely ridiculous to claim that I would straight up intentionally invent an Oatsmaster read so I could "get onboard" when there were other, better people to sheep if that's what I wanted to do. ##Vote KelsierSC I'm not saying it was intentional. I think you had to make up a read and made a mistake Voting me is some pathetic faje display of indignation. Why ate you reluctant to give the reads I asked for
What mistake did I make?
|
Reading these posts is literally making me sleepy.
|
United Kingdom10443 Posts
On February 28 2015 10:04 prplhz wrote:24 Show nested quote +On February 28 2015 10:02 KelsierSC wrote:On February 28 2015 09:59 prplhz wrote:On February 28 2015 09:53 KelsierSC wrote:On February 28 2015 09:48 prplhz wrote:19 On February 28 2015 09:36 KelsierSC wrote:On February 28 2015 09:33 prplhz wrote:17 On February 28 2015 09:30 KelsierSC wrote:On February 28 2015 09:25 prplhz wrote:13 On February 28 2015 09:24 raynpelikoneet wrote:
[quote]
????????????? I mean I can see why you would vote for Trfel. Mafia reads aren't real so they have to make them up. They can make mistakes/panic. That's why it seems scummy Like your language just seems wrong. You can see where we're coming from implies we made cases or had opinions and you're justifying your scum read. But now it feels like you are backtracking. "I see why your voting". Then you say you assume oats has a hard to follow reason..but how can you get where he js coming from...especially as you didn't even know his hard to follow reason Guy #1: "I don't like it when my nuts get trapped in a dutch oven" Guy #2: "I can understand that" Guy #3: "How can you understand that when I didn't explain why I don't like it when my nuts get trapped in a dutch oven?" This is literally the conversation I think we're having. No because oats didn't say anything. You said you got where he was.coming from. Then you said you assumed he had a hard to follow opinion. So how can you get it? Less dodging I never said "I get it". Take the part where I said "I get where [they] are coming from". Replace it with "I understand why they would think he is scum" (as in, "I think he is scummy so I understand why someone else would think he is scummy too"). If you don't accept that what I meant by the first line can be expressed by the second line then vote me or whatever. If you accept it, then start talking to me about the second line. I'm really not dodging, I just spent like 15 posts explaining this to you. Quite literally, most of my filter is talking to you about it so I'm not dodging. If you want to see me dodge then let me know. I'm already voting you. I've made my conclusions on this known. It seemed like you were making up reasons to get onboard and now you're backtracking. Also how can you get where oats is coming from, but then say he has a hard to follow reason, which he never gives. I think you're caught. But I'll let others give their views or whatever. Id like your read on other people Oats and robik specifically On February 28 2015 09:18 prplhz wrote:10 On February 28 2015 09:14 KelsierSC wrote:On February 28 2015 09:13 prplhz wrote:On February 28 2015 09:10 KelsierSC wrote:On February 28 2015 09:07 prplhz wrote:7 On February 28 2015 09:04 KelsierSC wrote:On February 28 2015 08:57 prplhz wrote:
[quote]
6
There's really not much to it.
"I think I see where you and Oatsmaster and raynpelikoneet are coming from"
What I mean is. I think I see why you are voting him, I think I see the reason he is scum. You had made a one liner and I thought it was "alright", not good but it had the gist of "that's a weirdly serious first post" which I agreed with. Oatsmaster and raynpelikoneet hadn't explained their reads but that doesn't mean I cannot see they would think Trfel is scum. Hmm I guess that makes sense. Oats did actually vote him I didn't see that And you just saw that just now? I didn't mention in my post that Oatsmaster had voted. ...bolded How else would you know oats thought trefl was scum as he didn't mention him in the thread... That was my whole point 9 I don't get it. I'm scum because I think Oatsmaster thinks Trfel is scum even though Oatsmaster hasn't said so in the thread? How does that make me scum? Because in that case you are making up reasons to justify your scum read on trfel. Do you seriously think scum just intentionally straight up invent reads? What would I even gain from inventing an Oatsmaster read on Trfel in that situation? If I was scum just looking to get on board, why would I feel the need to invent an Oatsmaster read? Don't you think I would have thought it sufficient to just mention you, rsoultin, and raynpelikoneet? There is literally no reason to invent an Oatsmaster read for me in that situation. With all due respect to Oatsmaster he's not exactly someone you name drop to get things done on this forum. It's completely ridiculous to claim that I would straight up intentionally invent an Oatsmaster read so I could "get onboard" when there were other, better people to sheep if that's what I wanted to do. ##Vote KelsierSC I'm not saying it was intentional. I think you had to make up a read and made a mistake Voting me is some pathetic faje display of indignation. Why ate you reluctant to give the reads I asked for What mistake did I make?
Ive made this clear already.
Give the reads I asked for so we can move on
|
25
On February 28 2015 10:05 KelsierSC wrote:Show nested quote +On February 28 2015 10:04 prplhz wrote:24 On February 28 2015 10:02 KelsierSC wrote:On February 28 2015 09:59 prplhz wrote:On February 28 2015 09:53 KelsierSC wrote:On February 28 2015 09:48 prplhz wrote:19 On February 28 2015 09:36 KelsierSC wrote:On February 28 2015 09:33 prplhz wrote:17 On February 28 2015 09:30 KelsierSC wrote:On February 28 2015 09:25 prplhz wrote:
13
[quote]
I mean I can see why you would vote for Trfel. Mafia reads aren't real so they have to make them up. They can make mistakes/panic. That's why it seems scummy Like your language just seems wrong. You can see where we're coming from implies we made cases or had opinions and you're justifying your scum read. But now it feels like you are backtracking. "I see why your voting". Then you say you assume oats has a hard to follow reason..but how can you get where he js coming from...especially as you didn't even know his hard to follow reason Guy #1: "I don't like it when my nuts get trapped in a dutch oven" Guy #2: "I can understand that" Guy #3: "How can you understand that when I didn't explain why I don't like it when my nuts get trapped in a dutch oven?" This is literally the conversation I think we're having. No because oats didn't say anything. You said you got where he was.coming from. Then you said you assumed he had a hard to follow opinion. So how can you get it? Less dodging I never said "I get it". Take the part where I said "I get where [they] are coming from". Replace it with "I understand why they would think he is scum" (as in, "I think he is scummy so I understand why someone else would think he is scummy too"). If you don't accept that what I meant by the first line can be expressed by the second line then vote me or whatever. If you accept it, then start talking to me about the second line. I'm really not dodging, I just spent like 15 posts explaining this to you. Quite literally, most of my filter is talking to you about it so I'm not dodging. If you want to see me dodge then let me know. I'm already voting you. I've made my conclusions on this known. It seemed like you were making up reasons to get onboard and now you're backtracking. Also how can you get where oats is coming from, but then say he has a hard to follow reason, which he never gives. I think you're caught. But I'll let others give their views or whatever. Id like your read on other people Oats and robik specifically On February 28 2015 09:18 prplhz wrote:10 On February 28 2015 09:14 KelsierSC wrote:On February 28 2015 09:13 prplhz wrote:On February 28 2015 09:10 KelsierSC wrote:On February 28 2015 09:07 prplhz wrote:7 On February 28 2015 09:04 KelsierSC wrote:
[quote]
Hmm I guess that makes sense.
Oats did actually vote him I didn't see that And you just saw that just now? I didn't mention in my post that Oatsmaster had voted. ...bolded How else would you know oats thought trefl was scum as he didn't mention him in the thread... That was my whole point 9 I don't get it. I'm scum because I think Oatsmaster thinks Trfel is scum even though Oatsmaster hasn't said so in the thread? How does that make me scum? Because in that case you are making up reasons to justify your scum read on trfel. Do you seriously think scum just intentionally straight up invent reads? What would I even gain from inventing an Oatsmaster read on Trfel in that situation? If I was scum just looking to get on board, why would I feel the need to invent an Oatsmaster read? Don't you think I would have thought it sufficient to just mention you, rsoultin, and raynpelikoneet? There is literally no reason to invent an Oatsmaster read for me in that situation. With all due respect to Oatsmaster he's not exactly someone you name drop to get things done on this forum. It's completely ridiculous to claim that I would straight up intentionally invent an Oatsmaster read so I could "get onboard" when there were other, better people to sheep if that's what I wanted to do. ##Vote KelsierSC I'm not saying it was intentional. I think you had to make up a read and made a mistake Voting me is some pathetic faje display of indignation. Why ate you reluctant to give the reads I asked for What mistake did I make? Ive made this clear already. Give the reads I asked for so we can move on
Like, I really also thought I'd made myself clear but I repeated myself again and again answering your questions.
Please, what mistake did I make?
|
1 between trfel and rso. Trfel's filter this game feels different from his mafia game filter, but only slightly. So meh. I can't even recount RSO's posts. So prob RSO.
|
Can someone link me to some of rayn's games? Especially ones where Palmar's playing as well.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
