|
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.
|
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?
|
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?
|
26
@Superbia Can you give reads on me and KelsierSC?
|
27
@KelsierSC I'll answer you question if you answer mine. This ignoring me thing is boring and useless and you don't know that I am scum for shit and since we're both here we might as well talk.
You just said I wasn't intentionally making up Oatsmaster's read so apparently the mistake I made was to think that Oatsmaster had scum read Trfel when he hadn't (although he had)? If this is the reason you're voting me you need to explain to me, why are scum more likely to make this mistake than town?
|
28
On February 28 2015 10:36 Superbia wrote:
Can we get a second wagon onto RSO?
Uh maybe you can explain this 5m-meta-god-read-meta to the uninitated?
|
29
On February 28 2015 10:41 KelsierSC wrote:Show nested quote +On February 28 2015 10:32 prplhz wrote:
27
@KelsierSC I'll answer you question if you answer mine. This ignoring me thing is boring and useless and you don't know that I am scum for shit and since we're both here we might as well talk.
You just said I wasn't intentionally making up Oatsmaster's read so apparently the mistake I made was to think that Oatsmaster had scum read Trfel when he hadn't (although he had)? If this is the reason you're voting me you need to explain to me, why are scum more likely to make this mistake than town? Alright broken down. 1. Your jump on trefl felt opportunistic and the reason was poor. 2. When questioned you said specifically that you "got where rayn,oats and I where coming from" to me this implies you liked the cases we made. I had a one liner,oats hadn't said anything. 3. You then said later that you didn't know oats reason and assumed it was hard to follow...if its hard to follow you can't get him. Especially when he hasn't given the reason. Scum reads are fake, they have to lie , they can make mistakes.especially under scrutiny 4. You dodged rayn on some pretty obvious technicalities 5. You voted me out if fake bullshit indignation. Ok you can give reads on robik and oats now
1. Can't convince you otherwise here. The reason was as good as they come at that stage in the game and certainly better than your reason.
2. Well then you are misunderstanding me. Please answer this question: can you not see how it is possible that what I meant by "I see where they're coming from" is "I can understand why they or anyone else would think Trfel is scummy because I think he is scummy too"? I want you to either a) acknowledge that possiblity and say that's not what you think I meant and that I am scum making that up as an afterthought or b) acknowledge that's exactly what I meant and there's nothing scummy about that.
3. Again, you are assuming I said I knew Oatsmaster's reason for voting Trfel when at no point did I know Oatsmaster's reason. I am even saying it now, I didn't know Oatsmaster's reason and I don't know it now. I can see that there are reasons for why he might think a person I find scummy is scummy. As for the "hard to follow", Oatsmaster is sometimes hard to follow, at least he was back when I played with him last.
4. No I really didn't dodge anything. I answered every question asked of me. This dodging accusation is really bullshit because I am answering everything here. You might think I'm not answering well enough, whatever, but I'm very clearly not dodging anything.
5. No. I am voting you because you cannot explain why you are voting me. You are saying that I made a mistake but you cannot explain why this mistake is scummy. The rest of the reason you are voting me consists of all these unsubstantial and unsubstantiated pokes like "oppotunistic" and "fake bullshit indignation" which is at best as ridiculous as Blazinghand's "fake anger" accusation against raynpelikoneet last game.
Please. You are saying that I am not intentionally making things up about Oatsmaster. Fine. Why are scum more likely to accidentally make things up about Oatsmaster than town? If anyone is dodging a question it's you dodging the question "Why are scum more likely to accidentally think Oatsmaster did something he didn't?" (which btw, he did), you really didn't answer that in that post just there. You just reinterated some other points on me I don't really care about.
2a or 2b and answer the question in the last paragraph.
IAmRobik seems town for the mod comment, I don't know about Oatsmaster but slightly leaning scum.
|
On February 28 2015 11:03 rsoultin wrote:
On skimming the thread, the argument against prplhz seems primarily based on semantics.
I did not see anything that just hit me in the face scummy from him...and there were a few such points early game when we were scum together in Titanic. I don't think he's scum this game.
And don't you think it's weird that KelsierSC doesn't get this?
|
31
On February 28 2015 11:09 KelsierSC wrote:Show nested quote +On February 28 2015 11:02 prplhz wrote:29 On February 28 2015 10:41 KelsierSC wrote:On February 28 2015 10:32 prplhz wrote:
27
@KelsierSC I'll answer you question if you answer mine. This ignoring me thing is boring and useless and you don't know that I am scum for shit and since we're both here we might as well talk.
You just said I wasn't intentionally making up Oatsmaster's read so apparently the mistake I made was to think that Oatsmaster had scum read Trfel when he hadn't (although he had)? If this is the reason you're voting me you need to explain to me, why are scum more likely to make this mistake than town? Alright broken down. 1. Your jump on trefl felt opportunistic and the reason was poor. 2. When questioned you said specifically that you "got where rayn,oats and I where coming from" to me this implies you liked the cases we made. I had a one liner,oats hadn't said anything. 3. You then said later that you didn't know oats reason and assumed it was hard to follow...if its hard to follow you can't get him. Especially when he hasn't given the reason. Scum reads are fake, they have to lie , they can make mistakes.especially under scrutiny 4. You dodged rayn on some pretty obvious technicalities 5. You voted me out if fake bullshit indignation. Ok you can give reads on robik and oats now 1. Can't convince you otherwise here. The reason was as good as they come at that stage in the game and certainly better than your reason. 2. Well then you are misunderstanding me. Please answer this question: can you not see how it is possible that what I meant by "I see where they're coming from" is "I can understand why they or anyone else would think Trfel is scummy because I think he is scummy too"? I want you to either a) acknowledge that possiblity and say that's not what you think I meant and that I am scum making that up as an afterthought or b) acknowledge that's exactly what I meant and there's nothing scummy about that. 3. Again, you are assuming I said I knew Oatsmaster's reason for voting Trfel when at no point did I know Oatsmaster's reason. I am even saying it now, I didn't know Oatsmaster's reason and I don't know it now. I can see that there are reasons for why he might think a person I find scummy is scummy. As for the "hard to follow", Oatsmaster is sometimes hard to follow, at least he was back when I played with him last. 4. No I really didn't dodge anything. I answered every question asked of me. This dodging accusation is really bullshit because I am answering everything here. You might think I'm not answering well enough, whatever, but I'm very clearly not dodging anything. 5. No. I am voting you because you cannot explain why you are voting me. You are saying that I made a mistake but you cannot explain why this mistake is scummy. The rest of the reason you are voting me consists of all these unsubstantial and unsubstantiated pokes like "oppotunistic" and "fake bullshit indignation" which is at best as ridiculous as Blazinghand's "fake anger" accusation against raynpelikoneet last game. Please. You are saying that I am not intentionally making things up about Oatsmaster. Fine. Why are scum more likely to accidentally make things up about Oatsmaster than town? If anyone is dodging a question it's you dodging the question "Why are scum more likely to accidentally think Oatsmaster did something he didn't?" (which btw, he did), you really didn't answer that in that post just there. You just reinterated some other points on me I don't really care about. 2a or 2b and answer the question in the last paragraph. IAmRobik seems town for the mod comment, I don't know about Oatsmaster but slightly leaning scum. Ive already explained why I was voting you so I dont understand why you keep saying that
I'm not exactly asking why you are voting me, I'm asking how your main argument (you think that I accidentally made something up about Oatsmaster) is alignment indicative. If you were just voting me for the other buzzword nonsense then I have nothing more.
I just cannot understand how you can think that I am scum for accidentally thinking that Oatsmaster had said something about Trfel. I don't understand why scum would be more likely to misremember something than town. Maybe in a long game where scum stop paying attention but this was like 3 pages into the game, most people (me included) can concentrate for that long even as scum.
|
32
On February 28 2015 11:16 KelsierSC wrote:
It is possible that you could have meant "i see why they would vote him".
and i already said scum have to fake reads so it is easy to make mistakes.
Your vote on me just felt desperate.
You have answered everything and yeh it can be explained by "oh but i meant this" but like you seem bad.
I have a scum read in you but I'm going to let this go for now as the trfel case is better
And you think I could have made that up on the fly as scum?
I still don't understand how accidentally believing someone has said something can be alignment indicative.
|
33
On February 28 2015 11:21 rsoultin wrote:
On an unrelated note, can someone explain to me why the mod's response to Robik's post makes Robik town? I'm lost on that one.
It looks like the moderator is confirming that IAmRobik's anger is real and he was angry about town not doing enough to figure out the game.
|
34
Alright maybe KelsierSC is town and just being stubborn about me.
##Vote Trfel
Lets see where this leads again.
@Superbia Would be really nice if you could explain some of that meta you have on Trfel.
|
35
Dunno the whole thing just looks like mod would have been like "lol cute robik" if he was scum and "wtf this nerd getting on my nerves again" when he was town.
I think it's pretty solid.
Probably shouldn't discuss mod actions but then again, mod should have stayed out of the thread.
|
36
On February 28 2015 11:33 KelsierSC wrote:Show nested quote +On February 28 2015 11:31 prplhz wrote:
35
Dunno the whole thing just looks like mod would have been like "lol cute robik" if he was scum and "wtf this nerd getting on my nerves again" when he was town.
I think it's pretty solid.
Probably shouldn't discuss mod actions but then again, mod should have stayed out of the thread. Maybe he just saw a green wall of rage and responded without really taking note of the name/alignment. This speculation is pointless.
Maybe, but I think it's a lot more likely that IAmRobik is town.
|
37
it's really annoying that your signature is making me listen to this 80s disco crap 
|
38
On February 28 2015 17:36 Palmar wrote:
Superbia is maffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffiiiiiiiiioooooooooooooooooossssssssszzzzzzoioiiiiiiiiiiioooooooooooo
Alright why is he more scum than Trfel?
|
but i wanted to be a cop
/confirm
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
