EPTmaybe the post restriction should be strictly enforced instead of this "well you can post more if you'd really like to"?
Mini Mafia Down Under
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
prplhz
Denmark8045 Posts
maybe the post restriction should be strictly enforced instead of this "well you can post more if you'd really like to"? | ||
|
prplhz
Denmark8045 Posts
I think it's weird that Trfel is complaining about the amount of nonsense in this thread after 3 pages. First of all, there's rarely any decent content after 3 pages. Second of all, there's often a lot more than 3 pages before the nonsense phase of the game is over. ##Vote Trfel We can vote in here too right? | ||
|
prplhz
Denmark8045 Posts
btw the cop claims are pretty useless if you have my role. host literally gave me the entire scum team so i don't have to wait until night just to get a single check, i know them all already. | ||
|
prplhz
Denmark8045 Posts
On February 27 2015 21:42 KelsierSC wrote: This isn't what he was really saying. [...] The part of his post where I think he is saying just that is the following part: On February 27 2015 14:05 Trfel wrote: [...] I feel like there has been a lot more opening nonsense this game than in most[...] And I am kind of piling on. Your point on Trfel was alright, rsoultin had something in there I understood too. I think I see where you and Oatsmaster and raynpelikoneet are coming from, but I think this is an important point too. I don't think any townie should really think that this game is so much more full of nonsense than other games that they'd feel the need to point it out. Like, I'm usually the guy who is the most easily annoyed by people messing around doing nothing and I didn't think it was happening. I also think it's weird that IAmRobik didn't vote Trfel. This Trfel post seems like a post IAmRobik would vote Trfel for. IAmRobik has been around to comment on Alakaslam's weird zen garden video, why didn't he throw a vote at Trfel at the same occasion? | ||
|
prplhz
Denmark8045 Posts
On February 28 2015 05:48 raynpelikoneet wrote: robik confirmed town. Really, no. Objectively he's just wasting posts. He's not saying anything other than "everybody else, please say more". | ||
|
prplhz
Denmark8045 Posts
On February 28 2015 06:18 IAmRobik wrote: I'm mod confirmed town because the comod is a dipshit and responded in a way that makes me confirmed town. So fucking dumb. Might as well have sentinal modding this shit. oh... | ||
|
prplhz
Denmark8045 Posts
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. | ||
|
prplhz
Denmark8045 Posts
On February 28 2015 09:04 KelsierSC wrote: 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. | ||
|
prplhz
Denmark8045 Posts
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? | ||
|
prplhz
Denmark8045 Posts
On February 28 2015 09:10 KelsierSC wrote: ...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? | ||
|
prplhz
Denmark8045 Posts
On February 28 2015 09:14 KelsierSC wrote: 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? | ||
|
prplhz
Denmark8045 Posts
On February 28 2015 09:17 KelsierSC wrote: So prpl just to clarify you didn't know the reasons why oats/rayn was voting trfel but you assumed they were good ones? No. I didn't comment on Oatsmaster's or raynpelikoneet's reasons to vote Trfel. What I said is that I could see why they (or anyone else) could think Trfel was scum. I didn't assume they were good or bad however. I assumed that Oatsmaster's was a bit hard to follow and that raynpelikoneet's was probably good. | ||
|
prplhz
Denmark8045 Posts
On February 28 2015 09:20 raynpelikoneet wrote: purplehaze what did you mean when you said you "get Oats"? "get Oats" is literally not in my filter. | ||
|
prplhz
Denmark8045 Posts
I mean I can see why you would vote for Trfel. | ||
|
prplhz
Denmark8045 Posts
On February 28 2015 09:23 prplhz wrote: 12 "get Oats" is literally not in my filter. Like, there were quotes so I went into my filter and Ctrl+f "get Oats" and it said no matches. | ||
|
prplhz
Denmark8045 Posts
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'm sorry, I didn't read that post. Could you repeat it? | ||
|
prplhz
Denmark8045 Posts
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. | ||
|
prplhz
Denmark8045 Posts
On February 28 2015 09:30 KelsierSC wrote: 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. | ||
|
prplhz
Denmark8045 Posts
Meh, Guy #1 and Guy #3 are the same guy and they're both Oatsmaster and KelsierSC. I hoped that cleared something up. | ||
|
prplhz
Denmark8045 Posts
On February 28 2015 09:36 KelsierSC wrote: 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. | ||
| ||
