|
On June 12 2015 07:46 ruXxar wrote:Show nested quote +On June 12 2015 07:41 Trfel wrote:On June 12 2015 07:36 ruXxar wrote:On June 12 2015 07:32 Trfel wrote:On June 12 2015 07:18 Kickstart wrote:
A friendly PSA: I don't like lurkers or liers or people who answer questions directed at other people. Why don't you like it when people answer questions directed at others? Usually you want to hear the reasoning of the person you're asking. If someone answers the question before him, you potentially open up for someone else to make a logical conclusion beforehand, and then the guy the question was directed at get an easy bandwagon onto that guys conclusions. At least that is what I think. ........ The "at least that is what I think" pushes it over the top. I could see it as a joke, but then there's no reason to include the last sentence. It's either inherently contradictory or unnecessarily cautious. Scum lean. What I meant by the last sentence was that that was my number one assumption of why he made that statement. I won't pretend to be a mind reader, but I find it strange that he throws out unsubstantiated claims like that. So far kickstart is a scumlean for me. Wait....
So you are serious about your explanation for not answering a question directed at someone else, because it helps them answer the question if they are scum. But in saying this, you answered a question directed at someone else, your scum read?
This explanation is going to be good.
|
On June 12 2015 07:41 Trfel wrote:Show nested quote +On June 12 2015 07:36 ruXxar wrote:On June 12 2015 07:32 Trfel wrote:On June 12 2015 07:18 Kickstart wrote:
A friendly PSA: I don't like lurkers or liers or people who answer questions directed at other people. Why don't you like it when people answer questions directed at others? Usually you want to hear the reasoning of the person you're asking. If someone answers the question before him, you potentially open up for someone else to make a logical conclusion beforehand, and then the guy the question was directed at get an easy bandwagon onto that guys conclusions. At least that is what I think. ........ The "at least that is what I think" pushes it over the top. I could see it as a joke, but then there's no reason to include the last sentence. It's either inherently contradictory or unnecessarily cautious. Scum lean.
What do you mean by "I could see it as a joke"?
Why do you say that it's contradictory?
Those parts of your post make no sense to me.
Please enlighten me if you will.
|
On June 12 2015 07:50 Trfel wrote:Show nested quote +On June 12 2015 07:46 ruXxar wrote:On June 12 2015 07:41 Trfel wrote:On June 12 2015 07:36 ruXxar wrote:On June 12 2015 07:32 Trfel wrote:On June 12 2015 07:18 Kickstart wrote:
A friendly PSA: I don't like lurkers or liers or people who answer questions directed at other people. Why don't you like it when people answer questions directed at others? Usually you want to hear the reasoning of the person you're asking. If someone answers the question before him, you potentially open up for someone else to make a logical conclusion beforehand, and then the guy the question was directed at get an easy bandwagon onto that guys conclusions. At least that is what I think. ........ The "at least that is what I think" pushes it over the top. I could see it as a joke, but then there's no reason to include the last sentence. It's either inherently contradictory or unnecessarily cautious. Scum lean. What I meant by the last sentence was that that was my number one assumption of why he made that statement. I won't pretend to be a mind reader, but I find it strange that he throws out unsubstantiated claims like that. So far kickstart is a scumlean for me. Wait.... So you are serious about your explanation for not answering a question directed at someone else, because it helps them answer the question if they are scum. But in saying this, you answered a question directed at someone else, your scum read? This explanation is going to be good.
Yes my answer was serious.
I see now how that actually denied us information from kick start.
It was a mistake on my part to actually answer that question.
|
On June 12 2015 07:54 ruXxar wrote:Show nested quote +On June 12 2015 07:50 Trfel wrote:On June 12 2015 07:46 ruXxar wrote:On June 12 2015 07:41 Trfel wrote:On June 12 2015 07:36 ruXxar wrote:On June 12 2015 07:32 Trfel wrote:On June 12 2015 07:18 Kickstart wrote:
A friendly PSA: I don't like lurkers or liers or people who answer questions directed at other people. Why don't you like it when people answer questions directed at others? Usually you want to hear the reasoning of the person you're asking. If someone answers the question before him, you potentially open up for someone else to make a logical conclusion beforehand, and then the guy the question was directed at get an easy bandwagon onto that guys conclusions. At least that is what I think. ........ The "at least that is what I think" pushes it over the top. I could see it as a joke, but then there's no reason to include the last sentence. It's either inherently contradictory or unnecessarily cautious. Scum lean. What I meant by the last sentence was that that was my number one assumption of why he made that statement. I won't pretend to be a mind reader, but I find it strange that he throws out unsubstantiated claims like that. So far kickstart is a scumlean for me. Wait.... So you are serious about your explanation for not answering a question directed at someone else, because it helps them answer the question if they are scum. But in saying this, you answered a question directed at someone else, your scum read? This explanation is going to be good. Yes my answer was serious. I see now how that actually denied us information from kick start. It was a mistake on my part to actually answer that question. Can you please clarify, why are you scumreading Kickstart?
|
On June 12 2015 07:56 Trfel wrote:Show nested quote +On June 12 2015 07:54 ruXxar wrote:On June 12 2015 07:50 Trfel wrote:On June 12 2015 07:46 ruXxar wrote:On June 12 2015 07:41 Trfel wrote:On June 12 2015 07:36 ruXxar wrote:On June 12 2015 07:32 Trfel wrote:On June 12 2015 07:18 Kickstart wrote:
A friendly PSA: I don't like lurkers or liers or people who answer questions directed at other people. Why don't you like it when people answer questions directed at others? Usually you want to hear the reasoning of the person you're asking. If someone answers the question before him, you potentially open up for someone else to make a logical conclusion beforehand, and then the guy the question was directed at get an easy bandwagon onto that guys conclusions. At least that is what I think. ........ The "at least that is what I think" pushes it over the top. I could see it as a joke, but then there's no reason to include the last sentence. It's either inherently contradictory or unnecessarily cautious. Scum lean. What I meant by the last sentence was that that was my number one assumption of why he made that statement. I won't pretend to be a mind reader, but I find it strange that he throws out unsubstantiated claims like that. So far kickstart is a scumlean for me. Wait.... So you are serious about your explanation for not answering a question directed at someone else, because it helps them answer the question if they are scum. But in saying this, you answered a question directed at someone else, your scum read? This explanation is going to be good. Yes my answer was serious. I see now how that actually denied us information from kick start. It was a mistake on my part to actually answer that question. Can you please clarify, why are you scumreading Kickstart?
I didn't like his statement about not liking liars.
This whole game is based on the concept of deception.
If you don't like that aspect of the game, why are you here?
You might claim that you like hunting lying mafia,
But it's not a given beforehand what role you will be, so that doesn't make sense either.
I have no prior info about any of the players here, so he might have some personal conviction for why he said that, but to me it didn't seem like a genuine well thought through statement.
|
On June 12 2015 08:04 ruXxar wrote:Show nested quote +On June 12 2015 07:56 Trfel wrote:On June 12 2015 07:54 ruXxar wrote:On June 12 2015 07:50 Trfel wrote:On June 12 2015 07:46 ruXxar wrote:On June 12 2015 07:41 Trfel wrote:On June 12 2015 07:36 ruXxar wrote:On June 12 2015 07:32 Trfel wrote:On June 12 2015 07:18 Kickstart wrote:
A friendly PSA: I don't like lurkers or liers or people who answer questions directed at other people. Why don't you like it when people answer questions directed at others? Usually you want to hear the reasoning of the person you're asking. If someone answers the question before him, you potentially open up for someone else to make a logical conclusion beforehand, and then the guy the question was directed at get an easy bandwagon onto that guys conclusions. At least that is what I think. ........ The "at least that is what I think" pushes it over the top. I could see it as a joke, but then there's no reason to include the last sentence. It's either inherently contradictory or unnecessarily cautious. Scum lean. What I meant by the last sentence was that that was my number one assumption of why he made that statement. I won't pretend to be a mind reader, but I find it strange that he throws out unsubstantiated claims like that. So far kickstart is a scumlean for me. Wait.... So you are serious about your explanation for not answering a question directed at someone else, because it helps them answer the question if they are scum. But in saying this, you answered a question directed at someone else, your scum read? This explanation is going to be good. Yes my answer was serious. I see now how that actually denied us information from kick start. It was a mistake on my part to actually answer that question. Can you please clarify, why are you scumreading Kickstart? I didn't like his statement about not liking liars. This whole game is based on the concept of deception. If you don't like that aspect of the game, why are you here? You might claim that you like hunting lying mafia, But it's not a given beforehand what role you will be, so that doesn't make sense either. I have no prior info about any of the players here, so he might have some personal conviction for why he said that, but to me it didn't seem like a genuine well thought through statement. Thank you very much for answering my question.
##vote ruXxar
|
I'd like to hear your reasoning for voting on me, besides the fact that very few other people have spoke up yet.
|
On June 12 2015 08:10 ruXxar wrote:
I'd like to hear your reasoning for voting on me, besides the fact that very few other people have spoke up yet.
I'm voting you because you did this:
On June 12 2015 06:15 ruXxar wrote:
I'm happy to confirm that for my first mafia game i get to play VT :D
|
On June 12 2015 07:47 batsnacks wrote:
##vote ruXxar
I would also like your reason for Voting on me.
Right now I want to make people talk so we have a wider range of information to base our lunches upon.
|
Liers means if you say you are going to do something but don't when it comes to forum mafia. Also good job breaking one of my rules, you answered a question directed at me!
|
But I might give you points for answering it correctly. Maybe. Probably not.
|
On June 12 2015 08:13 batsnacks wrote:Show nested quote +On June 12 2015 08:10 ruXxar wrote:
I'd like to hear your reasoning for voting on me, besides the fact that very few other people have spoke up yet. I'm voting you because you did this: Show nested quote +On June 12 2015 06:15 ruXxar wrote:
I'm happy to confirm that for my first mafia game i get to play VT :D
Fair enough.
|
Also lol@ruxxar not finding the jokey first posts 'genuine enough'. You so silly. or scum. Ill let you decide which it is.
|
On June 12 2015 08:10 ruXxar wrote:
I'd like to hear your reasoning for voting on me, besides the fact that very few other people have spoke up yet.
I am just rather overwhelmed by the amount of (cross) analysis occurring right now. ^.^ Although this is my first time around, I can already tell this will be great.
Down to business. So @ruXxar, your reasoning for voting for Kickstart is his statement about lying in a game of Mafia?
And @Trfel, can you please share why you're suspecting @ruXxar? I would have to agree with ruXxar's point that it is generally annoying when someone answers a question directed at you. Although I don't see why Kickstart went so far as to vote for Oatsmaster right off the bat. Unless he's the Mafia and trying to mislead us.
On another note, do we know how many Mafias there are? If there are two Mafias, Oatsmaster and Kickstart may be those two and may have set this up to make everyone confused and make people like you two fight amongst yourselves.
|
Oh also, dont forget that you have to 'actually' vote in the other thread. Generally you still say it here as well though so that people are sure to read it.
|
Day1 just at game start association cases are bad. Especially when I'm not scum.
|
ruXxar
1. Answered a question directed to someone else, while explaining why answering questions directed at others hurts town
+ Show Spoiler +On June 12 2015 07:36 ruXxar wrote:Show nested quote +On June 12 2015 07:32 Trfel wrote:On June 12 2015 07:18 Kickstart wrote:
A friendly PSA: I don't like lurkers or liers or people who answer questions directed at other people. Why don't you like it when people answer questions directed at others? Usually you want to hear the reasoning of the person you're asking. If someone answers the question before him, you potentially open up for someone else to make a logical conclusion beforehand, and then the guy the question was directed at get an easy bandwagon onto that guys conclusions. At least that is what I think. RuXxar provided a reasonable explanation for why it is bad to answer questions directed at other people. However, this explanation was an answer to my question directed at Kickstart. In this very post, he's doing why he says that this is bad. He's confident enough to ignore any potential purpose that I had for this question, confident enough in Kickstart's alignment that he doesn't want to hear Kickstart's answer, but not confident enough to leave the post without stating that this is what he thinks, implying that he could be wrong.
2. The person he answered a question for is now his scumread
+ Show Spoiler +On June 12 2015 07:46 ruXxar wrote:Show nested quote +On June 12 2015 07:41 Trfel wrote:On June 12 2015 07:36 ruXxar wrote:On June 12 2015 07:32 Trfel wrote:On June 12 2015 07:18 Kickstart wrote:
A friendly PSA: I don't like lurkers or liers or people who answer questions directed at other people. Why don't you like it when people answer questions directed at others? Usually you want to hear the reasoning of the person you're asking. If someone answers the question before him, you potentially open up for someone else to make a logical conclusion beforehand, and then the guy the question was directed at get an easy bandwagon onto that guys conclusions. At least that is what I think. ........ The "at least that is what I think" pushes it over the top. I could see it as a joke, but then there's no reason to include the last sentence. It's either inherently contradictory or unnecessarily cautious. Scum lean. What I meant by the last sentence was that that was my number one assumption of why he made that statement. I won't pretend to be a mind reader, but I find it strange that he throws out unsubstantiated claims like that. So far kickstart is a scumlean for me. When he is questioned, ruxXar throws out a scum lean. However, he does this on Kickstart, the same player he just answered a question for. Imagine that ruXxar is town. He sees Kickstart make a post, but doesn't try to look into his alignment. Then he sees me (Trfel) ask a question to Kickstart about that post, then immediately answers the question without stopping to realize that this is the same behavior criticized in his explanation (and he realizes that his play hurt town here). Only after answering my question to Kickstart does he bother to actually think about Kickstart's alignment. I can't see this coming from a town mindset, from someone who is actually interested in determining people's alignments. Furthermore, he hasn't made any alignment-related comments about anyone in the game other than Kickstart.
RuXxar is being contradictory, cautious, and is showing a mindset that isn't towny at all. He's not interested in thinking about people's alignments.
|
And there are 3 mafia, 10 town. There are probably blue roles and possibly mafia roles but this we do not know, only the possibility that there is.
|
On June 12 2015 08:16 Kickstart wrote:
Also lol@ruxxar not finding the jokey first posts 'genuine enough'. You so silly. or scum. Ill let you decide which it is. Can you please clarify what you mean in the bolded sentence?
|
On June 12 2015 08:16 MoosyDoosy wrote:Show nested quote +On June 12 2015 08:10 ruXxar wrote:
I'd like to hear your reasoning for voting on me, besides the fact that very few other people have spoke up yet. I am just rather overwhelmed by the amount of (cross) analysis occurring right now. ^.^ Although this is my first time around, I can already tell this will be great. Down to business. So @ruXxar, your reasoning for voting for Kickstart is his statement about lying in a game of Mafia?
I'm not voting on anyone yet, it's way too early for that.
I'm gathering information to base my reads upon.
I can only evaluate what I've read so far.
Putting pressure on people is also a good thing, not necessarily because you believe they are scum, but to see how they react in tense situations.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
