|
That is some impressive tinfoil, my dude.
|
On October 04 2016 22:41 Oatsmaster wrote:Show nested quote +On October 04 2016 22:28 Superbia wrote:On October 04 2016 22:25 Oatsmaster wrote:On October 04 2016 22:24 Superbia wrote:On October 04 2016 22:23 Oatsmaster wrote:On October 04 2016 22:17 Calix wrote:On October 04 2016 22:14 Oatsmaster wrote:
I don't see what is there to explain calix, I want to vote for him.
I really don't see what is hard to understand man.
Same to you nu. Why the fuck is who my vote on important now.
Calix asked me why I didn't vote for her basically and she clearly thinks it's alignment indicative or else why would she ask me me about it.
What the fuck kind of logic is that? You ask questions to pry into someone's thought processes which you are STILL NOT EXPLAINING. You stated "Calix is scummy" You voted for Superbia. You did not state a scum-read on Superbia. Why the fuck are you not explaining your vote? If it's 'lul randum xD' then why are you random-voting over a scum-read? Obviously I think super is scummy and obviously I dont think it's worth explaining a read on him just yet. Can you propose a reason why I would do this as scum? I'm looking forward to ignoring the forced read. Go and reread your first 2 posts and tell me they are made with the town wincon in mind. I have studied them thoroughly and have conclusively concluded that they are not only incredibly townie, they are the key to town winning this game. Explain
The fact that you're serious about this is not good.
|
On October 04 2016 22:41 Oatsmaster wrote:Show nested quote +On October 04 2016 22:25 Calix wrote:On October 04 2016 22:23 Oatsmaster wrote:On October 04 2016 22:17 Calix wrote:On October 04 2016 22:14 Oatsmaster wrote:
I don't see what is there to explain calix, I want to vote for him.
I really don't see what is hard to understand man.
Same to you nu. Why the fuck is who my vote on important now.
Calix asked me why I didn't vote for her basically and she clearly thinks it's alignment indicative or else why would she ask me me about it.
What the fuck kind of logic is that? You ask questions to pry into someone's thought processes which you are STILL NOT EXPLAINING. You stated "Calix is scummy" You voted for Superbia. You did not state a scum-read on Superbia. Why the fuck are you not explaining your vote? If it's 'lul randum xD' then why are you random-voting over a scum-read? Obviously I think super is scummy and obviously I dont think it's worth explaining a read on him just yet. Can you propose a reason why I would do this as scum? Can you explain why you are doing it as town? I don't have a fucking clue what you are trying to achieve here, dude. It makes no sense to throw down a 'vote' without actually voting and then refusing to explain it, since this draws a stupid amount of attention to you, but you are also aware of this (like I was earlier) so that weakens the argument a little. So as it stands, my reasoning for both alignments is "you're an idiot" You're welcome for this incisive analysis. In your opinion, after his first 2 posts what did you read superbia as? This is going somewhere, please assist
I can't help you out much, lol. I didn't have a read on him with those posts because he said he was planning on lurking on Day 1 in the pre-game so while repeating that is redundant, I just read them as generic "check-in" posts.
|
On October 04 2016 22:26 Calix wrote:
Like if you think that WIFOM is going to work out for you then you're going to have a bad time.
Explain yourself or eat rope.
Clearly I'm coming here and trying to get superbia to actually post relevant stuff so I can get a read on him that isnt predicated on his horrible first 2 posts. To do this I don't actually need to vote in the voting thread. You guys need to get it out of your heads that voting is alignment indicative. The only place it's alignment indicative is when it's the vote to Lynch someone or to Lynch some else that djdnt actually get lynched.
|
On October 04 2016 22:39 Calix wrote:
Superbia, you made a similar comment about me "pocketing" you last game. What I wonder is why you think anyone would be buddying up to a lurker.
@NU, I think so? But codes are lame so don't expect me to use one.
Idk. You tell me why you want to buddy up. That's why I was enquiring about the laptop joke as well.
|
On October 04 2016 22:44 Calix wrote:Show nested quote +On October 04 2016 22:41 Oatsmaster wrote:On October 04 2016 22:25 Calix wrote:On October 04 2016 22:23 Oatsmaster wrote:On October 04 2016 22:17 Calix wrote:On October 04 2016 22:14 Oatsmaster wrote:
I don't see what is there to explain calix, I want to vote for him.
I really don't see what is hard to understand man.
Same to you nu. Why the fuck is who my vote on important now.
Calix asked me why I didn't vote for her basically and she clearly thinks it's alignment indicative or else why would she ask me me about it.
What the fuck kind of logic is that? You ask questions to pry into someone's thought processes which you are STILL NOT EXPLAINING. You stated "Calix is scummy" You voted for Superbia. You did not state a scum-read on Superbia. Why the fuck are you not explaining your vote? If it's 'lul randum xD' then why are you random-voting over a scum-read? Obviously I think super is scummy and obviously I dont think it's worth explaining a read on him just yet. Can you propose a reason why I would do this as scum? Can you explain why you are doing it as town? I don't have a fucking clue what you are trying to achieve here, dude. It makes no sense to throw down a 'vote' without actually voting and then refusing to explain it, since this draws a stupid amount of attention to you, but you are also aware of this (like I was earlier) so that weakens the argument a little. So as it stands, my reasoning for both alignments is "you're an idiot" You're welcome for this incisive analysis. In your opinion, after his first 2 posts what did you read superbia as? This is going somewhere, please assist I can't help you out much, lol. I didn't have a read on him with those posts because he said he was planning on lurking on Day 1 in the pre-game so while repeating that is redundant, I just read them as generic "check-in" posts.
Come on you can do better than that. So he makes generic check in posts when it's at least 10 pages of stuff he could actually comment on but he chooses not to? What does that initially say about his alignment?
|
On October 04 2016 22:44 Superbia wrote:Show nested quote +On October 04 2016 22:39 Calix wrote:
Superbia, you made a similar comment about me "pocketing" you last game. What I wonder is why you think anyone would be buddying up to a lurker.
@NU, I think so? But codes are lame so don't expect me to use one. Idk. You tell me why you want to buddy up. That's why I was enquiring about the laptop joke as well.
If you legitimately think that me taking the piss out of your posting style via the form of an obvious joke is 'buddying' then I'm here to tell you that your proctologist called. He found your head.
|
On October 04 2016 22:47 Calix wrote:Show nested quote +On October 04 2016 22:44 Superbia wrote:On October 04 2016 22:39 Calix wrote:
Superbia, you made a similar comment about me "pocketing" you last game. What I wonder is why you think anyone would be buddying up to a lurker.
@NU, I think so? But codes are lame so don't expect me to use one. Idk. You tell me why you want to buddy up. That's why I was enquiring about the laptop joke as well. If you legitimately think that me taking the piss out of your posting style via the form of an obvious joke is 'buddying' then I'm here to tell you that your proctologist called. He found your head.
Getting n1 killed again confirmed.
|
Okay I'm going to stop trolling for now to get some work done. Later. :D
|
HF and Palmar being mafia is real though. Not a troll.
|
On October 04 2016 22:44 Oatsmaster wrote:Show nested quote +On October 04 2016 22:26 Calix wrote:
Like if you think that WIFOM is going to work out for you then you're going to have a bad time.
Explain yourself or eat rope. Clearly I'm coming here and trying to get superbia to actually post relevant stuff so I can get a read on him that isnt predicated on his horrible first 2 posts. To do this I don't actually need to vote in the voting thread. You guys need to get it out of your heads that voting is alignment indicative. The only place it's alignment indicative is when it's the vote to Lynch someone or to Lynch some else that djdnt actually get lynched.
That's detracting from the initial issue. Nobody was objecting to a Superbia vote. We were calling you out on saying that I was scummy while voting for someone else. The fact that the person is Superbia is 0% relevant.
And yes, votes are not AI unless you know what some of the flips are. Thanks mate.
On October 04 2016 22:46 Oatsmaster wrote:Show nested quote +On October 04 2016 22:44 Calix wrote:On October 04 2016 22:41 Oatsmaster wrote:On October 04 2016 22:25 Calix wrote:On October 04 2016 22:23 Oatsmaster wrote:On October 04 2016 22:17 Calix wrote:On October 04 2016 22:14 Oatsmaster wrote:
I don't see what is there to explain calix, I want to vote for him.
I really don't see what is hard to understand man.
Same to you nu. Why the fuck is who my vote on important now.
Calix asked me why I didn't vote for her basically and she clearly thinks it's alignment indicative or else why would she ask me me about it.
What the fuck kind of logic is that? You ask questions to pry into someone's thought processes which you are STILL NOT EXPLAINING. You stated "Calix is scummy" You voted for Superbia. You did not state a scum-read on Superbia. Why the fuck are you not explaining your vote? If it's 'lul randum xD' then why are you random-voting over a scum-read? Obviously I think super is scummy and obviously I dont think it's worth explaining a read on him just yet. Can you propose a reason why I would do this as scum? Can you explain why you are doing it as town? I don't have a fucking clue what you are trying to achieve here, dude. It makes no sense to throw down a 'vote' without actually voting and then refusing to explain it, since this draws a stupid amount of attention to you, but you are also aware of this (like I was earlier) so that weakens the argument a little. So as it stands, my reasoning for both alignments is "you're an idiot" You're welcome for this incisive analysis. In your opinion, after his first 2 posts what did you read superbia as? This is going somewhere, please assist I can't help you out much, lol. I didn't have a read on him with those posts because he said he was planning on lurking on Day 1 in the pre-game so while repeating that is redundant, I just read them as generic "check-in" posts. Come on you can do better than that. So he makes generic check in posts when it's at least 10 pages of stuff he could actually comment on but he chooses not to? What does that initially say about his alignment?
Why don't you just tell us what you're getting at instead of trying to prompt me into saying things for you? I can see the leading questions from a mile off. I've already said that I think those posts are NAI by themselves, the end.
Spit it out or piss off.
|
On October 04 2016 22:40 batsnacks wrote:
Also check out this skit I'm imagining
Mafia Calix goes after Mafia NU for dumb PM BS
People are town reading Mafia NU, Mafia Calix is going in too hard and getting heat
They buddy up and everything is suddenly fine after almost 24 hours of Calix scum reading NU for NAI reasons
Pretty good right?
Good skit. However, I think you are not giving me enough spotlight in it. You know, to make a skit successful, you have to appeal to gender codes. I propose that Mafia Calix is in so much heat that she is about to be lynched... when, suddenly, heroic Mafia NU comes to her rescue by buddying her. All of the assaillants back off the victim in fear of manly NU's wrath. Mafia NU drops Mafia Calix on a cozy hay bed on which she prays Jesus for sending NU to her rescue. Mafia NU leads charge against Town Oatsmaster who finds himself eating rope moments after.
The end.
That's a much better skit.
Sadly it's fiction as Mafia NU is not aboard the Cruise trip.
|
On October 04 2016 22:50 Calix wrote:Show nested quote +On October 04 2016 22:44 Oatsmaster wrote:On October 04 2016 22:26 Calix wrote:
Like if you think that WIFOM is going to work out for you then you're going to have a bad time.
Explain yourself or eat rope. Clearly I'm coming here and trying to get superbia to actually post relevant stuff so I can get a read on him that isnt predicated on his horrible first 2 posts. To do this I don't actually need to vote in the voting thread. You guys need to get it out of your heads that voting is alignment indicative. The only place it's alignment indicative is when it's the vote to Lynch someone or to Lynch some else that djdnt actually get lynched. That's detracting from the initial issue. Nobody was objecting to a Superbia vote. We were calling you out on saying that I was scummy while voting for someone else. The fact that the person is Superbia is 0% relevant. And yes, votes are not AI unless you know what some of the flips are. Thanks mate. Show nested quote +On October 04 2016 22:46 Oatsmaster wrote:On October 04 2016 22:44 Calix wrote:On October 04 2016 22:41 Oatsmaster wrote:On October 04 2016 22:25 Calix wrote:On October 04 2016 22:23 Oatsmaster wrote:On October 04 2016 22:17 Calix wrote:On October 04 2016 22:14 Oatsmaster wrote:
I don't see what is there to explain calix, I want to vote for him.
I really don't see what is hard to understand man.
Same to you nu. Why the fuck is who my vote on important now.
Calix asked me why I didn't vote for her basically and she clearly thinks it's alignment indicative or else why would she ask me me about it.
What the fuck kind of logic is that? You ask questions to pry into someone's thought processes which you are STILL NOT EXPLAINING. You stated "Calix is scummy" You voted for Superbia. You did not state a scum-read on Superbia. Why the fuck are you not explaining your vote? If it's 'lul randum xD' then why are you random-voting over a scum-read? Obviously I think super is scummy and obviously I dont think it's worth explaining a read on him just yet. Can you propose a reason why I would do this as scum? Can you explain why you are doing it as town? I don't have a fucking clue what you are trying to achieve here, dude. It makes no sense to throw down a 'vote' without actually voting and then refusing to explain it, since this draws a stupid amount of attention to you, but you are also aware of this (like I was earlier) so that weakens the argument a little. So as it stands, my reasoning for both alignments is "you're an idiot" You're welcome for this incisive analysis. In your opinion, after his first 2 posts what did you read superbia as? This is going somewhere, please assist I can't help you out much, lol. I didn't have a read on him with those posts because he said he was planning on lurking on Day 1 in the pre-game so while repeating that is redundant, I just read them as generic "check-in" posts. Come on you can do better than that. So he makes generic check in posts when it's at least 10 pages of stuff he could actually comment on but he chooses not to? What does that initially say about his alignment? Why don't you just tell us what you're getting at instead of trying to prompt me into saying things for you? I can see the leading questions from a mile off. I've already said that I think those posts are NAI by themselves, the end. Spit it out or piss off.
I said my point already.
Im not explaining my vote because I'm not trying to get other people to vote for superbia. Is that so hard to understand? The vote is to pressure superbia and it's only for him.
|
I really don't understand why you expect me to pour all my thoughts out into the game.
Is it not obvious that when I vote for someone it's because I think they are scummy?
So I have to say "xx is scummy vote xx" before voting? That's ludicrous.
And it says absolutely nothing about my alignment. So far in this game you have proceed with 2 ridiculous pushes.
|
On October 04 2016 22:55 Oatsmaster wrote:Show nested quote +On October 04 2016 22:50 Calix wrote:On October 04 2016 22:44 Oatsmaster wrote:On October 04 2016 22:26 Calix wrote:
Like if you think that WIFOM is going to work out for you then you're going to have a bad time.
Explain yourself or eat rope. Clearly I'm coming here and trying to get superbia to actually post relevant stuff so I can get a read on him that isnt predicated on his horrible first 2 posts. To do this I don't actually need to vote in the voting thread. You guys need to get it out of your heads that voting is alignment indicative. The only place it's alignment indicative is when it's the vote to Lynch someone or to Lynch some else that djdnt actually get lynched. That's detracting from the initial issue. Nobody was objecting to a Superbia vote. We were calling you out on saying that I was scummy while voting for someone else. The fact that the person is Superbia is 0% relevant. And yes, votes are not AI unless you know what some of the flips are. Thanks mate. On October 04 2016 22:46 Oatsmaster wrote:On October 04 2016 22:44 Calix wrote:On October 04 2016 22:41 Oatsmaster wrote:On October 04 2016 22:25 Calix wrote:On October 04 2016 22:23 Oatsmaster wrote:On October 04 2016 22:17 Calix wrote:On October 04 2016 22:14 Oatsmaster wrote:
I don't see what is there to explain calix, I want to vote for him.
I really don't see what is hard to understand man.
Same to you nu. Why the fuck is who my vote on important now.
Calix asked me why I didn't vote for her basically and she clearly thinks it's alignment indicative or else why would she ask me me about it.
What the fuck kind of logic is that? You ask questions to pry into someone's thought processes which you are STILL NOT EXPLAINING. You stated "Calix is scummy" You voted for Superbia. You did not state a scum-read on Superbia. Why the fuck are you not explaining your vote? If it's 'lul randum xD' then why are you random-voting over a scum-read? Obviously I think super is scummy and obviously I dont think it's worth explaining a read on him just yet. Can you propose a reason why I would do this as scum? Can you explain why you are doing it as town? I don't have a fucking clue what you are trying to achieve here, dude. It makes no sense to throw down a 'vote' without actually voting and then refusing to explain it, since this draws a stupid amount of attention to you, but you are also aware of this (like I was earlier) so that weakens the argument a little. So as it stands, my reasoning for both alignments is "you're an idiot" You're welcome for this incisive analysis. In your opinion, after his first 2 posts what did you read superbia as? This is going somewhere, please assist I can't help you out much, lol. I didn't have a read on him with those posts because he said he was planning on lurking on Day 1 in the pre-game so while repeating that is redundant, I just read them as generic "check-in" posts. Come on you can do better than that. So he makes generic check in posts when it's at least 10 pages of stuff he could actually comment on but he chooses not to? What does that initially say about his alignment? Why don't you just tell us what you're getting at instead of trying to prompt me into saying things for you? I can see the leading questions from a mile off. I've already said that I think those posts are NAI by themselves, the end. Spit it out or piss off. I said my point already. Im not explaining my vote because I'm not trying to get other people to vote for superbia. Is that so hard to understand? The vote is to pressure superbia and it's only for him.
If you're saying that you don't give a fuck about other people voting for Superbia and if you haven't given any compelling arguments for mafia!Superbia then where is the pressure? You just randomly 'voted' for Superbia out of nowhere and didn't explain your reasoning for multiple posts.
You're really confusing me tbh.
|
On October 04 2016 22:50 NeverUnlucky wrote:Show nested quote +On October 04 2016 22:40 batsnacks wrote:
Also check out this skit I'm imagining
Mafia Calix goes after Mafia NU for dumb PM BS
People are town reading Mafia NU, Mafia Calix is going in too hard and getting heat
They buddy up and everything is suddenly fine after almost 24 hours of Calix scum reading NU for NAI reasons
Pretty good right? Good skit. However, I think you are not giving me enough spotlight in it. You know, to make a skit successful, you have to appeal to gender codes. I propose that Mafia Calix is in so much heat that she is about to be lynched... when, suddenly, heroic Mafia NU comes to her rescue by buddying her. All of the assaillants back off the victim in fear of manly NU's wrath. Mafia NU drops Mafia Calix on a cozy hay bed on which she prays Jesus for sending NU to her rescue. Mafia NU leads charge against Town Oatsmaster who finds himself eating rope moments after. The end. That's a much better skit. Sadly it's fiction as Mafia NU is not aboard the Cruise trip.
So oats is town, yeah? 
|
On October 04 2016 22:55 Oatsmaster wrote:Show nested quote +On October 04 2016 22:50 Calix wrote:On October 04 2016 22:44 Oatsmaster wrote:On October 04 2016 22:26 Calix wrote:
Like if you think that WIFOM is going to work out for you then you're going to have a bad time.
Explain yourself or eat rope. Clearly I'm coming here and trying to get superbia to actually post relevant stuff so I can get a read on him that isnt predicated on his horrible first 2 posts. To do this I don't actually need to vote in the voting thread. You guys need to get it out of your heads that voting is alignment indicative. The only place it's alignment indicative is when it's the vote to Lynch someone or to Lynch some else that djdnt actually get lynched. That's detracting from the initial issue. Nobody was objecting to a Superbia vote. We were calling you out on saying that I was scummy while voting for someone else. The fact that the person is Superbia is 0% relevant. And yes, votes are not AI unless you know what some of the flips are. Thanks mate. On October 04 2016 22:46 Oatsmaster wrote:On October 04 2016 22:44 Calix wrote:On October 04 2016 22:41 Oatsmaster wrote:On October 04 2016 22:25 Calix wrote:On October 04 2016 22:23 Oatsmaster wrote:On October 04 2016 22:17 Calix wrote:On October 04 2016 22:14 Oatsmaster wrote:
I don't see what is there to explain calix, I want to vote for him.
I really don't see what is hard to understand man.
Same to you nu. Why the fuck is who my vote on important now.
Calix asked me why I didn't vote for her basically and she clearly thinks it's alignment indicative or else why would she ask me me about it.
What the fuck kind of logic is that? You ask questions to pry into someone's thought processes which you are STILL NOT EXPLAINING. You stated "Calix is scummy" You voted for Superbia. You did not state a scum-read on Superbia. Why the fuck are you not explaining your vote? If it's 'lul randum xD' then why are you random-voting over a scum-read? Obviously I think super is scummy and obviously I dont think it's worth explaining a read on him just yet. Can you propose a reason why I would do this as scum? Can you explain why you are doing it as town? I don't have a fucking clue what you are trying to achieve here, dude. It makes no sense to throw down a 'vote' without actually voting and then refusing to explain it, since this draws a stupid amount of attention to you, but you are also aware of this (like I was earlier) so that weakens the argument a little. So as it stands, my reasoning for both alignments is "you're an idiot" You're welcome for this incisive analysis. In your opinion, after his first 2 posts what did you read superbia as? This is going somewhere, please assist I can't help you out much, lol. I didn't have a read on him with those posts because he said he was planning on lurking on Day 1 in the pre-game so while repeating that is redundant, I just read them as generic "check-in" posts. Come on you can do better than that. So he makes generic check in posts when it's at least 10 pages of stuff he could actually comment on but he chooses not to? What does that initially say about his alignment? Why don't you just tell us what you're getting at instead of trying to prompt me into saying things for you? I can see the leading questions from a mile off. I've already said that I think those posts are NAI by themselves, the end. Spit it out or piss off. I said my point already. Im not explaining my vote because I'm not trying to get other people to vote for superbia. Is that so hard to understand? The vote is to pressure superbia and it's only for him.
Calling a vote a pressure vote kills its intent.
Do you have actual reads?
|
On October 04 2016 22:57 Oatsmaster wrote:
I really don't understand why you expect me to pour all my thoughts out into the game.
Is it not obvious that when I vote for someone it's because I think they are scummy?
So I have to say "xx is scummy vote xx" before voting? That's ludicrous.
And it says absolutely nothing about my alignment. So far in this game you have proceed with 2 ridiculous pushes.
So you didn't explain your reasoning for your vote and you didn't expect people to ask about it? Where exactly were you expecting things to go from there?
Really now.
|
I don't know if Oats is mafia. There was one post he made a while back which I felt was kind-of town.
Other than that, I don't understand him whatsoever.
|
On October 04 2016 22:57 Oatsmaster wrote:
I really don't understand why you expect me to pour all my thoughts out into the game.
Right? People who ask others to explain themselves in a 'talking game' are completely insane!
Is it not obvious that when I vote for someone it's because I think they are scummy?
You just said it was a pressure vote...
So I have to say "xx is scummy vote xx" before voting? That's ludicrous.
Unless you don't want xx lynched, yes.
And it says absolutely nothing about my alignment. So far in this game you have proceed with 2 ridiculous pushes.
Being defensive again.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
