|
I don't remember anything Palmar has done aside from "I'm town, gonna be useless lul" and "Calix is totes mufiah cos she's not writing lots"
HF is possible, haven't properly reread his posts and I imagine that he's hard to read.
Oats is the best one imo.
|
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?
|
On October 04 2016 22:16 Oatsmaster wrote:Show nested quote +On October 04 2016 22:00 Superbia wrote:
For serious though. There's a decent meta reason why I want to stay in the sidelines (as town—but also regardless of alignment) d1. Dude what the fuck. So you think that finding mafia isn't your first priority but instead, staying alive is your first priority? Full of shit
And saying that Superbia is being survivalistic here is a massive stretch. Hope you didn't sprain anything there, love.
|
You're not even voting for Superbia. I just checked the vote thread.
So what the fuck are you doing?
|
On October 04 2016 22:23 Oatsmaster wrote:Show nested quote +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.
|
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.
|
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.
|
That is some impressive tinfoil, my dude.
|
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 22:44 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 22:44 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 22:55 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 22:57 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 22:25 Oatsmaster wrote:Show nested quote +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.
Actually realised that I misread the post.
I thought he was telling the thread to reread Superbia's posts and I wasn't sure why scum would encourage town to look through someone else's filter instead of just making an argument to influence people. Like it doesn't make a lot of sense for scum to want town to review filters critically. This is super nitpicky, I know, but I thought the delivery sounded like something town would encourage more than scum.
But then I realised that he's directing his post to Superbia.
Even though I've just disproved my own point, I still feel uneasy about the thought of lynching him and I'm not sure why. How are you reading him tone-wise outside of 'defensive'?
|
On October 04 2016 23:11 Oatsmaster wrote:Show nested quote +On October 04 2016 22:59 NeverUnlucky wrote:On October 04 2016 22:55 Oatsmaster wrote: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:
[quote]
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? Intent over already. I think koshi has been skating by on pithy little comments. I seem to remember other people promising shit but not delivering. I think it's stutters so he's leaning scum. Pretty sure Marv and Palmar are town. They don't give enough of a shit.
How are you reading the more active players/
Unless you just included people that you have a legitimate alignment read on.
|
On October 04 2016 23:25 marvellosity wrote:Show nested quote +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? So you could ask "why would I do this as scum?" To look like you're doing something to feign activity to be a total twat to really be a total twat
I'm not so convinced here. It doesn't strike me as optimal play to shove yourself into the spotlight in exchange for "I'd never be this stupid as scum" WIFOM.
|
So your argument is that he has fatigue from playing scum too many times in a row and has decided to phone it in for that reason?
Possible, but I don't see a lot in his posts that would lean one way or the other.
I'm relatively confident that he'll slip up if he's scum so I am not worried about him atm.
|
On October 04 2016 23:53 Superbia wrote:Show nested quote +On October 04 2016 23:46 marvellosity wrote:On October 04 2016 23:43 Superbia wrote:
Marv what are your thoughts on the flare? Inconclusively town. Don't think his calix push was particularly shit flingy Mafia latching on then?
What exactly is your argument here? I'm not sure I get you.
|
On October 05 2016 00:14 batsnacks wrote:
Calix said that there was no specific evidence she could produce for NU abusing PMs as Mafia, even though she implied NU did this as Mafia before
Holyflare said "produce evidence or die"
Those events happened in that order. Maybe Mafia Holyflare knowingly issued Calix an impossible task to make the narrative for Calix being Mafia stronger? Anyway that's what I was thinking hopefully it makes sense.
Quote the posts please. I explicitly said that I had no specific evidence after HF's last post iirc.
On another note, Palmar is underwhelming as fuck so far. Wouldn't mind policy-lynching him.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
