|
On November 03 2016 05:01 Calix wrote:Show nested quote +On November 03 2016 04:59 Foreman wrote:
Calix, talk to me about marghell.
What do you make of his sheeping and buddying? How is he sheeping? He said he agreed with my case with some additional comments. I was initially paranoid that he was trying to pocket me. That was my fear until he made the "lol I don't want to think like Calix" comment. That seems too weird to be a buddying attempt to me. Why would mahrgell be scum if I am town exactly?
I said fair chance, not sure thing.
He's being your echo chamber. I think he realized that and had to distance a bit, hence the rude remark.
|
On November 03 2016 05:05 Skynx wrote:Show nested quote +On November 03 2016 05:00 Calix wrote:On November 03 2016 04:58 Skynx wrote:On November 03 2016 04:56 Calix wrote:On November 03 2016 04:54 Skynx wrote:On November 03 2016 04:53 Calix wrote:On November 03 2016 04:50 Skynx wrote:
None of what happened so far is AI guys please... Then do something that will make AI posts happen. What is the point of sitting around and complaining that people are making early reads exactly? What is the point of spamming bunch of stuff that doesn't have anything to do with anything other than increasing postcount for people that are not here yet? To generate conversation so that the not-yet-here people have something constructive to add, of course. What is your strategy to find scum if we're doing a poor job of it? Add something constructive when i find opportunity to do so. Like I'm doing now, stopping you guys go overboard with surjective NAI stuff cuz it really means absolutely nothing what you guys accuse each other for in past few pages  Oh wonderful, that means that you can tell us how my case on NU doesn't show scum-indicative behaviour Do you have any reads at all? I'm skeptical that you have no initial impressions at all. Here is what happened; Calix sr Exo (gif stuff) Exo sr Calix (doesn't like his push) Everyone sr Everyone (because all pushes are very surjective and doesn't mean anything and everyone is aware of that so might aswell sr the others) What you are asking right now makes sense in that regard as me suggesting you guys pushing NAI stuff on eachother means I should also sr you guys but its just not right and this is all really nothing productive in the end.
Here is what happened:
Skynx entered thread
Skynx complained about unproductive content
Skynx provided unproductive content
What you are doing right now is worse than anything you've complained about, because you should be of the mindset that providing even more unproductive content would only make our situation worse, given your remarks.
|
On November 03 2016 05:14 Calix wrote:Show nested quote +On November 03 2016 05:11 Foreman wrote:On November 03 2016 05:05 Skynx wrote:On November 03 2016 05:00 Calix wrote:On November 03 2016 04:58 Skynx wrote:On November 03 2016 04:56 Calix wrote:On November 03 2016 04:54 Skynx wrote:On November 03 2016 04:53 Calix wrote:On November 03 2016 04:50 Skynx wrote:
None of what happened so far is AI guys please... Then do something that will make AI posts happen. What is the point of sitting around and complaining that people are making early reads exactly? What is the point of spamming bunch of stuff that doesn't have anything to do with anything other than increasing postcount for people that are not here yet? To generate conversation so that the not-yet-here people have something constructive to add, of course. What is your strategy to find scum if we're doing a poor job of it? Add something constructive when i find opportunity to do so. Like I'm doing now, stopping you guys go overboard with surjective NAI stuff cuz it really means absolutely nothing what you guys accuse each other for in past few pages Oh wonderful, that means that you can tell us how my case on NU doesn't show scum-indicative behaviour Do you have any reads at all? I'm skeptical that you have no initial impressions at all. Here is what happened; Calix sr Exo (gif stuff) Exo sr Calix (doesn't like his push) Everyone sr Everyone (because all pushes are very surjective and doesn't mean anything and everyone is aware of that so might aswell sr the others) What you are asking right now makes sense in that regard as me suggesting you guys pushing NAI stuff on eachother means I should also sr you guys but its just not right and this is all really nothing productive in the end. Here is what happened: Skynx entered thread Skynx complained about unproductive content Skynx provided unproductive content What you are doing right now is worse than anything you've complained about, because you should be of the mindset that providing even more unproductive content would only make our situation worse, given your remarks. Last paragraph is the first thing that Foreman's posted that I really like.
This begs the question... What do you object to in the preceding paragraph?
|
On November 03 2016 05:27 Calix wrote:Show nested quote +On November 03 2016 05:24 Foreman wrote:On November 03 2016 05:14 Calix wrote:On November 03 2016 05:11 Foreman wrote:On November 03 2016 05:05 Skynx wrote:On November 03 2016 05:00 Calix wrote:On November 03 2016 04:58 Skynx wrote:On November 03 2016 04:56 Calix wrote:On November 03 2016 04:54 Skynx wrote:On November 03 2016 04:53 Calix wrote:
[quote]
Then do something that will make AI posts happen.
What is the point of sitting around and complaining that people are making early reads exactly? What is the point of spamming bunch of stuff that doesn't have anything to do with anything other than increasing postcount for people that are not here yet? To generate conversation so that the not-yet-here people have something constructive to add, of course. What is your strategy to find scum if we're doing a poor job of it? Add something constructive when i find opportunity to do so. Like I'm doing now, stopping you guys go overboard with surjective NAI stuff cuz it really means absolutely nothing what you guys accuse each other for in past few pages Oh wonderful, that means that you can tell us how my case on NU doesn't show scum-indicative behaviour Do you have any reads at all? I'm skeptical that you have no initial impressions at all. Here is what happened; Calix sr Exo (gif stuff) Exo sr Calix (doesn't like his push) Everyone sr Everyone (because all pushes are very surjective and doesn't mean anything and everyone is aware of that so might aswell sr the others) What you are asking right now makes sense in that regard as me suggesting you guys pushing NAI stuff on eachother means I should also sr you guys but its just not right and this is all really nothing productive in the end. Here is what happened: Skynx entered thread Skynx complained about unproductive content Skynx provided unproductive content What you are doing right now is worse than anything you've complained about, because you should be of the mindset that providing even more unproductive content would only make our situation worse, given your remarks. Last paragraph is the first thing that Foreman's posted that I really like. This begs the question... What do you object to in the preceding paragraph? Nothing. It's a summary of Skynx's behaviour which anyone can do. Nothing to note there. I used the intensifier 'really' to make it clear that I liked the concluding paragraph in particular.
I was just curious because the first set up the second, but your comment looked like you had a completely different take on the first which looked weird to me.
|
On November 03 2016 03:29 Foreman wrote:
1) You are going after an easy target for not doing what they said they'd do (after they got some friction about it when they announced it, iirc?)
And since you never really addressed the following:
On November 03 2016 03:30 Foreman wrote:Show nested quote +On November 03 2016 03:21 Calix wrote:
And as a side note, how is being tryhard a scum tell? Because you're looking for an excuse to accuse somebody of being scum where no scum motive is present.
Where is the scum motive in waffling over whether to post gifs or not?
Show me how doing that helps scum or admit your case was ridiculous and maybe can talk.
|
On November 03 2016 03:01 NeverUnlucky wrote:
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/nEreI9q.jpg)
|
On November 03 2016 05:44 Calix wrote:Show nested quote +On November 03 2016 05:38 Foreman wrote:On November 03 2016 03:29 Foreman wrote:
1) You are going after an easy target for not doing what they said they'd do (after they got some friction about it when they announced it, iirc?) And since you never really addressed the following: On November 03 2016 03:30 Foreman wrote:On November 03 2016 03:21 Calix wrote:
And as a side note, how is being tryhard a scum tell? Because you're looking for an excuse to accuse somebody of being scum where no scum motive is present. Where is the scum motive in waffling over whether to post gifs or not? Show me how doing that helps scum or admit your case was ridiculous and maybe can talk. It wasn't a case though. I never said there was scum motivation. I have stated this on multiple occasions so people need to actually read my posts. I'm not repeating myself again.All I did was ask "yo why did you change your posting style from X pre-game posting style that you said you were doing?". I think this is a perfectly reasonable question since he...changed his posting style AFTER receiving his role so thus it had a chance of yielding AI information. He didn't waffle over it and I didn't say it was scummy. I said it was illogical which isn't the same thing as scum-motivated. It means that I don't get why he did it. (I still don't but the actual reasoning is completely irrelevant so I don't want ExO to answer now) You also have to take into account that I considered his behaviour anti-town. I don't see the problem with questioning a player in that category within the first few posts. It's the best time to clear up such matters, no? I hope that clears up everything.
Well it looked stinted as hell, like you were setting up for an easy target.
Where's this damning evidence against NU?
|
On November 03 2016 05:49 Calix wrote:Show nested quote +On November 03 2016 05:48 Foreman wrote:On November 03 2016 05:44 Calix wrote:On November 03 2016 05:38 Foreman wrote:On November 03 2016 03:29 Foreman wrote:
1) You are going after an easy target for not doing what they said they'd do (after they got some friction about it when they announced it, iirc?) And since you never really addressed the following: On November 03 2016 03:30 Foreman wrote:On November 03 2016 03:21 Calix wrote:
And as a side note, how is being tryhard a scum tell? Because you're looking for an excuse to accuse somebody of being scum where no scum motive is present. Where is the scum motive in waffling over whether to post gifs or not? Show me how doing that helps scum or admit your case was ridiculous and maybe can talk. It wasn't a case though. I never said there was scum motivation. I have stated this on multiple occasions so people need to actually read my posts. I'm not repeating myself again.All I did was ask "yo why did you change your posting style from X pre-game posting style that you said you were doing?". I think this is a perfectly reasonable question since he...changed his posting style AFTER receiving his role so thus it had a chance of yielding AI information. He didn't waffle over it and I didn't say it was scummy. I said it was illogical which isn't the same thing as scum-motivated. It means that I don't get why he did it. (I still don't but the actual reasoning is completely irrelevant so I don't want ExO to answer now) You also have to take into account that I considered his behaviour anti-town. I don't see the problem with questioning a player in that category within the first few posts. It's the best time to clear up such matters, no? I hope that clears up everything. Well it looked stinted as hell, like you were setting up for an easy target. Where's this damning evidence against NU? In his filter...which you could have looked at irregardless of your read on me. Alternatively, it's in my filter. You can skip over Page 1 of my filter because it's pre-game stuff.
I don't share your interpretation of his post.
"I said that" looks to me as if he's saying "no, I'm saying he's scummy"to what you simply referred to as illogical, as in he seems to equivocate logical fallacy with scumminess.
If I'm wrong, so be it... but I don't think I am.
|
On November 03 2016 05:56 Calix wrote:Show nested quote +On November 03 2016 05:54 Foreman wrote:On November 03 2016 05:49 Calix wrote:On November 03 2016 05:48 Foreman wrote:On November 03 2016 05:44 Calix wrote:On November 03 2016 05:38 Foreman wrote:On November 03 2016 03:29 Foreman wrote:
1) You are going after an easy target for not doing what they said they'd do (after they got some friction about it when they announced it, iirc?) And since you never really addressed the following: On November 03 2016 03:30 Foreman wrote:On November 03 2016 03:21 Calix wrote:
And as a side note, how is being tryhard a scum tell? Because you're looking for an excuse to accuse somebody of being scum where no scum motive is present. Where is the scum motive in waffling over whether to post gifs or not? Show me how doing that helps scum or admit your case was ridiculous and maybe can talk. It wasn't a case though. I never said there was scum motivation. I have stated this on multiple occasions so people need to actually read my posts. I'm not repeating myself again.All I did was ask "yo why did you change your posting style from X pre-game posting style that you said you were doing?". I think this is a perfectly reasonable question since he...changed his posting style AFTER receiving his role so thus it had a chance of yielding AI information. He didn't waffle over it and I didn't say it was scummy. I said it was illogical which isn't the same thing as scum-motivated. It means that I don't get why he did it. (I still don't but the actual reasoning is completely irrelevant so I don't want ExO to answer now) You also have to take into account that I considered his behaviour anti-town. I don't see the problem with questioning a player in that category within the first few posts. It's the best time to clear up such matters, no? I hope that clears up everything. Well it looked stinted as hell, like you were setting up for an easy target. Where's this damning evidence against NU? In his filter...which you could have looked at irregardless of your read on me. Alternatively, it's in my filter. You can skip over Page 1 of my filter because it's pre-game stuff. I don't share your interpretation of his post. "I said that" looks to me as if he's saying "no, I'm saying he's scummy"to what you simply referred to as illogical, as in he seems to equivocate logical fallacy with scumminess. If I'm wrong, so be it... but I don't think I am. Are you referring to ExO or NU? I am assuming the former here. Your post is confusing and I don't understand how you reached...whatever it is that you concluded.
I'm talking about NU.
|
On November 03 2016 05:58 Calix wrote:Show nested quote +On November 03 2016 05:57 Foreman wrote:On November 03 2016 05:56 Calix wrote:On November 03 2016 05:54 Foreman wrote:On November 03 2016 05:49 Calix wrote:On November 03 2016 05:48 Foreman wrote:On November 03 2016 05:44 Calix wrote:On November 03 2016 05:38 Foreman wrote:On November 03 2016 03:29 Foreman wrote:
1) You are going after an easy target for not doing what they said they'd do (after they got some friction about it when they announced it, iirc?) And since you never really addressed the following: On November 03 2016 03:30 Foreman wrote:On November 03 2016 03:21 Calix wrote:
And as a side note, how is being tryhard a scum tell? Because you're looking for an excuse to accuse somebody of being scum where no scum motive is present. Where is the scum motive in waffling over whether to post gifs or not? Show me how doing that helps scum or admit your case was ridiculous and maybe can talk. It wasn't a case though. I never said there was scum motivation. I have stated this on multiple occasions so people need to actually read my posts. I'm not repeating myself again.All I did was ask "yo why did you change your posting style from X pre-game posting style that you said you were doing?". I think this is a perfectly reasonable question since he...changed his posting style AFTER receiving his role so thus it had a chance of yielding AI information. He didn't waffle over it and I didn't say it was scummy. I said it was illogical which isn't the same thing as scum-motivated. It means that I don't get why he did it. (I still don't but the actual reasoning is completely irrelevant so I don't want ExO to answer now) You also have to take into account that I considered his behaviour anti-town. I don't see the problem with questioning a player in that category within the first few posts. It's the best time to clear up such matters, no? I hope that clears up everything. Well it looked stinted as hell, like you were setting up for an easy target. Where's this damning evidence against NU? In his filter...which you could have looked at irregardless of your read on me. Alternatively, it's in my filter. You can skip over Page 1 of my filter because it's pre-game stuff. I don't share your interpretation of his post. "I said that" looks to me as if he's saying "no, I'm saying he's scummy"to what you simply referred to as illogical, as in he seems to equivocate logical fallacy with scumminess. If I'm wrong, so be it... but I don't think I am. Are you referring to ExO or NU? I am assuming the former here. Your post is confusing and I don't understand how you reached...whatever it is that you concluded. I'm talking about NU. Then I'm even more confused. Clarification would be welcomed.
You can't remember where NU said "I said that" and you got all twisted?
Oy vey, hold on...
|
On November 03 2016 03:25 NeverUnlucky wrote:Show nested quote +On November 03 2016 03:23 Calix wrote:On November 03 2016 03:21 NeverUnlucky wrote:
Haiii guises, let us keep this atmosphere positive!
I agree with Mr. Foreman and Mr. ExO that Calix's push is not her greatest, and I also agree with Calix that ExO's defensive response looks scummy!
Foreman, may I ask you where you are coming from in terms of community? c: I'm not pushing ExO. That's being extremely generous. I never claimed that ExO was scummy, just illogical. I didn't even call him defensive. Where did you get that from? I said that.
There
|
On November 03 2016 06:05 Calix wrote:Show nested quote +On November 03 2016 06:01 Foreman wrote:On November 03 2016 03:25 NeverUnlucky wrote:On November 03 2016 03:23 Calix wrote:On November 03 2016 03:21 NeverUnlucky wrote:
Haiii guises, let us keep this atmosphere positive!
I agree with Mr. Foreman and Mr. ExO that Calix's push is not her greatest, and I also agree with Calix that ExO's defensive response looks scummy!
Foreman, may I ask you where you are coming from in terms of community? c: I'm not pushing ExO. That's being extremely generous. I never claimed that ExO was scummy, just illogical. I didn't even call him defensive. Where did you get that from? I said that. There My 'illogical' comment was referring to ExO though, not NU. But NU said "I agree with Calix that ExO's defensiveness is scummy" and when I said "I didn't say that, where did you get that idea from?" he then changes and says "well I said that" Which makes no sense. How do you even get that mixed up?
As I already said, NU appears to me to equivocate logical fallacy with scumminess.
Reread his post with the mindset of using one as a synonym for the other and his mindset is more clear, even if I do disagree with the principle.
|
I'd like to see some reads with original content from mahrgell.
|
On November 03 2016 06:18 NeverUnlucky wrote:Show nested quote +On November 03 2016 04:17 Foreman wrote:On November 03 2016 04:14 Calix wrote:On November 03 2016 04:10 Foreman wrote:On November 03 2016 04:01 mahrgell wrote:
@Foreman
Now that you noticed your misread. Are you still going after Calix, or have you shifted your focus on NU?
Would the argument you made for Calix also apply to NU? Or where do you see the difference there? The fact he isn't voting ExO does not make his push any less disingenuous. Knock knock, Calix is here, asking you to read my NU case like a good dear. Is my NU case also disingenuous? If so, how? Considering you've yet to acquit yourself for that shady ExO push, I'm not concerned about your NU push when he isn't even here to respond to it. That is anti-town, dude. As bad and as incorrect as her post on me is, you cannot have this attitude towards her, especially 2 hours into the game. I'm reading this as buddying.
That's a terrible example of buddying.
You'll find one much more blatant if you keep reading.
So what?
|
|
|
|
|
As a side note, it's adorable how people call me anti-town like that should somehow effect the way I play.
Anti-town is how I roll. Not by design, just is what it is.
|
On November 03 2016 06:29 Calix wrote:Show nested quote +On November 03 2016 06:28 Foreman wrote:
As a side note, it's adorable how people call me anti-town like that should somehow effect the way I play.
Anti-town is how I roll. Not by design, just is what it is. How much experience do you have with mafia?
Not overly much, just a few years.
|
On November 03 2016 06:30 NeverUnlucky wrote:
I dislike in this order Skynx, ExO, Foreman, Calix, you.
And I appreciated darthfoley's one post.
That's about how my read look like.
How do you dislike mag**** less than Calix when mag**** has been an echo chamber of Calix?
|
On November 03 2016 06:31 NeverUnlucky wrote:Show nested quote +On November 03 2016 06:08 Foreman wrote:On November 03 2016 06:05 Calix wrote:On November 03 2016 06:01 Foreman wrote:On November 03 2016 03:25 NeverUnlucky wrote:On November 03 2016 03:23 Calix wrote:On November 03 2016 03:21 NeverUnlucky wrote:
Haiii guises, let us keep this atmosphere positive!
I agree with Mr. Foreman and Mr. ExO that Calix's push is not her greatest, and I also agree with Calix that ExO's defensive response looks scummy!
Foreman, may I ask you where you are coming from in terms of community? c: I'm not pushing ExO. That's being extremely generous. I never claimed that ExO was scummy, just illogical. I didn't even call him defensive. Where did you get that from? I said that. There My 'illogical' comment was referring to ExO though, not NU. But NU said "I agree with Calix that ExO's defensiveness is scummy" and when I said "I didn't say that, where did you get that idea from?" he then changes and says "well I said that" Which makes no sense. How do you even get that mixed up? As I already said, NU appears to me to equivocate logical fallacy with scumminess. Reread his post with the mindset of using one as a synonym for the other and his mindset is more clear, even if I do disagree with the principle. Mhh? That's 100% Calix you're describing here. I rarely if ever read people based on logic. What made you think that?
If you're saying you don't equivocate illogical with scummy, them I'm wrong in my interpretation and that actually strengthens Calix's case imho.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
