|
On May 21 2014 13:00 Tehpoofter wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2014 12:55 Cephiro wrote:On May 21 2014 12:23 Tehpoofter wrote:What should she have answered to be TOWN? Like i see you did that thing as mafia but if you ask a question and there are no right answers the questions are flawed. I think thats how you played this interaction. Yellow is the first one to analyse btw. And just for the record glad you're not just making one giant post and fucking off like the other games we've played. Coming out swinging I like although I don't like this post  Alright, so again. The questions weren't aimed to directly affirm her as mafia or town, but her thought process. The first question was about if she thinks ahead or not. Whether she does or not doesn't make her mafia or town. The second question was to see her thought process if she thought ahead (because the first question made me assured she doesn't, not too far at least.). Her reply: If you don't consider me as mafia, you shouldn't be voting me.
The only reason outside of you considering me as mafia for why you would vote for me is this: you want to get a read on me via my reactions to your voting on me to see if I react poorly or more town favored. This is only used if you don't have a read on me from what I've previously posted.
This can also lead to reads from other people if they begin questioning you or agreeing with you.
So again, why are you reading me as mafia? The main point here is the interaction between the first and last statement. It can easily be seen that she thinks that I consider her mafia, which is correct. Now, you're in a situation where a player is voting on you, asking you questions, since they think you are mafia. 1) Why would you at this point be fairly certain about that player being town, and not point out the possibility of him being scum? 2) Why is your first thought to find the reasons why you are suspected? If I am scum in that situation, my first thought (if I don't know already) is the reason why I'm being suspected. Even if I salvage the situation, if I'm dumb enough to make the mistake again, I will get #rekt. Which is why Step 1) Identify the reason you are being suspected Step 2) Prove why that reason is invalid Step 3) Ascertain your position by providing pro-town (or pro-town looking) content Step 4) Mislynch townies If I'm town and I'm being called scum, I instantly know it's because: 1) Someone is making conclusions that might be logical, but still untrue 2) Scum is pushing me for mislynch, or just trying to discredit my thread presence. Her thoughts are much more aligned with the way a scum thinks in this situation (in my opinion). The third question is to affirm that she isn't of the downplaying kind = she doesn't intentionally hide information to make herself look a worse player than what she is. Rather the opposite, she talks about how confident she is in her mafia-playing abilities. This makes me not believe her claims of having really thought ahead (which again is irrelevant, her response on the other hand is relevant.). These factors combined with the rest of her play like I pointed out, make me feel strongly certain about her being mafia rather than town. If you feel like I didn't elaborate on a point enough, do say and I'll explain further. I routinely read people as town when I'm town for thinking I did something scummy and noticing it. Especially if its something I think I do as scum more than town. This game for example in Mtamb's notes that he decided to post and break my mouse wheel he pointed out that I make jokes and am more trolly and was reading me more mafia from it (a tell he has on me in Video mafia) He clearly is trying to make a correlation between someone he knows and how they play and how they might play this game. This to me makes me think Tambo is coming from a town mindset. So I disagree that just because she reads you as town she is scum.
I don't think Tambo pushing that line of reasoning is in any way alignment indicative for him. I actually find it pretty odd that you push that. I will say that Banks is right in that her not finding her accuser automatically scummy doesn't mean she's scum. I've seen her not push on her accuser on video at least 3-4 times and that's just counting from D1.
|
On May 21 2014 12:40 Cephiro wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2014 12:17 27ninjabunnies wrote:
I figured the calling me mafia was where you were going with this post. I was interested in seeing what you posted, and I have to say, I'm quite impressed. However, there are many things you are wrong within this point. Allow me to point them out. I'll also give some feedback here and there, so if my explanations seems a bit out of order, I apologize.
1) Yes, I am a cooperative person. I'm not going to be completely BM towards a person or fight over things within this forum. I don't find that productive in finding mafia. What is odd to me is why you would start an exchange with me based on me being "cooperative".
1) So this is clearly a correct assumption made by me. I started an exchange with you because since I had my suspicions on you, I knew I would be able to interact with you in the way I wanted to. If you suddenly turned extremely uncooperative to my questions, it would make you look really bad in contrast to your earlier play, and you have pointed out you don't want to be read as scum very clearly. Basically, you were forced by yourself to answer my questions, so I decided to make the best out of it.
2) They say honesty is the best policy. I agree, being scum it is hard to be completely honest, actually impossible! I wasn't admitting annoyance to being called out on a play, I said I was annoyed by his play, specifically him claiming I was avoiding what he was asking, which in my opinion, I don't think I was avoiding. I ended up giing my reasons and reads anyway, so people bringing this up makes little sense to me.
2) It is actually not true, you never followed up with your reasons for Steveling/WaveOfShadow/Thepoofter. You quickly changed to agree that Steve is likely town on based what others posted. Nothing on Wave/Thepoofter, so this is a flat-out lie. You didn't give your reasons for thinking they are scum yet. I would be fine if you were "still looking for more to be certain", but claiming you gave reasons when you didn't? That's a flat-out lie, and you're scum for it. Still makes no sense why people bring it up?
3) No one wants to be read as scum. If I'm read as town, that's less likely there will be a mislynch on me, and actual mafia could be found. If there are any suspicions on me because of a certain read I made that made no sense, then that takes town off the agenda of finding mafia and having to discern whether or not I am town.
3) Certainly true. However, is it more important to a) Find scum or b) Not like like scum. You show great interest in contributing and trying to find scum when you really haven't done anything to show us that's the case, whereas you constantly go on about how you don't want to be read as scum. Certainly, defending yourself is important, but it won't be enough alone to just try and fend off pressure from yourself. Find a more preferable lynch target if you don't want to be on the block.
4) Just because I didn't post so in my posts, doesn't mean I am not thinking ahead. It was obvious from your initial post on me that you were reading me as scum. I wanted your reasons as to why. You hop in this thread with many other questioning going on, and single me out, and I figured you must have a reason to do so, thinking I am mafia. I did consider that you didn't have agood read from me from what I had posted within the forum in previous pages, but usually when someone votes you, you think, oh this person must think I'm mafia. What is he seeing that I nor others are seeing? You asked specifically 2 questions. And I answered those two questions. Just because I didn't answer beyond "the box" of what you wanted me to does not mean I am not thinking ahead or means I am mafia. I just refused to give you further information until you gave me information, which you did not until your huge post.
4) My last question already proved my point of you not being a player that downplays themselves. If you had thought as far ahead, you would've shown that in your posts. We already talked about you being honest. Also fits within your nature to not downplay yourself -> show what your honestly capable of. Again, I don't think you are scum for not thinking ahead. It was just a step I needed to figure so I could analyse your following responses based on if you are able to do that or not. All the questions support each other to the extent I have no reason to believe that you downplayed and were actually thinking far ahead of the scope of the situation we're currently in. So again, I do not think you're mafia for not thinking ahead, I think you are mafia for answering the way you did. (As pointed out in my case).
5) I don't question whether you are scum here yet because of these reasons: if you were scum, why would you single me out out of many other people who could lead harder on you or your partners? I admit I'm not leading town in any direction, nor pushing an agenda. I speak out where I feel is necessary and give reads on which I think is necessary. It's also only early in day 1, and if I have a better scum read, I could push elsewhere, as I stated in my response to you. I also specifically said I didn't know what your alignment was. Your alignment is yet to be determined.
5) You can say things all you want, but all your posts clearly pointed towards reading me as town. As you already said yourself, I have very little reason to do this to you if I was scum. So basically what you're saying is that you agree that the play I did is very likely to come from town? (Which wouldn't necessarily be the case.)
6) I am a good mafia player because I am confident in my reads. Because I push an agenda when I feel I have one. If I don't have a good read on anyone or any certainty, why would I push on a read and mislead town? Its counterproductive. I also asked for your read on me again and again, because you kept saying you would provide it, but then continue to ask me questions. I honestly don't care why you read me as scum. I care why you think I am scum. If you have good reads behind it, then so be it. But you don't. You are basing your entire read on our interactions, and not my interactions, reads, and plays I have made in previous pages of this forum.
6) Pushing on a read even if it's an uncertain one doesn't mean it's misleading town. I could be wrong on you, but I believe I am not. In that small chance of you being town, there is a lot of productive discussion to come from my push on you, do you not agree? I based most of my read on our interactions since that is exactly where I aimed to gain the affirmative thoughts of whether you are mafia or not. Turns out that they point towards you being one. If I thought you were town after those, there wouldn't be a case like this on you right now. Your previous reads and plays are basically nonexistant, like I proved in my point 2. You still haven't followed up on the reads you were asked to tell about, yet claim you have. This is a lie, and does not fit with your honest playstyle. You're a caught scum.
My replies in bolded. Read, she's still scum. Flat out lying in some of her statements, and some of her points just agree with mine, rather than contradicting them.
Ugh, tbh. You annoy me to no end. And my eyes hurt.
Let me refute each of your points once again.
1) Yes, it was correct. I agreed that I am cooperative. Would you rather me go. "NO YOU ARE WRONG. LIKE OHEMGEE SO WRONG! LIKE I CAN'T EVEN BELIEVE THIS." Uh no, I'm not like that. I'm not going to be BM, I'm not going to cause problem. And, So you are basically saying, you are manipulating me into responding how you want me to respond and then calling me scum for you asking leading questions that work in your favor. Congratulations. I wasn't forced into being cooperative. I can choose to be cooprative or not. I chose to be. It had nothing to do with you.
2) I didn't give specific reasonings on any of them because I didn't have specific reasonings. They were mostly because of a gut read and the theory that I had that mafia would be really active in the first couple of pages to come off as townie. I however, did give reads on two other people, Thrawn and Jampi and gave reads behind them. So, no, I'm not scum because of not giving my reads on them when I didn't have set reads.
3) I am questioning certain things, calling people who I think are scum, scum. But I'm not pushing. That's not how I get my reads. I like to read into interactions, plays, and other people's reads. Like I said, when I am certain on someone I will push that someone. Most of the conversation, however, at the beginning was about the RNG play, and then HF, Steve, and whoever the other person was being BM to each other, something I'm not all that into.
4) I don't think I'm reading your case very well. I'll reread again and comment on it later.
5) I don't see how my posts are anywhere indicitive of YOUR alignment, or what I am reading as your alignment. I wanted to know your thoughts and line of thinking before I jumped to that conclusion. If my posts came off as me thinking you were town, that wasn't my intention. Nor was it my intention for my posts to come off as me thinking you were mafia. I wanted to be objective when reading you, especially since you immediately hop into the forum and single me out. I think you could be town making this play, but you could also be mafia. I don't want to base the read ust off of what you think of me, because that is a biasy. There are 30 other players outside of just us.
6) You're right, pushing a wrong read isn't always necessarily bad. But I've gotten lynched in games because of "bad" reads and wrong reads. Especially in a game this big, I'm more hesitant. And the fact it's a closed setup. Maybe I shouldn't be so cautious, cause sometimes I'm not, but I don't have any solid reads to be able to afford to be wrong.
Now for this post:
+ Show Spoiler +On May 21 2014 12:55 Cephiro wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2014 12:23 Tehpoofter wrote:What should she have answered to be TOWN? Like i see you did that thing as mafia but if you ask a question and there are no right answers the questions are flawed. I think thats how you played this interaction. Yellow is the first one to analyse btw. And just for the record glad you're not just making one giant post and fucking off like the other games we've played. Coming out swinging I like although I don't like this post Alright, so again. The questions weren't aimed to directly affirm her as mafia or town, but her thought process. The first question was about if she thinks ahead or not. Whether she does or not doesn't make her mafia or town. The second question was to see her thought process if she thought ahead (because the first question made me assured she doesn't, not too far at least.). Her reply: Show nested quote +If you don't consider me as mafia, you shouldn't be voting me.
The only reason outside of you considering me as mafia for why you would vote for me is this: you want to get a read on me via my reactions to your voting on me to see if I react poorly or more town favored. This is only used if you don't have a read on me from what I've previously posted.
This can also lead to reads from other people if they begin questioning you or agreeing with you.
So again, why are you reading me as mafia? The main point here is the interaction between the first and last statement. It can easily be seen that she thinks that I consider her mafia, which is correct. Now, you're in a situation where a player is voting on you, asking you questions, since they think you are mafia. 1) Why would you at this point be fairly certain about that player being town, and not point out the possibility of him being scum? 2) Why is your first thought to find the reasons why you are suspected? If I am scum in that situation, my first thought (if I don't know already) is the reason why I'm being suspected. Even if I salvage the situation, if I'm dumb enough to make the mistake again, I will get #rekt. Which is why Step 1) Identify the reason you are being suspected Step 2) Prove why that reason is invalid Step 3) Ascertain your position by providing pro-town (or pro-town looking) content Step 4) Mislynch townies If I'm town and I'm being called scum, I instantly know it's because: 1) Someone is making conclusions that might be logical, but still untrue 2) Scum is pushing me for mislynch, or just trying to discredit my thread presence. Her thoughts are much more aligned with the way a scum thinks in this situation (in my opinion). The third question is to affirm that she isn't of the downplaying kind = she doesn't intentionally hide information to make herself look a worse player than what she is. Rather the opposite, she talks about how confident she is in her mafia-playing abilities. This makes me not believe her claims of having really thought ahead (which again is irrelevant, her response on the other hand is relevant.). These factors combined with the rest of her play like I pointed out, make me feel strongly certain about her being mafia rather than town. If you feel like I didn't elaborate on a point enough, do say and I'll explain further.
Like I said, I don't care why you think I'm scum. I wanted to make sure YOU knew why you thought I was scum. Of course I'm going to refute the reads that you have wrong on me, cause that is what you do as town, you show why you are town. Now if I had asked, "What exactly did I do that made me seem scummy, or what should I have done to not seem scummy?" then I would understand why you are pushing that agenda on me. But I specifically asked you what your reasons were, as you basically gave nothing, but just cntinued to ask me questions.
|
I'm not even mad, I'm just amazed at how you think that is "reasoning for a read".
Not providing reason for her reads because they have changed = Providing reads and reasons for them.
.... Can someone teach the me the maths necessary to make the above statement true?
Like seriously Holy, are you joking?
|
On May 21 2014 13:12 Holyflare wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2014 13:06 WaveofShadow wrote:On May 21 2014 13:03 Holyflare wrote:
but i like the cut of his jib Why do you think me/you/marv are the forbidden ones? meta reads? fuck knows, interested why you're on there over hapa tbh
I think it has to do with shadow?
|
Okay, I am taking a mini break to shower and refresh my brain cause it hurts at the moment! If you have any questions, ask away! I'll be up for a bit longer, so I'll respond when I get back!
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
On May 21 2014 13:13 Cephiro wrote:
I'm not even mad, I'm just amazed at how you think that is "reasoning for a read".
Not providing reason for her reads because they have changed = Providing reads and reasons for them.
.... Can someone teach the me the maths necessary to make the above statement true?
Like seriously Holy, are you joking?
because she's played 1 forum game and also comes from video mafia? like, she gave reasoning on why she didn't like 2 players and that's an explanation, what more do you want?
seriously this "pressure" isn't going anywhere and as long as bunnies is just responding to you i'm not going to get a proper read on her either so i suggest dropping it and revisiting it later if something untoward happens
|
On May 21 2014 13:12 Holyflare wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2014 13:06 WaveofShadow wrote:On May 21 2014 13:03 Holyflare wrote:
but i like the cut of his jib Why do you think me/you/marv are the forbidden ones? meta reads? fuck knows, interested why you're on there over hapa tbh
But see obviously you have some idea because you wouldn't have had a reason for hapa to be on there over me, right?
Also, what geript?
|
Oh shadow game. Just got it. Yeah that might make sense...?
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
On May 21 2014 13:21 WaveofShadow wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2014 13:12 Holyflare wrote:On May 21 2014 13:06 WaveofShadow wrote:On May 21 2014 13:03 Holyflare wrote:
but i like the cut of his jib Why do you think me/you/marv are the forbidden ones? meta reads? fuck knows, interested why you're on there over hapa tbh But see obviously you have some idea because you wouldn't have had a reason for hapa to be on there over me, right? Also, what geript?
well i'm assuming they are a list of people he thinks are town or at least not worth reading till later so it's weird hapa isn't there
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
but w/e i'll just let him get on with his thing tbh
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
wave why did you "possibly" town read marv early but after shadow said you wouldn't trust him as far as i remember?
|
On May 21 2014 13:13 27ninjabunnies wrote:Ugh, tbh. You annoy me to no end. And my eyes hurt. Let me refute each of your points once again. 1) Yes, it was correct. I agreed that I am cooperative. Would you rather me go. "NO YOU ARE WRONG. LIKE OHEMGEE SO WRONG! LIKE I CAN'T EVEN BELIEVE THIS." Uh no, I'm not like that. I'm not going to be BM, I'm not going to cause problem. And, So you are basically saying, you are manipulating me into responding how you want me to respond and then calling me scum for you asking leading questions that work in your favor. Congratulations. I wasn't forced into being cooperative. I can choose to be cooprative or not. I chose to be. It had nothing to do with you. 1) Why do you keep making flat out lies? I did not manipulate your responses with the exception of the second, where I only pointed you to think outside the box. Ridiculously enough, you claim right after that all you did was of your own free choice. Another contradiction. If you were so in control of the situation, then why claim that I manipulated you? I didn't say it's a bad thing that you're cooperative. I just pointed out why that was the reason I decided to pick you for my first examination.2) I didn't give specific reasonings on any of them because I didn't have specific reasonings. They were mostly because of a gut read and the theory that I had that mafia would be really active in the first couple of pages to come off as townie. I however, did give reads on two other people, Thrawn and Jampi and gave reads behind them. So, no, I'm not scum because of not giving my reads on them when I didn't have set reads. 2) As mentioned before, I have no issue with you waiting till you're more comfortable with your reads, what I do have an issue with is if you claim to have brought proper content when you haven't. (Lately, there are some smaller posts on other players which are decent, I can't after all expect you to spam walls of text all the time, nor do I want that. Just don't go off trying to make yourself look like a super-contributor when you're not.)3) I am questioning certain things, calling people who I think are scum, scum. But I'm not pushing. That's not how I get my reads. I like to read into interactions, plays, and other people's reads. Like I said, when I am certain on someone I will push that someone. Most of the conversation, however, at the beginning was about the RNG play, and then HF, Steve, and whoever the other person was being BM to each other, something I'm not all that into. 3) Fine with this, given that you'll actually do properly push someone once you're confident enough. But I'm not gonna wait around forever. What I would like to know though, is there a reason you prefer to be more passive instead of getting in there and creating the content yourself for your reads to become more trustworthy?4) I don't think I'm reading your case very well. I'll reread again and comment on it later. Very well. Please do point out as logically as possible if you think a certain point is extremely flawed. Or, if you simply think the logic behind it is reasonable, but the result is still not true, then do point out that also. (I don't expect you to do the latter if you are scum.)
5) I don't see how my posts are anywhere indicitive of YOUR alignment, or what I am reading as your alignment. I wanted to know your thoughts and line of thinking before I jumped to that conclusion. If my posts came off as me thinking you were town, that wasn't my intention. Nor was it my intention for my posts to come off as me thinking you were mafia. I wanted to be objective when reading you, especially since you immediately hop into the forum and single me out. I think you could be town making this play, but you could also be mafia. I don't want to base the read ust off of what you think of me, because that is a biasy. There are 30 other players outside of just us. Trying to remain objective while analyzing a player is fine. But from our interaction, by now at least you should have an idea of what my alignment seems to you. I'm not encouraging you to concentrate on me or my play alone, but it should be one where you shouldn't have too many problems of leaning towards a side or another. Obviously the opinions of other players matters as well, but don't count on anyone but yourself too much.6) You're right, pushing a wrong read isn't always necessarily bad. But I've gotten lynched in games because of "bad" reads and wrong reads. Especially in a game this big, I'm more hesitant. And the fact it's a closed setup. Maybe I shouldn't be so cautious, cause sometimes I'm not, but I don't have any solid reads to be able to afford to be wrong. Understandable.Now for this post: + Show Spoiler +On May 21 2014 12:55 Cephiro wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2014 12:23 Tehpoofter wrote:What should she have answered to be TOWN? Like i see you did that thing as mafia but if you ask a question and there are no right answers the questions are flawed. I think thats how you played this interaction. Yellow is the first one to analyse btw. And just for the record glad you're not just making one giant post and fucking off like the other games we've played. Coming out swinging I like although I don't like this post Alright, so again. The questions weren't aimed to directly affirm her as mafia or town, but her thought process. The first question was about if she thinks ahead or not. Whether she does or not doesn't make her mafia or town. The second question was to see her thought process if she thought ahead (because the first question made me assured she doesn't, not too far at least.). Her reply: Show nested quote +If you don't consider me as mafia, you shouldn't be voting me.
The only reason outside of you considering me as mafia for why you would vote for me is this: you want to get a read on me via my reactions to your voting on me to see if I react poorly or more town favored. This is only used if you don't have a read on me from what I've previously posted.
This can also lead to reads from other people if they begin questioning you or agreeing with you.
So again, why are you reading me as mafia? The main point here is the interaction between the first and last statement. It can easily be seen that she thinks that I consider her mafia, which is correct. Now, you're in a situation where a player is voting on you, asking you questions, since they think you are mafia. 1) Why would you at this point be fairly certain about that player being town, and not point out the possibility of him being scum? 2) Why is your first thought to find the reasons why you are suspected? If I am scum in that situation, my first thought (if I don't know already) is the reason why I'm being suspected. Even if I salvage the situation, if I'm dumb enough to make the mistake again, I will get #rekt. Which is why Step 1) Identify the reason you are being suspected Step 2) Prove why that reason is invalid Step 3) Ascertain your position by providing pro-town (or pro-town looking) content Step 4) Mislynch townies If I'm town and I'm being called scum, I instantly know it's because: 1) Someone is making conclusions that might be logical, but still untrue 2) Scum is pushing me for mislynch, or just trying to discredit my thread presence. Her thoughts are much more aligned with the way a scum thinks in this situation (in my opinion). The third question is to affirm that she isn't of the downplaying kind = she doesn't intentionally hide information to make herself look a worse player than what she is. Rather the opposite, she talks about how confident she is in her mafia-playing abilities. This makes me not believe her claims of having really thought ahead (which again is irrelevant, her response on the other hand is relevant.). These factors combined with the rest of her play like I pointed out, make me feel strongly certain about her being mafia rather than town. If you feel like I didn't elaborate on a point enough, do say and I'll explain further. Of course I'm going to refute the reads that you have wrong on me, cause that is what you do as town, you show why you are town. Now if I had asked, "What exactly did I do that made me seem scummy, or what should I have done to not seem scummy?" then I would understand why you are pushing that agenda on me. But I specifically asked you what your reasons were, as you basically gave nothing, but just cntinued to ask me questions.
The cursived statement I don't really believe in at all, sorry but it made me chuckle.
I continued to ask you questions because it was important to not ask them all at once, and me providing my reasoning before I had gotten what I wanted would not have gotten us where we are now. It was a necessity, even if it wasn't a polite way of going about it. As much as I like to be polite, sometimes other ways are just more effective in a game of mafia.
In any case, I'll give you a break for now. Will be returning to you later though, if you don't first. But I feel this is a good point to end the "First discussion cycle" between us.
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
can someone tell me if serious content posting slam is mafia slam? it used to be back in bewbies days
|
On May 21 2014 13:23 Holyflare wrote:
but w/e i'll just let him get on with his thing tbh
I'm kind of interested as to how he plans to get on with this 'thing' anyway. I'm holding just short of calling it a cop-out especially since surely he know he'd be pinged by about 2000 requests, most of which he will not be able to address. I'm just a little surprised at this approach to the game because Foolishness isn't usually the kind of person who needs direction, he finds his own and rolls with it, every time.
In the end, yeah, let him get on with it etc.
HF is my vote on you for srs?
|
On May 21 2014 13:29 Holyflare wrote:
wave why did you "possibly" town read marv early but after shadow said you wouldn't trust him as far as i remember?
I never fully trust marv.
Ask him. I've played games with him since.
Paranoia is my 'thing,' rite?
|
General question to the players in the game:
1) Is my play more likely to come from town or scum?
2) Reasoning for the above.
Answer these if you'd like to help me get a read on you.
|
Ehhhh I'm back.
Don't like the case on bunnies, I feel like Ceph is stretching it.
Ill filter-dive mtam and yellow, thoughts incoming.
Will keep an eye on end of thread too.
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
On May 21 2014 13:33 WaveofShadow wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2014 13:23 Holyflare wrote:
but w/e i'll just let him get on with his thing tbh I'm kind of interested as to how he plans to get on with this 'thing' anyway. I'm holding just short of calling it a cop-out especially since surely he know he'd be pinged by about 2000 requests, most of which he will not be able to address. I'm just a little surprised at this approach to the game because Foolishness isn't usually the kind of person who needs direction, he finds his own and rolls with it, every time. In the end, yeah, let him get on with it etc. HF is my vote on you for srs?
![[image loading]](http://cdn.niketalk.com/2/2b/2bb06ffa_sure-if-serious-i-am-not.jpeg)
|
holy crap that was a long read. i felt like i was never going to catch up to it.
i feel like there is a lot of jokes and interactions between people who have played together a lot that went wayyyyy over my head in the first few pages.
right now I am having a little bit of trouble organizing my thoughts because there is just a lot of stuff.
the two largest things that i noticed are:
1) 27ninjabunnies talks a whole lot about herself. I am kinda gonna sheep tamburini's reads on bunnies. I read a post and I am neutral, then I read the next one and I find it defensive and with 1 million I's in it, which puts me off. Then I read the next one and I am back to neutral. Idk, it just leaves me a bit skeptical because last game I played with her she was oozing town out of her pores it was so obvious, and the fact that I don't have that feeling right now gives me pause and concern. That said, she is contributing and typing seriously which is significantly more than most people (including myself) have done thus far.
2) I find the people who were highly opposed to the RNG lynch on day 1 questionable. Especially those who said things along the lines of "I think I am better than RNG". I think if you say that on day 2 you can sell me quite a bit on it, as I would not be in favor of an RNG lynch on any day after day 1. Usually there is enough information to make singinifcantly informed guesses by that point in the game. But when you say something along the lines of being "better than RNG" on day 1, it makes me think that you have more information than I do. Which very likely means that you are scum.
I have to do a couple things unexpectedly now and should be back in an hour or so to contribute more, but for now my I will at least leave my top town and scum read.
Top town: Meapak
Top scum: waveofshadow
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
On May 21 2014 13:34 WaveofShadow wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2014 13:29 Holyflare wrote:
wave why did you "possibly" town read marv early but after shadow said you wouldn't trust him as far as i remember? I never fully trust marv. Ask him. I've played games with him since. Paranoia is my 'thing,' rite?
yes i know but paranoia is like what you are doing with me where you just flat out won't trust me but i would have expected it to be similar to your response to marv but here you possibly town read him and i wanted you to explain why
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
