|
That case on ika is incredibly bad ME. I'll let him address it though but that's my opinion on it. It looks really fabricated and scummy.
bdtd-I'm here and if you think I'm avoiding the thread or trying not to do anything, then you are misrepping me badly. I have no problem addressing all your points in detail and anything else anyone wants to talk about.
First, I don't believe your roleblock claim because you lied about being the doc getting the real doc lynched, then claimed cop, then claimed VT, then claimed cop, then VT and now you say you are roleblocked. I don't believe a word you say. I think you should be lynched. Period. You've been lying all game. You have been flailing ever since. So no, I'm not going to reconsider wanting to lynch you.
There is nothing wrong with my Onegu filter. I had no read on him. That's how I got one. null town just means he is leaning town but has a lot of null posts so it isn't a strong townread. I went from null to town on him and I showed how I got there. I did the same on Squishy-I had no read and kept going back and forth-so now I have one. Town should always be reanalyzing their reads and make sure they are correct. If you don't know what null town means, you need to ask me instead of making false assumptions about it. You must be o.k. with my Reps filter since you said nothing about it.
I'm not the least afraid of pressuring Onegu or doing something this day phase. That is just serious misrep and it's scummy as hell. I have been here and am willing to answer any question directed at me including discussion of my reads and posts on filters, etc. You are basically calling one of the most active players afraid to do something. Yeah, no.
You saying it's incredibly scummy that I'm not feeling well and tired is BS. I have been sick for two days and have been going to the hospital everyday for radiation therapy. DO NOT EVER go after me for real life again.
You saying my townread on ika is scummy is complete crap since you also have a townread on him. I'm not praising ika at all-again complete and total misrep. I'm explaining why I think he's town because I have extensive experience with him. As far as paranoia goes or being too sure he's town, he's my strongest townread based on nearly 100 posts he's put into this game and my experience with him. If I had said right away, I think he's town, you'd have a point but I didn't.
That last part is me telling you to give reads if your town and the fact that you didn't was me thinking you are scum. Also, you went after me for RL again. I was at the dr. office so I couldn't post more than that. If that's the only thing I posted all day, I could let it go BUT I've been doing more than that. You are just ignoring it to fit your narrative that I'm trying to look active. Considering how many posts I've put into this game, that's just completely wrong.
I believe you are selectively pointing out posts I made this day phase and shifting them to fit your narrative that they are scummy when they are clearly town oriented and that's scummy as shit. Get lynched.
|
|
|
On January 11 2017 05:00 reps)squishy wrote:
What are you doing? If you want to see why he was convinced that I was town you cannot read a filter. You are only seeing his posts...
I would like to know why you think I am scum.
What am I doing ? I am trying to build a case against ika. I am not filter reading just him, I looked at your post. Are you trying to imply that I am being sloppy ? ( I probably am because i am playing this for the first time, but not in the way you are implying ).
I'll let you know why I think you are scum:
Quite a few of your posts are of the form : 'I am not around/work/car died/ but I try to make it up with posting 'quality'.' . It appears as if you are trying to be useful.
On January 09 2017 09:44 reps)squishy wrote:Show nested quote +On January 09 2017 09:39 ika42 wrote:On January 09 2017 09:35 reps)squishy wrote:On January 09 2017 09:30 ika42 wrote:
Cool silver is town Can you elaborate please. Did you read the start of the night? where i was talking to vix about it? Yes, but I will have to reread to get a clearer picture.
Now when you ask ika why you think SW is town, ika responds with 'have you read the posts'. You respond with 'yes, but i need to re-read them for a clearer picture' Why ? If you are contributing for quality over quantity, would you not already point out holes in ika's argument rather than come up with an apology.
On January 10 2017 05:30 reps)squishy wrote:Show nested quote +On January 10 2017 05:14 Calix wrote:On January 10 2017 04:56 darthfoley wrote:On January 08 2017 06:15 ika42 wrote:
rep is partner trying to save grak.
calling it now Also wondering what you make of squishy atm, now that Grack flipped town He's pretty weird. He has a strong start and I really liked the way he was approaching the game, felt legit to me. However he doesn't interact much with the thread and doesn't have a conversational way of posting so it's hard to get a feel for him. Even when he made some one-liners, he still talked like he had a stick up his arse. It sucks that we don't have any meta on him tbh. I don't think his Onegu post was that bad if you look at it out of context but his timing was whack and it doesn't fit with the rest of his filter imo. Given that, I have downgraded him to null for similar reasons to D1!kmatt. Noted. I will try to be more conversational. My posts in the past are bulky, because of real life time restraints. So my philosophy was quality over quantity. Right now aside from unanimously agreeing to lynch btdt, there are no leads. Therefore I will be more conversational!
Now here you again talk about this philosophy of yours, but what was that post then ? These are my reasons for calling you scum.
|
Okay, those giant posts of one-liners were a pile of crap. I don't understand what line of thinking BTDT is using. Like when he says something and makes a conclusion, I do not follow how he gets from A to B. It's hard to tell how valid his points actually are when I don't get what his points are in the first place.
ME's post also does not make a great deal of sense. I'll admit to only skimming that one but any 'case' with that many quotes needed is going to be mediocre at best.
Also for the love of Christ, can people please spoiler the text walls if you're gonna respond to them?
|
Another really weak case by ME on Squishy. Almost as bad as his ika case.
|
On January 11 2017 05:14 darthfoley wrote:Show nested quote +On January 11 2017 04:55 reps)squishy wrote:On January 11 2017 04:07 beentheredonethat wrote:reps)squishy should be lynched with fire. This is out of the question. On January 06 2017 16:53 reps)squishy wrote:On January 06 2017 10:41 KelsierSC wrote:On January 06 2017 10:39 darthfoley wrote:On January 06 2017 10:24 KelsierSC wrote:On January 06 2017 10:19 Calix wrote:On January 06 2017 10:16 KelsierSC wrote:On January 06 2017 10:13 Calix wrote:
[quote]
My emotional state is irrelevant to the question.
You claim to have reads, I'm asking for them. What's the point of saying "I have reads" and then be stubborn about sharing them? so what I did is I checked the order in which people responded to the questionnaire and the first ones to respond are clear town until we get to the people who were like 4th and onwards who are likely scum. 100% accurate I can't tell whether you're being serious or blowing me off here or both. If it's the former, I'd like to hear the rationale for that. nah not being serious, you just had no chill so it was fun to mess with you a bit. i thought your first post about michael was pretty good so your pretty towny to me. everyone else is suspect though. especially that kmatt dude If you think kmatt is suspect why did you vote Grack? cos silverwolf blew the whole thing wide open with his theory that maybe earlier posting was scum and not later posting. So I perfectly fused the two theories and my calculations said that 4th post was most likely mafia. You want a graph? I find this a bit scummy. He really can't get any leads from this and just throws out numbers. I do not think this logic is sound whatsoever. It would be fine if it was just begging of the game meme, but he actually did vote for Grack. Of topic: Typing Grack reminded me of this + Show Spoiler + So there's this huge conversation going on. Quote and quote and quote. And he "finds this a bit scummy." Why would you take a post that is obviously trolly so seriously? But he does: On January 07 2017 05:13 reps)squishy wrote:On January 07 2017 04:38 Kmatt wrote:
Grackaroni
Still waiting on more. Like with SW, I don't scumread this guy enough to vote him, but I can see why Kelsier wouldn't like him. A bit too quick to jump the gun but I've done that myself and everyone plays D1 differently.
Kelsier's logic was based on Ika's questionnaire people who responded early would be town. Then I think it was SW said maybe to opposite mafia would want to respond quickly. So Kelsier "perfectly fused the two theories to make the 4th person who respond mafia. Grack just unfortunately posted 4th which Kelsier humorously then voted for him. So do you also believe in the post too early or too late you are possible scum so the in between is where it is at? If you don't believe Kelsier's hypothesis then this statement "I can see why Kelsier wouldn't like him." is not all that true I am not out to lynch Kelsier, just his lynch vote is not based on any logic or read I would find compelling. Townreads Onegu in a weird way: + Show Spoiler +On January 07 2017 11:32 reps)squishy wrote:Show nested quote +On January 07 2017 09:24 Onegu wrote:On January 07 2017 08:31 darthfoley wrote:
@Calix Like do you really expect every player who goes AFK for a period of time to provide a reason why? If so, I can wait for the impending doom for btdt and Onegu lol You wont get reasons why I go afk. I used to provide them but then had a discussion over it with someone that it can cause people to make reads on me based on my reasons. So I have stopped posting them for the most part. Unless I know in a few days I have a doctors appointment and wont be around I normally tell people about it before hand but if something comes up and I am gone I just comeback and dont say anything anymore. Now that your caught up with the reading you could have told people who your leads are. Instead you have become entirely defensive about your activity, and BostonSC's failed vote for you. I want you to get on track since I kind of trust your VT claim. So here is a question for you. I am currently leaning toward Vivax myself because of SilverWolf77's response to my questioning. So why do you feel this way: Then, weird "suspicions that are not AI" on Vivax: On January 07 2017 12:40 reps)squishy wrote:@Grackaroni/b]
your evidence that Vivax was a townie was no different than just singling out his post like you can do here.
On January 07 2017 12:00 Grackaroni wrote:
If people want to lynch Vivax at the end of the day I will refute whatever arguments they put forth for him being scum and put forward my own arguments for whoever I want to lynch.
I have suspicions of vivax nothing AI otherwise I would have voted. But a failure to show that he is a townie makes my suspicions grow. Do we honestly need to vote for Vivax for you to finally give evidence he is a townie? Being lazy here, but I'd lynch him at any point. [b]I do not like his motives for voting the 4th person. I took it seriously because he did lay down a vote because of that reasoning. So I criticized it. I don't want other people following this hoopla. I was also worried Grack's "I can see why Kelsier wouldn't like him" meant other people were following Kelsiers unorthodox logic. I did take 1gu's VT claim to heart until I found out it is NAI. Having suspicions and not saying they are AI is scummy? I don't equate suspicions to AI. That is my own opinion if you don't agree, let us agree to disagree, because the last thing we need is an argument over semantics. His point is that people often vote randomly early game, just to be trolls or whatever, but you took it more seriously than it deserved at the time. Scum often want to seem like they're scum hunting, so going for someone that is trolling early game is kind of low hanging fruit and something I could see you trying to do to seem helpful.
I was not aware people randomly voted at the start of the game. Noted.
|
On January 11 2017 05:28 MichaelEhrmantraut wrote:Show nested quote +On January 11 2017 05:00 reps)squishy wrote:
What are you doing? If you want to see why he was convinced that I was town you cannot read a filter. You are only seeing his posts...
I would like to know why you think I am scum. What am I doing ? I am trying to build a case against ika. I am not filter reading just him, I looked at your post. Are you trying to imply that I am being sloppy ? ( I probably am because i am playing this for the first time, but not in the way you are implying ). I'll let you know why I think you are scum: Quite a few of your posts are of the form : 'I am not around/work/car died/ but I try to make it up with posting 'quality'.' . It appears as if you are trying to be useful. Show nested quote +On January 09 2017 09:44 reps)squishy wrote:On January 09 2017 09:39 ika42 wrote:On January 09 2017 09:35 reps)squishy wrote:On January 09 2017 09:30 ika42 wrote:
Cool silver is town Can you elaborate please. Did you read the start of the night? where i was talking to vix about it? Yes, but I will have to reread to get a clearer picture. Now when you ask ika why you think SW is town, ika responds with 'have you read the posts'. You respond with 'yes, but i need to re-read them for a clearer picture' Why ? If you are contributing for quality over quantity, would you not already point out holes in ika's argument rather than come up with an apology. Show nested quote +On January 10 2017 05:30 reps)squishy wrote:On January 10 2017 05:14 Calix wrote:On January 10 2017 04:56 darthfoley wrote:On January 08 2017 06:15 ika42 wrote:
rep is partner trying to save grak.
calling it now Also wondering what you make of squishy atm, now that Grack flipped town He's pretty weird. He has a strong start and I really liked the way he was approaching the game, felt legit to me. However he doesn't interact much with the thread and doesn't have a conversational way of posting so it's hard to get a feel for him. Even when he made some one-liners, he still talked like he had a stick up his arse. It sucks that we don't have any meta on him tbh. I don't think his Onegu post was that bad if you look at it out of context but his timing was whack and it doesn't fit with the rest of his filter imo. Given that, I have downgraded him to null for similar reasons to D1!kmatt. Noted. I will try to be more conversational. My posts in the past are bulky, because of real life time restraints. So my philosophy was quality over quantity. Right now aside from unanimously agreeing to lynch btdt, there are no leads. Therefore I will be more conversational! Now here you again talk about this philosophy of yours, but what was that post then ? These are my reasons for calling you scum.
This is actually readable, thank God.
Talking about people mentioning RL/ activity reasons/ etc is NOT something that should be used to determine someone's alignment. It really gets on my nerves when people speculate whether someone is lying about their RL issues because all that does is piss off the suspect in question and it does NOTHING.
Re: the actual read here, how do those posts 'try to look useful'?
I don't see an apology there so I do not understand your jump to your last line, nor do I see how any of this is AI.
|
On January 11 2017 05:29 Calix wrote:
ME's post also does not make a great deal of sense. I'll admit to only skimming that one but any 'case' with that many quotes needed is going to be mediocre at best.
Also for the love of Christ, can people please spoiler the text walls if you're gonna respond to them?
Ok.
On January 11 2017 05:34 Calix wrote:
This is actually readable, thank God.
Talking about people mentioning RL/ activity reasons/ etc is NOT something that should be used to determine someone's alignment. It really gets on my nerves when people speculate whether someone is lying about their RL issues because all that does is piss off the suspect in question and it does NOTHING.
Re: the actual read here, how do those posts 'try to look useful'?
I don't see an apology there so I do not understand your jump to your last line, nor do I see how any of this is AI.
ok, noted, but I don't think people should keep mentioning RL activity. What do you mean by you don't see an apology there ?
|
On January 11 2017 05:42 MichaelEhrmantraut wrote:Show nested quote +On January 11 2017 05:29 Calix wrote:
ME's post also does not make a great deal of sense. I'll admit to only skimming that one but any 'case' with that many quotes needed is going to be mediocre at best.
Also for the love of Christ, can people please spoiler the text walls if you're gonna respond to them? Ok. Show nested quote +On January 11 2017 05:34 Calix wrote:
This is actually readable, thank God.
Talking about people mentioning RL/ activity reasons/ etc is NOT something that should be used to determine someone's alignment. It really gets on my nerves when people speculate whether someone is lying about their RL issues because all that does is piss off the suspect in question and it does NOTHING.
Re: the actual read here, how do those posts 'try to look useful'?
I don't see an apology there so I do not understand your jump to your last line, nor do I see how any of this is AI. ok, noted, but I don't think people should keep mentioning RL activity. What do you mean by you don't see an apology there ?
"If you are contributing for quality over quantity, would you not already point out holes in ika's argument rather than come up with an apology."
Where is the apology you refer to? There isn't one in the quote you referenced when you wrote that line.
|
On January 11 2017 05:45 Calix wrote:Show nested quote +On January 11 2017 05:42 MichaelEhrmantraut wrote:On January 11 2017 05:29 Calix wrote:
ME's post also does not make a great deal of sense. I'll admit to only skimming that one but any 'case' with that many quotes needed is going to be mediocre at best.
Also for the love of Christ, can people please spoiler the text walls if you're gonna respond to them? Ok. On January 11 2017 05:34 Calix wrote:
This is actually readable, thank God.
Talking about people mentioning RL/ activity reasons/ etc is NOT something that should be used to determine someone's alignment. It really gets on my nerves when people speculate whether someone is lying about their RL issues because all that does is piss off the suspect in question and it does NOTHING.
Re: the actual read here, how do those posts 'try to look useful'?
I don't see an apology there so I do not understand your jump to your last line, nor do I see how any of this is AI. ok, noted, but I don't think people should keep mentioning RL activity. What do you mean by you don't see an apology there ? "If you are contributing for quality over quantity, would you not already point out holes in ika's argument rather than come up with an apology." Where is the apology you refer to? There isn't one in the quote you referenced when you wrote that line.
Do you actually have to say 'Sorry' for it to count as an apology. Look at the tone of his posts earlier, now suddenly he goes on to say that, I'll re-read, if he wants to contribute with quality over quantity ( which frankly should be everyone's goal ), shouldn't he already be on top of that post. He doesn't throw shade at it later, doesn't explain why he changed his opinion, when he had questioned it earlier.
|
On January 11 2017 05:49 MichaelEhrmantraut wrote:Show nested quote +On January 11 2017 05:45 Calix wrote:On January 11 2017 05:42 MichaelEhrmantraut wrote:On January 11 2017 05:29 Calix wrote:
ME's post also does not make a great deal of sense. I'll admit to only skimming that one but any 'case' with that many quotes needed is going to be mediocre at best.
Also for the love of Christ, can people please spoiler the text walls if you're gonna respond to them? Ok. On January 11 2017 05:34 Calix wrote:
This is actually readable, thank God.
Talking about people mentioning RL/ activity reasons/ etc is NOT something that should be used to determine someone's alignment. It really gets on my nerves when people speculate whether someone is lying about their RL issues because all that does is piss off the suspect in question and it does NOTHING.
Re: the actual read here, how do those posts 'try to look useful'?
I don't see an apology there so I do not understand your jump to your last line, nor do I see how any of this is AI. ok, noted, but I don't think people should keep mentioning RL activity. What do you mean by you don't see an apology there ? "If you are contributing for quality over quantity, would you not already point out holes in ika's argument rather than come up with an apology." Where is the apology you refer to? There isn't one in the quote you referenced when you wrote that line. Do you actually have to say 'Sorry' for it to count as an apology. Look at the tone of his posts earlier, now suddenly he goes on to say that, I'll re-read, if he wants to contribute with quality over quantity ( which frankly should be everyone's goal ), shouldn't he already be on top of that post. He doesn't throw shade at it later, doesn't explain why he changed his opinion, when he had questioned it earlier.
Uh, yes?
I have no idea what the rest of this says and I've probably lost brain cells trying to comprehend this.
|
On January 11 2017 05:49 MichaelEhrmantraut wrote:Show nested quote +On January 11 2017 05:45 Calix wrote:On January 11 2017 05:42 MichaelEhrmantraut wrote:On January 11 2017 05:29 Calix wrote:
ME's post also does not make a great deal of sense. I'll admit to only skimming that one but any 'case' with that many quotes needed is going to be mediocre at best.
Also for the love of Christ, can people please spoiler the text walls if you're gonna respond to them? Ok. On January 11 2017 05:34 Calix wrote:
This is actually readable, thank God.
Talking about people mentioning RL/ activity reasons/ etc is NOT something that should be used to determine someone's alignment. It really gets on my nerves when people speculate whether someone is lying about their RL issues because all that does is piss off the suspect in question and it does NOTHING.
Re: the actual read here, how do those posts 'try to look useful'?
I don't see an apology there so I do not understand your jump to your last line, nor do I see how any of this is AI. ok, noted, but I don't think people should keep mentioning RL activity. What do you mean by you don't see an apology there ? "If you are contributing for quality over quantity, would you not already point out holes in ika's argument rather than come up with an apology." Where is the apology you refer to? There isn't one in the quote you referenced when you wrote that line. Do you actually have to say 'Sorry' for it to count as an apology. Look at the tone of his posts earlier, now suddenly he goes on to say that, I'll re-read, if he wants to contribute with quality over quantity ( which frankly should be everyone's goal ), shouldn't he already be on top of that post. He doesn't throw shade at it later, doesn't explain why he changed his opinion, when he had questioned it earlier.
ME I do not know what you are saying, looks like you are cropping quotes a bit. Calix said to use spoilers, not to crop.
Use these + Show Spoiler +
|
On January 11 2017 05:23 SilverWolf77 wrote:
That case on ika is incredibly bad ME. I'll let him address it though but that's my opinion on it. It looks really fabricated and scummy.
bdtd-I'm here and if you think I'm avoiding the thread or trying not to do anything, then you are misrepping me badly. I have no problem addressing all your points in detail and anything else anyone wants to talk about.
First, I don't believe your roleblock claim because you lied about being the doc getting the real doc lynched, then claimed cop, then claimed VT, then claimed cop, then VT and now you say you are roleblocked. I don't believe a word you say. I think you should be lynched. Period. You've been lying all game. You have been flailing ever since. So no, I'm not going to reconsider wanting to lynch you.
There is nothing wrong with my Onegu filter. I had no read on him. That's how I got one. null town just means he is leaning town but has a lot of null posts so it isn't a strong townread. I went from null to town on him and I showed how I got there. I did the same on Squishy-I had no read and kept going back and forth-so now I have one. Town should always be reanalyzing their reads and make sure they are correct. If you don't know what null town means, you need to ask me instead of making false assumptions about it. You must be o.k. with my Reps filter since you said nothing about it.
I'm not the least afraid of pressuring Onegu or doing something this day phase. That is just serious misrep and it's scummy as hell. I have been here and am willing to answer any question directed at me including discussion of my reads and posts on filters, etc. You are basically calling one of the most active players afraid to do something. Yeah, no.
You saying it's incredibly scummy that I'm not feeling well and tired is BS. I have been sick for two days and have been going to the hospital everyday for radiation therapy. DO NOT EVER go after me for real life again.
You saying my townread on ika is scummy is complete crap since you also have a townread on him. I'm not praising ika at all-again complete and total misrep. I'm explaining why I think he's town because I have extensive experience with him. As far as paranoia goes or being too sure he's town, he's my strongest townread based on nearly 100 posts he's put into this game and my experience with him. If I had said right away, I think he's town, you'd have a point but I didn't.
That last part is me telling you to give reads if your town and the fact that you didn't was me thinking you are scum. Also, you went after me for RL again. I was at the dr. office so I couldn't post more than that. If that's the only thing I posted all day, I could let it go BUT I've been doing more than that. You are just ignoring it to fit your narrative that I'm trying to look active. Considering how many posts I've put into this game, that's just completely wrong.
I believe you are selectively pointing out posts I made this day phase and shifting them to fit your narrative that they are scummy when they are clearly town oriented and that's scummy as shit. Get lynched.
Why you feel the need to go through his post point by point and refute it all when
1) You think he's mafia
2) He's 1000% getting lynched today
This just feels a little too defensive for my liking. Can you focus on someone besides btdt? Like what do you make of Calix/ME/B0ston etc... anyone that isn't BTDT. If you're town literally the last thing we need is to continue to tilt.
|
I can literally feel a headache coming on from trying to understand what half of these posts the past two pages are even saying.
|
On January 11 2017 05:55 Calix wrote:
I can literally feel a headache coming on from trying to understand what half of these posts the past two pages are even saying.
What do you make of SW's response to btdt, considering my post ^
|
On January 11 2017 05:56 darthfoley wrote:Show nested quote +On January 11 2017 05:55 Calix wrote:
I can literally feel a headache coming on from trying to understand what half of these posts the past two pages are even saying. What do you make of SW's response to btdt, considering my post ^
I found it hard to read but when I actually look at the contents of the entire post, you're right. It's an awful lot of words for a defense which isn't needed and most of the defense is not even that good. I didn't find any of the points compelling is what I mean there.
|
On January 11 2017 05:56 darthfoley wrote:Show nested quote +On January 11 2017 05:55 Calix wrote:
I can literally feel a headache coming on from trying to understand what half of these posts the past two pages are even saying. What do you make of SW's response to btdt, considering my post ^
I know this was directed at Calix, but I think it is okay to respond to people who are getting lynched. What people say will influence how people see you. It may be a little over defensive though.
|
On January 11 2017 05:53 Calix wrote:Show nested quote +On January 11 2017 05:49 MichaelEhrmantraut wrote:On January 11 2017 05:45 Calix wrote:On January 11 2017 05:42 MichaelEhrmantraut wrote:On January 11 2017 05:29 Calix wrote:+ Show Spoiler +
ME's post also does not make a great deal of sense. I'll admit to only skimming that one but any 'case' with that many quotes needed is going to be mediocre at best.
Also for the love of Christ, can people please spoiler the text walls if you're gonna respond to them?
Ok. On January 11 2017 05:34 Calix wrote:
This is actually readable, thank God.
Talking about people mentioning RL/ activity reasons/ etc is NOT something that should be used to determine someone's alignment. It really gets on my nerves when people speculate whether someone is lying about their RL issues because all that does is piss off the suspect in question and it does NOTHING.
Re: the actual read here, how do those posts 'try to look useful'?
I don't see an apology there so I do not understand your jump to your last line, nor do I see how any of this is AI. ok, noted, but I don't think people should keep mentioning RL activity. What do you mean by you don't see an apology there ? "If you are contributing for quality over quantity, would you not already point out holes in ika's argument rather than come up with an apology." Where is the apology you refer to? There isn't one in the quote you referenced when you wrote that line. Do you actually have to say 'Sorry' for it to count as an apology. Look at the tone of his posts earlier, now suddenly he goes on to say that, I'll re-read, if he wants to contribute with quality over quantity ( which frankly should be everyone's goal ), shouldn't he already be on top of that post. He doesn't throw shade at it later, doesn't explain why he changed his opinion, when he had questioned it earlier. Uh, yes? I have no idea what the rest of this says and I've probably lost brain cells trying to comprehend this.
What can you not understand, here I'll fucking BULLET IT FOR YOU :
1. reps squishy is SCUM
2. reps squishy said : I value quality not quantity
3. reps squishy questions ika's read on Silverwolf77, ika says SW is town.
4. ika says did you read my arguments
5. reps says ' yes, but i'll have to re-read them'
6. why does reps have to re-read them when his earlier stated philosophy is : ' quality over quantity'
7. why is he not on top of ika, questioning his arguments
8. why does he not say why he changed his opinion on ika's read whne he questioned him earlier
|
On January 11 2017 05:54 darthfoley wrote:Show nested quote +On January 11 2017 05:23 SilverWolf77 wrote:
That case on ika is incredibly bad ME. I'll let him address it though but that's my opinion on it. It looks really fabricated and scummy.
bdtd-I'm here and if you think I'm avoiding the thread or trying not to do anything, then you are misrepping me badly. I have no problem addressing all your points in detail and anything else anyone wants to talk about.
First, I don't believe your roleblock claim because you lied about being the doc getting the real doc lynched, then claimed cop, then claimed VT, then claimed cop, then VT and now you say you are roleblocked. I don't believe a word you say. I think you should be lynched. Period. You've been lying all game. You have been flailing ever since. So no, I'm not going to reconsider wanting to lynch you.
There is nothing wrong with my Onegu filter. I had no read on him. That's how I got one. null town just means he is leaning town but has a lot of null posts so it isn't a strong townread. I went from null to town on him and I showed how I got there. I did the same on Squishy-I had no read and kept going back and forth-so now I have one. Town should always be reanalyzing their reads and make sure they are correct. If you don't know what null town means, you need to ask me instead of making false assumptions about it. You must be o.k. with my Reps filter since you said nothing about it.
I'm not the least afraid of pressuring Onegu or doing something this day phase. That is just serious misrep and it's scummy as hell. I have been here and am willing to answer any question directed at me including discussion of my reads and posts on filters, etc. You are basically calling one of the most active players afraid to do something. Yeah, no.
You saying it's incredibly scummy that I'm not feeling well and tired is BS. I have been sick for two days and have been going to the hospital everyday for radiation therapy. DO NOT EVER go after me for real life again.
You saying my townread on ika is scummy is complete crap since you also have a townread on him. I'm not praising ika at all-again complete and total misrep. I'm explaining why I think he's town because I have extensive experience with him. As far as paranoia goes or being too sure he's town, he's my strongest townread based on nearly 100 posts he's put into this game and my experience with him. If I had said right away, I think he's town, you'd have a point but I didn't.
That last part is me telling you to give reads if your town and the fact that you didn't was me thinking you are scum. Also, you went after me for RL again. I was at the dr. office so I couldn't post more than that. If that's the only thing I posted all day, I could let it go BUT I've been doing more than that. You are just ignoring it to fit your narrative that I'm trying to look active. Considering how many posts I've put into this game, that's just completely wrong.
I believe you are selectively pointing out posts I made this day phase and shifting them to fit your narrative that they are scummy when they are clearly town oriented and that's scummy as shit. Get lynched.
Why you feel the need to go through his post point by point and refute it all when 1) You think he's mafia 2) He's 1000% getting lynched today This just feels a little too defensive for my liking. Can you focus on someone besides btdt? Like what do you make of Calix/ME/B0ston etc... anyone that isn't BTDT. If you're town literally the last thing we need is to continue to tilt.
I've already said I think scum are in ME, B0ston, btdt, Kelsier group. I am going to go through yours, Calix, ME, B0ston filters before day end to make sure I still feel that way. I'm also paying attention to the Calix/ME interaction.
And why on Earth would a town member not respond to points made against them? Ignoring stuff like that is scummy. I don't care who it's from.
Like, I fully expect ika to respond to ME's points on him no matter what he thinks of ME when he get in here next.
|
On January 11 2017 06:01 MichaelEhrmantraut wrote:Show nested quote +On January 11 2017 05:53 Calix wrote:On January 11 2017 05:49 MichaelEhrmantraut wrote:On January 11 2017 05:45 Calix wrote:On January 11 2017 05:42 MichaelEhrmantraut wrote:On January 11 2017 05:29 Calix wrote:+ Show Spoiler +
ME's post also does not make a great deal of sense. I'll admit to only skimming that one but any 'case' with that many quotes needed is going to be mediocre at best.
Also for the love of Christ, can people please spoiler the text walls if you're gonna respond to them?
Ok. On January 11 2017 05:34 Calix wrote:
This is actually readable, thank God.
Talking about people mentioning RL/ activity reasons/ etc is NOT something that should be used to determine someone's alignment. It really gets on my nerves when people speculate whether someone is lying about their RL issues because all that does is piss off the suspect in question and it does NOTHING.
Re: the actual read here, how do those posts 'try to look useful'?
I don't see an apology there so I do not understand your jump to your last line, nor do I see how any of this is AI. ok, noted, but I don't think people should keep mentioning RL activity. What do you mean by you don't see an apology there ? "If you are contributing for quality over quantity, would you not already point out holes in ika's argument rather than come up with an apology." Where is the apology you refer to? There isn't one in the quote you referenced when you wrote that line. Do you actually have to say 'Sorry' for it to count as an apology. Look at the tone of his posts earlier, now suddenly he goes on to say that, I'll re-read, if he wants to contribute with quality over quantity ( which frankly should be everyone's goal ), shouldn't he already be on top of that post. He doesn't throw shade at it later, doesn't explain why he changed his opinion, when he had questioned it earlier. Uh, yes? I have no idea what the rest of this says and I've probably lost brain cells trying to comprehend this. What can you not understand, here I'll fucking BULLET IT FOR YOU : 1. reps squishy is SCUM 2. reps squishy said : I value quality not quantity 3. reps squishy questions ika's read on Silverwolf77, ika says SW is town. 4. ika says did you read my arguments 5. reps says ' yes, but i'll have to re-read them' 6. why does reps have to re-read them when his earlier stated philosophy is : ' quality over quantity' 7. why is he not on top of ika, questioning his arguments 8. why does he not say why he changed his opinion on ika's read whne he questioned him earlier
Yes and my concerns from before hold as Points 3-4-7 do not show a scum mindset and half of your points repeat themselves instead of showing a clear thought process.
Points 5-6 are illogical. Someone saying that they want to reread a thing has nothing to do with 'quality over quanity' and rereading is NAI. Thus your overall argument does not hold water.
I am not going to ask you to continue explaining yourself here as your case is bad and I'd rather have you do something else. If you have nothing, can you summarise your reads on SW AND ika please? No cases, just a few sentences will do here.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://i52.tinypic.com/2vw7m8h.jpg)
