|
The Ninth Layer posted:I'll flip town. Man, I'm not trying to convince you that you're scum, that's a fake idea.
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2015 01:52
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 07:20 |
|
|
Quidnose posted:You read my entire case in the minute it took me to respond to TMM? You are an amazing reader. I mean, someone had to sum up that long post because you sure as hell weren't going to.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2015 01:52
|
|
|
The Ninth Layer posted:Quidnose's case can be summed up as "TMM didn't vote who I think he should have" which is a very weak case for all the quotes he needed to rely on to make it. Prove that this is true. Footnote my loving quotes. I am about ready to thunderdome the poo poo out of you. Your posting thus far is 100% YAMS, and I'm tired of it. I'm sorry you replaced in as a 3p because I know that makes it hard to care about anything but play the game, man.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2015 01:52
|
|
|
MEDS CURE SCHIZOS posted:I think in our race to show off who has the biggest Mafia ego penis, we're ignoring that I investigated Tommunist ne้ Ninth Layer as scum. I'll trust it. ##vote TNL
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2015 01:52
|
|
|
The Ninth Layer posted:I mean, someone had to sum up that long post because you sure as hell weren't going to. See above.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2015 01:52
|
|
|
MEDS CURE SCHIZOS posted:Man, I'm not trying to convince you that you're scum, that's a fake idea. I realize that. I'm trying to convince you that I'll flip town.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2015 01:52
|
|
|
The Ninth Layer posted:I'm not third-party either. Town town town. I will say that my role is so ridiculously powerful that I've never gotten a role on its level before, to the point where I must wonder what scum got to compensate. 3p uncuddleable, reiterating this.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2015 01:53
|
|
|
The Ninth Layer posted:Quidnose voting me after pushing TMM for two pages is pretty ironic, considering he called TMM out for pushing Kashuno without voting him. Or I went with the soft-claimed cop result with the added boon of you being totally insufferable to play with thus far since you are adding a total of zero content or alignment calls. It's like you've never played mafia before. If there is a dayvig someone should shot TNL.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2015 01:54
|
|
|
Also, it could be just as likely that MEDS is fake claiming the investigation in order to try drawing out a real cop. So it's not something I'm just willing to take a face value.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2015 01:54
|
|
|
Quidnose posted:Prove that this is true. Footnote my loving quotes. I am about ready to thunderdome the poo poo out of you. You mad bro? To be honest I didn't even read you case really, I figured you didn't want anyone to read it the way you formatted it with a million "and then he said this!!" quotes.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2015 01:54
|
|
|
Calling me 3p is a cop-out for having nothing to call me scum on.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2015 01:55
|
|
|
TMMadman posted:Why would she move to that conclusion though? Why wouldn't she look at it and go "townie slap fight" in the way that she said she did? quote:Why couldn't I be scum and continue to attack Kash because if he gets voted out D1, it'd be easy as hell for me to turn around on D2 and say "Welp, I was wrong, but wrong doesn't equal scum." Why wouldn't you, as scum, also realize that tunneling is a bad idea especially if the person is tunneling back and find a way to drop it? Since you didn't do that, why would it be unreasonable for her to say "that's a town attitude?" quote:It's especially puzzling because I think I was the aggressor during most of it against Kash on D1, so if I'm town and think Kash is scum, then why wouldn't I continue to attack him? That's what she said you did. She also said that since Kash was doing it too, IT LOOKED LIKE YOU WERE BOTH TOWNIES DOING THE SAME THING. Jesus. quote:PMush does not seem like she is coming from an honest place and it feels like she already knows our alignments. Nah.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2015 01:56
|
|
|
The Ninth Layer posted:Calling me 3p is a cop-out for having nothing to call me scum on. Funny that when you've contributed zero content thus far!
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2015 01:56
|
|
|
Quidnose posted:Funny that when you've contributed zero content thus far! lmao you have a very interesting definition of zero content. I replaced in this afternoon and already have more content than half the thread.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2015 01:57
|
|
|
The Ninth Layer posted:You mad bro? To be honest I didn't even read you case really, I figured you didn't want anyone to read it the way you formatted it with a million "and then he said this!!" quotes. So what you're saying is, when you summarized my case, and then double downed on the summary of my case, you hadn't, in fact, read my case, and were lying about doing so, and then misrepresenting yourself to make me look bad?
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2015 01:57
|
|
|
The Ninth Layer posted:lmao you have a very interesting definition of zero content. I replaced in this afternoon and already have more content than half the thread. I am sorry, TNL, god's gift to mafia, that I have made you upset. Someone shoot TNL now please, thanks.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2015 01:57
|
|
|
Quidnose posted:Funny that when you've contributed zero content thus far! Seriously, how can you say he has produced no content? He's spent several hours today arguing with you and that is content for the rest of us to sort through and use to determine alignments.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2015 01:58
|
|
|
I think you're doing enough to make yourself look bad. Can you sum up your case in one paragraph?
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2015 01:58
|
|
|
Quidnose posted:I am sorry, TNL, god's gift to mafia, that I have made you upset. Hahaha I'm laughing at you dude. If anything I should thank you for being so amusing.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2015 01:59
|
|
|
The Ninth Layer posted:Hahaha I'm laughing at you dude. If anything I should thank you for being so amusing. I want to thank both of you for making this game so much more interesting today. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2015 01:59
|
|
|
TMMadman posted:Seriously, how can you say he has produced no content? He's spent several hours today arguing with you and that is content for the rest of us to sort through and use to determine alignments. His arguments are not based on content. They are completely based on him nit picking every. loving. post I have made in order to create a narrative of me being disingenuous, without making a hard call about me being scum. Reread it and see!
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2015 01:59
|
|
|
Quidnose posted:His arguments are not based on content. Your points themselves are nitpicky.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2015 02:00
|
|
|
Quidnose posted:That is not what I am saying at all and I really don't see why you are getting that from what I am saying. I'm gonna break it down again in case I'm not being clear: Oh yeah, I'm the one nitpicking here 
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2015 02:01
|
|
|
Thank you for taking the mantle of having to spend pages arguing
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2015 02:02
|
|
|
The Ninth Layer posted:I'm caught up. Happy with my Poison Mushroom vote, my impression up until that Kash vote was that Poison Mushroom was starting to play like a spectator. Then she voted Kash and immediately unvoted after one post, it was the most token effort ever and the kind of thing I have done as scum a lot when I make a case that I don't feel like committing on. None of this is true, there was, like, a day in between the Kash vote and her unvoting, and she discussed it with people. Ignores the specifics of PMush's contributions completely to create a narrative he wants. quote:Rarity's case on BK was bad, you know a case isn't very good when you could effectively remove four lines from it. The rest of her play isn't great either, she voted Tommunist citing his four games as evidence for him being newbie scum rather than just a newbie. An entire opinion based on one case that is easy to jump on because a. someone already called it out and b. it resulted in a miscuddle. A judgement call about what she did that cannot be verified and isn't really content based. CURIOUS~ quote:I don't think SA is a bad lynch, his posts have fallen off since the early portion of the game, strikes me as scum that wanted to make an impression early but couldn't sustain it. Easy to name a lurker-ish person as someone he is suspicious of. These reads are crap.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2015 02:02
|
|
|
Kashuno posted:Thank you for taking the mantle of having to spend pages arguing It's what I do. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2015 02:02
|
|
|
I honestly am just kinda ready to put TNL on ignore and be done with this.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2015 02:03
|
|
|
There were two posts between Poison Mushroom voting Kash and then unvoting. I just looked at the time stamps and it was 14 minutes, not one day. I didn't read the rest of your post because it's probably full of similar factual inaccuracies.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2015 02:04
|
|
|
Quidnose posted:His arguments are not based on content. Well, see the problem is that I know my alignment, so I know that your attacks on me are wrong and I have to question if you are coming at me from a sincere place. TNL on the other hand, has been quite clear and dead on right with his reading of my posts and the intentions behind them, so regardless of the soft-claim scum result from MEDS, I am not likely to vote for him today. I have no idea what kind of roles are out there, so it's possible he's been framed.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2015 02:04
|
|
|
TMMadman posted:Seriously, how can you say he has produced no content? He's spent several hours today arguing with you and that is content for the rest of us to sort through and use to determine alignments. TMM, if you're not scum, then I really want you to look at what TNL has contributed after his "initial hard and awesome reads" which I just analyzed through the lens of whether or not he's actually discussing content or just trying to rile me up while dropping no opinions himself. If you are town, I think you are getting caught up in the fact that he is defending you and letting it affect your judgement. I think it is much more likely that you are scum and just enjoying the fact that someone who is not on your scumteam (3p TNL) is defending you and distracting the entire thread.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2015 02:05
|
|
|
The Ninth Layer posted:It's what I do. I like to do it too. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2015 02:05
|
|
|
The Ninth Layer posted:There were two posts between Poison Mushroom voting Kash and then unvoting. I just looked at the time stamps and it was 14 minutes, not one day. I didn't read the rest of your post because it's probably full of similar factual inaccuracies. I thought you were referring to her initial vote on D1 and subsequent unvote, since you framed it immediately after your vote on her for this reasoning from TMM: TMMadman posted:Alright, I'll accept this for now. ...which explicitly states that he is suspicious of PMush for his actions on D1. He makes no mention of PMush's vote today. Had it even happened yet?
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2015 02:07
|
|
|
Quidnose posted:I thought you were referring to her initial vote on D1 and subsequent unvote, since you framed it immediately after your vote on her for this reasoning from TMM: I was referring to the vote that took me literally one minute to look up, link and quote.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2015 02:08
|
|
|
See and the reason I thought you were talking about her play on D1 is because you said this immediately afterwards:The Ninth Layer posted:I'm caught up. Happy with my Poison Mushroom vote, my impression up until that Kash vote was that Poison Mushroom was starting to play like a spectator. Then she voted Kash and immediately unvoted after one post, it was the most token effort ever and the kind of thing I have done as scum a lot when I make a case that I don't feel like committing on. And that seems to be referencing her case on D1 which she dropped, not an initial case that she immediately changed her mind on. Nowhere in here do you say you are talking about her D2 vote. I think you're backpedaling right now, poorly.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2015 02:08
|
|
|
The Ninth Layer posted:I was referring to the vote that took me literally one minute to look up, link and quote. Cool? This has nothing to do with anything, other than to dismiss my points yet again without: -addressing them -refuting them based in content -refuting them based on what I am doing as being disingenuous You are basically just posting "nah" the whole time to everything I am saying. It's yams. Yams yams yams yams yams. This is not content based play.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2015 02:09
|
|
|
Haha I'm obviously not backpedaling, I knew exactly what I was talking about and proved it with a link.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2015 02:09
|
|
|
TMMadman posted:Well, see the problem is that I know my alignment, so I know that your attacks on me are wrong and I have to question if you are coming at me from a sincere place. Again, that's not based in content. IF you are town, you are falling in love with him "reading your posts right." That has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO with the content he is creating. There is none. The Ninth Layer posted:Haha I'm obviously not backpedaling, I knew exactly what I was talking about and proved it with a link. This is "nah."
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2015 02:10
|
|
|
Quidnose posted:I don't buy it. How do you get TNL as 3P out of your conversation?
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2015 02:10
|
|
|
Quidnose posted:This is "nah." I just proved you wrong dude. There was nothing factually inaccurate about what I posted, you misattributed what I was talking about. I just demonstrated to you what I was talking about in my summary post. Get owned.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2015 02:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 07:20 |
|
|
Oh hey, welcome to the party FV. Have fun with it all. Btw, FV, if you to turn out to be scum this game I'm going to be so mad at you because right now you are like the towniest looking person in the game right now. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2015 02:12
|
|