|
I traded my andy sensors for some pogs and a sweet goosebumps slammer
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2014 19:18
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2024 04:41 |
|
|
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2014 19:22
|
|
|
If merk continues at this level going into future days, I may get suspicious. But at this point, it's pretty rad.
|
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2014 19:24
|
|
|
CapnAndy posted:Holy poo poo if you think this is uppity you need to recalibrate your Andy-sensors You're being a tad oversensitive about this.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2014 19:27
|
|
|
I swear, I'm just having a nice chat about it because Jake thinks I was doing poo poo I wasn't doing and I wanted to tell him I didn't think those things! I'm not sure if you guys want me to just not react when people get the wrong idea about me or what I think or what, because I'm not gonna do that, but um sorry if seriously my chill tone comes off as super angry? I guess? I'm not that sorry
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2014 19:30
|
|
|
Not angry, just panicked
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2014 19:31
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2014 19:33
|
|
|
quote:I swear, I'm just having a nice chat about it because Jake thinks I was doing poo poo I wasn't doing and I wanted to tell him I didn't think those things! Your posts are making a bigger deal out of this issue than it actually warrants. You come off as defensive. There's at least three scumtells in this image. What are you hiding, Jake?
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2014 19:40
|
|
|
QuoProQuid posted:Your posts are making a bigger deal out of this issue than it actually warrants. You come off as defensive.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2014 19:58
|
|
|
##vote merk Please explain why you are on me and please render an opinion on at least one other player.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2014 20:31
|
|
|
KhyrosFinalCut posted:##vote merk Not today.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2014 20:33
|
|
|
merk posted:Not today. Not today as in not 9/16/14 or not today as in not on this game day?
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2014 21:56
|
|
|
CapnAndy posted:The meinberg case is solid and I'll be happy to flip my vote to him if he's a viable lynch for today, but hey seriously, look at KFC: CapnAndy posted:Lol 'kay let's see some quotes CapnAndy posted:I swear, I'm just having a nice chat about it because Jake thinks I was doing poo poo I wasn't doing and I wanted to tell him I didn't think those things! Andy's tone in this game is super-emotive with little solid analysis. It's pinging my gut because I know he's a smart guy capable of good logical thinking. I think he's hiding behind emotive language on purpose to excuse himself from serious scum hunting. CapnAndy posted:What-loving-ever, if responding "I didn't say that" when someone says you said poo poo you didn't is a scumtell then fuckin' lynch me because I'll do it next time too Ok! #vote Andy
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2014 22:01
|
|
|
In other news, the discussion between Byers and Magnus makes me feel good about Magnus not being scum (though I haven't ruled out him being a SK, we'll see how tonight goes on that), this reads like Meinberg's town game to me and merk is a blue furry guy irl.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2014 22:04
|
|
|
QuoProQuid posted:THINKING COMPLETE.......... Terminator claim ITT
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2014 22:05
|
|
|
Hang on Magnus, your claim makes zero sense. What's the point of adding an extra fuel if you're immediately going to dayvig one of the people who gets the fuel? Passing fuel is a night action so there's zero fuel gain for town.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2014 22:09
|
|
|
Rarity posted:Hang on Magnus, your claim makes zero sense. What's the point of adding an extra fuel if you're immediately going to dayvig one of the people who gets the fuel? Passing fuel is a night action so there's zero fuel gain for town. If his claim is truthful - and I don't see why he'd lie about it, since it's sure to be tested at some point, and dayvigs are verifiable - I imagine the logic for including it is that kilran was worried the game might tip in the Scum's favour if they managed to grab up too much fuel and the Town can't use our powers as much as he'd intended. So Mags would then be the balancing factor... if he uses his power, then the Scum either have to let us have all the fuel (at the expense of sacrificing one of ourselves) or else risk having one of their team vigged. It also just adds a layer of WIFOM to the game... lets us play the "Four Brave Townies" thought experiment if we want without having to waste a lynch. Or whatever.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2014 22:27
|
|
|
The fact that the vig must be used and that the fuel taken by the victim is lost seems an intended part of the role, as it means that the actual amount of fuel obtained in a day doesn't change.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2014 22:28
|
|
|
I'm not doubting the veracity of the claim, I'm doubting that it's a town role. It screams 3P to me. Also, I don't like how Magnus said that we'd be able to have the fuel transferred before he uses his vig.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2014 22:34
|
|
|
Rarity posted:Hang on Magnus, your claim makes zero sense. What's the point of adding an extra fuel if you're immediately going to dayvig one of the people who gets the fuel? Passing fuel is a night action so there's zero fuel gain for town. Actually, it does. When you forage, you pick the initial recipient of the FUEL. kilran posted:6.1 Any player may claim 1 unit of FUEL by using the ##forage Day Action. They may then send a PM to the Moderator to name a player to receive the FUEL (this may be themselves).
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2014 22:36
|
|
|
So, you forage, you pick someone else to receive, and Magnus then kills you. It's a sacrificial extra FUEL, but only if the vig is public knowledge.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2014 22:37
|
|
|
Rarity posted:Hang on Magnus, your claim makes zero sense. What's the point of adding an extra fuel if you're immediately going to dayvig one of the people who gets the fuel? Passing fuel is a night action so there's zero fuel gain for town. quote:6.1 Any player may claim 1 unit of FUEL by using the ##forage Day Action. They may then send a PM to the Moderator to name a player to receive the FUEL (this may be themselves). The way I interpreted this, the PM sent in 6.1 can be sent immediately, and is separate from the ability to send fuel referenced in 6.3.  yeah what byers said
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2014 22:37
|
|
|
KhyrosFinalCut posted:Gut here: You're in a game where it will be frowned on if you get mean, so giving yourself a flavorful reason to be flashily obtuse feels like it serves scum-merk meta agendas more than it does town-merk meta agendas. Contrary to popular belief, merk isn't really that mean. He will call out bad play, bad logic, but rarely makes personal insults. He can play nice, so he doesn't need to play the way he has to avoid being mean. That said, being willfully vacuous in posting is never a town way of approaching the game.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2014 22:40
|
|
|
KhyrosFinalCut posted:I'm saying that I still think QPQ is scummy as articulated. It is also true that Xopods made a point against QPQ that is the kind of point I would definitely have made as scum if there was steam going on a townie. I considered making exactly xopods' point but I couldn't convince myself that it was on the right side of twisting theories to suit facts vs. the other way around. You're the third person to say that xopods was twisting things by not considering QPQ's later posts. What am I missing? xopods made a read that his early posting was needlessly ambiguous; while I disagree with it, I don't see how that point is invalidated by later posts to the point that he's scummy for making it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2014 22:43
|
|
|
Byers2142 posted:Actually, it does. When you forage, you pick the initial recipient of the FUEL.  I just read 6.3 and assumed it initially stayed with you.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2014 22:44
|
|
|
KhyrosFinalCut posted:The way I interpreted this, the PM sent in 6.1 can be sent immediately, and is separate from the ability to send fuel referenced in 6.3. What's key is that if you don't know about the vig, you might take the FUEL for yourself and then it's lost when you get killed. Unless the vig's made public, there's nothing to let people know that they can't keep the FUEL for their own use.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2014 22:45
|
|
|
QuoProQuid posted:why are you claiming any role at all Shush, it's all going to be ok. No Terminator scares Terry Crews.  Meinberg posted:I'm bad at Mafia, and I think it'd be better for town if I ate a dayvig, rather than someone useful. Holy poo poo, we got a martyr here. I'd vote Meinberg after his posting this afternoon. CapnAndy posted:What kind of weak sauce, wishy-washy, easily washed away defense is that? "Noooo guys he's totally suspicious but not scum, look at me justify not voting for him but also leaving myself a retreat for when he flips scum and people start looking for his buddies" Did you just link two unflipped players as scum, and advocate lynching the one whose case you're pushing in a large part is predicated on his defense of the other?
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2014 22:49
|
|
|
Meinberg's always as mean to himself as everyone else is to each other, though. I don't think going full martyr right out of the gates says anything about his alignment.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2014 22:53
|
|
|
JakeP posted:I traded my andy sensors for some pogs and a sweet goosebumps slammer If Jake keeps posting randomly and keeps getting away with it, I'm going to start posting men's health tips again. With pictures. ##vote Meinberg
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2014 22:54
|
|
|
Regarding me and QPQ, if you guys think that subsequent non-Scummy posts retroactively make an earlier Scummy post non-Scummy, I don't know what to tell you.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2014 22:55
|
|
|
xopods posted:Meinberg's always as mean to himself as everyone else is to each other, though. I don't think going full martyr right out of the gates says anything about his alignment. We're not allowed to be mean this game, not even to each other. It's for his own protection. Seriously, though, he was posting nothings until I agreed with Magnus on him, and literally was posting more within minutes of my comments on his lurking/white noise. Town can lurk. Town rarely lurk yet keep up to date on the thread.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2014 22:56
|
|
|
Byers2142 posted:Did you just link two unflipped players as scum, and advocate lynching the one whose case you're pushing in a large part is predicated on his defense of the other? Ugh, when you phrase it like that, it sounds bad. But I think KFC is scum regardless of meinberg's alignment!
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2014 22:56
|
|
|
Byers2142 posted:Contrary to popular belief, merk isn't really that mean. He will call out bad play, bad logic, but rarely makes personal insults. He can play nice, so he doesn't need to play the way he has to avoid being mean. I concede some of the semantics, but baseless vaguely personal standard mafia aggression is certainly a tool in merk's toolbox, even if it doesn't manifest itself in the way some other players get "mean" -- cultivating something else to draw from so you can be obtuse at will seems like it serves a scum agenda more than a town one.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2014 22:57
|
|
|
xopods posted:Regarding me and QPQ, if you guys think that subsequent non-Scummy posts retroactively make an earlier Scummy post non-Scummy, I don't know what to tell you. I disagree that he purposefully left things as ambiguous. I don't disagree that if you take that impression of his posting, later posts don't really invalidate the posts made, so while I disagree with your case I don't think it comes from a scum perspective.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2014 22:58
|
|
|
KhyrosFinalCut posted:I concede some of the semantics, but baseless vaguely personal standard mafia aggression is certainly a tool in merk's toolbox, even if it doesn't manifest itself in the way some other players get "mean" -- cultivating something else to draw from so you can be obtuse at will seems like it serves a scum agenda more than a town one. His posting is bad because it avoids engaging, but I don't think it's to avoid being mean. It's just to avoid the game in total. Like I said, it's rarely a town move to avoid making content-based posts, so I think we agree on that, just disagree on the why. You think it's because of the rules, I think it's likely some else since he can play within the rules easily as scum.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2014 23:02
|
|
|
CapnAndy posted:Yyyyyyes? Ok, throw out his defenses of Meinberg. Why is he scum?
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2014 23:03
|
|
|
Byers2142 posted:You're the third person to say that xopods was twisting things by not considering QPQ's later posts. What am I missing? xopods made a read that his early posting was needlessly ambiguous; while I disagree with it, I don't see how that point is invalidated by later posts to the point that he's scummy for making it. You misunderstand. I don't think xopods is scummy for that reason. The argument that QPQ's "non answer" of "it's as serious as it could be at that point" was maliciously crafted so that either interpretation could be hammered on as "the obvious one" later on is plausible but it just doesn't ring true to me. I still think QPQ is scummy for having any amount of serious in that vote and that's enough of a case for me. What I'm saying is that xopods' point is exactly the kind of thing I would say to fuel a fire on a townie getting steam built up on him -- I don't think he's twisting things by ignoring later posts, I'm just saying this point doesn't pass a smell test for me, but I wouldn't hesitate to make it if I was looking for something jump on a townie for.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2014 23:04
|
|
|
xopods posted:Regarding me and QPQ, if you guys think that subsequent non-Scummy posts retroactively make an earlier Scummy post non-Scummy, I don't know what to tell you. That's the thing about this game though. Posts don't occur in a vacuum. When you pointed out your scummy post there were other posts to be examined/considered. I think those posts negate the scumminess of the post you highlighted. You ignore those posts in your original vote post. almost like you're looking for a scummy post to latch on to rather than trying to find evidence of a scum player. ##vote Xopods If that was the only post that qpq had made at the time that you made your post then I would agree that it wasn't scummy. You were working with the information you had at the time, but you had more information to work with and you chose not to
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2014 23:04
|
|
|
Byers2142 posted:If Jake keeps posting randomly and keeps getting away with it, I'm going to start posting men's health tips again. With pictures. Why is a martyr scum? 
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2014 23:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2024 04:41 |
|
|
merk posted:Why is a martyr scum? Someone volunteering to be a martyr is, because they're suggesting they'll make the ultimate sacrifice for town.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2014 23:08
|
|