Both mafia groups can daytalk. This gives each group an
With that out of the way, let's get down to business...
Not around/doing other things.Farside22 wrote:##vote: SaintKerrigan
Where are you during this discussion and thought process?
Hello? I posted a V/LA notice in this thread, as well as several other places. Pay attention, please.Farside22 wrote:I'm still waiting to see anything town from SK who is posting nothing at all this game.
This is so bloody ridiculous and scummy. There is no way in hell anyone with a decent grasp of English would legitimately read your sentence as described in the second example.VasudeVa wrote:@Fish: "Talking about mechanics" is a gerund phrase, which makes it a noun, then the verb 'don't' refers to the discussion, not the mechanics.
If you read it this way:
Not really interested intalking aboutmechanicsthatdon't really matter/apply yet.
Then what is the bolded part, hm?
So obviously it's meant to be read this way:
Not really interested intalking about mechanicsthatdon'treally matter/apply yet.
Red = Noun
Blue = Verb.
So what is it exactly that you're trying to say with this?Andrius wrote:I like the latter part. Makes somewhat sense. But then again it a deterrant to making a really good case, because you don't have to convince that other person.
Uneasy like your posts have a scummy feel to them. Plus internal thinking about certain things you've said and how it applies to game mechanics. Considering I'm voting you, though, shouldn't you have been able to figure out somewhat what I meant by "uneasy"?Andrius wrote:Uneasy like how I feel when I stare at your avatar, or uneasy like you're going to puke your guts out after your first college party?
Because feeling "uneasy" makes me want to facepalm.
Because you tried to prove your interpretation of the sentence was correct, and only admitted that it was a mistake after it was clearly shown that you were wrong. The fact that your "mistake" just so happens to also be good English, but with a different meaning, doesn't make your story all that believable, either.VasudeVa wrote:Note the sig. Also, you could check my wiki and ISO me and see the semi-bad engrish(at least, that's how I perceive it.). How is defending my sentence, which due to a mistake came out wrong, scummy?Why do you think I'm lying about making a mistake?
Because you'd been voted for being too quiet, so you had to sayVasudeVa wrote:Also note: In the heat of all the mechanics discussion, Why would I openly claim in thread that the mechanics don't apply yet when they obviously do?
VasudeVa wrote:You are ignoring my post btw.
To reiterate:
Why would I say that the mechanics do not matter? Quite important if you're seriously considering that I'm lying.
And because I missed responding to this earlier:SaintKerrigan wrote:Because you'd been voted for being too quiet, so you had to say something. However, you were afraid that participating in the current discussion would give away your ulterior motives, so you simply dismissed the mechanics as "unimportant", in addition to saying a few other trivial things to appear like you weren't lurking scum.
Because I don't believe you actually made an honest mistake.VasudeVa wrote:1.That, or I could not have known the error I did until it was clearly pointed out to me. I don't disagree with you that it is good english. The main problem is it did not say what I wanted it to say.
How is it scummy that I was trying to make my point clear until the error of my ways have been pointed out? Of course, it's scummy to lie...but see here the message you have gotten from that sentence doesn't make sense (see cont.).
SaintKerrigan wrote:V/LA from playing games from today until earlySaturdaySunday morning. I'll still be around for modding, but that's it.
Because you didn't realize how serious a goof it was until people called you out on it.VasudeVa wrote:And why would I post that the mechanics don't apply yet? It's just stupid to say that, since the mechanics DO apply.
Scum trip up when they have to quick-post something to avoid the appearance of lurking.VasudeVa wrote:So, accdg. to you, because I was apparently being too quiet, I needed to post something that blatantly contradicts whatever is happening in the game? Makes no sense.
VasudeVa wrote:2.That, or I could have just megalurked like you did(you're not getting away with that BTW.) until the wagon was actually threatening. But I chose to post.
SaintKerrigan wrote:V/LA from playing games from today until early Saturday Sunday morning. I'll still be around for modding, but that's it.
Dear. Fucking. God. I have only said thisNobody Special wrote:StK, it makes no sense that you are 'convinced' that Vas is scum yet you refuse to vote. Clarify, please? You also have a list of "other" scum. Please, which is most likely out of that list to be paired with VV?
This, I can accept, is a grammar mistake. The other one, much less so.VasudeVa wrote:Of course, I tried to defend my mistake becauseI did not know that I meant another thingand even suspected Fish for twisting my words.
Only because I want some more discussion. You're living on borrowed time...VasudeVa wrote:This, btw, should be why I'm obv town right about now. I've been at L-1 for a while you know.
Nuh uh. Being convinced someone is scum and not voting them is scummy, yes, unless the person has a good reason not to. In this case, I do have a good reason to not vote VV yet.Nobody Special wrote:StK, I did NOT MISS YOUR HUGE BOLD SENTENCE. I just think that 'convinced' along with 'not voting' is suspicious. Period.
Right. I guess VV can wait until tomorrow (as much as I'd still like to lynch him today).Jack wrote:He's scummier, see that totally fake bit I quoted. Totally fake scumhunting = mafia every time.SaintKerrigan wrote:Explain to me why we should lynch Andrius over VV today?
AKA "Zomg SK didn't provide a 'good' reason for his vote, he must be scummiez." I do believe I explained later that the vote was to try and get information.Andrius wrote:SaintKerrigan's vote was highly scummy because he followed Jack saying "I'll dig this for now".
Conveniently leaving out the part where you were already a high suspect on my list and I was in fact voting you in lieu of VV earlier. Personally, I think both of you need to find a noose, and it doesn't really matter which of you two finds it first.Andrius wrote:He also followed Jack onto my lynch.
And you expected people toAndrius wrote:Sometimes I say stupid things to see what people will do afterwards/ see how they will react. I said I agreed with the wagon so I could see if the people who were already voting farside would jump onto me.
And yet you don't extend me the same offer. Favoritism for a scumbuddy, eh?Andrius wrote:You can however, vote SK and appease me for a brownie point. (Not redeemable for townie points. Reedemable for brownies.)
I'm sorry, did you say youAndrius wrote:It allows to me to watch suspicious players like VV, Jack, SK and see what they do. Naturally, VV votes me. Jack votes me. SK follows Jack. Why? We will find out.
Wait a minute. You're surprised Jack is town because VV flippedZajnet wrote:I'm not surprised that Jack is town. I'm surprised that he's town given that VV is scum, which I found unlikely to begin with.
And yet you have no suspicion of him from Day 1.Zajnet wrote:I want to see where today goes. Andrius is our best lead from D1, so I'm voting him for now.
Because he's not only not posting much, I've found his posts highly lacking in scumhuntingness. This is a big red flag that he might be scum.Nobody Special wrote:And, why pick Zang out of all the players to call out on not posting?
I figured, but getting you to say it means there's no confusion about it.Zajnet wrote:That was a typo, it was supposed to say I'm surprised that Jack flipped town given that VV flippedtown.
You made absolutely no mention of this yesterday. You didn't even mention any hint that you thought Jack might be scum. Why is this coming to light now?Zajnet wrote:The discussion between them gave me a gut feeling that one of them was scum. I don't know how to explain it, but it just felt that way.
Are you referring to Andrius or Nobody Special here? Either way, please expound on this.FishytheFish wrote:He's been very vocal and pretty convincing in his defense, but otherwise posting a lot while doing very little looks like under-the-radar scum to me.
Ok, I agree.Fishythefish wrote:Andrius. He's used a lot of words to do very little in this game, and I think that comes from scum more than town - scum want to look like they are a contribution, but have less motivation to actually scumhunt..SaintKerrigan wrote:Are you referring to Andrius or Nobody Special here? Either way, please expound on this.FishytheFish wrote:He's been very vocal and pretty convincing in his defense, but otherwise posting a lot while doing very little looks like under-the-radar scum to me.
Your narrow, one-sided point of view is not my problem, I'm afraid. At least explain why your explanation is better than mine.Steam-Powered Shovel wrote:I am aware of your attempt at revisionism.
Your point is still as obfuscated as it was before.Steam-Powered Shovel wrote:Context. For more context, you could consider Jack's post 294.
Wrong, actually. There is one role I'm positive Andrius is not, and it's one of the roles that is definitely in scum hands. Of the remaining five roles, I think two of them are in scum hands. Thus, mathematically Andrius has a 40% chance of being scum. I could still lynch on those odds, but there's other people that need my attention right now, so they're getting it.AlamasterGM wrote:If you are scum and someone says to you, "If you do not claim PR, I will unleash a case against you," what do you do?
You claim PR. And, because you started with a lot of money, you probably have one. So you can't even be called out for lying later.
Mission: Accomplish Nothing: Accomplished.
Fixed!Steam-Powered Shovel wrote:Yeah you're right I suck but I still won't explain it anyway.SaintKerrigan wrote:Your point is still as obfuscated as it was before.
Can you show me where you implied it, then? I'm totally not seeing it.Steam-Powered Shovel wrote:No, I implied it.
Because other people deserve my attention more right now? Also, you're wrong. See response to AlmasterGM.Steam-Powered Shovel wrote:No, it does not. Want to come up with a better reason for ditching the Andriuswagon?
I gave you the answer I wanted you to know. Anything else I may or may not have been trying to do, you don't need to know.AlmasterGM wrote:You are completely avoiding the question. Fine, we now have some "40% chance of scum" number (which isn't even actually mathematical legitimate because it is based on what you "think" and not actual number crunching). You don't want to lynch on it, I don't want to lynch on it...so what did that buy us, exactly, other than the outing of a PR?SK wrote:Wrong, actually. There is one role I'm positive Andrius is not, and it's one of the roles that is definitely in scum hands. Of the remaining five roles, I think two of them are in scum hands. Thus, mathematically Andrius has a 40% chance of being scum. I could still lynch on those odds, but there's other people that need my attention right now, so they're getting it.