Mafia 82: International (Game Over)
-
-
StrangerCoug He/HimDoes not ComputeHe/Him
- Does not Compute
- Does not Compute
- Posts: 12457
- Joined: May 6, 2008
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: San Antonio, Texas
I hereby understand and confirm my role.STRANGERCOUG: Stranger Than You!
Current avatar by PurryFurry of FurAffinity.
What Were You Thinking XV! is in progress.-
-
StrangerCoug He/HimDoes not ComputeHe/Him
- Does not Compute
- Does not Compute
- Posts: 12457
- Joined: May 6, 2008
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: San Antonio, Texas
Could we hang on to in-thread discussion until we actually start please?
*tears up the pact*STRANGERCOUG: Stranger Than You!
Current avatar by PurryFurry of FurAffinity.
What Were You Thinking XV! is in progress.-
-
StrangerCoug He/HimDoes not ComputeHe/Him
- Does not Compute
- Does not Compute
- Posts: 12457
- Joined: May 6, 2008
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: San Antonio, Texas
Welcome to hell xDmaxwellhouse wrote:SC you're always in my games. lolSTRANGERCOUG: Stranger Than You!
Current avatar by PurryFurry of FurAffinity.
What Were You Thinking XV! is in progress.-
-
StrangerCoug He/HimDoes not ComputeHe/Him
- Does not Compute
- Does not Compute
- Posts: 12457
- Joined: May 6, 2008
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: San Antonio, Texas
The problem that I see is that it's confusing, and I like the idea of waiting for the game to start much better.earthworm wrote:StrangerCoug, I don't really see the problem with discussion beginning in the pre-game, it's better than starting it with three pages of random votes, this way we'll be able to start placing pressure votes on suspicious people right off the bat when the game starts, rather than starting with random ones.STRANGERCOUG: Stranger Than You!
Current avatar by PurryFurry of FurAffinity.
What Were You Thinking XV! is in progress.-
-
StrangerCoug He/HimDoes not ComputeHe/Him
- Does not Compute
- Does not Compute
- Posts: 12457
- Joined: May 6, 2008
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: San Antonio, Texas
Sanity reasons and the fact that I'm not used to it.Netlava wrote:
Why is this advantageous?StrangerCoug wrote:Could we hang on to in-thread discussion until we actually start please?STRANGERCOUG: Stranger Than You!
Current avatar by PurryFurry of FurAffinity.
What Were You Thinking XV! is in progress.-
-
StrangerCoug He/HimDoes not ComputeHe/Him
- Does not Compute
- Does not Compute
- Posts: 12457
- Joined: May 6, 2008
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: San Antonio, Texas
Damn all of you for your mass posts since I last checked the thread ><STRANGERCOUG: Stranger Than You!
Current avatar by PurryFurry of FurAffinity.
What Were You Thinking XV! is in progress.-
-
StrangerCoug He/HimDoes not ComputeHe/Him
- Does not Compute
- Does not Compute
- Posts: 12457
- Joined: May 6, 2008
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: San Antonio, Texas
Has the confirmation stage ever stretched to eight or more pages before? This is making me curious.STRANGERCOUG: Stranger Than You!
Current avatar by PurryFurry of FurAffinity.
What Were You Thinking XV! is in progress.-
-
StrangerCoug He/HimDoes not ComputeHe/Him
- Does not Compute
- Does not Compute
- Posts: 12457
- Joined: May 6, 2008
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: San Antonio, Texas
I love Swiss neutrality xDSnaps_the_Pirate wrote:Just thought I’d weigh in on the whole pact thing. There seems to be a whole lot of discussion of this topic.
First, there is no guarantee that scum won’t join it, so it can’t be completely trusted. Second, it’s not going to be a “scum magnet” either. We will have some scum supporting it and we will have some scum opposed along with town on both sides of the issue. The pact in itself is not going to win/lose the game for us. I don’t see how the pact will either help or hurt the game.
I also predict that there will be a vote on me when the game starts for not wanting discussion in the confirmation stage and talking during it anyway.STRANGERCOUG: Stranger Than You!
Current avatar by PurryFurry of FurAffinity.
What Were You Thinking XV! is in progress.-
-
StrangerCoug He/HimDoes not ComputeHe/Him
- Does not Compute
- Does not Compute
- Posts: 12457
- Joined: May 6, 2008
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: San Antonio, Texas
Sure! Why not?Battle Mage wrote:
Not sure. Shall we bloat it out with some random FoS'ing?StrangerCoug wrote:Has the confirmation stage ever stretched to eight or more pages before? This is making me curious.
BMFoS: Everybody.STRANGERCOUG: Stranger Than You!
Current avatar by PurryFurry of FurAffinity.
What Were You Thinking XV! is in progress.-
-
StrangerCoug He/HimDoes not ComputeHe/Him
- Does not Compute
- Does not Compute
- Posts: 12457
- Joined: May 6, 2008
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: San Antonio, Texas
It was sarcasm anyway.Battle Mage wrote:
Aren't you terrified of OMGUS right about now?StrangerCoug wrote:
Sure! Why not?Battle Mage wrote:
Not sure. Shall we bloat it out with some random FoS'ing?StrangerCoug wrote:Has the confirmation stage ever stretched to eight or more pages before? This is making me curious.
BMFoS: Everybody.STRANGERCOUG: Stranger Than You!
Current avatar by PurryFurry of FurAffinity.
What Were You Thinking XV! is in progress.-
-
StrangerCoug He/HimDoes not ComputeHe/Him
- Does not Compute
- Does not Compute
- Posts: 12457
- Joined: May 6, 2008
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: San Antonio, Texas
Reverse OMGUS? What do you mean?Untitled wrote:yes it does, it's reverse OMGUS.STRANGERCOUG: Stranger Than You!
Current avatar by PurryFurry of FurAffinity.
What Were You Thinking XV! is in progress.-
-
StrangerCoug He/HimDoes not ComputeHe/Him
- Does not Compute
- Does not Compute
- Posts: 12457
- Joined: May 6, 2008
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: San Antonio, Texas
The first two people I want to look at are Battle Mage and Untitled. I think we can safely forgo random voting.STRANGERCOUG: Stranger Than You!
Current avatar by PurryFurry of FurAffinity.
What Were You Thinking XV! is in progress.-
-
StrangerCoug He/HimDoes not ComputeHe/Him
- Does not Compute
- Does not Compute
- Posts: 12457
- Joined: May 6, 2008
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: San Antonio, Texas
I think Untitled has done a good job defending his actions for the most part. I am more suspicious of Battle Mage and his pact. First off, I want to say the pact is a null tell, but it's more accurate to say it's misleading to vote people based on who is and is not in the pact. The pact simply won't work, as it's too easy to infiltrate.
Also, 73 posts in the pre-game and not a lot of substance to go with it, either. Mafia is largely a game of quality, not quantity.
Vote: Battle MageSTRANGERCOUG: Stranger Than You!
Current avatar by PurryFurry of FurAffinity.
What Were You Thinking XV! is in progress.-
-
StrangerCoug He/HimDoes not ComputeHe/Him
- Does not Compute
- Does not Compute
- Posts: 12457
- Joined: May 6, 2008
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: San Antonio, Texas
What specifically?Korts wrote:I smell broken logic.STRANGERCOUG: Stranger Than You!
Current avatar by PurryFurry of FurAffinity.
What Were You Thinking XV! is in progress.-
-
StrangerCoug He/HimDoes not ComputeHe/Him
- Does not Compute
- Does not Compute
- Posts: 12457
- Joined: May 6, 2008
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: San Antonio, Texas
Which do you find more credible: three posts that all make a good case or ten posts that suck?STRANGERCOUG: Stranger Than You!
Current avatar by PurryFurry of FurAffinity.
What Were You Thinking XV! is in progress.-
-
StrangerCoug He/HimDoes not ComputeHe/Him
- Does not Compute
- Does not Compute
- Posts: 12457
- Joined: May 6, 2008
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: San Antonio, Texas
I'm reminded of one of Stoofer's laws here.armlx wrote:SC, BM likes these dumb "Lets all gang up and vote someone to proceed the game" things regardless of alignment I think.
As for him posting infinite, he also has a tendency to be killed early on because a vig or scum group finds him too damn random/annoying to play the game with. You know its bad when a scum group targets you because.STRANGERCOUG: Stranger Than You!
Current avatar by PurryFurry of FurAffinity.
What Were You Thinking XV! is in progress.-
-
StrangerCoug He/HimDoes not ComputeHe/Him
- Does not Compute
- Does not Compute
- Posts: 12457
- Joined: May 6, 2008
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: San Antonio, Texas
EBWOP:
Since I posted this:armlx wrote:
But since when is that the issue at hand?Which do you find more credible: three posts that all make a good case or ten posts that suck?
StrangerCoug wrote:Also, 73 posts in the pre-game and not a lot of substance to go with it, either.STRANGERCOUG: Stranger Than You!
Current avatar by PurryFurry of FurAffinity.
What Were You Thinking XV! is in progress.-
-
StrangerCoug He/HimDoes not ComputeHe/Him
- Does not Compute
- Does not Compute
- Posts: 12457
- Joined: May 6, 2008
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: San Antonio, Texas
I'm not going to do a megapost with all of them and I'm too lazy to do links right now, but I can't find anything decent in Battle Mage's #2, #4, #12, #13 (which has a weak reason for an FoS), #18–#21, #24 for the most part, #27, #35, #40, #41, #43, #58, #69 besides the "don't mock" part, and #72 in isolation.STRANGERCOUG: Stranger Than You!
Current avatar by PurryFurry of FurAffinity.
What Were You Thinking XV! is in progress.-
-
StrangerCoug He/HimDoes not ComputeHe/Him
- Does not Compute
- Does not Compute
- Posts: 12457
- Joined: May 6, 2008
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: San Antonio, Texas
EBWOP: @Erratos Apathos, I do see one or two of them. The seventh one was my commenting that I was trying very hard to keep myself in control, and the last one was a legitimate question.STRANGERCOUG: Stranger Than You!
Current avatar by PurryFurry of FurAffinity.
What Were You Thinking XV! is in progress.-
-
StrangerCoug He/HimDoes not ComputeHe/Him
- Does not Compute
- Does not Compute
- Posts: 12457
- Joined: May 6, 2008
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: San Antonio, Texas
Once I realized I wasn't going to stop everybody in the thread from posting outside of just confirming, I decided "Ah, screw it" and decided to look for usable content.armlx wrote:Also, I'm interested in why you are insisting on content before there is even a random stage.STRANGERCOUG: Stranger Than You!
Current avatar by PurryFurry of FurAffinity.
What Were You Thinking XV! is in progress.-
-
StrangerCoug He/HimDoes not ComputeHe/Him
- Does not Compute
- Does not Compute
- Posts: 12457
- Joined: May 6, 2008
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: San Antonio, Texas
I counted seventeen (note the dash in between two of them), but in any case, there is no way on earth I can process 262 posts minus the confirmation posts in my brain and have decent cases on everybody who made them this early in the game. That is simply too much to ask, and I have to pick something to go after.
I took out some of the posts I knew to be jokes, but those are the ones I find questionable.STRANGERCOUG: Stranger Than You!
Current avatar by PurryFurry of FurAffinity.
What Were You Thinking XV! is in progress.-
-
StrangerCoug He/HimDoes not ComputeHe/Him
- Does not Compute
- Does not Compute
- Posts: 12457
- Joined: May 6, 2008
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: San Antonio, Texas
At the moment, best option. Large games require a lot of work, and this is my start toward it. We need a lot of team effort to get a good deal of the cases down to size.MafiaMann wrote:I have a question for coug. Do you think BM is scum or the best oprion for you atm.STRANGERCOUG: Stranger Than You!
Current avatar by PurryFurry of FurAffinity.
What Were You Thinking XV! is in progress.-
-
StrangerCoug He/HimDoes not ComputeHe/Him
- Does not Compute
- Does not Compute
- Posts: 12457
- Joined: May 6, 2008
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: San Antonio, Texas
I give up on this since, as I said, my poor brain is unable to digest everything in here. Cass is probably right to vote me for the reasons she did. I'm not fazed by just one vote, though, especially since it puts me at L-13 or something like that.Erratus Apathos wrote:
Ding ding ding, we have a winner! Question number two: does the fact that you had two pregame signal posts out of ten (excluding the confirm obv) tell you nothing about your attack on BM?StrangerCoug wrote:EBWOP: @Erratos Apathos, I do see one or two of them. The seventh one was my commenting that I was trying very hard to keep myself in control, and the last one was a legitimate question.
While I'm at it, Snaps_the_Pirate's case on me at #271 sucks since Battle Mage isn't anywhere near lynch either. What doesn't make sense is how one measly person, who has said multiple times that he has to manage things one case at a time, can be trying to push for a lynch when 14 people have to agree that the person is scummy. You, my friend, are blowing my case out of proportion.
Unvote: Battle Mage
Vote: Snaps_the_PirateSTRANGERCOUG: Stranger Than You!
Current avatar by PurryFurry of FurAffinity.
What Were You Thinking XV! is in progress.-
-
StrangerCoug He/HimDoes not ComputeHe/Him
- Does not Compute
- Does not Compute
- Posts: 12457
- Joined: May 6, 2008
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: San Antonio, Texas
Do you honestly think it is pro-town of me to suggest somebody's lynch this early and with this few posts on Battle Mage when I've repeatedly stated that there are too many posts to manage everybody's case?armlx wrote:
Not really. You can be trying to lynch someone from vote #1.SC wrote: While I'm at it, Snaps_the_Pirate's case on me at #271 sucks since Battle Mage isn't anywhere near lynch either. What doesn't make sense is how one measly person, who has said multiple times that he has to manage things one case at a time, can be trying to push for a lynch when 14 people have to agree that the person is scummy. You, my friend, are blowing my case out of proportion.STRANGERCOUG: Stranger Than You!
Current avatar by PurryFurry of FurAffinity.
What Were You Thinking XV! is in progress.-
-
StrangerCoug He/HimDoes not ComputeHe/Him
- Does not Compute
- Does not Compute
- Posts: 12457
- Joined: May 6, 2008
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: San Antonio, Texas
Minor FoS: animorpherv1because this is not the random voting stage.STRANGERCOUG: Stranger Than You!
Current avatar by PurryFurry of FurAffinity.
What Were You Thinking XV! is in progress.-
-
StrangerCoug He/HimDoes not ComputeHe/Him
- Does not Compute
- Does not Compute
- Posts: 12457
- Joined: May 6, 2008
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: San Antonio, Texas
I understand now. Where I come from you know the cop and doc in advance, so you can't kill them! xD (They call the doc the bodyguard there, but the role behaves the same way. You also don't vote out in the open where I come from.)
Un-FoS: animorpherv1STRANGERCOUG: Stranger Than You!
Current avatar by PurryFurry of FurAffinity.
What Were You Thinking XV! is in progress.-
-
StrangerCoug He/HimDoes not ComputeHe/Him
- Does not Compute
- Does not Compute
- Posts: 12457
- Joined: May 6, 2008
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: San Antonio, Texas
EBWOP:
He picked the wrong time to do it, although he didn't realize it and I just forgave him for his mistake.Erratus Apathos wrote:
How does random voting make him more likely to be scum?StrangerCoug wrote:Minor FoS: animorpherv1because this is not the random voting stage.STRANGERCOUG: Stranger Than You!
Current avatar by PurryFurry of FurAffinity.
What Were You Thinking XV! is in progress.-
-
StrangerCoug He/HimDoes not ComputeHe/Him
- Does not Compute
- Does not Compute
- Posts: 12457
- Joined: May 6, 2008
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: San Antonio, Texas
The "quality, not quantity" post can be debated, but because of the radically different playstyle there, it really did take me time to adapt from that site's thread to this site. Read my MafiaWiki page if you still don't believe me, because anything ever wrong with that page will fit into three categories, in approximate order of how easy it is to catch:DynamoXI wrote:Along with the fact that he mentions that he has played a completly different form of mafia that floors me (It seems that he just interjected something so that he wouldn't just be saying "I understand now"FoS: StrangerCoug
- Outdated information
- Things I didn't know
- Honest mistakes that I didn't mean to be misrepresentative
STRANGERCOUG: Stranger Than You!
Current avatar by PurryFurry of FurAffinity.
What Were You Thinking XV! is in progress.-
-
StrangerCoug He/HimDoes not ComputeHe/Him
- Does not Compute
- Does not Compute
- Posts: 12457
- Joined: May 6, 2008
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: San Antonio, Texas
Mod: Delete the extraneous [/list] tag from #355 please.STRANGERCOUG: Stranger Than You!
Current avatar by PurryFurry of FurAffinity.
What Were You Thinking XV! is in progress.-
-
StrangerCoug He/HimDoes not ComputeHe/Him
- Does not Compute
- Does not Compute
- Posts: 12457
- Joined: May 6, 2008
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: San Antonio, Texas
For the last time, it's not something I'm used to... *grumble*hasdgfas wrote:Post 64-SC: No, game discussion is fine before everyone has confirmed. What's wrong with it?STRANGERCOUG: Stranger Than You!
Current avatar by PurryFurry of FurAffinity.
What Were You Thinking XV! is in progress.-
-
StrangerCoug He/HimDoes not ComputeHe/Him
- Does not Compute
- Does not Compute
- Posts: 12457
- Joined: May 6, 2008
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: San Antonio, Texas
Could you explain nhat's distraction please?Cass wrote:On the other hand, EA implied that his votes do not mean an intention to lynch (yet). So his vote-swapping is comparable to a load of FoSes for different people, which does not seem scummy to me. I sounds like Nhat has built another very weak case, this time to distract attention.
That's an awfully weak reason for a vote switch.Netlava wrote:Cass calls the case a distraction, which sounds like a conscious decision.
Unvote, vote: CassFoS: NetlavaSTRANGERCOUG: Stranger Than You!
Current avatar by PurryFurry of FurAffinity.
What Were You Thinking XV! is in progress.-
-
StrangerCoug He/HimDoes not ComputeHe/Him
- Does not Compute
- Does not Compute
- Posts: 12457
- Joined: May 6, 2008
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: San Antonio, Texas
You were the first two people I was looking at when I made that post. I didn't want the long pre-game that we ended up having, but then again, there's a decent amount of information in there.Battle Mage wrote:
why?StrangerCoug wrote:The first two people I want to look at are Battle Mage and Untitled. I think we can safely forgo random voting.
This is delayed OMGUS since you lost the mental "convince the StrangerCoug" battle in my head. I believed Untitled more than you, so watch your step.Battle Mage wrote:
4 posts ago, you said that you wanted to look at Untitled. Evidently this was just an attempt to conceal an obvious attempt at tunnel-vision right?StrangerCoug wrote:I think Untitled has done a good job defending his actions for the most part. I am more suspicious of Battle Mage and his pact. First off, I want to say the pact is a null tell, but it's more accurate to say it's misleading to vote people based on who is and is not in the pact. The pact simply won't work, as it's too easy to infiltrate.
Also, 73 posts in the pre-game and not a lot of substance to go with it, either. Mafia is largely a game of quality, not quantity.
Vote: Battle Mage
Give me three useful pro-town purposes of the pact or I'm dismissing this argument as WIFOM done as an attempt to make me look bad.Battle Mage wrote:But, whilst i'm here, i'll point out that the "misleading" thing is that you clearly haven't actually READ the pact. If you had, you wouldnt make comments like, "to vote people based on who is and is not in the pact".
Content that's not confusing based on my prior experiences, which in the pre-game is everything besides confirmations. I'll accept a little bit of small talk, but it really took off, and I'm used to Day 1 starting somewhere on page 1 or 2. Not page 10.Battle Mage wrote:And if there was any chance of you salvaging any credibility, you lost it when you said "73 posts in the pre-game and not a lot of substance to go with it". Are you kidding me? Name somebody who provided more 'substance' in the first 10 pages of the game. And hell, in your words, it's the fricking PRE-GAME. What sort of content do you want??
Jesus christ.... BM
This is question dodging by means ofBattle Mage wrote:
1 word. Actually, i'll make it even easier. 2 syllables:StrangerCoug wrote:Which do you find more credible: three posts that all make a good case or ten posts that suck?
PRE-GAME.argumentum ad lapidem.
What the hell!? "Unwilling"? When I've said over and over that I'm NOT USED TO DISCUSSION IN THE PRE-GAME, which is why I tried to stop it!?Battle Mage wrote:All i can gather from your early posts is that you are unwilling to participate unless absolutely necessary.
Unvote: Snaps_the_Piratefor continuous misrepresentation of my case.
Vote: Battle MageSTRANGERCOUG: Stranger Than You!
Current avatar by PurryFurry of FurAffinity.
What Were You Thinking XV! is in progress.-
-
StrangerCoug He/HimDoes not ComputeHe/Him
- Does not Compute
- Does not Compute
- Posts: 12457
- Joined: May 6, 2008
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: San Antonio, Texas
By saying I'm "appealing to stupidity" you've reduced yourself to being insulting. A 10-page pre-game with a lot of discussion may not be something I'm used to, but I fail to understand how that translates into a random voting stage once it's actually Day 1.Battle Mage wrote:
That seems rather contradictory. Why did you feel you could 'safely forgo random voting', and subsequently name 2 'suspects', one of whom you declared 4 posts later to be probably protown, and in fact, NOT a suspect?StrangerCoug wrote:
You were the first two people I was looking at when I made that post. I didn't want the long pre-game that we ended up having, but then again, there's a decent amount of information in there.Battle Mage wrote:
why?StrangerCoug wrote:The first two people I want to look at are Battle Mage and Untitled. I think we can safely forgo random voting.
It seems just like a transparent attempt to bandwagon somebody with little reason. I believe they call it 'Appealing to Stupidity'.
Battle Mage wrote:
Rofl. If i was Armlx, i'd probably say something along the lines of 'Stop wanking', or something equally droll. I'm at least glad you concede that your suspicion of me was solely OMGUS, but seriously... threats? Did you even BOTHER to look where my vote is? 0.oStrangerCoug wrote:
This is delayed OMGUS since you lost the mental "convince the StrangerCoug" battle in my head. I believed Untitled more than you, so watch your step.Battle Mage wrote:
4 posts ago, you said that you wanted to look at Untitled. Evidently this was just an attempt to conceal an obvious attempt at tunnel-vision right?StrangerCoug wrote:I think Untitled has done a good job defending his actions for the most part. I am more suspicious of Battle Mage and his pact. First off, I want to say the pact is a null tell, but it's more accurate to say it's misleading to vote people based on who is and is not in the pact. The pact simply won't work, as it's too easy to infiltrate.
Also, 73 posts in the pre-game and not a lot of substance to go with it, either. Mafia is largely a game of quality, not quantity.
Vote: Battle MageAd lapidemagain.
This is tunnel vision and appealing to fear.Battle Mage wrote:Buddy, in my mind, you are probably scum. At this point, you voting for me is reassuring. It means you're scared enough of me to pit yourself directly against me, which means i am doing my job.
What else am I supposed to do, sit there?Battle Mage wrote:Another point i will make is that it is typically scum who look at games as simply as to say 'i believe 1 side over the other'. It's normally townies who actually look at the content and can differentiate between the two. This is mainly because townies actually care about who they lynch and for what reason, whereas scum just want to pick the winning side of the argument and cruise to the end.
If I hadn't read the pact, I wouldn't have objected to the goddamn thing.Battle Mage wrote:
ROFLMAO! It's like you aren't reading what i'm saying. This isn't anywhereStrangeCog wrote:Battle Mage wrote:But, whilst i'm here, i'll point out that the "misleading" thing is that you clearly haven't actually READ the pact. If you had, you wouldnt make comments like, "to vote people based on who is and is not in the pact".Give me three useful pro-town purposes of the pactorI'm dismissing this argumentas WIFOMdone as an attempt to make me look bad.NEARWIFOM. It's a fact. You havent read the pact, yet you take it upon yourself to slander it. Skimmy is Scummy. You don't even try to deny this, which proves my point. Maybe you should read it, so you can retract your points, and perhaps save some of your dignity? But far be it from me to make your life easier.
If anything, we have each other's attention.Battle Mage wrote:Other responses:
Underlined:Only defensive scum will see everything that is said against them as an 'argument'. In fact, in this case it wasn't, but because you instantly see me as the aggressor who is making you look bad, your OMGUS-dar is on overdrive and you cant help but consider it 'war'.
Tunnel vision again.Battle Mage wrote:Italics:You really don't need any help on that score. You've dug a big enough hole for yourself that we can bury you now. Keep going and we'll have enough graves for your buddies too!
1 and 3 I'll buy, but 2 doesn't answer my infiltration concern.Battle Mage wrote:Orange:Because i relish making you look the fool, i accept your challenge, however off the wall it was.
1. It brings certain players to the forefront much like you would expect from the traditional 'case and bandwagon' style of Mafia. Those players can be assessed more easily, and it prevents them lurking to victory.
2. For the first day at least, scum dont know what to make of it. Everybody has an opinion on it, and it makes a great starting discussion topic to get the game moving. We get people taking sides, which we can really assess later on.
3. If implemented, it would allow us to move bandwagons quickly, keeping the scum on their toes. How they'd react is interesting and i think we could learn alot from who followed orders unconditionally, who did what was in their heart, and what people's limits were.
By "not a lot of substance" I mean "filler". And where on Earth did you get "anything I don't understand doesn't count as participation"? If I'm slandering you as you say I am, then you're slandering me back, and this is a lose-lose proposition unless we can settle our differences.Battle Mage wrote:
Hi. I'm BM. I'm a little different to people you might have met before. I don't always do what everyone else does. I can be a bit wacky. I'm really sorry if you have such trouble with things being different, but it's the only way you can really learn in Mafia. But you still haven't answered my question. What did you mean by 'not alot of substance'? And no, i won't accept the "I get confused easily, and anything i don't understand doesn't count as participation'.StrangerCoug wrote:
Content that's not confusing based on my prior experiences, which in the pre-game is everything besides confirmations. I'll accept a little bit of small talk, but it really took off, and I'm used to Day 1 starting somewhere on page 1 or 2. Not page 10.Battle Mage wrote:And if there was any chance of you salvaging any credibility, you lost it when you said "73 posts in the pre-game and not a lot of substance to go with it". Are you kidding me? Name somebody who provided more 'substance' in the first 10 pages of the game. And hell, in your words, it's the fricking PRE-GAME. What sort of content do you want??
Jesus christ.... BM
Then do so.Battle Mage wrote:
Lol, long word! I'm impressed. In fact, i'm almost inclined to look it up.StrangeCoug wrote:
This is question dodging by means ofBattle Mage wrote:
1 word. Actually, i'll make it even easier. 2 syllables:StrangerCoug wrote:Which do you find more credible: three posts that all make a good case or ten posts that suck?
PRE-GAME.argumentum ad lapidem.
It may have been, but I was willing to allow anybody to answer.Battle Mage wrote:Were it not for the fact that...
THE QUESTION WAS NOT POSED TO ME IN THE FIRST PLACE, SO HOW THE HELL CAN YOU ACCUSE ME OF DODGING IT?
Battle Mage wrote:Geez man, you need help. Seriously. The fact you can quote clever things shows you do have something going on in that head of yours. I just don't see why it can't be transferred to this game?
Find where I did so, because I remember making no such post.Battle Mage wrote:I'll explain my point a little more to help you out. You were the guy who said that participation in the pre-game was bad.
Explain my posts not having quality. What do you think about my case on Snaps_the_Pirate, for example?Battle Mage wrote:Now, this is a million miles from a case of 'is quality better than quantity', because you are offering NEITHER. It's not like you have a leg to stand on when you attack me for lack of content, because even if only 1 word in each of my 73 posts was useful, and every single word you typed was awesomeness personified, you would still be inferior in terms of quality of posting. And sadly, this is far from the case.
Your question itself seems to be dodging the point in a humourous ironic twist.
A. Large games are very hard for me to digest in one go.Battle Mage wrote:You have already admitted that you:
A. Havent read the most important parts of the game so far.
B. Don't believe in participating unless absolutely necessary.
C. Voted for me solely based on OMGUS.
B. Yeah, right. You don't pay attention either. Iwillspeak up when I have something to add.
C. You only call it OMGUS because you fail to understand my case on you.
Then prove they don't.Battle Mage wrote:You really think i'm going to accept YOU telling me that my posts 'suck'?! Dream on kid.
Town or scum, I will question anything I'm not used to.Battle Mage wrote:
I'm directly referencing your earliest posts. Whether or not you are 'used' to discussion in pre-game is irrelevant. It is inherently protown to discuss as much as possible, and you argued against this, despite claiming not to really understand what was going on.Strangercoug wrote:
What the hell!? "Unwilling"? When I've said over and over that I'm NOT USED TO DISCUSSION IN THE PRE-GAME, which is why I tried to stop it!?Battle Mage wrote:All i can gather from your early posts is that you are unwilling to participate unless absolutely necessary.
Unvote: Snaps_the_Piratefor continuous misrepresentation of my case.
Vote: Battle Mage
Goddamn you, why are you so certain this early!? You seem to have made it your mission to get rid of me at all costs. I'm saving the rest of this paragraph for last, and we're almost at the end anyway.Battle Mage wrote:Again, you use the word 'case'. Where is the 'case'? I don't see it. You're scum who is barely paying attention.
Stop ridiculing me.Battle Mage wrote:oh and btw...
Oh My God, U Suck.
Let's change the subject for just a moment so neither of us end up clawing at each other and winning nothing at the end. I will take a look at the other 24 players in this game and post my opinions of them based on their posts, and I want you to do the same thing. I think we've made it clear that we each think the other is scum, so don't do me and I won't do you.Battle Mage wrote:Blinded by OMGUS and panic, because you aren't in your comfort zone, and you are slipping up under interrogation, left, right, and centre.STRANGERCOUG: Stranger Than You!
Current avatar by PurryFurry of FurAffinity.
What Were You Thinking XV! is in progress.-
-
StrangerCoug He/HimDoes not ComputeHe/Him
- Does not Compute
- Does not Compute
- Posts: 12457
- Joined: May 6, 2008
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: San Antonio, Texas
I have to leave at the moment, but I really am doing the player review. As I said, I'm skipping Battle Mage on purpose and told him to skip me in his own review, but I do have the first seven of the other players alphabetically at this point.STRANGERCOUG: Stranger Than You!
Current avatar by PurryFurry of FurAffinity.
What Were You Thinking XV! is in progress.-
-
StrangerCoug He/HimDoes not ComputeHe/Him
- Does not Compute
- Does not Compute
- Posts: 12457
- Joined: May 6, 2008
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: San Antonio, Texas
OK, I'm back. Here's the player review that I said I'd do so I have people other than Battle Mage to look at. This took a very long time, but I feel it's well worth it.
armlx:His first post attacks both the pact and Battle Mage's multiposting. Decides to look at the nhat vs. Peter Griffin case, then FoS's the latter and wolframnhart and votes DynamoXI, presumably for a reason having to do with the pact (I typed this up while looking at each post in isolation, though I also opened another tab with all the posts). He then chips in on the Battle Mage vs. StrangerCoug case, largely on me. Questions nhat's soft claim accusation, then says nhat is confusing a slip with a soft claim. Goes back to me, this time regarding my case against Snaps_the_Pirate. Returns to nhat's case and says soft claims are OK. Asks MafiaMann whether he has opinions or just anecdotal comments. Questions nhat's accusing PeterGriffin of OMGUS, then proceeds to vote the former for misrepresentation. Shifts his attention to cris150 for one vote, then returns to nhat. Buys his case and switches his vote back to DynamoXI for jumping on the pact wagon. Explains to Cass that nhat's first two votes were weak and the third strong. Engages in a discussion about whether votes are necessarily an intent to lynch and argues that it should given the long pregame. Voices an objection to Battle Mage's multiposting, briefly goes back to Battle Mage vs. StrangerCoug, then discusses vote switches with Erratos Apathos. armlx leans pro-town to me.
Cass:Decides not to trust anybody about the pact at first, then not to engage in discussion about the pact. FoS's nhat because his soft claim accusation doesn't make sense and votes me for hypocrisy and badly stretched logic. Disagrees that soft claiming is a tell. Explains what she thinks is my "badly stretched logic". Asks DynamoXI why he's so hesitant to vote. Votes nhat for creating a distraction with a weak case. Attacks the vote hopping accusation on her by saying she's only voted for nhat and me. I want to say that she's town.
Cephrir:A lot of his early discussion is about the pact. Announces that he hopes scum joins the pact (this is where I'm getting that scum will infiltrate the pact, BTW). A lot of his discussion about the pact is with Opposed Force. Tells Untitled that "we're all out to get you", then votes him in his next post for craplogic. FoS's nhat for WIFOM and thinking a soft claim is a scumtell, and asks him to look up Too Townie. Decides to vote nhat given that he doesn't want to sift through the game to quote Battle Mage for truth and that Untitled wasn't as bad as he once thought. Attacks Erratos Apathos's voting him because vote = intent to lynch doesn't apply on Day 1 by saying this game is an exception, then votes him two posts later for reasons that I can't exactly make out. Cephrir leans on the scummy side to me.
cerebus3:Very weak reason if any for voting Untitled. His replacement had better clean up his act.
cris150:I have a null read on this person as she hasn't contributed much as of yet, but she has gotten attention from armlx to an extent, Battle Mage, Cyberbob, nhat, Untitled, and me, with the latter two of us her suspicions. She has posted a PBPA up to post 330.
Cyberbob:Implies that he is against the pact. FoS's me based on post #254 and votes Netlava given post #88 and that he hasn't posted much content. Pretty good case on nhat. Voices a dislike of Cass's vote on nhat, but doesn't say why. States that he wouldn't be attacking nhat so much if he weren't acting like a crybaby, but that he is "not going to buy into anything else" until Netlava defends CB's vote on NL. Says that he doesn't object to Netlava's attacking the pact discussion, but rather that he agrees with it after having just done so. I'm getting a town vibe off this guy.
DynamoXI:Spends a good deal of the pre-game discussing the pact. FoS's nhat for horrible logic. Brings up my "quality, not quantity" argument and dismisses my buying PeterGriffin's defense for his random vote given my unusual-to-this-site other Mafia experience online as what I interpret as a lame excuse to clear him, and FoS's me for both. Defends his not voting as wanting a strong case on someone first. Buys nhat's case on Erratos Apathos and votes the latter. The vote looks like one of appeasement, however, and I already told him that if he doubted my Mafia experiences outside this site he could look them up on my MafiaWiki page.FoS: DynamoXI
earthworm:Tells me he sees no problem with extended pre-game discussion, then takes a stance against the pact. Thinks that people who join it without reason are more likely lazy town than scum. Responds to my prediction of someone voting me for not wanting pre-game discussion with a wish he listened to me. Votes nhat because he finds his voting Untitled suspicious. Unvotes three posts later, but still suspects him given he's trying to deflect his case on him by attacking Erratos Apathos. Says he isn't defending Netlava so much as disagreeing with Cyberbob's case on Netlava. Accuses Cephrir of vote hopping. earthworm is acting pro-town here.
Erratos Apathos:Predicts that the pact will implode four pages into Day 1. Shoots down my accusing Battle Mage of not posting a lot of content in the pregame. Asks Snaps_the_Pirate when I said I wanted to lynch Battle Mage. Asks why I think animorpherv1 is scum for placing a random vote. Votes Cephrir because, according to EA, Day 1 votes never imply an intent to lynch, then switches his vote to nhat for post #101. Says town wouldn't change their mind more than once. Dismisses the argument "you're putting words in my mouth" as worthless and having no business in Mafia. I'm glad I directed my attention away from Battle Mage to take a look at everybody else, because these vote reasons are HORRENDOUS. Not only that, but a pro-town player can and does change his mind more than once, and it is indeed wrong to put words in someone's mouth.Unvote: Battle Mageandvote: Erratos Apathos.
Korts:The majority of the pre-game is one-liners, but he does voice suspicion of the pact. Ironically, he forms his own pact to fight it. Admits to sitting on the fence in terms of the pact. Votes wolframnhart for the same reason that armlx voted DynamoXI. Attacks my case against Battle Mage by saying that 15 out of 73 posts lacking quality is not enough to accuse him of it. Attacks nhat's soft claim accusation by saying everyone claims to be pro-town. His minimal contribution gives me a scum vibe; however, I'll give him the chance to come up with some decent cases when he comes back from V/LA.
MafiaMann:Of his six posts other than his confirmation, four are one-liners. Objects to the treaty. Asks if I think Battle Mage is scum or my best option. Says that the way a case is presented can help or hurt a player. Asks if nhat suspects Cyberbob (who thinks MafiaMann meant Erratos Apathos) solely because the latter has a case against the former. I need to see more contribution from this guy if I am to believe he is pro-town.IGMEOY: MafiaMann.
maxwellhouse:Disagrees that using the first person plural is a scum tell. Says that pressure votes Day 1, even in a game like this, are possible. Says that, as of 4:43:54 PM MDT on August 21, nhat is the only person anywhere near a lynch with five votes. Argues that some people aren't going to read the pre-game since it's before the actual game. What little he has said so far makes me believe he is town at this moment.
Mr. T:Post, damn it! All you've done is confirm!
Netlava:Objects to the pact and FoS's PeterGriffin and earthworm for arguing over it and me for asking not to post in the pre-game. Votes PeterGriffin because pointing out objectionable behavior ≠ stifling discussion. Clears his suspicion of my not wanting pre-game discussion as it being in tune with my play style. Attacks PeterGriffin's question about my play style and why it excuses me from being hypocritical as loaded. Suspects Cephrir. Votes Cass for arbitrarily calling nhat's case a distraction. Frowns on earthworm buddying up to him. I don't like Netlava's vote switch, and my FoS on him at #405 stands, but I will downgrade it to aminor FoS: Netlavaif only because most of his other posts are reasonable.
nhat:Appears to be anti-pact. Accuses PeterGriffin of being overeager. Votes Untitled for softclaiming. Says that using the first person plural is Too Townie. Dismisses PeterGriffin's vote on him as OMGUS. Says that the pact was a farce. Votes Erratos Apathos for vote hopping and flimsy reasons for his vote. His early play and overall being a jerk warrants anFoS: nhat, but I think he's cleaned up his act since.
OpposedForce:Objects to the pact and FoS's everybody in it. He engages in a lengthy discussion of the pact with Battle Mage, and it's not until post #227 that he shifts his attention away from it. Votes cerebus3 for skimming the thread and going with whatever's easy for him in lieu of actual scumhunting. Switches his votes to Cass after a reread because, contrary to what she said, not everybody has flimsy cases against people. Says she voted me on her own merit but is now going with the flow and being lazy. OpposedForce is acting pro-town to me.
PeterGriffin:Starts off neutral in regards to the pact. He accuses OpposedForce of going to extremes with his FoS on everybody in it; on the other hand, he also FoS's DynamoXI for being too eager to join the pact. Shows no initial objection to my saying that discussion should wait until the game starts, but says such discussion is pro-town if started early. Explains the pact to earthworm and says the pact will only be as effective as the alignments of the players within it, so is hesitant to support it. By the time he discusses it with Netlava, he has become slightly anti-pact. States that nhat has been makingargumenta ad hominemagainst Battle Mage and the people talking about the pact. FoS's MafiaMann for hypocrisy. Accuses Untitled of threatening to vote Battle Mage for no solid reason, then votes the former for craplogic, then switches to nhat for the same reason as for Untitled and thinking Too Townie is a scumtell. PeterGriffin seems very rational, and I'm OK with him for now.
raider8169:Pro-pact, but other than that I can't get anything off him.
Snaps_the_Pirate:Appears to be anti-pact. Implies that I want to get rid of the most talkative player even though I didn't think the player in question was scum at the time. Defends my voting him as his questioning my case on Battle Mage rather than his making a case against me and accuses me of OMGUS (and StP has never voted, mind you). Questions my motivation to vote him. I still don't like his blowing my case out of proportion, and OMGUS only exists when player A votes player B solely because the vice versa happened, so I'm dismissing his accusation here as misrepresentation.FoS: Snaps_the_Pirate
Tovarish:Same as Mr. T.
Untitled:Anti-pact. Lots of discussion about it with Battle Mage et al. and votes Battle Mage for multiple reasons that I'm going to boil down as misrepresentation. Argues that using the first person plural is not softclaiming. Attacks the Too Townie argument as contravening the definition of "scum tell". Says that "I disagree" ≠ craplogic and "generally" allows for exceptions to the rule. I pretty much follow him, and I think he's town.
Veronica13:Agrees with PeterGriffin about Netlava. Attacks nhat's reasoning as misguided and votes him, then switches to Cass for a lazy reason to vote nhat. I'm neutral on her (I presume Veronica13 is female given her username), but she is levelheaded.
winterbells/animorpherv1:winterbells never posted. animorpherv1 random votes PeterGriffin and explains it as being from another site (which I am too), and then votes nhat on heresay about his softclaiming. This is the only three things he has done, and he doesn't seem to be trying to participate.HoS: animopherv1.
wolframnhart/hasdgfas:wolframnhart wonders why people should form a pact to kill off people in a pact, but agrees with the latter one. hasdgfas comes in and votes DynamoXI based on post #58. Unvotes given that he shouldn't have voted if he hasn't caught up to everybody yet. Most of what he brings up is pretty good; however, I'm going to go neutral on hasdgfas until he's on the same page as everybody else. However,mod: hasdgfas is not marked in the first post as replacing wolframnhart.STRANGERCOUG: Stranger Than You!
Current avatar by PurryFurry of FurAffinity.
What Were You Thinking XV! is in progress.-
-
StrangerCoug He/HimDoes not ComputeHe/Him
- Does not Compute
- Does not Compute
- Posts: 12457
- Joined: May 6, 2008
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: San Antonio, Texas
Sorry.Cyberbob wrote:
Reading comprehension FTW. My vote on him is for his turning around and buying into the discussion after having just attacked it, not for the attack itself.StrangerCoug wrote:Says that he doesn't object to Netlava's attacking the pact discussion, but rather that he agrees with it after having just done so.STRANGERCOUG: Stranger Than You!
Current avatar by PurryFurry of FurAffinity.
What Were You Thinking XV! is in progress.-
-
StrangerCoug He/HimDoes not ComputeHe/Him
- Does not Compute
- Does not Compute
- Posts: 12457
- Joined: May 6, 2008
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: San Antonio, Texas
Yes I do remember. I'd have to go back and check the discussion in Mini 601 (which is finished, so the mod can't kill us for talking about it), but I don't remember this argument being in the same context as in Mini 601.STRANGERCOUG: Stranger Than You!
Current avatar by PurryFurry of FurAffinity.
What Were You Thinking XV! is in progress.-
-
StrangerCoug He/HimDoes not ComputeHe/Him
- Does not Compute
- Does not Compute
- Posts: 12457
- Joined: May 6, 2008
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: San Antonio, Texas
OK, Erratos Apathos, I just finished looking at Mini 601, and it appears I bought your defending putting words in veerus's mouth in that game because I understood it was a joke. Are you saying your putting words in nhat's mouth is a joke as well?STRANGERCOUG: Stranger Than You!
Current avatar by PurryFurry of FurAffinity.
What Were You Thinking XV! is in progress.-
-
StrangerCoug He/HimDoes not ComputeHe/Him
- Does not Compute
- Does not Compute
- Posts: 12457
- Joined: May 6, 2008
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: San Antonio, Texas
StrangerCoug wrote:Mr. T:Post, damn it! All you've done is confirm!
So much for those...StrangerCoug wrote:Tovarish:Same as Mr. T.STRANGERCOUG: Stranger Than You!
Current avatar by PurryFurry of FurAffinity.
What Were You Thinking XV! is in progress.-
-
StrangerCoug He/HimDoes not ComputeHe/Him
- Does not Compute
- Does not Compute
- Posts: 12457
- Joined: May 6, 2008
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: San Antonio, Texas
StrangerCoug wrote:Battle Mage wrote:
I actually agree with you here. But you still haven't explained why you opted to single me out, and perhaps more importantly, TRY TO HIDE THIS BY NAMING AN ADDITIONAL 'SUSPECT'. And ftr, a vote based on no reasoning except personal dislike, is, for all intents and purposes, random.StrangerCoug wrote:
By saying I'm "appealing to stupidity" you've reduced yourself to being insulting. A 10-page pre-game with a lot of discussion may not be something I'm used to, but I fail to understand how that translates into a random voting stage once it's actually Day 1.Battle Mage wrote:
That seems rather contradictory. Why did you feel you could 'safely forgo random voting', and subsequently name 2 'suspects', one of whom you declared 4 posts later to be probably protown, and in fact, NOT a suspect?StrangerCoug wrote:
You were the first two people I was looking at when I made that post. I didn't want the long pre-game that we ended up having, but then again, there's a decent amount of information in there.Battle Mage wrote:
why?StrangerCoug wrote:The first two people I want to look at are Battle Mage and Untitled. I think we can safely forgo random voting.
It seems just like a transparent attempt to bandwagon somebody with little reason. I believe they call it 'Appealing to Stupidity'.Battle Mage wrote:
Avoiding a non-existent question? really?Strangercoug wrote:Battle Mage wrote:
Rofl. If i was Armlx, i'd probably say something along the lines of 'Stop wanking', or something equally droll. I'm at least glad you concede that your suspicion of me was solely OMGUS, but seriously... threats? Did you even BOTHER to look where my vote is? 0.oStrangerCoug wrote:
This is delayed OMGUS since you lost the mental "convince the StrangerCoug" battle in my head. I believed Untitled more than you, so watch your step.Battle Mage wrote:
4 posts ago, you said that you wanted to look at Untitled. Evidently this was just an attempt to conceal an obvious attempt at tunnel-vision right?StrangerCoug wrote:I think Untitled has done a good job defending his actions for the most part. I am more suspicious of Battle Mage and his pact. First off, I want to say the pact is a null tell, but it's more accurate to say it's misleading to vote people based on who is and is not in the pact. The pact simply won't work, as it's too easy to infiltrate.
Also, 73 posts in the pre-game and not a lot of substance to go with it, either. Mafia is largely a game of quality, not quantity.
Vote: Battle MageAd lapidemagain.
Not worrying about OMGUS makes so sense from a protown stance.Battle Mage wrote:
For something to be an 'appeal to' anything, it has to be directed at an audience. The fact i was talking directly to you, means that the only person i could be appealing to is you. Do you think i was trying to make you scared of yourself?Strangercoug wrote:
This is tunnel vision and appealing to fear.Battle Mage wrote:Buddy, in my mind, you are probably scum. At this point, you voting for me is reassuring. It means you're scared enough of me to pit yourself directly against me, which means i am doing my job.
And for something to be tunnel-vision, it has to involve some sort of scumhunting and analysis. I merely stated that i felt you were scummy, and thus, was not especially worried at you OMGUSing me. lol
Prove that I haven't read the pact.Battle Mage wrote:
This is why i'm attacking your comments. You cannot say objecting to something you haven't actually read, is a protown thing to do.strangercoug wrote:
If I hadn't read the pact, I wouldn't have objected to the goddamn thing.Battle Mage wrote:
ROFLMAO! It's like you aren't reading what i'm saying. This isn't anywhereStrangeCog wrote:Battle Mage wrote:But, whilst i'm here, i'll point out that the "misleading" thing is that you clearly haven't actually READ the pact. If you had, you wouldnt make comments like, "to vote people based on who is and is not in the pact".Give me three useful pro-town purposes of the pactorI'm dismissing this argumentas WIFOMdone as an attempt to make me look bad.NEARWIFOM. It's a fact. You havent read the pact, yet you take it upon yourself to slander it. Skimmy is Scummy. You don't even try to deny this, which proves my point. Maybe you should read it, so you can retract your points, and perhaps save some of your dignity? But far be it from me to make your life easier.
If your objective was to attract my attention and keep it glued to you, then congratulations, you have succeeded.Battle Mage wrote:
What?Strangercoug wrote:
If anything, we have each other's attention.Battle Mage wrote:Other responses:
Underlined:Only defensive scum will see everything that is said against them as an 'argument'. In fact, in this case it wasn't, but because you instantly see me as the aggressor who is making you look bad, your OMGUS-dar is on overdrive and you cant help but consider it 'war'.
If you instead asked "Would you like enough graves for your buddies too?" then I would accuse you of a loaded question, but since you were not asking a question I decided to call it tunnel vision. I don't know the difference between the two besides the existence of a question anyway. Would you prefer the more accurate "loaded statement"?Battle Mage wrote:
This falls into the same category as your failed attempt at labelling tunnel-vision earlier.Strangercoug wrote:
Tunnel vision again.Battle Mage wrote:Italics:You really don't need any help on that score. You've dug a big enough hole for yourself that we can bury you now. Keep going and we'll have enough graves for your buddies too!
And we are not allowed to think independently because?Battle Mage wrote:
Your infiltration concern is flawed because the pact is as much a method of creating a scumhunting system, as a scumhunting system in itself. But again, until you've actually read the treaty, there's not alot else i can do to help you.Strangercoug wrote:
1 and 3 I'll buy, but 2 doesn't answer my infiltration concern.Battle Mage wrote:Orange:Because i relish making you look the fool, i accept your challenge, however off the wall it was.
1. It brings certain players to the forefront much like you would expect from the traditional 'case and bandwagon' style of Mafia. Those players can be assessed more easily, and it prevents them lurking to victory.
2. For the first day at least, scum dont know what to make of it. Everybody has an opinion on it, and it makes a great starting discussion topic to get the game moving. We get people taking sides, which we can really assess later on.
3. If implemented, it would allow us to move bandwagons quickly, keeping the scum on their toes. How they'd react is interesting and i think we could learn alot from who followed orders unconditionally, who did what was in their heart, and what people's limits were.
From now on I'm just going to ignore you when you say "I am right", because all you're accomplishing with me when you do so is coming of as a selfish and elitist son of a gun.Battle Mage wrote:
Those are two completely different things. I can give you 12 pages of filler, but if i have 12 pages of content to go with it, i still have alot of substance. You said the content i posted was confusing, which explains why you didn't read it, and you also indicated that this content 'didnt count'. You seem to be under the impression this is solely personal. It is partially, but you are acting scummy, and i never back down from an argument when i know i am right.Strangercoug wrote:
By "not a lot of substance" I mean "filler". And where on Earth did you get "anything I don't understand doesn't count as participation"? If I'm slandering you as you say I am, then you're slandering me back, and this is a lose-lose proposition unless we can settle our differences.Battle Mage wrote:
Hi. I'm BM. I'm a little different to people you might have met before. I don't always do what everyone else does. I can be a bit wacky. I'm really sorry if you have such trouble with things being different, but it's the only way you can really learn in Mafia. But you still haven't answered my question. What did you mean by 'not alot of substance'? And no, i won't accept the "I get confused easily, and anything i don't understand doesn't count as participation'.StrangerCoug wrote:
Content that's not confusing based on my prior experiences, which in the pre-game is everything besides confirmations. I'll accept a little bit of small talk, but it really took off, and I'm used to Day 1 starting somewhere on page 1 or 2. Not page 10.Battle Mage wrote:And if there was any chance of you salvaging any credibility, you lost it when you said "73 posts in the pre-game and not a lot of substance to go with it". Are you kidding me? Name somebody who provided more 'substance' in the first 10 pages of the game. And hell, in your words, it's the fricking PRE-GAME. What sort of content do you want??
Jesus christ.... BM
I am responding to your comments. If you feel that you're not getting the kind of responses you want or that I am ignoring your comments by talking about something that's not the point, then say so.Battle Mage wrote:
Why should i do you the honour of taking your comments seriously when you cant even be bothered to respond to mine?Strangercoug wrote:
Then do so.Battle Mage wrote:
Lol, long word! I'm impressed. In fact, i'm almost inclined to look it up.StrangeCoug wrote:
This is question dodging by means ofBattle Mage wrote:
1 word. Actually, i'll make it even easier. 2 syllables:StrangerCoug wrote:Which do you find more credible: three posts that all make a good case or ten posts that suck?
PRE-GAME.argumentum ad lapidem.
So be it.Battle Mage wrote:
Oh, gee, thanks! Ya kno, for lettin me play and stuff.Strangercoug wrote:
It may have been, but I was willing to allow anybody to answer.Battle Mage wrote:Were it not for the fact that...
THE QUESTION WAS NOT POSED TO ME IN THE FIRST PLACE, SO HOW THE HELL CAN YOU ACCUSE ME OF DODGING IT?
I must've missed the announcement that you were appointed Moderator....
The question was not directed to me, hence you cannot accuse me of avoiding it. By not acknowledging this, it is you who is avoiding the question. lawl
Oh, is this retaliation for me not doing favors for you?Battle Mage wrote:
Use the search posts by player tool, and read the first few posts you made. I dont have the time or inclination to bottle-feed you.Strangercoug wrote:Battle Mage wrote:Geez man, you need help. Seriously. The fact you can quote clever things shows you do have something going on in that head of yours. I just don't see why it can't be transferred to this game?
Find where I did so, because I remember making no such post.Battle Mage wrote:I'll explain my point a little more to help you out. You were the guy who said that participation in the pre-game was bad.
One, if you accused me of not reading, then it would look bad on you if you said you haven't read either, now wouldn't it?Battle Mage wrote:
I'm not talking about since the game has started. I haven't even read past page 11, because there are still unanswered questions about that period. It was THEN that you criticised my lack of participation, and at that point, you had done F*All.Strangercoug wrote:
Explain my posts not having quality. What do you think about my case on Snaps_the_Pirate, for example?Battle Mage wrote:Now, this is a million miles from a case of 'is quality better than quantity', because you are offering NEITHER. It's not like you have a leg to stand on when you attack me for lack of content, because even if only 1 word in each of my 73 posts was useful, and every single word you typed was awesomeness personified, you would still be inferior in terms of quality of posting. And sadly, this is far from the case.
Your question itself seems to be dodging the point in a humourous ironic twist.
Two, please do not cuss me out, whether you censor yourself or not. It's offensive.
Battle Mage wrote:
Then dont pretend to be aware of whats going on, when you aren't. LaL is by no means a concrete rule, but if you lie about stuff with no protown motive, then you are going to look scummy. Plus it means you end up preaching bs, which makes you look really dumb.Strangercoug wrote:
A. Large games are very hard for me to digest in one go.Battle Mage wrote:You have already admitted that you:
A. Havent read the most important parts of the game so far.
B. Don't believe in participating unless absolutely necessary.
C. Voted for me solely based on OMGUS.Battle Mage wrote:
rofl. Actually, i call it OMGUS because that's what you called it.Strangercoug wrote: C. You only call it OMGUS because you fail to understand my case on you.
Note the verb forms here. You say youBattle Mage wrote:
I've created discussion. You hadn't.Strangercoug wrote:
Then prove they don't.Battle Mage wrote:You really think i'm going to accept YOU telling me that my posts 'suck'?! Dream on kid.HAcreated discussion, while I, on the other hand,VEHAdone so. I'm sorry, but you are talking to someone who used to copy edit for his high school newspaper and you now have to convince me that your word usage does not create a straw man argument.DNOT
You commit the scumtells, i call you out on them. Fairly mundane stuff.Strangercoug wrote:
Goddamn you, why are you so certain this early!? You seem to have made it your mission to get rid of me at all costs. I'm saving the rest of this paragraph for last, and we're almost at the end anyway.Battle Mage wrote:Again, you use the word 'case'. Where is the 'case'? I don't see it. You're scum who is barely paying attention.
Get real. Seriously.Battle Mage wrote:
NEVAR!Strangecog wrote:
Stop ridiculing me.Battle Mage wrote:oh and btw...
Oh My God, U Suck.
Sounds good. Analysing everyone at this point is probably a good idea. But, i still want a separate post outlining your case on me. Just for the record.Strangercog wrote:
Let's change the subject for just a moment so neither of us end up clawing at each other and winning nothing at the end. I will take a look at the other 24 players in this game and post my opinions of them based on their posts, and I want you to do the same thing. I think we've made it clear that we each think the other is scum, so don't do me and I won't do you.Battle Mage wrote:Blinded by OMGUS and panic, because you aren't in your comfort zone, and you are slipping up under interrogation, left, right, and centre.
BM[/quote]
OK, fair deal.
You say you hope scum joins the pact, which sounds a bit like something scum itself would say. It's like saying I hope scum kills Battle Mage tonight if he doesn't get lynched (especially since it would imply that I know Battle Mage is town). It is also not clear to me why you are voting Erratos Apathos.Cephrir wrote:
This is an accurate summary of what I've done in this game, for the most part. Care to explain why you think it makes me scummy? You kinda did something similar with a lot of people actually. So I'll just ask your entire post: why?StrangerCoug wrote:Cephrir: A lot of his early discussion is about the pact. Announces that he hopes scum joins the pact (this is where I'm getting that scum will infiltrate the pact, BTW). A lot of his discussion about the pact is with Opposed Force. Tells Untitled that "we're all out to get you", then votes him in his next post for craplogic. FoS's nhat for WIFOM and thinking a soft claim is a scumtell, and asks him to look up Too Townie. Decides to vote nhat given that he doesn't want to sift through the game to quote Battle Mage for truth and that Untitled wasn't as bad as he once thought. Attacks Erratos Apathos's voting him because vote = intent to lynch doesn't apply on Day 1 by saying this game is an exception, then votes him two posts later for reasons that I can't exactly make out. Cephrir leans on the scummy side to me.
OK, so it's better for us to engage in an ultimately futile vendetta? I don't get it.Snaps_the_Pirate wrote:
Wow, does that sound like he is scared of BM?SC wrote:Let’s change the subject for just a moment so neither of us end up clawing at each other and winning nothing at the end. I will take a look at the other 24 players in this game and post my opinions of them based on their posts, and I want you to do the same thing. I think we've made it clear that we each think the other is scum, so don't do me and I won't do you.
You said that my team effort was to get the most talkative player in the game lynched, which was not my intent.Snaps_the_Pirate wrote:SrangerCoug has said an awful lot, but has not said very much. He mentions his case on me a few times. What case? He has said nothing for me to defend.
I misinterpreted that comment. Sorry.Snaps_the_Pirate wrote:He also talks about being misrepresented, yet he stated I was anti-pact. My only comment on the pact was that it was null and wouldn’t affect the game one way or the other. How is that “anti-pact”? Who is mis-representing who?
When the game started, a lot of discussion was still about the pact. The page it did so, Untitled accused Battle Mage of misrepresentation, and I believed Untitled's case on Battle Mage, hence my vote for the latter.Snaps_the_Pirate wrote:StrangerCoug has yet to anwser my simple question “Why did he initially vote BM?”.
I know you only asked about the first time around, but the second time around was for accusing me of refusing to participate until absolutely necessary, which is not true since I've been able to post at least every 24 hours and say something at least half-decent.STRANGERCOUG: Stranger Than You!
Current avatar by PurryFurry of FurAffinity.
What Were You Thinking XV! is in progress.-
-
StrangerCoug He/HimDoes not ComputeHe/Him
- Does not Compute
- Does not Compute
- Posts: 12457
- Joined: May 6, 2008
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: San Antonio, Texas
EBWOP to fix the quote boxes and address some points that I forgot to:
Again, I was looking at Page 10 when I voted you. Also, who is this additional "suspect" that you speak of?Battle Mage wrote:
I actually agree with you here. But you still haven't explained why you opted to single me out, and perhaps more importantly, TRY TO HIDE THIS BY NAMING AN ADDITIONAL 'SUSPECT'. And ftr, a vote based on no reasoning except personal dislike, is, for all intents and purposes, random.StrangerCoug wrote:
By saying I'm "appealing to stupidity" you've reduced yourself to being insulting. A 10-page pre-game with a lot of discussion may not be something I'm used to, but I fail to understand how that translates into a random voting stage once it's actually Day 1.Battle Mage wrote:
That seems rather contradictory. Why did you feel you could 'safely forgo random voting', and subsequently name 2 'suspects', one of whom you declared 4 posts later to be probably protown, and in fact, NOT a suspect?StrangerCoug wrote:
You were the first two people I was looking at when I made that post. I didn't want the long pre-game that we ended up having, but then again, there's a decent amount of information in there.Battle Mage wrote:
why?StrangerCoug wrote:The first two people I want to look at are Battle Mage and Untitled. I think we can safely forgo random voting.
It seems just like a transparent attempt to bandwagon somebody with little reason. I believe they call it 'Appealing to Stupidity'.
If the question is not directed at you and it is not an open question, then don't respond to it. You can talk about the question if you like, but even though it was directed at one person, itBattle Mage wrote:
Avoiding a non-existent question? really?Strangercoug wrote:Battle Mage wrote:
Rofl. If i was Armlx, i'd probably say something along the lines of 'Stop wanking', or something equally droll. I'm at least glad you concede that your suspicion of me was solely OMGUS, but seriously... threats? Did you even BOTHER to look where my vote is? 0.oStrangerCoug wrote:
This is delayed OMGUS since you lost the mental "convince the StrangerCoug" battle in my head. I believed Untitled more than you, so watch your step.Battle Mage wrote:
4 posts ago, you said that you wanted to look at Untitled. Evidently this was just an attempt to conceal an obvious attempt at tunnel-vision right?StrangerCoug wrote:I think Untitled has done a good job defending his actions for the most part. I am more suspicious of Battle Mage and his pact. First off, I want to say the pact is a null tell, but it's more accurate to say it's misleading to vote people based on who is and is not in the pact. The pact simply won't work, as it's too easy to infiltrate.
Also, 73 posts in the pre-game and not a lot of substance to go with it, either. Mafia is largely a game of quality, not quantity.
Vote: Battle MageAd lapidemagain.WASopen.
Not worrying about OMGUS makes no sense from a protown stance.Battle Mage wrote:
For something to be an 'appeal to' anything, it has to be directed at an audience. The fact i was talking directly to you, means that the only person i could be appealing to is you. Do you think i was trying to make you scared of yourself?Strangercoug wrote:
This is tunnel vision and appealing to fear.Battle Mage wrote:Buddy, in my mind, you are probably scum. At this point, you voting for me is reassuring. It means you're scared enough of me to pit yourself directly against me, which means i am doing my job.
And for something to be tunnel-vision, it has to involve some sort of scumhunting and analysis. I merely stated that i felt you were scummy, and thus, was not especially worried at you OMGUSing me. lol
Prove that I haven't read the pact.Battle Mage wrote:
This is why i'm attacking your comments. You cannot say objecting to something you haven't actually read, is a protown thing to do.strangercoug wrote:
If I hadn't read the pact, I wouldn't have objected to the goddamn thing.Battle Mage wrote:
ROFLMAO! It's like you aren't reading what i'm saying. This isn't anywhereStrangeCog wrote:Battle Mage wrote:But, whilst i'm here, i'll point out that the "misleading" thing is that you clearly haven't actually READ the pact. If you had, you wouldnt make comments like, "to vote people based on who is and is not in the pact".Give me three useful pro-town purposes of the pactorI'm dismissing this argumentas WIFOMdone as an attempt to make me look bad.NEARWIFOM. It's a fact. You havent read the pact, yet you take it upon yourself to slander it. Skimmy is Scummy. You don't even try to deny this, which proves my point. Maybe you should read it, so you can retract your points, and perhaps save some of your dignity? But far be it from me to make your life easier.
If your objective was to attract my attention and keep it glued to you, then congratulations, you have succeeded.Battle Mage wrote:
What?Strangercoug wrote:
If anything, we have each other's attention.Battle Mage wrote:Other responses:
Underlined:Only defensive scum will see everything that is said against them as an 'argument'. In fact, in this case it wasn't, but because you instantly see me as the aggressor who is making you look bad, your OMGUS-dar is on overdrive and you cant help but consider it 'war'.
If you instead asked "Would you like enough graves for your buddies too?" then I would accuse you of a loaded question, but since you were not asking a question I decided to call it tunnel vision. I don't know the difference between the two besides the existence of a question anyway. Would you prefer the more accurate "loaded statement"?Battle Mage wrote:
This falls into the same category as your failed attempt at labelling tunnel-vision earlier.Strangercoug wrote:
Tunnel vision again.Battle Mage wrote:Italics:You really don't need any help on that score. You've dug a big enough hole for yourself that we can bury you now. Keep going and we'll have enough graves for your buddies too!
And we are not allowed to think independently because?Battle Mage wrote:
Your infiltration concern is flawed because the pact is as much a method of creating a scumhunting system, as a scumhunting system in itself. But again, until you've actually read the treaty, there's not alot else i can do to help you.Strangercoug wrote:
1 and 3 I'll buy, but 2 doesn't answer my infiltration concern.Battle Mage wrote:Orange:Because i relish making you look the fool, i accept your challenge, however off the wall it was.
1. It brings certain players to the forefront much like you would expect from the traditional 'case and bandwagon' style of Mafia. Those players can be assessed more easily, and it prevents them lurking to victory.
2. For the first day at least, scum dont know what to make of it. Everybody has an opinion on it, and it makes a great starting discussion topic to get the game moving. We get people taking sides, which we can really assess later on.
3. If implemented, it would allow us to move bandwagons quickly, keeping the scum on their toes. How they'd react is interesting and i think we could learn alot from who followed orders unconditionally, who did what was in their heart, and what people's limits were.
From now on I'm just going to ignore you when you say "I am right", because all you're accomplishing with me when you do so is coming of as a selfish and elitist son of a gun.Battle Mage wrote:
Those are two completely different things. I can give you 12 pages of filler, but if i have 12 pages of content to go with it, i still have alot of substance. You said the content i posted was confusing, which explains why you didn't read it, and you also indicated that this content 'didnt count'. You seem to be under the impression this is solely personal. It is partially, but you are acting scummy, and i never back down from an argument when i know i am right.Strangercoug wrote:
By "not a lot of substance" I mean "filler". And where on Earth did you get "anything I don't understand doesn't count as participation"? If I'm slandering you as you say I am, then you're slandering me back, and this is a lose-lose proposition unless we can settle our differences.Battle Mage wrote:
Hi. I'm BM. I'm a little different to people you might have met before. I don't always do what everyone else does. I can be a bit wacky. I'm really sorry if you have such trouble with things being different, but it's the only way you can really learn in Mafia. But you still haven't answered my question. What did you mean by 'not alot of substance'? And no, i won't accept the "I get confused easily, and anything i don't understand doesn't count as participation'.StrangerCoug wrote:
Content that's not confusing based on my prior experiences, which in the pre-game is everything besides confirmations. I'll accept a little bit of small talk, but it really took off, and I'm used to Day 1 starting somewhere on page 1 or 2. Not page 10.Battle Mage wrote:And if there was any chance of you salvaging any credibility, you lost it when you said "73 posts in the pre-game and not a lot of substance to go with it". Are you kidding me? Name somebody who provided more 'substance' in the first 10 pages of the game. And hell, in your words, it's the fricking PRE-GAME. What sort of content do you want??
Jesus christ.... BM
I am responding to your comments. If you feel that you're not getting the kind of responses you want or that I am ignoring your comments by talking about something that's not the point, then say so.Battle Mage wrote:
Why should i do you the honour of taking your comments seriously when you cant even be bothered to respond to mine?Strangercoug wrote:
Then do so.Battle Mage wrote:
Lol, long word! I'm impressed. In fact, i'm almost inclined to look it up.StrangeCoug wrote:
This is question dodging by means ofBattle Mage wrote:
1 word. Actually, i'll make it even easier. 2 syllables:StrangerCoug wrote:Which do you find more credible: three posts that all make a good case or ten posts that suck?
PRE-GAME.argumentum ad lapidem.
So be it.Battle Mage wrote:
Oh, gee, thanks! Ya kno, for lettin me play and stuff.Strangercoug wrote:
It may have been, but I was willing to allow anybody to answer.Battle Mage wrote:Were it not for the fact that...
THE QUESTION WAS NOT POSED TO ME IN THE FIRST PLACE, SO HOW THE HELL CAN YOU ACCUSE ME OF DODGING IT?
I must've missed the announcement that you were appointed Moderator....
The question was not directed to me, hence you cannot accuse me of avoiding it. By not acknowledging this, it is you who is avoiding the question. lawl
Oh, is this retaliation for me not doing favors for you?Battle Mage wrote:
Use the search posts by player tool, and read the first few posts you made. I dont have the time or inclination to bottle-feed you.Strangercoug wrote:Battle Mage wrote:Geez man, you need help. Seriously. The fact you can quote clever things shows you do have something going on in that head of yours. I just don't see why it can't be transferred to this game?
Find where I did so, because I remember making no such post.Battle Mage wrote:I'll explain my point a little more to help you out. You were the guy who said that participation in the pre-game was bad.
One, if you accused me of not reading, then it would look bad on you if you said you haven't read either, now wouldn't it?Battle Mage wrote:
I'm not talking about since the game has started. I haven't even read past page 11, because there are still unanswered questions about that period. It was THEN that you criticised my lack of participation, and at that point, you had done F*All.Strangercoug wrote:
Explain my posts not having quality. What do you think about my case on Snaps_the_Pirate, for example?Battle Mage wrote:Now, this is a million miles from a case of 'is quality better than quantity', because you are offering NEITHER. It's not like you have a leg to stand on when you attack me for lack of content, because even if only 1 word in each of my 73 posts was useful, and every single word you typed was awesomeness personified, you would still be inferior in terms of quality of posting. And sadly, this is far from the case.
Your question itself seems to be dodging the point in a humourous ironic twist.
Two, please do not cuss me out, whether you censor yourself or not. It's offensive.
Battle Mage wrote:
Then dont pretend to be aware of whats going on, when you aren't. LaL is by no means a concrete rule, but if you lie about stuff with no protown motive, then you are going to look scummy. Plus it means you end up preaching bs, which makes you look really dumb.Strangercoug wrote:
A. Large games are very hard for me to digest in one go.Battle Mage wrote:You have already admitted that you:
A. Havent read the most important parts of the game so far.
B. Don't believe in participating unless absolutely necessary.
C. Voted for me solely based on OMGUS.
Fine then!Battle Mage wrote:
rofl. Actually, i call it OMGUS because that's what you called it.Strangercoug wrote: C. You only call it OMGUS because you fail to understand my case on you.
Note the verb forms here. You say youBattle Mage wrote:
I've created discussion. You hadn't.Strangercoug wrote:
Then prove they don't.Battle Mage wrote:You really think i'm going to accept YOU telling me that my posts 'suck'?! Dream on kid.HAcreated discussion, while I, on the other hand,VEHAdone so. I'm sorry, but you are talking to someone who used to copy edit for his high school newspaper and you now have to convince me that your word usage does not create a straw man argument.DNOT
You commit the scumtells, i call you out on them. Fairly mundane stuff.[/quote]Strangercoug wrote:
Goddamn you, why are you so certain this early!? You seem to have made it your mission to get rid of me at all costs. I'm saving the rest of this paragraph for last, and we're almost at the end anyway.Battle Mage wrote:Again, you use the word 'case'. Where is the 'case'? I don't see it. You're scum who is barely paying attention.
Sounds simple, actually.
Get real. Seriously.Battle Mage wrote:
NEVAR!Strangecog wrote:
Stop ridiculing me.Battle Mage wrote:oh and btw...
Oh My God, U Suck.
OK, fair deal.Battle Mage wrote:
Sounds good. Analysing everyone at this point is probably a good idea. But, i still want a separate post outlining your case on me. Just for the record.Strangercog wrote:
Let's change the subject for just a moment so neither of us end up clawing at each other and winning nothing at the end. I will take a look at the other 24 players in this game and post my opinions of them based on their posts, and I want you to do the same thing. I think we've made it clear that we each think the other is scum, so don't do me and I won't do you.Battle Mage wrote:Blinded by OMGUS and panic, because you aren't in your comfort zone, and you are slipping up under interrogation, left, right, and centre.
BMSTRANGERCOUG: Stranger Than You!
Current avatar by PurryFurry of FurAffinity.
What Were You Thinking XV! is in progress.-
-
StrangerCoug He/HimDoes not ComputeHe/Him
- Does not Compute
- Does not Compute
- Posts: 12457
- Joined: May 6, 2008
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: San Antonio, Texas
By request, my review of Battle Mage (who, out of fairness, is now free to do a review of me). Mind you, not counting his confirm vote, he's made 100 posts as of when I started typing, and this is the best way I can condense it without leaving what I feel is important out.
Battle Mage:Obviously pro-pact since he made the pact. Laughed at Korts's pact made in retaliation to his own. Gives measures as to how he can control the pact. FoS's Cephrir for her Camelot comment. Dismisses OpposedForce's claim that scum will join the pact as ridiculous. States that he dies quickly in games he enjoys. Says OpposedForce doesn't see the similarities between the pact and a Mafia game and that BM would vote him on ridiculous logic. Mentions that he won't survive Night 1. Discusses the pact with earthworm. Asks Korts to explain why he's so willing to string up BM if he survives Night 1. Accuses OpposedForce of never having heard of Mafia. Says that he is vig-meat if he survives Night 1. Accuses OpposedForce of not reading. Asks Untitled why he needs to know how many confirms are left before he can vote BM. States that OpposedForce is the one that said the pact is foolproof and argues that it isn't, then says he said the exact opposite of what earthworm did about the pact. Questions Untitled's accusing him of a distraction. Says that Korts's comment is why BM won't live to see Day 2. Argues with OpposedForce and Untitled about the pact. HoS's Untitled for claiming he hasn't responded to his comments when he has not directed any such comments at him. Agrees with what PeterGriffin has to say about said pact. States that Untitled wants to kill BM for being an annoyance and dismisses the two posts of his Korts brought up as invalid. Asks if Untitled's attack on BM is justified. Accuses Korts of being noncommittal and fence sitting. Jokes with me about the length of the pregame. States that the pact had little chance of being successful. More agreement with PeterGriffin about Untitled, and he takes the same stance as the former on MafiaMann with some exception. More arguments with Untitled. Asks why I want to look at Battle Mage and Untitled and/or why I think the random voting stage can be skipped. Accuses me of tunnel vision. Votes me for being unwilling to participate unless absolutely necessary. Tells me to grow up when I mention my being reminded of one of Stoofer's Laws. Accuses me of hypocrisy and OMGUS. Argues for the pact, which I finally buy in part. Says that, in addition to what I've already covered in this post, I haven't read. Argues that "not a lot of content" and "filler" are two different things. Agrees to do a player review on everybody else while I would also do so, but asks me to review him anyway. Argues MafiaMann's points about his pre-game posts. Argues that wanting someone lynched and thinking someone is the most suspicious is the same thing. FoS's nhat for sheer BS and Cyberbob for being wrong about post #73. Accuses me of attacking one of BM's supporters when I realize pushing him won't work. Asks Netlava if he thinks anybody is scummy and questions his logic for BM being town.
I've taken a good look at the pact now, but I still think it's unnecessary. You've been awfully defensive about it, however. Your early posts aren't as bad on rereading as I thought, but I'm going neutral on you in general now. You do, however, bring up a really good point in your most recent posts...
HoS: MafiaMannfor thinking two people out of 26 in a pact is too many. That's 7.7% of everybody in here. Who's paying less attention about the pact, you or me?STRANGERCOUG: Stranger Than You!
Current avatar by PurryFurry of FurAffinity.
What Were You Thinking XV! is in progress.-
-
StrangerCoug He/HimDoes not ComputeHe/Him
- Does not Compute
- Does not Compute
- Posts: 12457
- Joined: May 6, 2008
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: San Antonio, Texas
OK, I'll bite. I was looking at an either/or situation and I didn't believe both of you were scum. I still don't.Battle Mage wrote:Untitled. The guy you named as 1 of 2 suspects, and then, a couple posts later, claimed was beyond suspicions atm.
So open = all 25 of the other players have to answer or they appear scummy? Directed at you or not, you blatantly shot it off.Battle Mage wrote:This is all true. But you have completely missed the point i'm actually raising. Do you really feel that it is possible to accuse somebody of AVOIDING a question which was not directed at them- Open, or otherwise. Because if you feel that is scummy, you should be equally suspicious of those who COMPLETELY avoided the question, rather than tackling it as i did.
Nobody is confirmed, so as true as this may be, it's irrelevant.Battle Mage wrote:Yes it does. Because, when you are town, you aren't especially worried about the prospect of scum voting for you. It happens. It's TOWN that you dont want to be chasing your wagon.
So sue me.Battle Mage wrote:You said "to vote people based on who is and is not in the pact."
Had you READ the pact, you would be more than aware that this was far from the case.
Hello? Did you catch my vote switch?Battle Mage wrote:Which is exactly my point. You aren't scumhunting. You simply want me dead because i'm attacking you.
Battle Mage wrote:Yes, because at least now i can kind of see what you are getting at.
And yeh, it isn't always helpful, but because you seem to be proverbially, crapping your pants atm, i figure the extra pressure could be a positive thing for the town.
"Selfish" for your saying "I'm right" without proving it and "elitist"Battle Mage wrote:selfish? elitist? Can you please explain how either of those words apply to me in this instance?
Screw this.Battle Mage wrote:And i'll keep stating facts, because 1 day you might actually read them, and realise the TRUTH.
Then get a life. If you really do suspect me, then tell me who you think are my scumbuddies, because the game is not necessarily over when I die.Battle Mage wrote:Ok, maybe i am a LITTLE elitist.
But Selfish? COME ON!
Then why are you taking before you are done?Battle Mage wrote:One, i havent PRETENDED to have read past where i have. Unlike your good self.
Two, i have started reading through, as you would see if you had read the posts of mine which aren't directed at you.
I hate you. That's the end of this trivial insult feud.Battle Mage wrote:Then don't get smarmy and don't talk stupid.
Your word usage implied that you provided content sometime over the course of the entire game while I didn't provide content before a specific point in said course. Sorry, but this does not get you a get out of jail free card.Battle Mage wrote:Yes, those word choices were deliberate, Mr High School Newspaper Editor, Sir!
Sadly, you've missed a pretty vital point which is, timing. It was alot earlier on when you accused me of having 'sucky' posts. At the time you made that comment, you had provided no content yourself. I don't care if you learnt from your mistakes since then, the fact remains that you are a hypocrite. Because i tend not to lie, i would not say that you have not provided content since then, because i havent finished catching up yet. That's the reason behind my word usage. But, it's irrelevant to my point, as you are well aware.STRANGERCOUG: Stranger Than You!
Current avatar by PurryFurry of FurAffinity.
What Were You Thinking XV! is in progress.-
-
StrangerCoug He/HimDoes not ComputeHe/Him
- Does not Compute
- Does not Compute
- Posts: 12457
- Joined: May 6, 2008
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: San Antonio, Texas
This does NOT look good at all. There is no Night 0, so you can't be cop with an innocent result, and I really don't know how you've deduced what role he has.animorpherv1 wrote:From what I've picked up, MafiaMann is town, I'm pretty sure I know his role too.
Major HoS: animorpherv1STRANGERCOUG: Stranger Than You!
Current avatar by PurryFurry of FurAffinity.
What Were You Thinking XV! is in progress.-
-
StrangerCoug He/HimDoes not ComputeHe/Him
- Does not Compute
- Does not Compute
- Posts: 12457
- Joined: May 6, 2008
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: San Antonio, Texas
Gotcha.Erratus Apathos wrote:
No, but the one from the other game wasn't exactly a joke either. What I mean is that my nhat fakequote in post 345 does reflect an opinion of mine (that is, I believe nhat was trying to weasel his way out of PeterGriffin's attack), but I'm not trying to pass it off as an actual nhat quote. Which is the same thing I was trying to do with the veerus fakequote in the other game.StrangerCoug wrote:OK, Erratos Apathos, I just finished looking at Mini 601, and it appears I bought your defending putting words in veerus's mouth in that game because I understood it was a joke. Are you saying your putting words in nhat's mouth is a joke as well?Unvote: Erratos Apathos.STRANGERCOUG: Stranger Than You!
Current avatar by PurryFurry of FurAffinity.
What Were You Thinking XV! is in progress.-
-
StrangerCoug He/HimDoes not ComputeHe/Him
- Does not Compute
- Does not Compute
- Posts: 12457
- Joined: May 6, 2008
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: San Antonio, Texas
Forgot this when I talked to him about it, but this is why I've called him elitist.hasdgfas wrote:BM-I still think he's town, but I haven't liked some of his arguments. It's as though he can't believe anything he does can be wrong at all.STRANGERCOUG: Stranger Than You!
Current avatar by PurryFurry of FurAffinity.
What Were You Thinking XV! is in progress.-
-
StrangerCoug He/HimDoes not ComputeHe/Him
- Does not Compute
- Does not Compute
- Posts: 12457
- Joined: May 6, 2008
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: San Antonio, Texas
Actually, those are better words. Thanks.Battle Mage wrote:
yeh, elitist isnt really the word ur looking for, because as far as i'm aware, if you are elitist, you look for perfection as much in others as in yourself. You are accusing me of simply being arrogant and self-righteous.StrangerCoug wrote:
Forgot this when I talked to him about it, but this is why I've called him elitist.hasdgfas wrote:BM-I still think he's town, but I haven't liked some of his arguments. It's as though he can't believe anything he does can be wrong at all.
BM
And I really need animorpherv1 in here explaining himself. I hate people that make scummy moves and then skedaddle as if nothing happened. That's a cheap way of getting out. I'm sorry.
Pressure vote: animorpherv1STRANGERCOUG: Stranger Than You!
Current avatar by PurryFurry of FurAffinity.
What Were You Thinking XV! is in progress.-
-
StrangerCoug He/HimDoes not ComputeHe/Him
- Does not Compute
- Does not Compute
- Posts: 12457
- Joined: May 6, 2008
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: San Antonio, Texas
"WRT"?Cyberbob wrote:I do like Animorphperv for possible scum; partly for the inconsistency Snaps just outlined but also for his arguable rolefishing WRT MafiaMann.
This looks like awfully weak reasoning. Explain please.Lowell wrote:unvote, vote cass. Why is cass still talking about "the pact"? It's a totally meaningless diversion.STRANGERCOUG: Stranger Than You!
Current avatar by PurryFurry of FurAffinity.
What Were You Thinking XV! is in progress.-
-
StrangerCoug He/HimDoes not ComputeHe/Him
- Does not Compute
- Does not Compute
- Posts: 12457
- Joined: May 6, 2008
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: San Antonio, Texas
Unvote: animorpherv1since the vote is accomplishing nothing.STRANGERCOUG: Stranger Than You!
Current avatar by PurryFurry of FurAffinity.
What Were You Thinking XV! is in progress.-
-
StrangerCoug He/HimDoes not ComputeHe/Him
- Does not Compute
- Does not Compute
- Posts: 12457
- Joined: May 6, 2008
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: San Antonio, Texas
They're not both hypothetical. Cephrir really did say he hopes scum gets in the treaty, which came off to me as his being scum itself. What would you think of me if I said "I hope scum kills Battle Mage"?Korts wrote:
I don't... exactly follow. Where do you make the connection between the two hypothetical situations?SC wrote:You say you hope scum joins the pact, which sounds a bit like something scum itself would say. It's like saying I hope scum kills Battle Mage tonight if he doesn't get lynched (especially since it would imply that I know Battle Mage is town)
All it was doing to each other in the long run was giving us tunnel vision. That's why I wanted to stop it.Korts wrote:
Why is it definitely futile to continue? There has been no proof of this.SC wrote:OK, so it's better for us to engage in an ultimately futile vendetta?
No, hence why I laughed.Korts wrote:
Um, you took it seriously?SC wrote:Laughed at Korts's pact made in retaliation to his own.STRANGERCOUG: Stranger Than You!
Current avatar by PurryFurry of FurAffinity.
What Were You Thinking XV! is in progress.-
-
StrangerCoug He/HimDoes not ComputeHe/Him
- Does not Compute
- Does not Compute
- Posts: 12457
- Joined: May 6, 2008
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: San Antonio, Texas
There are not many scenarios that I can think of where town should be hoping out loud that scum does something specific. It's not a scum direction per se, but it still encourages scum to act in a certain way, which probably won't be beneficial to town.Korts wrote:
It's this part that I can't follow. I don't understand how the first part warrants the other.SC wrote:Cephrir really did say he hopes scum gets in the treaty, which came off to me as his being scum itself.
I know I'm going out of context, but this would also encourage specific scum actions: Let's say I'm the doctor and I announced out loud that I wanted to protect nhat. If scum has a roleblocker, he or she might as well block me while scum offs him. If nhat is scum and/or scum does not have a roleblocker, they will get rid of me that night unless a more dangerous (to them) power role shows up.
Get the connection?
I have a tendency to drop the first person pronoun when it's clear that I'm the one being referred to, but I wasn't ><Korts wrote:SC wrote:
Heh. But in the original context, you said it was BM who laughed at my coalition, and you never implied (at least not in the originally quoted post) that you acknowledged it as a joke.Korts wrote:SC wrote: Laughed at Korts's pact made in retaliation to his own.
No, hence why I laughed.Korts wrote:Um, you took it seriously?STRANGERCOUG: Stranger Than You!
Current avatar by PurryFurry of FurAffinity.
What Were You Thinking XV! is in progress.-
-
StrangerCoug He/HimDoes not ComputeHe/Him
- Does not Compute
- Does not Compute
- Posts: 12457
- Joined: May 6, 2008
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: San Antonio, Texas
Mod: Please fix my quote tags. It should be nested Korts/SC/Korts/SC/Korts one inside the other.
I'm confused by the structure of the quotes, so I can't seem to figure it out. Sorry.STRANGERCOUG: Stranger Than You!
Current avatar by PurryFurry of FurAffinity.
What Were You Thinking XV! is in progress.-
-
StrangerCoug He/HimDoes not ComputeHe/Him
- Does not Compute
- Does not Compute
- Posts: 12457
- Joined: May 6, 2008
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: San Antonio, Texas
It's not the biggest offense in this game in my eyes, so don't worry too much.Cephrir wrote:
But that's not the same thing. Sure, I probably houldn't have said it out loud, but I don't get how that's a tell.SC wrote:They're not both hypothetical. Cephrir really did say he hopes scum gets in the treaty, which came off to me as his being scum itself. What would you think of me if I said "I hope scum kills Battle Mage"?
I know, but I bring them both up to show that they can both backfire when scum sees it.Cephrir wrote:
Noting that X might allow us to find scum better (X being scum in the pact) != declaring who you want t protect when you're the doctor. They are completely different things.SC wrote:There are not many scenarios that I can think of where town should be hoping out loud that scum does something specific. It's not a scum direction per se, but it still encourages scum to act in a certain way, which probably won't be beneficial to town.
I know I'm going out of context, but this would also encourage specific scum actions: Let's say I'm the doctor and I announced out loud that I wanted to protect nhat. If scum has a roleblocker, he or she might as well block me while scum offs him. If nhat is scum and/or scum does not have a roleblocker, they will get rid of me that night unless a more dangerous (to them) power role shows up.STRANGERCOUG: Stranger Than You!
Current avatar by PurryFurry of FurAffinity.
What Were You Thinking XV! is in progress.-
-
StrangerCoug He/HimDoes not ComputeHe/Him
- Does not Compute
- Does not Compute
- Posts: 12457
- Joined: May 6, 2008
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: San Antonio, Texas
Ditto. armlx is being hypocritical here.Erratus Apathos wrote:
nhat made an attack you considered reasonable, and that give you the impression that he was being unreasonable in general? Riiiiight.armlx wrote:
I figured nhat was just being unreasonable in general, which is not a scum tell usually, as opposed to being deliberately misrepresentative.You voted nhat for misrepresenting PeterGriffin, but then decided he didn't misrepresent PeterGriffin because you liked his attack on me? Not buying it.
I also fail to see the reason of voting somebody and letting the vote sit there unattended. If you forget why you're voting (and I have seen it happen), then if you want to gain credibility, I'd prefer you unvote until you have a clue, though asking questions of the person in question is useful as well. Don't sit there.Erratus Apathos wrote:1. Townies do not ignore the player they're voting forbecause it defeats the entire purpose of voting.If they want more information, they ask questions until they change their mind or are convinced they've found scum; when the latter occurs, they convince the town to join them. This is what's known as "scumhunting", and you haven't been doing it. The only reason townies ignore the player they're voting for is that they're lazy or inattentive or just plain gone, and you have shown yourself to be neither.
Not to mention that it's counterintuitive, too.Erratus Apathos wrote:2. You just don't stop digging your own grave, do you? If the pact hop was EXTREMELY SCUMMY then you have absolutely no excuse whatsoever to be ignoring it. Period.
Unvoteif necessary, but I don't think so.
Vote: armlxSTRANGERCOUG: Stranger Than You!
Current avatar by PurryFurry of FurAffinity.
What Were You Thinking XV! is in progress.-
-
StrangerCoug He/HimDoes not ComputeHe/Him
- Does not Compute
- Does not Compute
- Posts: 12457
- Joined: May 6, 2008
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: San Antonio, Texas
Sorry also (I'm in olive). Nothing new to add.STRANGERCOUG: Stranger Than You!
Current avatar by PurryFurry of FurAffinity.
What Were You Thinking XV! is in progress.-
-
StrangerCoug He/HimDoes not ComputeHe/Him
- Does not Compute
- Does not Compute
- Posts: 12457
- Joined: May 6, 2008
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: San Antonio, Texas
Thanks for bringing that up. I thought he was asking if he was prodded.MafiaMann wrote:
A bit too hasty no?hasdgfas wrote:Have we lynched Dynamo yet?
Minor FoS: hasdgfasSTRANGERCOUG: Stranger Than You!
Current avatar by PurryFurry of FurAffinity.
What Were You Thinking XV! is in progress.-
-
StrangerCoug He/HimDoes not ComputeHe/Him
- Does not Compute
- Does not Compute
- Posts: 12457
- Joined: May 6, 2008
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: San Antonio, Texas
Explain these.hasdgfas wrote:C) None of Dynamo's posts have been pro-town.
D) I haven't seen anyone scummier than Dynamo.STRANGERCOUG: Stranger Than You!
Current avatar by PurryFurry of FurAffinity.
What Were You Thinking XV! is in progress.-
-
StrangerCoug He/HimDoes not ComputeHe/Him
- Does not Compute
- Does not Compute
- Posts: 12457
- Joined: May 6, 2008
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: San Antonio, Texas
Go ahead.hasdgfas wrote:C) I can do a PBPA on Dynamo if you really want, but it shouldn't really need explaining.STRANGERCOUG: Stranger Than You!
Current avatar by PurryFurry of FurAffinity.
What Were You Thinking XV! is in progress.-
-
StrangerCoug He/HimDoes not ComputeHe/Him
- Does not Compute
- Does not Compute
- Posts: 12457
- Joined: May 6, 2008
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: San Antonio, Texas
OK, I'll have my say on this DynamoXI guy: He's awfully eager to get in this treaty thing, he doubts my unusual-to-most-people-here experience of Mafia elsewhere (it's on my damn Wiki page, for crying out loud!), he claims not to vote until there's a strong case and then votes Erratos Apathos seemingly without thinking twice, he appears to be appealing to emotion, and simply doesn't care about defending himself. I'm happy to go along with the bandwagon here, but I still wish I had better cases on more people at this point.
Unvote: armlx
Vote: DynamoXISTRANGERCOUG: Stranger Than You!
Current avatar by PurryFurry of FurAffinity.
What Were You Thinking XV! is in progress.-
-
StrangerCoug He/HimDoes not ComputeHe/Him
- Does not Compute
- Does not Compute
- Posts: 12457
- Joined: May 6, 2008
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: San Antonio, Texas
DynamoXI, claim or die.STRANGERCOUG: Stranger Than You!
Current avatar by PurryFurry of FurAffinity.
What Were You Thinking XV! is in progress.-
-
StrangerCoug He/HimDoes not ComputeHe/Him
- Does not Compute
- Does not Compute
- Posts: 12457
- Joined: May 6, 2008
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: San Antonio, Texas
Don't be lazy please.Korts wrote:Sigh... I'll dig the dirt up properly. Just not now.STRANGERCOUG: Stranger Than You!
Current avatar by PurryFurry of FurAffinity.
What Were You Thinking XV! is in progress.-
-
StrangerCoug He/HimDoes not ComputeHe/Him
- Does not Compute
- Does not Compute
- Posts: 12457
- Joined: May 6, 2008
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: San Antonio, Texas