Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Cheeetar]

Generally when you say chainsaw defending, you would be referring to defending somebody else (with a chainsaw aka aggressively), not defending yourself.

[Toaster]

Ugh.

I still don't trust Scripten, but I'm starting to think less and less he's a dopp.  Some sort of third party, maybe; I'd feel a lot better if he got Telepathed.  That said, I still stand by my Tiruin vote; her content to word ratio is poor.  Cheeetar is probably town; he's been hunting pretty well, if a bit jumpy.  Jim and ZU could be scum.  Deus is probably town, since Scum Deus could have kept MC alive.  Persus... I feel like I need to reread on him, though The Plan covers him pretty well.  I'll be interested to hear what Shakerag has to say tomorrow.  UXLZ I get no read on.   NQT raises some good points, though I admit I'm barely reading what he says.


I need to dig some more, but that's all my brain can do tonight.  Scripten, did that answer you?

[Tiruin]

PFP

Ugh.

I still don't trust Scripten, but I'm starting to think less and less he's a dopp. 

This. And I'm refraining from posting because of how....A bloody 'war vet' is on his high horse

Tiruin:

Because its assumed evidence. That's as substantial as many things in a mafia game.

Okay...?

I suppose this is kind of a moot point. I'm not trying to convince you that you're scum. You already know that. ^.^

Did you remember when I said technical issues? Like, more than you ever asked me that question?
The question you have here is something that I have been carrying for DAYS instead of the minutes it took you to formulate it. Consider that, rather than keeping on labeling me as a lurker with negative associations.

As I've said so many times before, I am judging you based on a ratio of your contributions relative to your posts. I am saying that the posts you DO have are insufficient for me to believe you have town motivations in your play.

That's not that which bugs me.
What bugs me is your lack of branching out onto others. You noted that ZU/Toaster is a second best target for you.
You didn't go into depth or detail about them at all.

This deflection isn't going to work. Though I will consider it for later associative reads.

Dropped it because of what? UXLZ's Medium Intervention?
Sans that kind of evidence--what actually made you drop it? The latter sentence?
I mean, that as much was obvious when you did bring up the consideration.

I'd forgotten that NQT had checked Jim that night. Why are you ragging on me for this? Do you expect it to distract me?

UXLZ:

Maybe I missed it in all the weirdness of your sentence construction, but what I saw was Scripten asking you a bunch of questions, then you attacking him back while ignoring all of the questions. Maybe I just missed them, though. My apologies if I did...

I'm noticing this, too. It's rather bothersome, especially since my questions are not exactly trivial. That being said, I'm not asking for paragraphs per question. I just want something of an answer.

Though, I should probably mention that what Tiruin is doing is not -exactly- chainsaw defense. Chainsaw defense is usually applied to a three-person interaction, where a scum's buddy attacks people for preying on his partner. Nevertheless, Tiruin's reactions are definitely scummy.

She -could- be putting my mind to ease right now, but it seems more likely that she's just trying to heap as much confusion around to avoid having to talk about other people, since she might slip and reveal her partners.

For this rubbish.

[Deus Asmoth]

If their claims are such rubbish, why aren't you doing anything to refute them?

[UXLZ]

Cheeetar: Yah, but I like it better this way. Otherwise we don't have a word for 'defending yourself by attacking your attacker' (not to be confused with OMGUS.)
This type of defending is making somewhat legitimate points (rather than the wild flailing of an OMGUS) but still ignoring your opponent's qestions.

A bloody 'war vet' is on his high horse

Tiruin: What the hell does this even mean? 'A War Vet on his high horse?'
What does Scripten's class have to do with this?

By the way... Are you gonna respond to his questions?

[Scripten]

PFP

Ugh.

I still don't trust Scripten, but I'm starting to think less and less he's a dopp. 

This. And I'm refraining from posting because of how....A bloody 'war vet' is on his high horse

You do realize that Toaster is busing you right now, right? You're not supposed to be letting yourself be associated with him.

[Tiruin]

If their claims are such rubbish, why aren't you doing anything to refute them?

Because they have no bearing whatsoever other than to goad or interject assumption. They are made in brevity, with lacking idea as to any kind of substance.

But sure, as you post from your phone, let's deconstruct this.

I suppose this is kind of a moot point. I'm not trying to convince you that you're scum. You already know that. ^.^

Facetious statement.
No substance to it but a roundabout idea of saying 'What I'm doing is trying to convince them; you're scum in my eyes', with the complete problem being that me being scum or not is not even proven at all--the only 'scummy' thing I had is my absence in D1/2
And that was purely for technical reasons.

As I've said so many times before, I am judging you based on a ratio of your contributions relative to your posts. I am saying that the posts you DO have are insufficient for me to believe you have town motivations in your play.

This misses a directness of saying things. 'Insufficient' pertains to a certain expectation which states one is town, which already judges people by some kind of criteria in relation to anyone else. Instead of asking towards that kind of goal, to me he sets very little space for communication.

This deflection isn't going to work. Though I will consider it for later associative reads.

Somehow, me stating fact is considered 'deflection'. Fact, in the obvious form of 'this is what you did, Scripten. The persons I noted are whom you have judged before alongside me. Without detailing why you judged them.'
I mean, if we go by your philosophy of 'more posts = town', then you'll falter by the wayside in every game, as scum can easily outrank posting either way; I restate my problem with you, being your level of scumhunting. I'm being used as your scapegoat, and your level of insight into this borders irritation. It's apparent that I'm already labeled by him--and its pretty obvious that he's biased so hard, by some kind of reasoning which makes him think that way, that he becomes pretty closed-minded in his thoughts, implying malevolence in lieu of anything else.

Evident by this:

I'm noticing this, too. It's rather bothersome, especially since my questions are not exactly trivial. That being said, I'm not asking for paragraphs per question. I just want something of an answer.

Though, I should probably mention that what Tiruin is doing is not -exactly- chainsaw defense. Chainsaw defense is usually applied to a three-person interaction, where a scum's buddy attacks people for preying on his partner. Nevertheless, Tiruin's reactions are definitely scummy.

She -could- be putting my mind to ease right now, but it seems more likely that she's just trying to heap as much confusion around to avoid having to talk about other people, [glow=bl,2,300]since she might slip and reveal her partners[/glow].

A glorified excuse. I could say this downplays me as a person, and as a player, but to put into perspective; How in the world can that kind of assumption even take place, when I have significantly noted my playstyle earlier--that I omit, rather than detract; in itself, it already shows that the kind of assumption present in Scripten's words, is of a non-significant possibility.

But hey, since he likes playing metaknowledge, Scripten: Look through the games you played with me. Tell me whenever that kind of assumption was validated. To push this aura of metaknowledge further, its unlike him to note my kind of playstyle early in game, yet later on push any kind of implicating idea as the motive which goes perpendicularly against my kind of playstyle.

So let's create some common ground.
Scripten: Back up your assumptions in blue up there. Throughout all this, you've done nothing but provide nudging and poking--no definitive case, and nothing short of direct impact. Just because the rest have a vote on me doesn't mean you're in any better position given that you've only been repeating the most superficial of reasons to cause implication, and its really gyrating on my nerves to see you as town that way; though a glance through your attitude proves...consistent.

Though the sudden jump of 'I think she's scum...' turns into 'Definitely scummy' is of very significant intrigue.

I'd forgotten that NQT had checked Jim that night. Why are you ragging on me for this? Do you expect it to distract me?

Like here. Instead of inquiring as to my tone, its taken as rage.
When I'm not in any sort of rage or anger. Just annoyance at this. While I do understand the level of suspicion onto Jim, that one bit is...amiss given Scripten's posting style.
He drifts off on a non-sequitur with his brevity that details are off in many parts at times.
I mean bloody fish. If a certain someone could just append the invisible 'why' at the end of his posts

Meph: Are players who are killed told who did the killing? I thought I remembered the flavor being relatively ambiguous in the last Paranormal I read.

Generally not. It depends on the situation, though. If the knowledge is something that will be revealed the next day anyway, (such as a War Vet and Vig killing each other off) I will often include it in the flavor. But if there is any ambiguity as to what happened, it is not revealed.

So... it's entirely possible that someone killed Toonyman, but Mastahcheese took the bullet for them when they fired back.

UXLZ, could you see if Toonyman could pull up his flavor PM and maybe give us an idea of what happened? I'm suddenly worried about Jim...

LIKE THIS ONE, it would be a ton better to understand him.


PPE: Bloody damned net dying twice whilst I type this out. Wasted time once more.

Tiruin:
Have you tried going into your browser's settings and telling it to not show/download pictures?  Yeah, it makes things look like ass, but they do tend to load pretty quickly.

No, and thanks.

You do realize that Toaster is busing you right now, right? You're not supposed to be letting yourself be associated with him.

Your goading won't work. It's this kind of stupidity insolence that got you killed in 4mask's Operation. Your eccentricity isn't tripping my stupid-alarms here this time.
Also there's a butterfly on your left ear.

[Scripten]

Tiruin:

I'm going to continue cutting the fluff from your posts.

This misses a directness of saying things. 'Insufficient' pertains to a certain expectation which states one is town, which already judges people by some kind of criteria in relation to anyone else. Instead of asking towards that kind of goal, to me he sets very little space for communication.

You know what, Tiruin? I've been incredibly understanding toward your position all game. I've been specifically judging you based only on the posts you are making, and here you continue whining that your bad internet is making it too hard to play, continually misrepresenting my case as being "Tiruin wasn't posting" when my case is actually "The posts Tiruin DID make don't show any evidence of town motive/scumhunting."

Well, if that's the case, replace out. Simple as that. If you are having so much trouble playing the game that, even when you ARE actually posting, you can't post anything of substance for THREE in-game days, then you need to consider the way you're affecting the town.

Otherwise, you need to steel yourself and actually reply to my posts and, specifically, my questions THAT YOU KEEP IGNORING. Frankly, what I've been asking of you is NOT hard to provide, but you insist on throwing mud at me instead of actually interacting with me.

And you wonder why I think you're scum.

Somehow, me stating fact is considered 'deflection'.

No. Deflection is trying to change the focus from your scummy play to someone else's.

I mean, if we go by your philosophy of 'more posts = town'

I've never said that the number of posts is indicative of alignment. Stop putting words in my mouth, thanks.

The rest of this paragraph is just gak.

Evident by this:

I'm noticing this, too. It's rather bothersome, especially since my questions are not exactly trivial. That being said, I'm not asking for paragraphs per question. I just want something of an answer.

Though, I should probably mention that what Tiruin is doing is not -exactly- chainsaw defense. Chainsaw defense is usually applied to a three-person interaction, where a scum's buddy attacks people for preying on his partner. Nevertheless, Tiruin's reactions are definitely scummy.

She -could- be putting my mind to ease right now, but it seems more likely that she's just trying to heap as much confusion around to avoid having to talk about other people, [glow=bl,2,300]since she might slip and reveal her partners[/glow].

A glorified excuse. I could say this downplays me as a person, and as a player, but to put into perspective; How in the world can that kind of assumption even take place, when I have significantly noted my playstyle earlier--that I omit, rather than detract; in itself, it already shows that the kind of assumption present in Scripten's words, is of a non-significant possibility.

Because you said something about your playstyle, that makes it true?

No.

I said that you're focusing on attacking me instead of presenting any show of scumhunting. You ARE omitting information. I specifically called you out on having next to no analysis about other players. The only reason you're scumreading me is because I'm voting you. It's purely OMGUS.

If you want to convince me that you are not scum, START ACTUALLY SCUMHUNTING. There are three scum. Who are they?

But hey, since he likes playing metaknowledge, Scripten: Look through the games you played with me. Tell me whenever that kind of assumption was validated. To push this aura of metaknowledge further, its unlike him to note my kind of playstyle early in game, yet later on push any kind of implicating idea as the motive which goes perpendicularly against my kind of playstyle.

What? You need to be clearer here, because I can't even tell what you're accusing me of doing.

So let's create some common ground.
Scripten: Back up your assumptions in blue up there. Throughout all this, you've done nothing but provide nudging and poking--no definitive case, and nothing short of direct impact. Just because the rest have a vote on me doesn't mean you're in any better position given that you've only been repeating the most superficial of reasons to cause implication, and its really gyrating on my nerves to see you as town that way; though a glance through your attitude proves...consistent.

Every time I ask you to provide examples of your own scumhunting, you just attack me instead. When I asked you to clarify reads, you ignore me until pages later. (During which time you are regularly posting.)

Though the sudden jump of 'I think she's scum...' turns into 'Definitely scummy' is of very significant intrigue.

It's called reading your reactions. Every reaction you've had to my accusations has been insanely scummy. It's all selective quoting, deflection, and OMGUS.

Like here. Instead of inquiring as to my tone, its taken as rage.

I said "ragging" on me. That is, you're continually bringing up the exact same thing, apparently not understanding/reading my posts. It's distracting.

He drifts off on a non-sequitur with his brevity that details are off in many parts at times.
I mean bloody fish. If a certain someone could just append the invisible 'why' at the end of his posts

Meph: Are players who are killed told who did the killing? I thought I remembered the flavor being relatively ambiguous in the last Paranormal I read.

Generally not. It depends on the situation, though. If the knowledge is something that will be revealed the next day anyway, (such as a War Vet and Vig killing each other off) I will often include it in the flavor. But if there is any ambiguity as to what happened, it is not revealed.

So... it's entirely possible that someone killed Toonyman, but Mastahcheese took the bullet for them when they fired back.

UXLZ, could you see if Toonyman could pull up his flavor PM and maybe give us an idea of what happened? I'm suddenly worried about Jim...

LIKE THIS ONE, it would be a ton better to understand him.

TRY READING MY POSTS. Nobody else is having trouble understanding my suspicions about Jim and subsequent retraction after further detail was provided about the situation.

Your goading won't work. It's this kind of stupidity insolence that got you killed in 4mask's Operation. Your eccentricity isn't tripping my stupid-alarms here this time.

Ouch, that's pretty fucking low.

Actually, what killed me in Operation Overlord was a lackluster town being led by the nose by scum!Flabort, but thanks for the insults.

[Tiruin]

"The posts Tiruin DID make don't show any evidence of town motive/scumhunting."

I did detail how I saw the others. I can't find much in them which pushes them one way or another.

Frankly, what I've been asking of you is NOT hard to provide, but you insist on throwing mud at me instead of actually interacting with me.

It was mainly the deflecting part there. Can anyone get that I can't really get a read on people? I didn't ignore those questions of 'whom of the neutral or null reads is scummier' because I see in part pieces which make them scummy, and then pieces which don't.
I really can't get how its deflection, when everything is stated without any case of editing, ever.

I said that you're focusing on attacking me instead of presenting any show of scumhunting. You ARE omitting information. I specifically called you out on having next to no analysis about other players. The only reason you're scumreading me is because I'm voting you. It's purely OMGUS.

...No? I'm checking out my read by making sure you've got a case--because comparing the links I brought up, its like that.
Yea, I got the questions on other players--yes it makes sense that 'omission' would take into play when I'm seeing them as neutral or withholding seeing them as scum, but that's not really what's happening. My reads are fluid and I can't bring up an exact there which really pings me that what they're doing is in fact against.
Not OMGUS when you check what's going on--especially when you use a term which doesn't belong in that context.

If you want to convince me that you are not scum, START ACTUALLY SCUMHUNTING. There are three scum. Who are they?

If I had any clue, I would've voted them. Or began questioning them. Lately, its been just you and me, with the rest reading up. I'm doing the same.
I mean its like you're asking me to name who the scum are when I don't even know who they are. I've checked who I feel aren't, but not who they are.

Every time I ask you to provide examples of your own scumhunting, you just attack me instead. When I asked you to clarify reads, you ignore me until pages later. (During which time you are regularly posting.)

Timezones. :/
And I get that bit where I'm not doing much scumhunting. When I come online the whole game jumps pages--and the part on why I'm not replacing out is that I know I can do this.

It's called reading your reactions. Every reaction you've had to my accusations has been insanely scummy. It's all selective quoting, deflection, and OMGUS.

...You could take it that way.
But all I've got is you asking me on clarification on my reads--which I've told you again and again on why I'm not really reading them one over the other. Deflection doesn't mean a thing if the term is taken by its real description because I should've gotten something if I had anything to deflect onto.
And OMGUS doesn't belong. Really. I mean I unvoted you after realizing 'o hey Scripten is being authentic.'

[Tiruin]

Also things like these did not give the indication of being incredibly understanding >.<
That, and usage of terminology.

I suppose this is kind of a moot point. I'm not trying to convince you that you're scum. You already know that. ^.^

You do realize that Toaster is busing you right now, right? You're not supposed to be letting yourself be associated with him.

And I just now notice that the second half is gone from that big analysis post.

...
Now this is extremely awkward.
^{And I didn't mean for that to insult you, sorry Scripten.}

Bringing it up--its hard to preview it to recheck I got the links right, considering current instances.

[Scripten]

Tiruin:

I did detail how I saw the others. I can't find much in them which pushes them one way or another.

It was mainly the deflecting part there. Can anyone get that I can't really get a read on people? I didn't ignore those questions of 'whom of the neutral or null reads is scummier' because I see in part pieces which make them scummy, and then pieces which don't.

Alright. I'll make you a deal. I'll step back and start working on other players for a bit, since I don't want to tunnel you. You go ahead and fix those reads. Interact with the rest of the playerbase. It's the weekend, but I think there's another extension.

I still think you're scum, but I have no intention of making my expectations unreasonable. Consider this a chance to show your town motivation.

Yea, I got the questions on other players--yes it makes sense that 'omission' would take into play when I'm seeing them as neutral or withholding seeing them as scum, but that's not really what's happening. My reads are fluid and I can't bring up an exact there which really pings me that what they're doing is in fact against.

If you don't know about another player, then you need to talk to them. Interact with them. I know for a fact that most of my reads are wrong in my mafia games. But eventually, those reads evolve and I occasionally catch scum. If my reads are too weak, then I push players until they are stronger. I would recommend you do the same.

Not OMGUS when you check what's going on--especially when you use a term which doesn't belong in that context.

Consider it a defense through offense, then, but regardless of what it's called, it's not town-sided if you do think I'm town. If you do, then work with me. Otherwise, the only conclusion I can come to is that you're scum.

If I had any clue, I would've voted them. Or began questioning them. Lately, its been just you and me, with the rest reading up. I'm doing the same.

Alright, like I said above, I'll back off for a bit and focus elsewhere. Go ahead and show me that your assertion that you're town is true through action.

Timezones. :/

That doesn't really work when you're replying to the posts within which are the parts you're ignoring.

You could take it that way.
But all I've got is you asking me on clarification on my reads--which I've told you again and again on why I'm not really reading them one over the other.

I do take it that way. Making a defense that hinges on discrediting another player only works if they are wrong. You keep asking for me case, and I'm giving it to you. If you want to show you're town, stop trying to attack my case and do things that show you are town. Like, I'm really trying here to be accommodating. 

Deflection doesn't mean a thing if the term is taken by its real description because I should've gotten something if I had anything to deflect onto.
And OMGUS doesn't belong. Really. I mean I unvoted you after realizing 'o hey Scripten is being authentic.'

Okay, let's chalk that up to semantics, then. Either way, instead of focusing on showing you're town, which you yourself admit is hard to see from your play, you've been focusing on attacking me for thinking you're scum. Can you see where this just reinforces my belief that you're scum?

PEDIT:

Also things like these did not give the indication of being incredibly understanding >.<
That, and usage of terminology.

Being understanding of your net problems and thinking you're scum in the context of the game are pretty different things. I like to think that I can still be reasonable to people even if they are evil, hungry dopplegangers. And in the game.

And I just now notice that the second half is gone from that big analysis post.

...
Now this is extremely awkward.

Seeing that might help a bit. Can you post that, please?

^{And I didn't mean for that to insult you, sorry Scripten.}

Apology accepted, and my apologies for any undue harshness.

[UXLZ]

There aren't any more extensions for today, Scripten.

[Scripten]

There aren't any more extensions for today, Scripten.

No? Well balls. Still, the weekend should offer at least something.

[Cheeetar]

Okay, can we get some sort of consensus on whether the power roles are okay for Jim's plan? Do you have anything better to suggest?

Jim, Zombie Urist, Tiruin, Deus, Persus, Shakerag, how do you feel about it?

[Jim Groovester]

Is Jim okay with his own plan?

Yes.