|
|
Post by Rocky Tactician on Mar 26, 2018 23:47:39 GMT
You are CONTRADICTING YOUR OWN POINT HERE. Your reasoning on me for being scum is my 'up-front, "invalid" reads' which are exactly the opposite of what you just said- I don't think you deny that I've been rather up-front with my reads, no? Also, you're evading my questions by stating that they're "not well thought-out" which is clearly either an effort to be lazy or you think that answering my questions makes you scummier- which, unless you are scum, it does not. No, my reasoning is not because of your 'up-front reads', in fact quite contrarily. My thing is you said all these smaller things, without pushing any of them at first. And I have no idea where you got the impression I was evading your questions. If you could point out an example, I'd happily accept being wrong, so be my guest. Maybe stop evading my answers? You only keep repeating the same thing over and over. 'We both had to deal with the same circumstances, you had no excuse to not post as often', 'Your reads are invalid, but mine aren't by any measure', for example. That's basically the gist of most of your responses. The only reason I've repeated that response is because you continue to direct the conversation toward that reasoning, aside from the other reasoning that I based my argument off of in the first place. |
|
|
|
Post by Rocky Tactician on Mar 26, 2018 23:48:28 GMT
Fenrir don't take this as an attack of any sort but is there a reason you're ignoring the elephant in the room of my debate with dasocks? What are your thoughts on that?
|
|
|
|
Post by Fenrir on Mar 26, 2018 23:49:18 GMT
Welp, RIP this I guess. Unvote: DeathbywobbuffetWas hoping to get some kind of reaction to the naked vote-for some reason my mind flashed back to PSAnon and I remembered some dichotomy in the way you reacted to pressure as Roland v. Jacuzzi. ODM can actually wait for the time being; having just gone through clc's ISO I've concluded that some pressure is definitely needed here and I'm also convinced be a good lynch for today. Vote: clc ironic |
|
|
|
Post by Fenrir on Mar 26, 2018 23:50:09 GMT
Fenrir don't take this as an attack of any sort but is there a reason you're ignoring the elephant in the room of my debate with dasocks? What are your thoughts on that? I've been going through the ISOs still and decided to try the DBW reaction test just since I noticed he was online, so I haven't actually been able to read the current discussions going on yet. |
|
|
|
Post by Wob on Mar 26, 2018 23:50:19 GMT
i tr dasocks. he's responded to puppy's pressure in a calm and reasonable way and wanting to get rid of lurkers d1 is far from scummy imo. i dislike how puppy has tried to dismiss dasocks' read on him as an omgus (it wasnt) and focused too much timezones / whether dasocks couldve posted before which is fairly irrelevant imo. scumlean him. This was just a small part of my suspicion that Dasocks deemed to be a weaker point that I made which he decided to redirect the conversation toward, not me. Why are you suddenly so defensive? Do you have any proof that the read on me wasn't OMGUS? omgus is lynching someone simply because they lynched you. dasocks has a different reason to lynch you, so no matter how invalid you think that reason is, you cannot call it an omgus. calling me "suddenly so defensive" is absolutely hilarious lmao. I'm not, and you can't just get away with screaming that whenever someone scumleans you. pretty sure you did the same with dasocks. |
|
|
|
Post by Dasocks~ on Mar 26, 2018 23:55:17 GMT
Just because people may have formed entire lists of reads, doesn't mean I have to automatically accept them. Using the reads of others to form your own, before making your own whatsoever, just sounds bad to me.
And I will say this- those are not my only reads. They are simply my main ones. I can and will make a full list of reads of the pl if need be, as I have said before. But for now, I will make reads based on what I think, not just following Champ and Fenrir, for example. Plus, my read change on you was attributed to the fact that you were pushing me on things that had no relevance. And if I were to say your claims weren't valid, instead stating sound reasons why they aren't, yet continue to deny that my reasons are sound, would that not give the impression you think your claims are infallible? At least, you've done nothing to tell me otherwise.
The reason why I have barely any townreads is because there has been no reason to heavily side by someone and say their town outright, at least in my opinion, that often. And, if my reads on clc are entirely activity-based, then what defines 'activity?' Speaking? Lynching? According to you, what is being said counts as activity. So... what makes your reads on me or vice versa any different? Or anyone else for that matter? If scumleaning someone based on their excessive shitposting is bad, then do we just leave them be, and write them off as town?
|
|
|
|
Post by Wob on Mar 26, 2018 23:55:30 GMT
Unlynch hingo
|
|
|
|
Post by Rocky Tactician on Mar 26, 2018 23:55:34 GMT
This was just a small part of my suspicion that Dasocks deemed to be a weaker point that I made which he decided to redirect the conversation toward, not me. Why are you suddenly so defensive? Do you have any proof that the read on me wasn't OMGUS? omgus is lynching someone simply because they lynched you. dasocks has a different reason to lynch you, so no matter how invalid you think that reason is, you cannot call it an omgus. calling me "suddenly so defensive" is absolutely hilarious lmao. I'm not, and you can't just get away with screaming that whenever someone scumleans you. pretty sure you did the same with dasocks. Are you denying that dasocks got defensive when I expressed slight suspicion in their claims? I still think it's incredibly interesting that dasocks went from a townread on me to an all-out scumread so quickly based off of one attack, without even lynching them. Also, OMGUS can apply to verbal attacks as well as lynches- it's about attacking someone solely because they attacked you, not lynching. |
|
|
|
Post by Rocky Tactician on Mar 27, 2018 0:00:09 GMT
Just because people may have formed entire lists of reads, doesn't mean I have to automatically accept them. Using the reads of others to form your own, before making your own whatsoever, just sounds bad to me. And I will say this- those are not my only reads. They are simply my main ones. I can and will make a full list of reads of the pl if need be, as I have said before. But for now, I will make reads based on what I think, not just following Champ and Fenrir, for example. Plus, my read change on you was attributed to the fact that you were pushing me on things that had no relevance. And if I were to say your claims weren't valid, instead stating sound reasons why they aren't, yet continue to deny that my reasons are sound, would that not give the impression you think your claims are infallible? At least, you've done nothing to tell me otherwise. The reason why I have barely any townreads is because there has been no reason to heavily side by someone and say their town outright, at least in my opinion, that often. And, if my reads on clc are entirely activity-based, then what defines 'activity?' Speaking? Lynching? According to you, what is being said counts as activity. So... what makes your reads on me or vice versa any different? Or anyone else for that matter? If scumleaning someone based on their excessive shitposting is bad, then do we just leave them be, and write them off as town? If you can make a full list of reads, why don't you do it instead of trying to shake my reasoning off of you quickly as well as Ayia's? I also didn't push you off things that had no relevance- I made multiple valid points, such as the fact that most of your reads are based off of activity and that you got incredibly defensive as soon as I presented suspicion, going from a townread to a lynch on me when I simply presented a point you made that rubbed me the wrong way. Activity is lynching someone solely on how often they post text other than lynches, by my definition. And my initial point on you was not your inactivity whatsoever, however you've decided to redirect the discussion towards that alleged 'point' that I made while ignoring my other points by extension. You have continued to redirect the discussion towards activity despite other points that I've made in the past. |
|
|
|
Post by Rocky Tactician on Mar 27, 2018 0:00:34 GMT
Fenrir don't take this as an attack of any sort but is there a reason you're ignoring the elephant in the room of my debate with dasocks? What are your thoughts on that? I've been going through the ISOs still and decided to try the DBW reaction test just since I noticed he was online, so I haven't actually been able to read the current discussions going on yet. Understandable enough |
|
|
|
Post by Fenrir on Mar 27, 2018 0:12:01 GMT
I have go go home for something quickly; should be back soon.
|
|
|
|
Post by Wob on Mar 27, 2018 0:15:12 GMT
omgus is lynching someone simply because they lynched you. dasocks has a different reason to lynch you, so no matter how invalid you think that reason is, you cannot call it an omgus. calling me "suddenly so defensive" is absolutely hilarious lmao. I'm not, and you can't just get away with screaming that whenever someone scumleans you. pretty sure you did the same with dasocks. Are you denying that dasocks got defensive when I expressed slight suspicion in their claims? I still think it's incredibly interesting that dasocks went from a townread on me to an all-out scumread so quickly based off of one attack, without even lynching them. Also, OMGUS can apply to verbal attacks as well as lynches- it's about attacking someone solely because they attacked you, not lynching. I'm not necessarily denying or agreeing that dasocks got defensive... where did I say anything about that? You're completely ignoring what I said, which is that calling me suddenly defensive for making a post with a slight sr on you is absolutely ridiculous. What do I have to defend even? Also given that more than half your posts in this game have been interacting with dasocks, I don't think its unreasonable for his read on you to change based on that. I don't think it was omgus. |
|
|
|
Post by Rocky Tactician on Mar 27, 2018 0:20:09 GMT
Are you denying that dasocks got defensive when I expressed slight suspicion in their claims? I still think it's incredibly interesting that dasocks went from a townread on me to an all-out scumread so quickly based off of one attack, without even lynching them. Also, OMGUS can apply to verbal attacks as well as lynches- it's about attacking someone solely because they attacked you, not lynching. I'm not necessarily denying or agreeing that dasocks got defensive... where did I say anything about that? You're completely ignoring what I said, which is that calling me suddenly defensive for making a post with a slight sr on you is absolutely ridiculous. What do I have to defend even? Also given that more than half your posts in this game have been interacting with dasocks, I don't think its unreasonable for his read on you to change based on that. I don't think it was omgus. I'md responding to your claim that "I call people defensive whenever they attack me" by stating that dasocks was, in fact, getting defensive when I questioned them. |
|
|
|
Post by Dasocks~ on Mar 27, 2018 0:21:46 GMT
Rocky Tactician- hingo (null) - miss meatball (heavy scumlean) - Agent Orange (slight scumlean) - og villain (null) - Tottenham (null) - Emily (null) - clc ironic (scumlean) - spiderz (townlean) - a man of the woods (null) - ayia (slight scumlean) - mr ego (null) - Fenrir (null) - the hallow (slight townlean) - Champ1604 (null) - ODM (null) - Toni 2 Many Chromosomi (null) - b3362 ( slight scumlean)- Twinkle Twink (null) - floooood (slight townlean) Now, instead of pestering me for my read list, you have yet to give any semblance of yours.
|
|
|
|
Post by ayia on Mar 27, 2018 0:25:53 GMT
I'd still like answers of why you'd go about lynching someone who hasn't talked, Daisocks, even if you got off. It makes absolutely no sense
|
|
|
|
Post by Dasocks~ on Mar 27, 2018 0:27:16 GMT
...What? Where did that even come from? I'm lynching Puppy :I
and is wanting to lynch somebody that is unhelpful to town... bad?
|
|
|
|
Post by Wob on Mar 27, 2018 0:27:18 GMT
I'm not necessarily denying or agreeing that dasocks got defensive... where did I say anything about that? You're completely ignoring what I said, which is that calling me suddenly defensive for making a post with a slight sr on you is absolutely ridiculous. What do I have to defend even? Also given that more than half your posts in this game have been interacting with dasocks, I don't think its unreasonable for his read on you to change based on that. I don't think it was omgus. I'md responding to your claim that "I call people defensive whenever they attack me" by stating that dasocks was, in fact, getting defensive when I questioned them. This isn't the point lol. Its reasonable for both town and scum to get defensive. Would you prefer it if he didn't respond to your posts and refuse to defend himself? |
|
|
|
Post by Rocky Tactician on Mar 27, 2018 0:38:45 GMT
Rocky Tactician - hingo (null) - miss meatball (heavy scumlean) - Agent Orange (slight scumlean) - og villain (null) - Tottenham (null) - Emily (null) - clc ironic (scumlean) - spiderz (townlean) - a man of the woods (null) - ayia (slight scumlean) - mr ego (null) - Fenrir (null) - the hallow (slight townlean) - Champ1604 (null) - ODM (null) - Toni 2 Many Chromosomi (null) - b3362 ( slight scumlean)- Twinkle Twink (null) - floooood (slight townlean) Now, instead of pestering me for my read list, you have yet to give any semblance of yours. I only have a few problems with this read list... a. the majority of your reads are still null, despite many of those people having participated in the game thus far b. is there any reason for your townlean on OM despite the fact that he's actively defending you???  c. the fact that you have a heavy scumlean on me doesn't make much sense, considering a. you thought that the first half of my posts in this game were townie, and b. your only evidence against me is that I have questioned you about your slight inactivity- a fact that you decided to milk to no end without discussing any of my other points as well, because you seemed to think this point was weaker. |
|
|
|
Post by Wob on Mar 27, 2018 0:53:32 GMT
om never defended him, ur thinking of me lol
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 27, 2018 1:02:39 GMT
sorry if ive been extremely inactive, music>forums, anyways something in specific i want to point out, puppy why does each and every one of his reads have to be town/scum read/lean? thats what you are implying by saying "the majority of your reads are null dispite most people talking". I feel its strange that you are pushing someone to make scum/town reads instead of them finding it on their own unkess im reading way into what you said but its something i thought id mention ill read the rest of the day o e more time b4 i go to sleep and give an update
|
|
|
|
Post by Dasocks~ on Mar 27, 2018 1:11:07 GMT
Rocky Tactician - hingo (null) - miss meatball (heavy scumlean) - Agent Orange (slight scumlean) - og villain (null) - Tottenham (null) - Emily (null) - clc ironic (scumlean) - spiderz (townlean) - a man of the woods (null) - ayia (slight scumlean) - mr ego (null) - Fenrir (null) - the hallow (slight townlean) - Champ1604 (null) - ODM (null) - Toni 2 Many Chromosomi (null) - b3362 ( slight scumlean)- Twinkle Twink (null) - floooood (slight townlean) Now, instead of pestering me for my read list, you have yet to give any semblance of yours. I only have a few problems with this read list... a. the majority of your reads are still null, despite many of those people having participated in the game thus far b. is there any reason for your townlean on OM despite the fact that he's actively defending you??? c. the fact that you have a heavy scumlean on me doesn't make much sense, considering a. you thought that the first half of my posts in this game were townie, and b. your only evidence against me is that I have questioned you about your slight inactivity- a fact that you decided to milk to no end without discussing any of my other points as well, because you seemed to think this point was weaker. Avoiding having to formulate your own reads, I see. a. Null=None, as in I have no read, or rather neither townlean nor scumlean. b. They aren't defending me??? c. As I have said, reads and perceptions can change. Your early actions could both be labeled as 'townie (bit moreso)' and 'scummy', but your later actions have far outweighed the 'townie' factor in my eyes. (what i'm assuming is supposed to be d). No, that is not my only evidence. Your earlier actions could be viewed as scummy, as well. Remember? I've even explained why I think so. Besides, you've milked the whole 'slight inactivity' thing far more than me. I gave you answers, but you just rebounded with more and more questions, when I made it clear that I had no care for that entire chain as a whole, as it was unnecessary. And of course this was weaker than your other points- doesn't mean I didn't respond to the other ones, even a little bit. |
|
|
|
Post by Rocky Tactician on Mar 27, 2018 1:20:46 GMT
Sorry, I was an idiot and somehow thought wob was OM
|
|
|
|
Post by Rocky Tactician on Mar 27, 2018 1:24:50 GMT
I'm sick of going back and forth with this, there's no point- if you won't respond to any of my other points, which you DIDN'T unless you can give me direct quotes of you doing so, in which case be my guest- but just because I'm asking questions doesn't mean I'm not responding to your answers- and why do you expect me to respond to answers with more answers? That doesn't make any sense. My points all go back to your original post, which I believe was an attempt to seem active while presenting reads that were not well-thought-out, then start attacking a strawman once I presented any sort of argument towards that point.
Unless you can provide an answer worth my time, I'm done going back and forth with the same points that don't even relate back to my original argument.
|
|
|
|
Post by Snaq ◢ ◤ on Mar 27, 2018 7:29:44 GMT
Lynchcount 1.9 3 ayia* - clc ironic , spiderz, VigilanteVigoroth3 Rocky Tactician - ScorrchingTheaph, Crespo, Dasocks~3 Dasocks~ - Arsenal, ayia, Rocky Tactician2 Fenrir - OM~!, qtball2 OM~! - Bomb Moss, @toxicmahshroom 1 Wob - Durza1 Arsenal - b33621 clc ironic - FenrirIf the deadline was right now, ayia would be lynched. The deadline is Wednesday the 28th of March, 3 PM EST. Players (+ their current lynch) - hingo (None) - Rocky Tactician ( Dasocks~) - Durza ( Wob ) - OM~! ( Fenrir ) - Arsenal ( Dasocks~) - qtball ( Fenrir) - clc ironic ( ayia ) - spiderz ( ayia ) - Wob (None) - ayia ( Dasocks~ ) - VigilanteVigoroth ( ayia) - Fenrir ( clc ironic) - Bomb Moss ( OM~!) - Champ1604 (None) - incognito (None) - Crespo ( Rocky Tactician ) - b3362 ( Arsenal) - @toxicmahshroom ( OM~!) - Dasocks~ ( Rocky Tactician) - ScorrchingTheaph ( qtball) As always, tell me if you spot a mistake ~INFORMATIVE POST COMING SOON~
|
|
|
|
Post by VigilanteVigoroth on Mar 27, 2018 7:36:22 GMT
Good morning, Good Morning! Good Morning, my beautiful people. (Not as beautiful as me but still, pretty hot)(specifically tballz qt)
I think the best place to start is to
unlynch Ayia
Dasocks is frankly acting scummier than Puppy. However Puppy really feels like he’s scum going for the easy town lynch to act like he’s making reads (I think I worded that badly zzz)
As for other players, CLC shouldn’t be lynched today, but if he continues his current style day 2, I would be cool to push him.
@toxicmahshroom I’m unsure why you are pushing me specifically for a lack of my own reads, as I think I’ve given more of my own reads than other players that you haven’t made a comment on. Examples being wob (though I may have missed a post) Durza, and That b3 231 guy idk
|
|
