everywhere116 wrote:You da man! Well, not really, because we're colorful ponies, but you get the idea.
shieldgenerator7 wrote:Thanks for the welcome back ghostly!
I read your case and it seems like you have the upper hand on kratos (but I always get turned one side or the other when reading cases I don't have strong opinions about), and I can see that you're really tired when you posted that.
I'll have more to say but I'm rather busy ATM so later
shieldgenerator7 wrote: (but I always get turned one side or the other when reading cases I don't have strong opinions about),
ghostly447 wrote:kratos644 wrote:ghostly447 wrote:Pyramid is getting a little too big for my liking so I will continue to post down here.
Sigh. Okay, well here is my point (since you pretty much rambled on about how you thought that he was scum for..trying to make cases..to seem towny.). I know from playing with PMC that his game play does not change when he is mafia, or town. But I do not see why, if he were mafia, he wouldnt accept any new cases. In my opinion, if he is truly thinking zimmah is mafia, and not changing his opinion on it till he gets a claim (or in this case, the argument blown back at himself), then there is a very good reason to beleive zimmah is mafia, or PMC is just not as careful as he was...Last night playing RT .
I don't know how to explain any clearer to you that there is a difference between Trying to APPEAR that you're scumhunting and trying to actually scumhunt. He was saying stuff to make it appear that he was scumhunting but at the time that's all I believed it was. It was day 1. It's not like my case is going to be rock solid on a person but he made some moves that appeared scummy to me and after enough of them I put together a case.
I dont know how to explain any clearer to YOU that that is not my point. My point here is this.
If there was another case available against someone else that got more traction than zimmah, then why in gods name, if he is scum, did he not jump on that one to try to force a claim? I dont care if he looks like he is scum hunting, I care about the fashion in which he scum hunted. Now that I think about it, he seemed more like a lyncher than he did some random scum. Because he kept pushing for zimmah's lynch rather than jumping to another player, that is the point I want you to get.
Well there wasn't a case that had more traction at the time but I can see your point here. I've yet to play in a game that had a lyncher though so if that's what his play resembled than that would be why I didn't pick up on it.
Sure. For everyones memory, I am a replacement. I had to come in and read 30 pages. Something I did not plan to do in 1 night. Kranos, either you do not get my posts of "I am stopping on page 23 for tonight" or you skimmed. Since there are 3 of them, I believe it is skimming since you never asked "What do you mean?". So, here. As an example:
I've read every single word in this thread thank you very much. As we can see from your post below that wasn't where you made your post about me and by the time you did make your post about me, you said you had read to the bottom of page 28 where I had already started to back off PMC by that point. That was what I didn't understand because either way it didn't make sense...
You are trying to pick my posts apart too much Kranos. I wonder why you took out your portion of the info here (my specific reply to your specific question which you did not include AT ALL here. Here, let me get that for you Mr. Scummy.
I took it out because these pyramids are getting gigantic between us. There was nothing more and nothing less to my reasoning behind it.
Would you mind clarifying the underlined portion for me? The way it reads, it sounds like you're saying you made a post about me and then I backed off, but you weren't even in the game before I backed off the PMC case... Are you saying that you made that post you italicized prior to reading the part where I backed off PMC?
As you can see, I clearly answered your question of "Are you saying that you made that post you italicized prior to reading the part where I backed off PMC?". And clearly, it can be easily inferred that yes. Yes I did. Also, clearly you are either not getting my point, or you are trying to outline the scummy things I have said out of context. And to be honest, I hope it is the second option because honestly, if you dont get what I meant by "I have read down to page 28", etc, then I fear for your health. Let me continue to break it down for others.
I guess the issue here is what we consider as backing off. I consider my backing off when I took my vote off of him rather than where I said it wouldn't go back on him. I was already losing confidence in that case as PMC had been adequtely defending himself and so when I took my vote off he would've had to do something extra scummy for me to revote. So yes I do understand what you saying you have read down to page 28 means but that still means that you would've read where I backed off in my mind at least.
I confirmed replacement at the bottom of page 28. This basically allows my followup posts to fall into place. The quote below and all my other posts I made while catching up were clearly made after page 28. And since I was keeping everyone updated on my notes as I went through, on what page I was on, you can clearly see that I had not yet read your back out post yet. Any further questions or need of explanation will be given if you quote this specific part and request it and I will do what I can to break it down more.
Mentioned above.ghostly447 wrote:Got halfway through page 23 guys. I have quite a few notes. I will finish reading tomorrow and post everything, but here are all the notes I have so far (bit unorganized of course guys).
SG7 - Trying to move on from the Zimmah/Freezie case by finding an inactive and trying to go from there (during open discussion) -Tails-
PMC - Said his case on SG7 was better than any others (around page 18). His only reason is that SG7 said "I think the case may be worth looking into, but I wont vote"...PMC, I do this all the time, I even did it in Power Roles. I feel it is a safety net to not only make sure you are going to get a decent case, but to also not reveal a Power Role.
Zimmah - OVer reaction in my opinion. Maybe a lyncher, maybe scum. Or maybe he actually did try to change up as to avoid getting "flamed".
Freezie - I dont like the way freezie has let others do his talking for him. Its like he is trying to fade out now.
Zimmah Page 20 votes PMC to attempt to change direction of thought
Freezie and PMC both attempt to keep subject on Zimmah while Zimmah attempts to change the direction of thought to another player. Freezie also tries to build something against Victor.
*Freezie and VS connection??? Freezie's random vote on VS for "The sake of lynching someone" still not removed for a VERY long time.
Page 21: Edoc Says he will vote the next person to bring up the case. Very strong feeling about this. Connection Edoc with Freezie or Zimmah?
Page 23: Freezie separates from PMC. Page 24?: PMC Asks is it the best case (against him) that they can get? When clearly its been established people would rather move on from Zimmah.
Like I said, still reading, but I took these as I went through.
Like I said no mention of me yet. Did you bring this one up just to try and say hey look I posted back while on page 23 before you backed off on PMC. This quote is completely irrelevant
Explained up top. It is not irrelevant. It also opened up a lot of facts about you such as that you either SKIMMED or you are MAFIA trying to get a free ride by saying I didnt answer your question when in fact I did, and you are just hoping no one will go back and check.
So, that is 1/3 posts buddy. You skimmed through them, and that is 100% confirmed fact. So yes, I made the post against you before I got to where you backed off. And I could swear I posted that...oh wait, I did. BIG POST THAT STARTS WITH "Im truly surprised others didnt pick up". Just scroll down to the bottom, after the last quote, the second paragraph:
Nearly done with Page 28, just a couple more posts. 1 thing I must say is that PCM from my experience is rather inactive. Nothing that I can truly pin him for, but in my opinion, PMC v PCM seems to be a town v town case.
100% confirmed fact that I skimmed is it? As I said above you actually didn't make your post before I backed off but instead of just admitting you were wrong you tried to fall back on that. You can believe you did all you want but if you can have a 100% confirmed fact that I skimmed than I can certainly have a 100% confirmed fact that you're BSing half of this stuff as we go along. For one you said you're nearly done with page 28 when you made that post. Well post 3 of page 28 is where I backed off. Now it stands to reason that only reading 2 posts wouldn't be considered as nearly finished with a page correct? So I can only assume that you had read it. So now here's where we run into a problem. You didn't make your post prior to reading where I backed off PMC. But you said that you did. Are you at this point just trying to change things around so you don't have to admit you were wrong?
100% confirmed you either skimmed or you are mafia now IMO. In fact, I did make my post after you backed off. And I never said any different. Here is the thing. You are either skimming, or trying to tell me what you are trying to tell me (its obvious enough you are trying to say I made my post before you backed off) when in fact I made it while I was still reading though the 30 damn pages and that was just part of my update.
I did in fact say I was at the end of page 28. But if you didnt notice, I said one thousand fucking times (I am sorry, I am getting extremely tired of this crap) THAT I TOOK THE FUCKING NOTES WHILE READING. EVERYONE SEE IT THIS TIME? BECAUSE IF I HAVE TO SAY IT ONE MORE TIME I WILL FIND YOU AND I WILL BITCH SLAP YOU (Had to add in a little humor there ). I saw you backed off, but it didnt seem like it was because you WANTED to because he had proven he was mafia. You even said it was to give him time for a counter case. So if that says you backed off with intention to stay off, I guess I could back off now and say none of this ever happened, right? Not that I would because in my opinion you have absolutely no case except the one you repeatedly have beat down 10 times already.
Explained above. We had different ideas of where I backed off which, I can only assume, is what has caused this misunderstanding. As for your notes thing though... who wouldn't update their notes to reflect new information...?
So now here's where we run into a problem. You didn't make your post prior to reading where I backed off PMC. But you said that you did.
Okay dude. Seriously? You just fucking went against yourself here. Let me show you where and explain so I dont have to go back and get it again too.
You didn't...backed off PMC: I did in fact make my post before I got to where you backed off PMC. They were notes I had been taking while reading, so therefore...
But you said that you did: This point is no longer valid on grounds that I have said twice in this post that I was taking notes while I read.
As stated above we've obviously had misunderstanding as to our individual interpretations of where I backed off are but still as I also said above why wouldn't you update notes? What would be the purpose in posting notes that were no longer valid. Granted you didn't get to where you thought I backed off so I'm not saying your notes should have reflected that.
STARTING SECOND PARAGRAPH OF POINT 2
As far as me "twisting your words" I obviously wasn't referencing the post you quoted because hey I didn't quote that one... You see most people tend to quote the post they're responding to not some random one.
Kratos, you are a silly one arent you? I do post my responses to the intended quote, and not a random one. I am doing it here, I did it in the post prior, where I accused the 4 people, and I will always do it for big posts like this. Dont you love how you kill yourself? This is the second big post where none of your points have held up, and I see the exact same players defending you every time (some of the ones I accused by basically all ganging up on my at once and expecting me to magically re-read through 30 pages and reply to 3 major cases).
Oh my oh my oh my. What I was saying is you tried to quote something you said and claimed I was "twisting your words when that in fact was not the post you made I was referencing and the one I was referencing I had quoted. What is so hard to understand about that? So far none of you defenses have held any ground and it's all just a bunch of BS you're trying to throw out because you don't have anything solid.
What is so hard to get about the fact that I answer everything point by point and therefore to say I misquoted, you need to point it out so I can re-address it? you keep saying "Oh you responded to the wrong quote" but you wont back it up. To say that none of my defenses have held their ground is a joke. This whole case spawned from my case against you and your failure to respond to certain pieces of the case till eventually you start saying "You misquoted" And dont have anything else to say. Its like you are trying to drop the entire piece of the case off the board until eventually its down to the pieces you still believe you can fight. I DO notice this. Me trying to throw in a bunch of BS? THIS is BS dude. BS in its prime.
I'll go back and find it for you later if you really want but I don't have the time to search through the pages at the moment.
I didn't realize there were parts of your case I didn't respond to? If you would like to put them in a nice list like SW did for you I would gladly respond to them.
And one more thought. If I was going with majority thought, why were there only 2 votes on PMC before I made my case and if you look I mentioned that I was working on a case(the one on PMC prior to him having any votes at all.
God, some people piss me off. Okay Kratos, I will go back for you and get some posts about people getting tired of the Zimmah case and wanting to vote the next person to repost about the zimmah case. If you truly think I must do that to make your life easier and show you why you should lose this point too. For now, I am in school, and this will be probably my only big case (only 1 more max after this methinks).
Yes I realize that people were getting tired of PMC beating the dead horse. For one, if you remember correctly I posted about a case I was working on putting together prior to the all out hatred of the zimmah case that was going on and that case was on PMC. And as my second point my case against PMC didn't revolve around going hey guys I know no one like all the pressure being put on the Zimmah case so let's vote for PMC instead because he's putting pressure on it. So know you don't have to go get posts but you point is still invalid.
Okay by saying this point is invalid is a completely idiotic statement IMO. Of course your case didnt openly revolve around "The majority hates PMC, lets go for him" or else you would have been dead long ago. Do you think that kind of talk is going to just fly right past town (for gods sake, it didnt fly by the rest of the town did it? ) This is one piece I am willing to drop because it could go either way very easily (sort of like WIFOM). You say that it was wrong place wrong time for the case to start up, and I say it was scummy with the placement, you keeping up with me on this point? It is a stupid point to argue because it will result in a poor outcome, because it is one that will be bickered back and forth all day every day.
Fair enough. It would just be a WIFOM argument so we can drop this point.
Yes because so many people were on the Zimmah case that it took some expert manipulating by me to swing everyone over to the PMC case.(SARCASM) And yes as you said, what you said is quoted above. You clearly mentioned how I don't finish my case"s" but why would I finish a case where I think the person who would get lynched is town? That's just silly. As for directing the flow in general though. Doesn't any case attempt to do such? Can I now say you're scummy because you're trying to direct the flow towards me? That seems rather ridiculous to me.
Okay, lets pretend we aren't all egotistic in here, alright? It took some expert manipulating?
I'll go ahead and leave this post of mine to make it easier to understand. I'm sorry that you're not able to interpret when someone is being sarcastic and when someone is being serious. That is certainly a flaw of mine I can be very sarcastic at times. So I do apologize that you didn't understand the sarcasm but I'm going to go ahead and take out the edoc quote to make things shorter and the fact that it's not needed because I wasn't being serious in what I said.
Heres the thing guys. Sarcasm does not always transfer well over the computer. You either have to be drastically sarcastic, or not at all. If you are just giving it a touch of sarcasm, some people will glide right over it and turn it into something it is not. I love being sarcastic, but I promise you will know when I am being sarcastic.
Sorry I think I was just a little annoyed by the time I got down this far in the pyramid. I realize sarcasm doesn't always transfer well and that one was kind of subtle. I truly do apologize for that one.
Why would you finish a case where you think the person who would get lynched is town? Well I dont know buddy, but here is the thing. You have gotten 0 claims out of the Zimmah case, the PMC case, and now this case (so far). If you dont get claims, you will never catch mafia for a day lynch, and your cases will never get further than "I think he is town". You dont have to lynch someone you think is town, just get them to claim when you get them as far as L-2 or L-1. Why the hell would you lead a case, get to L-2, and say "I dont need a claim, I think he is town"???
I'm sorry but he hinted at having a power role when he said he'd really rather not claim and look he was poison doctor so I still stand by not forcing him to claim. Normally I would want the claim to further the defense but he was really against claiming and revealing his role and his defense was pretty solid so I didn't feel like it should have been pushed for the claim.
I can accept that point of view where he did seem like a power role, etc, would cause you to back off of him. But after it goes that far, and he starts seeming that way, do you not think the mafia will catch onto that (if you arent mafia)? So what is the point if you push them that far, and have a seemingly soft claimed power role, and not forcing them to claim? It isnt going to help them if they are soft claiming a power role in the end, because they will more than likely be night killed. What if he had been mafia? Like I said, I know for a fact (meta gaming to a whole new level) that he will not change his outlook on a game. Regardless of his roles association. That is why, naturally, I always suspect him and watch him closely too. Another characteristic of his that I have seen is that he is VERY good at defending himself. He will pick everything out to the point you dont even notice how he turned it around. That is a fact, and he is a very good player. Therefore he could have more than easily been mafia, and you guys would have completely dismissed 10 pages of work to catch scum when he was right in your face.
Both statements have some truth to them For one we still had over a week in day 1 so there was time to try for a better case and get a claim out of them. If the whole looten thing hadn't happened then we would've had a better chance of having a decent outcome from another case. So while backing off and not getting a claim while there would've only been a day or two left would've imo been worthless but we still had time to do something.
Any case attempting to lead is in fact making a person the leader of the case. But here is what I have been saying FOREVER. You are scummy in particular because you TAKE THE MAJORITY THOUGHT AND TURN IT INTO A CASE. Such as in edocsil's quote above. The proof is in the pudding dude.
And as I said before I was working on this case long before it was the majority thought. The problem is I don't like to make cases that have no basis to them or that are so flimsy they can be defended with so much ease that it wasn't even worth making the case. So I waited a little longer to present the case than I had hoped for and as a result it happened to come when people were starting to get sick of the Zimmah case.
Addressed above. Like I said, point of view, and I can accept that.
Thank you for being resonable
Here, I have to quote EVERYTHING for the readers to get it.ghostly447 wrote:kratos644 wrote:ghostly447 wrote:Clever jumps all over the board with activity. Some games, he is inactive. Others, he is half active, half inactive. Most, he attempts to make the cases and figure out everything as he goes, and does relatively okay. In this case, I think he is trying to give little imput. Maybe either because he doesnt think the cases given are good ones, maybe because he is scum. He is not on the top of my list of potential scum.
This is just to further my point about you protecting clever. Here you're trying to sort of protect by saying he's not high on your list of potential scum/you don't think he's acting to scummy yet you also say that maybe he's acting the way he his because he is scum to kind of cover your tracks. I find this quite scummy in itself but unfortunately it is built around clever being scum so he would have to first be lynched to figure things out but if he does come up scum at some point you're my first target for a case.
Twisting my words again? Very much so. I did in fact say that he may or may not be scum. But I believe I also said that in some games he is hyper active, and in some inactive. Oh, I did. Here, I will highlight in cyan.
Not really sure what your highlighted part has to do with anything I mentioned. Yes you did also say that but it was irrelevant to the point I was bringing up and also not twisting your words in any way at all... I was just saying how they appear to me and to me it appears you're trying to protect a scum buddy while also leaving yourself a way out in case he gets lynched.
Well here, let me break it down for you. I assume you are talking about the cyan color. You said I was defending clever. I was actually meta-gaming (frowned upon, but you twisted my words to attempt to connect us. Which is clearly worse). So, I went up and showed where I meta-gamed. So, that brings us to your next part. I did in fact say it, and you were in fact twisting my words (as proven in my above sentence). And I was posting about how it appears to me, and to me, it appears you are trying to pin 2 people with a lie to get us both lynched.
You've still yet to show how I'm twisting your words to be quite honest. Here let me pick out my own part of what you said.In this case, I think he is trying to give little imput. Maybe either because he doesnt think the cases given are good ones, maybe because he is scum. He is not on the top of my list of potential scum.
Here is where I get the vibe that you're trying to protect a fellow scum buddy,and here is where I say you're leaving yourself a way out to me.
Are you not able to at least admit that it is reasonable for someone to believe that could be a way of throwing that in, especially the way that you and S7C have stuck together in this game? I mean after SW went on to vote you S7C then comes in and votes for SW. It's funny too because he chose to go after SW who voted you and not PCM who's arguments for voting you weren't any better, probably worse, but for some reason you two are dead set on attacking SW and I. The funny thing is neither of us can even be 100% sure that the other is town but you both seem to be 100% sure of the others alignment just by the way you're sticking together. Now that doesn't necessarily imply mafia of course. There were also masons in the last pokemon mafia so maybe that's why you guys are sticking together so hard. But S7C has seemed scummy this whole time and if you're not affiliated with each other then sticking together this way isn't helping you any.
Still waiting for a simple yes that's reasonable or not that's completely unreasonable.
Does this make it clear that all your points are gone? To me, yes. That is my defense. As for you Strike Wolf, not only do I find how you cleared yourself and kratos scummy without, in fact, delving into your cases, but I will also address your case today if I get time.
I await everyones input.
Nope it just makes even more clear how you're trying to make something out of nothing to make me look scummy. Since I was in no way satisfied with your response as it felt like a bunch of BS again I'm going to stick to my promise I made you and Vote Ghostly
Firstly, to make it easier on Doom, I want to point out that this was Kratos voting for me . Second of all, I hope you pull your vote back after this and put it on yourself, because you are obviously posting crap after crap. And on top of that, if you cant see why Strike Wolf clearing you both is scummy, then I am done defending myself against this case and will pray to god another town breaks it down for you. Because to be frank, I am tired of breaking things down after this case has led to you saying I am full of it when I feel I have more than proven your guilt.
everywhere116 wrote:You da man! Well, not really, because we're colorful ponies, but you get the idea.
jonty125 wrote:Boy, this is getting confusing.
Commander9 wrote:Trust Edoc, as I know he's VERY good.
zimmah wrote:Mind like a brick.
edocsil wrote:jonty125 wrote:Boy, this is getting confusing.
Yup too much color and a serious case of TLDR. Last several pages have been some serious spam.
everywhere116 wrote:You da man! Well, not really, because we're colorful ponies, but you get the idea.
jonty125 wrote:Boy, this is getting confusing.
owenshooter wrote:i disagree with you and i'm right!
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests