Open 473: Jungle Republic GAME OVER

[Majiffy]

1. List of two still counts as players even if you disagree with my logic of who is on the list. Also, as stated, the Whats were all quoted when I gave the list, so if you're still waiting it's because you're a little slow.

Well re-quote them for me because I'm really lazy and apparently you seem to know where all of these pieces of evidence ( ) are that prove how brilliant you are.

2. Okay, you have established the argument that I believe them to have provably bad reasons and that you disagree. Whoop-de-doo.
3. Whut?

Provable. Implying proof. Show me proof. Show me the money. I want the truth. I can handle the truth.

Link to town games of me - bet I can find me being difficult in them.

Being difficult and literally evading answers by giving wishy-washy side-steppable hohum answers are two different things.

No - it isn't. I said the case was bad, explained why the case was bad, and have quoted the players in question using the case I described as bad. I can reach down and hold your tiny meat and veggies to help you use the bathroom next, btu I can't think of any other way to make this more akin to baby-steps.

Requote this magnificent thing that neither I nor Whiskers have seen, then.

Also, what exactly is the scum agenda you're claiming I'm working here?

I pinned you in a corner and you're trying to writhe your way out.

[Thor665]

Well re-quote them for me because I'm really lazy and apparently you seem to know where all of these pieces of evidence ( ) are that prove how brilliant you are.

I remember someone whining about burden of proof and all that at some point - just go back to where I made the list of 4. You remember how I supplied a quote with everyone? That would be the supporting quote. Crazy, I know.

Provable. Implying proof. Show me proof. Show me the money. I want the truth. I can handle the truth.

Well, if you can find it, naturally.

Being difficult and literally evading answers by giving wishy-washy side-steppable hohum answers are two different things.

Only in perception. They're actually the exact same thing depending on what alignment you think the person is.
Also, I haven't side-stepped, and apparently you can't even recall what I have or haven't answered - making the whole accusation about me not answering things kind of looking pretty derp right now, I have to say.

Requote this magnificent thing that neither I nor Whiskers have seen, then.

I just did for her - want me to unzip you too?

Also, what exactly is the scum agenda you're claiming I'm working here?

I pinned you in a corner and you're trying to writhe your way out.

Oh, yeah, I *know* that I'm busted scum. I mean, clearly you busted me and that goes without saying.
All I'm asking is for you to explain why I was lying about my thoughts on this whole ProHawk push - what was my plan and reason to lie?

[Majiffy]

Well re-quote them for me because I'm really lazy and apparently you seem to know where all of these pieces of evidence ( ) are that prove how brilliant you are.

I remember someone whining about burden of proof and all that at some point - just go back to where I made the list of 4. You remember how I supplied a quote with everyone? That would be the supporting quote. Crazy, I know.

Uhhh what the hell does burden of proof have to do with anything? I'm asking you to link or quote for me because I'm lazy and don't feel like trawling through all your posts to find your "list of 4"

Well, if you can find it, naturally.

Also, I haven't side-stepped, and apparently you can't even recall what I have or haven't answered

Where are you getting this from?

I just did for her - want me to unzip you too?

You mean where you quoted 313 and said "Look! Look there! Evidence!" and not a single shred was to be had?

Oh, yeah, I *know* that I'm busted scum. I mean, clearly you busted me and that goes without saying.
All I'm asking is for you to explain why I was lying about my thoughts on this whole ProHawk push - what was my plan and reason to lie?

I don't think you had a "plan" or "reason" to lie. I think you made a claim that you felt you could negligibly argue from and didn't realize just how shitty of a position you were in until I called you on it.

[Thor665]

Oy vey, Majiffy - allow me to translate this most recent post from you;

"Hey, Thor, I'm lazy and need to find things, this is different from when you were lazy, help me find your list of 4 - that I've been attacking as bad this entire time!
Also, what do you mean when you suggest I can't recall what you've answered? Certainly it can have no connection to me asking you to quote what you've answered since I can't remember it.
Also, you quoted yourself calling out Whiskers on the tell you called bad, and showed how she kind of derped away from it and distanced herself immediately...but how does this show that people were pressing ProHawk for bad reasons?

Also, Thor, you lied about finding the ProHawk case bad for no reason at all - because when you're scum you would never have a purpose behind defending someone else in a bad way, and certainly I don't need to hurt my mighty brain thinking that over for any logic at all because I'm trying to parse battle you!"

[Thor665]

The sad thing is, you're doing this so badly, and I'm still not sure what alignment you are.

[Majiffy]

Oy vey, Majiffy - allow me to translate this most recent post from you;

"Hey, Thor, I'm lazy and need to find things, this is different from when you were lazy, help me find your list of 4 - that I've been attacking as bad this entire time!
Also, what do you mean when you suggest I can't recall what you've answered? Certainly it can have no connection to me asking you to quote what you've answered since I can't remember it.
Also, you quoted yourself calling out Whiskers on the tell you called bad, and showed how she kind of derped away from it and distanced herself immediately...but how does this show that people were pressing ProHawk for bad reasons?

Also, Thor, you lied about finding the ProHawk case bad for no reason at all - because when you're scum you would never have a purpose behind defending someone else in a bad way, and certainly I don't need to hurt my mighty brain thinking that over for any logic at all because I'm trying to parse battle you!"

Here, let me translate this back in the language of my people.

"Thor, please repost that thing you keep referring to that I asked you to repost. I know I've shot down everything else you've presented, including widdling down the first half of your "list of four" right off the bat, but I'd like to go ahead and finish that off for you.

Also, I think you'll recall that a lot of this argument has to do with the fact that you are being uncharacteristically avoiding of any questions or demands to pin down solid statements you've made to actual occurrences in the game, much less uncovering if any of these statements actually hold any merit - which we both know they don't.

I'm not sure what you're referring to re: Whiskers. Maybe some links or quotes might help! Or perhaps even some less vague sentence structures!

Also we both know I'm right here"

[Majiffy]

The sad thing is, you're doing this so badly, and I'm still not sure what alignment you are.

Keeping all your options open, eh? Makes sense, Mr. I-Can't-Be-Tied-Down.

[Rob14]

Who's flips would you like to see for determining his alignments? Do you see obvious potential partners, or what?

I don't discuss hypotheticals. I have some stuff in my notes, but it's all contingent on my assumptions regarding the alignments of others being correct, which is not always the case. Discussing a hypothetical situation for IF we lynch a specific person and IF that person flips scum is a waste of the town's time.

---

I stopped reading the Majiffy v Thor slap-fight around half a page ago. Answer this for me, Majiffy. What is the scum motivation for what Thor's done? It looks to me like you're splitting hairs with him over the exact meaning of his original post without actually establishing that scum-Thor would be more likely than town-Thor to do all this.

[Human Destroyer]

I still prefer Whiskers

, for the record, but this guy is a good second choice.

Why vote me if you prefer Whiskers?

Oh, by the way, Aldus is still scum, you guys should all join his wagon

[Rob14]

Oh, by the way, Aldus is still scum, you guys should all join his wagon

Tell me why. I don't see him as that bad anymore.

[Human Destroyer]

P-edit: In response to your comment towards me, Alduskkel, I don't see a connection between post #47 and post #44. If there is one,

it doesn't adequately explain away my early suspicions.

Rob, how can your read have possibly changed on him? This was in response to the last post he made in this game.

Anyway, I don't like how he dropped off the face of the earth under pressure, plus his early posts in general were just plain bad.

[Rob14]

But first, I'd like to mention that my Alduskkel read has slipped back to nullish. I re-read his ISO and the case wasn't that strong as compared to other reads I have. I might revisit him in the future when he has more content out.

[Human Destroyer]

Yet that was in the same post as the sentence I quoted

Seems somewhat contradictory to me

[Rob14]

My early suspicions are just that - early. They weren't that substantial. Don't get me wrong - Alduskkel is still on the scummy side of null. He's certainly not screaming townie. He also hasn't acted as scummy as my other scum reads, though.

In other words, think of my reads like a line. Early on, Alduskkel was the player closest to the scum side of the line, but he still was never terribly far from the center. Alduskkel hasn't moved on the line, but other people have moved past him by doing things that are more scummy than him.

[Thor665]

@Majiffy - you bore me.

[4nxi3ty]

Why are people ignoring Sky's posts?

Because they're so forgettable.
Do you have a case on him, I haven't managed to recall that either - you should restate it.

that's kinda the point, sky has been playing in a way to not get noticed or step on as few toes as possible. He picked two people in prohawk and whisker to attack, two people who were already getting a lot of attention already, an attack that other people wouldn't really be bothered by. (also his reasons for thinking their scum felt weak imo)

his reaction towards me and comments about rob looked off.

Don't get what you are trying to accomplish with your posts towards majiffy. I can see majiffy trying to get you to commit to something.

You jumped off it because you like how handeled the fake L-1. What did you like about it?

He sounded townish, was calm. Didn't freak out or give up and lurk.

what is your read of hd, ucitron, and thor?

[Thor665]

that's kinda the point, sky has been playing in a way to not get noticed or step on as few toes as possible.

Is he normally more bombastic?

Don't get what you are trying to accomplish with your posts towards majiffy. I can see majiffy trying to get you to commit to something.

You have noticed that my stance is that I've answered Majiffy's questions, and Majiffy's response is 'well, link them for me because I don't remember, even though I'm actively arguing with you using the answers I've said you haven't given me' yes?
I even went down his list of 'questions Thor hasn't answered' and answered them all by making comments about previous posts I'd done.
Thoughts?

[Thor665]

Didn't freak out or give up and lurk.

Also, I just realized by clicking back that this was in reference to ProHawk.
I actually think he did freak out and give up (though I'm arguing that's a null tell for him) could you clarify why you *didn't* see him do this?

[Human Destroyer]

Thor can you link me to a town game where ProHawk does that?

[4nxi3ty]

sky, normally bombtastic? no idea, don't see why that matters.

thoughts? you care more about the arguing than getting reactions.

prohawk said he wanted to give up, but he didn't actually give up, he continued to post.

[Whiskers]

Ok, I'm a simple cat. You know this. Where is the evidence in what you zeroed in on?

If Prohawk acts like this as both town or scum, then there's nothing to say this isn't scum play. It may not be a symptom of her alignment, but she's done other things that make me think she's scum.

Okay? My point being is that there are a number of people voting ProHawk for what are provably bad reasons. They should either adjust or they should clarify that they have additional reasons.

This is post 313-- where do you say

why

the reasons we voted for ProHawk were scummy? You don't, you just say that they are "provably bad".

Zeroed it in for you.
You also just decided to handwave the reason you'd stated as a supporting point - proving my point.

You've said now that in this post, 313, there is evidence that the reasons are provably bad. Where is the evidence in that post?

Provable. Implying proof. Show me proof. Show me the money. I want the truth. I can handle the truth.

Well, if you can find it, naturally.

But

this

is what really puts me on edge. If you're town, you can back up what you've said.

And you're not. You're spending as much time as possible Not backing up what you've said, avoiding answering the question until everyone has forgotten what the relevance of the question was-- just like scum.

[Whiskers]

prohawk said he wanted to give up, but he didn't actually give up, he continued to post.

And to me, that looks like epic AtE, nothing to be proud of.

[Thor665]

Thor can you link me to a town game where ProHawk does that?

He already provided the link when I asked - search through his iso for his answer to me asking if he was ever at L-1.

sky, normally bombtastic? no idea, don't see why that matters.

If he's scummy for lurking and quiet gameplay than he should probably not be a lurky and quiet player when town - make sense?
Othwerwise it's a playstyle tell, not a scum tell. His playstyle could easily suck, if this is the case, but it makes it a rather less viable scumcase.

thoughts? you care more about the arguing than getting reactions.

Um, actually Majiffy is the one scumhunting me, so, yeah, I'm not trying to get reactions, he is. big shock.
But I don't feel you discussed my point - I *have* answered his questions that you're saying I dodged doing.
Thoughts on that specifically?

prohawk said he wanted to give up, but he didn't actually give up, he continued to post.

So him refusing to respond to things is good and not giving up because he's still posting?
Okay, got it.

[Thor665]

Ok, I'm a simple cat. You know this. Where is the evidence in what you zeroed in on?

If Prohawk acts like this as both town or scum, then there's nothing to say this isn't scum play. It may not be a symptom of her alignment

, but she's done other things that make me think she's scum.

Okay? My point being is that there are a number of people voting ProHawk for what are provably bad reasons. They should either adjust or they should clarify that they have additional reasons.

This is post 313-- where do you say

why

the reasons we voted for ProHawk were scummy? You don't, you just say that they are "provably bad".

Zeroed it in for you.
You also just decided to handwave the reason you'd stated as a supporting point - proving my point.

You've said now that in this post, 313, there is evidence that the reasons are provably bad. Where is the evidence in that post?

I call you out on using the bad tell.
You respond, basically, that even if it's a null tell that ProHawk might still be scum (though, if it's a null tell it's still a pointless thing to bring up)
You then basically admit/accept it as a null tell and move away to retrench in your old case - proving my point that the tell is derp and people attacking over it are bad and consequently the wagon is currently bad.
Make sense now?

But

this

is what really puts me on edge. If you're town, you can back up what you've said.

And you're not. You're spending as much time as possible Not backing up what you've said, avoiding answering the question until everyone has forgotten what the relevance of the question was-- just like scum.

I will mention again.
I *have* answered all of Majiffy's questions and he's now asking me to re-quote them for him so he can find them.
Could you tell me, specifically, which questions you think I haven't answered?

[4nxi3ty]

@thor
there's a differenec between a lurky playstyle and intentionally playing under the radar. I'm getting vibes that it is the latter.

never said you dodge questions, only said it was unclear what your goal was.

I never got the impression prohawk was refusing to respond.