TWG XXII - Vampire Melee - GAME OVER

**Tasselfoot** · 10-24-2005, 03:22 PM

You're kidding right.... I'm pretty sure I said at the 1st time I agreed with something you said in the chat that I'd still post it. More to show that I'm not JUST showing one side of the story. Also, just because I agree with you on a few of your offensive attacks, and even fewer of your defensive points... and, pay attention here please.... DOES NOT CONTRADICT EVERYTHING ELSE I SAY. In fact, I'd be more inclined to believe you if I disagreed with EVERYTHING you said. The fact that you are still making a few valid points, instead of either ALL invalid points or ALL valid points is extremely wolfish. Why? What wolf is not going to defend another wolf at some point, to cover tracks, yet still correctly attack another to distance himself.

Also, thanks for ignoring ALL OF THE CHAT that I post as evidence, and instead take part in attacking about 10 sectences out of a monster post I make. Multiple sentences on most paragraphs you make, while you reply with a few words on such small points. You're attacking my word usable and the way in which I talk, instead of my evidence... and trying to play up the fact that I agree with a small portion of what you said instead of the fact that I absolutely destroy your defensive post.

As I said to Talisman... your offensive post isn't that bad. Its fairly spot on, EXCEPT where you attack myself and Talisman.

**alainbryden** · 10-24-2005, 03:50 PM

The reason your paragraphs are so long is because it takes you that much space to complete your cyclical reasoning.

**FishFishRevolution** · 10-24-2005, 04:02 PM

alainbryden: IMPORTANT IN_ _ R * _ _ _ * _ _ _ * _ _ _ * _ _ _ * _ _ _ F _ _ _ S _ _ _ * _ _ WHO KILLED ME
FishFishRevolution: it's important to figure out who killed him
alainbryden: is it?

I was taking a guess at what the message said; rephrased: "Hmm, maybe it's saying it's important to figure out who killed him?"

**Kilgamayan** · 10-24-2005, 04:06 PM

Yeah, it is pretty important, given that's the goal of the game.

PS Holy shit talisman I am not reading all that. Summarize or bad token.

I don't see much of a reason to doubt chardish but I'm not going to vote just yet. I'll be able to pay more attention tomorrow (roommate's 21st today and he's spending the entire day getting drunk off his ass) so I'll do a whole bunch of reading then.

**alainbryden** · 10-24-2005, 04:07 PM

that's fair enough. What's important was how I interpreted the statement. I wasn't trying to convict you of trying to figure out the message prematurely. Like I said, even If anyone had attempted to discern the untrustworthy thing before it's time, I don't think that's any indication of a wolf at all.

**talisman** · 10-24-2005, 04:32 PM

kilga you don't have to read all that beginning chat log if you don't want to... it's at the end of a page and it's just there for public knowledge. Tass went through and pulled some stuff out regarding alain and blah which he went in to if you're interested in that.

Plus I, uh, kinda did provide a summary of major points in the very next post. The vast majority of the chat was spent discussing the pms.

**alainbryden** · 10-24-2005, 04:38 PM

Qreepy you regarded the message as a red-herring before you even knew anything about it. It may be in nature to immediately assume guilty until proven innocent but the haste with which you proceeded to suggest that an entire pm be dropped into the chat room for analysis was beyond the innocence of a human mind.

QreepyBORIS (2:03:00 PM): Yeah, copy paste that motherfucker in here.

I was critical of the post once I found out everything I could about it's origins and structure, but you were irrationally critical of it just at the thought that something was out that excluded you or tried to suggest information about wolves. An insecure reaction that made all the difference between my critism, which many feel borderlined wolfishness, and yours, which undeniably screams wolfishness.

Originally posted by QreepyBoris

No, I absolutely saw self-contradiction in there. Doesn't necessarily hint at anything other than a tiny bit of his strategy (or lackthereof).

Not only this but your falure to assert any reasonable statements, or even do anything but excuse those statements instead of trying to go back and support them or at least recognise why they were wrong, shows that you really haven't put any thought into suspicions or evidence at all. This is further shown from your ultimate decision to vote for yourself after day one.

Originally posted by QreepyBoris

I have some suspicions, but to be quite frank, there's a whole lot of people who have already made themselves look suspicious (or at least outright stupid) this early in the game.

In this post you begin with a decision, and then try to work yourself towards that decision, but conlcude instead that you want to vote Q. Even after that, you don't, as to not contradict yourself, and end it at that thought. This method being a true show of a lack of previous conviction that infact there exists a wolf among the people to discuss. You are just playing off the ideas of others and trying to draw further conclusions that fail based on your initial fake understanding of your arguments.

Originally posted by QreepyBoris, bandwagonning after more votes on Q

Okay, Hans.

Q.

Nothing more. Just an excuse for homework. And then again at a loss for any true opinion, thinking he's excused himself by being open about it. It is really an indication that you are unable to concieve a wolf. A strong suggestiong that that is because you know who they are and avoid the obvious choices.

Originally posted by QreepyBoris

If I had any evidence you guys did not, I would share it right now.

Some people find it hard to think like a human, but only one kind of player tries to fake thinking like a human. Wolves. QreepyBoris.

**QreepyBORIS** · 10-24-2005, 05:39 PM

I'm too lazy to format, but my comments will be added in bold.

Originally posted by alainbryden

Qreepy you regarded the message as a red-herring before you even knew anything about it [Cute that you mention that. Every time Ireffered to it as a red herring, you replied with "red herring". Does that mean that you agreed with me? Does it mean you disagreed with me? More likely, you probably didn't understand what I was saying.]. It may be in nature to immediately assume guilty until proven innocent but the haste with which you proceeded to suggest that an entire pm be dropped into the chat room for analysis was beyond the innocence of a human mind[ At that point, it was only mentioned that there was a PM, not that it was ultra-secret or mission critical to the blues. Irrelevant.].

QreepyBORIS (2:03:00 PM): Yeah, copy paste that mo-fo in here. [Hi, me!]

I was critical of the post once I found out everything I could about it's origins and structure, but you were irrationally critical of it just at the thought that something was out that excluded you [That it excluded me? Brilliant analysis! (This is a Red Herring on my part. did you like it?)] or tried to suggest information about wolves [And what reason would I have not to be critical of it? It would be quite unlikely for a single player to know, on night 2, that 8 people who recieved the PM (I thought it was 5 at the time) were human beyond doubt. The only way they could be certain is if it was a wolf. So what's wrong with that?]. An insecure reaction that made all the difference between my critism[ ...?], which many feel borderlined wolfishness, and yours, which undeniably screams wolfishness[I don't really get this either.].

Originally posted by QreepyBoris

No, I absolutely saw self-contradiction in there. Doesn't necessarily hint at anything other than a tiny bit of his strategy (or lackthereof).

Not only this but your falure to assert any reasonable statements[I wasn't asserting anything, and I know it. People just seemed to think that the self-contradiction had some really deep meaning (and later I took to this idea, but at the time I had not, which makes all the difference in the world)], or even do anything but excuse those statements instead of trying to go back and support them or at least recognise why they were wrong[Fucking stupid. I said that they were self-contradictory. That means wrong, does it not? Idiot.], shows that you really haven't put any thought into suspicions or evidence at all [No, it means I did not voice them.]. This is further shown from your ultimate decision to vote for yourself after day one [I thought I had explained this well enough before (two damn times, no less!). Here it is AGAIN: I voted for myself just in case I would bump Q off by accident, because I thought that I might not see this thread again over the weekend. I didn't want to be the cause of someone's death just through my activity, so I placed a safety vote on myself to avoid phantom and accidental death. If that isn't clear, read it the other two times I wrote it in this thread. It will make more sense then.].

Originally posted by QreepyBoris

I have some suspicions, but to be quite frank, there's a whole lot of people who have already made themselves look suspicious (or at least outright stupid) this early in the game.

In this post you begin with a decision, and then try to work yourself towards that decision, but conlcude instead that you want to vote Q [I read this a few times, and never really understood your thoughtful analysis. Perhaps it is too sublime for me.]. Even after that, you don't, as to not contradict yourself, and end it at that thought. This method being a true show of a lack of previous conviction that infact there exists a wolf among the people to discuss. You are just playing off the ideas of others and trying to draw further conclusions that fail based on your initial fake understanding of your arguments [Same applies here.].

Originally posted by QreepyBoris, bandwagonning after more votes on Q

Okay, Hans.

Q.

Nothing more. Just an excuse for homework [I started and finished 2 essays in 2 different languages yesterday, complete with thoughtful analysis and full editing. Unless you're talking about something else.]. And then again at a loss for any true opinion, thinking he's excused himself by being open about it [Or maybe it was the homework?]. It is really an indication that you are unable to concieve a wolf [On day one, I'd be shocked if anyone else could.]. A strong suggestiong that that is because you know who they are and avoid the obvious choices.

Originally posted by QreepyBoris

If I had any evidence you guys did not, I would share it right now.

Some people find it hard to think like a human, but only one kind of player tries to fake thinking like a human. Wolves. QreepyBORIS.

Who did Alain vote for day one? Was it Q? Is he an enormous hypocrite? More if I feel like it.

**QreepyBORIS** · 10-24-2005, 05:41 PM

RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: TWG XXII - Vampi

What do you know. He did vote for Q day one! We voted for the same person, yet he accuses me of not being able to concieve a wolf. I do not understand.

AlainBryden for being "suspicious", for arguing terribly, not making any sense, etc, etc.

**whorlichan** · 10-24-2005, 06:02 PM

RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: TWG XXII - Vampi

Supremely Awesome Voting Guide of Doom

alainbryden - Tasselfoot, QreepyBORIS - 2
blahblah18 - talisman - 1
QreepyBORIS - alainbryden - 1
Afrobean - HansSky - 1

Phantoms:
flypie743 - 1

23.5 hours left.

**alainbryden** · 10-24-2005, 06:24 PM

RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: TWG XXII - Vampi

Does that mean that you agreed with me?

-No it means I was enjoying the Pun

That it excluded me? Brilliant analysis! (This is a Red Herring on my part. did you like it?)

-Read the sentence again. I wasn't making a point that it excluded you, I made a point that you reacted so drastically merely because it excluded you, as though this meant it targeted you. A paranoia suited for a wolf.

And what reason would I have not to be critical of it? It would be quite unlikely for a single player to know, on night 2, that 8 people who recieved the PM (I thought it was 5 at the time) were human beyond doubt. The only way they could be certain is if it was a wolf. So what's wrong with that?

-This nicely proves my point of you reiterating merely things that other people say. Also, you again took something I said for a ride, when that thing you're talking about isn't even relative to the point I'm making. You're 0 for 3.

No, it means I did not voice them.

-Whoa whoa. What reason would any human have to withhold his opinion? That's a very poor and fake excuse.

I thought I had explained this well enough before...

-Whether or not you excused yourself after you were harassed for your behaviour the initial action still caries suspicion. It doesn't matter to me that you were later to come up with an excuse for why you did it. It's always much easier to justify something in retrospect, once you see how strange it was.

I read this a few times, and never really understood your thoughtful analysis. Perhaps it is too sublime for me.

-Let me clarify. You began the post with "I am voting for myself" and what one would then expect would be that you would explain why you're voting for yourself, but you instead went off on a tangent and concluded that you want to vote for Q. In general, the conclusion of an argument is the same as the hypothesis for it to make sense. it just goes to show you made it up as you went along, and really had no notion of who you thought was a wolf. This, as I said, because you find it hard to imagine anyone being a wolf other than the 3 your know are wolves. 0 for 6.

Or maybe it was the homework?

Not an excuse.

On day one, I'd be shocked if anyone else could.

Everyone else who managed a reasonable vote did. I think that's everyone except flypie, and as could be seen in the last three games where you were green and blue, you're much better than that when you're working for the human cause.

Who did Alain vote for day one? Was it Q? Is he an enormous hypocrite?

Did I attack you for voting Q?
The answer to both questions is no. I was attacking you for bandwagonning on Q. If I must quote you again: "Okay Hans /n/n Q". Where I differ from you is that I had a good attempt at reasoning for why I felt Q was a wolf. In the end, it didn't even look like you felt Q were a wolf, just that you felt people would think you were a wolf if you didn't vote for him.

Final score: Shit for brains/10

**talisman** · 10-24-2005, 06:57 PM

RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: TWG XXII - Vampi

just a quick breather from the alain vs the world thread but some issues I want to raise--

-where's ld and his promised activity? It's not too late to start and don't feel like you have to get bogged down in all those convos right off the bat.... but there's lots and lots of info to talk about available if you need it.

-flypie be more active.

-blah same thing.

-kilga same thing. forget about the bms game...

-torlock don't feel intimidated... post something.

-alain you write some dramatic posts.

**flypie743** · 10-24-2005, 07:01 PM

RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: TWG XXII - Vampi

-flypie be more active.

Hi.

**lightdarkness** · 10-24-2005, 07:10 PM

Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: TWG XXII - V

Originally posted by flypie743

-flypie be more active.

Hi.

ooh ooh, me too!

**blahblah18** · 10-24-2005, 07:27 PM

RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: TWG XXII

first off talisman, admit to at least partially exonerating the BS you've said on me.. I think tass's stuff spoken of me in the log really clears me, no? more to post later tonight

TWG XXII - Vampire Melee - GAME OVER

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment