|
08-22-2018, 08:00 PM | #1 |
FFR Player
|
Re: TWG CLXXX - OuO what's this? [Game Thread]
unless sk is afk
__________________
,, ,_, -ー'"{ ゛ヌ ノノノノハヾ ノ li.゚ ヮ゚ノi 彡と} 猫.{つ |
08-22-2018, 08:02 PM | #2 |
FFR Player
Join Date: Mar 2017
Age: 29
Posts: 444
|
Re: TWG CLXXX - OuO what's this? [Game Thread]
not really worth playing to, and tbh an sk being alive would be... probably good for town?
its probably not that nice for us though
__________________
TWG Stats: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets...it?usp=sharing FFR is a pretty good place somehow. |
08-22-2018, 08:05 PM | #3 |
Picker @ JAX2
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 505
|
Re: TWG CLXXX - OuO what's this? [Game Thread]
|
08-22-2018, 08:31 PM | #4 | |||||||
Unacceptable
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 208
|
Re: TWG CLXXX - OuO what's this? [Game Thread]
Just thought I'd point out that Blind isn't town.
Quote:
Yesterday, I made a series of posts when I got back, one of which included a suggestion by me that we didn't know how many wolves there are. Quote:
As several people (DBP at length, Freezin and Sun Fan a bit) alluded to—see #1722—this was incorrect. All T tables include three wolves. My confusion came from the fact the the mafiascum wiki table differed from the official game table. I was reading the former when I made that claim, which led to what DBP characterized as a dumbtell. Blind claims that he hadn't read the long discussion about that when he commented on the post. But that's very hard to believe. You see, he reacted with extremely exaggerated concern Quote:
The problem is, he immediately undercut his own reading. Not only did he misunderstand what had actually happened, but his reaction upon being caught showed that the excessive “What” post was fake. Note the following: My initial response: Quote:
Quote:
Instead, by jumping all over it, he commits to the idea that there's something wrong with it. But he very clearly, as demonstrated by the post above, doesn't understand what. Rather, he saw that other people, primarily DBP, had discussed it at length, and saw an opportunity to scope out unclaimed case ground rather than actually making a case. Not only does this speak to a lack of actual scumhunting—looking for a unique position rather than a position supported by evidence—it clashes directly with his claim that he hadn't read further on, and was simply reacting to my post. If that was the case, why the initial overreaction. After all, “I get the chances.” This interpretation of Blind is borne out by his later responses. First, I pointed out the obvious problem with his post. Quote:
His initial reaction is to explain away his misreading as an immediate hot take to my initial post, although as I've demonstrated that's problematic because by his understanding there was nothing to react to. Quote:
Blind doesn't understand what's embarrassing because he still doesn't realize that he committed the same dumbtell. He read into my statement what he wanted to read, missing the actual point—a point that was necessary to understand in order for his original post (What what what...) to make any sense at all. Every single post he made in this sequence drives home the fact that he didn't understand what was wrong with what I said initially, which not only shows that his criticism of it was falsely constructed, but that his extreme reaction was as well. It would be one thing to make a passing remark regarding the "how many mafia" thing, another entirely to do what he did. blindreper1179 |
|||||||
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 8 (0 members and 8 guests) | |
|
|