Posted: Thu Mar 03, 2022 6:14 am
Yes yes. I'm such an impossible player not open to discussions that matter.
You gonna keep your vote planted on me I take it?
You gonna keep your vote planted on me I take it?
In post 986, Nordom wrote:If those particular sentences managed to offend anybody, then I think that person needs to grow a thicker skin.In post 981, tenebrousluminary wrote:In post 964, Nordom wrote:Malcom, I think you're getting too over-excited in the pants from Datisi's lazy town read on you. You gotta dig deeper.These posts are not appropriate. Please stop.In post 965, Nordom wrote:Unless you're maf butt-buddies together then fml
Yeah, nah. You do need to get a thicker skin. My intent when I was typing "butt-buddies" wasn't "Let me take a dig at homosexual people" it was for the sake of levity.In post 1003, Save The Dragons wrote:as a gay man,
i feel that phrases like "butt-buddies" is meant to put me down, to make gay people feel lesser. i don't deserve that.
so no. it is not acceptable and i do not need to get a thicker skin. please do not continue down this path. thank you.
Are you talking about datisi or deasvail?In post 954, Nordom wrote:It started when Deas voted for me. My initial thought was "Oh, okay maybe this is just a mis-informed effort post by town"
But, when I started thinking about it, it feels like maf trying to cut me off at the pass before I can make any possible move towards them. Deas came out with that post after I repeatedly gave comments that were questioning them. I honestly feel like he was trying to pocket me, but saw it wouldn't be so easy and decided to take the initiative in voting me first.
My wider point was that you've facilitated between kinda jokingly shrugging off accusations and getting more defensive about them. Neither on its own is a particular mafia tell, the two of them together is worth noting.In post 973, tenebrousluminary wrote:Here you go, Mr. Tucker.In post 466, tenebrousluminary wrote:If you wish to call my defenses weak, you should cite what specifically was weak.In post 459, MalcolmTucker wrote: I didn't necessarily suspect Tenebros on the basis of their early posts but found some of their later defences incredibly weak attempts to divert attention away from them without addressing accusations at-hand.
I don't understand how I can be making "defences" while also "not addressing accusations at hand." What accusations at hand would you like me to address? If you feel there are unanswered questions, you can ask them yourself, and if you really want to figure me out, I think you will do so.
Why is Frogster drawing attention to himself different from me drawing attention to myself? I don't disagree that it could be seen that way, but I want to hear your explanation.In post 461, MalcolmTucker wrote:Also TR'ing Frogster, their early question seemed so bizarre a theory for a mafia player to have, not sure why you'd draw attention to yourself with that. Also TR'ing Datisi at the moment, their frustrations re early accusations seemed fairly genuine to me at a point where players were keen to just get any theories or suspicions off the ground to get the game going.
You think Datisi is carefree this game? I think he seems quite upset about a small amount of pressure.In post 463, Aristeia wrote: I guess I am a tiny bit biased here but I think he's not as carefree as scum tho I haven't actually played with scum him this is just based on what he's said about his scum game previously.
Mhmm. Glad my post got completely ignored.In post 1012, Save The Dragons wrote:i will enjoy playing with your replacement.
It was an unnecessary comment to refer to potential teammates, you've had it explained by someone why it might come across as offensive and now you're rambling on about censorship. Probably best to just acknowledge the word usage wasn't good and then we can move on.In post 1007, Nordom wrote:Yeah, nah. You do need to get a thicker skin. My intent when I was typing "butt-buddies" wasn't "Let me take a dig at homosexual people" it was for the sake of levity.In post 1003, Save The Dragons wrote:as a gay man,
i feel that phrases like "butt-buddies" is meant to put me down, to make gay people feel lesser. i don't deserve that.
so no. it is not acceptable and i do not need to get a thicker skin. please do not continue down this path. thank you.
I don't want to come off as an insensitive shithead, but where does the censorship end?
*Vacillated, not facilitated fs.In post 1014, MalcolmTucker wrote:My wider point was that you've facilitated between kinda jokingly shrugging off accusations and getting more defensive about them. Neither on its own is a particular mafia tell, the two of them together is worth noting.In post 973, tenebrousluminary wrote:Here you go, Mr. Tucker.In post 466, tenebrousluminary wrote:If you wish to call my defenses weak, you should cite what specifically was weak.In post 459, MalcolmTucker wrote: I didn't necessarily suspect Tenebros on the basis of their early posts but found some of their later defences incredibly weak attempts to divert attention away from them without addressing accusations at-hand.
I don't understand how I can be making "defences" while also "not addressing accusations at hand." What accusations at hand would you like me to address? If you feel there are unanswered questions, you can ask them yourself, and if you really want to figure me out, I think you will do so.
Why is Frogster drawing attention to himself different from me drawing attention to myself? I don't disagree that it could be seen that way, but I want to hear your explanation.In post 461, MalcolmTucker wrote:Also TR'ing Frogster, their early question seemed so bizarre a theory for a mafia player to have, not sure why you'd draw attention to yourself with that. Also TR'ing Datisi at the moment, their frustrations re early accusations seemed fairly genuine to me at a point where players were keen to just get any theories or suspicions off the ground to get the game going.
You think Datisi is carefree this game? I think he seems quite upset about a small amount of pressure.In post 463, Aristeia wrote: I guess I am a tiny bit biased here but I think he's not as carefree as scum tho I haven't actually played with scum him this is just based on what he's said about his scum game previously.
lolIn post 968, fireisredsir wrote:lmao, this is like a day 6 endgame level paranoia and we're only 36 hours in. the legends are true...In post 921, Datisi wrote:if you're scum, obviously you want me to townread you. but, you know that those tiny bits of my "things that town!vp does" list won't help you because we both know they're on that list. bUT ALSO, you know that i know that. so now i'm like, would scum!baltar purposefully drop these little hints, *knowing* that i'm gonna notice them and start losing sleep over them, in order to get into my head?
Okay, so you're still going to crush off my post and continue suspecting me for the same reason. Thanks for clarifying.In post 1014, MalcolmTucker wrote:My wider point was that you've facilitated between kinda jokingly shrugging off accusations and getting more defensive about them. Neither on its own is a particular mafia tell, the two of them together is worth noting.
why fire?In post 974, Nordom wrote:There's so many people I want gone today. Datisi/DeasVail/fireisredsir/maybe VP Baltar