From a mafia theory perspective, I don’t see how that second is one scummy unless the agenda was something openly anti-town like lurking, mass claiming, tunneling, or spam posting. What agenda do you think I am trying to push?
Posted: Sun Aug 04, 2019 12:12 pm
by Acute Right Obtuse
i dunno.
agendas can change and you should know that.
my point isn't that you're actively planning stuff, it's that you're setting the stage to make it easier on yourself when you do plan some stuff.
Do I know you? Or is this the metaphorical You-as-a-person-with-a-brain?
In post 301, Acute Right Obtuse wrote:my point isn't that you're actively planning stuff, it's that you're setting the stage to make it easier on yourself when you do plan some stuff.
You keep using this amorphous phraseology to describe my play and I don’t like it. You’re either seeing shadows or talking out of your tail feathers. You can’t articulate what “agenda” I am pushing, just that I am pushing an “agenda” or at least laying the ground work for some “agenda”.
“The Turkey is doing...
THINGS
!”
“What kind of things?”
“I don’t know! But they are
bad things
!”
“What makes them bad?”
“Because! Because.. because I think he’s up to something!”
Do I know you? Or is this the metaphorical You-as-a-person-with-a-brain?
In post 301, Acute Right Obtuse wrote:my point isn't that you're actively planning stuff, it's that you're setting the stage to make it easier on yourself when you do plan some stuff.
You keep using this amorphous phraseology to describe my play and I don’t like it. You’re either seeing shadows or talking out of your tail feathers. You can’t articulate what “agenda” I am pushing, just that I am pushing an “agenda” or at least laying the ground work for some “agenda”.
“The Turkey is doing...
THINGS
!”
“What kind of things?”
“I don’t know! But they are
bad things
!”
“What makes them bad?”
“Because! Because.. because I think he’s up to something!”
“What do you mean?”
Start back at sentence 1
Do you not see how nonsensical that seems?
metaphorical, obviously.
and you're completely misrepping your own play as well as the way i've characterized it.
Posted: Sun Aug 04, 2019 12:25 pm
by gobbledygook
I think Skitter is being oddly aggressive with Fireball. Her earlier play gives me a totally different vibe for a player than her current play.
Posted: Sun Aug 04, 2019 12:25 pm
by gobbledygook
Well you see that’s where you’re wrong
Posted: Sun Aug 04, 2019 12:25 pm
by gobbledygook
I
don’t
have a brain
Posted: Sun Aug 04, 2019 12:33 pm
by gobbledygook
In post 303, Acute Right Obtuse wrote:and you're completely misrepping your own play as well as the way i've characterized it.
I don’t think I am. I think you’re afraid of calling this gut read well... a gut read.
In post 290, Channel Fireball wrote:You're welcome to towncase him if you want but you jumping in here in the way that you did is nagl. I don't see why you're so confident in town numbers that you feel the need to white knight him, I don't get why you would imagine only one very illogical scenario for us making a simple observation that their interactions aren't great, and I really dislike you trying to control the PoE.
I dont townread numbers strongly, but i think you're trying to put him in the poe
channel fireball i know skitter's probably not your top scum candidate and skitter if channel's your top scum candidate you should prolly reread
Why are they town ?
Posted: Sun Aug 04, 2019 12:58 pm
by skitter30
In post 304, gobbledygook wrote:I think Skitter is being oddly aggressive with Fireball. Her earlier play gives me a totally different vibe for a player than her current play.