Welcome to Smashboards, the world's largest Super Smash Brothers community! Over 250,000 Smash Bros. fans from around the world have come to discuss these great games in over 19 million posts!
You are currently viewing our boards as a visitor. Click here to sign up right now and start on your path in the Smash community!
Drat. Was hoping for a Town-slip, but this was the correct answer anyway.
Because I feel that the one person who's trying to generate content is doing so in a manner that gives me a non-towny feel. Plus, what better way to generate TRUE (true meaning what the **** were we gonna get out of mechanics talk and textbook questions?) content than by setting a stance?legoqerignaoriorigvknawernawergi:)<3 said:
Does this justification for his questions do anything for you?
Iirc, this was a question posed to Stew by KBBQ (not KBQQ) wrt his RVS question to Stew. It does absolutely nothing but enhance my suspicion of him. Look at the way he carries himself in that post. He lists ALL of the things he could have scrutinized in the response, and he does so in a manner that I can only imagine a forum mafia mentor (no pun intended) teaching his mentee about how you should play the game of mafia. The way he talks just seems so mechanical, so forced. I just DON'T think that that's how a person communicates, and that is the main backing of my suspicion of em for now. I know it may not be concrete, but really think about it.Nabe said:
I don't see any town intent from this post. As reachy as it seems, I honestly can't think of why you would need to know this as anything but mafia goon/puppet. Even the SK wouldn't really need to know this.
I don't like this question at all. Yes, as BBQ says later, we're all VTs, but I don't like that he would ask that when we're all VTs. There's nothing to gain from it as town, unless he was hoping to randomly out a scum character claim from Gord which would be a shakey case at best.
I have little doubt that if Gord himself had said this he would have used it in his argument of GordScum. Since it was Stew that answered he was able to easily explain it away.
This was a serious question, Gord.
You're right. Town doesn't need to form an understanding of how the setup works in a 4:3 situation. I'll go sit in a corner.
Mad suspicious. Disliking me more than Gord doesn't justify a vote. By the same reasoning, your sus on Gord will turn into a vote D2 after a D1 BBQ lynch, somehow turning this situation into an excuse to 1-2-punch.
This isn't justification of not answering me. But more importantly,
This is not a question that I feel matters, and just about nothing you say as far as reasoning will make me feel this question means anything. If you really care you can try.
Yes it is.
Sure. That would be you acknowledging I exist, so it's a step up.
The reason behind the first question: I don't understand why you think it's "off" that I don't agree with Stew. I don't even understand what "off" means -- it's a vague word to use. Therefore, I'm asking you to elaborate on what you mean.
Former: K, I wasnt saying it was off that you AGREE with stew. Iirc, my reason for thinking it wass off was cuz the question you had asked could have been posed to anybody, and iirc your justification for asking em was cuz he was here... Just seems weird that you ONLY asked him but im not calling scum for that. Its actually kinda off to me that you're rehashing this question... But I may be looking too into it idk.
Yes. And the sky is blue, and this isn't an answer as to why it's strange for Nabe to comment on the setup, compared to another player.
Reason for question:
It's weird for anyone, but less weird for somebody with little experience.
KBQQ said:
These questions ring a bit more "mechanical," though. So I will give Gord that. First question is meh, I could see "wanting to see how someone responds to it," but it feels like the answer to this one is way obvious. Second question is better, something which may actually produce an interesting response, or at the very least some useful insight. Final question is just plain useless though, which is pretty weird and slightly scummy.
I'm assuming that this case has taken into account KBQQ's 46. I can see the scumminess of the 46 but not anything else, and KBQQ doesn't seem to be playing up the "innocence factor" at all. Perhaps though you meant something else then that? Also I can definitely see why it as RVS, as already explained.
The thing is is that he's actually right here. However, (and this is a bit WIFOMis, so forgive me), but this post just strikes me as careful. Not careful in its stances, but careful in its structure. Like, it's as if TOO much thought went into how this post was going to be worded, like he's picking his words really carefully. Not something in itself that's worth a vote, but still something that's bugging me here, and should be discussed. Thoughts?KBQQ said:
Because I'm unsure if scummyness is attached to the questions. Like I can't see set-up speculation and near useless questions during essentially RVS to be scummy. It's weird, or as gorf put it "Off", but not worth a wagon based on the questions alone.
Mannn. LDR justifying me having their vote on them. Comical because he implied that he wasn't going to read any of the posts anyways.
Share with me the misconstruing things? This would be real solid stuff I'd like to see.
Did you really just call Moth scummy for having more than 1 scum read and choosing to pursue the one he felt more strongly on? 1-2-punch, wouldn't that imply that you're afraid of a gord(person you're currently voting) lynch happening? I'm afraid this might be what Moth meant by misconstruing things, this is a terrible try at moving suspicion.
This is the first one in the game. I don't think many people noticed it but he doesn't answer the question at all. I don't see anything here about his "intent" with his questions. He deflects the question entirely by essentially pointing at Gord and saying "YOU DON'T LIKE WHAT I'M DOING? YOU MUST BE SCUMMY!" He doesn't actually accuse him of being scum here, but no doubt it's a part of his thought process when calling him scum later.
Here is where he really starts bending words. He says Gord called Stew a townie, which, I'm sure most of you can see, is clearly not true. He treats him as a townie. Very different. He's not saying Stew is scum or town but for the sake of his argument he is treating him as the majority: town. After all it's not like KBBQ could know Stew is scum when he's asking these questions, right? We'll see...
This is a huge one for me and I've pointed it out before. Stew, not remembering the game is an open setup, says what any townie would say in normal closed setup game. KBBQ immediately takes this as a scumslip and intentional with an FoS and even worse, I haven't seen any pressure since.
Admittedly this is a pretty dumb post by Lego, but KBBQ misconstrues some things here anyway. First off he tries to put emphasis on Lego saying he's "letting" KBBQ "do his thing." He says it's a control word and implies that Lego thinks he has control of the game with it. Clearly this makes him scummy to KBBQ as there's also an FoS above the quote.
You asked about MAFIA ROLE PMS. How does that have ANYTHING TO DO with how the setup works from a town PoV? Unless you HAVE A MAFIA ROLE PM you don't even need that info.
Stew already commented on this but yeah by this logic, you're setting yourself up for 3 townie lynches in a row.KBBQ said:
