Normal Game Thread Elsword Mafia Game Thread

Ah, but simply agreeing does not substantiate a buddying claim. The logic behind the agreement has to flawed or otherwise you'll have to demonstrate how the agreement is undue - otherwise literally anyone agreeing with anything would be buddying.

 

because his was 100% fluff unlike other players that were mixed with either mechanical talk or little bit nonsense assumptions atleast they were saying something alongside their fluffiness. Stink case was straight up useless and 100% fluffly. So I casted my vote on him. I came back thinking he would improve he would post something but it was more fluff and carefree which is why i said earlier my vote is getting solidify on him. Since I did not have any particular scum read on anyone I kept my vote and thought it would be better to lynch out players who won't contribute and will harm us greatly later on in the game.

 

Hmm, that's not my memory. Let's test that, shall we?

Doesn't make any attempt to solve the game, nor does it talk about mechanics or even flavour. Fluff.

Doesn't make any attempt to solve the game, nor does it talk about mechanics or even flavour. Fluff.

And, yes, fluff.

And then your post.
That's at least two more posts, one of which you quoted, that has nothing like what you claimed. So why are these not 100% fluff? It's not like much more came out of any of the posters either - it was almost entirely a collection of buzzwords that were dropped, so even here I'm holding a very low standard for what constitutes "fluff".

 

we sure have different standards to what we consider fluff then. Look at their posts and stink post. They were talking about the game. Yes it was mostly useless but their posts were primarily about the game. Stink on the other hand came in like he just entered a bar. His posts were completely unrelated to the game. So he stick into me and wanted to see more of him. Simple as that. You are deeply overlooking this for some reason.

 

But if this agreeing means it seems you are coordinating your posts? That would seem a bit more deeper to me

 

Simply being tangibly related to the game doesn't exclude something from being fluff.

 

Right, but you've have to show why it appears that the posts are co-ordinated, which would come under the agreement being undue. As nice as gut feelings might be, they don't represent an actual argument.

 

Yes that's what im saying but i believe it's wrapping up to end of dp (?) So im not bothered by it now, but that's on my first 5 things i plan to do when dp begins.

 

You guys are so stupid, How Can I make an attempt if nothing has happened. I have to wait and see what happens after the first night phase, bruh all we have now are speculations.

 

Ratchet...... You going too deep into the rabbit hole.... Focusing soo much into a harmless pressure vote on a person I wanted to see more of him after his first post. Stop this nonsense.

 

So can I take this as you conceding the point? Because this itself doesn't address what I said.

 

I am not conceding on anything I explained why I voted him shit ton of times already but you keep digging deeper and deeper into to the point it becomes nonsense.

Here is an example of what you trying to do.

"Oh I like cake the best because it's sweet."

A wild ratchet comes. "Why do you like the cake the best out of all the other sweet things out there?"
me :"Umm because I do?"
Ratchet : "No!! many other things are sweet as well so you have to further explain why you like the cake specifically."
me : "Ummm whelp *goes into explaining*"
Ratchet : "that doesn't cut it you said you like it because it's sweet."

you see what you trying to do? stop digging yourself too deep. Making such simple things way more complicated that it should be.

 

Huuh?

 

Talking about the two that Quoted me earlier....

Ratchet and SK

 

I got that part just didn't quite understand what you were saying