Jump to content

Marvel Mafia - The game is over, the Sinister Six have conquered Earth!


rackcs

Recommended Posts

10 hours ago, Matts4313 said:

So now you have both slipped. 

My main wincon is to save the earth. Which is greater than just the mafia. Probably gotta kill Dingo also. 

Main- implying more than 1.....🤔🤔🤔🤔

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tbh, the Dome and Pickle angle on the use of “Civ” is a fairly poor look.  It’s a very strange portion to fixate on because you can do it with anything he said.

If he said “we” he is trying to force a connection with him and the collective.  

If he said “you” he slipped and is addressing the collective beyond himself as a directive, which imputes he is not Town.

If he used precise language to convey what he meant, then the unnecessary inclusion of the specifications instead of plain language is an abundance of caution Mafia would have.

This can keep going.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Counselor said:

Swag you really think I’m scum? 

Yeah, I see Town candidness at times, but a lot of actions sync with scum, and you complement my other reads.  So, inclusion is the simplest explanation.  

You keep acquiring minor strikes and the whole Green Aligned thing that you never really addressed is significant.  It approaches the significance of MWil claiming a character that didn’t exist in Criminal Minds.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If it’s any consolation, it’s more of a mountain of evidence read than anything.  Where there is smoke, ostensibly there is raging inferno.  So, either you’re the fire, or you have peoole fanning (admittedly seemingly self-ignited)!flames.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, SwAg said:

  It approaches the significance of MWil claiming a character that didn’t exist in Criminal Minds.

1. Her name was Emily Prentice 

2. I still stayed around an additional 5 days

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, SwAg said:

Tbh, the Dome and Pickle angle on the use of “Civ” is a fairly poor look.  It’s a very strange portion to fixate on because you can do it with anything he said.

That’s literally the entire game, is looking at everything that been said and figuring out what’s good, bad, genuine, fishy, sneaky or blatant. You can’t do that without questioning things that other people are going to say aren’t worth questioning. 

Your theory that suggested mission and I were teammates and I was trying to lynch you is laughably bad. So what happens when you’re shown to be wrong about me and mission being scummates? Was it a poor look for you? Were you too fixated? You could twist anything I say into some kind of read just like you’re claiming, it’s not different just because you’re doing it. 

9 minutes ago, SwAg said:

If he said “we” he is trying to force a connection with him and the collective.  

If he said “you” he slipped and is addressing the collective beyond himself as a directive, which imputes he is not Town.

If he used precise language to convey what he meant, then the unnecessary inclusion of the specifications instead of plain language is an abundance of caution Mafia would have.

This can keep going.

But it didn’t. I mentioned him asking for “the civs” to lynch malf was just as much as a slip as what malf did.

It read like a scum that got a “civ slip” out of a good player and was frustrated the easy lynch didn’t pan out like he expected it too 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don’t think you and Mission are trying to lynch me.  I think it’s a long game, with you and Ragnarok to carry a torch for the less vocal and viable members of your faction.

Well, the process is available to be scrutinized.  So, feel free to do so.  If it’s wrong, well, it was wrong in spite of its logical explanations for intent, and several pairs of eyes upon it.

It’s sorta interesting that you conflate your approach with matts/Civ to my argument for you, which you would know is wrong as Town.  Is that a slip too?

I don’t believe you genuinely think matts’ “slip” is equivalent to Malf’s slip.  There is no rational construction in which (assuming both to be a slip) those are equivalent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...