SwAg Posted October 3, 2019 Share Posted October 3, 2019 On 2/7/2019 at 5:50 AM, ET80 said: Following a minor hunch, off that train now. On 2/7/2019 at 10:41 AM, SwAg said: That’s a curious response. On 2/7/2019 at 10:52 AM, SwAg said: But I’ll go with ET80 and see what happens. On 2/7/2019 at 11:59 AM, ET80 said: SwAg tunneling too hard on nothing. Gotta flip the script from time to time. Part for my enjoyment, because hosting has been hot garbage lately (from what I've observed). On 2/7/2019 at 12:06 PM, SwAg said: This is the guy who said I’m tunneling too hard on nothing. On 2/7/2019 at 12:08 PM, ET80 said: And this was your sign-ups... So, yes - you're tunneling too hard. On 2/7/2019 at 12:12 PM, ET80 said: Looks like I'm @Malfatron... On 2/7/2019 at 12:13 PM, SwAg said: ET80, I’m a bit curious. You were willing to seize on what you thought might be a Freudian slip by bcb. Why were you so willing to abandon your read on bcb based, ostensibly (as it is the only intervening responses of substantive value on the issue, upon what tk3 said? The contemporaneous factual posture remained unchanged. Then, when I brought it up, you quickly disengaged, without much detail on why you disengaged, as though you’re concerned about articulating a thought process. You merely characterized yourself as “off that train,” so where were you at then, bro? Now you’re on me because I’m not swallowing this thinly-veiled obfuscation. On 2/7/2019 at 12:14 PM, SwAg said: Lmao. Your sign up said “say my name,” so I did. It was a joke before the game even started. You’re howling right now, bro. On 2/7/2019 at 12:15 PM, SwAg said: Lmao, guys, guise, guise, gaise! Come read this! ET is trying to dismiss my articulable suspicion based on his behavior as undue suspicion based upon a joke that he prompted in my sign up posts! On 2/7/2019 at 12:20 PM, ET80 said: Was I? Plop... ...splash. (Older members will remember this). Oh sweet, I'm dealing with a Mensa member. This game should be fun. On 2/7/2019 at 12:23 PM, ET80 said: Immediate notes on SwAg - he likes to use unnecessary words to project an image of some sort of higher thought process... bro. Not necessarily a game related function, but something to be mindful of... bro. On 2/7/2019 at 12:24 PM, SwAg said: This is your response? I fairly characterized the interaction. Anyone can go back, read it, and see that what I posited is a reasonable construction. All you’re doing is passive-aggressive and nonsensical sniping after your first argument plop splashed or whatever: lol SwAg is a “tunneling” bully, I’m voting for him based upon “tunneling” he did before the game started and abstaining from any substantive inquiry into my abysmal arguments. On 2/7/2019 at 12:25 PM, SwAg said: This guy with the deep insight. On 2/7/2019 at 12:25 PM, SwAg said: You can articulate an actual response at any time. Or, you can keep taking personal shots at me, I’m sure those will go over well with the jury. On 2/7/2019 at 12:29 PM, ET80 said: Ok, let me break down what "plop/splash" is - been a while since I used it, so only fair. You ever throw a coin in a pond? It pings into the water, sends out a ripple, impacts things - both positively and negatively. It's the underlying principle of sonar, if you want to get technical. So, that's what I was doing. Putting something out there (a "plop") to get a response (a "splash"). It's a pretty common interview technique to gauge how people react to unsettling statements (such as Google asking you random questions during their interview process). So, THAT'S my rationale. I got a solid read from someone, so I backed off. Got an even BETTER read from you, so thanks on that too. On 2/7/2019 at 12:31 PM, SwAg said: What was the rationale for your follow-up argument that I’m a malicious bully tunneling you based on sign up posts? You sound frustrated about being caught for nothing. On 2/7/2019 at 12:31 PM, ET80 said: K. On 2/7/2019 at 12:35 PM, ET80 said: - You did vote for me before the game started. - You've mentioned me nearly exclusively since the game has progressed. - You've admitted that your MO is to tunnel and Malf is your usual target, and he ain't playing. It's a "walk like a duck, talk like a duck, quack like a duck" conclusion. You could be a swan - I doubt it, but it could be the case. On 2/7/2019 at 12:50 PM, SwAg said: This is some Trailer Park logic. - Your sign-up post was a gif that said “Say My Name,” which is amusing in the context of a Mafia game where people are voted based upon saying their name. I mock voted you, which you liked. You understood it was a joke. - The “nearly exclusively” response is unpersuasive. I mocked a vote on a coin flip before the game started on one of two people who received their role before me. It didn’t count, then you were a tertiary element to my conversation with Dome and Ragnarok. I come back, and of the 30 posts made in my absence, your posts were the most suspect, and facilitated the discussion with bcb and tk3. I addressed all the thread developments in my absence, attempting to characterize it as unfair tunneling is a poor look, devoid of thread context. - What if I told you that I only ever “tunneled” Malf D1 once, and it was the byproduct of my other tunnel because Malf was defending the person I was after? I can cite you to every game and you can verify, or you can continue to erroneously rely on jokes, since it appears to be all you have. It’s a: you do not handle pressure very well (you lost your mind because you had one vote and I fairly characterized your interaction with other players), and seem to be determined to display strength. I likely would have moved off you as more occurred in the thread, but that interaction was likely the best choice for information on a sparse D1. Now, look where we are. On 2/7/2019 at 1:14 PM, ET80 said: ...you've never watched Breaking Bad, right? This is the only conclusion I can come to from this. Had you seen the show, you'd understand the relevance and see how I absolutely do NOT see it as a joke vote. And I've since explained my strategy behind your suspicion, but it doesn't seem to catch your fancy. Interview techniques used by Google, Apple, Microsoft - psh, ain't got time for that stuff, What if I told you none of those past instances matter in context of me, a player you've never played with? You open up by saying you tunnel, I'm taking you at face value. If you want to volunteer your details go ahead - I couldn't care less. Or it's b: you are typical of this generation and can not operate with a modicum of subterfuge - you need to be spoon-fed information to draw a conclusion. You hear hooves, you think horse - nevermind that it could be a zebra, could be a donkey. Nope, it's GOTTA be a horse. You see me call out an obviously weak thread of logic based on a host statement about an individual player, thinking "Oh see, THAT'S what he's going after! That's so weak!" never thinking that I'm intentionally saying it to get the reads from the following reactions. I have a couple more statements out there along these lines in this thread, try not to trip on them. On 2/7/2019 at 1:15 PM, ET80 said: I'm off to lunch, try not to hurt yourselves children. On 2/7/2019 at 1:20 PM, SwAg said: I’m honestly at a loss. ET’s response to me is literally attacks on my intelligence, demonstrably false information, and arbitrary dismissal of everything beyond his narrative, and some of you seriously think I’m unfairly “tunneling” him. On 2/7/2019 at 1:15 PM, SwAg said: Do you think attacking my age and intelligence is a legitimate response? On 2/7/2019 at 1:23 PM, ET80 said: No, but it's fun. On 2/7/2019 at 1:45 PM, SwAg said: Y’all are going to let ET get away with murder for days simply because of the name of the poster. You’re not going to effectively “big boy talk” me simply because you do a pointless appeal to authority by mentioning some buzz names from Corporate America. You can demean my intelligence all you want, but it only makes you look foolish as your profess your inordinate prowess for deep insight and logical thought, yet are incapable of addressing marginal suspicion without lashing out. Also, no one in this thread will seriously entertain the thought that you’re an intellectual giant and I’m a mental midget. I feel as though every sentence of that post proved me right. You’re not accustomed to pressure. You’re frustrated you pinged someone vocal for a less than stellar reason, and are now lashing out. This is becoming ridiculous. On 2/7/2019 at 1:49 PM, SwAg said: Don’t mind me though. Just a millennial ignoramus, who lacks any subtlety or nuance in his existence. The only thing on my mind is bagging hoes and drinking, brb gonna go fail some exams cuz im cool On 2/7/2019 at 1:49 PM, SwAg said: People are deathly avoiding this. It is unsettling. On 2/7/2019 at 2:09 PM, ET80 said: You know what, @SwAg - you're right. I did take a low brow approach to my responses, and it led to some less than flattering statements towards you. Not the best approach by me, and I can acknowledge that. To err is to be human, to forgive is divine, so yeah... sorry about that. It's not right for me to attack you like that, and I am sincerely sorry for it - game notwithstanding. Now, let's try to reset - based on information we know and things we can assume off said information: Your read on me is based on the host acknowledgment that roles were incomplete and bcb making an innocuous statement about said host acknowledgment. I went in a specific direction on that, a direction that isn't exactly transparent at face value - it was meant to draw reaction (which it did). Cool, it happens on occasion. Had that been the direction at face value, your read would be spot on. Your continued efforts not only tell me that you are town, but you're a very dedicated town. Same with touch. Orca, on the other hand - we'll have to get more information. Now, the rest of it - the tunneling and such - that's still something I'll hold a concern with, not because it makes you a suspect, but moreso because it could/might allow others to hide in plain sight (which actually might be a moveset for a guy like Gus Fring, who is undoubtedly in this particular game). So, bringing it back to square one - you think it's me. Your logic is sound, but you're operating without a full view of my intentions. So, let's put a pin in this and head another direction: Who else you got? lmfao look at this guy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwAg Posted October 3, 2019 Share Posted October 3, 2019 THE INTERNET NEVER FORGETS LOL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scoundrel Posted October 3, 2019 Share Posted October 3, 2019 Swag Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ET80 Posted October 3, 2019 Share Posted October 3, 2019 10 minutes ago, SwAg said: This is just demonstrably untrue and based on nothing. Yet he has three examples that he rattles off "when it's contextually relevant" which is even when the game hasn't started. You have exact games, individuals who perpetrated said attacks and you constantly remind everyone you can bump them at any given moment. You can categorize it however makes your *** sparkle, but the rest of us see it for what it is, and that's you preparing your victim card. I know I'm not the only one who sees it, so maybe (just maybe) the 3-4-5 of us who do see it see you for what you are behind those big words. 10 minutes ago, SwAg said: That's demonstrably not what you said. You cited specifically to that page 9 example, and it is wholly relevant the context in which it arose. The game hadn't even started, but you felt it necessary to raise it as contextually relevant. I call bull****, little man. 10 minutes ago, SwAg said: Now you're just having a good little freakout, while gaslighting me for the same. Meh, I'm old school. I call out BS when I see it, not try to hide behind a wall of half truths and justifications to make me feel better about my actions. That's your schtick. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwAg Posted October 3, 2019 Share Posted October 3, 2019 1 minute ago, Forge said: A lot of this stuff is just super hard to read. Feel like a lot of this is being posted to obfuscate. Nope, Town! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ET80 Posted October 3, 2019 Share Posted October 3, 2019 ...and right on cue, playing the victim. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theuntouchable Posted October 3, 2019 Share Posted October 3, 2019 14 minutes ago, MWil23 said: The soft claim or role fishing? The effort part 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ET80 Posted October 3, 2019 Share Posted October 3, 2019 1 minute ago, SwAg said: THE INTERNET NEVER FORGETS LOL Thank you for proving my point. Digging up quotes from February to show how I bulled you in that one game we played, ignoring that you called me a ***** a few times in this game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matts4313 Posted October 3, 2019 Share Posted October 3, 2019 17 minutes ago, Tk3 said: How many civ games will I be lynched for “rolefishing” before you dunces realize that I’m trying to get information and discussion flowing? i never asked a sole to share their role. What about souls to share what # role they got? (that was you right?) 10 minutes ago, SwAg said: Or, literary colloquialisms. Chad Ochocinco Child Please. 2 minutes ago, Forge said: A lot of this stuff is just super hard to read. Feel like a lot of this is being posted to 1. o 2. b 3. f 4. u 5. s 6. c 7. a 8. t 9. e. I am reporting you to @theuntouchable 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ET80 Posted October 3, 2019 Share Posted October 3, 2019 4 minutes ago, Matts4313 said: When your child throws a temper tantrum in the grocery store, does it ever quell their behavior to explain how they are ridiculous? Fair point. Always appreciated. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwAg Posted October 3, 2019 Share Posted October 3, 2019 Just now, ET80 said: Yet he has three examples that he rattles off "when it's contextually relevant" which is even when the game hasn't started. You have exact games, individuals who perpetrated said attacks and you constantly remind everyone you can bump them at any given moment. You can categorize it however makes your *** sparkle, but the rest of us see it for what it is, and that's you preparing your victim card. I know I'm not the only one who sees it, so maybe (just maybe) the 3-4-5 of us who do see it see you for what you are behind those big words. The game hadn't even started, but you felt it necessary to raise it as contextually relevant. I call bull****, little man. Meh, I'm old school. I call out BS when I see it, not try to hide behind a wall of half truths and justifications to make me feel better about my actions. That's your schtick. So, I have three examples, in which it is contextually relevant because the same thing was happening in that game. I cannot help that you think this is some grand attempt to play the victim, rather than the facts aligning. I'm not even using big words. And I'm not overly concerned about what people think of me. I'm concerned about this game. And I think you're using this as an excuse to avoid participation. It's part of compartmentalizing. It was contextually relevant. Try reading. It's not hard. Go for it. Read the 30 posts that were linked to it. If you cannot see the relevancy, it is an indictment on you, not me. Yeah, you're just wrong, and accept you're wrong, but say otherwise and don't care. That's exactly what I expect lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwAg Posted October 3, 2019 Share Posted October 3, 2019 4 minutes ago, ET80 said: ...and right on cue, playing the victim. I'm playing the victim. I'm demonstrating what you have said is demonstrably untrue based on a facial reading of the posts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwAg Posted October 3, 2019 Share Posted October 3, 2019 3 minutes ago, ET80 said: Thank you for proving my point. Digging up quotes from February to show how I bulled you in that one game we played, ignoring that you called me a ***** a few times in this game. You're welcome. You could stop avoiding the issue, which is that you're doing exactly what you've done in the past as scum. I gave you an out for an actual argument throughout all of this, and you refuse to take it, or call me on it, you just keep trying to disengage and make it about something outside the game. Even when I circle back and make those external things about the game, you try to disengage. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwAg Posted October 3, 2019 Share Posted October 3, 2019 It's also showing how ridiculous it is. How I can show that, and show this now, and I will get the same reaction: literally no one even interested in the topic even though I've brought it back to the game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matts4313 Posted October 3, 2019 Share Posted October 3, 2019 FINALLY - some drama in a mafia game. Dont worry @Llamalover, it normally doesnt take until page 110 for a full blown fight to break out. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.