Wrasslemafia 2- Day 10

[SwAg]

12 hours ago, Ragnarok said:

I looked at the subforum, clicked on a mafia game, and checked around lynches early in the game.  That way I get context.

Ragnarok is very concerned with context, apparently.  He said he's going through the posts the old-fashioned way to make sure he gets context.  Yet, here is what we got:

13 hours ago, Ragnarok said:

 

You mean how you said this about the Josh lynch when he got mislynched D1 in the vigilante game and you were scum?  I just caught this similarity.

Yeah, you haven't done that at all this game.  

I'll go look for some times when you played the omgus card.

He pointed to me taking no responsibility on a lynch where there is no conceivable way for me to be responsible.  I did not vote for Josh.  I even defended Josh slightly.  Then, he brings up Counselor's lynch where there is a comparison guilty put on Counselor and I.  Counselor is lynched and flipped Town.  There is no chance I am not scum at this point, and it's the culmination of me fooling Town for a full day.  So, after Counselor died I went into troll mode.  Apparently, that context is irrelevant to Ragnarok, and he is simply engaged in a binary exercise of "scum or town"

13 hours ago, Ragnarok said:

After the Counselor mislynch in Vigilants.

Again, see above.

12 hours ago, Ragnarok said:

 

Here's another time.  Death Note mafia where Swag was scum and Rick got mislynched D1.

Again, where is the context, my friends?  In this game, I am guaranteed to die by Day 5, and I have someone who will die in my place if I am killed before then.  I can be as scummy as I want in these circumstances, and I was.  Again, though, it was also a clear joke in this scenario because it was clearly my fault, and that is not dispositive because I do this almost every game.

12 hours ago, Ragnarok said:

 

Did find this one in MtG where he said it as town.  

I'll have to dig into this a bit more.  See if you're right or not.

Let's face it.  This is simply never going to happen because he's not going to waste his time simply to prove himself wrong.

12 hours ago, Ragnarok said:

Another one.  Referencing it not being his fault.

 

12 hours ago, Ragnarok said:

That was meme mafia when he was scum.

 

12 hours ago, theuntouchable said:

He was scum with llama that game 

Here is Touch literally giving the context to Ragnarok that he apparently skipped over in his haste to prove his point with another example.  But Touch thinks that I am somehow talking past Ragnarok, when it's genuinely what the words he has said mean.

12 hours ago, SwAg said:

Well, you’re allegedly concerned with context, and you quoted me from the Vigilant game when there was a comparison guilty between Counselor and I, and Counselor was mislynched, so I am trolling saying it wasn’t my fault; and then you cited me saying I don’t take responsibility for the Josh lynch in the same game because I genuinely had nothing to do with it and opposed it.  But, these are “textbook swag scum” moves.

Your case is asinine.

This is me asking Ragnarok to clarify the context he's going for, because right now he's offered an incomplete picture on every example, despite being so concerned with context.  This has not received a response.

But again, I've done this almost every game for a year, as every alignment.  So, none of it really matters.  The point I'm making is that there is apparently no standard to which we hold Ragnarok.

[Blue]

7 minutes ago, Dome said:

I’m skimming the good parts 

If you don't know what I meant, then I don't think you are.

[SwAg]

2 minutes ago, theuntouchable said:

He did answer you tho, you just didn’t accept the answer. 

No, he did not.  I asked the question, and his answer has been he has already answered it.  Go read his posts.  There is no construction of the words that result in a substantitive answer to my question.  It's almost as pointless to respond to you as it is Ragnarok at this point because you're determined to feign mindfulness and understanding "for both sides."  When the literal point of all of it is: "Ragnarok believes this because it's all he has experienced" and "SwAg knows this because it's what has happened."

[SwAg]

4 minutes ago, Blue said:

If you don't know what I meant, then I don't think you are.

Hey, Master of English, you want to explain how ******* English works for some people?

[Blue]

2 minutes ago, SwAg said:

Hey, Master of English, you want to explain how ******* English works for some people?

nobody caaaaaaaaaaaares

[SwAg]

1 minute ago, Blue said:

nobody caaaaaaaaaaaares

Exactly, everyone cares.

[SwAg]

What is the context you receive from not using the search feature?  It's the context of the game and the interaction around the point of interest.  If you're simply looking for an alignment, then that context is located in the OP of the respective game.

So, what is the context that Ragnarok is looking for in these games, that he seemingly missed at every opportunity, but presented it as evidence nonetheless?  He said he wanted the context, but never provided it, and routinely missed it.  Even you pointed it out.

Feel free to answer for Ragnarok, @theuntouchable, since he is apparently content refusing to engage, and he's tricked you into believing he's merely stupid rather than scum.

[MWil23]

Well, there you have it folks. No one else seems concerned about the Punjabi Playboy or Jinder Mahal. We'll be back shortly, LIVE, on SMACKDOWN, after a brief word from our sponsors.

[Dome]

11 minutes ago, Blue said:

If you don't know what I meant, then I don't think you are.

Glad we got that taken care of 

[theuntouchable]

12 minutes ago, SwAg said:

Ragnarok is very concerned with context, apparently.  He said he's going through the posts the old-fashioned way to make sure he gets context.  Yet, here is what we got:

He pointed to me taking no responsibility on a lynch where there is no conceivable way for me to be responsible.  I did not vote for Josh.  I even defended Josh slightly.  Then, he brings up Counselor's lynch where there is a comparison guilty put on Counselor and I.  Counselor is lynched and flipped Town.  There is no chance I am not scum at this point, and it's the culmination of me fooling Town for a full day.  So, after Counselor died I went into troll mode.  Apparently, that context is irrelevant to Ragnarok, and he is simply engaged in a binary exercise of "scum or town"

Again, see above.

Again, where is the context, my friends?  In this game, I am guaranteed to die by Day 5, and I have someone who will die in my place if I am killed before then.  I can be as scummy as I want in these circumstances, and I was.  Again, though, it was also a clear joke in this scenario because it was clearly my fault, and that is not dispositive because I do this almost every game.

Let's face it.  This is simply never going to happen because he's not going to waste his time simply to prove himself wrong.

 

 

Here is Touch literally giving the context to Ragnarok that he apparently skipped over in his haste to prove his point with another example.  But Touch thinks that I am somehow talking past Ragnarok, when it's genuinely what the words he has said mean.

This is me asking Ragnarok to clarify the context he's going for, because right now he's offered an incomplete picture on every example, despite being so concerned with context.  This has not received a response.

But again, I've done this almost every game for a year, as every alignment.  So, none of it really matters.  The point I'm making is that there is apparently no standard to which we hold Ragnarok.

He explained the context that he is going for. He explained his thought process as well as how he went about looking for it. 
 

I also told you that it wouldn’t surprise me at all if most of the times that he was still around in games that you did it, you were scum in those games. You and I both know that rags has not been too far invested in any of the games recently. 
 

he’s looking at it as tho he thinks you’re scum because of what he had personally seen in previous games. He’s also making an effort to go back and look to see if it is actually true or not. 
 

you’re looking at it as tho you think he’s scum because you know and understand the context behind those games and also know that you’ve done it as both scum and town. So from your perspective, it looks like he’s trying to twist things. 
 

all in all, you’re both acting like ******* children who can’t have a clear and concise discussion without dogging on the other one. 

[rackcs]

I'm trying to remember if swag was scum or town the last time he argued in circles with someone to the point where I just stopped reading it. I think it was with touch in some previous game.

[theuntouchable]

14 minutes ago, SwAg said:

No, he did not.  I asked the question, and his answer has been he has already answered it.  Go read his posts.  There is no construction of the words that result in a substantitive answer to my question.  It's almost as pointless to respond to you as it is Ragnarok at this point because you're determined to feign mindfulness and understanding "for both sides."  When the literal point of all of it is: "Ragnarok believes this because it's all he has experienced" and "SwAg knows this because it's what has happened."

Right, that is exactly my point. I’m glad we finally see eye to eye. 

[MWil23]

1 minute ago, rackcs said:

I'm trying to remember if swag was scum or town the last time he argued in circles with someone to the point where I just stopped reading it. I think it was with touch in some previous game

Folks, if we go back and watch the film, this event occurred in Meme Mafia! MWil faked a lie detector test after Touch called SwAg scum on D1, resulting in CARNAGE EVERYWHERE! This was after the Llamalover and Touch duel. Austin was stomping a mudhole and walking it dry!!!!!

[rackcs]

Just now, MWil23 said:

Folks, if we go back and watch the film, this event occurred in Meme Mafia! MWil faked a lie detector test after Touch called SwAg scum on D1, resulting in CARNAGE EVERYWHERE! This was after the Llamalover and Touch duel. Austin was stomping a mudhole and walking it dry!!!!!

I was thinking it was meme mafia. That's right, I remember it more specifically now.

[theuntouchable]

5 minutes ago, SwAg said:

What is the context you receive from not using the search feature?  It's the context of the game and the interaction around the point of interest.  If you're simply looking for an alignment, then that context is located in the OP of the respective game.

So, what is the context that Ragnarok is looking for in these games, that he seemingly missed at every opportunity, but presented it as evidence nonetheless?  He said he wanted the context, but never provided it, and routinely missed it.  Even you pointed it out.

Feel free to answer for Ragnarok, @theuntouchable, since he is apparently content refusing to engage, and he's tricked you into believing he's merely stupid rather than scum.

I will answer for him because you’re being a tool about it. 
 

He mentioned that last night he was just pulling for examples of the “I don’t take responsibility” and the “victim blaming” (victim used rather loosely here). He also said that he still needs to look at the surrounding context to help determine other factors as well. He pulled examples from times that you were town and times that you were scum last night and also mentioned this. 
 

You’re not acknowledging it because of your bias towards him in general. He’s absolutely right that you tend to think he’s scum more often than not. 
 

personally, I think you’re both town and would be major assets going forward so long as you two could come to grips and move on from this.