I am a Nation of Dams, this is true. We have terrible tourist attraction, but amazing healthcare. You're hurt? We'll build a new dam, and have a bottle of whisky!
bler144: I have no idea, but then I watched the series in 2011 or so. When I google "BSV Orange Pylon" I get this product made by Bedessee Sporting Goods.
Well, his statement only gives me an idea, and I am in no way certain if I'm right. I could definately see myself being wrong about it. If people want me to share my theory, I see no real harm in it.
Considering what PoppyAppletree has said about the setup being lore-newb-friendly, I don't think there's more to it than a flavor thing. And if the flavor of roles are indeed tied to powers and alignments, I'm damn sure I cannot place anything on my theory either.
bler144: Little A, little B. Also a little B and a little A. I will confess I'm not quite getting a good grasp on you yet. But will re-read once caught up to see what it is you think I'm missing there.
I don't rightly think you're missing anything - I spoke plainly when I said "But to make people's lives easier, it's either because A) youvre not reading my post closely enough, or
B) I do not want to share my opinion of you just yet."
bler144: Well then...maybe that's why I'm having trouble following you? I think the rest of your post is serious...so, it's joking?
cristigale: This. The tone feels so serious and then right in the midst a goat joke.
HypersomniacLive: That “assume I’m joking” kind of sounds that even when you’re joking you’re still serious to some degree…
The reason I commented on this, and phrased it as “somewhat (seemingly?) joking tone”, is that I didn’t actually read it as a joke. But if telling apart when you’re serious from when you’re joking is actually as hard as you say, then I quite likely shouldn’t have assumed that others read this the same way I did.
HypersomniacLive pretty much has a hold of my meaning - When I'm joking, you cannot really exclude that I'm not being serious as well. And when you're certain I'm serious, you cannot really exclude that I might be joking.
Like I said, I'm a very sarcastic person. Add in an occasional dash of sardonicism and some self-deprecating humour and you're on easy street of understanding who I am - just not necessarily what I say. In short - take what I say the way you understand it, and if you're in doubt, try a different angle.
And the whole goat thing. It's just what I do. I love saying the word (I like the animal too, but that's not of consequence). I use goat in lieu of god, as I am not religious, and I've begun using goat in lieu of fuck at times, and use it as a soft insult. I use the word a lot, really.
JoeSapphire: Regarding damnation & bookwyrm, I seem in minority having an urge to do just as bookwyrm did and start pulling apart the huge mess of misunderstandings and false conclusions that was damnation's post 281
My question is here: Why haven't you done so?
I think it fairly safe to say that post 281 is very open to critique, no?
elebutterfly: That is a bloody good question... Let me look that up. {
The Passage Of Time} Ahh I see what's happened here. I didn't have you "leaning scum", as you so provocatively indicate, so much as I found your contribution to the flub avatar debacle a bit suspect (flavour-related banter). Since that was the only thing that stood out, and since I am fully aware I too have referenced flavour, I didn't consider it enough data to have any firm read.
Being provocative is what I do! It's a tad suspect that you think me talking flavor is suspect considering you, yourself talk flavor and you did so early on. Should you find yourself suspect then? :p
elebutterfly: (Damn is in fact one of my towniest reads at the moment).
...
"oh my goat you prodded me in a sore spot so I'll do what you asked so that you stop so there :P now what?"...
Clearly I'm doing something wrong! Quick! Do something scummy!
Uuuh...
Uuuh...
I know!
unvote JoeSapphire vote Damnation unvote Damnation vote SirPrimalform Also, the goatening is becoming real! It shall consume us all!
SirPrimalform: Wait, crap. Did I ruin something? If yes, say nothing and blink twice.
*blinks thrice and says everything*
You didn't really ruin anything, you just pointed out my intention. Reading it through my phrasing is just to your benefit, no?
Bookwyrm627: Welcome! Once you're all caught up, maybe you'd like to explain why you were role fishing on Day 1. ;)
(Kidding. (But it's true.))
It's a shame littlerabbit was replaced. I'd really have liked to have an answer to her question. I doubt Lif can provide it, but I suppose it's possible.
Oh, and hi Lifthrasil! Welcome aboard! Please tell us why you'd ask me if I explicitly think flubbster is Town Cop!
Bookwyrm627: Yes.
"Seriously" as opposed to "facetiously". You provide a good example of a facetious scum claim.
Nonsense. Claiming 'likely' means that I think a lynch is the
likely result of such an action while I acknowledge that maybe it won't happen for some reason (brig, vig).
Such a claim typically results in the scum's lynch, but
not always. In that second example, I would have gone on to claim SK (while being Vanilla Town) but Yog already outted us as VT.
Good, so I understood your statement quite clearly. And I'm not distorting it, really. It's interesting you'd think that.
Perhaps I'm having a clarification issue here, but I'm saying the same thing as you are, just not that lynch would be my go-to resolution. Do note I at no point excluded any other result of such a claim in any of my posts.
Bookwyrm627: 1) By having multiple scum teams, all with the typical scum power set, squaring off against each other.
2) You've dispelled your own aggressive question with the slightest bit of thought.
1) Doesn't refer to the point in and of itself really. I get what you mean, but what I'm saying is that I would consider such a game to have no scum, as it has no town either. Semantics, perhaps, but that is what I said.
2) Yes, I did, and you make that statement as though I've only first done so now? And no inclination towards the fact that *I* did it, not someone else?
Bookwyrm627: I think scum are much more likely to do something like this, but everyone gets the dumb sometimes. Before that post, I've found your posts to be reasonable and relatively town. That post was just...baffling, and not in a good way.
I don't know what town strategy you are referencing. I'm not planning to wade back through that post, so please highlight it if you want me to review it.
Scum is more likely to do it, I suppose. There's no real sense in arguing against that, but that doesn't mean it cannot be a scum hunting tactic either. I've actually explained part of my reasoning.
On the town strategy I'm referring to, and the one I've always used; I'm going to be nice here: Town should hunt scum, nothing else. They should not care if they appear scum.
Sure, there are details that go into that - such as not make yourself the prime target for a lunch, etc..
Bookwyrm627: And you have commented on my reaction 3 times. What shall we read from this?
You can read it anyway you want. But you got me thinking if I've messed up certain things, so I'll look back.
And nope, I haven't. Yes, I've commented theorizing on how I perceive your reaction once (Hint: I haven't shared my concrete read). The
post I'm thinking you're referring to as the first time speaks of reactions in general, then thanking you for jumping to his defense. You jumping to his defense is not the only thing there is in a reaction.
My point in the previous post was relatively simple: You have attempted to outright tell me how I should perceive your reaction. Maybe I agree with you and do think you simply got very confused and felt you had to have some answers as to why, maybe I don't. I'm choosing to keep my cards to myself here.
And besides, I have primarily fished for reactions from the post from everyone - you're not the only one to react, you're just the only one to engage me about it and perhaps try to influence me.
Oh, and I got to say, I love the passive aggressiveness in post #346! This is shaping up real nice!
And you went from crazed questioning to guano insane questioning now? Is that escalation now, or do you consider the two terms the same? I certainly do not.