April 19th, 2022, 04:31 PM
January 15th, 2022, 11:09 PM
[QUOTE=SuperJack;954803]Sup[/QUOTE]
oh hai
Originally Posted by
SuperJack
Sup
oh hai
January 13th, 2022, 06:14 PM
[QUOTE=MrMostache;952784]Vacron and Exeter presented some good points.
Then how about this simple solution: Label Crier as "Crier" and Judge as "Judge" in night chat.
Exeter says that It is easy to identify the difference between a crier and a judge chat (which I personally don't agree with), which means that there is no point in making them both "Cirer".[/QUOTE]
Doing this removes the Judge's ability to pretend to be Crier.
Same with giving Crier a way to -reveal in daychat.
I like the idea of putting Crier in Town Support instead of Town Gov.
Originally Posted by
MrMostache
Vacron and Exeter presented some good points.
Then how about this simple solution: Label Crier as "Crier" and Judge as "Judge" in night chat.
Exeter says that It is easy to identify the difference between a crier and a judge chat (which I personally don't agree with), which means that there is no point in making them both "Cirer".
Doing this removes the Judge's ability to pretend to be Crier.
Same with giving Crier a way to -reveal in daychat.
I like the idea of putting Crier in Town Support instead of Town Gov.
October 3rd, 2020, 06:54 PM
[QUOTE=Oberon;894795]also [MENTION=2523]Lysergic[/MENTION], I LITERALLY said that I was specifically talking about UNARMED police shootings in my first post about police shootings going down.[/QUOTE]
I've quoted it for you like three times.
Would a screenshot make this sink in? lol
"Don't believe your lying eyes."
Originally Posted by
Oberon
also
@
Lysergic
, I LITERALLY said that I was specifically talking about UNARMED police shootings in my first post about police shootings going down.
I've quoted it for you like three times.
Would a screenshot make this sink in? lol
"Don't believe your lying eyes."
October 2nd, 2020, 03:18 PM
[QUOTE=Oberon;894616]lmao[/QUOTE]
Oh yeah, gun violence, hilaaaaaarious.
Originally Posted by
Oberon
lmao
Oh yeah, gun violence, hilaaaaaarious.
October 2nd, 2020, 03:06 PM
[quote] NRA types don't get shot by police.[/quote]
[img] https://nypost.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2020/09/rittenhouse-1.jpg?quality=80&strip=all&w=618&h=410&crop=1[/img]
They get a bottle of water and pat on the back instead.
NRA types don't get shot by police.
They get a bottle of water and pat on the back instead.
October 2nd, 2020, 03:03 PM
[QUOTE=Oberon;894077]btw, Reagan also destroyed the soviet union :P[/QUOTE]
So is that what made it “worth it” to sell weapons to our enemies to fund terrorism against a democratically elected government while helping to illegally smuggle drugs into the US?
I mean, what is “living up to your values” worth, compared to selling guns, peddling drugs, and toppling other governments?
Originally Posted by
Oberon
btw, Reagan also destroyed the soviet union :P
So is that what made it “worth it†to sell weapons to our enemies to fund terrorism against a democratically elected government while helping to illegally smuggle drugs into the US?
I mean, what is “living up to your values†worth, compared to selling guns, peddling drugs, and toppling other governments?
October 2nd, 2020, 02:59 PM
[QUOTE=oops_ur_dead;894586]Why is it so hard for you to say the words "white supremacy is bad"?[/QUOTE]
I have a theory.
Originally Posted by
oops_ur_dead
Why is it so hard for you to say the words "white supremacy is bad"?
I have a theory.
October 2nd, 2020, 02:58 PM
[quote] having a discussion on something is not moving the goal posts[/quote]
Making a general, inaccurate statement and then when correctly called out on it trying to spin it as a much more specific statement that wasn’t reflected in the original post = moving the goal posts.
[quote] the change in the total number of deaths is irrelevant if those were attributed to people committing.[/quote]
It’s relevant when you make a super broad statement like “police shootings are down” when that isn’t the case.
[quote] the best metric is how many unarmed people get killed by police, because there is a much higher probability that one is innocent if unarmed than if they are armed. much, much higher.[/quote]
So those open carrying NRA-types are far, far more likely to be criminals? I always suspected that was the case. Clearly the police need to crack down on open carry, by your own logic.
[quote] i find it pretty damn ironic,[/quote]
I find it ironic that you admit that before BLM the police were unnecessarily killing unarmed people while still trying to claim that there is no issue with racism in policing.
Because I know what irony is. Protip: it’s NOT like rain on your wedding day.
having a discussion on something is not moving the goal posts
Making a general, inaccurate statement and then when correctly called out on it trying to spin it as a much more specific statement that wasn’t reflected in the original post = moving the goal posts.
the change in the total number of deaths is irrelevant if those were attributed to people committing.
It’s relevant when you make a super broad statement like “police shootings are down” when that isn’t the case.
the best metric is how many unarmed people get killed by police, because there is a much higher probability that one is innocent if unarmed than if they are armed. much, much higher.
So those open carrying NRA-types are far, far more likely to be criminals? I always suspected that was the case. Clearly the police need to crack down on open carry, by your own logic.
i find it pretty damn ironic,
I find it ironic that you admit that before BLM the police were unnecessarily killing unarmed people while still trying to claim that there is no issue with racism in policing.
Because I know what irony is. Protip: it’s NOT like rain on your wedding day.
October 2nd, 2020, 02:21 PM
[QUOTE=Oberon;894486]those are the total fatal police shootings.[/QUOTE]
Wow, an almost [i]textbook[/i] example of moving the goal posts.
“Police shootings have decreased.”
“No they haven’t.”
“Obviously I meant police shootings of unarmed people! How could you twist my words and [i]personally attack[/i] me? Muh victimhood.”
It’s also baffling to me that you can acknowledge something like “police are being more careful not to [i]murder unarmed people[/i] due to the BLM movement” while simultaneously supporting a president who claims the BLM movement is a bad thing that hasn’t accomplished anything except rioting.
Like the cognitive dissonance is remarkable - you can’t make the jump to “maybe there was a problem to begin with, if suddenly the police aren’t just executing suspects after months of civil unrest over police executing unarmed suspects.”
[quote] , though IMO BLM has ironically played a huge part in it indirectly.[/quote]
Btw, this is not what “indirectly” means, nor is this ironic.
If the police are killing fewer unarmed people because they are worries about negative attention from the public because of BLM, then there is nothing indirect about that - that’s a direct result of the BLM movement. And if that is the case, it’s not ironic - it’s exactly what I would expect to happen.
Originally Posted by
Oberon
those are the total fatal police shootings.
Wow, an almost textbook example of moving the goal posts.
“Police shootings have decreased.â€
“No they haven’t.â€
“Obviously I meant police shootings of unarmed people! How could you twist my words and personally attack me? Muh victimhood.â€
It’s also baffling to me that you can acknowledge something like “police are being more careful not to murder unarmed people due to the BLM movement†while simultaneously supporting a president who claims the BLM movement is a bad thing that hasn’t accomplished anything except rioting.
Like the cognitive dissonance is remarkable - you can’t make the jump to “maybe there was a problem to begin with, if suddenly the police aren’t just executing suspects after months of civil unrest over police executing unarmed suspects.â€
, though IMO BLM has ironically played a huge part in it indirectly.
Btw, this is not what “indirectly†means, nor is this ironic.
If the police are killing fewer unarmed people because they are worries about negative attention from the public because of BLM, then there is nothing indirect about that - that’s a direct result of the BLM movement. And if that is the case, it’s not ironic - it’s exactly what I would expect to happen.
October 2nd, 2020, 11:45 AM
[QUOTE=Oberon;894285]I also think the decrease in police shootings has many variables influencing it[/quote]
Why lie about something so easily verifiable?
[url]https://killedbypolice.net/[/url]
Originally Posted by
Oberon
I also think the decrease in police shootings has many variables influencing it
Why lie about something so easily verifiable?
https://killedbypolice.net/
October 2nd, 2020, 12:05 AM
[QUOTE=Plotato;894026]Jeez you are no fun at all. I could pick up the new oxford dictionary and see "lysergic" under the definition of "actually", and perhaps "narcissist" too.[/QUOTE]
It's [b]actually[/b] a precursor chemical for LSD.
[quote]Anyway, if my basement was flooded up to 40% of the total volume would I say, oh well, its not at halfway capacity, guess I'll ignore it the situation.[/quote]
If I had a glass that was 40% full, I would not say "most of this glass is full" because I know what words mean.
Originally Posted by
Plotato
Jeez you are no fun at all. I could pick up the new oxford dictionary and see "lysergic" under the definition of "actually", and perhaps "narcissist" too.
It's actually a precursor chemical for LSD.
Anyway, if my basement was flooded up to 40% of the total volume would I say, oh well, its not at halfway capacity, guess I'll ignore it the situation.
If I had a glass that was 40% full, I would not say "most of this glass is full" because I know what words mean.
October 1st, 2020, 11:57 PM
[QUOTE=BananaCucho;894022]You're arguing with Potato[/QUOTE]
Don't be fooled by a Jester claim.
Originally Posted by
BananaCucho
You're arguing with Potato
Don't be fooled by a Jester claim.
October 1st, 2020, 11:48 PM
[QUOTE=Plotato;894020]Well firstly, I did not state that Trump was winning at all. I said Trump had a significant number of voters -- 41%, most polls show him somewhere between the 40 - 50% range. Why would you misconstrue my words like that? Even the 40% is a significant portion of people, worthy of being "most", as Oberon would describe. Of course, not a majority, but we know that majority vote wins elections, right?[/QUOTE]
Dude, I know how to scroll up by 1 post.
This is what you said:
[quote]Well if you look at the polls, and if you consider the polls to be accurate (watch what happened previously), most people, of a significant proportion, ARE voting for trump.[/quote]
You said according to polls, most people (of a significant proportion, which I took to mean by a significant margin) are voting for Trump.
According to polls (which I linked to you), that is not the case, and it seems like most people are voting for Biden (aka Biden is winning). The only poll I found that didn't indicate Biden was just flat out ahead was the Fox News one, which said Biden was ahead in key battleground states and that they were tied in others (aka not "most people" voting for Trump, and definitely not by a large margin).
So which polls were you referring to?
lol at this whole "how could you twist my words?" spiel. Obvious scum tactic is obvious. [vote]Plotato[/vote]
Originally Posted by
Plotato
Well firstly, I did not state that Trump was winning at all. I said Trump had a significant number of voters -- 41%, most polls show him somewhere between the 40 - 50% range. Why would you misconstrue my words like that? Even the 40% is a significant portion of people, worthy of being "most", as Oberon would describe. Of course, not a majority, but we know that majority vote wins elections, right?
Dude, I know how to scroll up by 1 post.
This is what you said:
Well if you look at the polls, and if you consider the polls to be accurate (watch what happened previously), most people, of a significant proportion, ARE voting for trump.
You said according to polls, most people (of a significant proportion, which I took to mean by a significant margin) are voting for Trump.
According to polls (which I linked to you), that is not the case, and it seems like most people are voting for Biden (aka Biden is winning). The only poll I found that didn't indicate Biden was just flat out ahead was the Fox News one, which said Biden was ahead in key battleground states and that they were tied in others (aka not "most people" voting for Trump, and definitely not by a large margin).
So which polls were you referring to?
lol at this whole "how could you twist my words?" spiel. Obvious scum tactic is obvious. -vote Plotato
October 1st, 2020, 11:21 PM
[QUOTE=Ash;893984]You really using Reagan as an example? The guy that made no effort against the AIDS epidemic? The guy that almost tripled the US national debt, and armed Saddam Hussein? And you know that your beloved hero Churchill had setup concentration camps in Africa too, right? Turns out that you can fight racists and still be racist.[/QUOTE]
Friendly reminder to everyone that Reagan's administration secretly sold weapons to Khomeini government of Iran (you know, the scary boogeyman whose general Trump bombed after pulling out of the nuclear inspections agreement?) while Iran was under an arms embargo, then used the funds they made from selling those illegal weapons to our enemies to assist the Contras in Nicaragua (including helping them smuggle cocaine into the US to sell illegally), for the purpose of overthrowing the democratically elected government of Nicaragua. Of the 11 administration officials convicted over this, some were vacated on appeal and the rest were pardoned by George H. W. Bush (father of later president George W. Bush and "please clap" candidate Jeb Bush).
[url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran%E2%80%93Contra_affair[/url]
[url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CIA_involvement_in_Contra_cocaine_trafficking[/url]
Originally Posted by
Ash
You really using Reagan as an example? The guy that made no effort against the AIDS epidemic? The guy that almost tripled the US national debt, and armed Saddam Hussein? And you know that your beloved hero Churchill had setup concentration camps in Africa too, right? Turns out that you can fight racists and still be racist.
Friendly reminder to everyone that Reagan's administration secretly sold weapons to Khomeini government of Iran (you know, the scary boogeyman whose general Trump bombed after pulling out of the nuclear inspections agreement?) while Iran was under an arms embargo, then used the funds they made from selling those illegal weapons to our enemies to assist the Contras in Nicaragua (including helping them smuggle cocaine into the US to sell illegally), for the purpose of overthrowing the democratically elected government of Nicaragua. Of the 11 administration officials convicted over this, some were vacated on appeal and the rest were pardoned by George H. W. Bush (father of later president George W. Bush and "please clap" candidate Jeb Bush).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran%E...3Contra_affair
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CIA_in...ne_trafficking
October 1st, 2020, 11:07 PM
[QUOTE=Plotato;894015]Well if you look at the polls, and if you consider the polls to be accurate (watch what happened previously), most people, of a significant proportion, ARE voting for trump.[/QUOTE]
[citation needed]
[url]https://www.nytimes.com/live/2020/presidential-polls-trump-biden[/url] - U.S. as a whole, Biden is +8 (if polls are as wrong as in 2016, then +5)
[url]https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2020-election-forecast/[/url] - Biden leading significantly
[url]https://www.foxnews.com/official-polls/fox-news-poll-tight-race-in-ohio-biden-tops-trump-in-nevada-and-pennsylvania[/url] - According to [i]Fox News[/i], Biden leads Trump in Nevada and Pennsylvania.
Which polls do I need to look at to see Trump winning "significantly"? Stormfront's poll?
Originally Posted by
Plotato
Well if you look at the polls, and if you consider the polls to be accurate (watch what happened previously), most people, of a significant proportion, ARE voting for trump.
[citation needed]
https://www.nytimes.com/live/2020/pr...ls-trump-biden - U.S. as a whole, Biden is +8 (if polls are as wrong as in 2016, then +5)
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com...tion-forecast/ - Biden leading significantly
https://www.foxnews.com/official-pol...d-pennsylvania - According to Fox News, Biden leads Trump in Nevada and Pennsylvania.
Which polls do I need to look at to see Trump winning "significantly"? Stormfront's poll?
October 1st, 2020, 10:47 PM
[QUOTE=BananaCucho;894010]HE NEVER GIVES ANY[/QUOTE]
Neither does his president, so I guess it's appropriate.
Originally Posted by
BananaCucho
HE NEVER GIVES ANY
Neither does his president, so I guess it's appropriate.
October 1st, 2020, 10:37 PM
lol
2020 had to have [i]some[/i] kind of silver lining I guess.
lol
2020 had to have some kind of silver lining I guess.
October 1st, 2020, 10:34 PM
[QUOTE=Oberon;893953]Most people are voting for Trump now.[/QUOTE]
[citation needed]
Originally Posted by
Oberon
Most people are voting for Trump now.
[citation needed]
September 24th, 2020, 04:52 PM
Yeah, that about covers it.
Yeah, that about covers it.
September 14th, 2020, 09:36 PM
Old account: 1-S2-1-632418
Last replay from my old laptop: [url]https://www.sc2mafia.com/replayextract/extracted/players/1-S2-1-632418/bank-2017-02-14-183359.xml[/url]
New account: 1-S2-1-11743667
Points: 18,082
Games Played: 1,028
Wins: 294
Achievements: 2, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 21, 23, 26, 27, 29, 30, 31, 32
Forever Alone, Epic Fail, Incognito, Hammer and Sickle, Happily Ever After, Flawless Victory, Divine Guidance, Last of Kin, State Religion, Suicide Hotline, Disco Inferno, The Inquisition, Licensed to Kill, Obviously Evil, Mission Failed, Hung Jury, Marathon, Generosity, Altruism
Old account: 1-S2-1-632418
Last replay from my old laptop: https://www.sc2mafia.com/replayextra...-14-183359.xml
New account: 1-S2-1-11743667
Points: 18,082
Games Played: 1,028
Wins: 294
Achievements: 2, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 21, 23, 26, 27, 29, 30, 31, 32
Forever Alone, Epic Fail, Incognito, Hammer and Sickle, Happily Ever After, Flawless Victory, Divine Guidance, Last of Kin, State Religion, Suicide Hotline, Disco Inferno, The Inquisition, Licensed to Kill, Obviously Evil, Mission Failed, Hung Jury, Marathon, Generosity, Altruism
September 14th, 2020, 04:02 PM
[QUOTE=yzb25;888963]In defense of the questionnaire, I think the questions are intentionally phrased divisively / ambiguously to draw out people's ideology. You're not supposed to ask "what is the context" or "what are the facts". You're supposed to give your gut "feeling" responses, and assume the context is "your" context and the facts are "your" facts. If you have no gut "feeling" response, then perhaps you just aren't ideologically inclined. If you boil every question of policy down to its specifics, providing people with a specific context and set of facts, then people will more or less agree unless they have some fundamentally philosophically different view of morality.[/QUOTE]
I guess that's one way to do it; I just ended up answering like 100+ questions as neutral/unsure because they were too vague for me to boil down my feelings to "strongly/weakly agree/disagree." I feel like I ended up way more moderate in several areas than I actually am.
Originally Posted by
yzb25
In defense of the questionnaire, I think the questions are intentionally phrased divisively / ambiguously to draw out people's ideology. You're not supposed to ask "what is the context" or "what are the facts". You're supposed to give your gut "feeling" responses, and assume the context is "your" context and the facts are "your" facts. If you have no gut "feeling" response, then perhaps you just aren't ideologically inclined. If you boil every question of policy down to its specifics, providing people with a specific context and set of facts, then people will more or less agree unless they have some fundamentally philosophically different view of morality.
I guess that's one way to do it; I just ended up answering like 100+ questions as neutral/unsure because they were too vague for me to boil down my feelings to "strongly/weakly agree/disagree." I feel like I ended up way more moderate in several areas than I actually am.
September 13th, 2020, 08:52 PM
[QUOTE=Marshmallow Marshall;868986]Neutrals are not town, so they have to die. [vote]Rumox[/vote][/QUOTE]
Lynch the Survivor claim!
[vote]Rumox[/vote]
[QUOTE=oops_ur_dead;868136]Ya I think some of the questions miss context.[/QUOTE]
I'm 14 questions into the long one, and I already think half the questions asked are really poorly/ambiguously phrased. Like "Local governments give each region good representation of their views." I'm not entirely sure what the fuck this question is even supposed to mean. Like... it depends? I'm sure a local government comprised of, say, KKK members in a mostly minority community would probably not give good representation. In an ideal world, under a democratic system? Sure, maybe - depends on voters, levels of voter engagement, and a bunch of other factors (like how gerrymandered / representative is the voting process to begin with).
No clue how to answer about half of these in just different strengths of "agree/disagree" because for many of the questions, I both agree AND disagree: e.g. "should anyone who wants to be free to enter the country?" I feel like I agree with the general sentiment of this (freedom of movement is important, as is the freedom to immigrate - it's one of the things that has historically made my country strong), but the way the question is phrased makes it seem like a trap - like "AHA! So you DO want Nazis to be able to enter the country freely!"
Curious to see what my results will be.
EDIT:
"Military spending is a waste of money."
Come the fuck on. Yes, when you are at peace (IF you are spending disproportionately high on military compared to things like social safety nets or basic infrastructure, etc; though obviously not for just maintaining basic defense). Obviously not when you are being like... Red Dawn'd by hostile paratroopers. How do I add context to "agree/disagree/unsure"?
EDIT:
"Laws should be completely consistent within all regions of a nation"
Seriously? Why isn't there a "depends on the damn law" option? A total campfire ban / stringent fire regulations makes sense in California; less so on the Gulf Coast. But there's a good case to be made for things like, say, murder being fairly universally standardized.
I don't think I'm going to make it to 216 because every fucking question makes me want to type up a new rant on how bad the questions are.
EDIT:
"The national government needs more power"
Fuck the people who wrote these questions.
Am I an authoritarian fascist if I strongly agree that the national government needs more power to enforce climate regulations without thinking that they just need a blanket "more power" in every category? I feel like I am answering "neutral/unsure" to [i]every question[/i] except the obvious gimmes like "should we wipe out countries that don't serve us" or shit like that.
EDIT:
Please define "more power" you quiz writing hacks. That's like the vaguest thing ever, and it's been in like five questions now. "More power" can mean anything from extra taxation powers for infrastructure maintenance to fucking death camps.
EDIT:
"When people have already suffered for technology to be developed, we should use that technology"
Is the technology in question like... new, better solar panels, or Skynet? FFS
"Nations should cooperate whenever it benefits them both"
There are more than two nations. "Sure, but not if it comes at the cost of a third nation, unless the third nation is doing some fucked up shit" doesn't seem to be an option, so I guess neutral/unsure it is.
EDIT:
"The United Nations should have a military to enforce its resolutions"
It kind of does?
[url]https://peacekeeping.un.org/en[/url]
EDIT:
So near the end finally got a bunch of questions where I could solidly answer how I felt one way or the other. But those early categories were hard to get through without a little more nuance.
Originally Posted by
Marshmallow Marshall
Neutrals are not town, so they have to die.
-vote Rumox
Lynch the Survivor claim!
-vote Rumox
Originally Posted by
oops_ur_dead
Ya I think some of the questions miss context.
I'm 14 questions into the long one, and I already think half the questions asked are really poorly/ambiguously phrased. Like "Local governments give each region good representation of their views." I'm not entirely sure what the fuck this question is even supposed to mean. Like... it depends? I'm sure a local government comprised of, say, KKK members in a mostly minority community would probably not give good representation. In an ideal world, under a democratic system? Sure, maybe - depends on voters, levels of voter engagement, and a bunch of other factors (like how gerrymandered / representative is the voting process to begin with).
No clue how to answer about half of these in just different strengths of "agree/disagree" because for many of the questions, I both agree AND disagree: e.g. "should anyone who wants to be free to enter the country?" I feel like I agree with the general sentiment of this (freedom of movement is important, as is the freedom to immigrate - it's one of the things that has historically made my country strong), but the way the question is phrased makes it seem like a trap - like "AHA! So you DO want Nazis to be able to enter the country freely!"
Curious to see what my results will be.
EDIT:
"Military spending is a waste of money."
Come the fuck on. Yes, when you are at peace (IF you are spending disproportionately high on military compared to things like social safety nets or basic infrastructure, etc; though obviously not for just maintaining basic defense). Obviously not when you are being like... Red Dawn'd by hostile paratroopers. How do I add context to "agree/disagree/unsure"?
EDIT:
"Laws should be completely consistent within all regions of a nation"
Seriously? Why isn't there a "depends on the damn law" option? A total campfire ban / stringent fire regulations makes sense in California; less so on the Gulf Coast. But there's a good case to be made for things like, say, murder being fairly universally standardized.
I don't think I'm going to make it to 216 because every fucking question makes me want to type up a new rant on how bad the questions are.
EDIT:
"The national government needs more power"
Fuck the people who wrote these questions.
Am I an authoritarian fascist if I strongly agree that the national government needs more power to enforce climate regulations without thinking that they just need a blanket "more power" in every category? I feel like I am answering "neutral/unsure" to every question except the obvious gimmes like "should we wipe out countries that don't serve us" or shit like that.
EDIT:
Please define "more power" you quiz writing hacks. That's like the vaguest thing ever, and it's been in like five questions now. "More power" can mean anything from extra taxation powers for infrastructure maintenance to fucking death camps.
EDIT:
"When people have already suffered for technology to be developed, we should use that technology"
Is the technology in question like... new, better solar panels, or Skynet? FFS
"Nations should cooperate whenever it benefits them both"
There are more than two nations. "Sure, but not if it comes at the cost of a third nation, unless the third nation is doing some fucked up shit" doesn't seem to be an option, so I guess neutral/unsure it is.
EDIT:
"The United Nations should have a military to enforce its resolutions"
It kind of does?
https://peacekeeping.un.org/en
EDIT:
So near the end finally got a bunch of questions where I could solidly answer how I felt one way or the other. But those early categories were hard to get through without a little more nuance.
December 29th, 2018, 09:59 AM
[url]www.christianmingle.com[/url]
www.christianmingle.com
December 29th, 2018, 09:47 AM
Unban Hitler and Osama Bin Laden pl0x
Unban Hitler and Osama Bin Laden pl0x
December 29th, 2018, 09:45 AM
You better watch your back, you plant type motherfucker.
[MENTION=4902]Arrow[/MENTION]
You better watch your back, you plant type motherfucker.
@Arrow
December 29th, 2018, 09:41 AM
[QUOTE=oops_ur_dead;784925]who the fuck is rachyl[/QUOTE]
Dunno but pretty sure [url=https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=nCk2ppH2XnU]Maggie Gylenhaal[/url] played her in her biopic.
Originally Posted by
oops_ur_dead
who the fuck is rachyl
Dunno but pretty sure Maggie Gylenhaal played her in her biopic.
November 13th, 2018, 09:07 PM
Congrats Noct!
The Squirtle infiltration of staff continues...
Congrats Noct!
The Squirtle infiltration of staff continues...
November 12th, 2018, 10:41 PM
[QUOTE=Stealthbomber16;771718]lol i completely forgot about this[/QUOTE]
Still going to do it?
Originally Posted by
Stealthbomber16
lol i completely forgot about this
Still going to do it?
November 12th, 2018, 10:37 PM
I’ll have three reps please!
I’ll have three reps please!
November 4th, 2018, 06:31 PM
All Squirtles should be proud that this thread exists.
All Squirtles should be proud that this thread exists.
November 4th, 2018, 06:28 PM
[QUOTE=AIVION;769717]I was workin on it xD[/QUOTE]
I'm in a game with this clown right now, but he died before he could ruin it.
EDIT:
And there were like 3 lobbies at the same time from players trying to avoid him. Sounds like he is ruining a lot of games.
Originally Posted by
AIVION
I was workin on it xD
I'm in a game with this clown right now, but he died before he could ruin it.
EDIT:
And there were like 3 lobbies at the same time from players trying to avoid him. Sounds like he is ruining a lot of games.
November 4th, 2018, 06:28 PM
[QUOTE=Cryptonic;761743]No[/QUOTE]
u focking wot m8?
Originally Posted by
Cryptonic
No
u focking wot m8?
November 4th, 2018, 06:20 PM
You forgot to attach the replay m8.
You forgot to attach the replay m8.
August 20th, 2018, 04:40 PM
FM XXIII for me. Though Crypt's Game of Thrones setup was also a lot of fun.
FM XXIII for me. Though Crypt's Game of Thrones setup was also a lot of fun.
August 13th, 2018, 09:44 PM
[QUOTE=Smitty;754442]wait a second, let me answer my own post....you can turn it on silly Smitty...
:idea:[/QUOTE]
Yeah, that's what the thread is about.
It's an option, and the default is OFF. I am saying the default should be ON so that Executioner doesn't get the easy win on day 2.
Originally Posted by
Smitty
wait a second, let me answer my own post....you can turn it on silly Smitty...
Yeah, that's what the thread is about.
It's an option, and the default is OFF. I am saying the default should be ON so that Executioner doesn't get the easy win on day 2.
August 12th, 2018, 08:20 PM
Love the idea for this setup, but imo it's a wasted opportunity to have the "cult" factions be legendary birds instead of Trainer Red/Blue/Yellow (with the recruits being "catching" a Pokemon - you could even give them a pool of different Pokeballs that either have a random chance for failure as in the games, or interact with typing in certain ways; so each trainer might have one Master Ball that guarantees a recruit, and then a variety of other balls that either guarantee recruit against certain types or are chance based). Oh man, if you went that way you could even have purple be Giovani. I would love a 4-way Cult themed setup, with Team Rocket getting special abilities that trainers might not have (like the ability to "steal" Pokemon from the other factions).
Then you could give powerful abilities to the legendary birds, add them to town pool, and nerf some of the other town roles. I like how you made the unevolved Pokemon Citizens.
[s]Is it possible to roll evolved Pokemon from the beginning? Imo, I think it would be more interesting if all Pokemon started out unevolved without abilities (except for the few that do not have evolutions / the legendaries - they could have abilities from the start). Then the emphasis becomes catching strong Pokemon before they start evolving / trying to cripple town before a point where they all get strong powers.[/s] lol who knew reading could be so complicated?
EDIT:
I also love the idea of type messing with the feedback you receive in addition to the other effects.
EDIT 2:
Controversial idea: no dead chat, add an ability that allows KO'ed Pokemon to be revived (maybe Chansey or Mew?).
EDIT 3:
If you were to go with trainer idea from up above, make it so Legendary Pokemon can only be caught with a Master Ball, and then give them the strongest night actions (like revive KO'd, Mass Murderer, Arsonist, etc.).
A game with town-aligned Arsonist who is recruitable by cult factions (but only if they use Master Ball, sacrificing ability to recruit other legendaries) sounds like it would be nuts. Imo, this would be perfect for Legendary Birds and Mewtwo - Moltres as Arsonist, Mewtwo as MM, Zapdos as maybe ElectroManiac, Articuno as a combo SK+escort (maybe immunity-piercing kill + role block your victim's target?).
EDIT 4:
Any plans to add Jailor? For that matter, I see a lot of missing traditional roles. Imo, I would limit every Pokemon to one possible night action (some have 2-3 possible actions) unless they get a TM. If you do that AND add all the other traditional roles (including traditionally scum-aligned roles) you should have enough abilities to cover the entire Pokedex. And I just love the idea of having townies with traditionally scum-based abilities that potentially add confusion (especially in a multi-cult game where townies will be motivated to try to use those abilities to disrupt Cult, and Cult will be motivated to recruit those abilities to try to get traditional scum powers).
Love the idea for this setup, but imo it's a wasted opportunity to have the "cult" factions be legendary birds instead of Trainer Red/Blue/Yellow (with the recruits being "catching" a Pokemon - you could even give them a pool of different Pokeballs that either have a random chance for failure as in the games, or interact with typing in certain ways; so each trainer might have one Master Ball that guarantees a recruit, and then a variety of other balls that either guarantee recruit against certain types or are chance based). Oh man, if you went that way you could even have purple be Giovani. I would love a 4-way Cult themed setup, with Team Rocket getting special abilities that trainers might not have (like the ability to "steal" Pokemon from the other factions).
Then you could give powerful abilities to the legendary birds, add them to town pool, and nerf some of the other town roles. I like how you made the unevolved Pokemon Citizens.
Is it possible to roll evolved Pokemon from the beginning? Imo, I think it would be more interesting if all Pokemon started out unevolved without abilities (except for the few that do not have evolutions / the legendaries - they could have abilities from the start). Then the emphasis becomes catching strong Pokemon before they start evolving / trying to cripple town before a point where they all get strong powers. lol who knew reading could be so complicated?
EDIT:
I also love the idea of type messing with the feedback you receive in addition to the other effects.
EDIT 2:
Controversial idea: no dead chat, add an ability that allows KO'ed Pokemon to be revived (maybe Chansey or Mew?).
EDIT 3:
If you were to go with trainer idea from up above, make it so Legendary Pokemon can only be caught with a Master Ball, and then give them the strongest night actions (like revive KO'd, Mass Murderer, Arsonist, etc.).
A game with town-aligned Arsonist who is recruitable by cult factions (but only if they use Master Ball, sacrificing ability to recruit other legendaries) sounds like it would be nuts. Imo, this would be perfect for Legendary Birds and Mewtwo - Moltres as Arsonist, Mewtwo as MM, Zapdos as maybe ElectroManiac, Articuno as a combo SK+escort (maybe immunity-piercing kill + role block your victim's target?).
EDIT 4:
Any plans to add Jailor? For that matter, I see a lot of missing traditional roles. Imo, I would limit every Pokemon to one possible night action (some have 2-3 possible actions) unless they get a TM. If you do that AND add all the other traditional roles (including traditionally scum-aligned roles) you should have enough abilities to cover the entire Pokedex. And I just love the idea of having townies with traditionally scum-based abilities that potentially add confusion (especially in a multi-cult game where townies will be motivated to try to use those abilities to disrupt Cult, and Cult will be motivated to recruit those abilities to try to get traditional scum powers).
August 12th, 2018, 08:04 PM
Barbra Streisand.
Barbra Streisand.
August 4th, 2018, 01:45 AM
Does anyone else think this should be the default setting for Executioner?
Every game I play, this option is always off. Every game I play, Executioner is Night Immune. And it seems like in a good 75% of those games, Executioner gets an easy win on day 2, then spends the rest of the game laughing and derailing the town, daring them to waste a day lynching him.
It literally takes zero skill to win as Executioner with the current meta, and there is very little incentive to play intelligently or do anything other than immediately make up a bullshit lead on Day 2 to get the easy win.
Why does Executioner need night invulnerability if he wins on day 2 every game?
Does anyone else think this should be the default setting for Executioner?
Every game I play, this option is always off. Every game I play, Executioner is Night Immune. And it seems like in a good 75% of those games, Executioner gets an easy win on day 2, then spends the rest of the game laughing and derailing the town, daring them to waste a day lynching him.
It literally takes zero skill to win as Executioner with the current meta, and there is very little incentive to play intelligently or do anything other than immediately make up a bullshit lead on Day 2 to get the easy win.
Why does Executioner need night invulnerability if he wins on day 2 every game?
August 4th, 2018, 12:21 AM
[QUOTE=Arsonist;751797]
[FONT=comic sans ms]
Wish pepole stop spamming "FUCK ME IN THE ASS" or something like that on NA server.[/FONT][/QUOTE]
Maybe if you gave them that dick, they wouldn't need to spam.
Originally Posted by
Arsonist
Wish pepole stop spamming "FUCK ME IN THE ASS" or something like that on NA server.
Maybe if you gave them that dick, they wouldn't need to spam.
August 4th, 2018, 12:18 AM
[img]https://i.giphy.com/media/9lMoyThpKynde/giphy.webp[/img]
August 2nd, 2018, 12:00 AM
Color name is great for town roles who need authority. Sucks for town roles who need anonymity. Sucks even harder for scum roles.
Color name is great for town roles who need authority. Sucks for town roles who need anonymity. Sucks even harder for scum roles.
April 9th, 2018, 01:08 AM
[QUOTE=OzyWho;725121]I became Senior in just 3 months, which means that I will be dead in 1-2 months! :weird:[/QUOTE]
Hope you payed into your 401(k); you've only got 2 months to enjoy retirement.
Originally Posted by
OzyWho
I became Senior in just 3 months, which means that I will be dead in 1-2 months!
Hope you payed into your 401(k); you've only got 2 months to enjoy retirement.
April 9th, 2018, 12:53 AM
[url]https://www.sc2mafia.com/forum/showthread.php/21625-Section-Rules-and-Appeal-Instructions[/url]
[quote][SIZE=3][COLOR=#ffffff][U][B]Do not post in reports threads unless you are appealing a report. [/B][/U][/COLOR][/SIZE]
[LIST]
[*]Community members should not be posting in these Punished Player threads. They are primarily for staff and community members wishing to appeal their punishments.
[*]Posting without clear intent to appeal your own punishment will most likely result in your post being deleted and infracted.
[*]If you wish to add something productive to the punishment thread, please either create a thread in [URL="https://www.sc2mafia.com/forum/forumdisplay.php/141-Answer-Hall"]Answer Hall[/URL] or message a staff member with your questions or comments and they will be considered.
[/LIST][/quote]
Please don't post in these topics unless you are the person who was reported (posting an appeal), the reporting player providing further info, or a member of staff.
https://www.sc2mafia.com/forum/showth...l-Instructions
Do not post in reports threads unless you are appealing a report.
- Community members should not be posting in these Punished Player threads. They are primarily for staff and community members wishing to appeal their punishments.
- Posting without clear intent to appeal your own punishment will most likely result in your post being deleted and infracted.
- If you wish to add something productive to the punishment thread, please either create a thread in Answer Hall or message a staff member with your questions or comments and they will be considered.
Please don't post in these topics unless you are the person who was reported (posting an appeal), the reporting player providing further info, or a member of staff.
April 9th, 2018, 12:17 AM
[QUOTE=Arsonist;729811][SIZE=7][FONT=Book Antiqua][COLOR="#FFFFFF"]404 Not Found[/COLOR][/FONT][/SIZE][/QUOTE]
[url]https://www.sc2mafia.com/forum/showthread.php/31792-In-Game-Admins[/url]
Originally Posted by
Arsonist
404 Not Found
https://www.sc2mafia.com/forum/showth...In-Game-Admins
April 8th, 2018, 11:46 PM
[B]Account Name:[/B] Win
[B]Account ID:[/B] 1-S2-1-2460321
[B]In-Game Name:[/B] 12 - Alessandro (Dragon Head)
[B]Account Name:[/B] Quo
[B]Account ID:[/B] 1-S2-1-2932383
[B]In-Game Name:[/B]
[B]Crimes Committed:[/B] Name Abuse
[B]Your Account Name:[/B] Lysergic
[B]Summary:[/B] Both players named themselves so that their names would mess with the graveyard. According to players in dead chat, they apparently do it every game. I didn't realize how the names would screw with the graveyard until one had died; when I noticed, I renamed both (though since one was already dead, the gaveyard remained screwed up).
Quo also seemed to use a lag switch after he was voted up at the end of the game.
The fact that they didn't coordinate this in-game also suggests potential Skyping/OOG communication in order to coordinate their name choices.
Account Name: Win
Account ID: 1-S2-1-2460321
In-Game Name: 12 - Alessandro (Dragon Head)
Account Name: Quo
Account ID: 1-S2-1-2932383
In-Game Name:
Crimes Committed: Name Abuse
Your Account Name: Lysergic
Summary: Both players named themselves so that their names would mess with the graveyard. According to players in dead chat, they apparently do it every game. I didn't realize how the names would screw with the graveyard until one had died; when I noticed, I renamed both (though since one was already dead, the gaveyard remained screwed up).
Quo also seemed to use a lag switch after he was voted up at the end of the game.
The fact that they didn't coordinate this in-game also suggests potential Skyping/OOG communication in order to coordinate their name choices.
March 22nd, 2018, 05:16 PM
Hey Arrow. Talked to this guy on Discord. He got a new hard drive, and doesn't have access to his old drive or any old replays.
I searched his ID in the database and the newest info we have from him is from Dec 2016 with the following stats:
Points: 11077
Wins: pending (don't remember how to read a bank lol)
Games Played: pending
Achievements:
11,13,14,15,16,21,22,23,25,27,41
If you're cool with it, I can restore him to that.
Hey Arrow. Talked to this guy on Discord. He got a new hard drive, and doesn't have access to his old drive or any old replays.
I searched his ID in the database and the newest info we have from him is from Dec 2016 with the following stats:
Points: 11077
Wins: pending (don't remember how to read a bank lol)
Games Played: pending
Achievements:
11,13,14,15,16,21,22,23,25,27,41
If you're cool with it, I can restore him to that.
November 16th, 2017, 09:41 PM
[QUOTE=Distorted;702985]This was the purpose that Skwirl was formed, to help preserve the mafia community. Right now we have an active discord, which is just now topping over 200 people. For everyone reading this, feel free to join the community!
[/QUOTE]
Given that we have our own Discord, it would be kind of nice if you advertised [i]that[/i] instead of your own seperate mafia community, especially since this thread is literally about this community dying. :/
Originally Posted by
Distorted
This was the purpose that Skwirl was formed, to help preserve the mafia community. Right now we have an active discord, which is just now topping over 200 people. For everyone reading this, feel free to join the community!
Given that we have our own Discord, it would be kind of nice if you advertised that instead of your own seperate mafia community, especially since this thread is literally about this community dying. :/
November 13th, 2017, 08:19 PM
[QUOTE=Voss;702324]I realize this might be an unpopular opinion, but I'd be willing to rehost some previously run older FM games. It's a shame that so much work was put into some of the setups that they'd only be used once. I also think it'd be interesting to use some of the setup meta from previous games to get a more complex play experience.
Of course, if there are people that want to host new setups, those should be run first.[/QUOTE]
I would play the Game of Thrones FM again in a heartbeat.
Originally Posted by
Voss
I realize this might be an unpopular opinion, but I'd be willing to rehost some previously run older FM games. It's a shame that so much work was put into some of the setups that they'd only be used once. I also think it'd be interesting to use some of the setup meta from previous games to get a more complex play experience.
Of course, if there are people that want to host new setups, those should be run first.
I would play the Game of Thrones FM again in a heartbeat.
October 23rd, 2017, 10:58 PM
Wow; it costs at least a grand for mod now. Inflation is a real bitch.
Wow; it costs at least a grand for mod now. Inflation is a real bitch.