S-FM 307: ?KRC AGAIN! - Page 5
Register

User Tag List

View Poll Results: ???

Voters
19. You may not vote on this poll
  • Option 1

    8 42.11%
  • Option 2

    7 36.84%
  • Option 3

    7 36.84%
Multiple Choice Poll.
Page 5 of 32 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 15 ... LastLast
Results 201 to 250 of 1574
  1. ISO #201

    Re: S-FM 307: ?KRC AGAIN!

    Quote Originally Posted by S-FM oooo View Post
    Name 1 helpful thing you've done since that essay post.
    Name 1 helpful thing you've done since the day you turned your back on Jesus Christ and welcomed the DEMON in your body. Or 1 helpful thing you've done this game

    ill wait

    I'm not even claiming to have done many helpful things myself, for i am a poor sinner, but you certainly cannot attack your fellow humans for not being helpful this early

  2. ISO #202

    Re: S-FM 307: ?KRC AGAIN!

    Quote Originally Posted by S-FM ZKL3DJ View Post
    I was thinking about it when I went to bed last night, about the fact that we last saw 13 players in the signups page, yet only 11 accounts here.
    I think it's entirely possible that one account is shared by multiple people.

    Now this theory may be a bit out there, but I have a little bit of evidence for it.
    In the S-FM queue, a player count was kept for this game, it was originally at 9 players until suddenly it was changed to an "???" amount of players.
    I suspect that someone wrote a role who's main feature is sharing an account with two other players, presumably they'd have their own roles as well, they could effectively be some sort of mason/mafia faction.
    I had a similar idea at some point :P
    And I think my beloved originally had it changed in the queue so he could mess with us as much as possible, whilst still remaining as honest as possible

  3. ISO #203

  4. ISO #204

    Re: S-FM 307: ?KRC AGAIN!

    Quote Originally Posted by S-FM Bibble View Post
    Name 1 helpful thing you've done since the day you turned your back on Jesus Christ and welcomed the DEMON in your body. Or 1 helpful thing you've done this game

    ill wait

    I'm not even claiming to have done many helpful things myself, for i am a poor sinner, but you certainly cannot attack your fellow humans for not being helpful this early
    When did I claim to be helpful?

    I'll wait.

  5. ISO #205

  6. ISO #206

  7. ISO #207

    Re: S-FM 307: ?KRC AGAIN!

    Quote Originally Posted by S-FM Bibble View Post
    Well then why'd you hold R2D2 responsible for not being helpful
    Holy fuck are you a Narwhal? Go re-read my post, and re-read the post I was responding to

    "I'm just trying to be helpful" - I'd like them to point how how they've been helpful. News flash - they haven't.

  8. ISO #208

    Re: S-FM 307: ?KRC AGAIN!

    Quote Originally Posted by S-FM oooo View Post
    Holy fuck are you a Narwhal? Go re-read my post, and re-read the post I was responding to

    "I'm just trying to be helpful" - I'd like them to point how how they've been helpful. News flash - they haven't.
    That's because I have obligations other than mafia to attend to, I'm here for the next few hours. I'm sorry that I don't meet your quota for usefulness in the first 16 hours of the first day, now go find someone else to attack

  9. ISO #209

  10. ISO #210

  11. ISO #211

  12. ISO #212

    Re: S-FM 307: ?KRC AGAIN!

    Quote Originally Posted by S-FM ZKL3DJ View Post
    That's because I have obligations other than mafia to attend to, I'm here for the next few hours. I'm sorry that I don't meet your quota for usefulness in the first 16 hours of the first day, now go find someone else to attack
    "Look at me I'm so helpful"

    "Point out how you're helpful"

    "Look at me I'm so busy"

  13. ISO #213

    Re: S-FM 307: ?KRC AGAIN!

    Quote Originally Posted by S-FM oooo View Post
    - drink Demon's blood

    I'm sorry it had to come to this.

    Quote Originally Posted by S-FM oooo View Post
    Holy fuck are you a Narwhal? Go re-read my post, and re-read the post I was responding to

    "I'm just trying to be helpful" - I'd like them to point how how they've been helpful. News flash - they haven't.
    They're obviously at least trying, they never said they succeeded

  14. ISO #214

  15. ISO #215

    Re: S-FM 307: ?KRC AGAIN!

    Quote Originally Posted by S-FM Jolly Rancher View Post
    Alternate

    theory of

    mine is that

    they ctrl-F'ed the number

    of "@"s in the planned OP

    11 players, but 13 mentions because hosts
    I have a theory

    Speculating about this will make us waste time and posts until we have more clues on it (or have no clues at all because there's nothing to have clues on), and we should just stop speculating about it and play the behavior game instead

  16. ISO #216

  17. ISO #217

  18. ISO #218

  19. ISO #219

  20. ISO #220

  21. ISO #221

  22. ISO #222

  23. ISO #223

    Re: S-FM 307: ?KRC AGAIN!

    Quote Originally Posted by S-FM Bibble View Post
    we are screwed


    Quote Originally Posted by S-FM Bibble View Post
    bc dr said so

    I don't know what you're talking about.

    Everybody is equally weak on the inside, just that some present their ruins as new castles and become kings –
    Deep into that darkness peering, long I stood there, wondering, fearing, doubting, dreaming dreams no mortal ever dared to dream before.
    If your dear heart is wounded, my wild heart bleeds with yours.

  24. ISO #224

  25. ISO #225

  26. ISO #226

    Re: S-FM 307: ?KRC AGAIN!

    Quote Originally Posted by S-FM Bibble View Post
    mechanical discussion

    It's not like they're towny for it, but you jumping on them stops them from proving that they're either filling the thread with fake usefulness or actually trying to solve
    1st, mechanical discussion is not helpful, especially in a MEME game

    2nd, look at their ISO up til I asked them what they've done to be helpful since their first post. Where's the mechanical discussion? It was 1 post

    3rd, what is your goal here in continuing to push back on this?

  27. ISO #227

  28. ISO #228

    Re: S-FM 307: ?KRC AGAIN!

    Quote Originally Posted by S-FM Birdie View Post
    tbh i thought they were playing for a lil bit since they posted so much and also the 2 blueberries were confusing

    i don't hate this tinfoil lol
    Sometime during this game, I'd like to vote Stealth. See what happens

    After we kill one of the 3 scum I've pegged early tho

  29. ISO #229

    Re: S-FM 307: ?KRC AGAIN!

    Quote Originally Posted by Stealthbomber16 View Post
    Day 1

    [Countdown Timers Cannot be Quoted from Other Posts]

    @S-FM Bibble
    @S-FM Jolly Rancher
    @S-FM Birdie
    @S-FM Cats 2019
    @S-FM oooo
    @S-FM Pig Spider Monkey
    @S-FM Lemon Party
    @S-FM Chernobyl
    @S-FM Piss Sun
    @S-FM Unfunny
    @S-FM ZKL3DJ

    With 11 players alive, 6 votes to hammer.
    Quote Originally Posted by S-FM Birdie View Post
    tbh i thought they were playing for a lil bit since they posted so much and also the 2 blueberries were confusing

    i don't hate this tinfoil lol
    Im gonna stop you right there. There are 11 players alive as per the quote above so unless the hosts are dead players they arent players at all, and if they're dead well they're dead and this is just to mess with us, at least until we see if there are mechanics about the dead

    Quote Originally Posted by S-FM oooo View Post
    1st, mechanical discussion is not helpful, especially in a MEME game

    2nd, look at their ISO up til I asked them what they've done to be helpful since their first post. Where's the mechanical discussion? It was 1 post

    3rd, what is your goal here in continuing to push back on this?
    it can be, just not if it takes over the thread for too long

    the player count and the "theory" is sort of included in mechanical discussion

    youre preventing them from actually becoming readable by pushing them on things that are still indicative of nothing because they haven't lasted long enough and that's antitown imo

  30. ISO #230

    Re: S-FM 307: ?KRC AGAIN!

    Quote Originally Posted by S-FM Bibble View Post
    Im gonna stop you right there. There are 11 players alive as per the quote above so unless the hosts are dead players they arent players at all, and if they're dead well they're dead and this is just to mess with us, at least until we see if there are mechanics about the dead



    it can be, just not if it takes over the thread for too long

    the player count and the "theory" is sort of included in mechanical discussion

    youre preventing them from actually becoming readable by pushing them on things that are still indicative of nothing because they haven't lasted long enough and that's antitown imo
    Ah, so the discussion about the player count is helpful according to this post?

    Quote Originally Posted by S-FM Bibble View Post
    I have a theory

    Speculating about this will make us waste time and posts until we have more clues on it (or have no clues at all because there's nothing to have clues on), and we should just stop speculating about it and play the behavior game instead
    What about this one?

    No, I think you're just looking to push back on me pushing on them for some reason. What is it? You teamed with them? Or you have TMI that they aren't aligned with you?

  31. ISO #231

  32. ISO #232

    Re: S-FM 307: ?KRC AGAIN!

    Quote Originally Posted by S-FM oooo View Post
    Ah, so the discussion about the player count is helpful according to this post?



    What about this one?

    No, I think you're just looking to push back on me pushing on them for some reason. What is it? You teamed with them? Or you have TMI that they aren't aligned with you?
    I think you're just chasing things that aren't there,
    at least you're chasing things, which is townie I think

  33. ISO #233

  34. ISO #234

    Re: S-FM 307: ?KRC AGAIN!

    Quote Originally Posted by S-FM oooo View Post
    Ah, so the discussion about the player count is helpful according to this post?

    What about this one?

    No, I think you're just looking to push back on me pushing on them for some reason. What is it? You teamed with them? Or you have TMI that they aren't aligned with you?
    but i didnt say it was actually useful, im just saying you're throwing stones at them too early and it looks like you want too much to look scumhunty
    and its not by omgusing me that youll fix your sinner's position in heaven
    Quote Originally Posted by S-FM Jolly Rancher View Post
    #lockdoggo
    Spoiler : :


    imao
    what do you think of ooooooooooooooo atm?

  35. ISO #235

    Re: S-FM 307: ?KRC AGAIN!

    Quote Originally Posted by S-FM Bibble View Post
    but i didnt say it was actually useful, im just saying you're throwing stones at them too early and it looks like you want too much to look scumhunty
    and its not by omgusing me that youll fix your sinner's position in heaven


    imao
    what do you think of ooooooooooooooo atm?
    Let's move onto another topic, since you brought up the OMGUS

    What is your thought of Jolly Rancher OMGUS'ing myself?

  36. ISO #236

    Re: S-FM 307: ?KRC AGAIN!

    Quote Originally Posted by S-FM oooo View Post
    I mean, most of the last 2 pages could have been completely avoided

    What do you think of Bibble defending you so hard here?
    I don't think it's telling of their alignment yet, if it would continue for a long time afterwards with no real reason, then I would be suspicious.
    Right now I think it's Bibble trying to encourage good play, that's the most likely explanation.

  37. ISO #237

    Re: S-FM 307: ?KRC AGAIN!

    Quote Originally Posted by S-FM oooo View Post
    Let's move onto another topic, since you brought up the OMGUS

    What is your thought of Jolly Rancher OMGUS'ing myself?
    I'm not sure I would call Jolly Rancher's vote OMGUS, that's "Oh my God, you suck", right? When a person votes someone else for putting a "bad vote" on them?
    I would like to know if it's a genuine scum read.

  38. ISO #238

    Re: S-FM 307: ?KRC AGAIN!

    Quote Originally Posted by S-FM oooo View Post
    I mean, most of the last 2 pages could have been completely avoided

    What do you think of Bibble defending you so hard here?
    the HOLY BIBLE of RACHYL defends those who are unjustly oppressed by men who hate men, by those who serve earthly powers, by those who want our fall

    but that does not mean the unjustly oppressed gain their place in HEAVEN immediatly, they have to prove their worth to GOD through the eyes of man and of those of the BIBLE, and that is yet to be done

    i certainly dont think this is w/w though
    Quote Originally Posted by S-FM oooo View Post
    Let's move onto another topic, since you brought up the OMGUS

    What is your thought of Jolly Rancher OMGUS'ing myself?
    omgusn't? my humble soul detected none of that. quotes?

  39. ISO #239

    Re: S-FM 307: ?KRC AGAIN!

    Quote Originally Posted by S-FM ZKL3DJ View Post
    I'm not sure I would call Jolly Rancher's vote OMGUS, that's "Oh my God, you suck", right? When a person votes someone else for putting a "bad vote" on them?
    I would like to know if it's a genuine scum read.
    Yeah, OMGUS is them basically voting me for scum reading them (I have had them scum read since page 1 for soft claiming lost wolf)

    They played it off/dodged it earlier, and now have planted their vote on me in the middle of the heated contest with Bibble

  40. ISO #240

    Re: S-FM 307: ?KRC AGAIN!

    Quote Originally Posted by S-FM Bibble View Post
    the HOLY BIBLE of RACHYL defends those who are unjustly oppressed by men who hate men, by those who serve earthly powers, by those who want our fall

    but that does not mean the unjustly oppressed gain their place in HEAVEN immediatly, they have to prove their worth to GOD through the eyes of man and of those of the BIBLE, and that is yet to be done

    i certainly dont think this is w/w though


    omgusn't? my humble soul detected none of that. quotes?
    Delayed OMGUS FMPOV

    Quote Originally Posted by S-FM oooo View Post
    Are you claiming lost wolf here?

    -vote S-FM Jolly Rancher


    Quote Originally Posted by S-FM Jolly Rancher View Post
    I

    claimed doggo

    thanks for playing

    more with

    me


    Quote Originally Posted by S-FM oooo View Post
    Keep wondering aloud lost wolfie


    Quote Originally Posted by S-FM Jolly Rancher View Post
    well

    at least

    this doggo is

    trying to contribute to

    the discussion when ever possibru

    dat should be something

    even to lost

    doggos like

    you


    Quote Originally Posted by S-FM Jolly Rancher View Post
    -vote S-FM oooo


    *insertz

    scummy one

    liners*
    @Jolly explain this vote please

  41. ISO #241

  42. ISO #242

    Re: S-FM 307: ?KRC AGAIN!

    Quote Originally Posted by S-FM Bibble View Post
    imao
    what do you think of ooooooooooooooo atm?
    At first I thought he was just trying to be bait, and just RVS

    but his continued persistence on his 3 early scum reads feels annoying

    like he's trying to set up his plans for what he does in the future so there isn't any confusion to what he does

    I was hoping to see more variety, but with him sticking to his schtick idk and (with your argument) I'm starting to see him as more scummy as anyone else

    but

    that is

    just a thonk


    sometimes people do early tunnels but I generally don't see it for multiple targets

    I'm just hoping more from him.

  43. ISO #243

  44. ISO #244

  45. ISO #245

  46. ISO #246

    Re: S-FM 307: ?KRC AGAIN!

    Quote Originally Posted by S-FM Jolly Rancher View Post
    At first I thought he was just trying to be bait, and just RVS

    but his continued persistence on his 3 early scum reads feels annoying

    like he's trying to set up his plans for what he does in the future so there isn't any confusion to what he does

    I was hoping to see more variety, but with him sticking to his schtick idk and (with your argument) I'm starting to see him as more scummy as anyone else

    but

    that is

    just a thonk


    sometimes people do early tunnels but I generally don't see it for multiple targets

    I'm just hoping more from him.
    @OIAJSD09134JOIOF

    There you have it. Admitted OMGUS. I have him as an early scum read and haven't backed off, they're voting me for scum reading those 3 specific people (himself included)

  47. ISO #247

  48. ISO #248

  49. ISO #249

  50. ISO #250

 

 

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •