Mini 857 Disney Movie Mafia 2 - The Classics (Roll Credits)

Crazy · Post Post #625 (ISO) » Mon Oct 19, 2009 9:06 am

SC wrote:The mod confirmed by editing my last post is that Kmd4390 did not get modkilled and I don't see him as enough of a bastard mod to include a day SK, so I think we have a day vig somewhere.

o_0 What a weird thing to say. Why is a day SK bastardly? You said you didn't want a mod-WIFOM game, but I don't see why a day SK is bastardly at all.

semioldguy · Post Post #626 (ISO) » Mon Oct 19, 2009 9:07 am

Do you not know your own flavor for your role? A simple "yes" or "no" will do, I don't want anything more than that at this point.

semioldguy · Post Post #627 (ISO) » Mon Oct 19, 2009 9:08 am

The above was directed at YankCane151

Crazy · Post Post #628 (ISO) » Mon Oct 19, 2009 9:08 am

Yank wrote:He is scum because he won't explain his flavor? He may not even know his flavor.

Yes. And I'm sure everybody has flavor. And even if he didn't, he should say that he doesn't.

My reasoning is that refusing to claim flavor is what "Peter Pan - Random Scum Role" that just made up the "Conditional Watcher thing" would do.

chamber · Post Post #629 (ISO) » Mon Oct 19, 2009 9:11 am

semioldguy wrote:Do you not know your own flavor for your role? A simple "yes" or "no" will do, I don't want anything more than that at this point.

massive fishing

YankCane151 · Post Post #630 (ISO) » Mon Oct 19, 2009 9:14 am

Crazy wrote:
Yank wrote:He is scum because he won't explain his flavor? He may not even know his flavor.
Yes. And I'm sure everybody has flavor. And even if he didn't, he should say that he doesn't.

My reasoning is that refusing to claim flavor is what "Peter Pan - Random Scum Role" that just made up the "Conditional Watcher thing" would do.

Peter Pan makes sense as a watcher to me. I mean, he flys, fights pirates, etc.

semioldguy · Post Post #631 (ISO) » Mon Oct 19, 2009 9:14 am

Crazy wrote:If you don't explain now, expect me to vote you the first time we lynch a townie.

This is another reason why Monkey's claim smells bad. It's a horrible role for town to have. If the town is losing, his claim turns to vanilla which would encourage another mislynch.

Add this to the reasons Monkey's claim is likely false.

MonkeyMan576 · Post Post #632 (ISO) » Mon Oct 19, 2009 9:14 am

FOS: Semioldguy

He was suspicious before, he is really suspicious now. Not as suspicious as Starbuck, but right up there. And he can't claim OMGUS because I suspected him first.

semioldguy · Post Post #633 (ISO) » Mon Oct 19, 2009 9:15 am

chamber wrote:
semioldguy wrote:Do you not know your own flavor for your role? A simple "yes" or "no" will do, I don't want anything more than that at this point.
massive fishing

What do you see me as fishing exactly?

YankCane151 · Post Post #634 (ISO) » Mon Oct 19, 2009 9:17 am

MonkeyMan576 wrote:
FOS: Semioldguy

He was suspicious before, he is really suspicious now. Not as suspicious as Starbuck, but right up there. And he can't claim OMGUS because I suspected him first.

Why is he suspicious now? and that last sentence is iffy.

Starbuck · Post Post #635 (ISO) » Mon Oct 19, 2009 9:18 am

Did you guys not see in Monkey's claim post which I have linked MULTIPLE TIMES that he explained the condition of his watching?

He can watch as long as TOWNIE ISN'T LYNCHED. The lack of attention to detail here is really starting to bug me, but Monkey has explained himself (in my eyes) to fullest that he can without quoting or going into modkill land.

semioldguy · Post Post #636 (ISO) » Mon Oct 19, 2009 9:19 am

MonkeyMan576 wrote:
FOS: Semioldguy

He was suspicious before, he is really suspicious now. Not as suspicious as Starbuck, but right up there. And he can't claim OMGUS
because I suspected him first
.

Please quote where you suspected me first.

Here is where I first suspected you: viewtopic.php?t=12398&postdays=0&postor ... &&start=68

semioldguy · Post Post #637 (ISO) » Mon Oct 19, 2009 9:20 am

Starbuck wrote:Did you guys not see in Monkey's claim post which I have linked MULTIPLE TIMES that he explained the condition of his watching?

He can watch as long as TOWNIE ISN'T LYNCHED. The lack of attention to detail here is really starting to bug me, but Monkey has explained himself (in my eyes) to fullest that he can without quoting or going into modkill land.

The request is for flavor, not ability.

Gorrad · Post Post #638 (ISO) » Mon Oct 19, 2009 9:30 am

Starbuck, the question is for MM to fill in this blank. "Peter Pan is a conditional watcher because in the movie he _____________".

semioldguy · Post Post #639 (ISO) » Mon Oct 19, 2009 9:31 am

chamber wrote:
semioldguy wrote:Do you not know your own flavor for your role? A simple "yes" or "no" will do, I don't want anything more than that at this point.
massive fishing

Why didn't you point this out as being massive fishing?

MonkeyMan576 Post 515 wrote:Can anyone besides Starbuck claim to be a movie after 1980(Don't give the actual title, just yes or no)?

FoS:

chamber

Starbuck · Post Post #640 (ISO) » Mon Oct 19, 2009 9:35 am

Gorrad wrote:Starbuck, the question is for MM to fill in this blank. "Peter Pan is a conditional watcher because in the movie he _____________".

Gotcha.

My bad for misunderstanding.

chamber · Post Post #641 (ISO) » Mon Oct 19, 2009 9:43 am

semioldguy wrote:
chamber wrote:
semioldguy wrote:Do you not know your own flavor for your role? A simple "yes" or "no" will do, I don't want anything more than that at this point.
massive fishing
Why didn't you point this out as being massive fishing?
MonkeyMan576 Post 515 wrote:Can anyone besides Starbuck claim to be a movie after 1980(Don't give the actual title, just yes or no)?

FoS:
chamber

I think the info that answering your question would inderectly reveal is way more important than the year a given players movie if from.

semioldguy · Post Post #642 (ISO) » Mon Oct 19, 2009 9:48 am

I think that's a dumb argument. It was more or less a rhetorical question to begin with as I would find it strange for anyone not to have flavor to their role when this is a theme game.

I am town and I have flavor. I don't think it in any way damaging to town or helpful to scum to admit this.

Why are players in this game getting hung up on really dumb ideas?

Starbuck · Post Post #643 (ISO) » Mon Oct 19, 2009 9:57 am

I was asking the same thing, semioldguy.

It's all distracting from the actual scumhunt, unless it really is the scum doing it, then it's definitely beneficial to them.

MonkeyMan576 · Post Post #644 (ISO) » Mon Oct 19, 2009 10:46 am

semioldguy wrote:I think that's a dumb argument. It was more or less a rhetorical question to begin with as I would find it strange for anyone not to have flavor to their role when this is a theme game.

I am town and I have flavor. I don't think it in any way damaging to town or helpful to scum to admit this.

Why are players in this game getting hung up on really dumb ideas?

I don't think anyone is "hung up" about it. You are the one who keeps on bringing it up. And the one who wants people to keep on giving more of their role info than they are comfortable with.

semioldguy · Post Post #645 (ISO) » Mon Oct 19, 2009 11:12 am

MonkeyMan576 wrote:
semioldguy wrote:I think that's a dumb argument. It was more or less a rhetorical question to begin with as I would find it strange for anyone not to have flavor to their role when this is a theme game.

I am town and I have flavor. I don't think it in any way damaging to town or helpful to scum to admit this.

Why are players in this game getting hung up on really dumb ideas?
I don't think anyone is "hung up" about it. You are the one who keeps on bringing it up. And the one who wants people to keep on giving more of their role info than they are comfortable with.

Dumb ideas like whether Toy Story is a Disney Classic movie or not or whether or not a character from that movie is scum or if only Pixar animated characters or certain timeframes would make up the scum group. These are the dumb ideas I refer to and the ones I wish people would all just drop because they are not and will not be fruitful for the town.

You are the only one I want more role info from. Partial claims are scummy.

YankCane151 · Post Post #646 (ISO) » Mon Oct 19, 2009 11:17 am

semioldguy wrote:
You are the only one I want more role info from. Partial claims are scummy.

Did Starbuck really flavor claim? If not, shouldnt you accuse her as well?

Starbuck · Post Post #647 (ISO) » Mon Oct 19, 2009 11:20 am

YankCane151 wrote:
semioldguy wrote:
You are the only one I want more role info from. Partial claims are scummy.
Did Starbuck really flavor claim? If not, shouldnt you accuse her as well?

Even as a vanilla townie, I have flavor too.

YankCane151 · Post Post #648 (ISO) » Mon Oct 19, 2009 11:27 am

Starbuck wrote:
YankCane151 wrote:
semioldguy wrote:
You are the only one I want more role info from. Partial claims are scummy.
Did Starbuck really flavor claim? If not, shouldnt you accuse her as well?
Even as a vanilla townie, I have flavor too.

I wasn't asking whether you had flavor or not, but if you had actually claimed it. Since if you didn't, then according to semioldguy you made a partial claim.

semioldguy · Post Post #649 (ISO) » Mon Oct 19, 2009 11:30 am

@YankCane151
You're right. I thought she had, but looking back through just her posts she was never the one to mentioned any flavor. Monkey's claim is still scummier in my eyes because he has blatantly refused to provide flavor. Starbuck seems not to have been requested for it yet, and her claim loses much of the current credibility it had to me because I thought she had...

@Starbuck
I'd like to hear your flavor as well. Why are you, Buzz Lightyear, vanilla?