Not specifying a part means he agrees with all of it. And then he says he doesn't agree with all of it. So why say he agrees with it?bea wrote:I've quoted FZ's original post because it's important in relationship to boo.FZ. wrote: Boo strikes me as an intelligent player and when he posts, it usually makes a lot of sense, but it also seems like he's on the outskirts looking in, afraid to get his hands dirty. Don't know what to make of it, because I don't know how he usually plays.
And see what you did there boo? See it? It's why I have a hard time trusting you even when like in the Made lynch I agreed that a yoshiba isn't a detctive and therefore not so aweful.
It's because of the assumptions you make. DP said he agreed with that statement up there but never said what part of it.
In fact, FZ herself never said when "usually" applies. You took that all on yourself to mean that she meant that she suspects who you suspect.
Then you used an assumption of what posts you've made that FZ finds and thinks makes sense of to turn it around to make it look like DP is double talking when in fact - his meaning I think was pretty clear.
That he agrees - sometimes you make sense, but you suspect people he doesn't and that worries him.
And did you really think if you actually presented a case against me rather than your trip to imagination land that I'd really flip out all balls to the walls? Is that the impression you have of me?
I know what happened with MM and DH was aweful and I feel so very very bad about it.
All I can think of is bioshock when I was up for lynch for days and finally just said "I don't fucking care anymore, lynch me." I was a nilla civ in that - incarnation and I was calm and cool for DAYS about it. And for DAYS no one said I read genuine. Once I lost it - everyone gave me cred that fault isn't mine. I felt badly about loosing it tbh.
It's your misrepresentation - or unwillingnes to clarify why you think I'm bad in a way that's not a trip to imagination land - and now your twisting of both FZ's post and DF's posts that make me think you are up to no good. Prove me wrong boo. I want you to be civ, but man, you are making it so super hard for me to believe you have good intentions at all.
Usually means most of the time. Most of the time, my posts are about suspecting people. Most of the time, if my posts make sense, then FZ understands where I am coming from on my suspicions. I don't have to make assumptions about her use of the word usually, it's what the word means.
DP was double talking, and yes, I picked that up from his post, and I think most people will be able to, so yes, his meaning was clear. But he was trying to mask it, and that's the whole reason I find him suspicious.
And then again, if he agrees I usually (not sometimes, but nice trying to change the word there, very on the up and up bea) make sense, and most of my posts are about my suspicions and why I find people suspicious, but he doesn't agree with who I find suspicious - to the point he is paranoid about me - then he doesn't usually find that I make sense and agree with me. So why say that he does?
Just because I didn't frame my suspicions of you in my typical way does not make it 'imagination land'. I think you are the killer. I provided reasons why I think you're the killer. You still could have chose to respond to the things I actually said (which you have never made any real effort to do), but instead, you're trying to write it off as make believe. And yes, I left you that out, by discussing why I didn't build a case around you, and instead discussed who died, why I think you'd do, and why I think that makes you the killer. By the standards of most people, that is case building. It isn't by mine, so I didn't call it a case, and you're trying to turn my doing that into saying everything I said (that was still based on reason, and things from within the thread) is imaginary. \
No, I didn't think you'd 'flip out balls to the wall'. And I said that. I said that I think you do a version of that type of defense, where it isn't about defending based on countering the other person in a meaningful way, but defending by making posts that strike people as 'genuine' which makes go back to trusting you. And yes, I think that's absolutely how you defend yourself if it's a method of defense that is available. That isn't even about civ vs. mafia bea though, you can do it as either. I was trying to come at you in a way where the option wouldn't be open, so you'd have to defend yourself in a more transparent way. And I think you're ignoring the actual things I said, and downplaying it as me making things up, is that kind of transparency.
You were not a civvie in Bioshock. There weren't civvies in Bioshock. That whole argument is the reason I got lynched in that game. In Bioshock, you were a security bot. Then you replaced in as Fontaine. As a security bot, 1 player needed to die, and when they did, you had a last person standing win condition and a NK. You died before that happen (but it did happen, and in a game that size, the odds it didn't were always low), yes, but you were not a civvie. I assume that's the scenario you're referring to, because Fontaine was even less ambiguous and the closest to being a baddie that game had to offfer. You know my role in Bioshock, where I got lynched (for being right, to remind you. Again)? I was part of the 'civvies 2' group (the civvies in that game were in quotes - because they were not actually civvies), which was the group that was the closest to a standard idea of civvies, because their win conditions allowed for the greatest number of people alive at the end of the game.
So... bad example trying to pick Bioshock, is my point.
I gave reasons I think you're bad. I think you're the one killing. I made that clear. I also used language that allowed you to try and get out of my actual suspicions by dismissing them. Rather than make any attempt at reading my suspicions and addressing them (which I think civ bea would do), you're entire strategy for dealing with me has been 1) ignoring me when possible and 2) Focusing on the out I gave you that it wasn't my usual way of discussing my suspicions.
What do you think of Mata? I'm curious as to how you are reading her after your musketeer stint in Recruitment. 
Well, not literally. I'm still paranoid about boo. There's still the matter of him often going after people I currently feel good about, and I think FZ made a good point about him. FZ herself I'm unsure about. I think Epi's case, while interesting, doesn't fully sway me. Her getting angry, as I mentioned, doesn't do anything to quell any suspicions I may have had, but there's not much to begin with. I'd need something bigger to want to vote FZ. Then there's TH, whom I just do not feel is trustworthy. 
