Hinckley Posted May 3, 2008 Posted May 3, 2008 I believe you avoided my question: Why should we trust you? You shouldn't. There's a murderer out there and plebs have infiltrated our ranks and our villages! We shouldn't trust anyone and clearly no one should trust either one of us based on what's been said up to this point. I do find it interesting that the reasons people can't trust me are based solely on things you've said, while it's your actions that make you untrustworthy. That's very interesting to me...care for some fish?
MagPiesRUs Posted May 3, 2008 Posted May 3, 2008 You shouldn't. There's a murderer out there and plebs have infiltrated our ranks and our villages! We shouldn't trust anyone and clearly no one should trust either one of us based on what's been said up to this point. I do find it interesting that the reasons people can't trust me are based solely on things you've said, while it's your actions that make you untrustworthy. That's very interesting to me...care for some fish? Well, I suppose you have me there. Although, you're reason for you're scratches isn't really believable, and you were just as quick to jump to conclusions as me. Also, you avoided my question again pretty skillfully. Anyway, I'd love some fish. Nothing works up an appetite more than a heated debate.
Scouty Posted May 3, 2008 Posted May 3, 2008 Fish for breakfast for three days? My good man, Barnabas, no offense to you, but would there be any other farmers here with different types of food? Where is the baker, the owner of the vineyards? I would very much like bread and grapes for breakfast.
Hinckley Posted May 3, 2008 Posted May 3, 2008 Well, I suppose you have me there. Although, you're reason for you're scratches isn't really believable, and you were just as quick to jump to conclusions as me. Also, you avoided my question again pretty skillfully. Oh, I didn't avoid your question. I answered it quite directly: no one should trust me, or you, or anyone. There is a murderer loose and hill plebs infiltrating our ranks. I'd be a fool to try and get anyone to trust me. So would you. Especially since you admit to torturing people, and claim it's for the government. No one has any reason to trust that's true. You could be a torturer, but work for the plebs. Then of course if you did torture information out of someone, for example, that they work for the government, you would have no choice but to accuse them of being a member of a hill pleb, to get people to vote with you to condemn them. I don't know. I'm trying to figure out who to trust too and since you're hurling crazy accusations at me, I trust you the least. But, like I said, neither one of us is trusted at this point I'm sure, me because of the things you've said and you because you're threatening to torture everyone and calling them scum. But, what's the use in talking about what we can't prove? I'm going to eat my fish and grapes before they get cold. Well, the grapes are supposed to be cold, so I guess I should say before the fish gets cold and the grapes get warm. Yum yum yum...oh BTW the vote tally is: Lt. Veers: 1 Tiny Pies R Us: 6
MagPiesRUs Posted May 4, 2008 Posted May 4, 2008 Oh, I didn't avoid your question. I answered it quite directly: no one should trust me, or you, or anyone. There is a murderer loose and hill plebs infiltrating our ranks. I'd be a fool to try and get anyone to trust me. So would you. Especially since you admit to torturing people, and claim it's for the government. No one has any reason to trust that's true. You could be a torturer, but work for the plebs. Then of course if you did torture information out of someone, for example, that they work for the government, you would have no choice but to accuse them of being a member of a hill pleb, to get people to vote with you to condemn them. I don't know. I'm trying to figure out who to trust too and since you're hurling crazy accusations at me, I trust you the least. But, like I said, neither one of us is trusted at this point I'm sure, me because of the things you've said and you because you're threatening to torture everyone and calling them scum. But, what's the use in talking about what we can't prove? I'm going to eat my fish and grapes before they get cold. Well, the grapes are supposed to be cold, so I guess I should say before the fish gets cold and the grapes get warm. Yum yum yum...oh BTW the vote tally is:Lt. Veers: 1 Tiny Pies R Us: 6 And what would be the point in a scum investigator? Everyone in the same gang knows who is who already, so they know that whoever they vote against who isn't in their gang is an enemy. In contrast, the government members do not know who else is part of the government, thus they need an investigator to find out who is not part of the government, so that they don't kill their own members. And (for the 51st time) why would I accuse someone who is innocent, as it is clear that once they die, the rest of the town will turn on me the very next day? Do not let scum lead you. It will be disastrous. I heard from a soothsayer that the same thing will happen in about 1800 years time
Hinckley Posted May 4, 2008 Posted May 4, 2008 And what would be the point in a scum investigator? Everyone in the same gang knows who is who already, so they know that whoever they vote against who isn't in their gang is an enemy. Oh really? I'm work for the government and I wasn't told who else works with me. And how can you be sure what the gang members were told? How would you know what the gangs were told unless you were a member? hmmm? You should just eat your fish and shut your mouth, you keep looking more and more like the real gang leader here...
MagPiesRUs Posted May 4, 2008 Posted May 4, 2008 Oh really? I'm work for the government and I wasn't told who else works with me. And how can you be sure what the gang members were told? How would you know what the gangs were told unless you were a member? hmmm? You should just eat your fish and shut your mouth, you keep looking more and more like the real gang leader here... Yes, I said that the government doesn't know who is a member. And scum knowing each other is a standard rule... of life.
Hinckley Posted May 4, 2008 Posted May 4, 2008 Yes, I said that the government doesn't know who is a member.And scum knowing each other is a standard rule... of life. You know alot about scum...thanks for enlightening me as I had no idea how the plebs work. It's a good thing you're so knowledgeable on the subject.
Batbrick Posted May 4, 2008 Posted May 4, 2008 I am sorry, Vote: TinyPiesRUs But know this Hinckley, if this man is indeed a government member, then I will vote for you next
Hinckley Posted May 4, 2008 Posted May 4, 2008 I am sorry, Vote: TinyPiesRUsBut know this Hinckley, if this man is indeed a government member, then I will vote for you next Pffft...if he turns out to be a government member, I'll vote for myself. Lt. Veers: 1 Tiny Pies R Us: 7
MagPiesRUs Posted May 4, 2008 Posted May 4, 2008 I am sorry, Vote: TinyPiesRUsBut know this Hinckley, if this man is indeed a government member, then I will vote for you next What? I thought we were friends! Torturers and fishermen go hand in hand! That's the last time I'm buying your fish. A summary of days: Day I - Hinckey lays low, along with his best friend Lt. Veers. Clearly trying to keep attention away from himself. Day II - Once accused of being the dux of the Aventine plebs, Hinckley jumps out almost immediately to defend himself. Clearly he had been lurking all along, a very scummy move. Among all this, he makes this post: If I wanted to shift focus away from me, I wouldn't have included your vote for me in the re-cap. You have my word I will not try to kill you tonight. I understand people do drastic things and jump to strange conclusions when they're scared. I only hope I can prove to you that I'm not who you think I am. He openly admits that he has the ability to kill people at night. Day III - Both Hinckley and Lt. Veers vote against Pencoin, who I now believe to be a member of the government. Pencoin is sent to the circus, attention has now shifted from Hinckley. Day IV - Atoll Dweller is killed and turns out to be scum. I had been pressing to lynch him since Day II if I recall. Like Hinckley, Lt. Veers suddenly pops up as soon as he is accused. Hinckley, not wanting one of his own to die, quickly counter-attacks, and with the help of jipay and wouwie, turns the blame on innocent little me And here you are, about to kill to kill your very own investigator. This does not have to happen. If you still need proof that I'm an investigator for the government, just kill Veers, who hasn't contributed to our discussions at all, and won't be a large loss. Or preferrably kill Hinckley. When they turn out to be scum, you will know I do not lie. And to reiterate this, why would I try to kill two government members if it is oh so clear that I will be immediately killed if either turn out to be part of the government? I say this one last time, as you Romans don't seem to be grasping this at all. Why would I try to kill someone just so I can die afterwards? Good day to you fellow Romans, I hope that you come to your senses soon.
iamded Posted May 4, 2008 Posted May 4, 2008 Snap, it's page 3 already! I mean, snap, it's lunch time already! Caught any good fish, Barnabus? Hinckley puts up a good, convincing argument. Tiny Pius, you are starting to seem very suspicious now. All the points Hinckley's brought up seem extremely good, and I don't find your rebuttals too convincing. So, I vote: TinyPiesRUs. If you really are working for the Government, I pray you put up a good convincing argument now so as no one else votes for you.
Hinckley Posted May 4, 2008 Posted May 4, 2008 What? I thought we were friends! Torturers and fishermen go hand in hand! That's the last time I'm buying your fish. A summary of days: Day I - Hinckey lays low, along with his best friend Lt. Veers. Clearly trying to keep attention away from himself. Day II - Once accused of being the dux of the Aventine plebs, Hinckley jumps out almost immediately to defend himself. Clearly he had been lurking all along, a very scummy move. Among all this, he makes this post: He openly admits that he has the ability to kill people at night. Day III - Both Hinckley and Lt. Veers vote against Pencoin, who I now believe to be a member of the government. Pencoin is sent to the circus, attention has now shifted from Hinckley. Day IV - Atoll Dweller is killed and turns out to be scum. I had been pressing to lynch him since Day II if I recall. Like Hinckley, Lt. Veers suddenly pops up as soon as he is accused. Hinckley, not wanting one of his own to die, quickly counter-attacks, and with the help of jipay and wouwie, turns the blame on innocent little me And here you are, about to kill to kill your very own investigator. This does not have to happen. If you still need proof that I'm an investigator for the government, just kill Veers, who hasn't contributed to our discussions at all, and won't be a large loss. Or preferrably kill Hinckley. When they turn out to be scum, you will know I do not lie. And to reiterate this, why would I try to kill two government members if it is oh so clear that I will be immediately killed if either turn out to be part of the government? I say this one last time, as you Romans don't seem to be grasping this at all. Why would I try to kill someone just so I can die afterwards? Good day to you fellow Romans, I hope that you come to your senses soon. Well, now that you put it all in one place it's much clearer how circumstantial your evidence is against me. All humans have the ability to kill. You were scared and I was simply trying to re-assure you I wouldn't harm you. All the while you were threatening to torture people. And is everyone who voted for Pencoin guilty in your eyes? I could ask the same question, why would I accuse you of lying and try to condemn you if your death would mean my automatic condemnation? I don't stand to gain anything by killing someone and dying right after, do I? Really the more you explain your arguments, the more suspicious I get. Perhaps you are just trying to convince people you have this power so they won't try to kill you. Sounds like a good strategy to stay in the game...of life: "Don't kill me, I can save you all..." I don't buy it for a second. You're lying and you're up to no good... Lt. Veers: 1 Tiny Pies R Us: 8
MagPiesRUs Posted May 4, 2008 Posted May 4, 2008 Convincing arguments? All he's been doing is giving us flowery answers, telling us what we want to think. As for my knowing that scum know each other, I've played many games of... err... life, and in all of them, the scum know each other. If they didn't, it would be very unlikely for them to win... at life, anyway. It's over for me anyway... I only pray that either the council come to their senses, or that I will survive the torment I will suffer in the circus. Well, now that you put it all in one place it's much clearer how circumstantial your evidence is against me. All humans have the ability to kill. You were scared and I was simply trying to re-assure you I wouldn't harm you. Not I. You could've simply told me that you are not able to kill. Most people in this game life cannot. I ask you, good citizens, how many of you can kill someone? Not many, I bet. All the while you were threatening to torture people. Never. I simply investigated the roles of those who I found suspicious. why would I accuse you of lying and try to condemn you if your death would mean my automatic condemnation? I don't stand to gain anything by killing someone and dying right after, do I? Really the more you explain your arguments, the more suspicious I get. Well if you didn't defend yourself, you would most certainly be killed. You are simply delaying the inevitable, and hoping to bring down a strong member of the government with you to help your gang. You didn't try to vote me first, I did. If you hadn't done anything to defend yourself, you would've been killed in Day II.
Hinckley Posted May 4, 2008 Posted May 4, 2008 Well if you didn't defend yourself, you would most certainly be killed. You are simply delaying the inevitable, and hoping to bring down a strong member of the government with you to help your gang.You didn't try to vote me first, I did. If you hadn't done anything to defend yourself, you would've been killed in Day II. You would also be delaying the inevitable with your actions. And if I'd have accused you of being a pleb dox on day II, I would probably be in your spot as well, so we can keep going in circles about this or we can admit that we're basically in the same boat in opposing currents and it'll be up to the others to decipher the truth. Whoever goes to consul tonight the truth will certainly come out...
MagPiesRUs Posted May 4, 2008 Posted May 4, 2008 You would also be delaying the inevitable with your actions. No, as I said, it was I who accused you. This situation would've never arose had I not investigated you and told the town of it. And you would not have tried to vote me out in Day II, as you know that you are not an investigator and are in fact the Aventine dux. See, it's a lose-lose situation for you. Either you die, or you die and bring me down with you. For me, either I die and you are killed straight afterwards, or you are killed and am trusted by the town from then on out.
Dragonator Posted May 4, 2008 Posted May 4, 2008 I go away for a few moments to get some eggs and already somebody is almost convicted? Wow... Gentlemen, this is how I see it. If TinyPiesRUs is voted in and turns out to be a member of the government, then we will konw he was definitely telling the truth, and that therefore we can immediately vote Hinckley to be condemned. If however he is a rebel, then Hinckley is innocent, and no harm is done. Either way we loss TinyPiesRUs, and we find out whether Hinckley is who he says he is. We will not come to a good conclusion without one of them dying. I know it is hard for us, but it seems to be the only way. Because of this, I am sorry to say, that I Vote: TinyPiesRUs. I just hope that you can prove your innocence. Hinckley, if you have been lying all this time and TinyPiesRUs turns out to be who he says he is, then by Jupiter we will have you nailed up within the hour on the cross. I am sorry if my views come across too strong, but for the sake of Rome, we must find out the truth. We will either loss both of you, or one of you, but we cannot continue with you both. May the Gods be with us all on this day.
MagPiesRUs Posted May 4, 2008 Posted May 4, 2008 Alternatively, we could vote Veers... Ok. Before I'm sent to the council, I'd like to make a list of those to pursue once I die: I. Hinckley II. Lt. Veers III. Jipay IV. googleson V. wouwie Now if you'll escuse me, I'll be sulking near the Tiber
Hinckley Posted May 4, 2008 Posted May 4, 2008 No, as I said, it was I who accused you. This situation would've never arose had I not investigated you and told the town of it. And you would not have tried to vote me out in Day II, as you know that you are not an investigator and are in fact the Aventine dux. See, it's a lose-lose situation for you. Either you die, or you die and bring me down with you. For me, either I die and you are killed straight afterwards, or you are killed and am trusted by the town from then on out. No. Again, I could've pretended to investigate you on day 2 and accuse you of being the Aventine dox. The situation would be lose-lose for me only if I was lying. It's lose-lose for whoever's lying. If you are condemned tonight and don't survive the circus, it will be I who is trusted by the town. I've been thinking as I sit hear eating my grapes...I find it interesting you keep using the term dox. I didn't know this word until you accused me of being one. I wonder why you know the term "dox of a hill pleb" so well...I'll bet the person who got the role...in life...of the dox of the aventene plebs...would have learned the term when the got their PM about their role...in life.
MagPiesRUs Posted May 4, 2008 Posted May 4, 2008 (edited) I've been thinking as I sit hear eating my grapes...I find it interesting you keep using the term dox. I didn't know this word until you accused me of being one. I wonder why you know the term "dox of a hill pleb" so well...I'll bet the person who got the role...in life...of the dox of the aventene plebs...would have learned the term when the got their PM about their role...in life. I'm guessing from you're logic that Batbrick isn't really the fisherman, as in one post he wasn't sure of the type of fish that lives in Rome. And anyway, anyone can say that they have no knowledge of something. There is no true way to prove that they don't. In fact, it seems you purposefully misspelt 'dux' in your posts to make it appear so. Afterall, the link you provided is spelled correctly. Thanks for telling me what a dux was anyway. I was wondering myself Admittedly though, I myself endlessly searched through dozens of sources to find out exactly what methods torturers of the Roman period used Edited May 4, 2008 by TinyPiesRUs
Hinckley Posted May 4, 2008 Posted May 4, 2008 I'm guessing from you're logic that Batbrick isn't really the fisherman, as in one post he wasn't sure of the type of fish that lives in Rome. And anyway, anyone can say that they have no knowledge of something. There is no true way to prove that they don't. In fact, it seems you purposefully misspelt 'dux' in your posts to make it appear so. Afterall, the link you provided is spelled correctly. Thanks for telling me what a dux was anyway. I was wondering myself Admittedly though, I myself endlessly searched through dozens of sources to find out exactly what methods torturers of the Roman period used oh, well I copied it and pasted it into google, cuz I'm lazy. And I'm not wearing my glasses. Good point about Batbrick. I guess I'm just overthinking it. I tend to think about people's behavior who are falsely accusing me. And I kinda felt dumb not knowing the word. You misspelled misspelled by the way. Oh, and by google I mean the oracle of course. Why'd you edit your post, anyway?
MagPiesRUs Posted May 4, 2008 Posted May 4, 2008 You misspelled misspelled by the way. Ah, I see you're wearing you're glasses now As to why I edited my post, I forgot. Don't worry though, you have my word that I didn't edit anything crucial. We can't tell if you've edited you're posts anyway, so we'll have to take your word too.
Scouty Posted May 4, 2008 Posted May 4, 2008 oh, well I copied it and pasted it into google, cuz I'm lazy. And I'm not wearing my glasses. Good point about Batbrick. I guess I'm just overthinking it. I tend to think about people's behavior who are falsely accusing me. And I kinda felt dumb not knowing the word. You misspelled misspelled by the way. Oh, and by google I mean the oracle of course. Why'd you edit your post, anyway? What are 'glasses'? How would you be copying and pasting? Why would you be dealing with an oracle? How does one 'edit' your post, can people do that? In any way, disregard that and keep to the peace! We have already condemned a man and fighting and arguing are not necessary any more!
Batbrick Posted May 4, 2008 Posted May 4, 2008 I am at odds that people are accusing me of not being a proper fisherman when my job is just part of this mere game.....of our lives. Still, I would ask that you trust me friends, as though I am sad to have voted for men to be killed, I and most others have been entirely rational about this all. TinyPiesRUs and Hinckley have gone beyond paranoia, twisting each other's words and backstabbing, I say we should be suspicious of both of them, but still think rationally unlike they.
Recommended Posts