Moderators: jestingrabbit, Moderators General, Prelates
b.i.o wrote:Anyway, I'm finding Lorenz a bit flighty. FoS! Vote for someone else! Unvote when it looks like there might actually be a lynch! That much caution is often telling. So for now I'm going to go with that, and my instincts, and vote.
Not a Raptor's Signature wrote:WARNING: Is acting like Not a Raptor
existential_elevator wrote:It's like a jigsaw puzzle of Hitler pissing on Mother Theresa. No individual piece is offensive, but together...
If you think hot women have it easy because everyone wants to have sex at them, you're both wrong and also the reason you're wrong.
existential_elevator wrote:It's like a jigsaw puzzle of Hitler pissing on Mother Theresa. No individual piece is offensive, but together...
If you think hot women have it easy because everyone wants to have sex at them, you're both wrong and also the reason you're wrong.
Van wrote:I like simple games.
Like Wizardry.
weiyaoli wrote:I don't like his "it's disturbingly easy to be suspicious of FAOT, therefore I will lurker lynch instead" stance he took. His fence sitting at this point regarding FAOT is a bit strange, even from the point of view of voting to encourage discussion. I certainly felt that FAOT answering Lorenz's points against him well which Lorenz did not even mention later.
existential_elevator wrote:It's like a jigsaw puzzle of Hitler pissing on Mother Theresa. No individual piece is offensive, but together...
If you think hot women have it easy because everyone wants to have sex at them, you're both wrong and also the reason you're wrong.
Lorenz wrote:weiyaoli wrote:I don't like his "it's disturbingly easy to be suspicious of FAOT, therefore I will lurker lynch instead" stance he took. His fence sitting at this point regarding FAOT is a bit strange, even from the point of view of voting to encourage discussion. I certainly felt that FAOT answering Lorenz's points against him well which Lorenz did not even mention later.
I can't say much more on my first NaR vote, I truly just wanted to spark discussion. The NaR votals quickly, and there REALLY was no reason for him to be voted, which is why I unvoted.
FAOT explanation of the quick wiki skim didn't make that much sense to me, since my first info came from 10 mins of googling, and I reached a completely different conclusion.
e_e, how do you know you were roleblocked, where you told?
Van wrote:I like simple games.
Like Wizardry.
Van wrote:I like simple games.
Like Wizardry.
Lorenz wrote:Spreading wine? You posted a single time with content, where you voted for the most suspicious player (Before I voted you at least). I believe my idea was exactly the same as yours, getting people to follow and catching scum. I'd appreciate it if you took your vote out, at least let me make a better case, as it takes only 3 to lynch now. I'm sure we can catch scum making a better argument than "You are on of which took my bait".
Unvote
Just so we don't get a hammer. I still don't know who I want my vote to go to really.
existential_elevator wrote:It's like a jigsaw puzzle of Hitler pissing on Mother Theresa. No individual piece is offensive, but together...
If you think hot women have it easy because everyone wants to have sex at them, you're both wrong and also the reason you're wrong.
Careful to unvote NAR in case there was a lynch and then voting for FAOT when called out on this.
DaBigCheez wrote:4) Neither are scum, and town just got super-lucky.
Thoughts?
I suggested DBC as scum???? (Oh... double NINJA-D, did you mean FAOT?)
Lorenz wrote:Careful to unvote NAR in case there was a lynch and then voting for FAOT when called out on this.
I was not careful at all to unvote NaR. As soon as I logged and saw he had 3 votes I quickly unvoted. What I meant with the "I don't know who I want voted", was that I wasn't convinced enough to vote FAOT right then, which was in part for a quick log-in I had done. After I analyzed, I was pretty convinced FAOT was scum.
Anyway, that logic makes no sense imo. If I WAS scum, why raise so much suspicion on myself, when I could have voted for either? (This is, as long as NaR is town)
I'm interested in knowing why you're convinced the role blocker is scum? Don't get me wrong, it makes more sense for it to be scum so that scum have a way of protecting against the vig. However, I could equally have been roleblocked by town. Town do occasionally throw night actions at other town. But - I do personally think in this case that it is more likely to be scum, just because I don't see how that power fits into town in this context. I was only earlier speculating a little on possible role distribution, and, given that we lost two town power roles overnight, and we know that there is a vig, it's entirely possible that us two remaining town are going to have powers. Personally, I'm worried with my votes because I'm guessing that the vig is likely to be someone who is looking slightly scummy in order to protect themselves, and I think that's why I feel like I'm not sure I can trust all of you.Lorenz wrote:e_e's claim of being role-blocked also worries me a lot. Especially because of her earlier supposition that extra powers may all be town. I trust that if there IS a role blocker, it's on the scum side. Still, I can not find a way to logically put this info together, and reach a conclusion.
existential_elevator wrote:It's like a jigsaw puzzle of Hitler pissing on Mother Theresa. No individual piece is offensive, but together...
If you think hot women have it easy because everyone wants to have sex at them, you're both wrong and also the reason you're wrong.
Lorenz wrote:Anyway, I am more and more convinced of a DBC/weiyaoli scum-team. Hopefully I am not being misleaded by weiyaoli, who seems to be focusing only on putting pressure on my, and nobody else. He did put DBC on his slightly scummy list, but I don't see any attempts to confirm that.
weiyaoli wrote:You really haven't changed my mind at all regarding you because like I pointed out in that post before yours, your explanation doesn't actually explain anything so I'm not sure where you gave your explanations already
I'm not sure why you are suggesting that plan and in particular why it is "This is the only I can see working right now" (I assume you meant way?) when your first idea would work fine.
Van wrote:I like simple games.
Like Wizardry.
existential_elevator wrote:It's like a jigsaw puzzle of Hitler pissing on Mother Theresa. No individual piece is offensive, but together...
If you think hot women have it easy because everyone wants to have sex at them, you're both wrong and also the reason you're wrong.
existential_elevator wrote:It's like a jigsaw puzzle of Hitler pissing on Mother Theresa. No individual piece is offensive, but together...
If you think hot women have it easy because everyone wants to have sex at them, you're both wrong and also the reason you're wrong.
Users browsing this forum: thudworm and 0 guests