|
On January 14 2012 20:51 wherebugsgo wrote:Show nested quote +On January 14 2012 20:08 Palmar wrote:On January 14 2012 20:04 wherebugsgo wrote:On January 14 2012 20:02 Cyber_Cheese wrote:On January 14 2012 19:59 wherebugsgo wrote:On January 14 2012 19:57 Palmar wrote:
Wherebugsgo, can you summarize your case against me in one post so I can break it down and tell you why you're dumb and bad, possibly scum. I don't explain shit to scum Explain it to me then. go read my filter in one word, meta. So, knowing each game is a different game, and that meta is not valid unless it's applied very precisely (you can't say something like x has posted less than usual, what's important is how, why and what he has posted), you still think that you have a valid enough case? Would you bet your abilities as a player on this case? if I'm wrong about you being scum right now it reflects more on how bad your play is right now than mine. The fact that you are willing to try and guilt me into laying off you suggests you already know I'm town. Otherwise, you wouldn't ask whether I am willing to bet my abilities as a player on this case, since if I was scum I'd have no vested interest in something like that. So, that just strengthens my case even more. TL;DR, go die, scum.
No, because you don't have a case. My play is in no way, shape, or form bad. Take away the Palmar name, and you have someone you'd probably have a town read on. This means you're not reading the game objectively, and thus it's your play that's bad, not mine. If you remove meta from a case, it should still have some merit to it. Does yours?
The only possible way you're playing well right now, is if you're scum.
|
yeah i think its gonna be betwen BC and Bill for election.I am still hesitating about the right person and i also think that one of them is mafia for some reasons.Peace.
|
On January 14 2012 20:02 Macpo wrote:
It's getting clear that Bill Murray is the way to go.
Mr Wiggles, a good town, but he just doesn't want to be on the stage too much, so I guess the mayor role doesn't suit him very well.
BC: way too unclear and risky for me; he is trying too much stuff, going for a thousand contradictory stuff, taking back what he said and so on.
Bill has shown a lot of presence, and has made reasonable analyses, plus he is not afraid. That's enough for me up to now, I think we won't have better than that.
To those complaining about me being rational, it's getting obvious that they prefer random one line crap to argumentation. I'll answer back when they'll meet my standards.
Also, I changed my mind on Cybercheese, as he opened my eyes on the the BC case.
To bill: some people here have NOT posted yet at all!! I feel fine about lynching sandroba, as he acts quite scummy, but I suggest that if you are elected, you lynch someone who has not talked yet. statistics we'll be that it is mafia.
Your list of election candidates is lacking.
My post there was heavily inspired by Protactinium. I'm not voting him because outside of that post focused purely on BC, he doesn't seem to have left many opinions on anything, or made any promises we can hold him to, but as is, he seems like one of the better candidates.
Also, what are your stances on Kitaman, VisceraEyes and MrWiggles
On January 14 2012 20:51 wherebugsgo wrote:Show nested quote +On January 14 2012 20:08 Palmar wrote:On January 14 2012 20:04 wherebugsgo wrote:On January 14 2012 20:02 Cyber_Cheese wrote:On January 14 2012 19:59 wherebugsgo wrote:On January 14 2012 19:57 Palmar wrote:
Wherebugsgo, can you summarize your case against me in one post so I can break it down and tell you why you're dumb and bad, possibly scum. I don't explain shit to scum Explain it to me then. go read my filter in one word, meta. So, knowing each game is a different game, and that meta is not valid unless it's applied very precisely (you can't say something like x has posted less than usual, what's important is how, why and what he has posted), you still think that you have a valid enough case? Would you bet your abilities as a player on this case? if I'm wrong about you being scum right now it reflects more on how bad your play is right now than mine. The fact that you are willing to try and guilt me into laying off you suggests you already know I'm town. Otherwise, you wouldn't ask whether I am willing to bet my abilities as a player on this case, since if I was scum I'd have no vested interest in something like that. So, that just strengthens my case even more. TL;DR, go die, scum.
WBG, you might be right, but with meta alone you aren't very convincing.
On January 14 2012 20:57 Palmar wrote:Show nested quote +On January 14 2012 20:51 wherebugsgo wrote:On January 14 2012 20:08 Palmar wrote:On January 14 2012 20:04 wherebugsgo wrote:On January 14 2012 20:02 Cyber_Cheese wrote:On January 14 2012 19:59 wherebugsgo wrote:On January 14 2012 19:57 Palmar wrote:
Wherebugsgo, can you summarize your case against me in one post so I can break it down and tell you why you're dumb and bad, possibly scum. I don't explain shit to scum Explain it to me then. go read my filter in one word, meta. So, knowing each game is a different game, and that meta is not valid unless it's applied very precisely (you can't say something like x has posted less than usual, what's important is how, why and what he has posted), you still think that you have a valid enough case? Would you bet your abilities as a player on this case? if I'm wrong about you being scum right now it reflects more on how bad your play is right now than mine. The fact that you are willing to try and guilt me into laying off you suggests you already know I'm town. Otherwise, you wouldn't ask whether I am willing to bet my abilities as a player on this case, since if I was scum I'd have no vested interest in something like that. So, that just strengthens my case even more. TL;DR, go die, scum. No, because you don't have a case. My play is in no way, shape, or form bad. Take away the Palmar name, and you have someone you'd probably have a town read on. This means you're not reading the game objectively, and thus it's your play that's bad, not mine. If you remove meta from a case, it should still have some merit to it. Does yours? The only possible way you're playing well right now, is if you're scum.
You always get trapped in an 'I'm being accused, the person must be scum' state of mind Palmar. Remember what happened with Ace in XLVIII?
|
On January 14 2012 20:57 rtgICEMAN wrote:
yeah i think its gonna be betwen BC and Bill for election.I am still hesitating about the right person and i also think that one of them is mafia for some reasons.Peace.
There are two elected roles. If one of them is scum, who do you want in the other spot?
|
On January 14 2012 21:01 Cyber_Cheese wrote:Show nested quote +On January 14 2012 20:02 Macpo wrote:
It's getting clear that Bill Murray is the way to go.
Mr Wiggles, a good town, but he just doesn't want to be on the stage too much, so I guess the mayor role doesn't suit him very well.
BC: way too unclear and risky for me; he is trying too much stuff, going for a thousand contradictory stuff, taking back what he said and so on.
Bill has shown a lot of presence, and has made reasonable analyses, plus he is not afraid. That's enough for me up to now, I think we won't have better than that.
To those complaining about me being rational, it's getting obvious that they prefer random one line crap to argumentation. I'll answer back when they'll meet my standards.
Also, I changed my mind on Cybercheese, as he opened my eyes on the the BC case.
To bill: some people here have NOT posted yet at all!! I feel fine about lynching sandroba, as he acts quite scummy, but I suggest that if you are elected, you lynch someone who has not talked yet. statistics we'll be that it is mafia. Your list of election candidates is lacking. My post there was heavily inspired by Protactinium. I'm not voting him because outside of that post focused purely on BC, he doesn't seem to have left many opinions on anything, or made any promises we can hold him to, but as is, he seems like one of the better candidates. Also, what are your stances on Kitaman, VisceraEyes and MrWigglesShow nested quote +On January 14 2012 20:51 wherebugsgo wrote:On January 14 2012 20:08 Palmar wrote:On January 14 2012 20:04 wherebugsgo wrote:On January 14 2012 20:02 Cyber_Cheese wrote:On January 14 2012 19:59 wherebugsgo wrote:On January 14 2012 19:57 Palmar wrote:
Wherebugsgo, can you summarize your case against me in one post so I can break it down and tell you why you're dumb and bad, possibly scum. I don't explain shit to scum Explain it to me then. go read my filter in one word, meta. So, knowing each game is a different game, and that meta is not valid unless it's applied very precisely (you can't say something like x has posted less than usual, what's important is how, why and what he has posted), you still think that you have a valid enough case? Would you bet your abilities as a player on this case? if I'm wrong about you being scum right now it reflects more on how bad your play is right now than mine. The fact that you are willing to try and guilt me into laying off you suggests you already know I'm town. Otherwise, you wouldn't ask whether I am willing to bet my abilities as a player on this case, since if I was scum I'd have no vested interest in something like that. So, that just strengthens my case even more. TL;DR, go die, scum. WBG, you might be right, but with meta alone you aren't very convincing. Show nested quote +On January 14 2012 20:57 Palmar wrote:On January 14 2012 20:51 wherebugsgo wrote:On January 14 2012 20:08 Palmar wrote:On January 14 2012 20:04 wherebugsgo wrote:On January 14 2012 20:02 Cyber_Cheese wrote:On January 14 2012 19:59 wherebugsgo wrote:On January 14 2012 19:57 Palmar wrote:
Wherebugsgo, can you summarize your case against me in one post so I can break it down and tell you why you're dumb and bad, possibly scum. I don't explain shit to scum Explain it to me then. go read my filter in one word, meta. So, knowing each game is a different game, and that meta is not valid unless it's applied very precisely (you can't say something like x has posted less than usual, what's important is how, why and what he has posted), you still think that you have a valid enough case? Would you bet your abilities as a player on this case? if I'm wrong about you being scum right now it reflects more on how bad your play is right now than mine. The fact that you are willing to try and guilt me into laying off you suggests you already know I'm town. Otherwise, you wouldn't ask whether I am willing to bet my abilities as a player on this case, since if I was scum I'd have no vested interest in something like that. So, that just strengthens my case even more. TL;DR, go die, scum. No, because you don't have a case. My play is in no way, shape, or form bad. Take away the Palmar name, and you have someone you'd probably have a town read on. This means you're not reading the game objectively, and thus it's your play that's bad, not mine. If you remove meta from a case, it should still have some merit to it. Does yours? The only possible way you're playing well right now, is if you're scum. You always get trapped in an 'I'm being accused, the person must be scum' state of mind Palmar. Remember what happened with Ace in XLVIII?
I'm not in the least bit surprised in your response; I didn't bother to reiterate myself because I knew you wouldn't understand my argument to begin with.
Go back and read my filter again if you are town.
|
Risk.Nuke threw in his candidacy, cast doubt on the easiest person to cast doubt on in the game (Palmar with his lack of effort), protected BC and promptly disappears.
I would not be averse to lynching him instead.
|
also for anyone who is legitimately concerned that I am tunneling Palmar so early in the game, go look at what I did in Steamship, XLVII, Resurrection, etc. After I saw Palmar's scum play in XLV I have found that there are consistent patterns in his play that almost never change. He admits this himself; he knows his scum play is not good.
However, his town play is incredibly easy to figure out. This is actually why it makes him a pretty good town player; he establishes his innocence very quickly. This is why, in Resurrection, in Steamship, and in XLVII I spent almost no time at all in concluding that Palmar was town. It's just stupidly easy to do so.
In this game, there is absolutely no reason to think Palmar is town. In over 24 hours, there has not been a single reason to do so. That's an incredibly long amount of time for someone who is normally as active as Palmar. Of course there isn't going to be anything much stronger than a meta argument at this stage in the game for someone like Palmar, with the kind of scum playstyle that Palmar has. This is true almost by definition; scum Palmar puts next to nothing in thread, and is, quite literally, absolutely worthless to town.
I personally am surprised that players like Wiggles and bum have not caught onto this yet. Maybe I'm paranoid, maybe I'm seeing things. But certainly I believe 100% that the best lynch for today is Palmar. I wouldn't say this if I didn't fully believe it, since I probably have played more with Palmar in the last 3 months than anyone else here. I know his current play. If you don't believe me, that's fine, but I don't see anyone pushing anyone better for lynch.
Let's stop this stupid mason discussion shit and actually move on to hunting scum. Too many of you have been saying you'll do it and then not actually following up. We have around 15 hours left in the day and no candidates have any real momentum, and the scumhunting is still extraordinarily minimum.
|
Um, WBG, there hasn't really been any mason discussion for a while now.
I feel like the whole thread went back about 15 pages. Gotta figure out why.
|
I just couldn't go to bed yet without being caught up
I didn't want to clutter up the thread with one line replies like I was doing, though, that's not good to do. I am going to catch up from my most recent campaign post when I wake up. I want to address something CC said right now, though.
Masons and mafia are not at a point where they know enough information to decide what to do yet. They are the only people who have PMs right now, I'm pretty sure.
Can mafia communicate during the day, where there are no PMs this game?
Even if they can't, they have a neighbourizer like town do, and whether or not it's BC, ~OpZ~, or Mattchew I don't know. That is probably the town ones, and we have a mafia neighbourizer hanging out like Sandroba. That is who I would lynch for his scummy pushing of mason outting. I really don't like having the masons out at all for the mafia to "deal with" like you said.
They are the mouths that we need to use
|
Hi friends! Up and awake. Spending my time at a Starbucks in order to stay on track. Sorry if I cover older posts in my analysis, I was asleep.
Topics to discuss:
A) Mattchew
Let’s analyze his post.
On January 14 2012 10:46 Mattchew wrote:
I am running for Mayor.
I believe you should vote for me because I am confirmed town. How? Let me explain. I am a mason who used my first "masoning" on Foolishness. In the past I have proven not great at this game both as mafia and as town. I also have not been a good listener to scum team advice when it is given to me. So the odds of a scum team picking me to be their mason is slim to none. Not really an argument. A variance of the usual “I suck at scum”. Nothing special.Also, the fact that I pm'd arguably the best townie player in the game should prove in itself that I am town. I am not a vet or a well regarded player, why would any scum team even consider the thought of letting me either a. (if foolishness is also scum) claim to PM one of their best players and spotlight him or b. (if foolishness is town) let me PM one of the best townies and maybe get myself caught. This is logic. This make sense. Why would mafia PM the best town player straight away? After he already started a campaign for BM. There is no real perspective for scum here. And the idea that both are scum is strange, too. The BM campaign wouldn’t make sense. There’s no chance that all 3 are scum.Why should we vote you if you are bad?A. I am confirmed town. This is by far the best reason to elect me. Not really confirmed. But by logic he’s likely town.B. I would become a roleblock immune, mason, with either 3 votes (mayor) or a jailing ability. Masons can’t get roleblock! They have a day action. So B is not really an issue. The townish vibes make the difference here. C. The fact that I am a mason allows me to solicit advice on my actions behind closed doors from veteran players. While I obviously will be extremely skeptical in everything they tell me, it is better than a Mayor acting purely on his own. I will not be manipulated because I will present the options and ask their opinions on them. I will not be asking broad questions, yet specific questions to leave little to no room for scum influence. Makes sense to me. That is why the BC claim timing was so odd to me. He would have had a great chance to become mayor. What is your stance on Mayoral Issues.I will be active. I can read and respond while at work. Monday - Friday I should be on and reading from 13:30 GMT (+00:00) to 04:00 GMT (+00:00). Saturday and sunday I will be reading and responding while watching football but as the day progresses I will probably be getting more and more drunk, around 03:00 GMT (+00:00). The standard obligatory "I suck at scum" I currently am looking at 3 candidates for the day 1 lynch and will be open to discussion on all 3. Those 3 are (in no particular order) Ciryandor, Mapco, Chaosquo is also good. The mayor downside of his post  . I agree with WBG here, these candidates suck. Would like to see Echelot or Palmar here. Mapco is a new player, you can clearly see it. So why lynch him.I am now open for questions for the next half hour or so before company arrives at my house and I will be offline until 16:00 GMT (+00:00) [/b]
That being said, before he was roleclaiming, he already posted some really townish posts to back him up like this:
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=253716¤tpage=31#605
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=253716¤tpage=31#612
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=253716¤tpage=35#682
He is clearly applying logic to help town. Passionately fighting for the right townplay. Thinking ahead and providing opinions and information. I like this. A lot.
In the bigger picture, his playstyle alongside masoning foolishness doesn’t make sense as a scum play. The PM log seems consistent to other stuff they’ve been saying. E.g. foolishness attitude towards masons. It’s either well faked or real.
Foolishness would never suggest his mafia buddy BM if he were scum only to proceed and claim another scum buddy. That’s way too risky.
Therefore, I am convinced. And my townread clearly outweigh the disagreement in the lynch choices. So here it is:
##vote Mattchew
2) @ foolishness, just a quick question. Where is this coming from, did he mason you or is it just assuming because of his posts?
On January 14 2012 09:16 Foolishness wrote:Show nested quote +On January 14 2012 09:05 Jayjay54 wrote:
Hmm. As this thread slowed down a bit, could all the candidates please say what their lynch plan for day one is and why? would be quite nice for the town! As I speak on the behalf of the candidacy of the one and only BILL MURRAY I can tell you right now that he will be lynching Chaosquo.
3) Our lovely hydra Protactinium
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=253716¤tpage=44#870
I’m not going to make a detailed case on his post. I just think it’s really good and focused. Have the same feeling about BC. Everyone read this post and consider unvoting him. There’s something off here. Like I stated in a bazillion post after his roleclaim. He started a discussion, he could’ve easily started differently. Also, there was no need to this at day 1, but night 1. I don’t feel comfortable with him as a mayor.
The roleclaim made zeeero sense. Read his filter, he doesn’t provide any reasonable explantion. He argues about how to deal with masons, but not why he claimed.
So why not vote him then? I like his lynch candidate and analysis and I think he’s town, but IMO a mason as mayor could be helping a lot. That’s why my vote is on mattchew even though I am completely onboard the we should lynch BC train!
4) sandro
On January 14 2012 15:49 sandroba wrote:Nah you don't interest me. Plus I wish I could. Maybe I can. Who the fuck knows.
This post was just odd to me. He was the one who initiated the mass claim, why post something like this now. Seems inconsistent.
5) Echelon
On January 14 2012 04:17 Jayjay54 wrote: Show nested quote +On January 14 2012 04:02 EchelonTee wrote:
@jay, it was a posting mistake, that would be a pretty sorry way to try and get town credit. I have spreadsheets and stuff, which is where it came from. its not good practice imo to post tells without substantiation, thus I would've rather not posted that tidbit. And what's with the -mafia tag, is that just a dig at my post?
I don't like foolishness but that doesn't mean bm is bad. will return to this again later.
Current opinion on BC: wouldn't it have been better to get elected then mason one of your bodyguards? To get a tell on them? You already had a good shot at getting elected... I don't see as this scum though, more like a weird gambit.
Posted from phone, will post more later. You posted TL links. How is this coming from a spreadsheet? Do you have links in your spreadsheet? The mafia tag was a dig, yes. Your thoughts on BM and BC are right, though
I am still waiting for an explanation here. Seriously. Step up.
6) Opz
On January 14 2012 06:18 Jayjay54 wrote:Show nested quote +On January 14 2012 06:09 ~OpZ~ wrote:On January 14 2012 06:07 BloodyC0bbler wrote:On January 14 2012 06:07 ~OpZ~ wrote:On January 14 2012 06:04 BloodyC0bbler wrote:On January 14 2012 06:02 ~OpZ~ wrote:
I'm still wondering the proper benefits to the mass mason claim. I'm neutral as again, the role seems rather bland for the town this game. Being a mason doesn't confirm you. I'd like to know the general town consensus.
So far I see Sandroba screaming for mass mason claim. Which I suppose all of the whisperers being public knowledge would be a good thing. But I don't wanna feel like sheep. I suppose theres no way around it though, or that its really important. I'm Mason #2. And I mason'd BC. But he won't talk to me. *cries*
to be fair i have no mod confirmation that i was mason'd -_- ...To be fair, do you think I would willingly violate the rules? I'm more about enjoying my experience of playing than winning. I'm above cheating at mafia. fair point. Thank you for that respect, good sir. so you're saying that the masoning has not been mod confirmed? or what rule didn't you want to violate?
still waiting for an answer here as well. Not to accuse you. But I just don’t get what happened. You masoned him, you didn’t get confirmation and thus you never wrote him? Wth?
Finally this post here)
On January 14 2012 13:52 Maxella wrote:How do you guys even have the time to read all of this? I'm back on Page 32 and there are 45 pages so far? And we're still in day 1? This is bonkers ... I'm skipping a solid 15 pages of conversation and doing the only thing that makes sense. ##Vote Bill Murray for Mayor. Why? He survived the zombie apocolypse. That's good enough for me 
post is either dumb, bonkerz or stupid. I am not sure yet…
So that’s it for now.
|
Sorry guys, had school and then had to work til 4am.
At this moment, I'm considering switching my vote for mayor to kita.
I fear WBG may be correct in regards to Palmar and that comes as unexpected to me. Not that he'd be correct, but that I'd be thinking Palmar is a good lynch d1 after the last game I was in and the realizations I came to.
(what happens if no one reaches majority for the mayoral lynch?)
It's now 5 am, I'm exhausted, I will see you tomorrow.
|
FREEAGLELAND26781 Posts
glurio is replacing d3_crescentia.
|
Holy Jalapenos. Just noticed my game started. Time to catch up.
|
On January 14 2012 11:51 wherebugsgo wrote:
I'm willing to vote bum for the fact that I like him right now. I think he's
Bum are you willing to lynch Palmar?
I'd be willing to lynch BC too if I continue feeling the way I'm feeling about him. But we'll see. Need more time on that, since BC is much harder to read than Palmar. Palmar's just like lolscum
woke up and I'm at this post.
Yeah I liked bum a lot too but I don't really like the people he likes
|
On January 14 2012 19:54 Adam4167 wrote:
EchelonTee:
”Adam, I’m curious if you are still for cheese”
I missed this line because of the whole “–town” debacle that occurred right after it. And the answer is… No, I've since put my vote on Protactinium. I don’t trust cheese since a large portion of his posts have been shitty. He can change my mind by doing some great analysis though.
GGQ:
You’ve had some experience playing with Palmar, should we hang him based on his meta of being obstructive and lazy as scum?
Jackal58:
In your last post, you agreed with Nisani201 that lynching Palmar based off of meta alone is a stupid idea. Do you feel that Palmar should warrant a ‘stay of execution’ until day 2 so we can better determine his alignment?
Actually I was disagreeing with him.
+ Show Spoiler +On January 14 2012 10:49 Jackal58 wrote:Show nested quote +On January 14 2012 10:38 wherebugsgo wrote:On January 14 2012 10:35 Toadesstern wrote:On January 14 2012 10:30 wherebugsgo wrote:On January 14 2012 10:28 Mr. Wiggles wrote:
Also, BC when are you claiming who you masoned with? I'd like confirmation about your role.
Right now, I'm leaning town on you. I've seen you manipulate townies before in PM as scum, and in light of that, your mason claim makes it seem like you're more likely to be town. I don't see a benefit for a scum BC to claim mason, when it puts a lot of pressure and suspicion on himself, when instead he can just win the election and use his secret mason role to manipulate townies. Instead, you're going to be forced to pretty much claim your target every day, and anyone you talk to is instantly going to be more on guard after all the discussion today. let's get this straight right now, so we don't have to deal with this later: BC's mason claim is NOT reflective of his alignment in any way, shape, or form. If he's scum, people saying "oh yeah his mason claim makes him more likely to be town" and then voting him are exactly what he wants! Good scum take calculated risks like this, and this very well could be a calculated move to get the mayoral position. Since the mason claim is not indicative of alignment, please do not suggest that it is, because such a suggestion is not even close to conclusive or useful. yeah that's what i keep saying. Or at least I tried to. I see his claim as reasonable in some situations and it's it could be good for both, townie and mafia BC. I'm pretending that mason never happened at this point in time, I'd also like to leave palmar for d2 to see what changes. It's not like he's going to run away and if he's still behaving like that, fine lynch if. For the time being we got some better candidates to look at imo. no, screw leaving people till day 2. If he's useless now he'll be useless day 2. Kill him.
I couldn't care less about veterans and usefulness later on or all of that bs. If you're a vet and I think you're scum day 1 I want you to die day 1. Palmar fits this perfectly. Just look at his filter if you don't believe me; he's had a full day (and by EU time it was an actual day, I've only had about 6 hours worth if you compare) and all of his posts have been one liner marginal content bull. He also refuses to respond to any sort of pressure and has been completely incapable of any sort of scumhunting. He's scum. Just kill him. Thank you. I don't know why people are willing to give obvscum til day 2 to get their act together. On January 14 2012 12:36 Jackal58 wrote:Show nested quote +On January 14 2012 12:16 Nisani201 wrote:
I would recommend against a Palmar lynch. The argument against him is entirely meta-based, and as such should not be used as the basis of an argument.
However I would like to see him post more. Good enough for me.
|
Ah, OK.
I assumed "Good enough for me", was your way of saying "OK, you make a good argument", when instead you meant "A meta case is 'good enough for me' to lynch him with". My mistake.
While you're around, who do you like for Mayor? I have an idea which way you might go ( )
|
Sandroba are you trying to trick peoples radar again like you did with Radfield?
|
On January 14 2012 23:23 Adam4167 wrote:Ah, OK. I assumed "Good enough for me", was your way of saying "OK, you make a good argument", when instead you meant "A meta case is 'good enough for me' to lynch him with". My mistake. While you're around, who do you like for Mayor? I have an idea which way you might go ( )
Bum.
|
Some people won't really get a segment here. I'm a little bit more busy than I'd like, so if you want more information, you'll have to prod me for it.
Competitors I would consider lynching
Risk.Nuke- He disappeared off the face of the earth after a few posts.
Slardar- Makes a more or less throwaway campaign long after theres about 10 candidates. Has barely any thread presence.
BC for his anti-town plan.
Other people we should't elect
Mattchew seems to have his campaign revolve heavily around his role, and is keen on WIFOM. He also seems a little bit too easily influenced, and I don't want to risk scum masons taking the mayors votes. I wouldn't be surprised if he was only running because Foolishness told him to.
Sandroba.
Neutral
Bumatlarge directed blues, and wants to kill me, so I'll pass.
Wiggles.
Would like to vote for
VisceraEyes currently has my vote. This is more because I want him to stick in the running and see what his next move is more than anything.
Kitaman.
Protactinium has no campaign promises or anything to hold him to, akin to wiggles, except he made the original case on BC, so he ranks a little higher.
Would probably vote for
Bill Murray. He's very active, and seems willing to listen to people while thinking for himself.
Meapak is a strong contender.
Myself, if it was an option.
|
On January 14 2012 22:13 L wrote:
Holy Jalapenos. Just noticed my game started. Time to catch up.
All is lost
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
