|
On August 23 2011 04:54 wherebugsgo wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2011 04:53 Vain wrote:On August 23 2011 04:22 hiro protagonist wrote:On August 23 2011 04:20 Vain wrote:On August 23 2011 03:52 supersoft wrote:funny how xtfftc, vain and rayzorflash defend each other ;-) On August 23 2011 02:58 Vain wrote:On August 23 2011 02:44 supersoft wrote:
why don't we lynch RayzorFlash? He's probably gotten coached and his death would give us a lot of information to work with... Can you write out what information we get then? In my opinion that only creates more wifom On August 23 2011 03:30 xtfftc wrote:
He (Vain) is saying that if we agree on one single target for a vigilante, mafia would know who to protect. @vain: you want an answer to your question? filter me. That is correct I have no idea what your trying to say Vain... He asked me if i meant what xtffc said. To me it was pretty clear but i guess not to everyone. So to be clear: Yes, if we agree on a single target and direct vigilante's to them you have a big chance mafia just protects them. but i think we wasted too much posts on that subject already. Who are the 3 scummiest people to you, then?
1: nard
2: xtfftc
3: dunno yet
|
On August 23 2011 05:29 xtfftc wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2011 04:50 wherebugsgo wrote:
xtfftc has made some "contributions", but his reactions have been really strange. Supersoft made a list once of people who haven't voted, and xtfftc jumped to the conclusion that it was a suspicion list.
...
Apologizes meekly to supersoft later, why? I did not say that the list of people Supersoft made was a list of people who were suspicious - I merely pointed out that he was wrong. I voted for Palmer, Supersoft quoted my post and voted for me immediately after - and then he put me on the list. It was sloppy, no matter how you look at it. Then I saw I missed doing it on the voting thread, so I apologised for my mistake. Why - because I was wrong and even made a sneer remark on it.
Okay. Fair enough.
On August 23 2011 05:29 xtfftc wrote:Show nested quote +Then there's this gem: On August 21 2011 03:49 xtfftc wrote:On August 21 2011 03:37 wherebugsgo wrote:On August 21 2011 03:24 xtfftc wrote:
By the way, I have to apologise to supersoft - I just noticed that I didn't post in the voting thread, which was probably the reason he put me on his list (although it's still kind of sloppy).
So I'm going to vote after Sevryn defends himself. Palmar, DropBear and BrownBear are a story that has to develop further. wtf? why are you afraid of voting now? Is it because others have labeled you as scum already? I expected supersoft to be superhappy about this but noone else. Sevryn is basically dead, one way or another. No mafia will be dumb enough to protect him anymore and the townies are aware that going after anyone else now would look suspicious. But in case Sevryn gets modkilled, we need to use the opportunity for two town kills. wat wat indeed? What is it that you are claiming? Is this all about semantics or is there anything more to it?
#1: Why would it have been suspicious to go after anyone else? If you had evidence, you could've made the case for someone else! In fact, multiple people did (and weren't suspected of being scum) in the ultimate hours before Sevryn's lynch.
It seems like you've been afraid or hesitant for quite a bit.
On August 23 2011 05:29 xtfftc wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2011 04:50 wherebugsgo wrote:
I will answer to QuickSilver in a separate post because this one is long enough anyway. but never actually made such a post, semi-copping out with this trash: Show nested quote +If I don't answer QuickSilver, people will claim that I have nothing to say in my defense.
If I don't analyse Sevyrn, I will be accused of not contributing. I never got to responding to it, mostly because I felt there was not much to talk about. Most of his accusations were based on me arguing the point that lynching lurkers as top priority is not a great strategy for town. The rest was an analysis on my vote for Palmer, which was taken out of context. Still, there you go: Show nested quote +On August 20 2011 16:52 QuickSilver7 wrote:Our scum dying today is xtfftc, he does the same thing that Trotske does. On August 20 2011 05:09 xtfftc wrote:
##Vote: Palmar
He obviously had something in mind and there's no way he wasn't aware of how his accusations would be perceived by the rest of us.
However, his strategy hasn't benefited town by now. He has until the deadline to convince me to vote DropBear or BrownBear. If nothing meaningful comes out of the discussion initiated by him, I'd rather have one less player who throws arbitrary accusations around.
I'd also like to point out that it shouldn't be that difficult to convince me to switch to DropBear, considering DropBear's behaviour. So lemme get this straight, he votes Palmar to try and get Palmar to convince him that DB or BB are scum? He doesn’t even think Palmar is scum but he’s fine killing him if it means “one less player who throws arbitrary accusations around” Townies throw accusations around not mafia, mafia want to lurk where they won’t be seen. People vote for more than one reason. Not every vote means "this person is mafia". Sometimes you vote to pressure, sometime you vote to encourage.
Sure, but those reasons are generally bad. Look what happened to Sevryn when he voted to "pressurevote."
Vote to kill mafia. That's our job. Our job is not to extract information. Our job is to kill mafia. If you're not voting to kill mafia, then you're fucking up.
On August 23 2011 05:29 xtfftc wrote:Show nested quote +He also picks DB and BB as people who he’d switch to if Palmar magically convinces him that one of them is scum. However he doesn’t give any reasons why he’d vote for these people other than a very vague reference to DB’s “behavior.” Mentioning DB wasn't a vague reference, I had already commented on it in a previous post. Mentioning BB was to encourage Palmar to keep on with his lead because I thought he was onto something.
Why? You never mentioned WHY you thought he was onto something. In this sense, I agreed with Quicksilver.
Also, it makes very little sense how voting Palmar would encourage him to keep on with his "lead" on DB or BB. It just seems likely to cause chaos, as when you randomly vote for someone, it forces that person to defend themselves.
Voting to encourage someone is by far one of the strangest things you've said so far.
On August 23 2011 05:29 xtfftc wrote:Show nested quote +Here is another: On August 19 2011 08:46 xtfftc wrote:On August 19 2011 08:38 Curu wrote:
We already had a mess of a first day in Personality with everyone trying to roleplay.
What point are you trying to get at xtfftc? I don't have anything to add really - as long as we're all active, all is good. I'd just bear in mind that people don't want to die, even in a game. Woa red flags going up all over the place, for context xtfftc was posting some troll crap at the beginning about democracy and random stuff which Curu called him out on. Firstly he says he has nothing to add, bad bad bad, as a townie you can always add to the discussion. Show nested quote +For context, this post comes in the middle of a discussion about lynching lurkers and different lynch organization techniques. A townie should have lots to say on this subject, after the lynch is how we’re killing scum. Yet xtfftc doesn’t address any of this and skates by with a very neutral “as long as we're all active, all is good.” Then he drops the bomb “I'd just bear in mind that people don't want to die, even in a game” a townie would be happy to die, every townie that dies at night is a blue that didn’t get sniped (or a medic failure lolol  ). Townies should have no fear of death and be contributing as much as possible, any reticence towards posting indicates something to hide and that indicates scum. This was a discussion about policies which should have been over a long time ago. I said what I had to say - that some town players will lurk and lynching players for lurking is a bad idea. At the time of my post there were people calling out for lynching all lurkers as a top priority... I don't agree with this and never will.
Bad town players will lurk. While you're right in that lurking says little about alignment, it is certainly true that you in particular have had a reluctance toward posting. You haven't contributed very much to the town cause, and that raises red flags.
On August 23 2011 05:29 xtfftc wrote:Show nested quote +Anyway next post: On August 19 2011 08:06 chaos13 wrote:On August 19 2011 08:03 xtfftc wrote:
Surely the Mafia is aware that open discussion is the ordinary citizens' strongest weapon and are thus likely to target those who are unafraid to speak their minds? A dictator always targets the means of communication: the media, the internet, etc. Yes. Does that mean we should all lurk? No. If everybody discusses in a productive way, mafia will have trouble blending in and providing the same level of constructive input, and suddenly those extremely pro-town players don't become such high profile targets, because everyone is joining in to an equal degree. I agree, of course. If the whole population takes part in the democracy process, the people become too powerful to be messed with. But it often takes just one ordinary citizen to show signs of cowardice - and suddenly we see a snowball effect affecting the whole town. Show nested quote +But in the below post he contradicts himself by saying that if 1 person doesn't post, we all lose. Show nested quote +Snowball effect = one person deciding to do something and the others following. One person is not a problem unless the others follow suit.
I apologise if the way I expressed myself was a bit hard to understand but by twisting my words all you do is make me suspicious. I never said that "if 1 person doesn't post, we all lose" - I said that "One person is not a problem unless the others follow suit."
Okay.
On August 23 2011 05:29 xtfftc wrote:Show nested quote +The nested quotes here show the little exchange about democracy I was talking about earlier. Now I would have let that whole thing go as early game trolling and not taken anything he said seriously, but rather then say “oh hey nbd I was just trolling”, xtfftc chooses to defend his comments which means he meant them, if he mean them than GeyMist’s argument for xtfftc’s posts being scummy is suddenly relevant. Beyond the democracy exchange this post also rehashes stuff others have been saying about lurkers and town KP, adding nothing new to the table. The very definition of CWC. I did mean them and I still mean them - prioritising on lurkers is bad for the game. According to QuickSilver I was wrong for saying "there is nothing more to add", yet I am also wrong for "adding nothing new to the table". I made my point about the policy, then I made it again. And then I got asked about it again. Yes, I had nothing else to add and I still don't.
Yes, but when people suggest that we could lynch lurkers, you can add to the discussion by instead suggesting SPECIFIC PEOPLE to lynch, and reasons/evidence why. The only time you EVER did that was with Palmar, and that post was terrible because you voted for Palmar to "encourage" him to follow up on his lead.
Like I said earlier, you don't vote to "encourage" someone, pressurevote them, whatever. You vote someone to kill them, because you think they're mafia.
|
Oh, I forgot this:
After the #1 (my "wat" comment)
You said we needed to use the opportunity for two kills. Funny thing is, you really didn't have any suggestions for WHO to kill, just "hey guys maybe we should kill two people."
That makes me question your motives for wanting two people to die. If you wanted to lynch mafia, why wouldn't you make a suggestion of who you suspected?
|
On August 23 2011 05:40 Foolishness wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2011 05:27 VisceraEyes wrote:On August 22 2011 14:40 Foolishness wrote:
It's because I'm not sure what to make of the night events. I got roleblocked and shot. That's not something most people would do. Either way you got some pretty damning evidence against Mig there.
##Vote Mig Foolish, I'm concerned about your vote here. If you're not sure what to make of a night's events, why in the hell would you vote for someone that is in your opinion involved? I reread Mig's posts (like you, it was short reading) and he hasn't done anything overtly scummy so far...there are a LOT of scummy targets out here, why Mig? Everyone is voting based on YOUR logic, I'd like you to state ALL of the reasons you think Mig is the best lynch if you please. On the contrary, chaoser's the one that found the contradiction. I started the campaign against Mig yesterday, and chaoser was the only one who also voted for him on day 1 (and one of the few to actually comment about it). It only makes sense that we continue the campaign today since Mig hasn't done much to prove himself an ally to the town. And I am building a good case against him; you can expect more later in the day.
If it's based entirely around meta, don't bother. I like meta for determining peoples' motivations, but he hasn't posted much today, as you said, so it will be useless to that end.
If it's based on the posts he's made this game however, I look forward to reading it - he IS the leading candidate today.
|
On August 23 2011 04:12 hiro protagonist wrote:
@rayzor: Im sorry, what question do you want me to answer? you seem to think I need to defend my actions. I dont.
Kk, heres some clear questions: Hiro, what do you think of xtfftc? Why did you choose to vote for him? I want some opinions on who you think is scummy and who you think isnt... You've been wayyy too guarded this entire game, and have avoided saying anything about your opinions at all.
Your reasons for voting so far (spoilered due to length):
+ Show Spoiler +On August 21 2011 03:58 hiro protagonist wrote:
Voting Sevryn for now, as a no lynch is bad. On August 21 2011 07:54 hiro protagonist wrote:
I would be down with lynching RayzorFlash
On August 21 2011 08:53 hiro protagonist wrote:
Sorry Gman.
lets vote RayzorFlash everyone! On August 21 2011 10:04 hiro protagonist wrote:
Ok people, heres the deal:
I want to switch to razor. others do to, but if you make the switch you must promise to stay around till the dead line in order to guarantee a lynch. if by 15 min. till the deadline and we dont have enough votes we all switch back to Sev. cool? Say you switch, and there is not enough to make a lynch happen, but you dont switch back to Sev, the consequences will be dire
##Vote: RazorFlash On August 21 2011 10:50 hiro protagonist wrote:
looks like this wont work :/
It was worth a try, but not enough people that where here wanted to switch.
Im going back to Sev, everyone that switched needs to as well
gogogo!
##Unvote
##Vote Sevryn On August 23 2011 04:12 hiro protagonist wrote:
I am so down for lynching xtfftc today.
##Vote: xtfftc
Please stop this bullshit of voting without a reason, this is almost as bad as "stealth voting" and "ninja voting", IMO... Give a reason for why your votes are deliberately ambiguous
|
On August 23 2011 05:52 Vain wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2011 04:54 wherebugsgo wrote:On August 23 2011 04:53 Vain wrote:On August 23 2011 04:22 hiro protagonist wrote:On August 23 2011 04:20 Vain wrote:On August 23 2011 03:52 supersoft wrote:funny how xtfftc, vain and rayzorflash defend each other ;-) On August 23 2011 02:58 Vain wrote:On August 23 2011 02:44 supersoft wrote:
why don't we lynch RayzorFlash? He's probably gotten coached and his death would give us a lot of information to work with... Can you write out what information we get then? In my opinion that only creates more wifom On August 23 2011 03:30 xtfftc wrote:
He (Vain) is saying that if we agree on one single target for a vigilante, mafia would know who to protect. @vain: you want an answer to your question? filter me. That is correct I have no idea what your trying to say Vain... He asked me if i meant what xtffc said. To me it was pretty clear but i guess not to everyone. So to be clear: Yes, if we agree on a single target and direct vigilante's to them you have a big chance mafia just protects them. but i think we wasted too much posts on that subject already. Who are the 3 scummiest people to you, then? 1: nard 2: xtfftc 3: dunno yet
Sorry for all the posting, but I just noticed this, gotta follow up:
1.) Okay, why? Why is nard suspicious to you?
2.) Why is xtfftc suspicious to you?
3.) Why is nard MORE suspicious to you than xtfftc?
4.) If you don't have a third person, what have you thought about Mig? Rayzor?
5.) Why are you lurking so hard?
|
On August 23 2011 05:52 Vain wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2011 04:54 wherebugsgo wrote:On August 23 2011 04:53 Vain wrote:On August 23 2011 04:22 hiro protagonist wrote:On August 23 2011 04:20 Vain wrote:On August 23 2011 03:52 supersoft wrote:funny how xtfftc, vain and rayzorflash defend each other ;-) On August 23 2011 02:58 Vain wrote:On August 23 2011 02:44 supersoft wrote:
why don't we lynch RayzorFlash? He's probably gotten coached and his death would give us a lot of information to work with... Can you write out what information we get then? In my opinion that only creates more wifom On August 23 2011 03:30 xtfftc wrote:
He (Vain) is saying that if we agree on one single target for a vigilante, mafia would know who to protect. @vain: you want an answer to your question? filter me. That is correct Why did you slam a vote onto Sevryn when it was obvious there was a very good possibility the vote may have been shifted off of a person that appeared to be a townie getting mislynched? I have no idea what your trying to say Vain... He asked me if i meant what xtffc said. To me it was pretty clear but i guess not to everyone. So to be clear: Yes, if we agree on a single target and direct vigilante's to them you have a big chance mafia just protects them. but i think we wasted too much posts on that subject already. Who are the 3 scummiest people to you, then? 1: nard 2: xtfftc 3: dunno yet
|
Dammit.
Why did you slam a vote onto Sevryn when it was obvious there was a very good possibility the vote may have been shifted off of a person that appeared to be a townie getting mislynched?
|
On August 23 2011 06:14 Jackal58 wrote:
Dammit.
Why did you slam a vote onto Sevryn when it was obvious there was a very good possibility the vote may have been shifted off of a person that appeared to be a townie getting mislynched?
because i'm stupid and didn't want to no-lynch. Also it was like 3am in the morning:@
|
purely out of respect for mig's normal awesome townplay I'm fine with lynching him.
|
On August 23 2011 06:19 Palmar wrote:
purely out of respect for mig's normal awesome townplay I'm fine with lynching him.
On August 21 2011 07:03 Jackal58 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 21 2011 06:59 Palmar wrote:
i'd be totally down with lynching RayzorFlash You're totally down with lynching everybody.
|
Vain please answer bugs' questions if it's not too much trouble. Your activity is atrocious and you're not giving ANYONE any reason to keep you around with your non-committal 'suspicions'...
And I'd be interested in hearing Hiro's response to Rayzor. Last time Rayzor asked him a question, he answered by saying he didn't have to. Let's see if he's more compliant this time around.
|
Foolishness
United States3044 Posts
On August 23 2011 06:14 Jackal58 wrote:
Dammit.
Why did you slam a vote onto Sevryn when it was obvious there was a very good possibility the vote may have been shifted off of a person that appeared to be a townie getting mislynched?
Don't forget that Mig did this as well.
Let's say Rayzor is mafia. Does it make sense for one of Mig or Vain to be mafia? Yes because their votes ensured that the vote switch wouldn't happen. Does it make sense for both of them to be mafia? No because mafia wouldn't out two of their members just like that.
You obviously know who I think is mafia. Vain's posting may not be the most optimal, but he writes stuff like this:
On August 23 2011 04:22 Vain wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2011 04:13 supersoft wrote:
i'd prefer vain but let's do it.
##Vote: xtfftc wtf, you prefer me but lets just go for xtffc. Sounds logic. Now when its not xtffc you can always say"oh jeah i liked vain better" very convenient
That's totally a townie talking there. Not afraid to voice his opinion or yell at someone. I'm not totally sold that he's townie, it's just Mig looks a lot better for lynching now. Not to mention if Vain flips green we'll be back at square one. If Mig flips green we can look at who jumped on his case after Chaoser's initial vote today.
|
On August 23 2011 06:19 Palmar wrote:
purely out of respect for mig's normal awesome townplay I'm fine with lynching him.
Hey surprise surprise...Palmar on the biggest bandwagon. Welcome back bro.
|
#1: Why would it have been suspicious to go after anyone else?
Because it would look as if they are trying to save their buddy.
If you had evidence, you could've made the case for someone else!
I did and I made one against Rayzor.
Vote to kill mafia. That's our job. Our job is not to extract information. Our job is to kill mafia. If you're not voting to kill mafia, then you're fucking up.
...
Like I said earlier, you don't vote to "encourage" someone, pressurevote them, whatever. You vote someone to kill them, because you think they're mafia.
I don't agree. The game is not that simple. Yes, if we have a serious target, we vote to kill him. By the time of my vote there wasn't.
Yes, but when people suggest that we could lynch lurkers, you can add to the discussion by instead suggesting SPECIFIC PEOPLE to lynch, and reasons/evidence why.
We are talking about very early Day 1. You and like ~25 of the other players didn't add something constructive about specific people at that time; the few who did were just probing. You can not attack me for not having a concrete target that early in the game.
On August 23 2011 05:55 wherebugsgo wrote:
Oh, I forgot this:
After the #1 (my "wat" comment)
You said we needed to use the opportunity for two kills. Funny thing is, you really didn't have any suggestions for WHO to kill, just "hey guys maybe we should kill two people."
That makes me question your motives for wanting two people to die. If you wanted to lynch mafia, why wouldn't you make a suggestion of who you suspected?
In the next hour after this post I urged DB and BB to enter the discussion and raised my suspicions on Rayzor. But why wouldn't we want a second lynch? Everyone agrees that a non-lynch is bad for town, so why not do two?
On August 23 2011 05:41 hiro protagonist wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2011 05:37 xtfftc wrote:On August 23 2011 04:50 hiro protagonist wrote:On August 23 2011 04:30 xtfftc wrote:On August 23 2011 04:23 hiro protagonist wrote:
while you here, could you give me your opinion of xtfftc? who do you want to lynch today? And while he is working on it, how about you sharing your thoughts on my persona? The first time you ever mentioned me was when you voted for my lynching. well, there's this: On August 20 2011 05:09 xtfftc wrote:
##Vote: Palmar
He obviously had something in mind and there's no way he wasn't aware of how his accusations would be perceived by the rest of us.
However, his strategy hasn't benefited town by now. He has until the deadline to convince me to vote DropBear or BrownBear. If nothing meaningful comes out of the discussion initiated by him, I'd rather have one less player who throws arbitrary accusations around.
I'd also like to point out that it shouldn't be that difficult to convince me to switch to DropBear, considering DropBear's behaviour. yeah, If I was scum, I wouldn't want someone around that randomly accusing people ether. I mean, why would you want anyone to do something that puts pressure on scum, right? It puts pressure on everyone and can be detrimental to discussion. Don't take things out of context, please. I did not say anything about the negative aspects of random accusations. I said that if I was scum, I would not want someone around that randomly accuses people.
Well you could have asked me why it is that I don't want people throwing random accusations and I would have explained to you what is my stance on the issue. Why it is that you decided to vote before enquiring is beyond me.
|
On August 23 2011 05:59 RayzorFlash wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2011 04:12 hiro protagonist wrote:
@rayzor: Im sorry, what question do you want me to answer? you seem to think I need to defend my actions. I dont.
Kk, heres some clear questions: Hiro, what do you think of xtfftc? He's scum Why did you choose to vote for him? He's scum I want some opinions on who you think is scummy xtfftc and who you think isnt the game is called find the scum, not find the townie... You've been wayyy too guarded this entire game, and have avoided saying anything about your opinions at all. lolPlease stop this bullshit of voting without a reason, this is almost as bad as "stealth voting" and "ninja voting", IMO... Give a reason for why your votes are deliberately ambiguous No. Dont like it? Vote for me
KK, my turn!
what do you think of xtfftc? what about Mig?
|
On August 23 2011 06:22 Foolishness wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2011 06:14 Jackal58 wrote:
Dammit.
Why did you slam a vote onto Sevryn when it was obvious there was a very good possibility the vote may have been shifted off of a person that appeared to be a townie getting mislynched? Don't forget that Mig did this as well. Let's say Rayzor is mafia. Does it make sense for one of Mig or Vain to be mafia? Yes because their votes ensured that the vote switch wouldn't happen. Does it make sense for both of them to be mafia? No because mafia wouldn't out two of their members just like that. You obviously know who I think is mafia. Vain's posting may not be the most optimal, but he writes stuff like this: Show nested quote +On August 23 2011 04:22 Vain wrote:On August 23 2011 04:13 supersoft wrote:
i'd prefer vain but let's do it.
##Vote: xtfftc wtf, you prefer me but lets just go for xtffc. Sounds logic. Now when its not xtffc you can always say"oh jeah i liked vain better" very convenient That's totally a townie talking there. Not afraid to voice his opinion or yell at someone. I'm not totally sold that he's townie, it's just Mig looks a lot better for lynching now. Not to mention if Vain flips green we'll be back at square one. If Mig flips green we can look at who jumped on his case after Chaoser's initial vote today.
Can you maybe rewind and replay that post, only start it with "Let's say Rayzor is town" please? See where that leads you? This whole post is nothing but WIFOM.
|
btw, I will put up an analysis on xtfftc when I feel like it.
|
On August 23 2011 06:22 Foolishness wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2011 06:14 Jackal58 wrote:
Dammit.
Why did you slam a vote onto Sevryn when it was obvious there was a very good possibility the vote may have been shifted off of a person that appeared to be a townie getting mislynched? Don't forget that Mig did this as well. Let's say Rayzor is mafia. Does it make sense for one of Mig or Vain to be mafia? Yes because their votes ensured that the vote switch wouldn't happen. Does it make sense for both of them to be mafia? No because mafia wouldn't out two of their members just like that. You obviously know who I think is mafia. Vain's posting may not be the most optimal, but he writes stuff like this: Show nested quote +On August 23 2011 04:22 Vain wrote:On August 23 2011 04:13 supersoft wrote:
i'd prefer vain but let's do it.
##Vote: xtfftc wtf, you prefer me but lets just go for xtffc. Sounds logic. Now when its not xtffc you can always say"oh jeah i liked vain better" very convenient That's totally a townie talking there. Not afraid to voice his opinion or yell at someone. I'm not totally sold that he's townie, it's just Mig looks a lot better for lynching now. Not to mention if Vain flips green we'll be back at square one. If Mig flips green we can look at who jumped on his case after Chaoser's initial vote today.
Well aware of that. That's why I asked Vain to explain. Most scum would have ignored the question.
My vote has been on Mig all day and shall remain there unless he shows up with the heads of all the scum team on a platter.
In the mean time I'm enjoying the bugs flitting about the porch light.
|
On August 23 2011 06:25 hiro protagonist wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2011 05:59 RayzorFlash wrote:On August 23 2011 04:12 hiro protagonist wrote:
@rayzor: Im sorry, what question do you want me to answer? you seem to think I need to defend my actions. I dont.
Kk, heres some clear questions: Hiro, what do you think of xtfftc? He's scum Why did you choose to vote for him? He's scum I want some opinions on who you think is scummy xtfftc and who you think isnt the game is called find the scum, not find the townie... You've been wayyy too guarded this entire game, and have avoided saying anything about your opinions at all. lolPlease stop this bullshit of voting without a reason, this is almost as bad as "stealth voting" and "ninja voting", IMO... Give a reason for why your votes are deliberately ambiguous No. Dont like it? Vote for me KK, my turn! what do you think of xtfftc? what about Mig?
Done.
##Unvote: xtfftc
##Vote: hiro protagonist
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
