EPTMy main reason for wanting to lynch Mandalor is because he started this ridiculous vote on a bad townie who seems like he doesn't want to play and it apparently easy to get votes for and won't defend himself.
Newbie Mini Mafia XXXV - Page 2
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
Trotske
410 Posts
My main reason for wanting to lynch Mandalor is because he started this ridiculous vote on a bad townie who seems like he doesn't want to play and it apparently easy to get votes for and won't defend himself. | ||
|
Trotske
410 Posts
| ||
|
Trotske
410 Posts
| ||
|
Trotske
410 Posts
On January 15 2013 03:03 Sn0_Man wrote: Okay fine, but seriously. Just read that post a few times, its HORRIBLE. Its emotional, nonsensical and in no way makes any sense from any townie perspective. I'll quote it for ease: Even if he is right, and laguerta is just a bad townie, that post... Scum want to preserve the bad townies over the good ones I guess. Sorry if you didn't understand my meaning, I was defending someone who I think is town when we had a better lynch candidate you are using my defense on laguerta to say I'm scum? you posted On January 15 2013 02:08 Sn0_Man wrote: This is the scummiest thing I’ve seen posted all thread. He calls laguerta a lurker, then asks to lynch a different lurker. Then he calls the vote ridiculous after many others have given perfectly fine reasons for laguerta to be scum. Then he says that he is keeping his vote on the person who “started the vote (Mandalor, who at this point HAD NO OTHER VOTES). I didn't vote to lynch mandlalor because he was lurking, no where did I say that please do not put words in my mouth to make a case on me. I was really trying to stop the band wagon that I felt was ridiculous on laguerta and so I voted for my scummiest read. I Don't see how the fact that he had no votes on him mattered even more so because in the end he got lynched. I will post again once I have read more into other people's cases just wanted to get this cleared up right now. | ||
|
Trotske
410 Posts
I feel that most of his posts so far have been only restating that he doesn't like lurkers Literally half of his posts have had some comment about lurkers. His posts seem to me to be saying nothing while looking very large at the same time. FoS on zebezt Mocasta and Oats had made some good points and after going back and looking at his filter I find it highly suspicious that he hasn't added anything of his own to the game so far and has been posting as if to make it look like he is active while not actually contributing anything. I would love for some other opinions on these players. Thanks. | ||
|
Trotske
410 Posts
On January 15 2013 10:04 Mocsta wrote: I have to be quick not much time. must is a strong word. We don't know that.. Look i think its pointless assuming Serial Killer this early, thats like making association cases. Its likely Oats shot Glurio.. but his last post points out a few scum reads.. why glurio out of all of them? Just keep that in mind. Gotta go. Could be the lurker factor, isn't it a common start for vig to kill off lurkers? | ||
|
Trotske
410 Posts
| ||
|
Trotske
410 Posts
| ||
|
Trotske
410 Posts
On January 15 2013 11:39 Mocsta wrote: Personally. I found his attempt at a re-cap: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=391615¤tpage=29#580 to be the most impartial analysis of the Day1 events. Most people that tried to summarise, had the perception skewed towards their goals.. (e.g. Shz with me.. and Sn0_man with Trotske etc etc). Hence.. I found this post useful, I'm surprised you dont care to mention it as a meaningful contribution? @Trotske Spaghetticus identified you as as a low post count, low quality contributer. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=391615¤tpage=29#570 You have reciprocated by saying he is only targetting lurkers, and therefore he is a cause for concern. Why would this behaviour be scummy motivated? @Spaghetticus I want to see more from you. I think coming in as a replacement and providing a through summary - that includes original thought is a good sign of your alignment. However, we are now in Day2, and I am going to be watching your actions carefully. Its easy to say you are targeting lurkers, but I want to see this followed through. Actions need to speak louder than words. I ask that you begin to lead the discussions on one your identified scummy-ish lurkers. i.e. It is cause for concern when the only scum hunting he has done is point out that lurkers are bad. | ||
|
Trotske
410 Posts
| ||
|
Trotske
410 Posts
On January 15 2013 15:37 Mocsta wrote: @Trotske I hope we are just having communication breakdown here; as you did not address my question. Im not asking why it is a cause for concern. Im asking you to explain why the behaviour that YOU have identified is scummy motivated. I do not think what you have provided so far is a sufficient response. From what I understand one of the main things mafia will do is post but not give any new information or opinions on the game and perhaps just post things that have been said differently then they were before, Hence pointing out lurkers being half of his posts when the fact is we have had multiple people already post about lurkers being a problem. I don't see how someone who comes in after it starts can just rephrase that there are lurkers and he doesn't like it and not be called out on it. On January 15 2013 13:03 Spaghetticus wrote: @Trotske Have you not heard? I am a pretty big deal. LAL is what I live and breathe day 1&2, but I understand your point that my contributions on other fronts have been limited. It may or may not be due to HAVING STARTED 50 HOURS AFTER EVERYONE ELSE. I am aware that I did ask you to contribute and that by going Ad-Hom I would be an enormous hypocrite. That you ask for contribution from someone who has been losing sleep catching up on the thread while you are sitting on a two-page filter after night one is not lost on me. You are contributing now however. If you want to pursue me further you need to post a case stating more than I haven’t done anything other than X. X is more than I see most people doing. Make a case or focus your efforts elsewhere please. When I see something scummy I'll call it out doesn't matter that other people haven't done as much. Please note that I did not claim you were scum and then vote for you I was asking other people's opinion on you. I find that your reasons for talking mostly about lurkers suspect and without much depth. NOTE I am at work and may not be able to post during the day. | ||
|
Trotske
410 Posts
On January 16 2013 03:14 zebezt wrote: Bleh.. Forgot I had to go out tonight. Good thing I already answered most questions.. My thoughts on Trotske before I go: I don't see many quality posts by him. At first he seems to like me (yay) later he changes his mind and puts a FoS on me stating I don't contribute that much. Weird turnaround, but not too scummy. He doesnt like Spag either saying Spag is only about finding lurkers. Seems a bit unfair since Spag has said this is mostly for the first days. besides that he hasnt said anything much at all. Many 1 line posts. Not a big contributor for sure. Why are you trying to discredit me? because I put a FoS on you? Your post is like the definition of ad-homiem. Also I never said I liked you, I assume you are referring to this post + Show Spoiler + On January 14 2013 08:55 Trotske wrote: @Acid How is Zebezt a better lynch than sn0_man. Also your post + Show Spoiler + On January 14 2013 08:34 Acid~ wrote: There were no questions that were "put to me", you just asked me to post and I did. So, now I have to "earn" town cred before I'm allowed to play? Oh please, pretty please, can I play with you Mr mayor? I find this attitude pretty fucking hypocritical coming from a guy who attacked someone else earlier supposedly because they were intimidating others into not participating. This shit you're trying to pull right there, not only is it exactly the kind of behavior you attacked in others, it's also textbook ad-hominem. So, please, with sugar on top, answer the fucking question. Maybe you'll manage to post your first line of useful content. seemed to be aimed at getting people emotional near the lynch deadline and you need to stop it now because that won't help people make informed lynch decisions. that post was 100% pointless unless you want to get people emotional. I was asking why he put a vote on you when I thought sn0_man had some scummy traits that you didn't even though you both had the same amount of activity. As for spag Just because it is his first day doesn't mean he gets to act like Day1 when there are a bunch of real day1 posts to go through. Thanks for your input on him though. I would still like some more talk about spag and zebezt. | ||
|
Trotske
410 Posts
On January 16 2013 05:55 Sn0_Man wrote: Then talk. I've openly stated that I don't like zebezt's filter, but that equally other people (like you) have scummy filters too and that town are simply misplaying this game, if nothing else due to a lack of detailed analysis and general activity. If you see anything specific that you would like to point out, or even re-emphasize (preferably with quotes, maybe some contrast with "valuable" posts...), I for one would LOVE to hear it. If not, I don't have any nails to put in the coffin zebezt is constructing for himself so I'll just leave it be. My thoughts on spag: I could totally see him being part of a fairly specific scum team but I can't see him getting lynched any time soon so I'm not wasting my time. If nothing else, he is stimulating posts which are a resource town MUST HAVE to win. And all his posts look townie, you have to be really skeptical/hypothetical to see a scum underlay. Too much "master plan/conspiracy theory" not enough "hey look its obvious he is scum" for me to make a real case against him. Thanks for the advice I'll try to go in depth once I get home from work. | ||
|
Trotske
410 Posts
On January 17 2013 00:27 Mocsta wrote: Because, for what ever reason, La Guerta has been interpretted widely as "bad town" and now that I have had a clear mind to revisit the past... it resets the now. I do not think La Guerta is bad town. I think his play is akin to TeMiL and therefore is SCUM What a crock of shit This is the silliest scum reasoning I have read. Don't you think this argument actually might work the other way around? you are seeing scum because you had a scum play like really really really bad town in another game? As I am 100% certain La Guerta is scum. If that is the case even though his posts may be useless to find associations. I think the chaos he raised will have presented an opportunistic scum to take advantage of the situation. Seems like a 180 from where you said "You have to take a RISK" most risks are not 100% sure things. I say ?problem? because I think the intention for La Guerta was always to be lynched Day 1. The gambit being to destroy town productivity over multiple days. As a strategy I can see validity in this. It didnt matter if he was alive or not, because he would never be productive for town. It could even be incorporated for scum to lynch La Guerta by uncovering the lie to get town cred for free. Obviously though its always better to keep up numbers, so I think mafia planted a seed (inception) they hoped someone else would develop (the idea being a luxury but not essential )... Therefore when Trotske threw this out there: I think this was the advantage scum were waiting for to receive a solution to problem that didnt really exist (i.e. save La Guerta), but would be a nice-to-have. so the plan was to start a bus for no reason other than town cred right away? that seems a little far fetched. Now, my scum read (by association) I think saw this opportunity and decided to pounce. The response to Trotske is here: (I have intentionally removed the name to remove bias when reading) I think this person setup the play and pulled the strings for La Guerta to be freed. The strings were pulled so hard, even narrow-sighted Oatsmaster was led to say this in the final heartbeats of Day 1: I think this quote summarises the state of confusion for town in general, and La Guerta uncertainty. We all know Oats is a straight shooter, so for him to be in this disarray is saying something. + Show Spoiler [Delving Deeper] + The unnamed person in the quote above is OmniEulogy (1) I have to put it out there, every game with OmniEulogy, I have pushed for his lynch at some stage in the game. I rate OmniEulogy high enough to be a scum mastermind. Heck last game he even talked about wanting to play scum that way - something very rare for newbies. Therefore I think he took full advantage of the thread due to Trotske's opening about La Guerta being bad town. (2) With this information I decided to read through OmniEulogy filter. These are the snippets I find interesting. His filter starts off rational, trying to be a voice of reason. I think this is not hard for a scum or mafia to do however (its easy enough to copy/paste other posts) its about whether you follow through. e.g. of Omni sound reassoning posts + Show Spoiler + On January 13 2013 03:55 OmniEulogy wrote: @Bringaniga you are going to make this game enjoyable I can tell. I already enjoy your posts and I look forward to more. lol Anyway just to touch on what has happened so far, I agree with Oats opinion on the lurkers, not on how Mocsta asked the question. If anybody really said yes/no to that question they would be pressured for it, possibly used as a reason to be voted on later in D1. It would be a silly thing for town to do, almost as silly as not answering the questions. I think having people explain the reasoning behind their votes is fantastic but I don't think it goes far enough, I believe we should go through each others cases and not only agree/disagree but see if we can prove the case right or wrong ourselves while waiting for the defense of the person being accused. (it is important to wait for them to defend themselves first, otherwise we give them an escape with no effort on their part) I know this is done to some degree each time a case is made but in both of my last games we've made the mistake of lynching townies due to their arguments not standing up to one persons case. I'm hoping we can avoid that if everybody weighs in with not only their own case but their thoughts on the other cases as well. It's a lot of extra effort but I believe it's a good way to discuss scum reads with each other and keep conversation strongly focused on scum hunting. I've got an event going on in roughly 4~ hours and I'll be busy for most of the night (cleaning up the house for it right now) so I'll periodically check in and hopefully be able to make some cases by the end of the night. Also if we could have Mandalor, Shz, Acid, Glurio, and Bringaniga answer at least one of the questions asked it would be nice. Let us know you are alive guys  + Show Spoiler + On January 13 2013 18:47 OmniEulogy wrote: Thanks Mocsta and yeah, I share your opinion on reads for people. I assume everybody is scum and let them prove that they are town. I know I am town, this isn't a soft call, I am a townie. I know I'll have to prove it, and although my first medium sized post is a null read, I hope that with time and my future actions it will prove to everybody that I am town because I'm hoping that if we use my advice we will be able to hunt and catch scum easier. I have a soft town read on you because I know your meta, and I'm not sure if you would be as comfortable as you normally are leading conversation early on as scum and talking about your pool. Some people get very nervous when they are scum. We've had several in our games who didn't post as much as they normally do. On the other side we have Oats as an example who posts an average amount in both roles. However his play style (now that I've read through his filter for XXXII) changes a little. Experience changes everything though but there are some similarities between his XXXII game and what he has done this time, and very little in his other games that I read through. Again not enough for me to vote for him but it's not a good sign either. I'm hoping some of our lurkers can weigh in, and if Bringaniga doesn't come up with anything by the lynch deadline, my current thoughts of him will turn to scum pretending to be active and I'll be pushing for his lynching over the current Oats for sure. He then enters the fray and tries to break up Me and Oatsmaster (Shz did too)... I actually read this as null Last game, scum tried to break up Me and Spaghetticus.. its actually an easy way to get town cred, so the action in itself does not indicate town motives (even though it helps town). + Show Spoiler + On January 13 2013 22:22 OmniEulogy wrote: Alright, I just got a call in from work ##Vote: Acid~ This is NOT what I intended to do. Under normal circumstances I would have put this at the end of my case on who ever I would have made it on. I might have to work a double shift and if I do, I won't be back in time, I don't want my random vote to be a deciding factor in a lynch and therefore have effectively wasted my vote. I do have access to a computer but on the off chance I can't log in on it I had to vote to make sure I wasn't going to be modkilled. I probably wont have to work the double but just in case. Sorry about this guys. So far Omni play has been safe. Nothing indicates he is scum; but nothing is screaming pro-town either. I do notice in general his approach is a bit different. But that is because I have played 2 games in a row with him. The question is.. is he different intentionally due to improving town game... or because he finally rolled scum. Continuing On He does a defense on Mandalor (I dont remember anyone else but Omni saying it was wrong; even Oatsmaster at one stage voted Mandalor - I *think* after my case too).. As a scum OmniEulogy.. of course he can defend Mandalor, he KNOWS he is town. Read: slightly scum (because no1 else called me out of line for the case) He then swaps to Shz, who was flying under the radar. Again an easy vote to do, with no real repercussions. Read: Null Things get interesting when La Guerta is caught in the lie. OmniEulogy is the one who pounces on this immediately (conveniently) On January 14 2013 09:06 OmniEulogy wrote: ##Vote: Laguerta He's already lied, has not contributed at all and now that I think about it, he goes from calling Bringaniga town, to voting on him with no posts between the two. He didn't answer my questions to why he voted for him OR why we shouldn't lynch him very well at all... Anybody have any reasons for why we shouldn't lynch him? I think this was a way to do two objectives (1) Create disarray in town atmosphere due to La Guerta weirdness & (2) Establish town cred for OmniEulogy picking scum first round.. a rare feat to achieve. From here Oatsmaster asked to consolidate votes, and we ended up with 7 votes on La Guerta, an essential certainty for lynch. The Long-Con On January 14 2013 07:03 OmniEulogy wrote: ugh I can't tell if that's just brutal honesty or extremely scummy. @Laguerta why should we NOT vote to lynch you in 2 hours? This is where I think OmniEulogy sowed the seeds for someone like Trotske or whoever to develop further. and indeed Trotske did. In hindsight with the Acid~ case, you could even contest Trotske is mafia and used this seed to develop the idea for the rest of town. What eventuated was Inception.,. i.e. Omni/zarepath/Oats started discussing the concept that La Guerta was bad town, and then used the excuse of "no opposition to the lynch" to justify moving off La Guerta. I treat OmniEulogy as the instigator for this entire action based on the above. I don't think they knew it was guaranteed to happen but were to prepared to adapt with it on the fly. Then here is some really nice interplay .. seeing that there is uncertainty with La Guerta On January 14 2013 10:35 OmniEulogy wrote: If Laguerta is scum, I must admit there is a lack of anybody trying to save him... would scum bus themselves D1? That's suicidal. The fact that nobody has even tried to push strongly for another lynch worries me a little bit... This only creates more uncertainty in the chaotic environment. Now that the bait has taken off.. Omni is trying really hard to hook the fish and int he process save La Guerta. On January 14 2013 12:25 OmniEulogy wrote: Honestly he has just as good a chance as flipping scum as Laguerta imo. The only difference is that I can't just put Zebezt in the "bad townie" category for every single post he's made. On January 14 2013 12:29 OmniEulogy wrote: I think the bigger thing at the moment is that even if the three of us, Mocsta, Oats, and myself all switch to another person who already has a vote on them, it won't be enough to stop Laguerta from being lynched. I can only see this as Mafia being FINE with Laguerta being lynched today. If we don't have another person on the Laguerta wagon active I think we might be lynching him no matter what. More rallying for people to get off La Guerta. Now that he has achieved his goal and people are dispersed again (as indicated in the Preface).. he turns on the guy he has been working with this whole time... On January 14 2013 12:56 OmniEulogy wrote: ##Vote: Oatsmaster I don't like the constant vote jumping. Or pulling off Laguerta after jumping around so much. It makes me think you know who the townies are and have been testing to see which wagon sticks. That confidence in nailing Zebezt is bothering me too... I'm biased with my thinking past thing point. Don't wanna screw with anybody else I'll explain it after the lynch. This is such a clever vote. He set up Oats to do the vote jumping, and then votes for him.. clearing him of any direct association to LA Guerta at that point in time (including flipping). He then writes a massive post on Oats, again detailing the vote jumping that him and Oats worked together on. To me, oats was screaming town by the end of Day 1.. i even wrote this in my last will to leave him alone... why would scum go out of their way to pressure so many targets? They wouldnt, its too risky... I think Omni achieved more from teh long-con than they imagined all due to persistance. Look at the contributions post Day 1.. He follows up on Oats once or twice (again.. screaming town.. why would you do this).. and then doesnt post anymore. He has stated real life problems, I wont treat that as not true... but regardless.. the contributions in Night1 were useless. Conveniently when I am in the firing range.. all he does is perturb Oats !! In Summary.. the concept to free La Guerta resulted in:
Summary: My scum read (open Delving deeper to find out name)
In short, I think scum used La Guerta to create a chaotic environment.. and took a chance with inception.. and managed to save La Guerta to keep numbers healthy (even though it was not a required part of the plan) I feel like your main case on onmi would be a lot stronger if you just didn't include the parts about laguerta being scum that feels like it is reaching. The onmi and oats thing was a very interesting catch I will look into both of there filters to see what the vote switching was about but that might take some more time and I want to post this up for other people to read I will make sure to have it done before the vote. | ||
|
Trotske
410 Posts
On January 16 2013 17:49 Acid~ wrote: The case against Trotske Exhibit A Emphasis mine. Yes, we want people to post but we should also call them out whenever they post something scummy and/or useless, because that is the basis of scumhunting. If we never attack anyone, then we're all just a bunch of carebears waiting around for the mafia to assassinate us all. This post alone from Trotske is not enough for a scum read, but it makes me suspicious. The last sentence especially. You think posting fluff is just as bad as not posting? Good, show us your content. What content, you ask? Yes, my point exactly. Exhibit B Emphasis mine. Talk about low standards. Prior to this post you had done no scumhunting, had posted no analysis of any kind - in fact the only posting you had done was defending Mocsta against Sn0_Man and complaining about bringaniga's style of posting. I feel this is a good place to remind everyone that Mandalor was the first person to attack Trotske on his low-quality posting. Answering questions politely is not scumhunting. While your case on Sn0_Man isn't completely baseless, it's also very thin and since you seem hellbent on hanging a lurker, well there were other lurkers to look at. What I get from this is that you don't care who you lynch, so you pick an easy target: given how he attacked Mocsta, who still had a lot of town cred at the time, no one would be rushing to defend Sn0_Man. He was also not there to defend himself. Or I thought lynching a lurker who was scummy at the same time was a very good choice. And why did you say I didn't care who I lynched I'm the only person who was actively saying that laguerta was a townie and not going to the person with 7 votes on them... Please also note that end of that post where I say it may change if he posts more aka I'd still rather lynch the real lurkers. Translation from scum to English: "It's so hard to pick which of these townies to falsely accuse, maybe I'll just wait and see if my Sn0 vote gets any traction, if not I'll just pick an easier target." You also conveniently forget to mention laguerta, the worst of them all, in your "professional lurkers" list. first off after my sn0 vote I didn't pick an easy target I picked manalor who at the time didn't exactly have everyone's support behind the lynch. Second I also Thought and still do that Laguerta was a bad townie who didn't really want to play. Exhibit C Emphasis mine again in the quotes, to demonstrate my previous claim. The vote on Sn0 gets no traction, so again he sheeps Mocsta. This is like Christmas for scum because he can safely attack Mandalor (who, let me remind you, had posted his own suspicions about Trotske) by piggybacking on Mocsta's case without having to do any work. Or I voted for the person who I thought was trying to get a free kill on a bad townie and on whom a case had already been built by someone else that I thought was a pretty good start to a confirmed scum add these together and mandalor was look pretty scummy to me. his case in the spoiler. + Show Spoiler + On January 14 2013 00:44 Mocsta wrote: Guys.. im going to bed. See you in 8 hrs, hopefully we have a few more pages to read through by then!! Please keep up the discussions. Now that I have unvoted, I am uncertain of where my vote should go. I will have a re-think when I wake up (4hrs before lynch).But below details my current thoughts before sleep (and its been a REALLY long day for me) The majority of us have been fixated on looking for tells in active players (yes, this includes myself).. why.. because he have nothing to read in the lurkers posts so we just cannibalize each other. History tells us, lynching active people Day 1 usually is town. I haven't managed to lynch scum Day1 yet, but, i haven't given up this game. I think our best way to succeed is go for the non-contributors. seriously.. 36hrs and minimal posts is NOT ACCEPTABLE. Some of us are active in our own ways; but posting at least shows interest; which is more of a read than I can give for a hardcore lurker. I think for the time being, my vote will go on ##Vote: Sn0_Man Filter: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=391615&user=287497 Why?
Exhibit D What is with this 180 now? You are now openly and directly attacking a player for wanting to lynch a lurker. Even though you had spent the whole of day1 arguing in favor of lynching a lurker. Suddenly, this lurker is not good enough for some reason? Exhibit E You FoS these players because they: 1. Are too insistent on wanting to lynch lurkers. 2. Post no useful content. If those are your criteria, I think you should start fingering yourself. Additionally, the insistence on wanting other players' opinions before you actually turn those fingers into votes reads to me like you don't want to pressure and you definitely don't want to commit to a lynch before you're sure you can get traction to kill another innocent. Closing argument At this point, I still have to review Zebezt's case with a fresh look, so I'm not taking my vote off him and onto Trotske just yet. However, Trotske seems scummy as hell to me and I want his case to be discussed. you make some interesting points but all it really boils down to is that I haven't been super active which as much as I hate it is undeniable. I hope I have given some better perspective into the exhibits and why some of them aren't near as scummy as you made them out to be. | ||
|
Trotske
410 Posts
I feel like mocsta is trying to make a case up out of very thin air. "To me, oats was screaming town by the end of Day 1.. i even wrote this in my last will to leave him alone... why would scum go out of their way to pressure so many targets? They wouldnt, its too risky... I think Omni achieved more from teh long-con than they imagined all due to persistance." I also feel that this part of the post seems scummy to me, mocsta keeps telling everyone why he is obviously town instead of trying to figure out who is scum. This and his lack of any decent argument for the cases he has put up force me to conclude he is the scummiest person in the thread right now. ##Vote Mocsta | ||
|
Trotske
410 Posts
On January 17 2013 06:57 Mocsta wrote: I said Trotske case before looked solid, and he is even around for my inception concept. I am going to put my vote his way; I also like how he has barely contributed and then kicks me in the guts when everyone else does.(A first from him this game.. but at a time when his balls are on the line) I usually attribute that to scum play. P.S. look how heavily he defends La Guerta in my case..he even adds. I think your case on Omni might be stronger if you didnt vote La Guerta. The general feedback I got was that there was no case on Omni.. so this is an interesting comment. This guy has gone out of this way to protect La Guerta.. even now in Day 2.. Maybe I was wrong with Omni.. but for this type of protection, there must be a relationship.I cant make sense of it any other way. ##Vote: Trotske You misquoted me "I feel like your main case on onmi would be a lot stronger if you just didn't include the parts about laguerta being scum that feels like it is reaching." was the quote nothing about your voting habits. OFC I'm going to defend someone I think is town, is that so hard to understand? I must have missed some really damning evidence on laguerta because what I have seen reeks of bad town not scum. | ||
|
Trotske
410 Posts
On January 17 2013 07:11 cDgCorazon wrote: Dinner Plate Role Call: Votes not in the proper format will NOT be counted. EVERYONE is required to vote. Mocsta (2): Acid~, Trotske Trotske (2): Zarepath, Mocsta Zebezt(1): Spaghetticus, Trotske (1): Sn0_Man JacobStrangelove(1): Zebezt OmniEulogy(0): Acid~(0): Not Voting (3): OmniEulogy, JacobStrangelove, Shz, Currently Mocsta is set to be lynched! 2 hours until lynch deadline. If I got your vote wrong, make sure to pm me. The lynch deadline is 00:00 GMT (+00:00). Why do I have two separate places? | ||
|
Trotske
410 Posts
On January 17 2013 07:20 shz wrote: Are you kidding me Mocsta? How the fuck can't you still not vote for laguerta/Jacob? I will stick with laguerta for now. I think he did a great job of either causing confusion in this town, or at playing bad. I hope it's the former. As long Jacob does'nt participate at all, I see no value in keeping him around. I'm not completly sold on Mocsta, but that doesn't I see him as town. ##Vote: JacobStrangelove Please participate in some way before you die, maybe you can explain what the fuck laguertas play was and defend yourself (even if you weren't the one doing this shit). If not, I'll keep my vote on you. Between me and Acid which points do you not think are good enough for you to vote him as scum? | ||
|
Trotske
410 Posts
On January 17 2013 07:34 zebezt wrote: Hey guys, I'm off to bed. I encourage everyone to vote either Mocsta or JacobStrangelove, I think the last one makes more sense logically, but right now they both seem scummy to me. How does that last one make more sense he will get modkilled if he doesn't vote in the next hour and a half. if you think mocsta is scummy vote for him. | ||
| ||
