|
Unofficial Vote Count:
Sylencia: kitaman27, Kurumi
Crossfire99: Mr. Cheesecake
Mr. Cheesecake: Stutters
Oatsmaster: Keirathi
kitaman27: Sylencia
randombum: gonzaw
Stutters: iamperfection, Dandel Ion
Hassybaby: marvellosity, Oatsmaster, randombum
iamperfection: austinmcc, Crossfire, iamperfection
We need 9 votes to lynch someone. I think we need to start consolidating.
|
On February 15 2013 07:32 Crossfire99 wrote:Show nested quote +On February 15 2013 07:28 Keirathi wrote: Unofficial Vote Count:
Sylencia: kitaman27, Kurumi
Crossfire99: Mr. Cheesecake
Mr. Cheesecake: Stutters
Oatsmaster: Keirathi
kitaman27: Sylencia
randombum: gonzaw
Stutters: iamperfection, Dandel Ion
Hassybaby: marvellosity, Oatsmaster, randombum
iamperfection: austinmcc, Crossfire, iamperfection
We need 9 votes to lynch someone. I think we need to start consolidating. A man after my own consolidatory (made that word up lol) heart. Do you still think oats is scum? He hasn't done anything to change my mind.
Gonzaw would probably be my top choice ATM. Then Oats. But it kind of doesn't look like either of those are happening.
Hassy/Stutters/MrCC are all just a 100% coinflip, IMO. Sylencia only 90% coinflip, but still coinflip (I dislike how he used "innocent" instead of "townie" in his defense, and the straight OMGUS vote onto Kita).
I still dont particularly want to lynch iamp though, even though I am leaning scum on him. I just believe that the longer the game goes, we will be able to tell with almost absolute certainty what his alignment is. Right now I can make points for either side.
So, anyone still up for gonzaw? :o
|
On February 15 2013 07:42 iamperfection wrote:Show nested quote +On February 15 2013 07:38 Keirathi wrote:On February 15 2013 07:32 Crossfire99 wrote:On February 15 2013 07:28 Keirathi wrote: Unofficial Vote Count:
Sylencia: kitaman27, Kurumi
Crossfire99: Mr. Cheesecake
Mr. Cheesecake: Stutters
Oatsmaster: Keirathi
kitaman27: Sylencia
randombum: gonzaw
Stutters: iamperfection, Dandel Ion
Hassybaby: marvellosity, Oatsmaster, randombum
iamperfection: austinmcc, Crossfire, iamperfection
We need 9 votes to lynch someone. I think we need to start consolidating. A man after my own consolidatory (made that word up lol) heart. Do you still think oats is scum? He hasn't done anything to change my mind. Gonzaw would probably be my top choice ATM. Then Oats. But it kind of doesn't look like either of those are happening. Hassy/Stutters/MrCC are all just a 100% coinflip, IMO. Sylencia only 90% coinflip, but still coinflip (I dislike how he used "innocent" instead of "townie" in his defense, and the straight OMGUS vote onto Kita). I still dont particularly want to lynch iamp though, even though I am leaning scum on him. I just believe that the longer the game goes, we will be able to tell with almost absolute certainty what his alignment is. Right now I can make points for either side. So, anyone still up for gonzaw? :o no lets kill hassy I disagree with the "Hassy is scum" sentiment. Any lynch on Hassy is 100% lurker policy lynch. Nothing he has said this game is exclusively alignment indicating.
|
On February 15 2013 07:56 iamperfection wrote:Show nested quote +On February 15 2013 07:55 Blazinghand wrote: i categorically oppose a lurker policy lynch when there are scummy people to be lynched but fucking lurking is scummy So, since scum are the only people that ever lurk, then the scumteam must be Hassy/Sylencia/MrCC/Stutters! Thank you for solving the game! [/sarcasm]
|
On February 15 2013 08:00 iamperfection wrote:Show nested quote +On February 15 2013 07:59 Keirathi wrote:On February 15 2013 07:56 iamperfection wrote:On February 15 2013 07:55 Blazinghand wrote: i categorically oppose a lurker policy lynch when there are scummy people to be lynched but fucking lurking is scummy So, since scum are the only people that ever lurk, then the scumteam must be Hassy/Sylencia/MrCC/Stutters! Thank you for solving the game! [/sarcasm] stfu No. Your entire premise is dumb, because it can be categorically proven than townies lurk from time to time, for whatever reason. Yes, lurking is bad. Yes, lurking hurts town. Yes, it is frustrating to play with people who never post. But no, lurking does not make someone scum. And there are valid reasons to actually think other people ARE scum.
|
On February 15 2013 08:03 iamperfection wrote:Show nested quote +On February 15 2013 08:02 Keirathi wrote:On February 15 2013 08:00 iamperfection wrote:On February 15 2013 07:59 Keirathi wrote:On February 15 2013 07:56 iamperfection wrote:On February 15 2013 07:55 Blazinghand wrote: i categorically oppose a lurker policy lynch when there are scummy people to be lynched but fucking lurking is scummy So, since scum are the only people that ever lurk, then the scumteam must be Hassy/Sylencia/MrCC/Stutters! Thank you for solving the game! [/sarcasm] stfu No. Your entire premise is dumb, because it can be categorically proven than townies lurk from time to time, for whatever reason. Yes, lurking is bad. Yes, lurking hurts town. Yes, it is frustrating to play with people who never post. But no, lurking does not make someone scum. And there are valid reasons to actually think other people ARE scum. show me where the fuck i said every fucking lurker is scum Lurking is literally the only reason you've given for wanting to lynch Hassy. So why Hassy, and not CC? Or Sylencia? Or Stutters? If lurking is scummy for one, then it should be scummy for all. Why are you picking him out of the crowd? Context says that if lurking is enough to condemn Hassy as scum, it should be enough to condemn them all.
|
On February 15 2013 08:15 marvellosity wrote:Show nested quote +On February 15 2013 08:02 Blazinghand wrote:On February 15 2013 08:02 Blazinghand wrote:On February 15 2013 08:01 iamperfection wrote:On February 15 2013 08:00 Blazinghand wrote:On February 15 2013 07:59 iamperfection wrote:On February 15 2013 07:56 Blazinghand wrote: iamp I want you to seriously sit down with the three oats filters I linked, or at least the quotes I linked, and tell me this is town oats
you won't be able to do that because this isn't town oats you cant just categorically say that. Each of those games is a different beast. CT has so much activity there was a ton of info to go off of ( this game not so much) The other game was a newbie of course he is going to be more forceful he doesn't have vets or better players to listen to in this game he has stuck his neck out and isnt trying to blend in he is town in this game. wow you literally didn't read my case, did you. you're actually just scum. ##unvote ##vote iamperfection whatever dude your delusional tell me why you think im scum you didn't read my case and you're acting like you read it also you want a bad policy lynch This particular gentleman wonders if you are in fact yamato in disguise. I wonder, in particular, how lynching someone who lurks in the shadows has become in this establishment, and recent establishments, a "policy lynch" or "coinflip". This indicates that gentlemen have a lack of confidence in their ability to read those with few posts. Show nested quote +On February 15 2013 08:09 Keirathi wrote:On February 15 2013 08:03 iamperfection wrote:On February 15 2013 08:02 Keirathi wrote:On February 15 2013 08:00 iamperfection wrote:On February 15 2013 07:59 Keirathi wrote:On February 15 2013 07:56 iamperfection wrote:On February 15 2013 07:55 Blazinghand wrote: i categorically oppose a lurker policy lynch when there are scummy people to be lynched but fucking lurking is scummy So, since scum are the only people that ever lurk, then the scumteam must be Hassy/Sylencia/MrCC/Stutters! Thank you for solving the game! [/sarcasm] stfu No. Your entire premise is dumb, because it can be categorically proven than townies lurk from time to time, for whatever reason. Yes, lurking is bad. Yes, lurking hurts town. Yes, it is frustrating to play with people who never post. But no, lurking does not make someone scum. And there are valid reasons to actually think other people ARE scum. show me where the fuck i said every fucking lurker is scum Lurking is literally the only reason you've given for wanting to lynch Hassy. So why Hassy, and not CC? Or Sylencia? Or Stutters? If lurking is scummy for one, then it should be scummy for all. Why are you picking him out of the crowd? Context says that if lurking is enough to condemn Hassy as scum, it should be enough to condemn them all. I am aware, gentleman Keirathi, that this is not aimed at me. Hassybaby usually has enthusiasm for themed games at least when he has good intentions. I remember a previous establishment (Mad Men) where I confidently declared him of evil intentions, for the reason that he never showed any interest in his fellow gentlemen. Count Cheesecake, to my horror, is performing a similar feat to his shenanigans in the watering hole named 'LVIII', therefore I am not confident that he may have evil intentions; Stut-utt-utters has come across as amiable to discourse of late. The man known as Sylencia I also believe may well have evil intentions. He continuously makes little chitter-chatter with other gentlemen, but only ever about his own person, and never unprompted. This is why looking at such gentlemen is not merely "policy". Forgive me for not jumping to sheep you then, but your weakly reasoned policy-but-not-policy lynch of Kenpachi in Parallel has turned me away from following you down those rabbit holes.
|
Anyways, with 25 minutes left until the deadline, I am sadly going to switch my vote over to Hassy. 100% policy lynch, but neither of my preferred lynches are happening, and I'm not sold on iamp being scum. I would rather have an iamp that is actually participating to give me something to get a read on him with around later in a game that a person who isn't participating at all.
|
On February 15 2013 08:39 Blazinghand wrote: also why is everyone trying to lynch hassybaby you guys are all terrible I just told you.
If people want to lynch Oats or gonzaw, I'm down. But between a coinflip Hassy and a coinflip iamp, I would rather have iamp around who is at least participating.
|
On February 15 2013 08:42 iamperfection wrote: marv where are you why are not trying to get shit done? Haven't you figured out that he doesn't care about this game by this point? :o
|
Can someone just say "We're lynching X" and lets do it? I would prefer Oats, but Hassy is acceptable since he obviously isn't playing at all. 12 minutes left. I'm honestly willing to throw my vote anywhere right now to avoid a no-lynch.
|
|
1 more please. Anyone? Iamp?
|
On February 15 2013 08:54 gonzaw wrote: So he should have like 6 or 7 votes now right?
Does someone know how many exact votes he has? 8. They are all in a row and easy to count.
|
Well this was a zerg of the zergiest proportions, but I'm satisfied with the lynch. Glad we didn't flounder around and no-lynch.
|
(OOC): That ability doesn't even make sense. Hipsters thrive on being "The person who does something before its cool". So why would they swarm and kill a fellow Hipster? Wouldn't it have made more sense to swarm and kill the person who was the straw that broke the camels back between underground and mainstream!?
|
On February 15 2013 09:13 austinmcc wrote:AS A SIDE NOTE IN ALL CAPS IT SURE AS HECK DOES MAKE THIS LOOK SUSPICIOUS Keirathi's vote was ON OATS. He unvoted and revoted oats. He would have been the first voter had he not done that. When I unvoted, I was the ONLY vote on Oats, and no one was even seriously talking about lynching him. The bandwagon happened after I unvoted.
And no, I didn't make Oats' role. I made jcarlson's. He can confirm by this: Zerg.
|
On February 15 2013 09:17 Kurumi wrote:Show nested quote +On February 15 2013 09:13 austinmcc wrote:AS A SIDE NOTE IN ALL CAPS IT SURE AS HECK DOES MAKE THIS LOOK SUSPICIOUS On February 15 2013 08:51 Keirathi wrote: ##Unvote ##Vote: Oatsmaster Keirathi's vote was ON OATS. He unvoted and revoted oats. He would have been the first voter had he not done that. Wait, he unvoted Oats and voted again? That counted? No. I unvoted Oats to vote Hassy. Then the bandwagon on Oats started, and I switched back over.
|
On February 15 2013 09:35 austinmcc wrote: I guess you can interpret that as "Maybe I thought it was possible BH was scum," but I feel like he'd just come out and say so if that were the case, instead of talking about himself in the third person? No, I'm pretty sure that post means he created Oat's role. Why else would he have said "Sorry it fucked us", and made the comment about his first vote of the game being on BH.
|
Anyways, I have a killer headache. Im going to go lay down for a while. Might be back tonight, maybe not until morning.
Too-da-loo.
|
|
|
|