It's probably safe to assume that Elvis, Vi and Chamber got one as well, although obviously less than certain.
I'm not going to pick any of them for my RVS because maybe they can be uber helpful town.
Well there's communication between mod and players... I don't get what your problem is with this?vi wrote: Seacore 30 wrote:
One, I was encouraging people to speed up the drafting process by explaining why there's no need to wait for the mod before picking.
That's not what I read.
Quote:
although I imagine it won't hurt to just pick, since there's no communication [between players] during this time.
Actually, there is a reason for town to choose framer. So scum can't. I thought of it and so did Budja. Your absolute statements are not helping anybody, nor are your quotes of your own comments that are on the same page.Cobalt wrote:Cobalt wrote:Nice try, Seacore, but that's totally unreasonable.
1) There is zero reason for a town player to choose the framer role.
2) There is zero reason for a scum player to claim framer.
I think one of your partners picked framer, and you wanted to set up town cred for them.
Sigh, I don't think this is hard to follow.Cobalt wrote:What?Seacore wrote:I agree, not now, but if we ask for info now, sometimes scum forget the info they gave by day 3I wouldn't be surprised if this setup could be broken apart at some point, but not now.
I, in fact, did say why it wasn't scummy in post 30. When Vi stay preoccupied with it I asked her to clarify why she thought it was so scummy, and could not understand her answers.farside22 wrote:You never pointed to why it wasn't scummy. Vi had to point it out. Why didn't you just say hey this is what the mod said instead of just pussy footing around the statement?Seacore wrote:farside, I knew what I said in the post, I was asking why it seemed scummy as it seemed innocent to me.
Um, Vi, I think Budja was trying to say there was scum on my wagon at that point, and just got confused by the aquatic references. That's his case anyway.vi wrote: *jumped on at the peak of the Fishy wagon (for what it's worth) and tried to say "oh there may already be scum on this three-person wagon"
What were?They were better reasons that the ones which started the whole wagon IMO.
So either you voted for me because of my bad idea, which means you lied in your voting post, or you voted for me because of earlier cases, in which case you just lied in the above post.Bulletproof is much better unknown as is bomb. This just helps scum.
unvote, vote Seacore (not just for this obv.)
I don't think wagons with probable scum on them are necessarily bad, remembering that they are also scum hunting (and scum hunting significantly more info than us)Plum wrote: All the wagons on players I find scummy are populated by scummish or shady players and all the players I feel are town are on wagons I wouldn't want to vote ('cept BC, but he's not a top-tier scumpick).
Sorry, I don't think I was clear.Fishythefish wrote:It's true that they're scumhunting. But their info is exclusively about not lynching their own team. So it's going to be monumentally unhelpful for us.Seacore wrote:I don't think wagons with probable scum on them are necessarily bad, remembering that they are also scum hunting (and scum hunting significantly more info than us)