HackerHuck wrote:lord_hur wrote:Actually, that's another thing I have against you, thanks for reminding me : you voted for Guardian while at the same time saying you didn't know if he were town or scum.
Quote please.
These are the two post you did after your actual vote :
HackerHuck wrote:I'm not sure if I need to repeat any of the things that everyone else has said about you Guardian. It should be obvious to you why Millers are bad news to the town. It's a crappy claim because the only way to prove it is by lynching you. Scum would never kill a miller, which means that the town has to do it at some point. The only good news is that cops won't bother wasting an investigation on you, but you pretty much blew that by crumbing cop to begin with.
Like the others, I think you forgot that I was already voting you, so my vote was more of a confirmation than anything else - hence the context.
If you're town, then I guess you did us a favor by claiming miller so we can kill you sooner rather than later, but that's small comfort.
In this one, you're only considering Guardian being town.
HackerHuck wrote:Jesters are pretty darn rare and I sure would hope that self-voting invalidates their win condition.
Guardian, I don't like how you keep trying to portray my vote on you as one that is based on your supposed millership. I had voted you prior to that and your claim has only cemented my vote. My comments were all related to how millers are bad news for the town. If you can tell me one good thing the miller does for the town, then I will admit I'm wrong (but I still won't pull my vote).
I've seen scum claim miller as often as I've seen town do it. It's not going to get you off the hook in my eyes.
I don't like how TVOD reacted by pushing the jester angle, but I'm not sure if it should be chalked up to newbishness.
In this one, Guardian was right (in my opinion) to believe you voted him for being a miller. We don't know what's in your head, but that's actually the way it appeared to me too. And you nail the "vote for townie" further by saying you won't unvote, even if he proves you you're wrong.
And to conclude this, you say metagaming couldn't tell you whether he had a greated chance to be scum or town...
HackerHuck wrote:lord_hur wrote:But here, I was talking about day 2 :
- your only attack this day (springlullaby bussing me) is pretty weak and hard to give credit to in my opinion - though I might be biased, so if someone else could comment on this...
- your Musher333 vote was only following Mr Stoofer with no additional argument -> weak vote
- you basically voted me just because someone else was voting me (and someone you're apparently suspecting of being scum, at that), while implying that you voted just to get the game going -> weak vote
How is this non-commital?
Ah, maybe I used a wrong term. Sorry then, I just meant I think you didn't come up with any good arguments, in my eyes, during day 2, and thus that your votes are looking scummy to me.
All lurkers unite! And jump off the nearest cliff. Now.