I'm sorry, but I don't see how questioning a vote on myself is opportunistic when I feel that it is unjust. I haven't lied at all yet but I am accused of it? Should I just let the vote pass without response or should I ask about it? I fail to see how this is opportunistic at all.Lowell wrote:FOS clockwork. That's the second time he's taken the path of least resistance and tried to look useful while being opportunistic.
unvote, vote guzame. I highly doubt reborn is scum, more like your standard, run-of-the-mill reckless townie. The fact that guzame seems intent on goading him on rings alarm bells for me.
Haschel Cedricson wrote:goborage: Care to explain why you felt that it was okay to put chenhsi at L-3 on the first page?
ClockworkRuse wrote:Anyways... Why does Chenhsi has three votes already? I'd like to hear an explaination from at least the third voter.
Even though he denied that he was trying to breadcrumb that, why would you bring it out in the open like that? You can hardly blame him for not keeping his role secret, when it was you who drew attention to the crumb.Guzame wrote:And if I'm reading his posts right,he's claiming to be a roleblocker,which he should've just kept secret.
There comes a point in every bandwagon when it transitions from "This person is mildly suspicious" to "We should seriously consider killing this person today." I feel that point is around four votes in a mini. There's nothing inherently wrong with putting the fourth vote on a person, but on the first page and for something that is only mildly scummy at best? That merits further investigation.Erratus Apathos wrote:What are you worried about?
Why would anyone believe your innocence at this point? All you've done so far is make a semi-roleclaim that, if true, hurts the town and dosn't at all show you to be town. We have absolutly no reason to believe you at this point, about anything.reborn537 wrote:Yes, but if you believe my innocence.
Can you really blame me? All we have to find scum on day 1 is finding the more suspicious people.Lowell wrote:
unvote, vote guzame. I highly doubt reborn is scum, more like your standard, run-of-the-mill reckless townie. The fact that guzame seems intent on goading him on rings alarm bells for me.
What he did can hardly be called breadcrumbing. His first real post basically said that he has a good role,which is just bad townie play,and could only be useful if has a real powerrole(Which you shouldn't give away so easily),or if he's scum trying to confuse the town.Erratus Apathos wrote:Even though he denied that he was trying to breadcrumb that, why would you bring it out in the open like that? You can hardly blame him for not keeping his role secret, when it was you who drew attention to the crumb.Guzame wrote:And if I'm reading his posts right,he's claiming to be a roleblocker,which he should've just kept secret.
QFT.goborage wrote:I like lurker-votes (don't let them get away with it!) but I'm not a fan of straight lurker-lynch.
Hunch it is, but notice i'm not suspicious of those who put a vote on a "potentially scummy player"; i'm suspicious of you for placing a vote on a lurker. Much as i seem to be in the minority, i think that's a poor reason for a vote.Clammy, you used the word "smells" twice. I assume this is your way of saying that you are working from a hunch. It's as good a place as any to start, but to imply that anyone putting a vote on a potentially scummy player is himself scummy is a bit of an over reaction, in my opinion. I mean, the guy is at only at L-3.
