If it weren't for the fact that one person here habitually votes the mod and another one votes himself, I'd expect a ton more of these to come my way (pseudorandomly, of course...) Perhaps I still shouldMafiaSSK wrote:random vote:Vi
Anyway,
You feel lucky, I take itCruciare wrote:You need to be lynched for many many reasons.Vote: Scattered
Uhh... what? 'Splain that one.Scattered 17 wrote:Reasons I am claiming:
2) So Scum don't NK me, unless they believe I am bluffing
'Hope that's not in response to me; I don't see where you'd need one with your role as claimed.Scattered wrote:Guys, read all my damn posts, I've explained perfectly logically why having a time dilation device would make no sense for my role. There isn't much more I can say on the matter.
No, I'm asking why you don't want to be NKd by them whenScattered wrote:Are you really asking why scum won't NK someone who blows up anyone who targets them at night?
Nonono. I'm not talking about adverse side effects of getting targeted by a Town player. I'm talking about how you specifically said you do not want to be hit by scum. massive difference.Scattered wrote:Ah ok. The reason was that scum aren't the only ones who have abilities, and it would put the town in a bad situation if I got targeted by a town aligned player.Vi wrote:No, I'm asking why you don't want to be NKd by them whenScattered wrote:Are you really asking why scum won't NK someone who blows up anyone who targets them at night?getting NKd kills a scum.
I'll point out that the discussion about the avatar is there mostly as filler since there's nothing else of note going on (at least IMO). You're more than welcome to derail us with any more relevant conversation of your own.Netlava 173 wrote:I'm following my gut. The discussion about your avatar while the deadline approaches is suspicious.
Any thoughts on this, again? Quite honestly, I feel that the lynch today will be based on petty reasons, and the reward of lynching someone will be rather poor versus the risk.Vi 176 wrote:In short, I'm seriously considering No Lynch.
Explain this.Netlava 171 wrote:His response, though reasonable, loses cred points for what constitutes a "delayed reaction."
That depends on this objekt, doesn't it?Netlava 179 wrote:I think a lynch is important in our current situation, or at least some sort of pressure for the scumor else they can do whatever they want at their leisure.
melikefood #11 wrote:Objekt vote: Vi and forbiddanknight
So it's a reasonably grounded metaguessforbiddanlight wrote:Agree with most of this. Except the fact that you call it a meta guess. I'm not using meta, I'm using the fact that EVERY EVENT SO FAR HAS PUSHED THE DEADLINE BACK!
Netlava gets the privilege for "being more useless than you", at least at the time of the initial voting.forbiddanlight 194 wrote:Mostly from me sinceIwant to touch is and have no idea why netlava gets the privelege.
o.0MafiaSSK 203 wrote:Touch:Netlava
It IS depending on an unknown. But discussion is awesome, regardless of what sparks it. And we're about to find out what that discussion will entail, since you're going on a one-way trip to the bold unknown as soon as the mod gets in.Netlava 204 wrote:Depending on an objekt is like depending on an unknown.
Not necessarily...Netlava 213 wrote:Um, I don't know. Results = unknown. I'm assuming scum don't know what happens either.So reactions will be pretty useless since town and scum would react the same way.
With all due respect, neither is anyone else.Netlava 219 wrote:You aren't anywhere near a lynch.forbiddan wrote:Sorry, *ATTEMPTING* to rush us to a lynch. Mine. For weak reasons at that.
I'll vouch for this *shot repeatedly*forbiddanlight 216 wrote:I'm an attention whore
Yes, but do you have anything to say about what is/n't going on?MafiaSSK 233 wrote:This hasn't popped up on my watched games list until now. Sorry.
No, but you said you would apply Lynch *All* Lurkers and targeted the person who happened to be the current bandwagon.Netlava 231 wrote:Is there something wrong with the current wagon?
About whatever the heck it takes to put your views out there.MafiaSSK 242 wrote:About LAL?Vi wrote:Yes, but do you have anything to say about what is/n't going on?MafiaSSK 233 wrote:This hasn't popped up on my watched games list until now. Sorry.
"Yes" is usually a good answer to questions like those. Elaborate.melikefood 243 wrote:Do you wish me to continue as to why?
I'm not sure I buy it. The previous topic said that this game was vanillaless. In addition, I'd like to ask if you were PMd the other effects of touching the objekt.Netlava 299 wrote:Anyways, claim: descendant from the tsars. No powers.
Problem.Natirasha 305 wrote:Town gets another day to lynch before Night Actions start going online.
Um... what?RossWilliam 309 wrote:Let's keep that dead person scumhunting and activeand using their roleas long as possible, right?
The only two legitimately useless people are the first two. The rest aref-light 314 wrote:Do we lynch people for being USELESS, or do we lynch them for being scum? Because right now this looks like a "list of useless people with a couple suspicious peeps thrown in". I don't like it.
Why, in 100 words or fewer?f-light 314 wrote:Because Netlava is scum.
orlyqwints 328 wrote:I alsoknowthat Netlava's claim that he can't self-destruct b/c he's town is false.
And:f-light 329 wrote:And the WIFOM begins.
Doesn't he have to flip scum first?forbiddanlight 332 wrote:By the way, IGMEOY for guarding your scumbuddy.*the tunnel vision continues.
I suppose I'd have to ask what it was qwints "knew", that he had no time dilation device or that he was scum.forbiddanlight 332 wrote:Um yeah. Everyone should know this, if I'm reading the rules correctlyorly
Oh come now, you know I'm not an evil mastermind until someone hands me the mod hatforbiddanlight 335 wrote:Because you said thatDoesn't he have to flip scum first?
And why, exactly, do I have a good reason to guard someone who's in optimum bussing position right now?
Mmm, enjoy your backpedaling~forbiddanlight 335 wrote:Depends on how things work. There are any number of reasons why he might not want to suicide. And also, you do realize that we are less likely to lynch him if he doesn't do anything since people will think just like you are now.Last, if Netlava were scum and had an out... wouldn't he have, y'know, already used it instead of leaving us here to squabble over whether we should lynch him, given that a lynch would ruin everything he's done scumside?
Exmples are not the Soviet way! You listen to authority on pain of death!forbiddanlight 337 wrote:Backpedalling? Where? I certainly don't see any. And since you apparently don't believe in examples...Mmm, enjoy your backpedaling~
I'm interested in the answer to this question. (Yes, what is your opinion on yourself? Sub qwints in for your own name.)forbiddanlight 343 wrote:Netlava wrote:Speaking of forbiddan, what are your thoughts on forbiddan and rosswilliams.I noticed that no one has commented on my ultra strong cases. Everyone's thoughts?Your ultra weak scum cases?
Perhaps about you. But the others on the Netlava wagon?forbiddanlight 343 wrote:Ok.
Anyway, you are wrong.
Thanks for making yourself the third member in my fantasy scum dream team.RossWilliam 351 wrote:Good morning everyone.
I'm not gonna point any fingers because I'm among the offenders, but I think we all need to not let ourself get rushed by the whole vortex thing and think things through. I know that at least I would not be so quick to have voted Netlava in slower circumstances and our hastiness resulted in a mislynch. Let's not be hasty about this and really be methodical with our voting strategies.
Gonna wait for melikefood to explain himself, but I'm leaning towards voting him.
Go through this thread and count carefully. <_<qwints 384 wrote:The fact that you've claimed 4 recruits is suspicious given the fact that you only had 3 nights to do it in.
I don't think Cruciare is scum. I'm aiming for scum. Isn't that what you wanted us to do?~qwints 388 wrote:Vi,
If you're not going to lynch Nat, why not vote for Cruciare? I see no benefit for you in lynching another purported cult recruit.
Be someone elseNatirasha 393 wrote:What do I need to do to convince you of my truth?Vi wrote:I see your reasons, Nati, and they're not bad at all. I still have to wonder why I should believe a (however entertaining) claim from a habitual liar.
If you'll forgive me for saying so,MafiaSSK 396 wrote:When? I've only seen Nati claim his truthful role.Vi wrote:I disagree with this proposal for two reasons:
1) Natirasha ALWAYS fakeclaims.
I second this. (pre-in included)MafiaSSK 462 wrote:Lord gurgi, I am /pre-inning for all of your games where you will use this epic flavor. Man can I not wait for Parralel universes.
You should have been lynched as Town in that first game anyway (...wait, you were)forbiddanlight 468 wrote:Anyway Vi, this would be the second time I've been super scummy and not been lynched as scum. Not the third.
Four-person LyLo, I think.qwints 470 wrote:I mean, what would have happened if the mafia had nk'd Nat?