Open 131 - Nightless Vanilla (Over) before 767

[hewitt]

Actually Empking I did not post about how we need to policy lynch, I was posting in response to the convo farside, millar, Netlava, and yourself were having about policy lynching.

[Empking]

A D1 lynch of an anti-town person doesn't give information that is correct. But keeping an anti-town person throughout the length of the game until it becomes hurtful to the town is not good. At what day would you agree with a policy lynch if not D1 and D1 alone?

[hewitt]

That wasn't at all campaigning for a policy lynch in this game Empking. That is quite clear, I actually asked a question that was never really answered now that I think about it.

[Empking]

That wasn't at all campaigning for a policy lynch in this game Empking. That is quite clear, .

No it wasn't.

[hewitt]

Yeah, actually it was Empking. I'm sorry if you couldn't understand that but that's not my fault. Campaigning for a policy lynch would be saying "hey everybody! We need to policy lynch Empking because he's an idiot and is anti-town and unhelpful to the game!" But I'm not doing that am I?

[Empking]

Yeah, actually it was Empking. I'm sorry if you couldn't understand that but that's not my fault. Campaigning for a policy lynch would be saying "hey everybody! We need to policy lynch Empking because he's an idiot and is anti-town and unhelpful to the game!" But I'm not doing that am I?

So if you wanted to policy lynch Lowell you'd go "hey everybody! We need to policy lynch Empking because he's an idiot and is anti-town and unhelpful to the game!". That doesn't surprise me but its very stupid.

[Wall-E]

A D1 lynch of an anti-town person doesn't give information that is correct. But keeping an anti-town person throughout the length of the game until it becomes hurtful to the town is not good. At what day would you agree with a policy lynch if not D1 and D1 alone?

This 100% sounds like a person campaigning for a policy lynch. Just so you know, hewitt. It's also a bit pandering.

[hewitt]

Since when have I wanted to policy lynch Lowell? And no I was not campaigning for a policy lynch, there was a discussion going on about policy lynching and somebody raised the point that a D1 lynch of an anti-town player does not give much information. I agreed and then said that the problem with that is keeping an anti-town player throughout the length of the game is problematic as well. I went on to ask what day people would policy lynch if not D1. At no point in that statement did I campaign for a policy lynch on any player.

I didn't realize that was so difficult for people to understand.

[White Castle]

hewitt- when three people in a game have a hard time understanding you, maybe you're the problem.

[hewitt]

Since everybody is having SUCH a hard time understanding me, who was I trying to campaign a policy lynch lynch on then? I don't believe for a second that you actually do not understand what I was saying, but that you are refusing to understand what I was saying. Because I'm pretty sure by now I've made my point. Go back, reread, then come back and post.

[Lowell]

I'd like more people to think about voting Wall-E, please.

[White Castle]

I'd like more people to think about voting Wall-E, please.

Try harder. Give us a reason.

[Lowell]

I posted a large post about it. You want me to cut and paste?

[White Castle]

I posted a large post about it. You want me to cut and paste?

You're using that big post from 12 days ago as a crutch. Do you have anything to add to it?

[skitzer]

Nothing major in the last few pages. Definitely need replacements - if it weren't for flaker Adam Smith's vote a bunch of players would be tied at 2 votes. Not that it's significant, but I'm basically saying Lowell's 3 votes is only representative of 2 in this scenario.

[hewitt]

White Castle are you going to answer my question?

[White Castle]

What question hewitt? I had a hard time understanding what you meant earlier, not about policy lynching.

[hewitt]

Well then why didn't you say that, okay I redirect my question Empking and Wall-E.

[White Castle]

Well then why didn't you say that, okay I redirect my question Empking and Wall-E.

You're right. I should have said so. I've just tired of the way you try to turn it around and say the problem is with us.

[hewitt]

I just said in post 357 that I hadn't realized it was difficult to understand. I didn't say you were a problem White Castle. Jeez, sensitive...lol.

[White Castle]

There you go again with the backhanded comments.

[Rishi]

Vote Count – Page 15

Lowell – 3 (Adam Smith, millar13, Empking)
millar13 – 2 (farside22, lixyl)
skitzer – 2 (Netlava, Jazzmyn)
Wall-E – 2 (Lowell, skitzer)
hewitt – 1 (Wall-E)

Not voting: hewitt, White Castle

With 12 alive, it takes 7 votes to lynch.

Prodding Netlava.

[Rishi]

StrangerCoug replaces lixyl, effective immediately.

[StrangerCoug]

Hello

Let me give this a read...

[StrangerCoug]

OK, these are just notes that I've taken on my first read. Still trying to get the situation straight.

Unvote: millar13

.

#24 farside22: I disapprove of policy lynching people, especially on Day 1.
#39 Netlava: Not often that I see someone abstain from random voting. A null tell in my opinion, but that doesn't mean it's not a standout.
Mid-40's: To tell you the truth, I see Lowell's "billion scum" comment as a null tell. If he wasn't joking, it's still perfectly normal to be disappointed with a game.
#54 White Castle: OK, what the hell? Are we going to argue over something that happened in the queue, and does what people do in the queue really matter in the first place?
#59 millar13:

Major HoS.

You put Lowell at L-2 without providing a reason. Not good.
#66 Wall-E: Same deal with millar13 plus the opportunism.

Vote: Wall-E.

#100 Wall-E: I'd yell at your line of thinking, but an example of an opinion that you should keep to yourself that came to mind (which obviously doesn't apply here) is whom you want vigged.
#154 Wall-E: Why the sudden change of opinion?
#157 millar13: Calling your playstyle unconventional is a weak defense and reminds me of the newbie card.
#176 skitzer: Just what I was thinking about #175. I agree with you here.
#221 Wall-E: I hate this post. Not only is this a nightless, which means no NK, but I don't think clearing somebody warrants a vote per se.
Page 10 hewitt: It's just a missing quote tag. Relax.
#249 Wall-E: "Quote or you're lying" comes off to me as a tad harsh, especially given I remember the post of yours Lowell is attacking. Also, I don't like the words "my heart hasn't been in any of my votes yet"—it means you don't care who gets lynched, which is scummy.
#286 Wall-E: Are you even awake, darn you? There are no power roles here!
#324 Netlava: Way to post fluff.

FoS: Netlava

#331 Wall-E: Same response as #324.
#333 White Castle: That would grind this game to a halt if we're not careful.
#340 Wall-E: Congratulations, you've proven your statement about yourself at #249 and bankrupted any seriousness to your votes.

Tell me if I've missed anything important.