iam wrote:Fuck that noise. Gut feelings own.
There's nothing wrong with gut feelings, I don't believe I ever stated as such. I remember distinctly explaining that it shouldn't be your sole reason for judgment. If you're going to dispute this, would you at least provide reasoning other than "they own"?
HavingFitz wrote:Sorry I didn’t spoon feed you. There a thingy on the bottom of the screen that allows you to sort on specific players. If you look at my ISO 6-8 posts they state and elaborate on my reasons for suspecting Korashk/Llamafluff. All while in the middle of trying to get my dalt case supported. These remain the only reasons atm for my suspicions towards Llamafluff so if you want more…just reread them repeatedly.
You are right, I did not look far enough back to see your case. Thank you for pointing that out.
HavingFitz wrote:Thanks for the warning. Can you define a flip flop wagon and how it pertains to me (as opposed to anyone else in the game who has moved their votes? And as mentioned above…I still support a dalt lynch but I’m not going to keep my vote essentially out of play when there are other scum to catch.
The word "other" in that last statment indicates that you do believe that Dalt is scum. I do not buy, for a second, that you would switch your vote off of someone you believe is scum, for someone that you're suspecting for the reasons you stated. How the flip flop wagon pertains to you, as opposed to others, is how you clearly believed in your case only to drop if for your "second best" just because that wagon had steam.
LmL wrote:Because it's the biggest bandwagon at the time.
Well, I do feel the need to point out that I was wrong here. HF did explain reasons why in earlier posts of his, I just did not look back far enough. While I am in agreement with you on the swap, you should take into consideration that he did explain his case previously. Just not at the time of his switch.
tomorrow wendy wrote:I didn't like how havingfitz played along with iamausername's claim thingy early in the game.
I like the posts by Leech and Loud Mouth Lee.
havingfitz voted for me.
unvote, vote: havingfitz
Fluff, Fluff, OMGUS. Wow, that post is so bad it's painful. If you are going to state that you feel a specific way about a player, or that you like the posts of others, you should offer explainations.
tomorrow wendy wrote:yes. i am accusing you of being scum, and lying about not knowing the set-up. To me you post replying to iamausername seems to be written with the voice of a scum player impersonating town, playing along by pretending to not know the setup but to still try to stop the gambit by accusing the gambit author of being a rolefisher.
You said you believe he is scum, yet also knew the setup of the game. When you look at HF's initial post it was a clear indication that he thought there were PR's present. If he was scum and knew the setup, why would he post in a manner that deliberately made it appear he was unfamiliar with the setup, and draw attention to himself?
Xite wrote:I'm not voting for him because I would like to keep discussion going
as long as it's good, and me
voting him would just make the day end just that much faster
, plus I was more interested in Lat at the time (although Fitz still looks like scum and I wouldn't mind ====[ ] him, but
I'm waiting for discussion to die down and him to be at L-1
). I'm not voting him now because I'm more interested in you, in the noncreepiest way possible
So, you're not voting for HF because you want to keep discussion going? Am I silly for assuming that you weren't voting for HF because you feel that Lat is more suspicious? Your vote is on him afterall. What you've just said is that if the conversation were to stop now, you'd vote for HF. Let's actually think about that for a second. If conversation stopped, nothing else would be added to the conversation, right? You just said that if conversation stopped you would vote for HF, without anything else being added to cause that. So, why is your vote still on Lat?
With the last two bolds you just said that you are going to be a hammer vote. Why does he have to be at L-1 before you vote for him? If the event you described were to take place, it would be easy for you to justify that hammer because there was no duscussion. You could claim it was better than a no-lynch, or that the game was dead and you wanted to progress it. I cannot think of a single pro-town reason to withhold a vote for the reason you just stated. This is easily the scummiest post that I've seen in this game so far.
Unvote, Vote: Xite91
) And hey, I was 
