If we don't get rid of the lyncher we have to be extraordinarily careful even if we find scum.Guardian wrote:I want to find the scum first.A non scum lynch means lylo day two-- and ignoring scum hunting means people can not give reasons for their suspicions -- like you are doing -- and instead just try and get someone lynched -- which would be perfect for the lyncher that you supposedly want to get lynched.
I think you are anti-town.
JDodge, you haven't done much scum-hunting as apposed to lyncher findings.JDodge wrote:If we don't get rid of the lyncher we have to be extraordinarily careful even if we find scum.Guardian wrote:I want to find the scum first.A non scum lynch means lylo day two-- and ignoring scum hunting means people can not give reasons for their suspicions -- like you are doing -- and instead just try and get someone lynched -- which would be perfect for the lyncher that you supposedly want to get lynched.
I think you are anti-town.
I think that if you actually think about it a lyncher is more of a danger than the scum.Sammich wrote:JDodge, you haven't done much scum-hunting as apposed to lyncher findings.JDodge wrote:If we don't get rid of the lyncher we have to be extraordinarily careful even if we find scum.Guardian wrote:I want to find the scum first.A non scum lynch means lylo day two-- and ignoring scum hunting means people can not give reasons for their suspicions -- like you are doing -- and instead just try and get someone lynched -- which would be perfect for the lyncher that you supposedly want to get lynched.
I think you are anti-town.
If the lyncher wins, we all lose, but I think most scum would find getting the lyncher out of the way a #1 priority.
You thought?I think that if you actually think about it a lyncher is more of a danger than the scum.
WILL YOU PLEASE DO US ALL A FAVOR AND READ THE FUCKING GAME.Sammich wrote:You thought?I think that if you actually think about it a lyncher is more of a danger than the scum.
No way!
Well, all taunting aside, who do you think has a good chance of being the lyncher? I know you're very pressed on your belief that I'm not town, but I would like to hear any of your other suspicions.
Meh.d3sisted wrote:I'd actually like to take this opportunity to ask Sammich, why did you vote no-lynch, and what did you hope to achieve by it?
I highly doubt it was a coincidence that his suggestion came 2 posts after Kerplunk's vote on him. Looks to me like he got nervous at being voted, and maybe even a bit apprehensive of Kerplunk's suspicion. Whatever the case, he tried to lay the votes off himself before the case could escalate.
No, I'm actually not happy with that at all.JDodge wrote:They're thinking off the top of my head and remembering who was scummy, not exactly what they did. I do this for secondary suspicions because otherwise they are a waste of my time. Happy?Guardian wrote:Jdodge, explain your suspicions. Seriously.
Or are they just fabricated?
I think you're an idiot.Guardian wrote:No, I'm actually not happy with that at all.JDodge wrote:They're thinking off the top of my head and remembering who was scummy, not exactly what they did. I do this for secondary suspicions because otherwise they are a waste of my time. Happy?Guardian wrote:Jdodge, explain your suspicions. Seriously.
Or are they just fabricated?
I could say that about anyone in the game, and then never back it up with anything if that was acceptable. I think it is not acceptable, and a response easily used by scum.
d3sisted isn't your lyncher, we'll see if Crub is, but I doubt it -- I think if Crub is scum he's teamscum.
I think a Jdodge lynch today would be great.
.. If you want me to buy in to you having legitimate pro-town reasons for not giving reasons for your suspicions, I need something more concrete than that.JDodge wrote:Telling you why would defeat the purpose of not explainingGuardian wrote:WHY aren't you explaining? It's not like the mafia can NK you or something, I can't understand why you don't want to give reasons.
You all need to learn basic reading comprehensionJDodge wrote:They're thinking off the top of my head and remembering who was scummy, not exactly what they did. I do this for secondary suspicions because otherwise they are a waste of my time. Happy?Guardian wrote:Jdodge, explain your suspicions. Seriously.
Or are they just fabricated?
Remembering that they probably did something that could have been scummy doesn't cut it for me as your full explanation of why you suspect them.Guardian wrote:In a game this small, with 60% of the other players being scum (IF you are town),you should have more than one legitimate suspicion.
Your suspicions at this point basically are:
Sammich -- he could be my lyncher, maybe, well -- if I have a lyncher, he is it. I think.
Kerplunk -- scum with d3sisted.
d3sisted -- scum with Kerplunk.
I think that if you are town you could and should do much better than that.
I bolded the important part because you seem to be having great difficulty finding itJDodge wrote:You all need to learn basic reading comprehensionJDodge wrote:They're thinking off the top of my head and remembering who was scummy, not exactly what they did.Guardian wrote:Jdodge, explain your suspicions. Seriously.
Or are they just fabricated?I do this for secondary suspicions because otherwise they are a waste of my time.Happy?
I did that too...JDodge wrote:I bolded the important part because you seem to be having great difficulty finding it
That's nice.Guardian wrote:I did that too...JDodge wrote:I bolded the important part because you seem to be having great difficulty finding it
I am not OK with you having only one primary suspicion -- only one player whose alignment you have put significant thought into.
More like JDodge the Lyncher.JDodge wrote:Interestingly enough I'm trying to look for scum, not play "do what Guardian tells me to do", so I'm just going to start ignoring this and focusing on getting rid of Sammich the Lyncher.