Mini 1783: GTA 2 Mafia (GaME OVAH)

ISO · Post Post #800 (ISO) » Thu Apr 21, 2016 9:16 am

I think I have already. Mainly the last game I played with Titus, Titus had very strong opinions that he basically clung to the whole game, even if they were wrong.

BlackStar · Post Post #801 (ISO) » Thu Apr 21, 2016 9:18 am

Anyone could do that as town or scum though

Dragon Knight · Post Post #802 (ISO) » Thu Apr 21, 2016 9:18 am

In post 800, Ircher wrote:I think I have already. Mainly the last game I played with Titus, Titus had very strong opinions that he basically clung to the whole game, even if they were wrong.

Unfortunately, there's a massive lack of those in this game.

Dragon Knight · Post Post #803 (ISO) » Thu Apr 21, 2016 9:19 am

In post 801, BlackStar wrote:Anyone could do that as town or scum though

Actually, Titus has a tell with those. Unfortunately, however, this is not her town game. Her town and scum game is very recognizable.

Ranger · Post Post #804 (ISO) » Thu Apr 21, 2016 9:19 am

MagnaofIllusion wrote:But let’s get into the heart of your “One of her Townies would be an easy mislynch” portion. Why are all of DK / Banterlords / Dom easy mislynches? DK is clearly off the table by the time Ranger replaced so that is out. Banterlords had gotten exactly zero heat all game so I don’t see why you call them an easy push either. Dom is the only player that might be an easy lynch among the three.

Aaaaaaaaaaaaaand, Magna shows his true colors here.

Magna's original argument?

"I find it suspect that Ranger didn't suspect any of the players voting her slot."
Magna's comment here? "Why would it be unusual for a scum-Ranger to not go after them? None of them are easy mislynches."

MagnaofIllusion wrote:And a Cop claim with no other claims on the board as scum risks counter-claim and instant hemp at the cost of outing the Town Cop.

The same applies to a Watcher. Cop claims risk counters from Hiders, Gunsmiths, Neapolitans, and Cops; Watcher claims risk counters from Trackers, Followers, Motion Detectors, Voyeurs, Watchers, and about half a dozen other variants.

Why should I be saying the wagon is bad when the only vote that I would see coming from a scum-read was Blackstar’s which I had not read as of 658

Hmm...let's see. How about your willingness to compromise on TheDominator, the founder of the wagon on me? Or how you clearly state that you want to reevaluate Dragon Knight come D2 multiple times after their claim and continue to call them scummy in spite of the claim? (You say you're townreading them as of that post. This is news! 209, 261, 331, and even THIS OWN POST earlier at the top all suggest otherwise.) Then there is of course the BlackStar vote. Especially given you were attacking me for

not

going after the composition of a wagon.

You say it yourself!

Dom is a compromise lynch for me because he’s exceedingly low content and I see a potential scum-slip which I already mentioned.

^This is not something you should be willing to join a wagon with. Especially given your vote/suspicion there. Or, if you do, you should note it. You did not. You joined the wagon without thinking about the person already on there.

Ranger · Post Post #805 (ISO) » Thu Apr 21, 2016 9:20 am

Intent to hammer.

I'm demanding a claim from Code of Honor.

ISO · Post Post #806 (ISO) » Thu Apr 21, 2016 9:20 am

In post 801, BlackStar wrote:Anyone could do that as town or scum though

Indeed, true, which is why I still hold a scumread, but obviously, it makes me reconsider the motive behind their posts.

Ranger · Post Post #807 (ISO) » Thu Apr 21, 2016 9:20 am

Because I'm dead serious, I'm seconds away from hammering if they don't come in and claim RIGHT NOW.

Ranger · Post Post #808 (ISO) » Thu Apr 21, 2016 9:21 am

Code of Honor wrote:You can't possibly think that makes any sense.

-Xk

You're online.

So, claim now.

Ranger · Post Post #809 (ISO) » Thu Apr 21, 2016 9:22 am

I'm giving four minutes.

Ranger · Post Post #810 (ISO) » Thu Apr 21, 2016 9:22 am

Make that three.

Ranger · Post Post #811 (ISO) » Thu Apr 21, 2016 9:23 am

Ranger · Post Post #812 (ISO) » Thu Apr 21, 2016 9:24 am

The Banterlords · Post Post #813 (ISO) » Thu Apr 21, 2016 9:25 am

UNVOTE:

Polar Vortex · Post Post #814 (ISO) » Thu Apr 21, 2016 9:25 am

Let's umm, discuss things first before we do something stupid?

Bearbert D

The Banterlords · Post Post #815 (ISO) » Thu Apr 21, 2016 9:25 am

No no no no no no ranger..
~Both Dwlee

Ranger · Post Post #816 (ISO) » Thu Apr 21, 2016 9:26 am

Hmph.

Spineless coward.

Code of Honor was online.
They haven't posted a claim in spite of intent.

They're scum.

Polar Vortex · Post Post #817 (ISO) » Thu Apr 21, 2016 9:26 am

Banterlords is super duper town with that unvote btw

Bearbert

The Banterlords · Post Post #818 (ISO) » Thu Apr 21, 2016 9:27 am

or you know, maybe they have the tab open and are afk?

Ranger · Post Post #819 (ISO) » Thu Apr 21, 2016 9:27 am

Well,

yes

, but it's still irrelevant to the fact Code of Honor is scum.

The Banterlords · Post Post #820 (ISO) » Thu Apr 21, 2016 9:28 am

Why are you refusing to think about the fact that they could have left the tab open while they eat?
~Both dwlee again

pedit Idc, they claim first.

BlackStar · Post Post #821 (ISO) » Thu Apr 21, 2016 9:28 am

You're starting to give off some really bad vibes, ranger

The Banterlords · Post Post #822 (ISO) » Thu Apr 21, 2016 9:29 am

In post 821, BlackStar wrote:You're starting to give off some really bad vibes, ranger

~Dwlee

Dragon Knight · Post Post #823 (ISO) » Thu Apr 21, 2016 9:30 am

Ircher, Ranger, hammer.

Also, for Dwlee, that is null, at best. that's not his town play, unfortunately.

Ranger · Post Post #824 (ISO) » Thu Apr 21, 2016 9:30 am

BlackStar wrote:You're starting to give off some really bad vibes, ranger

I've been kept from hammering scum.

I'm grumpy.