Thanatos (2) - Gorgon, Disciple Slayer
liamcool (1) - charter
Disciple Slayer (1) - Thanatos
Not Voting (5) - Dark_Lady_Shaiann, liamcool, Infinitive, Nudude, VampyreLord
Votes are always reset when the day starts.
I don't build cases on crap info. Vote stays until something substantial comes along.Thanatos wrote:I admit I over reacted. But I only did it, at first at least, because I misunderstood what it was exactly what you were doing. I thought you were building a case on crap-info.
If we can agree on that premise, I'm content.
Biulding a case against me based onDisciple Slayer wrote:I don't build cases on crap info. Vote stays until something substantial comes along.Thanatos wrote:I admit I over reacted. But I only did it, at first at least, because I misunderstood what it was exactly what you were doing. I thought you were building a case on crap-info.
If we can agree on that premise, I'm content.
VL, jeez. You could have spent the time posting your useless remarks on contributing to the town, for once. I'm tempted to vote you simply to pressure you into giving some info.
Could you clarify what you mean here? I haven't got an idea what you mean, based off the second sentence, which could change the entire meaning.charter wrote:
Around 430 when infinitive votes for liamcool, I think he liamcool thought that DT wasnt actually going to end up lynched, and he switched right over to liamcool when he even admitted to not finiding liamcool very suspicious. He just wanted to be on the next bandwagon early enough so as to avoid suspicion.
I merely summarized what HeH said in my list. I've got a commentary below the posts I quoted. Overreacting again? All the more reason to keep my vote on you. Do you OMGUS this late into the game? That's what your vote on me sure looks like.Thanatos wrote:Biulding a case against me based onDisciple Slayer wrote:I don't build cases on crap info. Vote stays until something substantial comes along.Thanatos wrote:I admit I over reacted. But I only did it, at first at least, because I misunderstood what it was exactly what you were doing. I thought you were building a case on crap-info.
If we can agree on that premise, I'm content.
VL, jeez. You could have spent the time posting your useless remarks on contributing to the town, for once. I'm tempted to vote you simply to pressure you into giving some info.Lurking? I think that's crap info.
Wait....what did all of that have to do with me? Are you assuming that simply because I defended S_K that I shall now defend Thanatos, because HeH hinted that there was a possible link between me and S_K becuase I defended her and we had consecutive votes on the player who died N1? I'm fairly certain that is why, and if it thats fine. But, didn't the chance of partnership of S_K(Thanatos) and I get thrown away somewhere in the game or are do we have to go back to that? I don't even think I have had much to say about or do with Thanatos since he got here. Why would that start now? If I had anything to say about him I would have said something when HeH posted all of that stuff. I'm not going to all of a sudden jump to his defense just becuase your now using the same arguements and deciding to vote him (which I believe is the only vote on him, so I don't really care too much right now anyway). I defended S_K becuase I thought she was being attacked unfairly by a lot of people. I'm not really sure where your trying to go with that last part, but it's definetly not happening right now, and if it does it won't have anything to do with the fact that Thanatos replaced S_K, nor will it have anything to do with the fact that you are the one accusing him.Disciple Slayer wrote:I just gave a PBPA and you FOS me for quoting the words of a dead townie? I think your reasoning is flawed. Here's a vote to pressure you into more information.
Vote: Thanatos
Now watch as DLS rushes to defend him in her next post.
I never said anything about you two having consecutive votes on the doctor who got mislynched N1. It could mean something. It could mean nothing. I don't know. That's why I posted HeH's votes and FOSs, to gauge reactions of players in an attempt to figure out what the hell is going on here.Dark_Lady_Shaiann wrote:Are you assuming that simply because I defended S_K that I shall now defend Thanatos, because HeH hinted that there was a possible link between me and S_K becuase I defended herand we had consecutive votes on the player who died N1?
...*sigh* that's what I said...I'm tired of this, and I'm not walking through this little circular thing you've got going on here.Disciple Slayer wrote:I merely summarized what HeH said in my list. I've got a commentary below the posts I quoted. Overreacting again? All the more reason to keep my vote on you. Do you OMGUS this late into the game? That's what your vote on me sure looks like.Thanatos wrote:Biulding a case against me based onDisciple Slayer wrote:I don't build cases on crap info. Vote stays until something substantial comes along.Thanatos wrote:I admit I over reacted. But I only did it, at first at least, because I misunderstood what it was exactly what you were doing. I thought you were building a case on crap-info.
If we can agree on that premise, I'm content.
VL, jeez. You could have spent the time posting your useless remarks on contributing to the town, for once. I'm tempted to vote you simply to pressure you into giving some info.Lurking? I think that's crap info.
liam, he means that Infinitive supposedly thought that DT wasn't going to get lynched, so he decided to move on to you to draw suspicion away from himself in the event that you got lynched and turned out to be a townie. This is under the hypothesis that Infinitive is scum and knows you are either a SK or pro-town. Can you post what you think about charter's theory?
Man, you have some posting to do. Get more active.
These are the good points he brings up. Jeez. Try to complicate things, will you.Hang 'em High wrote:I've liked your contributions so far, but this post is a bit yucky. You are advocating killing someone and only giving hints of reasons. I've found liamcool suspicious, so I'll be very interested in hearing your case fully outlined. However, I still find your post fishy. Just yesterday you said:Thanatos wrote:hm...Well, I have some reasons for this, though not the time to explain them in Detail (mainly they were aligned during the SK issue, DT's response to Liam's horrible plan, and the way Liam voted) I am fairly certain that Liam and DT are scumbuddies.
Therefore, if the cucensous is to let DT live the night, I propose we kill Liam.
You haven't talked about liamcool at all since then until your post calling for his death. I don't know how you go from a case you say isn't strong to advocating his death. Adding to this, late last night you said:Thanatos wrote:Besides, I don't see any other strong leads at the moment, to be honest. Except for Liam, but even that I don't consider strong at the moment.
Here you are calling for a calm, reasoned discussion before lynching deepthought, but when it comes to liamcool you want to rush right into the kill. Your approach to liam is very different from your approach to DT. Why the inconsistency? Also, it's interesting to note your wording in the last sentence.Thanatos wrote:unvoteCool it, kiddos. I don't want a lynch on the first day. I want more time to think. If nothing else, get a roleclaim out of him before you kill. (and frankly, I think it's too soon for that as well)
It's not that Deepthought hasn't done alot to make me suspicious, but this is moving way too fast.
I've underlined the part that interests me. Why are you thinking about who to let live through the night? While I'm pretty certain you meant "live through the day" and merely made a typo, I'm not willing to entirely discount the possibility you slipped up. I'd like to hear your answer to this and the reasoning behind your call for liamcool's lynch. Until then IGMEOY.Thanatos wrote:Therefore, if the cucensous is to let DTlive the night, I propose we kill Liam.
OK..now you are trying to instigate something. Basically, I agreed with what you are doing and you are taunting me about something completely different, basically knowing that it's going to start a fight. Alright, you have fun with that. I'll respond to this particular post anyway.Disciple Slayer wrote:I never said anything about you two having consecutive votes on the doctor who got mislynched N1. It could mean something. It could mean nothing. I don't know. That's why I posted HeH's votes and FOSs, to gauge reactions of players in an attempt to figure out what the hell is going on here.Dark_Lady_Shaiann wrote:Are you assuming that simply because I defended S_K that I shall now defend Thanatos, because HeH hinted that there was a possible link between me and S_K becuase I defended herand we had consecutive votes on the player who died N1?
Moving on to a different topic.
Whatever happened to those suspicions you had of me? Post them now, while you're still online.
No, I don't have anything to say about that. I'm commenting on DS's methods right now.... not really on his points, which really aren't even his.I believe/believed that DSes comments about me were him saying "HeH suspected Thanatos, because SK lurked." which is stupid. I may have missinterepreted it, I don't know. But, if I read correctly, DLS read it that way, so maybe I didn't...
I agree with this.My Vote on him is because he continues to ignore things brought up against him. Like, for example, how he has yet to comment on the fact that the "good points brought up against me" were dropped within that same page, and because he continues to be unreasponcive.
Alright, thats fine.Okay, now I'm getting a bit confused. I thought you had consecutive votes on deepthought, not Insurgent. I'm not taunting you though, you know what I'm like if I am. Sorry, I thought I picked up on a slip.
Thats completely understandable but, do you agree with them? It doesn't really make much sense to me to use some one elses arguements if you don't agree with them. That is what I am trying to get at. I don't really care that you are using them, aslong as you agree with them, becuase if you don't then it goes back to my statement about 'hiding behind a dead townies speculations': Basically trying to make yourself look good by throwing suspision at some one for trying to argue with some one who is dead. Thats just one reason I can think of how that would work. There definetly are others but...whatever.I'm not using his points to attack. I'm using them to try and unravel what's been going on. Not much really, but it's something. Something's always better than nothing.
I make a prediction. DLS accuses me of assuming things.Dark_Lady_Shaiann wrote:Wait....what did all of that have to do with me? Are you assuming that simply because I defended S_K that I shall now defend Thanatos, because HeH hinted that there was a possible link between me and S_K becuase I defended her and we had consecutive votes on the player who died N1?Disciple Slayer wrote:I just gave a PBPA and you FOS me for quoting the words of a dead townie? I think your reasoning is flawed. Here's a vote to pressure you into more information.
Vote: Thanatos
Now watch as DLS rushes to defend him in her next post.
Thanatos backs DLS up.Thanatos wrote:I believe/believed that DSes comments about me were him saying "HeH suspected Thanatos, because SK lurked." which is stupid. I may have missinterepreted it, I don't know. But, if I read correctly, DLS read it that way, so maybe I didn't...
DLS backs up Thanatos, just as I predicted.Dark_Lady_Shaiann wrote:I agree with this.Thanatos wrote: My Vote on him is because he continues to ignore things brought up against him. Like, for example, how he has yet to comment on the fact that the "good points brought up against me" were dropped within that same page, and because he continues to be unreasponcive.
Like I said before, I'm using them to draw reactions from players. So far I've heard both the reactions of you and Thanatos, but I want to hear from everyone else soon.Dark_Lady_Shaiann wrote:Thats completely understandable but, do you agree with them? It doesn't really make much sense to me to use some one elses arguements if you don't agree with them. That is what I am trying to get at. I don't really care that you are using them, aslong as you agree with them, becuase if you don't then it goes back to my statement about 'hiding behind a dead townies speculations': Basically trying to make yourself look good by throwing suspision at some one for trying to argue with some one who is dead. Thats just one reason I can think of how that would work. There definetly are others but...whatever.
Disciple Slayer wrote:(1) I make a prediction. DLS accuses me of assuming things.Dark_Lady_Shaiann wrote:Wait....what did all of that have to do with me? Are you assuming that simply because I defended S_K that I shall now defend Thanatos, because HeH hinted that there was a possible link between me and S_K becuase I defended her and we had consecutive votes on the player who died N1?Disciple Slayer wrote:I just gave a PBPA and you FOS me for quoting the words of a dead townie? I think your reasoning is flawed. Here's a vote to pressure you into more information.
Vote: Thanatos
Now watch as DLS rushes to defend him in her next post.
(2)Thanatos backs DLS up.Thanatos wrote:I believe/believed that DSes comments about me were him saying "HeH suspected Thanatos, because SK lurked." which is stupid. I may have missinterepreted it, I don't know. But, if I read correctly, DLS read it that way, so maybe I didn't...
(3)DLS backs up Thanatos, just as I predicted.Dark_Lady_Shaiann wrote:I agree with this.Thanatos wrote: My Vote on him is because he continues to ignore things brought up against him. Like, for example, how he has yet to comment on the fact that the "good points brought up against me" were dropped within that same page, and because he continues to be unreasponcive.
I never went on an all-out offensive against anyone, but at the first sign of trouble (a list of players suspected by HeH at some point during the game, regardless whether he cleared them afterwards or not), DLS and Thanatos once again reveal their ties to each other.
Other people please comment and add your own thoughts on this fiasco. It seems to be growing into what could potentially be the most important discussion of D2.
It's a yes or no question. Do you agree with the points HeH made or not?Disciple Slayer wrote:Like I said before, I'm using them to draw reactions from players. So far I've heard both the reactions of you and Thanatos, but I want to hear from everyone else soon.Dark_Lady_Shaiann wrote:Thats completely understandable but, do you agree with them? It doesn't really make much sense to me to use some one elses arguements if you don't agree with them. That is what I am trying to get at. I don't really care that you are using them, aslong as you agree with them, becuase if you don't then it goes back to my statement about 'hiding behind a dead townies speculations': Basically trying to make yourself look good by throwing suspision at some one for trying to argue with some one who is dead. Thats just one reason I can think of how that would work. There definetly are others but...whatever.
I didn't instantly do anything. It definetly took me a while to notice the part that got me talking, and I'm not reacting to the list I'm reacting to your comment. I wouldn't call myself being overly defensive. I may be overly explaining myself, but thats just because I'm trying my best to cover myself from all sides, but your doing a pretty good job of trying to pretend like your intepreting it wrong.Disciple Slayer wrote:Just wondering, why did you two instantly overreact to my list of players? It was a list, and nothing more. No real substantial cases or arguments. Can you explain why both of you are being over-defensive?
I usually am.Dark_Lady_Shaiann wrote:And...yeah, your right.