I'm new around here, so please explain that acronym.OMGUS-ed Yvonne
But on the other hand, you can be suspicious of someone without committing yourself. I suppose it depends on how developed the bandwagon is.Pink Puppy wrote:I agree with this.YvonneSeer wrote:Supporting a wagon from the sidelines but not committing yourself to it is a really scummy thing to do.
It's sort of inciting the mob to take action without taking the action yourself and thus, avoiding the heat.
I find this post odd. You're no taking that much notice of zeddicus, but you are taking some--and I think that post was a bit more suspicious than you seemed to. On the other hand, some people just like making accusations like that.vikingfan wrote:careful zed...I'm always leery of people who say we need to do things NOW... there is never a need to hurry. Longer days always help the town. Of course, there is a point where a lynch is good, but IMO, we haven't reached that point yet.
that being said, I'm sensing heavy scummy vibes from darkdude since he's overly paranoid at the moment and not giving really good reasons to go after Yvonne.unvote vote darkdude.
So:QuantumFruit wrote:@Everyone: Let's not get too over-eager band-wagoning and keep track of the vote count. (Btw, I don't throw my votes out like candy, so when I do vote, it's basically a final decision type of thing [joke votes excepted]. On the other hand, it takes a lot for me to decide to vote. Just keep that in mind. I like giving people a chance to defend themselves.)
Here yes. Mafia no.@darkdude Is this your 1st game here?
The thing I said baseless was your point about me urging others to vote for windkirby but not voting myself. That is untrue. The rest is subjective.Firstly, you need to understand that just because you don't agree with my argument, doesn't mean it's baseless.
I've seem much more genuine freak outs during my short time here....being all overdefensive after only having one vote on you.
My rationale is that I didn't like the way that he said it, but on the other hand, darkdude is nowhere near lynching, so I didn't view as suspiciously as I would otherwise have, especially since no wave of votes occurred afterward. I do agree, though, I can't tell whether he just does that or not.Akonas wrote:I find this post odd. You're no taking that much notice of zeddicus, but you are taking some--and I think that post was a bit more suspicious than you seemed to. On the other hand, some people just like making accusations like that.
Why is it baseless if you just restated the base (I use base to mean the reason for Yvonne's reaction)? Some players find it suspicious if someone expresses suspicion of another player and does not back it up with a vote. I think I understand what you mean by baseless (more like unsubstantiated) - like she doesn't have enough evidence to make that claim or something?darkdude wrote:The thing I said baseless was your point about me urging others to vote for windkirby but not voting myself.
Your question was why I think Yvonne's accusation is baseless correct?That doesn't answer my question.
(given you said you need two votes and did vote later) isnt this doing the same thing darkdude was originally deemed suspicious for......throwing suspicion on a wagon but not voting?zeddicus wrote:You pushed a wagon without adding your vote to it. Major FoS: darkdude I need two votes
zeddicus wrote:eager for night?
unvote, vote:mozsuggs
again you seem guilty of your own accusations against others.zeddicus wrote:we need to lynch darkdude now.
From my perspective Yvonne successfully made me a magnet for all suspicions and made all else seem less important. And all I did was suggest the possibility of a cover up.isnt this doing the same thing darkdude was originally deemed suspicious for......throwing suspicion on a wagon but not voting?
Mm-hm. Focusing on one person at a time and building a case is how a lot of people play this game, as well. Get used to it, DD.QuantumFruit wrote:So, you felt like Yvonne was focusing too much on you and not on other players, which is scummy because it's trying to get a specific townie to look like scum and get lynched - yes?
Thing is, there is a reason to play that way, because we then get people to react and respond and arguments grow from that. That would hold if she was still doing it, but I think it was more of a suggestion accompanied by some prodding.
Really? With that point of view you're bound to get lynched. You're being defensive and using as your defense that you know you're not scum, which is of absolutely no help to us because you could easily be lying. I agree that Yvonne's accusation wasn't that strong, but your reaction to it is absurd.darkdude wrote:From an objective point of view though, I realize that I'm going to get lynched sooner or later in a couple of days. Even if I survive this day (and the following night) I would only draw more suspicion and eventually get lynched anyways. I only hope that if it comes to that the remaining towns should remember the other suspicious persons here.....
