Deadline is on
Needed to lynch a fool: 7 votes
If by deadline no one has 7 votes the fool is the player with more votes
If two fools share the top score of votes the foolest among them is decided by
ooba wrote:RangeroftheNorth wrote:Hi. I'm sorry I haven't been paying adequate attention to this game. I'll catch up over the weekend, and try to post something by Monday.Welcome backStrider wrote:"You draw to much attention to yourself, Mr. Underhill."
I agree. Strike my last vote, reverse it.gorckat wrote:@Al: Wishy-washy. much?
Wishy-washy in bold.Al wrote:isread your post because when you said I didn't want to be responsible for it, I took that as meaning I wanted to hide the fact that I started it (which I didn't) but you meant I was tryingto make it look like I didn't want people to know I was supporting it. Which I wasn't, necessarily. But I wasn't against it, either, as I had FoS'd him.
This is bad. Scum are the ones that don't want to be caught out.Alabaska J wrote:I can see the logic in what you all are saying. I only use random.org because a truly random vote keeps me out of the opening semantics and misunderstanding, since, there is nothing to be gleaned from what I have posted and therefore eliminates the possibility of someone taking my vote the wrong way.
Hmm. I don't like this. Better off asking for him to be replaced, lynching someone with no posts is not very beneficial for the future.armix wrote:RotN is only worth lynching if he decides not to post (at least based on the current wagon).
This comment wasn't phrased the best. What I meant was if Ranger showed back up and kept with the "Screw this, hate day starts, not posting" he should be considered for a lynch. Not if he just doesn't post and legitimately needs replacement.Rogueben wrote:armixHmm. I don't like this. Better off asking for him to be replaced, lynching someone with no posts is not very beneficial for the future.armix wrote:RotN is only worth lynching if he decides not to post (at least based on the current wagon).