The first line in this post shows that he understands that "Links to lynches" link to the lynch posts in the game.SpyreX wrote:Yea, I'm pretty sure the front is just flavored links to the game.
What could links to the dead mean though cry?
I think this pressure on me is due toSlaine Hayes wrote:As I'm sure you can see, there is quite a lot of pressure on you right now. Are you feeling pressured? How do you plan to convince the other players to move their votes off of you and onto someone else?
It is quite possible that the only way to answer for part A is to claim or to make a hell of a defense.ooba wrote:I think this pressure on me is due toSlaine Hayes wrote:As I'm sure you can see, there is quite a lot of pressure on you right now. Are you feeling pressured? How do you plan to convince the other players to move their votes off of you and onto someone else?
a) Bandwagoning to get some discussion started
b) And partly due to the fact that I had just made one post in the game and hadn't contributed
Now that I've responded - I think I've addressed part b ..
Not much pressure - I am wary of newb or supposedly "accident" hammering though ..
My question to you is this -ooba wrote: I think this pressure on me is due to
a) Bandwagoning to get some discussion started
b) And partly due to the fact that I had just made one post in the game and hadn't contributed
Now that I've responded - I think I've addressed part b ..
.
Again another post that makes no sense. What sort of defense can he mount other than 'I'm more active'? Because the wagon basically formed around his lack of activity.CryMe wrote: It is quite possible that the only way to answer for part A is to claim or to make a hell of a defense.
1. It does make sense. They formed the wagon for information, who they targeted with it does not matter. If the wagon breaks apart just because he posted, they are back in square one, therefore I do not think it will just disappear. I do not agree with a claim out of Ooba and I do think the wagon should just dissipate, but try convincing the wagon of that.MagnaofIllusion wrote:Again another post that makes no sense. What sort of defense can he mount other than 'I'm more active'? Because the wagon basically formed around his lack of activity.CryMe wrote: It is quite possible that the only way to answer for part A is to claim or to make a hell of a defense.
Unvote, Vote: CryMeARiver
I didn't like how quickly you jumped on Yosarian for attempting to move out of the fluff stage and I'm not thrilled with what here reads like a soft role-fish attempt.
Shouldn't that have been obvious in the first place?JoshTheStampede wrote:No one is going to hammer him now that it's been made clear that we'll all assume the hammer is scum.Zang wrote:Can someone unvote ooba. I believe he is at L-1 which gives scum a chance to hammer. You started the bandwagon to start discussion and I believe that was accomplished.
Zang wrote:Shouldn't that have been obvious in the first place?JoshTheStampede wrote:No one is going to hammer him now that it's been made clear that we'll all assume the hammer is scum.Zang wrote:Can someone unvote ooba. I believe he is at L-1 which gives scum a chance to hammer. You started the bandwagon to start discussion and I believe that was accomplished.
If you believe that town won't hammer ooba, why are you voting him? Your stated vote is for pressure. If you believe that town won't hammer ooba, how is he under any pressure?JoshTheStampede wrote:Zang wrote:Shouldn't that have been obvious in the first place?JoshTheStampede wrote:No one is going to hammer him now that it's been made clear that we'll all assume the hammer is scum.Zang wrote:Can someone unvote ooba. I believe he is at L-1 which gives scum a chance to hammer. You started the bandwagon to start discussion and I believe that was accomplished.
Should have been, yes, but everyone declaring it outright took the chance of a overeager scum slip-up from "slim" to "none".
I do not like both these posts .. Not sure how any setup discussion helps at this point - but the second post looks like an obvious fishing attempt to me..
When he was at L-1 and before everyone talked about the hammer stuff, he was under pressure. Now, you're right, he isn't. My vote doesn't really need to be on him anymore.TheSkeward wrote:If you believe that town won't hammer ooba, why are you voting him? Your stated vote is for pressure. If you believe that town won't hammer ooba, how is he under any pressure?JoshTheStampede wrote:Zang wrote:Shouldn't that have been obvious in the first place?JoshTheStampede wrote:No one is going to hammer him now that it's been made clear that we'll all assume the hammer is scum.Zang wrote:Can someone unvote ooba. I believe he is at L-1 which gives scum a chance to hammer. You started the bandwagon to start discussion and I believe that was accomplished.
Should have been, yes, but everyone declaring it outright took the chance of a overeager scum slip-up from "slim" to "none".
Not finding a town motivation here.
So you're fine leaving him at l-1 even believing that those who would hammer are scum, and you're not scumhunting at all, just waiting for something to ping your scumdar.JoshTheStampede wrote:When he was at L-1 and before everyone talked about the hammer stuff, he was under pressure. Now, you're right, he isn't. My vote doesn't really need to be on him anymore.TheSkeward wrote:If you believe that town won't hammer ooba, why are you voting him? Your stated vote is for pressure. If you believe that town won't hammer ooba, how is he under any pressure?JoshTheStampede wrote:Zang wrote:Shouldn't that have been obvious in the first place?JoshTheStampede wrote:No one is going to hammer him now that it's been made clear that we'll all assume the hammer is scum.Zang wrote:Can someone unvote ooba. I believe he is at L-1 which gives scum a chance to hammer. You started the bandwagon to start discussion and I believe that was accomplished.
Should have been, yes, but everyone declaring it outright took the chance of a overeager scum slip-up from "slim" to "none".
Not finding a town motivation here.
However, I don't generally unvote unless I am moving my vote somewhere else, though, or unless I think that having it there is detrimental somehow. So until someone else pings my scumdar I'll leave my vote where it is.
Who says I'm not scumhunting? We're barely out of RVS, I'm reading what's here, which isn't much.TheSkeward wrote:
So you're fine leaving him at l-1 even believing that those who would hammer are scum, and you're not scumhunting at all, just waiting for something to ping your scumdar.
Unvote: Vote: JoshTheStampede
HEY EVERYONE: this is a much better wagon than ooba.
why not unvote? it's as simple as thisJoshTheStampede wrote:When he was at L-1 and before everyone talked about the hammer stuff, he was under pressure. Now, you're right, he isn't. My vote doesn't really need to be on him anymore.TheSkeward wrote:If you believe that town won't hammer ooba, why are you voting him? Your stated vote is for pressure. If you believe that town won't hammer ooba, how is he under any pressure?JoshTheStampede wrote:Zang wrote:Shouldn't that have been obvious in the first place?JoshTheStampede wrote:No one is going to hammer him now that it's been made clear that we'll all assume the hammer is scum.Zang wrote:Can someone unvote ooba. I believe he is at L-1 which gives scum a chance to hammer. You started the bandwagon to start discussion and I believe that was accomplished.
Should have been, yes, but everyone declaring it outright took the chance of a overeager scum slip-up from "slim" to "none".
Not finding a town motivation here.
However, I don't generally unvote unless I am moving my vote somewhere else, though, or unless I think that having it there is detrimental somehow. So until someone else pings my scumdar I'll leave my vote where it is.
I know how to unvote. But votes create pressure, and not using that pressure is a waste of the only game mechanic the town can use to their advantage. People often speak and post very differently when there are a few votes on them than they do when they feel they are not under close scrutiny. I like to have my vote on someone whenever possible.Zang wrote:why not unvote? it's as simple as thisJoshTheStampede wrote:When he was at L-1 and before everyone talked about the hammer stuff, he was under pressure. Now, you're right, he isn't. My vote doesn't really need to be on him anymore.TheSkeward wrote:If you believe that town won't hammer ooba, why are you voting him? Your stated vote is for pressure. If you believe that town won't hammer ooba, how is he under any pressure?JoshTheStampede wrote:Zang wrote:Shouldn't that have been obvious in the first place?JoshTheStampede wrote:No one is going to hammer him now that it's been made clear that we'll all assume the hammer is scum.Zang wrote:Can someone unvote ooba. I believe he is at L-1 which gives scum a chance to hammer. You started the bandwagon to start discussion and I believe that was accomplished.
Should have been, yes, but everyone declaring it outright took the chance of a overeager scum slip-up from "slim" to "none".
Not finding a town motivation here.
However, I don't generally unvote unless I am moving my vote somewhere else, though, or unless I think that having it there is detrimental somehow. So until someone else pings my scumdar I'll leave my vote where it is.
Unvote
