Mini 387: Suicide Bombers, GAME OVER (at last)!

[pablito]

But most of all I really don't like Sherlock's posts. But I'm not going to vote him. Seriously Sherlock looked the scummiest to me on the re-read. Tried to make mountains out of molehills.

[chaotic_diablo]

I called you defensive, not scummy, there is a difference between the two imo

So what kind of point are you trying to bring up? Supposively, you called him defensive to call it into attention. My attention is on him now, but there's nothing there.

[bird1111]

I brought that up because it seemed odd to me

[Tamuz]

How did Twito get pulled into this menage a deux?

[Twito]

How did Twito get pulled into this menage a deux?

It was him! *points a finger*

[Scalebane]

I'm here. (yes, I know this is a post devoid of content)

[Tamuz]

Aren't all of ours.

[chaotic_diablo]

vote sherlock

[molestargazer]

I'm here now.

What've I missed? Why are you voting that Chaotic?

[pablito]

Sherlock's gone. I'm here now. But I would completely agree with that vote, c_d if he were still around.

[chaotic_diablo]

Just to get things moving.

Well..
Random votes often end up in lynching a townie.. so I'm not going to do that..

What else is there to say?

He establishes that random voting is bad. Yippee. Big clue, but wait!

I'd do a random dice roll on this forum, but I don't know how, so I'll have to random.org it.

How odd.. Random.org also says Twomz. So he must be scum. Rolling Eyes

Vote: Twomz

What the? He randomly votes even though he just said that he wouldn't. IMO, it has to do something with the "fat ugly mole" exchange he had with sherlock. As a result, there is a slight established connection.

The next big thing is MGS's rise to defend sherlock in post 31.

I see what you're saying - however pointing out that could just be letting people know.

In this case, MGS is telling us that sherlock's point is to inform us. However, just in the last page, sherlock accused both TCS and I of being "lynchers" with little evidence. This is tied in with sherlock's post 27 in that he subtly tells us to watch out for the "dangerous" people, TCS and I. Seriously, err on the side of caution? What sort of suggestion is "not voting?" In a way, I think MGS was trying to divert our attention from that aspect.

Later, MGS starts "lurking" like everyone else. [quote="MGS']Well.. there's not much I can say.

I'm still watching though.[/quote] However, when I voted for a nonexistant sherlock, MGs immediatel rises to question me.

I'm here now.

What've I missed? Why are you voting that Chaotic?

It's difficult to vote someone who isn't here. There, he establishes a stronger connection.

That's about it.

unvote

if I need it

vote molestargazer

[molestargazer]

By the way, who's MGS?

The next big thing is MGS's rise to defend sherlock in post 31.

MGS wrote:
I see what you're saying - however pointing out that could just be letting people know.

In this case, MGS is telling us that sherlock's point is to inform us. However, just in the last page, sherlock accused both TCS and I of being "lynchers" with little evidence. This is tied in with sherlock's post 27 in that he subtly tells us to watch out for the "dangerous" people, TCS and I. Seriously, err on the side of caution? What sort of suggestion is "not voting?" In a way, I think MGS was trying to divert our attention from that aspect.

I was actually saying that in regards to that post only - not a word was said or thought about when it came to the 'other' posts.

What the? He randomly votes even though he just said that he wouldn't. IMO, it has to do something with the "fat ugly mole" exchange he had with sherlock. As a result, there is a slight established connection.

What's that got to do with anything?
I don't hold grudges. I don't see what that's got to do with anything.

OK, I admit, the random vote thing was my mistake. You read Newbie 281, you see how really quite awful my memory is - that was to my downfall, and I hope it doesn't this time.

[molestargazer]

By the way, who's MGS?

The next big thing is MGS's rise to defend sherlock in post 31.

MGS wrote:
I see what you're saying - however pointing out that could just be letting people know.

In this case, MGS is telling us that sherlock's point is to inform us. However, just in the last page, sherlock accused both TCS and I of being "lynchers" with little evidence. This is tied in with sherlock's post 27 in that he subtly tells us to watch out for the "dangerous" people, TCS and I. Seriously, err on the side of caution? What sort of suggestion is "not voting?" In a way, I think MGS was trying to divert our attention from that aspect.

I was actually saying that in regards to that post only - not a word was said or thought about when it came to the 'other' posts.

What the? He randomly votes even though he just said that he wouldn't. IMO, it has to do something with the "fat ugly mole" exchange he had with sherlock. As a result, there is a slight established connection.

What's that got to do with anything?
I don't hold grudges. I don't see what that's got to do with anything. I'm slightly confused there with that 'connection' you're talking about.

OK, I admit, the random vote thing was my mistake. You read Newbie 281, you see how really quite awful my memory is - that was to my downfall, and I hope it doesn't this time.

[molestargazer]

Whoops!

I posted the same thing twice. Damn internet. Sorry all!

[chaotic_diablo]

Sorry, your name is so similar to MGS in acronym. MSG, MGS, yadda yadda yadda.

What's that got to do with anything?
I don't hold grudges. I don't see what that's got to do with anything. I'm slightly confused there with that 'connection' you're talking about.

It's not the grudge, but the slight exchange in what seems to be a 'joke.' In a way, it can be viewed as just a joke itself or scum trying to warm themselves with another player/scum. There are plenty of other reasons, but I'm going with the latter for now since there's more points to support it.

I was actually saying that in regards to that post only - not a word was said or thought about when it came to the 'other' posts.

Still, you defended sherlock and tried to lessen the impact. The main issue is that you didn't let sherlock defend himself. Although defending other people is fine, you must have at least a plausible reason to do it. In your case, you were trying to tell us sherlock's motive, which isn't something we can believe.

You know, anyone can jump in right about now and at least tell me how my argument are stupid.

[chaotic_diablo]

Prods for everyone! Please?

[neongrey]

Here.

[bird1111]

I'm here.

[mikeburnfire]

I'll prod everyone soon. In the meantime, I encourage everyone to bookmark this page, as the WATCHED TOPICS ability is suspended.

[pablito]

Here.

[The Central Scrutinizer]

Howdy.

[Tamuz]

Sir

[mikeburnfire]

Mass prods sent

[Twito]

I'll prod everyone soon. In the meantime, I encourage everyone to bookmark this page, as the WATCHED TOPICS ability is suspended.

Seems to work rather fine..
if it stops working I'm fucked..

[neongrey]

It seems to have just been re-enabled.