/confirm
forum
Newbie Mafia - 2of4 [Town Win!]
posted
Total Posts
267
Yep.
Confirm
inb4 drakari & ekaru mafia pair
inb4 drakari & ekaru mafia pair
confirm
inb4 I die day 1 again.
Topic Starter
7 confirmations, close enough.
It is now Day 1
You have 5 days from this post.
It is now Day 1
You have 5 days from this post.
vote bmin11
oh no
vote: Rantai
because omgus from that one game
because omgus from that one game
ha ha hahah you are cornered nowbmin11 wrote:
oh no
Day 1 in traditional mafia, my worst enemy.
Also hi guys.
Also hi guys.
Morning. Back to basics huh.
RQS:
1) What's your favorite role and alignment?
2) Would you lynch lurkers?
3) Would you rely on meta?
4) How often do you plan on posting?
My Answers:
1) Don't care about alignment, as long as it's a role wherein I can communicate with people (Mason, Mafia, Neighborizer), I'm happy.
2) Only if the player usually doesn't lurk.
3) Yes. Discovered how meta is very useful.
4) Once per day. At the very least, once every two days.
1) What's your favorite role and alignment?
2) Would you lynch lurkers?
3) Would you rely on meta?
4) How often do you plan on posting?
My Answers:
1) Don't care about alignment, as long as it's a role wherein I can communicate with people (Mason, Mafia, Neighborizer), I'm happy.
2) Only if the player usually doesn't lurk.
3) Yes. Discovered how meta is very useful.
4) Once per day. At the very least, once every two days.
Also, Vote: Backfire
Oh hey whats up bro.
1) What's your favorite role and alignment?
Informative roles if I'm townie. Mafia? I'm happy with anything as long as I can kill.
2) Would you lynch lurkers?
Yes.
3) Would you rely on meta?
I would agree on circumstances and other people's arguments (if they use it correctly), but I won't but myself using it too often. I'm bad with handling metas.
4) How often do you plan on posting?
idk. I'm thinking of atleast per day.
Informative roles if I'm townie. Mafia? I'm happy with anything as long as I can kill.
2) Would you lynch lurkers?
Yes.
3) Would you rely on meta?
I would agree on circumstances and other people's arguments (if they use it correctly), but I won't but myself using it too often. I'm bad with handling metas.
4) How often do you plan on posting?
idk. I'm thinking of atleast per day.
1. My favorite role so far is a tie between Flavor cop and Lynch Redirector. I liked knowing what roles people had, and having a possibly game-changing role was both scary and thrillingNoHItter wrote:
RQS:
1) What's your favorite role and alignment?
2) Would you lynch lurkers?
3) Would you rely on meta?
4) How often do you plan on posting?
2. depends on the situation; the short answer is yes.
3. depends on the situation; the short answer is no.
4. Whenever I feel that I have something to contribute
1) Anything that can confirm me as town. That doesn't apply for this setup very much.NoHItter wrote:
RQS:
1) What's your favorite role and alignment?
2) Would you lynch lurkers?
3) Would you rely on meta?
4) How often do you plan on posting?
2) Neutral.
3) Somewhat, yes.
4) As often as I end up doing so. That's how it always is.
1) I dunno.NoHItter wrote:
RQS:
1) What's your favorite role and alignment?
2) Would you lynch lurkers?
3) Would you rely on meta?
4) How often do you plan on posting?
2) If nobody who was actually active seemed like a good target, then possibly.
3) I dunno.
4) I dunno.
How many games of mafia have you played, Ekaru?
if it's more than 3 then those answers suck
if it's more than 3 then those answers suck
Oh, and I have another question for everyone
Do you think RVS is useless and unnecessary? If so, why? If not, how can it be used to benefit town?
My answer:
I think RVS is useful on flavorless mafia games because it is the only way town can get any reads off of anybody.
Do you think RVS is useless and unnecessary? If so, why? If not, how can it be used to benefit town?
My answer:
I think RVS is useful on flavorless mafia games because it is the only way town can get any reads off of anybody.
Yes, but as you said it's really the only way town can get reads. I've been trying to think of an alternative but RQS is the only close alternative and it doesn't do much either. I'm not fond of D1 in most mafia games. I love being able to do things like claiming insomniac D1 in WWG, that's what's fun.Sync wrote:
Do you think RVS is useless and unnecessary? If so, why? If not, how can it be used to benefit town?
I couldn't take any advantage from RVSs so far, so personally I don't find it too useful. It's just one of those 'tossing" tactics I found, just like RQS
I haven't actually completed a single game yet, actually.Sync wrote:
How many games of mafia have you played, Ekaru?
if it's more than 3 then those answers suck
NoHItter wrote:
RQS:
1) What's your favorite role and alignment? Mafia or Serial Killer
2) Would you lynch lurkers? Depending on the current suspicion list
3) Would you rely on meta? Large games, not really. Small games, as far as it can carry me
4) How often do you plan on posting? Once a day min
oh lolEkaru wrote:
I haven't actually completed a single game yet, actually.Sync wrote:
How many games of mafia have you played, Ekaru?
if it's more than 3 then those answers suck
RQS:
1) What's your favorite role and alignment? I like getting fancy with my own roles in games so something unique I can explore the boundaries and usefulness of always gets me pumped. In this setup the next best thing I guess is jailkeeper.
2) Would you lynch lurkers? Nah. Replace them.
3) Would you rely on meta? Yes. I do a lot of meta reads on day one and I tend to be right with them a lot.
4) How often do you plan on posting? I browse the forums at rather unchristian hours, expect bouts of posts one after another and periods of total radio silence
1) What's your favorite role and alignment? I like getting fancy with my own roles in games so something unique I can explore the boundaries and usefulness of always gets me pumped. In this setup the next best thing I guess is jailkeeper.
2) Would you lynch lurkers? Nah. Replace them.
3) Would you rely on meta? Yes. I do a lot of meta reads on day one and I tend to be right with them a lot.
4) How often do you plan on posting? I browse the forums at rather unchristian hours, expect bouts of posts one after another and periods of total radio silence
So Backfire, why did you post but not answer the RQS?
Basically RVS (like RQS) a way of starting the game during Day 1 - get reads and reactions.
It's not useless. I think I've gone over this with Salvage a lot of times already.Sync wrote:
Do you think RVS is useless and unnecessary? If so, why? If not, how can it be used to benefit town?
Basically RVS (like RQS) a way of starting the game during Day 1 - get reads and reactions.
Also Ekaru, your answers to 3 and 4 are cop outs.
For 1, I can understand given that you haven't even finished a game, but not 3 or 4.
For 1, I can understand given that you haven't even finished a game, but not 3 or 4.
Oh fine, I'll stop being lazy and answer those:NoHItter wrote:
Also Ekaru, your answers to 3 and 4 are cop outs.
For 1, I can understand given that you haven't even finished a game, but not 3 or 4.
3) It depends. Meta reads are good, but sometimes they're worthless because some people are just crazy.
4) I expect to post a lot. I have no life.
Oh, I didn't notice till after I posted that there was.
Favorite role is Vigilante
Wouldn't lynch lurkers
Sometimes meta can be useful
Whenever I can.
Favorite role is Vigilante
Wouldn't lynch lurkers
Sometimes meta can be useful
Whenever I can.
Oh noes, I don't understand the jargon here. Guess I'll do whatever RQS means and hope I understand everything.
Favorite role is mafia anti-investigator. It's happened to me before.
I lynch lurkers if the way they're lurking won't get them modkilled.
Meta should be used to direct investigations, but isn't enough for kills unless there's nothing else.
I post when I'm on this forum.
Favorite role is mafia anti-investigator. It's happened to me before.
I lynch lurkers if the way they're lurking won't get them modkilled.
Meta should be used to direct investigations, but isn't enough for kills unless there's nothing else.
I post when I'm on this forum.
RQS and RVS are rando question and vote stage, respectively
why we use stage and not phase I don't know.
why we use stage and not phase I don't know.
Wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee
THIS THREAD IS TOO QUIET. I WILL SHOUT TO FIX THAT.
Really. If you wanted the thread to not be quiet, instead of prodding other people to talk, you try to generate activity first.
Then why didn't you post again after you saw it? You had to wait for someone to call you out before answering.Backfire wrote:
Oh, I didn't notice till after I posted that there was.
Honestly it doesn't seem much good is going to come out of that rqs.
Though I do see a very aggressive Hitter.
Though I do see a very aggressive Hitter.
Well, IMO in a somewhat basic game like this, you should take notice of everything.
We only have a 50% of getting one investigative role.
We only have a 50% of getting one investigative role.
Because I didn't notice till I came back ;_;NoHItter wrote:
Really. If you wanted the thread to not be quiet, instead of prodding other people to talk, you try to generate activity first.Then why didn't you post again after you saw it? You had to wait for someone to call you out before answering.Backfire wrote:
Oh, I didn't notice till after I posted that there was.
I'm terribly sorry to ask this, but can I be replaced? I'm going to finish Themeless and take a break afterward. Sorry.
Topic Starter
JInxyjem replaces bmin11.
yo
will read when I've reaches home and got all the laughs required from jesterfest
will read when I've reaches home and got all the laughs required from jesterfest
Vote: NoHItter.
Let's go back to me voting on gut until things happen.
Let's go back to me voting on gut until things happen.
I'm just here for the sake of being here. Never been particularly good at day 1.
'K.Drakari wrote:
I'm just here for the sake of being here. Never been particularly good at day 1.
unvote
vote: Drakari
Post something because posting is required -> get votes.
kthx, next time I'll post nothing.
kthx, next time I'll post nothing.
Ekaru's vote actually isn't justified at all
Actually, it is. He basically said that he's bad at voting randomly until something comes up.Sync wrote:
Ekaru's vote actually isn't justified at all
There's not much else to go on since it's Day 1.
D1 isn't all about RVS, you know...
Also, not voting randomly is not a scum tell at all
You're right, there's almost never much to go on D1 until scum slips up
in this case, it's you voting for Drakari giving not a single valid reason whatsoever
Also, not voting randomly is not a scum tell at all
You're right, there's almost never much to go on D1 until scum slips up
in this case, it's you voting for Drakari giving not a single valid reason whatsoever
Of course it isn't. We already went over that last time.Sync wrote:
D1 isn't all about RVS, you know...
in this case, it's you voting for Drakari giving not a single valid reason whatsoeverThen half the people in this thread are scum for voting without giving a valid reason. That's what RVS is.
they aren't scum
also, are you claiming your vote for Drakari was a random vote?
also, are you claiming your vote for Drakari was a random vote?
Exactly my point.Sync wrote:
they aren't scum
also, are you claiming your vote for Drakari was a random vote?I'm claiming it's semi-random, yes. The moment a better vote comes up I'll switch to it. Again, I only voted for Drakari for now because he said he wasn't posting just because he isn't confident in his day 1 abilities. It's not anywhere near a reliable read, of course, but neither is somebody voting without an explanation early on in the game.
it's past RVS now. "semi-random" is worse than "random". Also, your "semi-random" reasoning doesn't make sense -- how exactly did you interpret "I am not confident in my D1 abilities" as a scum-tell?Ekaru wrote:
I'm claiming it's semi-random, yes. The moment a better vote comes up I'll switch to it. Again, I only voted for Drakari for now because he said he wasn't posting just because he isn't confident in his day 1 abilities. It's not anywhere near a reliable read, of course, but neither is somebody voting without an explanation early on in the game.
And I'm supposed to know this... how?Sync wrote:
it's past RVS now.
"semi-random" is worse than "random".Please explain. As I said, it's just a light vote until something better comes up.
Also, your "semi-random" reasoning doesn't make sense -- how exactly did you interpret "I am not confident in my D1 abilities" as a scum-tell?As an excuse for lurking, of course.
...Though yeah, since I'm going to change it anyways I might as well
unvote
unvote
You don't see people randomly voting people, do you? When there is actual conversation about the game, that generally means RVS is over.Ekaru wrote:
And I'm supposed to know this... how?Sync wrote:
it's past RVS now."semi-random" is worse than "random".Please explain. As I said, it's just a light vote until something better comes up.Also, your "semi-random" reasoning doesn't make sense -- how exactly did you interpret "I am not confident in my D1 abilities" as a scum-tell?As an excuse for lurking, of course.
Semi-random means that there is reasoning behind it, yet you claim it to be random which makes you look stupid.
While I agree that there is never an excuse to not contribute anything, it's certainly not a scum-tell.
I never claimed it to be random. Now you're just putting words into my mouth. Go read what I said again:Sync wrote:
Semi-random means that there is reasoning behind it, yet you claim it to be random which makes you look stupid.
Then half the people in this thread are scum for voting without giving a valid reason. That's what RVS is.RVS is when you vote without giving out a valid reason because there is nothing to go on. At the point in which I voted, all I had to go on was that little snippet of Drakari's. I was rebutting your point that voting without a reason this early on is a scum tell; again, there was nothing to go on at that point. Furthermore,
You don't see people randomly voting people, do you? When there is actual conversation about the game, that generally means RVS is over.Go look at the posts right before mine. There was no actual discussion about the game at all at that point, and two posts before mine LS voted on so-called "gut instinct" and is arguably "random."
case and pointEkaru wrote:
I'm claiming it's semi-random, yes.
Don't talk to me like I don't know what RVS is.
If you knew pieguy's meta, he ALWAYS does this. Anyways, "gut-feeling" is not RVS. Either you're scum trying to make up for your mistakes or you do not know what RVS is.
RVS is when you vote randomly without any reason.
edit: I mistook LS with pieguy; ignore that part about the meta
First we have Ekaru voting Drakari for his "I'm just here for the sake of being here. Never been particularly good at day 1." post.
IMO the post itself is suspicious and warrants a vote. I agree that it seems like a disclaimer that he wouldn't contribute during D1.
Then after Ekaru voted for him, you have him seemingly raging about how posting merits a vote and that he won't post anymore.
But then we have Ekaru who after being questioned by Sync, claims that his vote was "semi-random".
Ekaru claims that he voted Drakari for his statement which you could correlate to lurking, but IMO that reason doesn't even have an inkling of "random" anymore.
So between Ekaru and Drakari, I would vote Ekaru.
Vote: Ekaru
Finally some activity.
IMO the post itself is suspicious and warrants a vote. I agree that it seems like a disclaimer that he wouldn't contribute during D1.
Then after Ekaru voted for him, you have him seemingly raging about how posting merits a vote and that he won't post anymore.
But then we have Ekaru who after being questioned by Sync, claims that his vote was "semi-random".
Ekaru claims that he voted Drakari for his statement which you could correlate to lurking, but IMO that reason doesn't even have an inkling of "random" anymore.
So between Ekaru and Drakari, I would vote Ekaru.
Vote: Ekaru
Finally some activity.
and then he denied that he said the vote was random
vote: Ekaru
vote: Ekaru
I can see myself bandwagoning on this one.
I NEED CONSISTENCY
I NEED CONSISTENCY
Vote: Ekaru
Ekaru's sudden vote excuse when questioned is indeed scummy, but we still have 3 or so days left, and he's on L-2. So FoS: Ekaru for now.NoHItter wrote:
RQS:
1) What's your favorite role and alignment? Any role, but investigative/with people. Basically whatever with more information then the common townie.
2) Would you lynch lurkers? Prod -> Find Replacements -> Lynch if none are found
3) Would you rely on meta? Sometimes, but I don't go out to collect meta and shit
4) How often do you plan on posting? Once a day
Drakari's rant was plain bad. That is not how one plays mafia.
Sync wrote:
and then he denied that he said the vote was random
vote: Ekaru
I never said the vote was random. I already said this.Sync wrote:
and then he denied that he said the vote was random
vote: Ekaru
I said it was semi-random; as in, it was only partially random. As in, there was reasoning behind it but it's not that serious of a vote. Again, stop putting words into my mouth. That is how people use "semi-random" where I live; to mean that it was kinda random, but not really.
All I did was do what I have seen other people do in mafia games; vote without much explanation because the reasoning behind their vote is implied. Ex. What Rantai did just now, what I've seen other people do in other games, etc. Am I supposed to not do what I've seen others do? Because that really makes no sense.
Also, RVS votes are not truly random. The reasoning behind it is typically ridiculous, but there is still reasoning. If the votes were truly random then RVS would be pretty much useless.
P.S. The post above this one was accidental. Ignore that.
All I did was do what I have seen other people do in mafia games; vote without much explanation because the reasoning behind their vote is implied.What I mean here is that the reasoning is implied in my quote.
Topic Starter
Vote Count
Ekaru (3) - NoHItter, Sync, Rantai
JInxyjem (1) - Wojjan
NoHItter (1) - LadySuburu
Not voting - Backfire, JInxyjem, Drakari, Ekaru
2 days, 7.5 hours remaining. Check the Links in the OP for a countdown to the day end.
Ekaru (3) - NoHItter, Sync, Rantai
JInxyjem (1) - Wojjan
NoHItter (1) - LadySuburu
Not voting - Backfire, JInxyjem, Drakari, Ekaru
2 days, 7.5 hours remaining. Check the Links in the OP for a countdown to the day end.
This is signifcantly in Ekaru's metalane but I almost wanna vote him just to see if he's scum so I can make a case when this happens again
almost. still on bmin
almost. still on bmin
Sarcasm failed here, that was very unexpected.
Not that two more pages have really helped me form an opinion, after seeing Ekaru's reasoning I'm slightly more inclined to vote him but I'll leave it for now.
Not that two more pages have really helped me form an opinion, after seeing Ekaru's reasoning I'm slightly more inclined to vote him but I'll leave it for now.
Yeah, I'm kinda leaning Ekaru right now but not enough to really counter my gut on NoHItter.
The meaning of semi-random is universal.Ekaru wrote:
I never said the vote was random. I already said this.Sync wrote:
and then he denied that he said the vote was random
vote: Ekaru
I said it was semi-random; as in, it was only partially random. As in, there was reasoning behind it but it's not that serious of a vote. Again, stop putting words into my mouth. That is how people use "semi-random" where I live; to mean that it was kinda random, but not really.
All I did was do what I have seen other people do in mafia games; vote without much explanation because the reasoning behind their vote is implied. Ex. What Rantai did just now, what I've seen other people do in other games, etc. Am I supposed to not do what I've seen others do? Because that really makes no sense.
Also, RVS votes are not truly random. The reasoning behind it is typically ridiculous, but there is still reasoning. If the votes were truly random then RVS would be pretty much useless.
P.S. The post above this one was accidental. Ignore that.
I'm not putting any words into your mouth -- in fact, I'm taking words directly from your posts. It's way past RVS and you should have known this. I believe you were very well aware of this and that you are scum trying to make up for your mistakes.
Rantai's vote was not random.
RVS votes are random. That is the whole point. The reason behind it is tacked on for fun, not because it is a serious reason like yours.
The meaning of semi-random is universal.Semi-random simply means that it's not 100% random, but it also is not 0% random. That is the universal definition. I included a quote in my post so it was far more on the "not random" side of semi-random. When somebody says "random" and not "semi-random", they typically mean "100% random", AKA truly random, AKA not what my post said. Therefore you are indeed putting words into my mouth. Semi-random really isn't random by pure definition.
It's way past RVS and you should have known this.It currently is, but not when I posted. There was no discussion when I posted.
I'm not putting any words into your mouth -- in fact, I'm taking words directly from your posts
RVS votes are random. That is the whole point. The reason behind it is tacked on for fun, not because it is a serious reason like yours.As I've said for the billionth time, it was not really a serious vote. Just look at it. I quoted a post and then said "'K". I've also said a billion times that I planned on switching my vote the moment something better came up. Again, you're putting words into my mouth. I've been arguing this whole time that it was not a serious vote, and here you go again claiming that the reasoning was serious.
Furthermore, they are not 100% random. THAT IS THE WHOLE POINT. If you can post a reasoning behind your post other than "I used a RNG/rolled a die/etc." then your vote is only semi-random by the very definition and therefore is not truly random. If it's not 100% random then it's not truly random. The entire point of RVS is to try to get a vague read of people via the "reasoning" given by their "random" votes.
Rantai's vote was not random.Exactly my point! If you believe my vote was not really random like you claim it to be and are attacking it solely because there was no reasoning tacked onto it, then why the hell aren't you attacking Rantai's post? He's even worse, because he didn't even include a quote or any explanation in his post. His post is more scummy than mine was from a purely objective viewpoint. He gave less reasoning and I did and while I wasn't even so much as trying to start a bandwagon - again, you can tell this just by looking at my post - Rantai was bandwagoning on another person's post.
But is he scum? No way to tell, because voting with no explanation is not a reliable read at all. Coincidentally, you are ignoring this point.
Furthermore, it is not ludicrous to claim that you do not know the point of RVS because in a Newbie Game on mafiascum.net you claimed that you were not that experienced.
And this was like 2 weeks ago BTW.Ekaru wrote:
Furthermore, it is not ludicrous to claim that you do not know the point of RVS because in a Newbie Game on mafiascum.net you claimed that you were not that experienced.
You were being inconsistent.Rantai wrote:
I NEED CONSISTENCY
That and blowing off your vote as 'semi-random' is a cop out. Either it was random or you had SOME reasoning behind it. You can't have both.
I'm laughing at the fact that you saw that and you are using it to your advantage in this game
The point is, there was discussion prior to you voting.
Your vote was not "semi-random" because you voted him because of a post he made
Also, you agree that Rantai's vote was not random... okay...
so you say you thought it was still RVS because of what Rantai did...
you aren't making any sense
The point is, there was discussion prior to you voting.
Your vote was not "semi-random" because you voted him because of a post he made
Also, you agree that Rantai's vote was not random... okay...
so you say you thought it was still RVS because of what Rantai did...
you aren't making any sense
FYI, the definition of experienced is subjective.
Now you are indeed putting words into my mouth. Go read the thread again. I never said that I thought it was RVS because of what Rantai said. I said I thought it was still in RVS because at the time that I posted there was not much discussion. You are in fact making shit up now.Sync wrote:
so you say you thought it was still RVS because of what Rantai did...
I'm laughing at the fact that you saw that and you are using it to your advantage in this gameIt's called meta.
FYI, the definition of experienced is subjective.The definition of what is "semi-random" is also subjective. I only partially voted because of that post. I also voted for the hell of it, which is what people do in RVS.
Your vote was not "semi-random" because you voted him because of a post he madeI voted partially because of a post he made and, again, partially for the hell of it. "for the hell of it" typically qualifies as "random"; ex. If you, say, suddenly start singing for the hell of it, people will call it "random behavior".
you aren't making any senseMy argument makes more sense than your claiming that I thought it was RVS because of what Rantai did. I was clearly using it to show that your argument is flawed. My argument is that claiming that somebody is scum just because they voted without explanation is fucking retarded.
Also, you agree that Rantai's vote was not random... okay...Exactly. You claim my post isn't random in the slightest and, therefore, the same logic would apply to Rantai because his vote isn't random.
2. I already told you the meaning of experienced is completely subjective. Your meta is bullshit: are you trying to say that I don't know what RVS is? Are you telling me that everything I am saying now is null because I said I was inexperienced on a completely different website?Ekaru wrote:
All I did was do what I have seen other people do in mafia games; vote without much explanation because the reasoning behind their vote is implied. Ex. What Rantai did just now, what I've seen other people do in other games, etc. Am I supposed to not do what I've seen others do? Because that really makes no sense.
3. It wasn't RVS
4. Ok, so your vote wasn't random
5. My argument is not flawed. You have no right to say my argument is flawed when you're denying things you've said and using something (that doesn't make sense) against me from a different site in a different game.
6. Yes, Rantai's vote isn't random. He never claimed it was. You, on the other hand, are claiming that your vote was "semi-random".
...Sync wrote:
Ekaru wrote:
All I did was do what I have seen other people do in mafia games; vote without much explanation because the reasoning behind their vote is implied. Ex. What Rantai did just now, what I've seen other people do in other games, etc. Am I supposed to not do what I've seen others do? Because that really makes no sense.
That argument is fucking retarded. Where the fuck does that say, "The game was in RVS when I posted because of something that happened way after I posted"?
2. I already told you the meaning of experienced is completely subjective.And I already told you that whether or not the game is still in RVS at the exact point in time that I posted my vote is subjective. Both things are subjective. What is subjective is both ways. Whether or not somebody's action is semi-random is also subjective because, as I've said, semi-random is an extremely vague term; if an action is 0.001% random, then it's semi-random, and if an action is 99.99% random then it is STILL semi-random. Or at least, that's the way it's commonly used. It could technically mean something else, but that is irrelevant.
"Coincidentally"...
http://www.quicktopic.com/47/H/bijJXinfMtjY
Ekaru is digging himself a grave lolThis scenario is extremely similar to what happened in Themeless Mafia. EXTREMELY similar. Sync, you're once again scum. You're taking something that isn't really a scum tell and trying to start a bandwagon on me. As we've seen from that game and other games, scum try to get bandwagons going on D1. I never tried to start a bandwagon, but you are. You're scum, scum, scum. You're taking things that are subjective and claiming that they aren't subjective when, in fact, they are.
this is awesome
"I saw Rantai post a vote that seemed 'semi-random', am I not supposed to do what other people do?"
"I didn't vote because of Rantai! I never said that!"
Are you really that desperate? Using a quicktopic from a different game to further your "argument"? To make it even worse, it's completely irrelevant! I didn't even start a bandwagon on you and I unvoted.
You are an idiot and I'm tired of you spewing out bullshit
Long posts don't make you look town
"I didn't vote because of Rantai! I never said that!"
Are you really that desperate? Using a quicktopic from a different game to further your "argument"? To make it even worse, it's completely irrelevant! I didn't even start a bandwagon on you and I unvoted.
You are an idiot and I'm tired of you spewing out bullshit
Long posts don't make you look town
Topic Starter
Let's keep the name-calling to a minimum, thanks.
<3
I never said the former. At all. I'm not sure if you knew this, but in English if someone says "Ex." in front of something, that means it's an example. Rantai is an example of somebody who voted without an explanation, and I said that because of that and because his vote was clearly not random, your argument would also apply to him. That is all I said. I never said it looked semi-random; in fact, I even said the opposite. I never said what you're claiming me to say. Are you really that desperate that you have to twist what I'm saying so severely?Sync wrote:
"I saw Rantai post a vote that seemed 'semi-random', am I not supposed to do what other people do?"
"I didn't vote because of Rantai! I never said that!"
To make it even worse, it's completely irrelevant! I didn't even start a bandwagon on you and I unvoted.Uh, yes it is relevant? It's a really similar situation. You unvoted after you realized that the bandwagon was not going to work in an attempt to not look scummy; therefore, the unvote is irrelevant. You did in fact start the bandwagon by being the one who attacked me and claimed I was acting scummy over and over again, just like you are now. Who made the first vote is irrelevant because you planned on voting for me in the first place as clearly proven by the quicktopic. You are using the same strategy you used in another game where you were scum. It's relevant because it's some of the most solid meta out there - similar situation, same people, etc.
You're trying to brush off some of the most solid meta out there - a very similar situation where you attacked me over something relatively tiny - and are also severely twisting what I said about Rantai to the most unimaginable lengths. The Rantai thing in particular is making you look extremely scummy, you know.
You are seriously twisting your own words -- it's very funny yet frustrating to me.
Drop the smart-ass bullshit and read carefully: you said you voted for Drakari because you saw other people in other mafia games do the same thing. That's a pathetic excuse if I've ever seen one.
No, it's not relevant. Want to know why? I never started the bandwagon -- not in this game, or the last game. I don't think you know what a bandwagon is. You should probably look it up.
I'm calling you out for your horrible and pathetic vote on Drakari. I'm calling you out for your horrible and pathetic attempts at trying to use meta (incorrectly).
You are of no benefit to town which makes it clear that you are scum.
Drop the smart-ass bullshit and read carefully: you said you voted for Drakari because you saw other people in other mafia games do the same thing. That's a pathetic excuse if I've ever seen one.
No, it's not relevant. Want to know why? I never started the bandwagon -- not in this game, or the last game. I don't think you know what a bandwagon is. You should probably look it up.
I'm calling you out for your horrible and pathetic vote on Drakari. I'm calling you out for your horrible and pathetic attempts at trying to use meta (incorrectly).
You are of no benefit to town which makes it clear that you are scum.
Sync MVP
thx
My vote stays on Ekaru.
Just wanted to clarify, again that I actually did have my reason there.
Most of it was me agreeing to what had been said against you but I also added that you were being inconsistent.
Most of it was me agreeing to what had been said against you but I also added that you were being inconsistent.
In my experience (in games which are only similar, not the same) the "bad" group is more likely to back down when confronted, due to trying to avoid attention. Not 100% the case, but I have seen it a lot.
Topic Starter
Vote Count
Ekaru (3) - NoHItter, Sync, Rantai
JInxyjem (1) - Wojjan
NoHItter (1) - LadySuburu
Not voting - Backfire, JInxyjem, Drakari, Ekaru
22 hours remaining.
Ekaru (3) - NoHItter, Sync, Rantai
JInxyjem (1) - Wojjan
NoHItter (1) - LadySuburu
Not voting - Backfire, JInxyjem, Drakari, Ekaru
22 hours remaining.
mod: Do you need a hammer to lynch somebody or is it majority?
Topic Starter
Whoever has the most votes at the deadline will be lynched.Sync wrote:
mod: Do you need a hammer to lynch somebody or is it majority?
vote: Ekaru
No better target I've seen.
No better target I've seen.
Topic Starter
Vote Count
Ekaru (4) - NoHItter, Sync, Rantai, Drakari
JInxyjem (1) - Wojjan
NoHItter (1) - LadySuburu
Not voting - Backfire, JInxyjem, Ekaru
18 hours remaining.
5 votes required for hammer.
Ekaru (4) - NoHItter, Sync, Rantai, Drakari
JInxyjem (1) - Wojjan
NoHItter (1) - LadySuburu
Not voting - Backfire, JInxyjem, Ekaru
18 hours remaining.
5 votes required for hammer.
dkun MVP
Bad argumenting all day.
Bad argumenting all day.
Ekaru: what have you done thus far in this game to show us that you are pro-town
nobody hammer until he answers
nobody hammer until he answers