confirming~
Why not? Voting the same person for no apparent reason is fun, these votes will not matter anything in the next bunch of postsDakeDekaane wrote:
You never stack votes for lulz.
Glad I voted Tsukasa.
Why would you associate us at this point of the game?pieguy1372 wrote:
inb4 farto + rEdo bus
trying to force an end to RVS as soon as possible is very anti-townDakeDekaane wrote:
Also pieguy, why do you vote farto when he's clearly trying to put an end to RVS as quick as possible, we have plenty of time, but that's not reason to goof around.
I see you still can't read me for shit. see: information mafiarEdo wrote:
I kinda dislike pieguy's reaction to farto's vote swap, though. That was just an action performed in order to push the game forward, yet he tries to revert it to him, huh.
scumrEdo wrote:
Why would you associate us at this point of the game?
disagree. I find that when people actively try to cut off RVS, the information gained becomes very limited and misleading. it seemed like you were trying to cut off RVS by just declaring "getting out of RVS quickly".fartownik wrote:
There's no such thing as 'RVS ending unnaturally', it always ends naturally because you can always gather some information out of the circumstances. Just like you did now, how does that differ from a 'regular' (in your point of view) end of an RVS?
my point is that forcing discussion is bad. RVS works best if you don't force it too much, although some movement is required to get the game out of RVS. farto was claiming RVS was over with just a few votes, no reasons and more than half the players hadn't even posted yet. it seems way too preliminaryDakeDekaane wrote:
We could basically spend all D1 in RVS without any sign of "ending naturally", better starting discussion as soon as possible, lefting very few spots for scum to play around, don't you think?
why not? I figured there was a chance of farto voting his scumbuddy in the first serious vote of the game. tho you two being friends also explains itrEdo wrote:
Also, please respond to my question instead of that blunt accusation with no coverage.