i like you foulcoon
Having slight difficulty wording my thoughts*foulcoon wrote:
So I take it nobody saw my post on day 2 where I actually voted for animask for the same exact reason. I guess you can FoS Lyby for being the 2nd on the "bandwagon" though lol. My vote never was an RV, it was a lame meta-gaming vote.
I don't believe using meta to form serious accusations is the right way to go to be honest.Have you reread fully? If something seems out of line with someone's behavior on day one, it's about everything you can get at that point. If you notice anything it's worth pursuing. By the way, I don't think anyone is sticking on animask for his cautious behavior more than his piss poor reaction regarding Lyby's accusation.
As I see it right now, Lybydose FoS'd animask to start up a conversation (or is it because animask RV'd him?) and animask is doing a fairly bad job at defending himself (I believe this to be more incompetence than actually being scum right now).Lybydose didn't FoS animask to incite conversation, he did that because something was genuinely off. He probably wanted to see how animask would defend himself, and seeing who would follow his tracks and who would defend him was part of that.
Interesting you didn't start drawing attention to your vote (or post at all for that matter) until after someone else started looking animask's way.Normally people don't need to draw attention to anything. Everybody posts under the assumption that their post gets read, there's no need to say "Hey guys, that post back on the page before? Read it again because I think you didn't." Or at least, there shouldn't be a reason to unless it's been proven that people didn't read the post. Nothing is wrong with foulcoon's reaction.
It kind of feels like you're trying to convert an RV [...] into a legitimate vote under the guise of "I was on him all along".if foulcoon stated a reasoning for voting animask, it's not a random vote. That vote was as legitimate as a Day 1 lynch can get.
How to explain, like one of those people who feel the need to constantly prove their innocence because they don't want to be suspected. Of course you aren't proving your innocence in this case but I hope my thought process makes it across.What you wrote here probably isn't what you want to get across, since it fits more with animask's and your behavior. animask's reaction to Lyby's accusation was FoSsing him right back, softclaiming an aux role, trying desperately to get attention off him and even lamenting the fact that people are voting him. Your posts so far have been mostly filler, agreeing with people and stating the obvious in particular standing out to me, and when you make one post to gather your thoughts you discredit Lyby's FoS as breaking the ice, call animask incompetent townie twice, ignore Rolled altogether and focus on foulcoon with a reason riddled with holes.
That was me voicing my opinion on meta regardless if it was right or wrong. I agree with you on animask's poor defense.Wojjan wrote:
Have you reread fully? If something seems out of line with someone's behavior on day one, it's about everything you can get at that point. If you notice anything it's worth pursuing. By the way, I don't think anyone is sticking on animask for his cautious behavior more than his piss poor reaction regarding Lyby's accusation.
He says that later but it may have just started as something as simple as that (remember this is only guessing), it might well have been a mix of both for all I know. Conversation was dry and nothing had happened then poof. Either way I'm not too concerned about it, they were just initial observations as interpreted by me.Wojjan wrote:
Lybydose didn't FoS animask to incite conversation, he did that because something was genuinely off. He probably wanted to see how animask would defend himself, and seeing who would follow his tracks and who would defend him was part of that.
I'd like to know where it was proven that no one read it. Otherwise, as you say, there is no reason for him to say; "Hey guys, that post back on the page before? Read it again because I think you didn't." - in your words.Wojjan wrote:
Normally people don't need to draw attention to anything. Everybody posts under the assumption that their post gets read, there's no need to say "Hey guys, that post back on the page before? Read it again because I think you didn't." Or at least, there shouldn't be a reason to unless it's been proven that people didn't read the post. Nothing is wrong with foulcoon's reaction.
In Lybydose's case, my intention was not to discredit his FoS (if it looks like that then I only have myself to blame for it) as 'breaking the ice'. As for Rolled, I don't have an opinion on his posts so far.Wojjan wrote:
What you wrote here probably isn't what you want to get across, since it fits more with animask's and your behavior. animask's reaction to Lyby's accusation was FoSsing him right back, softclaiming an aux role, trying desperately to get attention off him and even lamenting the fact that people are voting him. Your posts so far have been mostly filler, agreeing with people and stating the obvious in particular standing out to me, and when you make one post to gather your thoughts you discredit Lyby's FoS as breaking the ice, call animask incompetent townie twice, ignore Rolled altogether and focus on foulcoon with a reason riddled with holes.
Ok legitimise was not the right word for that. Allow me to retry explaining what I mean.Wojjan wrote:
if foulcoon stated a reasoning for voting animask, it's not a random vote. That vote was as legitimate as a Day 1 lynch can get.
Was mainly pointing it out to Rolled who was saying Lyby was on to something. Btw at your last post: are you assuming I can't read animasks posts this game? I was basing my vote off of meta but its not far off from Lyby's. Maybe because I posted it in a sea of RV's it was overlooked. That is the only reason I mentioned it.Rantai wrote:
Uhhh missed a quote >.<Ok legitimise was not the right word for that. Allow me to retry explaining what I mean.Wojjan wrote:
if foulcoon stated a reasoning for voting animask, it's not a random vote. That vote was as legitimate as a Day 1 lynch can get.
I'm more irked that he is trying to make it look like his vote had the exact same reasoning as Lybydose which is quite impossible. As far as I understand it, his vote was based on the fact that animask is always suspicious in each game he plays. Lybydose's was based on the fact that animask was laying low and saying somewhat scummy things.
So here, both are based on animask's meta. But one is drawing entirely from other games while the other is drawing from both other games and this current one.
Btw at your last post: are you assuming I can't read animasks posts this game?No. I believe you are perfectly capable of reading animask's posts.
Was mainly pointing it out to Rolled who was saying Lyby was on to something.
I was basing my vote off of meta but its not far off from Lyby'sLybydose was on to something, for sure but it wasn't what you were saying. As I said, you were just pointing fingers because of how animask played before. Lybydose was onto the fact that animask was playing differently to how he used to play. What gets me is you're trying to say that your initial vote took into account that animask is playing more cautiously.
So I take it nobody saw my post on day 2 where I actually voted for animask for the same exact reason.For reference
*gives foulcoon a medal*foulcoon wrote:
Well he wasn't mafia but he also wasn't town. Can I still have that medal?
foulcoon wrote:
Well he wasn't mafia but he also wasn't town. Can I still have that medal?
If that is your win condition I"m going to rage. LadySuburu should have taken into account that you're animask.animask wrote:
*gives foulcoon a medal*foulcoon wrote:
Well he wasn't mafia but he also wasn't town. Can I still have that medal?
It would be funny if getting lynched on Day 1 got me my win condition...
this ^Wojjan wrote:
so guess what, I'm also a bulletproof serial killer. I don't think I actually am. animask claimed he was a serial killer, but flipped ordinary townie, so I guess this is where the mind game comes in.
oooooh LS you dastardly host you
Wojjan wrote:
this is where the mind game comes in.
Wojjan wrote:
well unbeknownst to us there's probably one mafia in here who can actually kill. So we have to scumhunt without even the mafia themselves knowing which of us is the mafia.
So the best step I guess would be to have the person who didn't die (probably due to being bulletproof) claim if he's hit.
I'm guessing not, seeing as the night ended 11 hours early.foulcoon wrote:
Yeah, but that person might not know if they're hit, and claiming they were hit might be admitting scum. Did anyone with the role "Buletproof Serial Killer" not send in a night kill action?