mod: update the first post please. Also, is Pasonia gonna be replaced or no?
Sorry, I was wrong. I didn't know that you had forgotten to bold you vote because of the edit. However, you still said that you planned to lurk this game.Pasonia wrote:
Sorry for inactivity? Then later he says that he had planned to lurk this game. Those two don't seem to go together.BagelBob wrote:
[quote="Pasonia":44520]EDIT @ adam: I'm sorry I haven't voted in weeks. >.>
Could you quote "the mafia thing" so I know exactly what you're talking about?Pasonia wrote:
Your logic is broken the moment you quote THIS post, and now I regard you as scum because you're able to go into so much detail on the mafia thing, while saying little about the person you protected or about yourself.
It doesn't matter to me if it's WIFOM, I'd still be pleased if you could say one, becauseLadySuburu wrote:
There are many possible reasons SFG could have been killed, but it's all WIFOM.
As for the current situation, I think Pasonia looks a bit scummy.
As for the approach I reccomend, I think we examine what happened D1, and analyze it.
*goes back to WoW*
When it comes down to it, Everything is WIFOM.Again, we need REASONS for people looking scummy, not gut end-stinks.
It seems you missed the last two games where I was "analytical" and got killed night 1.Pasonia wrote:
I clearly remember the last time BagelBob was "analytical" it ended in his ignoble death at the hands of the WW2 townies.
You think I'm scum because I'm trying to look like a townie? It appears that you've missed this post. Also, I haven't been "trying to look like a townie", I've been "trying to look for scum".Pasonia wrote:
Therefore, risking a WIFOM I am pretty sure BB is also a scum this game, and is in fact trying very hard to look like a townie while discrediting the rest as scum.
What point is it that you think I'm trying too hard to prove? I don't recall having made any assertions other than what I think is scummy. If you want to say that my reasons aren't scummy, go ahead, but unless you provide proof to the contrary, I won't change my opinions. As for "just" being inactive, I believe I've stated that before. However, you haven't been "just" inactive. It's obvious that you've been reading the thread, but up until now, you haven't posted unless prodded. You're avoiding posting on purpose, not due to circumstances beyond your control.Pasonia wrote:
I hope you guys do remember that while it's good to prove a point, trying too hard (hint: trying like BagelBob is doing) can be detrimental especially if you'd been lying (i.e. you are scum). Just because I'm inactive don't mean shit.
Ah, I see, you were referring toWojjan wrote:
What I meant to say was that you can't possibly think that is what adam meant, so you were looking for reasons to get him lynched off.
I may have phrased that the wrong way.BagelBob wrote:
Adam in this post is asking other people to point fingers at each other. This isn't laziness, this is scummy.
If you're saying I did something in the RVS that was suspicious, then you might want to read through the game again, or say it was Kuu.Wojjan wrote:
This is the same thing you did with 0_o for calling trying to get the stupid voters of the RVS to, you know, see that he's gonna get lynched on no fact at all. I personally would have foound it more weird (not scummy, but weird) if he DIDN'T protect himself.
Well, bummer, but lets look at what you think could be the reasons for SFG's night kill now.LadySuburu wrote:
Well, I just did a reread and got absolutely nothing out of it.
No one's saying anything because we know that whatever anyone says, you're just going use whatever it is to attack them.BagelBob wrote:
Well, bummer, but lets look at what you think could be the reasons for SFG's night kill now.
Well put. Bagel is obviously attacking everyone to get suspicion on anyone but him. I'd give him another boost on the suspicion list, but I think I've seen enough.adam2046 wrote:
No one's saying anything because we know that whatever anyone says, you're just going use whatever it is to attack them.
..followed by a paragraph of resistingPasonia wrote:
Well, you can put me at L-1 now and I won't resist.
Sorry for inactivity? Then later he says that he had planned to lurk this game. Those two don't seem to go together.But it seems fairly obvious to me that this attack was simply a misunderstanding of Pas's post (it should have been read "I'm sorry, I haven't voted in weeks" instead of an apology for not voting)BagelBob wrote:
[quote="Pasonia":264cc]EDIT @ adam: I'm sorry I haven't voted in weeks. >.>
Pur-ree-sai-sur-lee! Why can't you get this?adam2046 wrote:
So Pasonia, you're saying that it's impossible for you to be scum?
Well, I died at the hand of the villagers and wolves in WW2 because Suburu is a really good liar.Wojjan wrote:
but have you ever considered why you always die at the hands of the villagers in Mafia and Werewolf?
Good to know that you don't read my posts. Again.Pasonia wrote:
Mark my words - Bagel doesn't even TRY to play analytical UNLESS he is scum (whatever happened to WW2, you guys?!).
This is just my opinion, I think that a member of the town would look at everyone and pick out the most scummy person to lynch, while a goon would pick one person and tunnel on them, to make them look more scummy. Again, this is only my opinion.Pasonia wrote:
Take it this way - why would I specifically aim BagelBob if I had nothing to gain from it?
This is an appeal to emotion. That's scummy.Pasonia wrote:
I'm just terribly disappointed that you guys want to lynch me because you believe BagelBob that much more, whilst not trusting that my vote will hit the right people.
Active like I was? Or is that different? And every vanilla should fight to find scum. Since that's how they win, when they find the scum. And I believe that everyone should play to win every time, or the game kind of... sucks.Pasonia wrote:
An aux has to keep himself alive so he would try to be active. An inactive vanilla has near zero to fight for.
You belong to the bold. Why would you specifically aim me if you weren't targetted back there? You INSIST that I was the scum just based on the fact that my activity level is low, so...BagelBob wrote:
This is just my opinion, I think that a member of the town would look at everyone and pick out the most scummy person to lynch, while a goon would pick one person and tunnel on them, to make them look more scummy. Again, this is only my opinion.
So...Pasonia wrote:
EDIT: Good to know that I don't read your posts BB? Oh come on, yer can get the cop's ass on me and when he does you'll know I am to be trusted by town. I am a law-abiding citizen =D
You clearly didn't read his post very well if you had to make an edit for this.
0_o - what I did was called a direct contradiction. Believe me, it IS intentional. When I say I won't resist the L-1 I lied, why on mothereffing earth would I actually want to not stay in the game?
Ah, yes, just to make a bold statement...
1. The scum will not kill me, because he'll sign a death warrant if he does it.
2. The cop (if he's alive) won't waste his investigate on me because I am innocent. No questions asked.
3. You guys better think fast and not kill me unless you want a townie voted dead.
1. The scum will not kill me, because he'll sign a death warrant if he does it.This doesn't make sense, roles aren't revealed on death so we don't know if you're innocent upon death.
2. The cop (if he's alive) won't waste his investigate on me because I am innocent. No questions asked.Ok what the fuck are you talking about?
3. You guys better think fast and not kill me unless you want a townie voted dead.Seriously your entire defense consists of, "GUYS DON'T LYNCH ME BB IS SCUM GUYS!" which isn't very convincing.