|
Absurd Revolver posted:If it's true, then doesn't that prove your theory incorrect, Kasu? There being a doc, that is. I don't follow.
|
#
?
May 20, 2016 23:53
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 20, 2024 09:29 |
|
|
Kasumeat posted:I don't follow. Kasumeat posted:Yeah I thought about it and realised how terrible an idea it is.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2016 23:55
|
|
|
Oh yeah if that is indeed a Tracker claim, everything is different. That setup spec you posted was previous to Nutsack's post. But nobody should claim anything else until we hear from Nutsack again.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2016 00:00
|
|
|
I believe in Nutsack
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2016 00:18
|
|
|
I'm going to ignore Nutsack for the moment since I have no idea what he's talking about, I'll wait for him to explain. I looked back over the quid lynch to see what was what. It was, for all intents and purposes, was a blind lynch. No one gave a good explanation as to why he was scum, it was more a continuation of the latent turbo that we were trying for. Given that, I don't like Illegally's vote. He posted nothing of substance the whole day and then threw on his vote on Quid, which screamed to me that he saw his scumbuddy was going down and bussed him. That alone wouldn't be enough for me to vote him but combined with him trying to fly under the radar is enough to make me suspicious. ##vote Illegally
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2016 02:37
|
|
|
i'm a little peeved nutsack just dropped that claim and left, paralyzing discussion
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2016 02:43
|
|
|
It could conceivably be some desperate gamble by scum
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2016 02:44
|
|
|
Kasumeat posted:It could conceivably be some desperate gamble by scum I think it might be a gambit to have me claim doc so he can counter claim me. Doesn't seem like a scum thing, but I could just be giving him more credit than is due.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2016 02:47
|
|
|
he didn't drop a loving claim holy poo poo.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2016 02:48
|
|
|
Kashuno posted:he didn't drop a loving claim holy poo poo. Literally everyone except you is reading it that way
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2016 02:48
|
|
|
It's either a gambit or real life happened
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2016 02:50
|
|
|
Kasumeat posted:Literally everyone except you is reading it that way Because I've had people do the exact same thing, then come bak after a lynch and be like "hm? No I was just saying lol"
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2016 02:51
|
|
|
Kashuno posted:Because I've had people do the exact same thing, then come bak after a lynch and be like "hm? No I was just saying lol" This is true, but it felt like a claim. We may as well let him come back though. In the meantime I will put my considerable resources into reading YPM to figure out for myself.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2016 03:19
|
|
|
Hal Incandenza posted:This is true, but it felt like a claim. We may as well let him come back though. In the meantime I will put my considerable resources into reading YPM to figure out for myself. What do you think about my case on Illegally?
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2016 03:25
|
|
|
Your Personal Muse posted:I'm going to ignore Nutsack for the moment since I have no idea what he's talking about, I'll wait for him to explain. This does seem like a pretty manufactured case. Didn't feel like anyone gave a real reason for voting quid and in a small game it seems pointless to bus a scumbro for "cred" when you aren't going to get any cred for hopping into a turbo.Even YPM admits this isn't much of a case so we have to get added "flying under the radar" mafia buzzword thrown in at the end. This case could have substituted any name in for IllegallySober because it is so generic. Would vote YPM regardless of Nutsack.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2016 03:25
|
|
|
Your Personal Muse posted:What do you think about my case on Illegally? Oh it's fantastic!
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2016 03:25
|
|
|
I used that buzzword because that's what he is doing. His entire day one is white noise. While this wasn't a content heavy day one, he actively tried to avoid content.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2016 03:29
|
|
|
Your Personal Muse posted:I'm going to ignore Nutsack for the moment since I have no idea what he's talking about, I'll wait for him to explain. Aren't you the one Nutsack voted for right before he disappeared? I agree with you that in general the first lynch seemed to basically be blind and if you read back through what I posted I had no real justification for adding my vote besides trying to get the wheels turning on something. However, Nutsack calls you out, disappears, and while the rest of us are waiting for more explanation, now you're trying to pin the blame on someone else? I have no idea what the term "bussed him" refers to in this context unless it's "throwing him under the bus" which I'll happily cop to as a member of Town and someone who wanted to get the game moving. And Town was right (probably by chance, but whatever) If your accusation on me is "flying under the radar," though, that's exactly what you're trying to do by deflecting attention in my direction when I haven't done anything, in the face of the first accusation that you haven't defended at all. I'm convinced on this one. ##vote Your Personal Muse
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2016 03:30
|
|
|
I'm moving on because there is otherwise we would have our hands in our pants saying "whelp, guess we wait for Nutsack to say something." If he says something I'll address it but he just said something vague.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2016 03:32
|
|
|
Your Personal Muse posted:I used that buzzword because that's what he is doing. His entire day one is white noise. While this wasn't a content heavy day one, he actively tried to avoid content. I did the same thing and conspicuously backed of quidnose and never went back, why doesn't that set off your alarm bells? I dunno it seems very thin.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2016 03:32
|
|
|
This is a good time for a smooth jazz interlude
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2016 03:34
|
|
|
Hal Incandenza posted:I did the same thing and conspicuously backed of quidnose and never went back, why doesn't that set off your alarm bells? You didn't actively avoid content. Like I said, having a poor reason to vote quid doesn't mean anything without the avoiding content. The quid votes are poor and don't mean anything in a vacuum
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2016 03:37
|
|
|
Your Personal Muse posted:I used that buzzword because that's what he is doing. His entire day one is white noise. While this wasn't a content heavy day one, he actively tried to avoid content. Don't see a whole lot of substance in your day one posts either, buddy. At least I had Bulleit to drink. What's your excuse?
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2016 03:38
|
|
|
Your Personal Muse posted:You didn't actively avoid content. Like I said, having a poor reason to vote quid doesn't mean anything without the avoiding content. The quid votes are poor and don't mean anything in a vacuum What content did I avoid? You're gonna have to help me understand this one.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2016 03:39
|
|
|
I'm not voting for poo poo until we get a reply on that claim.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2016 03:39
|
|
|
IllegallySober posted:That is quite the saxophone. This is during a turbo of quid. No comment on the turbo. Not saying he should of jumped on it, but he kind of acted like it didn't happen. IllegallySober posted:I'm here but I still have no clue wtf is going on The only stuff of substance, in response to a lynch all lurkers post, is something that isn't scumhunting. And then he votes quid. Admittedly, reading over it he mentioned drinking during this time which could account for his relative aloofness. But still, it read to me as someone with his head in the ground while chaos was happening, and given that that chaos resulted in scum dying, it could have been tactic by scum to make the case on his scum buddy seem less heated than it was.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2016 03:49
|
|
|
IllegallySober posted:Don't see a whole lot of substance in your day one posts either, buddy. At least I had Bulleit to drink. What's your excuse? My scumhunting failed spectacularly, but at least I tried.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2016 03:50
|
|
|
Your Personal Muse posted:This is during a turbo of quid. No comment on the turbo. Not saying he should of jumped on it, but he kind of acted like it didn't happen. Best I can tell in my exceptionally limited experience with this game is that someone usually gets singled out and gets a few votes and everyone then backs off. I was trying to stay in-theme despite knowing little to nothing about it. Whoops, I guess? Your Personal Muse posted:The only stuff of substance, in response to a lynch all lurkers post, is something that isn't scumhunting. Was I supposed to stay quiet and get lynched instead? And that last tactical piece- if I were scum, would it not have made more sense to try to deflect onto someone else to save my scum buddy rather than either sit back and do nothing or dogpile one of my own? Meanwhile, there's still only one person who's deflecting onto someone else (you) and one person who's hasn't given a solid answer to an accusation (that's you too).
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2016 04:05
|
|
|
IllegallySober posted:Best I can tell in my exceptionally limited experience with this game is that someone usually gets singled out and gets a few votes and everyone then backs off. I was trying to stay in-theme despite knowing little to nothing about it. Whoops, I guess? Few things: you weren't going to get lynched. That's why I pointed it out. You over reacted to a perceived threat that wasn't there. Second, you couldn't have deflected. It was pretty clear he was getting lynched. Third, what am I supposed to react to? There is no accusation, just done vague bullshit
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2016 04:10
|
|
|
Your Personal Muse posted:But still, it read to me as someone with his head in the ground while chaos was happening, and given that that chaos resulted in scum dying, it could have been tactic by scum to make the case on his scum buddy seem less heated than it was. Your Personal Muse posted:Second, you couldn't have deflected. It was pretty clear he was getting lynched. So I had my head in the ground but I couldn't have done anything if I wanted to, but because I didn't do anything it reads as a scum tactic anyway? Got it.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2016 04:19
|
|
|
IllegallySober posted:So I had my head in the ground but I couldn't have done anything if I wanted to, but because I didn't do anything it reads as a scum tactic anyway? By the time you voted quid you couldn't have done anything. At that point he was getting lynched
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2016 04:22
|
|
|
You and I can argue back and forth all night but no one else seems interested in doing anything about it until Nutsack comes back. I'll drop it for the moment, but your case against me seems awful flimsy and to all of a sudden single me out seems far more like a scum tactic than anything I did or didn't do.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2016 04:27
|
|
|
God forbid someone tried to make a case around here.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2016 04:28
|
|
|
Your Personal Muse posted:God forbid someone tried to make a case around here. Fair point.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2016 04:30
|
|
|
Your Personal Muse posted:God forbid someone tried to make a case around here. Hey YPM how do you feel about my case against AR?
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2016 04:45
|
|
|
Kashuno posted:Hey YPM how do you feel about my case against AR? I thought the same thing about him, but I remember thinking the same thing in a game where he was town. The other problem is you have a case based on no content in a game where no one had content. I know that I have something similar on illegality, but it's more how he has no content, not just that he just has no content.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2016 04:54
|
|
|
I feel good about everyone after that exchange
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2016 04:58
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2016 05:00
|
|
|
Kashuno posted:Hey YPM how do you feel about my case against AR? Tell me how it is much different than YPMs case against IS?
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2016 05:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 20, 2024 09:29 |
|
|
I'm ready to listen
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2016 05:01
|
|