Mafia: A World Reborn Game Thread - Game Over

#951

Luke, I did the best i could to make Tranqs question easier for you to understand but that didn't work. I don't know what else to do but go with the answer you have already given. Also, you still havent answered my questions and they are from yesterday but I'm no longer expecting that you will.

#952

OK, I am going to the pre game Party (this may be the Mets last gasp, so the faithful are especially intense tonight ha ha).

I am going to vote for Nutella. I think she was more invested in that tie than she would have us think.

Linki @ Golden, WTF? I used to live in Montana, for almost 20 years, but I grew up in Brooklyn, and have been back in New York for almost 4 years.

#953

a2thezebra wrote:Elaborate? Well initially I found nutella's history to be the most suspicious out of the lurkers, but she made a post that damaged my suspicions enough to put my vote on BUGLA and it stayed there for the rest of the day. I am of course voting for sig over her for reasons I have made perfectly clear, and being someone who doesn't trust any other lynch at this time, I would be more inclined to say that anyone not willing to vote for sig at this point is forcing themselves to do so.

What, this post? Her third post in the entire game, explaining she was busy, where she doesn't even mention BUG and you don't even mention that she caused you to vote BUG? Your ultra-confidence on sig looks more like doubling-down, which is kinda weird in that it shouldn't even be necessary at this point of the game; if you're right and he's scum, we already know you're right. If you're wrong and he's town, so were several other bandwagoners that you could deflect onto.

a2thezebra wrote:I don't think nutella's interactions so far have much to dig into, as opposed to sig who has more than once tried to redirect the attention of the case against him onto other players, which would provide great analysis upon his death. I am not interested in a Mac lynch at all and I find it baffling that people are using his activity as a reason to be suspicious of him when he has made clear multiple times that his activity is not going to be consistent given his current circumstances. I find it especially baffling that you are using "at the very least he isn't a clear town read" to justify a potential lynching of him, when the same accusation (minus the "he" pronoun) could be applied to literally every other player. THAT is forced.

She's made comments on many players by now, in terms of suspicions, lynch preferences, etc. Which players are you referring to sig redirecting stuff onto? If sig is scum, do you think a scum player just throwing "no u" to ever player accusing him can be meaningfully analyzed, if that's what you think sig's history shows?

Mac wasn't being cooperative even when he was posting, so I don't feel particularly bad there. I used that because some when pressed, a lot of people seem to not have to much to really say against nutella. Matt made the most thorough case and it rings genuine and in line with how he cased players in Talking Heads. Others, like Epi, aren't giving too much and I'd like to hear what would make nutella look scummier than Mac.

#954

S~V~S wrote:Linki @ Golden, WTF? I used to live in Montana, for almost 20 years, but I grew up in Brooklyn, and have been back in New York for almost 4 years.

I must be getting you confused with Henry Gale.

(Also known as - slight geography fail. Minnesota... Montana... that's not so far off...

I knew you were in New York for the last few years, but I didn't know you were born there!)

#955

Sorry still haven't been around. I've been skimming, but I hope to read the thread more fully tomorrow. I don't see the case on most of the people getting votes, so I'm going with Sig who I do see the case on. I'm not sure what time the lynch ends and I don't want to miss it.

#956

Golden wrote:
S~V~S wrote:Linki @ Golden, WTF? I used to live in Montana, for almost 20 years, but I grew up in Brooklyn, and have been back in New York for almost 4 years.
I must be getting you confused with Henry Gale.

(Also known as - slight geography fail. Minnesota... Montana... that's not so far off...

I knew you were in New York for the last few years, but I didn't know you were born there!)

Actually I was born in North Carolina, on Fort Bragg. My father was in the Army. But my parents were from Brooklyn, and when he got out we went back there. I was in Kindergarten when we moved back to NY.

Later guys

#957

Aside from golden himself, has anyone brought up that golden jumped off the 4-4-4 to vote for TinyBubbles? And along those lines, that I reformed the 4-4-4 tie (with the intent of making it 5-4-4 though)? Aside from the specific interaction aspect between nutella and others, I don't see why avoiding the tie itself means that much. It also seems very hypocritical for S~V~S to use nutella's investment in the tie as grounds for supporting her lynch when she placed the vote that ultimately led to BANANA's lynch. The tie is completely meaningless if it turns out the other two lynch candidates are also town or third-party.

#958

Did Splint say why she votedfor me or was it just a fly by?

linki: Nevermind Splint did you read my initial post and Bull's reasons for pursuing me? Do you find me saying the mafia is probably killing low posters to be suspicious?

#959

Um @ Hammy, I made a stand. My point re Nutella was that she did not. She took the least resistance route when she had actually said she suspected one of the tied parties.

Not at ALL the same thing. Quite opposite things, actually.

Now really, bye lol.

#960

I'm voting nutella

#961

Wait SVS one more thing!!!!

#962

a2thezebra wrote:
Epignosis wrote:
a2thezebra wrote:
Epignosis wrote:
a2thezebra wrote:
Epignosis wrote:
a2thezebra wrote:linki @Epi - So he should never be lynched because you were wrong once? You seem indecisive about whether to say you won't vote for him because of your own previous misread or because you're actually not convinced that there is a solid case against him.
That...isn't at all what I said or why I said it.

Someone asked for my opinion on the sig wagon. I couldn't well answer that without providing an opinion of sig. So I gave the latter first and then responded to the original question.
So it is what you said, but not why you said it. Don't exaggerate now, it reveals your deceitful intentions.
WHAT is what I said?

Please, for the love of God, all of you, stop STARTING YOUR SENTENCES WITH PRONOUNS. BEGIN WITH AN ANTECEDENT, and THEN YOU ARE FREE TO USE A PRONOUN.

Watch:

"She's hot."

"Who?"

"Kathy Bates."

A lot of time (and awkward stares) could have been spared if you had started out with "Kathy Bates is hot."
1. Nobody cares.
2. I'm impressed that your (get it?) criticizing people's grammar so soon after such a disaster.
3. "Kathy Bates is hot" has much less personality than the lengthier example you provided right before it, so this post has actually had the opposite effect on me than the one you intended, so I will now consciously be using pronouns to start my sentences more often.

It's interesting that you were willing to deny that the mysterious "that" is what you said, despite claiming now that you didn't know what "that" is even referring to. Your digging you're own grave here lol. Your scum and you're alignment is not looking too good based on you're posts.
I had a typo. That's not a grammatical error.

And I care, because I don't fucking know what you're talking about. Please clarify.

Hosting now.
1. I think you missed the point. Did you read the last two sentences of my post?
2. I don't see why you would be willing to deny something before understanding it. If you didn't know what I was talking about in the first place, why not ask what I am implying initially, instead of immediately claiming I was wrong? To clarify, I was implying that your post before seemed inconsistent in your reasoning for not voting for sig, and the inconsistency came across as deceitful.
3. Yay

1. I don't understand your point.
2. "Would be willing?" How about, "I don't understand your point." One could deny something while misunderstanding it. I've even read you clarification, and I STILL don't understand you. Which post before what? Maybe you would do well to link those posts, because you are making no sense to me.
3. Yee haw

#963

S~V~S wrote:Epi, quick tip~ in Brooklyn, "That's bullshit" means everything from "I had to stay 5 minutes late at work" to "my spouse is having an affair" to "I swear, Mom, I did not cut class" to "I think the blue carpet is better than the beige one". It's fairly inclusive as opposed to being exclusive.

Sorry for lack of clarity; I thought I answered it, it did not occur to me that you literally wanted to know what i meant by the actual word "bullshit" lol. I was talking about the content of the bullshit.

I can accept that.

Still...

But I can accept that.

#964

S~V~S wrote:Um @ Hammy, I made a stand. My point re Nutella was that she did not. She took the least resistance route when she had actually said she suspected one of the tied parties.

Not at ALL the same thing. Quite opposite things, actually.

Now really, bye lol.

nutella's only comment about BUG, prior to casting her vote for Sorsha, was "I am very confused by Buglabush and might consider a vote there." It's something, I guess, but hardly the kind of read I'd expect her to commit to. The difference between your case and her's is that yours was a bit more visible, but both could easily be interpreted as easy saves. Or, they could be interpreted as coincidences and suspicion of protection where neither player has had alignment revealed yet, which is a bad thing to bank on.

#965

HamburgerBoy wrote:
a2thezebra wrote:Elaborate? Well initially I found nutella's history to be the most suspicious out of the lurkers, but she made a post that damaged my suspicions enough to put my vote on BUGLA and it stayed there for the rest of the day. I am of course voting for sig over her for reasons I have made perfectly clear, and being someone who doesn't trust any other lynch at this time, I would be more inclined to say that anyone not willing to vote for sig at this point is forcing themselves to do so.
What, this post? Her third post in the entire game, explaining she was busy, where she doesn't even mention BUG and you don't even mention that she caused you to vote BUG? Your ultra-confidence on sig looks more like doubling-down, which is kinda weird in that it shouldn't even be necessary at this point of the game; if you're right and he's scum, we already know you're right. If you're wrong and he's town, so were several other bandwagoners that you could deflect onto.

You're reaching here for most of these assumptions. My nutella vote was mainly pressure-based, and since I thought her third post was genuine I took my vote off of her, and she hasn't pinged me since. True story. It doesn't matter that she doesn't mention BUG (why on earth would it?) because BUG, before nutella's third post, was my second most confident scum read of the lurkers. nutella responded well to my vote, whereas he made himself look much much worse when the attention was directed to him. She didn't cause me to vote for BUG directly, she did it by making me turn to the next best option, who turned out to be the best for that day. And you seem eager to accuse of not taking responsibility for sig flipping town when that is yet to even happen.

If sig does end up flipping town I will take responsibility as the one who pushed for his lynch the most aggressively, and regardless of his flip I will say now and in the future that the lynch is justified. This goes back to what Epi said earlier about thinking sig was scum even in BTSC; if your meta is so scummy that people are afraid to lynch you just because the constant scumtells are consistent with your style of play, then there's no way to get you lynched if you are in fact scum, which sig is here.

a2thezebra wrote:I don't think nutella's interactions so far have much to dig into, as opposed to sig who has more than once tried to redirect the attention of the case against him onto other players, which would provide great analysis upon his death. I am not interested in a Mac lynch at all and I find it baffling that people are using his activity as a reason to be suspicious of him when he has made clear multiple times that his activity is not going to be consistent given his current circumstances. I find it especially baffling that you are using "at the very least he isn't a clear town read" to justify a potential lynching of him, when the same accusation (minus the "he" pronoun) could be applied to literally every other player. THAT is forced.

She's made comments on many players by now, in terms of suspicions, lynch preferences, etc. Which players are you referring to sig redirecting stuff onto? If sig is scum, do you think a scum player just throwing "no u" to ever player accusing him can be meaningfully analyzed, if that's what you think sig's history shows?

Mac wasn't being cooperative even when he was posting, so I don't feel particularly bad there. I used that because some when pressed, a lot of people seem to not have to much to really say against nutella. Matt made the most thorough case and it rings genuine and in line with how he cased players in Talking Heads. Others, like Epi, aren't giving too much and I'd like to hear what would make nutella look scummier than Mac.[/quote]
sig tried to use his case against Bullz as a valid defense for his own behavior, clearly trying to redirect the attention. And I'm not saying the most obvious example of his redirections can be analyzed, but he has had interactions with enough players for there to be a lot of meat to dig into. Mac is Mac. I do agree that Epi's nutella suspicion is unjustified.

linki@Epi Don't worry about it, you've addressed everything I need to know for now.

#966

a2thezebra wrote:linki@Epi Don't worry about it, you've addressed everything I need to know for now.

That's great!

#967

My bad on the format fuckup.

#968

Who should I vote for?

#969

#970

MacDougall wrote:Who should I vote for?

Nutella.

Under no circumstances should you vote sig. I believe Zebra is wrong about that.

#971

a2thezebra wrote:This goes back to what Epi said earlier about thinking sig was scum even in BTSC; if your meta is so scummy that people are afraid to lynch you just because the constant scumtells are consistent with your style of play, then there's no way to get you lynched if you are in fact scum, which sig is here.

That's not what I said.

#972

HBoy - your defence of nutella sounds sincere. But it looks like it is either sig or nutella. Will you put your money where your mouth is and show you prefer a nutella lynch to a sig one?

@Sig - you better be as worth my effort to save as I think you are.

#973

Golden wrote:HBoy - your defence of nutella sounds sincere. But it looks like it is either sig or nutella. Will you put your money where your mouth is and show you prefer a nutella lynch to a sig one?

@Sig - you better be as worth my effort to save as I think you are.

You think fingersplints is going to vote nutella instead of sig? She w-

Oh.

#974

Epignosis wrote:
a2thezebra wrote:This goes back to what Epi said earlier about thinking sig was scum even in BTSC; if your meta is so scummy that people are afraid to lynch you just because the constant scumtells are consistent with your style of play, then there's no way to get you lynched if you are in fact scum, which sig is here.
That's not what I said.

Yeah, it is actually.

Epignosis wrote: I don't know how what to do with sig. He does things that make absolutely no sense (at ENDGAME, no less), and when you call him on it, he turns out civilian. I don't know how much he is aware of that, but in The Syndicate Mafia, that's what happened. I even had him in BTSC, teasing and taunting him that I knew he was bad- everything, and I mean everything, pointed to it.

Then he was good.

Listen, he wasn't even doing a good job in BTSC convincing me he wasn't bad. He just kept digging himself into a hole.

So I don't know sig well enough to lynch him. Not Day 2.

As for the wagon, the only vote there that makes sense to me is Bullzeye's, who did the dirty work.

#975

@epi - I don't get it.

#976

Golden wrote:@epi - I don't get it.

It's a joke. fingersplints voted sig.

#977

I am
In regards to Epi's initial post not only was I not scum I was the only player who was correct and voted for the remaining scum.
Know I'll admit I can come across as scummy when I'm not but with zebras comment on scumtells. As scum I don't usually make these tells only as a civ do I do this. THis usually only happens within the first few phases when someone finds a reason to start a bandwagon and multiply people jump on it. Usually the people who push my wagon and start them are scum, such as Bull's. Quite possibly zebra as well, but I'm unsure on that.

#978

Unless you're referring to everything after the ";" Epi, which is my own words, and I did not imply that they were you'res unless you mistook it for a ":".

#979

sig wrote:I am
In regards to Epi's initial post not only was I not scum I was the only player who was correct and voted for the remaining scum.
Know I'll admit I can come across as scummy when I'm not but with zebras comment on scumtells. As scum I don't usually make these tells only as a civ do I do this. THis usually only happens within the first few phases when someone finds a reason to start a bandwagon and multiply people jump on it. Usually the people who push my wagon and start them are scum, such as Bull's. Quite possibly zebra as well, but I'm unsure on that.

So when you're town, you're scummy, and when you're scum, you're townie. Got it.

Can we lynch this already?

#980

Golden wrote:
MacDougall wrote:Who should I vote for?
Nutella.

Under no circumstances should you vote sig. I believe Zebra is wrong about that.

I want to vote for juliets who is almost certainly scum. Can we lynch her instead?

#981

a2thezebra wrote:You're reaching here for most of these assumptions. My nutella vote was mainly pressure-based, and since I thought her third post was genuine I took my vote off of her, and she hasn't pinged me since. True story. It doesn't matter that she doesn't mention BUG (why on earth would it?) because BUG, before nutella's third post, was my second most confident scum read of the lurkers. nutella responded well to my vote, whereas he made himself look much much worse when the attention was directed to him. She didn't cause me to vote for BUG directly, she did it by making me turn to the next best option, who turned out to be the best for that day. And you seem eager to accuse of not taking responsibility for sig flipping town when that is yet to even happen. If sig does end up flipping town I will take responsibility as the one who pushed for his lynch the most aggressively, and regardless of his flip I will say now and in the future that the lynch is justified. This goes back to what Epi said earlier about thinking sig was scum even in BTSC; if your meta is so scummy that people are afraid to lynch you just because the constant scumtells are consistent with your style of play, then there's no way to get you lynched if you are in fact scum, which sig is here.

OK, don't expect me to have mind-reading powers when you claim other players made you vote a certain way. I still think it's weird to make that a bad thing, since it assumes she had the intention of making you feel good about her so that you'd switch for your second best candidate. Is that all you have to disagree with me on when I say I don't see anything scummy in nutella's post history?

a2thezebra wrote:sig tried to use his case against Bullz as a valid defense for his own behavior, clearly trying to redirect the attention. And I'm not saying the most obvious example of his redirections can be analyzed, but he has had interactions with enough players for there to be a lot of meat to dig into. Mac is Mac. I do agree that Epi's nutella suspicion is unjustified.

Are you referring to the "us" thing here? Because I view that as more of a rhetorical tool, a "if you can do why can't I?" kind of thing. If sig flips scum, who will you look at most? Let's say aside from me since Bullz already suspects me for my defense of sig, and since I'll be an obvious first candidate.

#982

If I am forced to choose between sig and nutella I couldn't care less. Juliets is scum though.

#983

MacDougall wrote:
Golden wrote:
MacDougall wrote:Who should I vote for?
Nutella.

Under no circumstances should you vote sig. I believe Zebra is wrong about that.
I want to vote for juliets who is almost certainly scum. Can we lynch her instead?

Have a look at juliet's posts re nutella

#984

a2thezebra wrote:
Epignosis wrote:
a2thezebra wrote:This goes back to what Epi said earlier about thinking sig was scum even in BTSC; if your meta is so scummy that people are afraid to lynch you just because the constant scumtells are consistent with your style of play, then there's no way to get you lynched if you are in fact scum, which sig is here.
That's not what I said.

Yeah, it is actually.
Epignosis wrote: I don't know how what to do with sig. He does things that make absolutely no sense (at ENDGAME, no less), and when you call him on it, he turns out civilian. I don't know how much he is aware of that, but in The Syndicate Mafia, that's what happened. I even had him in BTSC, teasing and taunting him that I knew he was bad- everything, and I mean everything, pointed to it.

Then he was good.

Listen, he wasn't even doing a good job in BTSC convincing me he wasn't bad. He just kept digging himself into a hole.

So I don't know sig well enough to lynch him. Not Day 2.

As for the wagon, the only vote there that makes sense to me is Bullzeye's, who did the dirty work.

No, it isn't.

You are using my solitary example to say: "if your meta is so scummy..."

I have played two, maybe three games with sig. I only paid attention to him in one of those, a sock puppet game, and even then, only at endgame. There is not enough data there for me to say anything about sig as a whole. I gave a specific example about my experience with sig, to answer a question someone asked me about the sig "wagon," and you extrapolate it into a theorem. That's not sound.

#985

Golden wrote:HBoy - your defence of nutella sounds sincere. But it looks like it is either sig or nutella. Will you put your money where your mouth is and show you prefer a nutella lynch to a sig one?

@Sig - you better be as worth my effort to save as I think you are.

Do you have a reason to save him other than thinking him civ? Do you have some idea to what role he is?

#986

MacDougall wrote:If I am forced to choose between sig and nutella I couldn't care less. Juliets is scum though.

What makes you think that?

#987

I don't like either of these lynch trains. Why is Dom's vote on Mac? I thought he was suspicious of nutella and she's one of the major candidates.

#988

Turnip Head wrote:I don't like either of these lynch trains. Why is Dom's vote on Mac? I thought he was suspicious of nutella and she's one of the major candidates.

Why not?

What train would you want to be riding?

#989

tentative vote on sorsha it was gonna be her or nutella for me, cause they sound like they are intentionally drawing attention to each other and their posts about the matt/mac controversy were similar in timing.
and sorry for not posting more! real life has kept me busy

#990

HamburgerBoy wrote:
a2thezebra wrote:You're reaching here for most of these assumptions. My nutella vote was mainly pressure-based, and since I thought her third post was genuine I took my vote off of her, and she hasn't pinged me since. True story. It doesn't matter that she doesn't mention BUG (why on earth would it?) because BUG, before nutella's third post, was my second most confident scum read of the lurkers. nutella responded well to my vote, whereas he made himself look much much worse when the attention was directed to him. She didn't cause me to vote for BUG directly, she did it by making me turn to the next best option, who turned out to be the best for that day. And you seem eager to accuse of not taking responsibility for sig flipping town when that is yet to even happen. If sig does end up flipping town I will take responsibility as the one who pushed for his lynch the most aggressively, and regardless of his flip I will say now and in the future that the lynch is justified. This goes back to what Epi said earlier about thinking sig was scum even in BTSC; if your meta is so scummy that people are afraid to lynch you just because the constant scumtells are consistent with your style of play, then there's no way to get you lynched if you are in fact scum, which sig is here.
OK, don't expect me to have mind-reading powers when you claim other players made you vote a certain way. I still think it's weird to make that a bad thing, since it assumes she had the intention of making you feel good about her so that you'd switch for your second best candidate. Is that all you have to disagree with me on when I say I don't see anything scummy in nutella's post history?

a2thezebra wrote:sig tried to use his case against Bullz as a valid defense for his own behavior, clearly trying to redirect the attention. And I'm not saying the most obvious example of his redirections can be analyzed, but he has had interactions with enough players for there to be a lot of meat to dig into. Mac is Mac. I do agree that Epi's nutella suspicion is unjustified.
Are you referring to the "us" thing here? Because I view that as more of a rhetorical tool, a "if you can do why can't I?" kind of thing. If sig flips scum, who will you look at most? Let's say aside from me since Bullz already suspects me for my defense of sig, and since I'll be an obvious first candidate.

I'm not expecting you to have mind-reading powers, only to not make uninformed and inaccurate assumptions about my actions. nutella's initial two posts were scummy. That's more than not seeing anything, so yeah, that is all I have to disagree with you on the subject. sig only played it off as a rhetorical tool when I called him out on it, as the initial post of the "us" thing was dead set on accusing me of scum-slipping. He only backed out because he realized how horribly supported the accusation was. If sig flips scum I will look at everyone that voted for him and see whose votes are the laziest. You don't need to say "aside from me" since I'm one of the few people that hasn't gone after you for defending sig so rigorously.

linki@Epi - Just because I didn't use an example of what you said to your liking doesn't mean I misquoted you. Why play dumb?

#991

TheFloyd73 wrote:
juliets wrote:
Tranq wrote:TheFloyd73's vote for BUGLABUSH stands out to me. Matt F brought up his vote here:

TheFloyd73 wrote:
Matt F wrote: However, I do have a question for you Floyd. You invited your friends to play in this game, yet you voted for Bug on Day 1. Why?
Anyone who votes for someone wth the excuse "he bad" is more than likely scum. Perhaps he's trying to (very vaguely) convince us that Zebra's scum.
At this stage, I'm not convinced that Zebra is on one specific side of the (civ-scum) spectrum (in other words, I'd call him neural). I'll need to re-read his posts.
Looks to me BUGLABUSH's post was a response to getting a vote from a2thezebra:

a2thezebra wrote:To BUGLABUSH it is.

BUGLABUSH wrote:I voted for a2thezebra because he bad
Floyd, i don't see how a no u-vote makes BUGLABUSH 'more than likely' bad. Could you elaborate on this? Looks like you two know each other irl so i'd understand a joke Day 1 vote, but given your response to Matt F, this doesn't appear to be that.
Floyd, you were online this afternoon at 3:32, an hour after Tranq made this post and after I made mine. Can you explain why you did not address this issue? Your behavior regarding these questions makes me believe you are bad. This isn't your first game, you know better.
I was only able to get a quick glance at the thread, I didn't have time to make a post because I was going out somewhere.
How exactly can it be elaborated on? I do know BUGLABUSH in real life, but I'm still going to treat him (and the other people I know IRL) like any regular player.
My point is that a vague reason is always a suspicious reason.

Floyd, i went through your posts, looks like you started playing mafia roughly 1 month ago. What do you mean when you say "a vague reason is always a suspicious reason"? The always part. This doesn't seem like something a relatively new player would say.

I'm feeling ok with a vote on Floyd today.

#992

Epignosis wrote:
Turnip Head wrote:I don't like either of these lynch trains. Why is Dom's vote on Mac? I thought he was suspicious of nutella and she's one of the major candidates.
Why not?

What train would you want to be riding?

nutella sounds genuine to me and I had a front row seat to her baddie game in Recruitment IV, she's not reminding me of that. I think the case on sig is balloney because he chose poor wording. I would prefer a Dom lynch or a Luke lynch.

#993

Golden wrote:HBoy - your defence of nutella sounds sincere. But it looks like it is either sig or nutella. Will you put your money where your mouth is and show you prefer a nutella lynch to a sig one?

@Sig - you better be as worth my effort to save as I think you are.

To be completely honest, I'm now having second thoughts. I hadn't given nutella's history much attention prior to the votes building on her, but I legitimately don't see a case against her. Your point about potential hypocrisy in latching onto the Bubbles case while not answering your own "Are you civ?" question is probably the closest to a tangible case, but even still it's so shady. If I was asked multiple questions, I could easily gloss over that part. Not to mention you could go WIFOM and ask whether a scum player would be more eager to answer it.

The way I see it, both the nutella and sig cases are fluff. However, nutella is at least answering the criticism against her more clearly. The defensive part of me wants to keep sig alive, but the pragmatic part is now asking "What's the use if people are just going to keep hounding him?" I think if nutella lasted another day, this stuff would die down. If sig lasts another day, it could just be another day (at some point in the future) of the same old crap. That's what happened on Talking Heads; almost lynched him day 1, things quieted down, then around day 9 or something people are suddenly like "Hey, let's hit the reset button and go sig all over again!"

#994

juliets wrote:
MacDougall wrote:If I am forced to choose between sig and nutella I couldn't care less. Juliets is scum though.
What makes you think that?

You just are. I think everyone feels it too.

No hard feels though. Your posts just have that faux contributive feel about em. You are lovely and all but yeah I think u got dat scumcard. Do you enjoy playing as a big bad?

Imma vote you and I hope some others do too.

#995

By Epi's logic, I could quote a post from sig and he could defend himself by saying "I didn't say that!" simply because he disagrees with my interpretation of the content.

#996

a2thezebra wrote:linki@Epi - Just because I didn't use an example of what you said to your liking doesn't mean I misquoted you. Why play dumb?

I didn't accuse you of misquoting something I said. I accused you of inappropriately extrapolating something I said.

#997

Vote 1 Juliets

#998

a2thezebra wrote:By Epi's logic, I could quote a post from sig and he could defend himself by saying "I didn't say that!" simply because he disagrees with my interpretation of the content.

Yes...yes he could. That's not my logic. I didn't make that up. That's a staple of rhetoric.

#999

Sorsha wrote:
Golden wrote:HBoy - your defence of nutella sounds sincere. But it looks like it is either sig or nutella. Will you put your money where your mouth is and show you prefer a nutella lynch to a sig one?

@Sig - you better be as worth my effort to save as I think you are.
Do you have a reason to save him other than thinking him civ? Do you have some idea to what role he is?

No. I wish I did. It's entirely gut, no info on either him or nutella.

I do feel, though, like nutella is racking up the connections while literally no-one but me is coming to sig's defence. I think thats what it is mostly. It doesn't even feel like anyone is subtly leading the thread away from him. Sig had such an early and easy bandwagon, with no-one who wanted to stand up for him. It seemed very easy.

@HB - I'm not surprised you are having second thoughts. The whole thing sounded like a distance to begin with. If nutella was lynched today and came back bad, I'd be after you tomorrow.

#1000

You guys should shut up and vote for juliets if you want to lynch a scum.

Who to lynch? 24 hour day!