Canucklehead wrote:bea wrote:I could see a vote for cannuck - the quotes br pulled are compelling.
I promise you, they're bot. All they amount to is (and this is MP's case, too) that I haven't contributed much and haven't been thinking deeply about the game and haven't made smart (or rather blendy) votes. That's lazy Canuck. That's typical Canuck when she isn't involved in discussion.
But That's not baddie Canuck, Bea, and you know it. So does BR
Linki: lol. Good job, baddies.
That is convenient and not your game play as of late.
blindfaeth wrote:I'm going to pull a civvie mp here and start screaming shenanigans. Why are four people voting Canuck out of nowhere? Something is amiss.
I wouldn't say out of nowhere. Have you been following along. I have suspected Canuck since night 1.
Canucklehead wrote:blindfaeth wrote:So... You tell us not to spread our votes, then vote someone who wouldn't have had a vote if it weren't for the baddie in the room manipulating JC? :P
QFT.
I voted BR, for a moral victory
I think she's a bad baddie, and I hope civs will avenge me by seeking out her baddie buddies. I don't think they're hiding very deeply.
You are so wrong here, and if you can state I know your civ game and then completely ignore mine why would I trust you.
MovingPictures07 wrote:Okay, I'm a bit freaked out myself that BR did a complete 180 again and ended up voting for Canuck. But I still voted for the player whose actions are most suspect to me.
Having a pause for a second and then sticking to my gut is NOT a 180. If I voted elsewhere that would be a 180.
With that all said I withdraw my Canuck suspicion and will now be moving on. I just had to do all of that because it seems like before the lynch was even revealed I was being set up for the fall if the lynch went south. A suspicion is a suspicion and can be wrong, that doesn't make one a baddie, it makes one wrong.