Ricochet wrote:LoRab wrote:Ricochet wrote:LoRab wrote:
What I read from your post that you mention was that I was particularly bringing up G-Man's behavior in old games, which is what I never did. Yes, I post about meta. Meta is a lot of how I think in games. And that another player came to a different conclusion than I did...well, that happens. We all see things differently.
And, again, it was the powerful part that pinged me in Golden's post--not the civ part. I have no problem with civ claims--I expect civs to say that they are civs. It was
And yes, I am getting frustrated. And there's too many posts to respond to remind everyone to eye me all you want and twirl for them. I'm a serious lynch candidate at this point, and that's really frustrating, when I know that the conclusion that people are coming to about me is not accurate.
And I didn't like the lynch day 2, either. I look forward to hearing why that power was used for the day 2 lynch in end game, because I didn't like having to choose between what at the time didn't seem like a good selection to me. But, being forced to vote one of those candidates, and having only mild pings to go on, I decided to leave it to the mafia gods. It's not the first time I've been part of making a tie.
LoRab wrote:I do care who is lynched.
LoRab wrote:I decided to leave it to the mafia gods
In general, I care who is lynched. When there are only 4 choices, none of whom I'm completely sure on, I'm comfortable with an aspect of chance between those choices.
No matter what, I had to make an active choice in that lynch and no matter how I voted it would have been a deciding vote. With no choices that had me convinced or even somewhat sure, I went with going for 1 of 2 choices.
And I'm not sure what that demonstrates, other than my unsurety about that vote.
But you didn't make a deciding vote. You made a tie vote and you waited (and wavered between the candidates) till the tie would have been decisive. Why not vote for MM the first time you saw a tie opportunity (4-4 each) I think and feel good about the same rationale that "the gods will decide" or someone else left to vote will take the lynch in a different direction?
Instead, you designed the tie at 5-5,
forced Golden to have to save himself and counting the three votes left as improbable to ever happen. Would this sound like a fair tie making to you, if someone else would have done it?
I generally vote as late as I can--it gives me the opportunity to take everything into account.
And yes, I would have understood it if someone else had done it.
linkitis: @Dragon: Yes, I agree I've been tunnel visioning. It's a bad habit. And nothing else that he's posted has really stuck out to me one way or the other, so I haven't mentioned it.
And, over the course of 4 phases, I've also been defending myself. And many of the posts against me have had to do with the LD thing, so I've had to continue talking about it. And when needing to defend, the ability to consider and post about other suspicions is limited.
And you are wrong in your vote for me.