RIP blooper.

Has canuck fought yet? I'm tempted to vote her just cuz.
besides elo (who is clearly winning at this point) and JC (who doesn't want to fight) - who else hasn't fought?
Moderator: Community Team
Epignosis wrote:Bitch, my identity is my identity theft protection!
Kyle and DP 2.0, I believe. You should vote fo DP 2.0. I always forget he is in this game.bea wrote:Same player?
RIP blooper.![]()
Has canuck fought yet? I'm tempted to vote her just cuz.
besides elo (who is clearly winning at this point) and JC (who doesn't want to fight) - who else hasn't fought?
Epignosis wrote:If llama is good, it means we exist in a universe in which multitasking llama can call out the first of two mafia while simultaneously calling out two civilians.
I don't want to live in that universe.
Epignosis wrote:Bitch, my identity is my identity theft protection!
Hehe you made me laugh, it was vote worthyCanucklehead wrote:I love you, kylemii. I will never vote for you again as long as I live ever.
The plan is for Day 7 to run from Thursday through Saturday morning. Night 7 will last until Sunday morning. After that... things will be harder to predict since I'm moving starting Monday. More likely to have evening ending times after I'm settled in San Antonio. I'll figure it out and keep you guys updated though.juliets wrote:MP: Is the day going to run from sometime tomorrow (Thurs.)morning til sometime Sat. morning or are you getting us back on a night schedule? I'm traveling Friday so I'm hoping it ends Sat. morning.
It was not an effort to clear association with him, it was stating that I am not connected with him. Different. He was bad and trying to draw attention from himself to me. The end. You continuing to point to this exchange which was simply me trying to diffuse a miffed baddie being called out for being bad makes meS~V~S wrote:Oh God I almost forgot
I am not seeing the cases here other than as related to proximity. I am voting Lea again as not only was she in the right place at the right time, but that whole exchange she had with DH felt off to me, and now she I's apparently using it to clear her from association with him.
I felt a bit differently about this. Can you expand?Long Con wrote: Anyways, ten minutes left to vote... I was diggin' on the case against Vomps until several people practically vouched for him, so I'm not going to thrust him back into the tie-spotlight so soon.
OkCanucklehead wrote:I WANT TO HIT SOMEONE! Vote for me to fight, you turds!
My thoughts exactly, at first Lea was a neutral read for me but no more. That was an extreme overreaction coupled with a poor defense.juliets wrote:Lea, there is no bandwagon. At this point there is SVS saying she is suspicious of you and me saying there was a conversation with you and DH that I thought was odd and I will probably take a look at your posts. You sound more defensive than this amount of activity calls for. Is there something I'm missing?
I keep pointing to it becasue you were not the only one voting against him; he singled you out to point to as the cause of his troubles, when pretty much everyone was against him fighting, and the day before, even his own brother decided not to vote for him. But he only singled out you to publicly blame. It reallly, really feels like distancing to me. This is the main post in question, but rereading Penns Groves last day, there were others.Leamiteo wrote:Sorry I missed the vote! It totally slipped my mind since I've been in the habit of voting at night.
It was not an effort to clear association with him, it was stating that I am not connected with him. Different. He was bad and trying to draw attention from himself to me. The end. You continuing to point to this exchange which was simply me trying to diffuse a miffed baddie being called out for being bad makes meS~V~S wrote:Oh God I almost forgot
I am not seeing the cases here other than as related to proximity. I am voting Lea again as not only was she in the right place at the right time, but that whole exchange she had with DH felt off to me, and now she I's apparently using it to clear her from association with him.you and all those who join this silly bandwagon you keep trying to form.
I'm voting for Eloh since she hasn't fought yet. Good luck!
And you were in the same thread Day One, when i think he was recruited. I don't think it is all that unreasonable. But nice No U there, kiddoDharmaHelper wrote:In fairness, you're also publicly and openly discouraging other players from allowing me to fight. So yeah, I'm a bit defensive when it comes to your tactics. Am I upset? Not really. I'm just confused why it is you've so aggressively singled me out.. I'm just trying to play the game. I get very bored just voting and waiting for 72 hours at a time.Leamiteo wrote:Um, defensive much? Am I the only one voting in this thread for who fights? Aren't a bunch of other people hyped up about a new city to move around in? Yes. Don't blame me solely for your not getting to fight last night, please and thank you. This is another example of your behavior in being overly eager I was talking about; this is my first time fighting. I'll gladly vote for someone who hasn't had the chance yet on this next night phase. I, like you, don't have an issue with taking turns and letting others fight.DharmaHelper wrote:Are you going to keep cock blocking me?Leamiteo wrote:May the best fighter win, Vomp!
Oooohh, Chicago! I like the city IRL and that sounds like a neat place to check out the fight club there! I think I had better wait to vote to see what happens with the fight? Or if I vote to move and then (God forbid) get seriously injured I would just stay here Host, yes?
No, my reason to move has nothing to do with you in fact. Perhaps I'll go back to New Castle where I started to see what the buzz is over there.
maybe SVS onto something thereyou and all those who join this silly bandwagon you keep trying to form.
For someone who is trying to "clear association with him", this sounds a bit defensive and overly emotional. And what bandwagon? I don't think you've been in severe danger of getting lynched yet, so I don't see how you can claim that a bandwagon is forming against you.Leamiteo wrote:It was not an effort to clear association with him, it was stating that I am not connected with him. Different. He was bad and trying to draw attention from himself to me. The end. You continuing to point to this exchange which was simply me trying to diffuse a miffed baddie being called out for being bad makes meS~V~S wrote:Oh God I almost forgot
I am not seeing the cases here other than as related to proximity. I am voting Lea again as not only was she in the right place at the right time, but that whole exchange she had with DH felt off to me, and now she I's apparently using it to clear her from association with him.you and all those who join this silly bandwagon you keep trying to form.
Not sure how to expand. The case on Vompatti I was referring to was laid out here, and that stood out the most to me among suspicions. Then at least three people made a point to say that they're not voting for Vompatti, that they're feeling his Civvieness or something. To see that many people sticking their neck out to defend him made me more uncomfortable to vote for him.Dom wrote:I felt a bit differently about this. Can you expand?Long Con wrote: Anyways, ten minutes left to vote... I was diggin' on the case against Vomps until several people practically vouched for him, so I'm not going to thrust him back into the tie-spotlight so soon.
She didn't claim that a bandwagon was forming, she claimed that S~V~S and others were trying to form one. I don't know Lea too well, but if she has played a lot of Mafia, then she probably has good enough instincts to see where the wind is blowing. As soon as it sticks that she is connected to DH, then she's as good as lynched. THEN the bandwagons would circle up.birdwithteeth11 wrote:For someone who is trying to "clear association with him", this sounds a bit defensive and overly emotional. And what bandwagon? I don't think you've been in severe danger of getting lynched yet, so I don't see how you can claim that a bandwagon is forming against you.Leamiteo wrote:It was not an effort to clear association with him, it was stating that I am not connected with him. Different. He was bad and trying to draw attention from himself to me. The end. You continuing to point to this exchange which was simply me trying to diffuse a miffed baddie being called out for being bad makes meS~V~S wrote:Oh God I almost forgot
I am not seeing the cases here other than as related to proximity. I am voting Lea again as not only was she in the right place at the right time, but that whole exchange she had with DH felt off to me, and now she I's apparently using it to clear her from association with him.you and all those who join this silly bandwagon you keep trying to form.
Turnip Head wrote: We need to lynch Pennsylvania Bitch.
To be fair, as a last resort, you can resort to a hockey stick and skates. Sounds like an unfair advantage to me. :PCanucklehead wrote:*flexes awesome muscles*
*looks super tough*
*inspires fear*
Yeah, I see what you mean. Sorry about that. I've just been ridiculously busy with work the last week, and I've had a hard time keeping up the last few days. So it's certainly possible that I am misintepreting what she said.Long Con wrote:She didn't claim that a bandwagon was forming, she claimed that S~V~S and others were trying to form one. I don't know Lea too well, but if she has played a lot of Mafia, then she probably has good enough instincts to see where the wind is blowing. As soon as it sticks that she is connected to DH, then she's as good as lynched. THEN the bandwagons would circle up.birdwithteeth11 wrote:For someone who is trying to "clear association with him", this sounds a bit defensive and overly emotional. And what bandwagon? I don't think you've been in severe danger of getting lynched yet, so I don't see how you can claim that a bandwagon is forming against you.Leamiteo wrote:It was not an effort to clear association with him, it was stating that I am not connected with him. Different. He was bad and trying to draw attention from himself to me. The end. You continuing to point to this exchange which was simply me trying to diffuse a miffed baddie being called out for being bad makes meS~V~S wrote:Oh God I almost forgot
I am not seeing the cases here other than as related to proximity. I am voting Lea again as not only was she in the right place at the right time, but that whole exchange she had with DH felt off to me, and now she I's apparently using it to clear her from association with him.you and all those who join this silly bandwagon you keep trying to form.
And in a quick read of my own post here, I can see that S~V~S said Lea is "apparently using it to clear her from association with him", THEN Lea said "It was not an effort to clear association with him"... BWT, you then started in with 'For someone who is trying to "clear association with him", this sounds a bit defensive and overly emotional.'... as if you are quoting lea with the "clear association" thing... and yet you quoted her oppositely. See what I'm saying?
Just bringing that up because I'm sure it would frustrated Lea to be misquoted in that way, then she'd have to correct you, and then someone would say "Look how defensive she is, she can't give it up!"... and if we're going to lynch someone, I'd rather have it be for real things, not drummed-up meta-defensiveness over lazy quoting.
Timmertimmer wrote:Okay, hold the damn phone.
So yesterday, near the end of the lynch, you come in and say this:
The poll, when you write this, has four people with 4-5 votes. Bullz, johns, nevinera and vompatti. You clearly have read the thread, you say as much in your post. Yours is the VERY LAST VOTE to come in. You vote for johns, the vote that ultimately killed him. You say NOTHING about Vompatti, despite him being in the LEAD with 5 votes at the time of your vote, meaning it was kind of a big deal.nijuukyugou wrote:Thank goodness I still had this page open; I nearly forgot the vote! I read this thread earlier, but didn't get terribly strong feelings. However, in the past couple of games I've played, inactive people have often turned out to be bad. Both Nevinera and johns2jj have been so, and I'm not really feeling Bullz as being bad. The flyby vote on Nevinera by johns2jj pinged me when I first read the thread, so I'm gonna go with him. Not a strong feeling, but I must vote so I don't suffer Sock's consequences.
And then here we are today.
You say this:
So suddenly, you are confused about most of the cases, even though the case against bullz and nevinera HAVEN'T CHANGED AT ALL. But suddenly, the case against Vomps stands out to you? The case against Vomps, which was largely brought up by me? Because here's the deal, man. I brought up the case against Vompatti YESTERDAY (in game terms), but TODAY I actually said I thought I was wrong. in fact, I don't believe has actually laid out a case against Vomps today, its just been a few people who referenced yesterday, basically.nijuukyugou wrote:I'm gonna forget to vote if I don't do it now, and I certainly don't want to be modkilledI've read some arguments but I feel rather confused by most of them at the moment. (I blame it on vacation brain.) The one that does stand out to me is the case on Vomps. Not terribly strong, but what is on what is really a "Day 2" kind of vote? I've ignored Vomps before, and he's been good. I've ignored Vomps before, and he's been bad. Yeah, he has his moments of lucidity, but he has been a bit more on point with this game than I've noticed in others (especially those he turned out to be good), and it seems others have noticed this, too. I'm not gung-ho about the choice, but I feel stronger about voting him than anyone else at the moment.
So how do you go from commenting on everyone but Vompatti yesterday and casting the final, damaging vote in the lynchto suddenly being confused by all of the cases, but hey the one against Vompatti seems best?
I think there is a solid chance that you tried to save one of bullz or nevinera yesterday. I think you're either a recruit or Tyler. I do NOT think you were trying to save a cop, for the record, because INH voted near the end and placed his vote on a third party, which tells me none of his cop buddies were in trouble at all yesterday. So if you were coming to someone's help, they were bad, and so are you.
voting nijuu
SVS, I would agree that this post from Lea seems forced. Her reaction to DH, given his alignment, doesn't ring true to me.S~V~S wrote:And you were in the same thread Day One, when i think he was recruited. I don't think it is all that unreasonable. But nice No U there, kiddoDharmaHelper wrote:In fairness, you're also publicly and openly discouraging other players from allowing me to fight. So yeah, I'm a bit defensive when it comes to your tactics. Am I upset? Not really. I'm just confused why it is you've so aggressively singled me out.. I'm just trying to play the game. I get very bored just voting and waiting for 72 hours at a time.Leamiteo wrote:Um, defensive much? Am I the only one voting in this thread for who fights? Aren't a bunch of other people hyped up about a new city to move around in? Yes. Don't blame me solely for your not getting to fight last night, please and thank you. This is another example of your behavior in being overly eager I was talking about; this is my first time fighting. I'll gladly vote for someone who hasn't had the chance yet on this next night phase. I, like you, don't have an issue with taking turns and letting others fight.DharmaHelper wrote:Are you going to keep cock blocking me?Leamiteo wrote:May the best fighter win, Vomp!
Oooohh, Chicago! I like the city IRL and that sounds like a neat place to check out the fight club there! I think I had better wait to vote to see what happens with the fight? Or if I vote to move and then (God forbid) get seriously injured I would just stay here Host, yes?
No, my reason to move has nothing to do with you in fact. Perhaps I'll go back to New Castle where I started to see what the buzz is over there.
I just thought that since the theory was that Vomps was Tyler and the theory is that DH was recruited early and Vomps didn't meet DH until late, the theory was dead. Not that Vomps was civvie.Long Con wrote:Not sure how to expand. The case on Vompatti I was referring to was laid out here, and that stood out the most to me among suspicions. Then at least three people made a point to say that they're not voting for Vompatti, that they're feeling his Civvieness or something. To see that many people sticking their neck out to defend him made me more uncomfortable to vote for him.Dom wrote:I felt a bit differently about this. Can you expand?Long Con wrote: Anyways, ten minutes left to vote... I was diggin' on the case against Vomps until several people practically vouched for him, so I'm not going to thrust him back into the tie-spotlight so soon.
Dom, you felt differently about that situation, what is your angle on things?
Odds were, if nijuu was saving someone it was either bullz or nevin, but how to tell which one? Obviously it's moot now, but it made more sense for me to vote for the player who was being suspicious and seemed to have saved someone than to try to guess which person was being saved when I may not even be right, which obv I wasn't.unfurl wrote: Timmer
I have few question about your case about nijuu, the underline part
You said that you thought she was trying to save bullz or nevinera
so why not vote for one of the people she was trying to aparently to save? as we know nijuu was civvie
so what are you thoughs on bullz or nevinera? do you still think they were being saved?
what is your thought of a lot people following your vote two days in a row?
day 5 several people voted for vompatti cause you made a case, and day 6 you also made a case, and a lot people followed your vote
who are you looking for this day?
Has anyone heard a peep from MR? He's usually really active, and pretty insightful imo.juliets wrote:i just looked at the post count because I could not remember if metalmarsh had said anything and discovered boogs has only posted once in this thread. Boogs, where are you? Why are you not joining in discussions? You are not normally quiet. There are several others who are not joining us too - DP 2.0 for one. Take a look at the list yourselves and see who we need to encourage.
It wasn't the first time, it was brought up before.juliets wrote:Lea, there is no bandwagon. At this point there is SVS saying she is suspicious of you and me saying there was a conversation with you and DH that I thought was odd and I will probably take a look at your posts. You sound more defensive than this amount of activity calls for. Is there something I'm missing?
Well you're wrong, hate to break it to you. But hey, if I can't dissuade you, keep pursuing a dead-end road for all I care, I don't have anything more to say other than I'm looking to lynch Tyler.S~V~S wrote:And you were in the same thread Day One, when i think he was recruited. I don't think it is all that unreasonable. But nice No U there, kiddo
Yes, THANK YOU.Long Con wrote:She didn't claim that a bandwagon was forming, she claimed that S~V~S and others were trying to form one. I don't know Lea too well, but if she has played a lot of Mafia, then she probably has good enough instincts to see where the wind is blowing. As soon as it sticks that she is connected to DH, then she's as good as lynched. THEN the bandwagons would circle up.birdwithteeth11 wrote:For someone who is trying to "clear association with him", this sounds a bit defensive and overly emotional. And what bandwagon? I don't think you've been in severe danger of getting lynched yet, so I don't see how you can claim that a bandwagon is forming against you.Leamiteo wrote:It was not an effort to clear association with him, it was stating that I am not connected with him. Different. He was bad and trying to draw attention from himself to me. The end. You continuing to point to this exchange which was simply me trying to diffuse a miffed baddie being called out for being bad makes meS~V~S wrote:Oh God I almost forgot
I am not seeing the cases here other than as related to proximity. I am voting Lea again as not only was she in the right place at the right time, but that whole exchange she had with DH felt off to me, and now she I's apparently using it to clear her from association with him.you and all those who join this silly bandwagon you keep trying to form.
And in a quick read of my own post here, I can see that S~V~S said Lea is "apparently using it to clear her from association with him", THEN Lea said "It was not an effort to clear association with him"... BWT, you then started in with 'For someone who is trying to "clear association with him", this sounds a bit defensive and overly emotional.'... as if you are quoting lea with the "clear association" thing... and yet you quoted her oppositely. See what I'm saying?
Just bringing that up because I'm sure it would frustrated Lea to be misquoted in that way, then she'd have to correct you, and then someone would say "Look how defensive she is, she can't give it up!"... and if we're going to lynch someone, I'd rather have it be for real things, not drummed-up meta-defensiveness over lazy quoting.
I would add MR to the list JC. He was injured and not able to post/vote for the first cycle that we were all merged (Sorry MR. I didn't know my pillow was that effective.juliets wrote:i just looked at the post count because I could not remember if metalmarsh had said anything and discovered boogs has only posted once in this thread. Boogs, where are you? Why are you not joining in discussions? You are not normally quiet. There are several others who are not joining us too - DP 2.0 for one. Take a look at the list yourselves and see who we need to encourage.
Epignosis wrote:Bitch, my identity is my identity theft protection!
yes, you're right, where are you Mr. R? We need your insights.bea wrote:I would add MR to the list JC. He was injured and not able to post/vote for the first cycle that we were all merged (Sorry MR. I didn't know my pillow was that effective.juliets wrote:i just looked at the post count because I could not remember if metalmarsh had said anything and discovered boogs has only posted once in this thread. Boogs, where are you? Why are you not joining in discussions? You are not normally quiet. There are several others who are not joining us too - DP 2.0 for one. Take a look at the list yourselves and see who we need to encourage.) but I don't think he's posted once since that restriction was lifted.
linki - I guess rusti beat me to it.
Epignosis wrote:If llama is good, it means we exist in a universe in which multitasking llama can call out the first of two mafia while simultaneously calling out two civilians.
I don't want to live in that universe.
I agree with this 100 percent.thellama73 wrote:How is it Day 7 and I still feel like I have nothing to go on? Anyone? Bueller?
Epignosis wrote:Bitch, my identity is my identity theft protection!