By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
radishhead said:
Wonktonodi said:
radishhead said:
 

Not all of my posts are valuble to discussion - who cares? Picking on 3 people for something so insignificant is a greater threat to the town, in my opinion.


now you seem to be getting rather defensive.

Funny part is had you just said you hadn't read hephs post it would have been very plausible since it was the post right before yours and it hadn't been that long. Instead you defended you post by saying the discussion continued.

You never explained why wanting the flavour discussion to end was suspicious. I clearly said "we shouldn't have looked too far into the flavour", which I assume is the post that is causing the fuss. This post wasn't meant to mean much - it was just me being smug for feeling that the Gork thing was leading nowhere, and it got confirmed by Heph. The post was going to begin "as I suspected", but I didn't think that it would be well recieved x) Why did you want discussion of the flavour to continue?


Your post was as helpful as saying I though someone was scum after the nod confirms it. Not helpful at all. If you really thought it you should have said it while the topic was being discussed.The same applies to the other two as well. Asking for something to stop that has stopped means they know what is going on but don't post until after.

Or aren't paying much attention and just trying to make a safe post.



Around the Network

Wonktonodi said:

Or aren't paying much attention and just trying to make a safe post.


Or had just come back from school and ran into several posts arguing over the most stupid thing ever, and wanted to stop people from continually drowning the topic in useless discussion...



Sig thanks to Saber! :D 

dsister said:
Wonktonodi said:


really what post happened after the first tiem heph clarified that was still talking about it? Let alone after the second.


There were 6 posts in between Heph's and my post

Three of them were mentioning it...

 

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=3989925

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=3989931

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=3989946


The first is just a vote

the second is hat saying trucks was suspicios for being in the discussion not discussing it

the third is prof saying didn't I have this idea 100 posts ago

none are discussing what the flavor means now



radishhead said:
Wonktonodi said:


now you seem to be getting rather defensive.

Funny part is had you just said you hadn't read hephs post it would have been very plausible since it was the post right before yours and it hadn't been that long. Instead you defended you post by saying the discussion continued.

You never explained why wanting the flavour discussion to end was suspicious. I clearly said "we shouldn't have looked too far into the flavour", which I assume is the post that is causing the fuss. This post wasn't meant to mean much - it was just me being smug for feeling that the Gork thing was leading nowhere, and it got confirmed by Heph. The post was going to begin "as I suspected", but I didn't think that it would be well recieved x) Why did you want discussion of the flavour to continue?

Now you're just distorting what was said in order to make Wonk look bad.

This is not about wanting the discussion to go on but wondering why people felt it was necessary to state the obvious after Heph clarified the situation.

FoS radishhead



Signature goes here!

Wonktonodi said:


The first is just a vote

the second is hat saying trucks was suspicios for being in the discussion not discussing it

the third is prof saying didn't I have this idea 100 posts ago

none are discussing what the flavor means now


They are all 3 mentioning "Gork" and "gorky" which is what my post was addressing directly. 

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=3989982

And look, you are bringing it back, yay -___-



Sig thanks to Saber! :D 

Around the Network
dsister said:

Wonktonodi said:

Or aren't paying much attention and just trying to make a safe post.


Or had just come back from school and ran into several posts arguing over the most stupid thing ever, and wanted to stop people from continually drowning the topic in useless discussion...


so in honor of that you make a useless post on a topic that ended?



Wonktonodi said:


so in honor of that you make a useless post on a topic that ended?


yes, a topic that had ended and people were still mentioning...



Sig thanks to Saber! :D 

dsister said:
Wonktonodi said:


The first is just a vote

the second is hat saying trucks was suspicios for being in the discussion not discussing it

the third is prof saying didn't I have this idea 100 posts ago

none are discussing what the flavor means now


They are all 3 mentioning "Gork" and "gorky" which is what my post was addressing directly. 

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=3989982

And look, you are bringing it back, yay -___-


So you just hate the term??  Flavor hater!

although that does clear you partially.. for now



theprof00 said:
radishhead said:

Who on earth suggested you to act scummier!? xO It's important to look innocent in Mafia; it's the main aim of the game, for both alignments.

first of all, radish, a townie should never go out of their way to look town. The more town a player looks, the more likely they are to die. So yes, acting "scummy" is beneficial to townies, specifically power roles.

However, that is not what Baal did. He was not trying to act scummy, he is being scummy and saying it was an act.

I'm convinced enough to throw my vote on this.

ungork

vote: Baalzamon

Also, just to point something out that I have seen mentioned yet, Baal wrote in a post to (Radish?),

"why on earth would you bring up flavor when all it led to was [my own suspicion]".

Is that a mafia complaining about his teammate?

Just going to say that it can be just as important to appear townie as town as it can be to appear scummy. I don't believe there's any reason to say more, as it would just be pointing out what may be considered, but if you strongly disagree then I'll elaborate.

Vote: radishhead
Unvote

I would rather lynch radish for a few posts he's made which I will soon point out, but I have to agree with your take on Baal(claiming the scumminess was an act rather than attempting to act scummy) and I think he is more likely to be lynchable today.

Vote: Baalzamon

More reasoning to follow as well.(I'm quoting posts in backwards chronological order)



Baalzamon said:
Gnizmo said:
Baalzamon said:

I honestly don't even know how people find some of these supposed "slip ups"...I didn't even know what I said was plural until it was blatantly pointed out.


By reading posts very carefully. The "I didn't know it was plural" is a really weak defense. 95% of the time a word that ends in S is plural. If we don't work off these minor slip-ups then the game devolves into "follow the cop" and I really hate that. Nothing worse than having one person play.

Ugh, I didn't mean that after seeing it pointed out, I didn't realize what I said was plural, it's rather obvious that stuff ending in s is plural, I mean that when I originally typed it, I had absolutely no intention of apparently making it a plural word that made others think I apparently have information about ToS.

Baalzamon said:
hatmoza said:

You guys want to lynch Balz or TOS? I'm fine with either.

Or we can lynch you with your supposed power role since you seem to want to rid the town of assets.

I do not buy that you didn't realize it was plural. You are clearly responding to a post that groups you with someone else, and if you were only referring to yourself than you would use "rid the town of an asset." The inclusion of the "s" is not a simple typo. Unless you think we shouldn't ever lynch anyone? Oh maybe that is what you're trying to say:

Baalzamon said:

theprof00 said:

Actually, I put a vote based on his post. Did you not see that? I didn't gork him because I wanted to do that misguided thing of saccing him to gork, I gorked him because I didn't like his claim. I wouldn't just throw someone to the dogs just to sate the would be SK.

I did see that, but whether or not he is actually the asset that he claims he is, I can't in my right mind vote for somebody on day 1 who has the potential to be a huge asset.

First, this is extremely naive. You're pretty much saying you won't vote for anyone because they could be a power role. This also contradicts something you said roughly an hour earlier:

Baalzamon said:
theprof00 said:

haha, if it's basically a vote, it may as well stay. It really makes no difference.

This is normal hat craziness on the first day, with a little suspicious behavior thrown in. I mean, this is the first time that Hat hasn't been like, "your days are numbered, scum". It totally lacks his usual emotion.

I dunno. It's day 1. This is the day for discussion and random voting. If I'm wrong about the emotion thing, then just chalk my vote up to randomness, ya know?

Makes enough sense I guess...I kinda forgot we only have a 48 hour limit too, so votes need to get out rather quickly 

I believe you're scum and you're afraid to get on board with a lynch, because you think you're going to catch heat if it's a mislynch.

 

However, to confirm once again: You are now stating that you don't know TOS's alignment?