Linkzmax said:
I didn't say I was.. My turnaround and vote were due to your dissenting opinion that NIV candidates should be discussed. That also ties in with why I felt good about Wonk. He expressed the exact viewpoints I held, which to me was the most pro-town strategy. After my vote though you've done far more scummy stuff. I could understand the sentiments you would have for almost dying at my hands, but while you have reason not to trust me, it doesn't explain the antagonist approach. 2) For example, you have still yet to explain your suspicion of radish. When I questioned you about it, you called my frustration palpable. It's not only hypocritcal to point the finger after pulling a 180 yourself and remaining silent about why, but how is it in any way helpful to town to hide your reasoning when questioned on it? |
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=4334191
"All I can say is I've had far more time to read and think things over than I have had to write up posts. If sleep tells me I should pursue prof more then there'll be a novel tomorrow after I'm out of work and finished putting up lights."
Again. I proposed discussing the vote. I even played devil's advocate.
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=4328208
After thinking very hard about the matter, I'm not sure that discussing cop candidates is very beneficial to town.
And I'm leaning toward it being actually detrimental.
Perhaps more discussion on the subject is necessary.
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=4328238
"Perhaps I was unclear.
The last sentence is supposed to read "perhaps we should discuss whether or not to discuss night votes". I'm both against discussing night votes, and slightly for it. I'm for it because it keeps the choice with the majority. I'm against it because that person who we think should be copped will be a death sentence (if they are town). See, mafia will want to kill anyone who is copped, especially on the night it happens, thereby making the investigation useless. This also means that doc will have to choose between the majority agreed player and someone else, which means mafia could have free reign to kill anyone in town.
I think that's a bad scenario. I don't see how it's good for town at all. But, it's not my decision to make and therefore, we should discuss whether we should talk about candidates or not."
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=4328242
"To clarify the "keeping the choice with the majority", take this example:
every townie votes for a different person with no clear majority. The mafia all vote for one person of their choice, making him the investigation, and then killing him.
In this way, the mafia know exactly who will be copped, and kill him, as opposed to doc, who really gains no advantage over any regular game.
So, with discussion, we at least KNOW who has a good chance of being copped, giving the doc an advantage, and making the mafia decide on killing that person or not out of fear of protection and losing the night kill.
That's the benefit, as I see it. However, this advantage is not as clear as it appears. If the mafia simply go after someone else, then it's basically a typical mafia game with no advantage on either side?
The thing we need to discuss is to who would discussion benefit most, and how to swing the benefit into town territory."
2) http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=4330334
"I meant 4.
Plus i looked at the players and came up with this:
Vette saved me, so hes not mafia.
ff went after me too hard and hes usually more cautious as scum.
baal has sided with me on things that are threatening to lynch me.
Spurge seems to genuine
Mg also saved my buttwith his extension though hes my suspect on the fence.
Of those left its moreno you radiah wonfence, but im leañing toward moreno not being scum"
There isn't any real specific reason to like or dislike radish for a lynch. He's kinda vague, and he's corrected things that were said against me. Sometimes I feel good about him, sometimes I don't. Now, I've put forward lynching wonk, and I've gone after you but nobody wants to vote for either. So, I'm moving down my list.
I pointed out your frustration. You don't have anything on me, which is why you ask things like "why the change on radish" in a way that tries to make the simple act of changing one's mind about someone who was already on the fence (or not given a solid defense earlier). It's the same thing you're doing to spurge now. "why didn't you vote such and such", when it's not that suspicious at all that he votes for different people.
In fact, ANYONE who is lying about the NIV is going to be in trouble, because right now we are borderline breaking the rules. If the cop knows that wonk was not the investigation, then at least 2 people in the wonk category are lying, and therefore mafia. Etc. etc. It's meta-gaming and it breaks the rules.
Furthermore about going after spurge right now, it would be stupid for mafia to NOT vote a leading person, and they would most likely be coached on what to do, unless you think the mafia is all noobs? So right now, I don't see any value in your going after spurge.
FYI being helpful to town == explaining every thought process I have. When making a big decision, it is important, though. Like your lack of reason to vote me (and almost lynch me) even after you said you had a good feeling.
My vote on Radish at the end of the day however, was first and foremost to see what you two would do. You disappeared of course. You only cared whether I would be lynched. I saw you both online. Wonk at least, took 19 minutes to acknowledge my offer of lynching someone, though all he did was unvote (actually probably the best thing he could do to get a lynch), saying "I'll be right back". Whether he was spamming someones QT to get in the thread, I dunno.
Now let's have a proper accusation Linkz. Come at me.
