Oh, RIP. Anyways, that ended relatively fast.
No, you should always have at least some kind of issue with any given lynch unless you're 100% you're lynching scum. Lynching town isn't desirable, even if you get info. Lynching scum>Lynching town+info.Personally, you shouldn't have an issue with it. If I'm scum, you lynch a scum, If I'm town, you get lots of information.
I'm at L-2 at the moment. Acting aggressive was me trying to lynch a scum and get NK'ed or get lynched D1. I'm glad the plan's working.Oh, RIP. Anyways, that ended relatively fast.
Nono, I unvoted right after.Me, SS, scattered, Camo, Jesi, simsands, quaking, Vom, Jabber, TGK
That's 10. Hammer is 11. You're not lynched.
Exactly, so he's not lynched. 10 votes were placed, so the most he got to was L-1, and now he's L-2. He said he was hammered, which was false.Nono, I unvoted right after.
Nono, more discussion time is never a bad thing.We should tag everyone who hasn't voted yet and bug them to end this, I guess.
While it isn't optimal, it could be better then gambling and losing a townie without gaining any extra info.No, you should always have at least some kind of issue with any given lynch unless you're 100% you're lynching scum. Lynching town isn't desirable, even if you get info. Lynching scum>Lynching town+info.
Also, what happened to all that 'I'm town guys' thingy?
I'm bad at math, if you haven't noticed alreadyMe, SS, scattered, Camo, Jesi, simsands, quaking, Vom, Jabber, TGK
That's 10. Hammer is 11. You're not lynched.
Self-targeting is different then self-voting.We should tag everyone who hasn't voted yet and bug them to end this, I guess.
Also, if I'm not wrong, self-targeting is against the rules... so we might need three votes.
Discussion time is never bad, but I don't really see anything new to discuss.Nono, more discussion time is never a bad thing.
No reason to cut it short. Little reason not to, but most townies won't want to take the potential fall from hammering.Discussion time is never bad, but I don't really see anything new to discuss.
Which is why more discussion time is useful. :UDiscussion time is never bad, but I don't really see anything new to discuss.
Here quaking is being highly nitpicking on TFP's wording. Sounds like manipulative scum. While it isn't as extreme as few of his other scummy things, it was noticeable before. I didn't bring it up because I did want to see how TFP reacted, but now that's long past, this is something to bring up.Who told you to vote for someone?
This was not echoing.This is echoing Celever. The case was posted last night while I was sleeping, I had no time to check and read back.
This is proper scummy OMGUS if I have ever seen it. Celever pressures quaking, quaking than tries to link Celever to Jesi. Sounds like an overly-irritated scum if you ask me...Celever and Jesi, now that I've answered this, can you refute the claims of buddying that I bring up?
I like how you say "now". xDCelever, if you want honesty, then do you propose I claim, because I'm being honest with you now. The only other thing I could do is claim at this point.
Celever, what will you do when I flip town?
Now I know why people were saying I was scum when I said this to Celever and Grant, it sounds scummy. But now I've been given a reason to doubt quaking's case because I pulled this same tactic when I was town and about to be lynched....
Sorry I just caught up (I just had to respond to that post since I was doing that in the Ace Attorney game)But what do you think about the main point on quakingpunch?
Sorry I just caught up (I just had to respond to that post since I was doing that in the Ace Attorney game)
Anyways um to be fair I'm super lost on the quaking case. I thought he was scum but after the claim (which could totally still be a safe-claim) and revealing it was his plan to get lynched took me by complete surprise.
I actually want to get lynched at this point.
Reason: