jnd94 wrote:Why i defend him? I didn't ever defend him.......give me one quote and I will show you.....
By the by, Chu, just because i sont want to claim doesnt mean Im scum. Im not claiming because its not grounds for a claim. If I feel that you guys have presented a good case against me I will. But right now it is a speculation. My post show dissapointment, but Im not that stupid to be scum and do that....
Claiming is claiming Jnd, you claim to benifit the town, not because of the reason. I would wait for a few votes more votes to claim, but the fact that you wouldn't claim because of the logic presented is bad. If you're in trouble of being lynched info is needed no matter whether you think the logic in the case is good or bad.
Vote: Mandy
Eddie35: hi everyone
Serbia: YOU IDIOT! What is THAT supposed to be? Are you even TRYING to play this game?! Kill the idiot NOW please!
Skoffin wrote: So um.. er... I'll be honest, I don't know what the f*ck to do from here. Goddamnit chu.
Annnnnyway, I guess I am a bit more sympathetic to the Iliad case. His case appears weak to me because I have seem him do the same thing with his votes, where he waits untill unvoting, in other games (Heh, I do the same thing). And poor Illy is too trusting, (metagame tiem) in Wrongturn he was town, I was mafia, he 100% believed me and even sacrificed himself to spare me. His style of play here seems strikingly familiar to that. And I guess I am a bit more understanding as I am in the same timezone, so I know he is telling the truth about the bulk of the Clive lynch happened during latenight/early morning our time.
Annnnyway, I don't trust Iliad, but I don't find him muchmore scummy then the rest of ya really.
Our of the two of them, I prefer the Jnd route myself. Though I think his case isn't much better.
And this is where someone says "Well Skoffin, make your own case then!" Boo! I'm on it, such a shame though. I was going to make a case against scumarining Mando, but the bastard had to come in and request replacement and ruin the whole thing.
Oh, and for the record, I am going to limit posting for the next day or two (I will still be on) unless it's necessary. My keypad is broken, so untill I get it fixed I have to copypaste some letters. Such as 'T'. As you can imagine, it is very frustrating...
Everything confuses and enrages me! Raaaargh Join Discord groupfor multiplayer gaming and general nonsense.
Iliad wrote:Where did I shift attention from clive?
Iliad wrote:hey cool we have leads.
I suggest militant. Clive has had computer problems, militant has been just playing rt. So has clive but at lteast he had problems before
unvote vote militant
Iliad wrote:Where did I shift attention from clive?
Iliad wrote:hey cool we have leads.
I suggest militant. Clive has had computer problems, militant has been just playing rt. So has clive but at lteast he had problems before
unvote vote militant
And at that point that was perfectly fine logic. I had the choice of clive or mil and one had actual explanation unlike the other.
Iliad wrote:Where did I shift attention from clive?
Iliad wrote:hey cool we have leads.
I suggest militant. Clive has had computer problems, militant has been just playing rt. So has clive but at lteast he had problems before
unvote vote militant
And at that point that was perfectly fine logic. I had the choice of clive or mil and one had actual explanation unlike the other.
Nagerous said Clive was also playing rt.
Anyhow,
Iliad wrote:I usually do not unvote. If there is a wagon adn the person claims I usually keep my vote on him if someone has already unvoted and then switch my vote when there is a better candidate.
I checked Wrong Turn mafia. Day 1, you random voted ExplainThis. A bandwagon formed and put ET on L-1. He claimed. You didn't unvote. That's pretty not completely the same as what happened here (nobody else unvoted ET either, leaving him at L-1), but I suppose it's close enough. However, 1 game doesn't make a meta. I'll need to see another example before I'm convinced.
Sierra_Leon wrote:
/quote]
And at that point that was perfectly fine logic. I had the choice of clive or mil and one had actual explanation unlike the other.
Nagerous said Clive was also playing rt.
Anyhow,
Iliad wrote:I usually do not unvote. If there is a wagon adn the person claims I usually keep my vote on him if someone has already unvoted and then switch my vote when there is a better candidate.
I checked Wrong Turn mafia. Day 1, you random voted ExplainThis. A bandwagon formed and put ET on L-1. He claimed. You didn't unvote. That's pretty not completely the same as what happened here (nobody else unvoted ET either, leaving him at L-1), but I suppose it's close enough. However, 1 game doesn't make a meta. I'll need to see another example before I'm convinced.
I can't really show you another game since I can't remember this happening in a game anytime recent.
Yeah I chose mil at first over clive because clive had an actual excuse for submarining unlike mil. If I wasn't asleep in Oz when the whole clive thing happened I would of switched my vote to clive.
Iliad wrote:If I wasn't asleep in Oz when the whole clive thing happened I would of switched my vote to clive.
How does that even matter? Especially scum would be eager to get on the clive wagon after he practically confessed guilt. You keep saying you would've voted Clive after his claim, but that's irrelevant really. What's important is where your vote was *before* that happened.
jnd94 wrote:Why i defend him? I didn't ever defend him.......give me one quote and I will show you.....
WTF? ML had just posted the quotes incriminating you... Bury your head in the sand as defense much? I also find bad the WIFOMS "I would be more subtle" etc that some people *cough*nag*cough* seem to buy, ML has a point there you can't really know. My guts tell me it was a honest reaction, but either way fact is the rest looks bad too.
Else I agree with the chu, to me that could make yet another slipup in fact, caused by shitting in his pants on the perspective of claiming. I stand to my point for Illy, which doesn't make him innocent of course but definitely not as solid...
Anarkistsdream wrote:If you guys can't tell that Doom is being forced to post this drivel, you are fools...
I'm tempted to vote jnd after he refused to claim. Also cena after that post. But it's staying on Iliad for poor reasoning in avoiding Clive in the first place too.
firth4eva wrote:I'm tempted to vote jnd after he refused to claim. Also cena after that post. But it's staying on Iliad for poor reasoning in avoiding Clive in the first place too.
cena, please read back more carefully. Iliad posted something very scummy after militant claimed and didn't unvote. So he was online at that time. I already said in my previous post that it doesn't really matter he wasn't there when Clive was lynched, what matters is that he kept hoping for mili to take the fall instead of Clive after militant claimed.
Sierra_Leon wrote:After militant claimed R2D2, Iliad said this:
Iliad wrote:
Sierra_Leon wrote:Does you not unvoting mean you still think we should lynch militant? If so, then why? If not, then who?
me not changing anything means I'm not sure. On one hand the claim looks all right, on the other hand it smells a lot like a safe-claim.
Notice how he didn't unvote, but instead is being really indecisive about how he feels about a militant lynch. It's the kind of post where someone really hopes the person will get lynched (he dropped the bit about a safe-claim hoping others would agree with that and vote militant too), but if that person finally gets lynched you he could still say he had his doubts and blame it all on the people who voted after him.
I think that nagerous makes a good case against ga7, but I like an Iliad lynch better.
Vote Iliad
You seem pretty eager to defend Iliad, cena. That has me thinking you might be his scum-buddy. When looking back to find my own post just now, I ran across this post of yours:
cena-rules wrote:I bet he's jester
Where you were referring to Clive. Lookyhere, isn't that the exact same thing jnd is getting voted for?
sigh. I said that because he claimed not having a win condition and then admitted being scum and voted himself all signs of a jester. I was wrong. I think that everyone has their own decision on a claim. I believed it after a while.
Iliad wrote:cena just copy pasting the pm and then changing one word is not that great. Not that hard to paraphrase.
Does you not unvoting mean you still think we should lynch militant? If so, then why? If not, then who?
me not changing anything means I'm not sure. On one hand the claim looks all right, on the other hand it smells a lot like a safe-claim.
Thanks for bringing this up cena. This is a really scummy post because R2D2 is far from a safe claim. He has a high chance of being in it. Heck, if I were to name the 6 most likely townies he would be on that list.
yes deadline set for 72 hours...plus then some cause i wouldnt be awake at this time ill give u exact time when i know it
but roughly 72 hours...it wont be any less
Sierra_Leon wrote:
Does you not unvoting mean you still think we should lynch militant? If so, then why? If not, then who?
me not changing anything means I'm not sure. On one hand the claim looks all right, on the other hand it smells a lot like a safe-claim.
Thanks for bringing this up cena. This is a really scummy post because R2D2 is far from a safe claim. He has a high chance of being in it. Heck, if I were to name the 6 most likely townies he would be on that list.
That's your opinion. At the time I didn't trust it that much because it seemed rather bland. Just because I did not trust mil, and had a different opinion to you does not mean I was scum
