Open 752: Donner Party [Game Over]

scum reading · Post Post #1000 (ISO) » Tue Mar 12, 2019 6:07 am

In post 999, DoubtingThomas wrote:
In post 984, Eyes without a face wrote:
In post 972, scum reading wrote:Yup sorry eyes, we’ll have to roast you for a bit
Yeah, roast me bc the Vig only kills Town including my strongest TR. Roast me bc both Vig & Mafia were too smart not to target the "silent one" (which is exactly why I decided to check Chateau. I saw he was never going to get killed). We may have been unlucky by same target kills, but it makes sense if there are always missing kills that the SK must've been hit on one of the 3 nights, so do your best roasting me but I'll make the same choice every fucking time. Town did not deserve to win what with the Vig unvoting my guilty and voicing suspicion towards me still, which us why I second guessed my read on him (as if eating SR of all wasn't reason enough to suspect DT).

I gave 2 guilties in 3 checks. Vig ate 3 townies in 3 nights. Then you want to blame me?
Me eating SR was not suspicious at all if you read my D2.

Me "unvoting" your guilty should show townie suspicion. Why would I do that as scum/sk who can just win if I lynch another cannibal?? That thought doesn't make sense. I don't think you played bad, but you don't blame me for that.

I don’t trust myself UGHHHHHH why does nobody back me up on solid cases, it made me think I was being a dumb player with the shittiest reads given that nobody even tried to vote with me, that’s why I hammered

Dr Worm · Post Post #1001 (ISO) » Tue Mar 12, 2019 6:48 am

TECHRICALLY NOBIDY ATE ME!!

Dr Worm · Post Post #1002 (ISO) » Tue Mar 12, 2019 6:50 am

NOBIDY!!

DoubtingThomas · Post Post #1003 (ISO) » Tue Mar 12, 2019 7:02 am

In post 1000, scum reading wrote:
In post 999, DoubtingThomas wrote:
In post 984, Eyes without a face wrote:
In post 972, scum reading wrote:Yup sorry eyes, we’ll have to roast you for a bit
Yeah, roast me bc the Vig only kills Town including my strongest TR. Roast me bc both Vig & Mafia were too smart not to target the "silent one" (which is exactly why I decided to check Chateau. I saw he was never going to get killed). We may have been unlucky by same target kills, but it makes sense if there are always missing kills that the SK must've been hit on one of the 3 nights, so do your best roasting me but I'll make the same choice every fucking time. Town did not deserve to win what with the Vig unvoting my guilty and voicing suspicion towards me still, which us why I second guessed my read on him (as if eating SR of all wasn't reason enough to suspect DT).

I gave 2 guilties in 3 checks. Vig ate 3 townies in 3 nights. Then you want to blame me?
Me eating SR was not suspicious at all if you read my D2.

Me "unvoting" your guilty should show townie suspicion. Why would I do that as scum/sk who can just win if I lynch another cannibal?? That thought doesn't make sense. I don't think you played bad, but you don't blame me for that.
I don’t trust myself UGHHHHHH why does nobody back me up on solid cases, it made me think I was being a dumb player with the shittiest reads given that nobody even tried to vote with me, that’s why I hammered

Just push your thoughts next time.

Think about it like this -- If you make a case, but you back out of it for whatever reason, it's like saying you, the person who should be most confident about the case, is not confident about it. Then why should others be confident in sheeping you?

It's not that I didn't think your case was good or because I didn't trust you. I just didn't really see your case/understand the flow of it, and then you all of a sudden backed out and I no longer had a real reason to consider your case. It was just unfortunate timing. It's okay to back out of your reads in case it's tunnel, but if you feel really strong about it, you should still preach it whenever you can and try to make others acknowledge it and get their responses too. For me, it was just that I didn't really read it lolmao