Posted: Sat Oct 01, 2016 4:58 am
Why isn't your vote on Scarlet?In post 298, Icy wrote:You really believe that Scarlet is throwing his partner under the bus?In post 296, Accountant wrote:WTF leads you to believe my poe is wrong???
Why isn't your vote on Scarlet?In post 298, Icy wrote:You really believe that Scarlet is throwing his partner under the bus?In post 296, Accountant wrote:WTF leads you to believe my poe is wrong???
Until this silly game is over I will remain a no-vote.In post 300, PenguinPower wrote:Why isn't your vote on Scarlet?In post 298, Icy wrote:You really believe that Scarlet is throwing his partner under the bus?In post 296, Accountant wrote:WTF leads you to believe my poe is wrong???
WHATIn post 302, Icy wrote:Until this silly game is over I will remain a no-vote.In post 300, PenguinPower wrote:Why isn't your vote on Scarlet?In post 298, Icy wrote:You really believe that Scarlet is throwing his partner under the bus?In post 296, Accountant wrote:WTF leads you to believe my poe is wrong???
Why? You strongly think Scarlet is scum, right? Why remain non-comittal...unless you are trying to give yourself flexibility later on.In post 302, Icy wrote:Until this silly game is over I will remain a no-vote.
Ok, I see your point, but I still won't vote for someone I believe to be townIn post 303, Accountant wrote:WHATIn post 302, Icy wrote:Until this silly game is over I will remain a no-vote.In post 300, PenguinPower wrote:Why isn't your vote on Scarlet?In post 298, Icy wrote:You really believe that Scarlet is throwing his partner under the bus?In post 296, Accountant wrote:WTF leads you to believe my poe is wrong???
Ok listen up
a no-vote is a terrible idea
objectively a terrible idea
you're taking away info from town because they can't look at what wagons you're on
and you lose a chance to vote your scumreads, even if they're wrong
there's literally 0 reason for you to no-vote
plz get your head back in the game and stop with this temper tantrum "I don't like accountatn's game so I won't play!" thing
Reason 2: For four days he doged me with you, but never strongly suspected me? Pull his ISO and look for any scum hunting. He knew I was town but wanted the dirt on your hands.In post 194, PenguinPower wrote:I suspect everyone, that's why I'm asking questions. Did I strongly suspect he was scum? Well...did I put my vote down?
Reason 3: Questions Shadow, but now knows it's likely Shadow will sheep him.In post 208, PenguinPower wrote:Why am I your strongest townread?
Reason 4: Votes you, (and puts you at L-1 buy the way...not that anyone cares) but I unvote you before Shadow gets a chance to sheep.In post 238, PenguinPower wrote:Unless they have an IC coaching them pre-game not to worry about it.In post 169, Accountant wrote:Shadowlancer isn't scum. Newbscum doesnt L-1 themselves early on the game.
I don't get why you're buddying me.In post 170, Accountant wrote:This vote confirms PP as town.
Can't trust an IC who is buddying me. You swapped off Icy because it makes you look more towny.In post 187, Accountant wrote:TRUSTIn post 186, PenguinPower wrote:I'm getting a really bad feeling that Accountant may be scum leading the town.
YOU GOTTA HAVE TRUST
(also, why would I bother switching off Icy if I was scum)
In post 223, Accountant wrote:Huntress is the only scum I'm 100% absolutely sure of. Vote her or me, pick your side.I'm actually wanting to do this as the inverse.In post 224, Accountant wrote:If Huntress flips town, I want everyone to lynch me tomorrow.
Agreed, but I can't shake the feeling that you and Shadow are scumbuddies. More confident in you.In post 232, Accountant wrote:To be blunt, I don't think the setup is relevant right now.
VOTE: Accountant
Reason 5: Swaps to Huntress for no apparent reason
In post 265, PenguinPower wrote:Or, if Huntress flips town, because you're scum buddies with Accountant.In post 262, Icy wrote:I dropped my vote on you so Shadow couldn't derphammer you!
Ouch. That hurts my feelings. I don't have a defined play style yet. I've only been here three months.In post 262, Icy wrote:Your support of him seems to hinge on him being so bad of a player that he is incapable of changing his play style from game to game?
Reason 6: Setting me up for lynch day 3 if he has trouble lynching youIn post 305, PenguinPower wrote:Icy is becoming a strong contender for scum #2.
Why is this scum PP? Questioning Shadow isn't scummy - knowing it's likely Shadow will sheep him isn't scummy(because I don't see him manipulatively capitalizing on that knowledge). Why is this something that scum PP would do and not town PP?Reason 3: Questions Shadow, but now knows it's likely Shadow will sheep him.
He did give a reason - he no longer trusts his gut read, and goes with his logic, which says Huntress. As it well should.Reason 5: Swaps to Huntress for no apparent reason
Oh, and I forgot this beautyIn post 247, PenguinPower wrote:UNVOTE:In post 245, Accountant wrote:I'm okay with this. Let me outline the rules of the Accountant Game.I'm actually wanting to do this as the inverse.
The Accountant Game
TWO PLAYERS ENTER
ONE PLAYER LEAVE
IT'S TIME TO RUMBLE
Rules:
- You can only vote eitherAccountantorHuntresstoday. Anyone who doesn't vote one of these two options is either scum or a big weenie nya nya!
- Hint: you should voteHuntress.
- If you do end up votingAccountant, youmustlynchHuntressafterAccountantflips town. Everyone in this game has to look me in the metaphorical eyes and promise me this.Huntresscannot be town together withAccountant, because if that was the case mafia would sheepAccountantand then mislynch me the next day afterHuntressflips town.
- No voters are a big weenie nya nya as well! If you're town, you shouldn't be afraid to stand firm and declare your side!
STOP TEARING MY MIND APART!!!!
I like the game.Want to hear more from Huntress.
What's wrong with that? The "game" makes the most logical sense at this point.In post 310, Icy wrote:Oh, and I forgot this beauty
This one is gold. Yes, I'm coming after you when Huntress flips scum. You've been actively defending her the entire game.
I've been following all game, never leading with my own thoughts, own ideas. Whatever happens today, my vote is about me needing to make a choice on my own behalf. I need to be able to make my own mistakes, not sheep someone else's.In post 291, BlackVoid wrote:I can understand the thought process here to a certain extent but if you feel strongly about Huntress and townread Accountant, you should just be lynching Huntress without the Accountant detour.In post 274, Shadowlancerx wrote:I still read accountant as town, but I don't trust my reads at this point. I don't trust anything at this point. And I have to know if I've been strung along this hard. A lynch on Accountant gives me closure, and it puts me at a point where I feel better about the game, because either
A. He comes up town, I feel that much stronger about Huntress.
B. He comes up scum and we are that much closer to winning.
This really bothers me. Of all the things I have said this game, the one that should shine through is my caution over L-1 and lynches in general. I've pointed out other L-1s, and I have no interest in quickhammers or lynches without a claim and serious consideration/collaboration of everyone. I'll freely admit that I've been sheeping and not trusting myself (and I have every intent not to anymore), but to say you were truly worried about a quickhammer from me? Just no.In post 308, Icy wrote:Reason 4: Votes you, (and puts you at L-1 buy the way...not that anyone cares) but I unvote you before Shadow gets a chance to sheep.
My point of view, what scum wouldn't love a game pitting two townee's against each other.In post 311, Accountant wrote:why is that scum?
You are absolutely right, you have and I commend you for it.In post 315, Shadowlancerx wrote:I've been following all game, never leading with my own thoughts, own ideas. Whatever happens today, my vote is about me needing to make a choice on my own behalf. I need to be able to make my own mistakes, not sheep someone else's.In post 291, BlackVoid wrote:I can understand the thought process here to a certain extent but if you feel strongly about Huntress and townread Accountant, you should just be lynching Huntress without the Accountant detour.In post 274, Shadowlancerx wrote:I still read accountant as town, but I don't trust my reads at this point. I don't trust anything at this point. And I have to know if I've been strung along this hard. A lynch on Accountant gives me closure, and it puts me at a point where I feel better about the game, because either
A. He comes up town, I feel that much stronger about Huntress.
B. He comes up scum and we are that much closer to winning.
At this point, the only thing I feel strongly about is wanted to avoid further manipulation, for good or for ill, and just be me, and maybe make a difference.
This really bothers me.In post 308, Icy wrote:Reason 4: Votes you, (and puts you at L-1 buy the way...not that anyone cares) but I unvote you before Shadow gets a chance to sheep.Of all the things I have said this game, the one that should shine through is my caution over L-1 and lynches in general. I've pointed out other L-1s, and I have no interest in quickhammers or lynches without a claim and serious consideration/collaboration of everyone. I'll freely admit that I've been sheeping and not trusting myself (and I have every intent not to anymore), but to say you were truly worried about a quickhammer from me? Just no.
I love this game too. I caught scum early. What townie wouldn't love a game where they caught scum early?In post 316, Icy wrote:My point of view, what scum wouldn't love a game pitting two townee's against each other.In post 311, Accountant wrote:why is that scum?
I guess I just don't see your case on Huntress. Maybe I just don't want to see it.
Your defense of Penguin also seems solely based on his other games.
I didn't ISO him until this morning, and I wasn't as confident in you as town at that point either (wasn't until my Huntress interaction last night). I still feel stronger about Huntress than I do Icy - but if she's scum, he would be first on my chopping block at this point.In post 314, Accountant wrote:265 and 305 seem to contradict each other
you imply that he's scum buds with me in 265 and scum buds with huntress 305
i understand you were flipping back on forth on who the scum was between me and huntress; does this imply you think icy is confirmed scum and you're trying to find his partner
That list was based on individual reads and doesn't take account of possible partnerships. It's ok to look at connections but we need to lynch scum first then deal with the partner later. That way we don't get distracted. If I was going for someone who could be scum with both of my scum reads I would be voting BlackVoid, but I'd rather vote for someone I've got a definite scumread on first.In post 287, Icy wrote:Huntress what is up with this post. First you say Blackvoid is most likely Accountants partner, then you list Accountant and I as most likely scum?
Care to explain that to me?
Explain please. Why should I stay on a player I was no longer scumreading rather than move to another player who was looking more scummy?In post 291, BlackVoid wrote:But I do think she was too quick to "like" the response from Penguin and move onto Icy, the hot wagon at the time.
I've already explained this. It was not the fact that he attacked me, but theIn post 291, BlackVoid wrote:The sudden switch to Accountant right after he accused her looked like scum pushing back against their accuser despite both pushing on Icy before.
It would only be logical if it was known for a fact that one of us was scum, like if there had been a claim and counter-claim. As it is there is a chance that we're both town so trying to restrict the voting to just the two of us doesn't make sense.In post 312, PenguinPower wrote:What's wrong with that? The "game" makes the most logical sense at this point.
I'm not unhappy with this hammer - quite the opposite - and I like what you said below (above?) about Icy...I am just going to point this out for purposes...you never actually stated Intent to Hammer. You asked for a claim, which one could reasonably infer as intent, but you didn't say it.In post 321, BlackVoid wrote:Also, no claim after intent = hammer. Looks more like you are stalling for time. You also logged on this morning after I gave intent and didn't post here.