Hello, me neither.Crola wrote:Hi everyone, I'm not random voting, yay!!!!!!
S. (eleventh)
I am aware that roles are random, and that he is last on the list has no bearing at all on whether he is scum or not. But then again, neither does anyMr. Flay wrote:I'm really not best pleased with Sineish's non-random vote, since he's claiming spurious reasoning for it; what difference does the order in which spork signed up have on whether or not he's scum? You do know roles are randomized here, right?
I'm sorry if I missed the reasoning for this, and I'm not saying that he is, but what makes you so sure he is not scum?Commodore Amazing wrote:Oh, and for what it's worth, KingEnigma's not scum.
That's twice now I've been writing a post while you have been postingMr. Flay wrote:I'm still not happy that Sineish has fallen silent...
Would you care to share this insight? I'm currently at a loss for someone to vote for, so any help would be appreciatedMr. Flay, emphasis mine wrote:Revote: Sineish. All of this claiming and speculation distracted me from my initial instinct, and if it pays off now,I've got a good idea who his partner might be(one of them, anyway).
Well, we've only had four characters revealed so far. As for the other characters there could be, I think it's fairly likely that Tyler Durden, Marla, Robert Paulsen and The Narrator are out there, and the other four could include any of about 10 others. Also, trying to decide which of these main characters would be pro-town is tricky, given that a large number of the remaining smaller characters I can think of were part of Project Mayhem. Would it be sensible to assume that our mafia are those in Project Mayhem or not, given the information we already have?Bamboomancer wrote:We've got like 10 guys here that claim to be minor characters, where the hell is Tyler Durden? Marla? Robert Paulsen? The Narrator? That blonde pretty boy
I think you're quibbling over semantics here. Thesp wasn't saying that you said that I looked 'really scummy', he was asking if you 'really' thought I was 'looking scummy'.olio wrote:How about this:Thesp wrote:I'm confused. I quoted your entire post and didn't add anything to it. Where am I putting words into your mouth?Where did I say Sineish really looking scummy to me?Thesp wrote:Sineish is really looking scummy to you for his "non-random random" post?
I could be wrong, so don't rely on this, but unofficially I make it 2 votes each for olio, Thesp, Sineish and d_rouge, and 1 vote each for spork76 and KingEnigma.Commodore Amazing wrote:can we get a vote count?
Well, there seems to be one bandwagon, but it too is moving slowly. I quite honestly expected to be on 4 votes at least by now. Personally I think I got off to a bad start in this game when I tried to be funny with my first post, and I don't think I did too good a job of defending myself.Mr. Flay wrote:The game is going slowly because NO ONE is willing to join a bandwagon.
While he hasn't exactly lurked in this game and I believe his absence to be genuine, I feel like there is a growing trend to back off from lynching people who post that they will be away for a while. This will enevitably lead to this being used as an effective tactic by scum and this is why I would have no problem lynching him in his absence, quite apart from the other points I am making.d_rouge wrote:In 24 hours I'm leaving for a scout camp and I'll be with absolutely no Internet access until August 10th
True, but to go after KingEnigma today really is not the best move, as has already been discussed.d_rouge wrote:we shouldn't exclude the possibility of going after somebody who has already claimed.
Ok, so you had not seen Mr. Flay's explanation of this when you posted, but I don't like the way you contered by accusing me of jumping onto your bandwagon. You didn't even say what you didn't understand about the sentence. By switching my vote to you I fully expected to be put under even closer scrutiny. I did it because I believe in what I wrote (if you're innocent then CA and KE aren't) and I believed it to be thed_rouge wrote:I don't understand this sentence. Why can't I say anything about someone who seems linked to someone else?
Sineish, it seems you're jumping on my bandwagon just to keep the attention off you.
ok then.spork76 wrote:!CLAIM TIME!