NY 173: Knight-Errant 2 - GAME OVER!

[Hopkirk]

45/twisted: "I would also say that I like Turkish Van for town right now. Unless someone can better explain their case to me, I will proceed with"
Please explain this considering they haven't posted anything (of any substance) since you voted them. Also why you voted them in the first place with a belief they were town.

VOTE: Twisted

[Hopkirk]

Are you reading the thread, Hopkirk? Iago voted Turkish Van because he did not like their 33. I disagreed, saying that I actually did like it, and he was fine moving the vote away from them. Plus Bob is a much better vote anyway.

~The Royal Vizier

Neither of you mentioned any reasoning for the initial vote. I’m asking the person who actually made the vote so “it was the other head” is not a valid excuse.

And saying “are you reading the thread” then trying to justify that by saying there’s stuff you’re talking about in the quick topic that you’re presenting as being part of the thread is stupid.

So I’m waiting from a response from the one of you who made a vote.

Greyice is there a justification for your vote there?

[Hopkirk]

I also agree with burn, it sounds town. But I don’t really think that was indicative of alignment. That kind of stuff seems to be something that he has a long standing dislike of so he does believe what he’s saying which nullifies the point that it looks town motivated- it looks genuine because it is genuine but it’s about something which scum or town can easily look genuine in saying.

Beast why? This would mean you view us both as scum so got a case on each of us?

@60 twisted: Because of the vote on someone then the statement in your next post that the person was town with nothing changing.
If one of you thinks he’s town and the other says scum then the presentation that your slot views him as town is out of place.

@66: Could you explain? Is this due to a meta read on ice?

pedit: Holy cow
VOTE: Monkeyman

[Hopkirk]

wow, that last one from hopkirk was a doozy

UNVOTE:
VOTE: hopkirk

Want to explain?

[Hopkirk]

well, for one you're asking for cases on page 3 when beast was pretty clear on what his point was against you
second, your stance on KK makes no sense and tries to kind of parrot what GreyICE said while agreeing with the "KK is town" echochamber (you agree with burn, it sounds town; but..... then again, not?)
third, the monkeyman vote. it's pretty awful

now your turn.

1.) If i'm bussing he thinks we're both scum. If his only reason is "hop's bussing" that's not enough to justify a scum read on either of us. The other parts of his post- he did it... that means nothing, and it looks artifical- last town game i was called robotic, i rather frequently get that kind of stuff.
2.) I do not say he is town or scum, i am explaining the point that makes him, on first look, appear obvious town is something which was not actually indicative of alignment. (I find him null btw)
3.) His posts were pretty awful yeah. It sounds like his mtivation there is to totally halt what's going on and draw away attention from something that was happening there.

Pere want to explain?

[Hopkirk]

And monkey's town reads come from whomever defends him while he tries to bring us back to rvs and stop what's going on now?

[Hopkirk]

for* not from

[Hopkirk]

1.) I said during the post I made the vote- the sudden 360 from voting someone to saying that person was a town read- and a good town read- without any explanation and without the person posting in between.

2.) As I’ve said before “3.) His posts were pretty awful yeah. It sounds like his mtivation there is to totally halt what's going on and draw away attention from something that was happening there.” And “And monkey's town reads come from whomever defends him while he tries to bring us back to rvs and stop what's going on now?” He’s trying to perpetuate unnecessarily rvs in what appears to me to be an attempt to remove attention to something from a partner.

[Hopkirk]

"this should be evident from the way he tried to differentiate between protown and townish in 73"

Yes i'm saying that it's not possible to tell town genuinity from something you actually believe genuinity meaning the tell become null.

[Hopkirk]

And anti-hero want to respond after avoiding it in your last couple of posts?

[Hopkirk]

34- “VOTE: Turkish Van”
Turkish says nothing in between.
45- “I would also say that I like Turkish Van for town right now”
Nothing changed in between. Sounds weird and I may as well use my vote to get an answer.
Suddenly shifting from scum-town read on someone is weird with no explanation (even if it’s a hydra that doesn’t mean they don’t need to give any reasoning for anything).

[Hopkirk]

I don't think i'm oversimplifying anything... and nice selective quoting/ ignoring the main reasons for the vote.

What other parts are townish then? You don't give them then what do you expect.

[Hopkirk]

You're highly defensive. I didn't say which parts I thought were townish because I thought all parts of the quote were townish.

I'm almost ready to change my vote.

FOS: Hopkirk

I believe you mean offensive? I'm attacking other people and the stuff i'm "defending" is the attacks i'm making this, convincing others you are right, is a key part of persuasion

[Hopkirk]

Hopkirk is very polarizing... though it's a good thing we have a town majority.

Again anti-hero want to respond?

[Hopkirk]

notice how you're immediately choosing to cast what hopkirk is doing in the scummiest light without considering that maybe you don't know what the hell he's talking about

You know in 80 you said "your turn".
Then in 84 right after that i responded.
Then you ignored the response?
If you indirectly and directly ask for a response then there is something wrong when you ignore said response.

[Hopkirk]

So no response to what i'm saying? If you simply say it's wrong then the only thing there is your opinion rather than solid logic backing- which i have. when it comes down to logic vs someone saying "nah i don't think i even need to bother refuting the logic" then logic wins.

[Hopkirk]

120: Twisted answer? If you’re making a request idk what you mean. Also everything I said I’d said before.

121: Please don’t joke, stuff like that sounds like you don’t have a serious answer. This isn’t a game.

124: Not my logic at all.

[Hopkirk]

He sounded as though he aimed to stop/change the current conversation by bringing the gamestate back to an earlier phase.

[Hopkirk]

how about when peregrine did it here: http://forum.mafiascum.net/viewtopic.ph ... 7#p5791787

Those sounded different. The length of monkey- bringing lots of old stuff up- and the fact it was monk's first post but not pere's make not only the content but the context different.

[Hopkirk]

1.) That's all beast said.
3.) That's not all he did.
And the excuse for most of it is "I'm a hydra"... yeah i don't like hydras.

Beast:
I generally try and pick up on little things at the start- get out of rvs- the bigger reasons come later. Who ever has a great reason to be lynching around p3/4?
My posts are genuine so there's nothing i can argue here.
I will get a link in a minute.

[Hopkirk]

I do not have time to look for past games tonight actually as i don't remember who said it.

[Hopkirk]

Hopkirk, you weren't even in RVS. You just came in throwing around a vote for bad reasons. Then after you had to reply you made yourself look worse not better. When are the bigger reasons going to come? You tried to start a wagon on someone and had nothing behind it. You are throwing stuff out and hoping it sticks. What is your opinion on me exactly?

1.)At this stage of the game those reasons seem enough for preliminary voting... nothing better means you use your vote for little things and see how stuff develops.
2.) Yeah that helps develop the gamestate/get reads. If you don't pick up on little things and question people about them you're not going to get reads.
3.) Leaning bad but that's possibly because pretty much all you've said is about me and is wrong.

“The first game was like half filled by players from the other site. We have a close knit bond and I feel we all think we can read the others better than most people.”: I don’t think I’ve played with beast or notscience more than once (or twice at the most).

@Twisted: 73 I have clearly explained my logic. 99- we can’t see your quicktopic can we? So why do you expect us to know what's in it?

UNVOTE: Monkey

[Hopkirk]

1.) Which was not present when you attacked me for saying it?

2.) Yes- as a reaction test. Seeing if anyone voting me would unvote when i did then they would be probable partners for monkey.
The initial logic i've already said was not the best-it's good for the stage it was made at-thus the scumread is minor. Why do you think i can't change my votes?

[Hopkirk]

VOTE: Hopkirk

How does it feel like being caught so early in the game? Are you the type to bus?

It's quite funny beast thinks "the poers can read each other better" considering where you two are voting.

@Guzame: If you read it why didn't you say anything game related?

[Hopkirk]

1.) Which was not present when you attacked me for saying it?

2.) Yes- as a reaction test. Seeing if anyone voting me would unvote when i did then they would be

probable partners for monkey

.
The initial logic i've already said was not the best-it's good for the stage it was made at-thus

the scumread is minor

. Why do you think i can't change my votes?

So to further explain myself here, bolded is both massive cognitive dissonance and somewhat contradictory with the attempt to maintain the logic (while unvoting) in previous post. Basically there is just nothing right here. I'll volunteer to eat the sultan's moldy crackers if this is town.

jbomber--liked his early willingness to go against the grain with a Hopkirk town read and his seeming to be happy at knowing someone in the game from his comment to Mala.

Good point, I hadn't looked at it that way.

Also, nice entry post. Stay a while.

trying to be cute and disarming while not really saying anything :3

Dang it, that totally worked on me.

Iago

If the thing i was trying to bait out happened (not just happened but happened right) then it would make them both shoot up to heavy scum.
Not a hard concept to grasp eh?

[Hopkirk]

Monkey/206: This seems to be an example of trying to make his scumreads look stupid (taking something I said as something that someone else said later and implying the second person was the first+only one to say it).

@Twisted: Since i'm not referring to you specifically then why would you get that from it? The only point on you that i've made i have considered moot for a while now so why would you say that?

[Hopkirk]

Well on 1 side skimming posts is scummy, but on the other side honestly admitting that you skimmed them is towny. Therefore you are a null

Why is skimming scummy?
How do you think scum should play?
These are linked btw.

[Hopkirk]

'mkay

unvote
vote: bob

Lots of flipping and putting votes on every wagons seems so opportunistic. It doesn't really seem you care who is lynched just you get a lynch/can sow as much distrust as possible/stir stuff up.

[Hopkirk]

" In post 174, Hopkirk wrote:2.) Yes- as a reaction test. Seeing if anyone voting me would unvote when i did then they would be probable partners for monkey.

"reaction test!" isn't an excuse for everything, sorry to say."

As notscience touched upon- i do not simply not say/do something because it's going to draw suspicion upon me.
If i want to bring into question suspect behavior or make plays to further my reads then i shall do so regardless of how you want to view it.

[Hopkirk]

But would you not think scum would need to read carefully as they would need to fake reasons for votes. They can't really get gut reads (unless multiple scum) so must read more carefully to make their points and make sure they sound town.

Just out of interest: Why did you put "fail spelling" rather than correcting the spelling?

[Hopkirk]

Lots of flipping and putting votes on every wagons seems so opportunistic. It doesn't really seem you care who is lynched just you get a lynch/can sow as much distrust as possible/stir stuff up.

it's called scumhunting and gauging reactions

you should try it some time

I do.
Though people vote me for it.
You voted me for that exact thing.
Though with less flipping and more focusing on several people to get a good idea.

[Hopkirk]

Why are you writing in poetry?

approaching despair
as the town dies around me
breeds sad poetry

[Hopkirk]

Can someone on the hopkirk wagon (I'd prefer one of the later votes) explain why it's a thing? "Bcoz he's scummy" is not an answer.

not on the wagon, but i'll take this one

it's because he bills himself as a "logical" player, but there's a lot of holes in his logic. the last series of posts on my bob vote is a prime example; there's an assumption that there's only one way to play as town and that vote hopping is a scumtell.


other than kat's vote, i don't have an issue with the composition of the hopkirk wagon. i'm a lot more wary of the white-knights.
^notty, what are you thinking re: what i said last line

I believe what I said was I throw stuff around at the start and see what works.

@Burn: Want to explain how my case was any worse than other around rvs stage votes?

@Twisted 309: The vote was not doing anything effective. My reaction test failed as I was forced to explain it. Why are people scum-reading hop is a better question which I have seen no good response to.

[Hopkirk]

"Read our posts???"

I see you missed where i said "good" reason.

[Hopkirk]

@Burn: Want to explain how my case was any worse than other around rvs stage votes?

Because they didnt have cases for their votes or at least didnt really believe in the cases if they did make one. I guess basically all the others were half assed accusations that more often then not were a joke but yours was one of the first that wasnt like this and it was just so....bad. I mean It was pretty clear what he was doing. He pulled a name out of a hat like the rest of the people that voted, probably without fully reading, and then felt like Turkish was town so he took his vote off. Nothing there is scummy or even expected differently from a townie.

In fact Twisted continues to look more and more town with every post they make. They are my strongest town read at the moment. Just all around good content and town play coming from them.

Post 332 Rubs me the wrong way. Why do you not do towncases? Part of figuring out who is scum, or at least a huge help towards doing that, is deducing who is town. Someone is asking you why you think someone is town and you are refusing to. Why are choosing NOT to be helpful?

Things like claiming that one vote was a reaction test does seem to come from a town mindset of wanting to incite interaction/reactions, even if the execution is shoddy. What I'm having trouble deciding is whether this is genuine or scum covering for a bizarre play.

For what its worth everytime I have done something that stupid as scum that early in the game, I always say it was a reaction test.

Ok firstly you say minor logic>no logic why?
Secondly if he viewed the person as town he shouldn't have voted them in the first place-nothing could have happened

visably[/b] to change his opinion.
The unvote was to test reactions.

[Hopkirk]

So the vote was totally unjustified (for p3) why?

[Hopkirk]

Guzame could just be some inactive fellow so giving them your top scumread, rather than waiting to see what they do next, seems out of place.
I realized i am not actually voting.
VOTE: Beast

[Hopkirk]

Guzame could just be some inactive fellow so giving them your top scumread, rather than waiting to see what they do next, seems out of place.
I realized i am not actually voting.
VOTE: Beast

He says that he read through 8+ pages of arguing and posts and he does not have 1 scum read? That made me very suspicious and I'm surprised it didn't make you.

I think i marked it as suspicious earlier in the thread but wanted to see how he followed it up in his next post.

[Hopkirk]

Hey katriana you know how you haven't mentioned bop other than talking about his avatar- why the vote there?

[Hopkirk]

I don’t like any of beast’s early posts as the logic is dreadful.
167 is an pretty false statement he’s making to try and get an easier lynch.
I changed my mind about the earlier stuff after viewing it again with less bias. It does look bad.

I dislike the way mafiassk only made 3 posts- with nothing but votes- then his last was to hop on a big wagon.

Bob does look bad.

@Mnumonic: You say several times I voted/unvoted with no explanation. Are you saying this because you didn’t read the later explanations or because you disliked them?

Vote Count 1.19

Bicephalous Bob (9) - PeregrineV, Antihero, Lords of the Unreal, Twisted Advice, notscience, MafiaSSK, mnemonicdevice, Katarina LeBlanc, jbomber732

jbomber732 (2) - burn_209, beastcharizard
beastcharizard (1) - Hopkirk
Katarina LeBlanc (1) - Turkish Van
Hopkirk (1) - MonkeyMan576
GreyICE (1) - Kublai Khan
PeregrineV (1) - Bicephalous Bob
Kublai Khan (1) - GreyICE

Not Voting (1) - Metal Sonic

18 alive, 10 to lynch. Deadline is set for 3 weeks from now, on April 21st, 2014 at 6:00 p.m., PST.

Countdown:
(expired on 2014-04-21 18:00:00)

[Hopkirk]

So a real reason instead of dodging the q?

The apologizing for who your predecessors actions i agree is very scummy, i missed that.

[Hopkirk]

Well since I did majorly scumread guzame, I guess you're right and I should'nt give him a fair chance. Plus bob makes me laugh especially with his horrible avitars, so I'll keep him around.

VOTE: MNEUIMNIC

What is this...

Vote Count 1.20

Bicephalous Bob (7) - PeregrineV, Antihero, Lords of the Unreal, Twisted Advice, MafiaSSK, mnemonicdevice, Katarina LeBlanc
mnemonicdevice (3) - GreyICE, Turkish Van, jbomber732
jbomber732 (2) - burn_209, beastcharizard
beastcharizard (1) - Hopkirk
Hopkirk (1) - MonkeyMan576
GreyICE (1) - Kublai Khan
PeregrineV (1) - Bicephalous Bob

Not Voting (2) - Metal Sonic, notscience

18 alive, 10 to lynch. Deadline is set for 3 weeks from now, on April 21st, 2014 at 6:00 p.m., PST.

Countdown:
(expired on 2014-04-21 18:00:00)

[Hopkirk]

Vote mnem

l/1

[Hopkirk]

man hopkirk was really keeping all options open

Ok this vote should go well.
As should the next one.

[Hopkirk]

Vote bob

Lets continue the roll.

[Hopkirk]

Bob, mafia ssk and twisted- these would be nice lynches.

[Hopkirk]

Vote mafia ssk

[Hopkirk]

Explain.

Vote bob

[Hopkirk]

unvote

Twisted: I addressed the points you made day one and I cannot see your rebuttal thus I would request a case if you believe me to be scum.

Twisted appears to be trying to go on an easy wagon (and disassociate with another easy one/kat for town cred) and is now going for bad justification based on associations with scum which he does no more than allude briefly, without quotations, to.

I disliked the way twisted’s votes went yesterday in relation to device. He seemed to stay on the wagon (bob), that most of the scum were on with very little reason then switched to device when it would look the best/when he was obviously being lynched.

In hindsight guzame (who device replaced) makes a nice early pseudo-attack on twisted in the way they attack hydras.

Mafiassk I dislike because of how he voted and no contributions.

@Beast: Interesting how the only vote on device you found opportunistic was mine when I’m a scumread of yours. Want to make some comments about the other later voters on the wagon or admit it’s just confirmation bias perpetuating your read on me? (also I actually had reason to support the wagon early on as I gave)

Also please explain how the posts where I just vote have scum motivation. You say they have no town motivation then go on to use that as a reason I’m scum but why would that come from scum?

Monkey: Why are you switching so much?

[Hopkirk]

VOTE: Twisted

[Hopkirk]

Explain please.

[Hopkirk]

unvote

Twisted: I addressed the points you made day one and I cannot see your rebuttal thus I would request a case if you believe me to be scum.

I'm not looking at it right now but I'd take good odds I don't find this "rebuttal" convincing or sufficient.

Twisted appears to be trying to go on an easy wagon (and disassociate with another easy one/kat for town cred) and is now going for bad justification based on associations with scum which he does no more than allude briefly, without quotations, to.

You could say this about literally anyone.

I disliked the way twisted’s votes went yesterday in relation to device. He seemed to stay on the wagon (bob), that most of the scum were on with very little reason then switched to device when it would look the best/when he was obviously being lynched.

Funny, that's the first we've heard of it. Awfully convenient.

VOTE: Twisted

Any way the wind blows, eh?

Iago

Wait for it.
Not so much as you.
Of course it's the first you've heard of it, this is the first real post i've made today...

[Hopkirk]

Isolation- using the iso next to post number to show all of a player's posts in isolation.

[Hopkirk]

“Unless there was a threat of …a guilty”
Scumclaiming blanc?

Turkish: Can you explain why? Nobody else seems to know why I’m scum.

[Hopkirk]

R u implying a guilty on you would be possible?

[Hopkirk]

Lol @twisted.
Complains my vote (when i expressed suspicion of him first) is an omgus then follows up with an omgus on someone else.

[Hopkirk]

Vote mafiassk

More likely to go through.

[Hopkirk]

Getting bored waiting for ns to be useful.

VOTE: notscience

--PA (and Mala endorses this too...)

What do you think of ssk?

[Hopkirk]

Getting bored waiting for ns to be useful.

VOTE: notscience

--PA (and Mala endorses this too...)

What do you think of ssk?

What does this have to do with anything? I'd rather hear what you think of ns, especially after you voted SSK as 'most likely to go through'

--PA

Because what you said about notscience is the same criticisms you could make of ssk so i'd like to see if one is being consistent.

[Hopkirk]

Burn town.

[Hopkirk]

Monkey

Righto.

[Hopkirk]

Monkey

Righto.

I did this exact same thing as scum in the other game! It is really hard to not purposely forget to type vote when using bold tags.

Actually i do this rather a lot. Look at my previous games to see i screw tags up quite a lot.

Anyone who played the last game should be jumping on the Hopkirk wagon right this second. We can deal with Monkey tomorrow.

Am I the only one who's noticed that Hopkirk's day 2 play has consisted entirely of shameless bandwagon hopping?

VOTE: Hopkirk, deal with it Jafar.

Iago

Between 3-4 people i said i suspected day one.
No point having a vote doing nothing is there?

VOTE: Monkey
L-1
When typing that i wrote VOTE: monkey [/b]

[Hopkirk]

Am I the only one who's noticed that Hopkirk's day 2 play has consisted entirely of shameless bandwagon hopping?

no, it seems that the "logical" playstyle i was given so much shit about on day 1 has given way to a million opportunistic votes (culminating in the magnum opus of the monkey vote)

Notice how every person i've voted today (4) i had as potential scum yesterday.

Monkey

Righto.

I did this exact same thing as scum in the other game! It is really hard to not purposely forget to type vote when using bold tags.

Actually i do this rather a lot. Look at my previous games to see i screw tags up quite a lot.

Anyone who played the last game should be jumping on the Hopkirk wagon right this second. We can deal with Monkey tomorrow.

Am I the only one who's noticed that Hopkirk's day 2 play has consisted entirely of shameless bandwagon hopping?

VOTE: Hopkirk, deal with it Jafar.

Iago

Between 3-4 people i said i suspected day one.
No point having a vote doing nothing is there?

VOTE: Monkey
L-1
When typing that i wrote VOTE: monkey [/b]

Lets test that to see if it makes my text bold.

VOTE: Testing bold [/b]

oh look, it doesn't. You clearly type the open and closing for the bold tags to make it bold.

Don't think you understand what i'm saying. When in the post you just quoted i was making a vote and i'd written what i typed there... then corrected it (obviously).

Want to explain why it's scummy to get tags wrong there anyway?

[Hopkirk]

Don't think you understand what i'm saying. When in the post you just quoted i was making a vote and i'd written what i typed there... then corrected it (obviously).

No, not obviously!

You are now making stuff up. If you had "fixed" it you would have thought to put the vote part of the thing. Or you would have done the closing part of the vote tags. I have never even heard of this mistake before. I would understand the VOTE: VOTE: thing I did last game because I did that in an actual game which gave me the idea. But forgetting the vote part when bolding is a little too farfetch'd.

The obvious meaning when using that is it's talking about the comment i just made. You're now trying to turn poor interpretations into a scumread... and you still haven't said why it would be scummy in the first place.

[Hopkirk]

Don't think you understand what i'm saying. When in the post you just quoted i was making a vote and i'd written what i typed there... then corrected it (obviously).

No, not obviously!

You are now making stuff up. If you had "fixed" it you would have thought to put the vote part of the thing. Or you would have done the closing part of the vote tags. I have never even heard of this mistake before. I would understand the VOTE: VOTE: thing I did last game because I did that in an actual game which gave me the idea. But forgetting the vote part when bolding is a little too farfetch'd.

The obvious meaning when using that is it's talking about the comment i just made. You're now trying to turn poor interpretations into a scumread... and you still haven't said why it would be scummy in the first place.

Trying to turn it into a scum read? I have thought you were scum basically the whole game and I am not even tunneling you imo. Every post of yours just adds to the reasons why I think you are scum.

Reasons why what you did is scummy:
1. I have only seen 1 person do that "mistake" and it was me and I was scum.
2. If you realized you messed up the tags you would have realized you missed the "vote" part of it.

Also, I explained why it was scummy when I first pointed it out and there after. You are obviously reading my posts but I guess you are just skipping over the part where I explain stuff to twist what I am saying.

Look through old games and you'll see me do it. Try chocolate mafia where i recall messing tags up about twice/thrice in a row.
Justifying a scumread rather than creating then.
I still see no logical justification for hop scum.

[Hopkirk]

Couple of example of me and tags: Mini 1521
551
1689

[Hopkirk]

I know Hopkirk is scum. I have said it literally the whole game. And it is a scum tell when they lie about it.

I am now scum because only if i'm scum would i say i'm town. Lmao.

To make beast happy:
I made post 1031 in the morning before leaving for school.
When I returned from school to read through developments I saw your 1041 and in my next post- first post since coming in- (1047) I placed my vote where I thought it was taking monkey to l-1.

Qq @Beast: In 1049 after you misinterpreted what I was saying why did you feel the need to test if something would make your words bold when they didn’t bold it in mine?

Vote Count 2.21

Aj The Epic (5) - Kublai Khan, Katarina LeBlanc, notscience, jbomber732, Hopkirk
Hopkirk (5) - beastcharizard, Antihero, Twisted Advice, Bicephalous Bob, Metal Sonic
Katarina LeBlanc (1) - Lords of the Unreal
jbomber732 (1) - Aj The Epic
Metal Sonic (1) - MafiaSSK

Not Voting (2) - burn_209, Turkish Van

15 alive, 8 to lynch.

Deadline is May 4th, 3:20 PM EST.

Countdown:
(expired on 2014-05-04 15:20:00)

[Hopkirk]

That is a decent tldr.

[Hopkirk]

” You didn't answer my question. How did you catch your mistake?”
“When I returned from school to read through developments I saw your 1041”
Explain how this is not an answer to your question?

“

AJ didn't know who he replaced, must not have isoed his predecessor
Iago

”
He also said that he read the whole thread which means he would know who he replaced since the host clearly said it in the thread which he’s read.

[Hopkirk]

Sure then.

VOTE: Hopkirk

Going from "i will regret it" to a vote with the only change being beast saying "you won't regret it" is weird- please explain.

” You didn't answer my question. How did you catch your mistake?”
“When I returned from school to read through developments I saw your 1041”
Explain how this is not an answer to your question?

How did you discover you typed VOTE: Monkey[/b]?

@Kat

No you won't regret it. My case isn't just about this "mistake" of tags. It is about everything they are doing. They are just voting the top wagon and not even giving reasons. They are asking more questions than they are answering themselves and relying on other people to do all the work for them.

1.) "How did you discover you typed VOTE: Monkey[/b]?": How can you even ask such a

stupid

question? Let me explain this very simply:
-Firstly i vote monkey before leaving- i put

Monkey

And forget to type vote.
-I later saw that was wrong thus corrected my mistake. When making my vote i typed

Monkey

then, before making the post, realized i had mistyped it and changed it to the correct form.

I have expressed this before so either you are not reading my posts, in which case your "case" (which i fail to see) is going to be very poorly made or you are misrepping me on purpose with malicious-scum motivated- intent.

2.) "They are asking more questions than they are answering themselves and relying on other people to do all the work for them.": I have answered every question aimed at me. I have scumreads which i am placing votes on so no i'm not relying on anyone else since i clearly have reads I'm following on.

[Hopkirk]

"When making my vote i typed

Monkey then"
Should read "When making my vote i typed

Monkey [/vote] then"

[Hopkirk]

I wrote whatever i said in the post i said it.
I did not look at that post when typing 1184- i don't memorize exactly everything i type.

Vote twisted

This is not going to be from town. His reasons for voting are too bad.

[Hopkirk]

oh my god Hopkirk shut up about the formatting thing

People ask about it.
People trying to use in as a reason for a scumread-beast.
When i flip town you'll probably just let the mafia convince you to ignore looking at the wagon so i kind of have to do stuff now.
Care to answer my questions?

[Hopkirk]

Ah l1 i think.

Mafia roleblocker.

[Hopkirk]

Hey beast, you know you said you haven't seen me play this way before and like 80% of games you've seen me in i've been scum? Does that a.) Suggest something to you or b.) Draw suspicion on your bad meta reads (which you made a point of saying earlier would be better than most as we've "played a lot")?

[Hopkirk]

And look who hammers there after i claim mr- there's someone opportunistic.

Vt.