I'm currently having problems with my internet at home and it might not work all the time.
And me being V/LA "Sometime late December" means limited access from the 25th/26th to new years eve(at latest).
Thor665 wrote:And because last to post is not only pase' it's also totally ignoring the two larger wagons that were already rampaging around and I dislike players who try to slow down the exit of the RVS.
Why'd you feel a need to ask my reasoning on Rhinox and not really have any issues whatsoever with my primary suspicion reasoning on AGar which, though explained, was most assuredly flimsy?
Why do we have talk about every single player at the same time?AGar wrote:I'm with Thor on this one. Questioning the reasoning of one but not the other, suspiciously selective.
Why random vote when we aren't in random anymore?sims5487 wrote:Unvote: Rhinoxbecause I know him IRL and he is SUPER SCUMMY.
Vote: AGar
1: Clear scum overreactionsims5487 wrote:
1: WOAH! Holy smokes, are you for real right now? Firstly, who said I was trying to continue the RVS? Reading into my posts a bit much, aren't you?
2: But then again, what's wrong with continuing RVS? We're only a few days in, my friend, and right now there is little to go on despite the nonsense that CC & SS are throwing around. Additionally, just "knowing" there's a serious conversation going on doesn't mean I should go around voting willy-nilly without thinking things through, no?
^*Scummy self-contradiction*^sims5487 wrote:What? That was hardly an overreaction. I think maybe you're the one overreacting, no?
Carrotcake wrote:Your entire case against powerrox is that he ignored your initial vote against agar, but he questioned the rhinox one.
Carrotcake brings up some important point.Carrotcake wrote:There is no indication of him paying any attention to agar...
Sorry, I've must have missed that one *Removing it ASAP*DemonHybrid wrote:I note Powerrox93's signature and would like to remind everyone of rule #20:
However, feel free to sig anything that does not have to do with game content itself. This is a public notice that I'm changing the rule to note that. I'm okay with his sigged quote, but be careful and be smart with it.20. Don't post elsewhere on mafiascum about this thread, and don't quote anything from the game in your signature until the game is over.
1: After I've got the explanation of Rhinox then there was a large chance of me asking questions about AGar.Thor665 wrote:Were you interested in Rhinox and not AGar or weren't you?1 You're playing a weak semantics game and hiding behind a defense someone else provided you without even having the conviction to say whether or not you were or were not interested in AGar.2
Because I haven't played with Rhinoxx before but I've played with AGar before. I've nothing to on when it comes to Rhinox, but at least some when it comes to AGarThor665 wrote:Why did you want the explanation on Rhinox first - you still haven't clarified this.
Is it actually a good idea of doing so? I've never been in a game with an SK before, that's why I'm asking.Carrotcake wrote:If he is the serial killer, then I suggest we donotkill him. Let the scum burn a nightkill to get rid of him.
Stop reading that post their.Guderian wrote:I was kidding about claiming serial killer
No way I'm making that kind of promise. WhatGuderian wrote:Sims singer and power NEED TO PROMISE that tomorrow, If I am lynched, they will not support ANY lynch on any of the other two. The lynch will look tempting. It will seem to make sense. Its going to seem tempting. But unless there is a cop with a guilty, you ARE NOT to lynch among your little threesome. Day 3 and on, sure, but tomorrow, please dont. If any of you are attacked, you MUST defend each other. Otherwise town will almost definitely lose.
Blood Queen wrote:Post 149, made by Power
Do we really have to deal with 'maybe' arguments ._.?1
Anyway, if this was the case, why didn't you say so with your first reaction to the accusation? 1
1: The answer lies in post 168 (Has everyone forgotten that post?)As for post 154 Why didn't you ask about the AGar 'suspicion' after Thor explained the reason behind the Rhinox 'suspicions'?1 And what's your reason for voting Thor?2
To try to look townier by doing something a townie would never do.About post 287, what do you think were Gud's reasons for claiming SK?
I actually don't know why I did that analysis, it just felt like the right thing for meReckamonic wrote: ...
Considering he's dead, you don't really have to mention if his posts are scummy or townie...
Can you please expand this point a bit?singersigner wrote:NK speculation can be dangerous so early on, though...
Of course we shouldn't use only NK speculation in finding the scumsingersigner wrote:I've seen NK speculation be very beneficial later on, when patterns have formed, and less people are around (i.e. the field is narrowed). It's just difficult to use the same logic after just one night. I'm not saying it can't be used (it might be an addendum to a case); I would just advise against it being a primary source of a case so early in the game.
It would be you (due to CC), AGar and ReckamonicLateralus22 wrote:I would like everyone to give me their top three suspects as I read through the thread.
You say whaaat?Reckamonic wrote:PIIIIIIIIINGPowerrox93 wrote:In order to give the replacements some time to catch up UNVOTE:
Hey mothrax, sorry for not saying this earlier
Hey Lateralus!
Nay, but she isn't confirmed-town either from my eyesLateralus22 wrote:Everyone who hasn't said so:Singer-scum, Yay or Nay?
Lat, but I could accept an AGar lynchMoth/Sera/powerrox:Lat vs Agar for the lynch. Take a pick.
Yeah, I could also wait with claiming at MyLoReckamonic wrote:Okay, nevermind.
After further discussion with dramonic, we've decided that a massclaim today would tell the scum exactly who to kill. It's better to just end the day quickly with a no lynch and send them blindly into the dark.
Vote: No Lynch
1: I said all that was needed to say when I claimed.Seraphim wrote:Powerrox: mind expanding on those jailkeep targets of yours?1 Why were you so driven on using it as a roleblock rather than as a protective role2? Also, why did you find each player scummy1?
I'm confused. Lat claims Watcher that failed N3, and I claimed Jailkeeper targeting Lat N3, so how does that make me scum.singersigner wrote:I'm interested to hearing Powerrox's response to you calling him scum. Hmm...