Open 91 - Trendy and Subversive C9 - Over, before 656

[armlx]

You attacked Natirasha for his self vote AKA took the bait.

You voted someone who was inactive purposefully in a 7 person game.

---

Vote Count... of DOOM!

Apothecary (2) - BlakAdder, Bulvox

Bulvox (2) - PimHel, armlx
Natirasha (2) - Natirasha, raider8169
raider8169 (1) - Apothecary

With 7 alive, it takes 4 votes to lynch.

[raider8169]

Bulvox, is there a better place for his vote then on you currently?

[armlx]

I suggest everyone who has not done so ever read a 7 player newbie game just to get the feel of the tempo of a 7 player game. Notice how short they usually are.... lets not let that happen.

[Bulvox]

Bulvox, is there a better place for his vote then on you currently?

....none that i can think of. but i still think that it's a bad vote.

[BlakAdder]

It's called the random voting stage for a reason, bulvox.[/b]

[BlakAdder]

That said,

FOS: bulvox for being overly defensive

and

unvote

while I'm at it.

[Natirasha]

I suggest everyone who has not done so ever read a 7 player newbie game just to get the feel of the tempo of a 7 player game. Notice how short they usually are.... lets not let that happen.

I prefer my games shorter.

[armlx]

I prefer my games shorter.

This game will be shorter, but too short = V bad.

FOS BA

for using defensiveness as a scum tell.

[raider8169]

Read threw a few games but didnt find one that was 7 people.

Being defensive is going to happen as no one wants to be lynched. Being overly defensive I think is a scum tell but for most people (including myself) have a hard time telling the difference.

[armlx]

Read threw a few games but didnt find one that was 7 people.

Go to way back when.

And in 7 player games defensiveness at 2 legit votes isn't even remotely over reacting given the chance of QLs.

[BlakAdder]

FOS BA

for using defensiveness as a scum tell.

I wasn't calling defensiveness a scum tell, I was calling being overly defense, (i.e., questioning random votes) a scum tell.

[armlx]

I wasn't calling defensiveness a scum tell, I was calling being overly defense, (i.e., questioning random votes) a scum tell.

Again.....

[BlakAdder]

All I'm saying is that it seemed like you were trying to twist my words around. Simply being defensive, I have no problem with.

[armlx]

All I'm saying is that it seemed like you were trying to twist my words around. Simply being defensive, I have no problem with.

And what separates the two? My vote was clearly not random.

[BlakAdder]

Overly

is clearly the operative word.

[armlx]

Overly is clearly the operative word.

What qualifies overly defensive, especially in this set up? Why is it scummy?

[BlakAdder]

Again, questioning the point of a random vote. I know yours wasn't, but PimHel's still was. I'm going to bed now.

[armlx]

Again, questioning the point of a random vote. I know yours wasn't, but PimHel's still was. I'm going to bed now.

Ok... and thats overly defensive how? He was at the wagon point of this game.

[Bulvox]

It's called the random voting stage for a reason, bulvox.[/b]

armlx's vote was in no way, shape, or form of randomness. he had a clear logical reason behind it. which i respect.

[raider8169]

BlakAdder, you FOSd him for being overly defensive, what were you hoping would come out of that?

[BlakAdder]

All I did was FOS him, it's not like it's a big deal. If I hammered him for being overly defensive, then I can see where you're coming from, but you're all making a mountain out of a molehill.

[armlx]

No, you attacked him for it. It deserves an answer.

[PimHel]

unvote

even though it isn't needed (little miss eh?), but if something happens as there is a FoS from BA I did it just in case.

But BA does overly defensive really deserves a FoS?

[BlakAdder]

I did answer, armlx.

[armlx]

You did not really answer raider. You dismissed the question.