Its a good thing you're town or I would lose my mind.
![Razz :P](./images/smilies/icon_razz.gif)
Early bandwagons = good is a matter of taste and not alignment. It, in fact, can help both sides based on who the wagon IS and what comes from it.
I would think that "I always do it" would be an excuse, as by definition it would be a null tell. Please stop making bad arguments...alma wrote:"I always do it" isn't an excuse. Scummy behavior is scummy. If you are in this game and you are on the town side, your should be trying to make the town win.f13 wrote: @Almaster - Your case was pretty weak. I don't have a lot to add on top of MordyS and Gammagooey, but I can send you to some meta where Archaebob is scum, and another where he is town. In both of these he interspersed content posts with one liners in a very similar manner to which he is doing now, except here there is less content than there normally is.
We don't -need- one, but the wagon on you DID have a lot to do with the text we've had so far. If you remember, you pulled out a "you're scummy gamma cause of research" which then put you in the spotlight. After you got a few votes on you, f13 chimed in saying that you had a case when the consensus is you didn't, and that's when he voted for the wrong person, which spawned a multi-page debate over why he didn't then correct the error. It could be a sign that f13 saw his scumbuddy gaining the early vote lead and panicked to shove it onto anyone else.alma wrote:My point is we don't need a bandwagon to have conversation, which is proven by the fact that there's 9 massive pages of text that have nothing to do with the "wagon" on me.
From yesterday:muffin wrote: Same for me. Was busy most of the day yesterday and probably will be busy until Monday evening. Post later.
muffin wrote: Just checking in to say, as I said earlier, probably won't have time to post until late tonight.
Actually, looking over his posts I want him to answer one more question before I give a stance.archaebob wrote:@ Gammagooey - what's your stance on peanutman?
1) Yes, it is still on Bob. Just his last few posts give me reason to keep it there. For one, he once again votes without explaining, which to me seems quite scummy, given that he can justify his vote later. If Lexprod hadn't questionned him right away, he might have gotten reactions from other people before even explaining his own vote, thereby molding his answer to what the town would want to hear. In addition, I don't like the way he tries to dictate the whole pace of the game and direct us where to focus our attention, who should be the main lynch-candidates, etc. Whether it's de facto indicative of scum, I wouldn't know because I haven't played that many games, but I do notice that he dictates the pace of this game without explicitly sharing any of his own views very often. And I am quite uneasy with that because I get the feeling his has a hidden agenda, only shining light and where it's most advantageous to him.GG-267 wrote: @peanut- You gave a response to you not claiming that the person you were voting for was scum that I find still a little weird, but plausible.
Given recent events, is archaebob still 1)your vote to lynch, and 2)who do you think is the most likely scum?