This post bothers me; it's not saying anything other than "look at me, I'm great!"farside22 wrote:I think I was the first person on day one to lay any case against Holy at all.Akonas wrote:FoS: Holy. Looking back, I don't like her; she doesn't seem to be saying much of late.
I don't see the fact that farside didn't notice has on her own to be scummy, though I do find it interesting that she and Elias are going at each other the way they are.
You said I didn't say anything on my own about how scummy Holy was and I stated I thought I was the first to bring it up. Now you are saying I'm making it look like I'm great? You are making less sense at this point.Akonas wrote:(ah, I see Gorgon already took care of it for me)This post bothers me; it's not saying anything other than "look at me, I'm great!"farside22 wrote:I think I was the first person on day one to lay any case against Holy at all.Akonas wrote:FoS: Holy. Looking back, I don't like her; she doesn't seem to be saying much of late.
I don't see the fact that farside didn't notice has on her own to be scummy, though I do find it interesting that she and Elias are going at each other the way they are.
The argument between Farside and Elias really bothers me. There seems to be a definite lack of real content, and I think that this is contributing because there's not much to say when you're not saying much.
Where's Shanba?
Mostly because you then responded to holy's vote with a request for reasoning without giving any of your own.Elias_the_thief wrote:I was just gauging his response to it...i dont get why everyone is so bothered by it.
What changed? I'm assuming it's "I am not very suspicious of Akonas. The case on him sucked yesterday, and his full support of the Hasdgfas wagon only reinforces his townness. "Elias_the_thief, Jan 18, Day 1 wrote:the case against Akonas seems kind of silly and exaggerated. But its enough to make him unworthy of immunity.
This is your only justification for voting me, it seems.Holy wrote:Okay Rigel, I guess I'll downgrade my suspicion towards you because I can accept your explanation about it I guess.
About Akonas, I'm thinking what he said about more than 1 scum-group, I speculate about an SK, I don't know if an SK interpreted as group by him, but if he's an SK, we can avoid 2 deaths tonight. So, I'm thinking about Akonas lynch more than hasdgfas lynch right now based on that.
QuickBen has been replaced by Mgm. Everyone else in the game has posted fairly recently.Akonas wrote: We still need to hear more from more people, especially QuickBen.
Mod:A round of prods, please?
...what? I was only arguing with farside to gain info. First, thats not an action that really needs justification, second I gave the justification in that I need info and suspect a link. What holy did was place a vote for immunity without explaining. How are those the least bit comparable?Akonas wrote:Mostly because you then responded to holy's vote with a request for reasoning without giving any of your own.Elias_the_thief wrote:I was just gauging his response to it...i dont get why everyone is so bothered by it.
It was your support of the hasd wagon, and after the wagon I looked back and reevaluated the case and found it more dumb than before.Akonas wrote:What changed? I'm assuming it's "I am not very suspicious of Akonas. The case on him sucked yesterday, and his full support of the Hasdgfas wagon only reinforces his townness.Elias_the_thief, Jan 18, Day 1 wrote:the case against Akonas seems kind of silly and exaggerated. But its enough to make him unworthy of immunity.
k.Akonas wrote: Elias voted for hasdgfas "on the basis of the NK of SJ", and didn't support himself all that well at the beginning, which I'm assuming is because he just came in. Just mentioning.
Lol.Gorgon wrote:Where's your own reasoning for your immunity vote?Elias_the_thief wrote:reasoning?Holy wrote:Immunity: farside22.
Yep, an SK probability. The case which I drop today. And honestly, hasdgfas' case yesterday was likely question from scum, but you won my attention more based from your speculation about more than 1 scum-group.Akonas wrote:This is your only justification for voting me, it seems.Holy wrote:Okay Rigel, I guess I'll downgrade my suspicion towards you because I can accept your explanation about it I guess.
About Akonas, I'm thinking what he said about more than 1 scum-group, I speculate about an SK, I don't know if an SK interpreted as group by him, but if he's an SK, we can avoid 2 deaths tonight. So, I'm thinking about Akonas lynch more than hasdgfas lynch right now based on that.
Tell me where you see he made a good case and not a half ass attempt at a case and I might believe you were right. As it stands you are second on my list for pushing this when it seems only I am listening. Gordon make a WIFOM comment and you go all over anyone who seems to defend me.Elias_the_thief wrote:good omgus farside. if hes making a case against you then OBVIOUSLY hes scum. To me the immunity given by holy seems more like a desperate attempt to save a scumbuddys ass, but I wont know that until farside is lynched.
This is a bullshit point. of COURSE you'll think any case he presents is "halfass". Its against you, would you ever call it good? Besides that, there's the fact that that was his first and only post. You're talking about it as if he's been pushing and pushing for your lynch, hes only made ONE POST. And besides that, I thought the points he raised were good, especially when coupled with the possible link I pointed out. You need to learn that mafia has more important factors than who creates a clear cut "case" or who has the most activity. I think considering him your number one after one post, when his predecessor was simply a lurker, is ridiculous, and pretty OMGUS.farside22 wrote: Tell me where you see he made a good case and not a half ass attempt at a case and I might believe you were right.
Huh? I do that. I like to pick out flaws in peoples posts, make them defend them, make sure what theyre saying is genuine. Its how I play the game. When I myself make a mistake I go back and fix it. Everyone was clamoring for my reasoning for the akonas immunity, akonas brought up some quotes of mine and I clarified that those were the reasons.farside22 wrote: As it stands you are second on my list for pushing this when it seems only I am listening. Gordon make a WIFOM comment and you go all over anyone who seems to defend me.
Issues that you had with about 4 players who were lurking. The only difference is that QB's replacement placed a vote on you. THus making it OMGUS.farside22 wrote: I already had my issues with QB from the beginning so you need to get your facts straight before calling my vote against him OMGUS.