def Posted January 6, 2015 Posted January 6, 2015 You like this don´t you, to be in charge No, I like to see people actually play, rather than show up twice a day and vote. I am just a vanilla townie, and I've managed to help bring down scum. Help, mind you, from other players.
Adam Posted January 6, 2015 Posted January 6, 2015 If anything, Octan members would be all-aboard the bandwagon express, so saying that his vote was to try and deny the fact for a lynch, is silly. You did that on Day One, am I correct? And how else was he supposed to defend himself without risking his reputation? From experience, it's very hard and I don't blame him. And worst of all, since you started that bandwagon, he came up as a Loyalist. Now I'm not going to try and deny the fact I didn't vote for him when I clearly did, but because I believed it was the right choice. You're good, Sinclair, but not that good. You are being a hypocrite by accusing me of these actions when you condoned them on Day One and you didn't follow what you said. Your accusation against Palacios for trying to stop a lynch intrigues me since he never voted at all. So how did he exactly try to prevent a lynch when Calanon, the Day One lynch, was already set to be lynched? You've made some solid points in previous posts, but I'm not sure I can agree with this. Sinclair (Scaevola) provided the same justification for his vote against Jacob (JackJonespaw) as we all did. The same reason that you gave when you voted for him, and the same reason I gave when I singled him out at the end of the first day. Jacob (JackJonespaw) played a quiet, scummy game. You claim that all of your votes have been placed because you "believed it was the right choice." I'm sure Stanley (StickFig) would've told us the same thing had he asked him. I don't know that "the right choice" is a good enough reason. To me, some of your arguments today feel like the pot calling the kettle black. Have I not explained sufficiently over the past few days? I'll repeat myself again (as you're also prone to do) by saying that you're purposefully confusing, forgetful, repetitive, and all around a bit fluffy. You've been talking a lot these past few days, but I'm not really sure you've had much to say. The Bob I remember is the strong-silent type. Who are you and what have you done with the real Bob?
Lady K Posted January 6, 2015 Posted January 6, 2015 Are you complaining? Are you trying to win my vote to be against you? If anything, I thought you where too loud and targeted me, which you did the past days. If you haven't learned anything from the Palacios impeachment, you are quite foolish. I'm not saying that being quiet should go excused, especially on Day Four, but it shouldn't mean they're the scummiest of them all. Again, I would vote for you for acting like a buffoon and a quitter but that might be for another day. Again, you're avoiding my question. Why only target me for bandwagoning in a situation, like you clearly just said, everyone bandwagoned in? I actually wasn't aware that Figurelli was a confirmed scum until this day. That's what I find scummy about you - trying to target me for bandwagoning when other people clearly have, like yourself. I have a question for you though and I want you to give some thinking - If you are an Octan, was it hard to sell out one of your colleagues when he made it clear he was Octan without blatantly saying it? I've gone back and looked at the previous Days again and I must say this response to both people involved feels just downright mean. Name calling and vicious statements regardless of what side people are on is just wrong. What points were you trying to get across here?
Yzalirk Posted January 6, 2015 Posted January 6, 2015 You've made some solid points in previous posts, but I'm not sure I can agree with this. Sinclair (Scaevola) provided the same justification for his vote against Jacob (JackJonespaw) as we all did. The same reason that you gave when you voted for him, and the same reason I gave when I singled him out at the end of the first day. Jacob (JackJonespaw) played a quiet, scummy game. You claim that all of your votes have been placed because you "believed it was the right choice." I'm sure Stanley (StickFig) would've told us the same thing had he asked him. I don't know that "the right choice" is a good enough reason. To me, some of your arguments today feel like the pot calling the kettle black. You've been talking a lot these past few days, but I'm not really sure you've had much to say. The Bob I remember is the strong-silent type. Who are you and what have you done with the real Bob? I suppose but of all people, why go for Palacios over Addie on Day Two despite her continuing her fluff posts? Don't you think Sinclair would have tried to a lynch on Day Two for Addie rather than target Palacios for abstaining on Day One? That's what I find to be a bit odd and questionable. I've gone back and looked at the previous Days again and I must say this response to both people involved feels just downright mean. Name calling and vicious statements regardless of what side people are on is just wrong. What points were you trying to get across here? Really? Of all the time you could have said something you come up with this? I never said he's a fool or a buffoon, I said he was acting like one. Asking for sympathy isn't going to save him, putting up a fight just might. Also, it's really disappointing that you've only adsorbed just that out of all I said. And it's not meant to be taken personally, it's a game. If anyone takes it to heart, I apologize but seriously, it's a game, strong feelings are going to be said.
Lady K Posted January 6, 2015 Posted January 6, 2015 I suppose but of all people, why go for Palacios over Addie on Day Two despite her continuing her fluff posts? Don't you think Sinclair would have tried to a lynch on Day Two for Addie rather than target Palacios for abstaining on Day One? That's what I find to be a bit odd and questionable. Really? Of all the time you could have said something you come up with this? I never said he's a fool or a buffoon, I said he was acting like one. Asking for sympathy isn't going to save him, putting up a fight just might. Also, it's really disappointing that you've only adsorbed just that out of all I said. And it's not meant to be taken personally, it's a game. If anyone takes it to heart, I apologize but seriously, it's a game, strong feelings are going to be said. Nothing disappointing about it. I read what you wrote. Nothing else needed comment. Some of your statements still fall short of reason.
Yzalirk Posted January 6, 2015 Posted January 6, 2015 I guess I'll share some things on you then. Her's what you said on Day One, Well I see tech difficulties are no excuse for lack of posting after two fluffy in character posts. As for my defense, I told the truth about my delays in posting. As for pointing out low post counts, I was merely stating that others besides me had offered very little as well. I only posted two fluffy posts so I don't see what everyone is getting at here. As for offering new information, there is none. It's Day one, there is nothing but finger pointing to go on. I will stand by on my suspicions on Rep Laughlin, who was the first to vote for Rep Nottingham and hasn't said anything else since. Yes we need a lynch day one so I will change my vote if needed. Day two will give us more to go on. I agree, there wasn't an excuse for your fluff posts but you continued that on Day Two, I'll get to that in a second. You supported the fact for a Day One lynch but instead, voted for Brickelodeon and not Calanon. That's a bit odd but you did state your reason for voting against him. Let's continue to what you said on Day Two. Well, this is depressing! Three of our own, how is that even possible? More fluff yet you said it inexcusable yet you continued... There is always very little to contribute on Day 1. I said required fluff and was deemed suspicious for it, rather than say more fluff or restating, I simply kept quiet till I had something worthy to say. As for Day 2, look to the voting pattern. I had suspicions on Rep Laughlin more so than Rep Nottingham so I kept my vote on him. He was the first to vote for Rep Nottingham and then said nothing after. There were others that posted fluff or fewer posts than me, we should see what they have to say. Again, you said it was inexcusable and you expect not to look suspicious for it. Your vote against Bryant is oddly reasoned but makes sense at the same time. He voted due to a hunch, just like what others have done. Did others have to vote against Calanon? No, of course not! But it seems very suspicious that you, the only voter against him, comes up impeached on Night Two. No one else suspected him at the time besides you. On Day Three, there isn't much to say about you but this was a bit interesting, Now either you have said too little or too much? Care to share more or elaborate on this statement for the rest of us? I find this most curious. Also, you find me suspicious yet you vote for someone else? I found you suspicious on Day One, and I voted for you. I should also add that you've found me suspicious on days Two and Three but never voted for me. Day Three can be excused since StickFig got caught pretty badly but you could have easily voted against me on Day Two. There's are just some points I wanted to bring up. Do I find you suspicious? Yes I do, but not at the tippy top of my suspects.
def Posted January 6, 2015 Posted January 6, 2015 Well, in light of the circles some are going in, I'd like to start with some votes. And the Octan is..... Stanley's voting buddy Sinclair. Let's lead Sinclair to prison unanimously! Vote: Scaevola (Sinclair Viola) Sinclair, is there anything you have to say in your defense? Do you want to say you were framed?
def Posted January 7, 2015 Posted January 7, 2015 Also, lets keep looking at others. That's two Octan scumbags down, probably two to go. So we need to find the others!
Scaevola Posted January 7, 2015 Posted January 7, 2015 Well, in light of the circles some are going in, I'd like to start with some votes. And the Octan is..... Stanley's voting buddy Sinclair. Let's lead Sinclair to prison unanimously! Vote: Scaevola (Sinclair Viola) Sinclair, is there anything you have to say in your defense? Do you want to say you were framed? What? Your cop must be an insane one or opposite. I'm Loyal and will turn up as so tomorrow should I be impeached. Then can you interpret this? You dislike the fact I may have bandwagoned yet you condone the fact it should be done? You should remember this, you did say it on Day One. You support a Day One lynch but you didn't vote for Calanon, despite the fact he/she was a Loyalist, and instead voted for Addie, whom only had 4 votes against her that day. You made a claim but you didn't actually support it yourself, not any of the days except for Day Two. You started a bandwagon against Palacios by saying this, If anything, Octan members would be all-aboard the bandwagon express, so saying that his vote was to try and deny the fact for a lynch, is silly. You did that on Day One, am I correct? And how else was he supposed to defend himself without risking his reputation? From experience, it's very hard and I don't blame him. And worst of all, since you started that bandwagon, he came up as a Loyalist. Now I'm not going to try and deny the fact I didn't vote for him when I clearly did, but because I believed it was the right choice. You're good, Sinclair, but not that good. You are being a hypocrite by accusing me of these actions when you condoned them on Day One and you didn't follow what you said. Your accusation against Palacios for trying to stop a lynch intrigues me since he never voted at all. So how did he exactly try to prevent a lynch when Calanon, the Day One lynch, was already set to be lynched? Care to try and counter what I've said here? Firstly, I thought Addie was scummier. Were I not asleep I would've altered my vote. I voted for Palacios because his abstinence could have cost us an impeachment. Would you rather have paranoid and confused Day 1? That's what made it scummy. Also the lynch was not sealed on Nottingham when Palacios announced he would abstain. Palacios acted very scummily, I'd think a scum wouldn't want a Day 1 impeachment so the Loyals wouldn't have more information to go on. Before you all barrage me with votes, I'll say that Stanley and myself acted without coordination. I'm not tethered to the Octan corporation. The investigation result is wrong, therefore I'm inclined to believe the cop is insane or comes up with opposite results.
Adam Posted January 7, 2015 Posted January 7, 2015 Before you all barrage me with votes, I'll say that Stanley and myself acted without coordination. I'm not tethered to the Octan corporation. The investigation result is wrong, therefore I'm inclined to believe the cop is insane or comes up with opposite results. So you're saying that everything the cop has done up until now has been unreliable? I'm going to apply Occam's Razor and say the cop is right on the money. Vote: Scaevola (Sinclair Viola)
mostlytechnic Posted January 7, 2015 Posted January 7, 2015 Yep, why start doubting the cop now? Vote: Scaevola (Sinclair Viola)
Bob Posted January 7, 2015 Posted January 7, 2015 Vote: Sinclair Viola (Scaevola) I see no reason to doubt our Speaker's investigator. If by some miracle Sinclair comes up as loyal tomorrow, then we lynch the Speaker. It's as easy as that. You've been talking a lot these past few days, but I'm not really sure you've had much to say. The Bob I remember is the strong-silent type. Who are you and what have you done with the real Bob? The real Bob? What kind of crazy nonsense are you spouting, Representative Matthews?
Scaevola Posted January 7, 2015 Posted January 7, 2015 So you're saying that everything the cop has done up until now has been unreliable? I'm going to apply Occam's Razor and say the cop is right on the money. Vote: Scaevola (Sinclair Viola) Yep, why start doubting the cop now? Vote: Scaevola (Sinclair Viola) Nails in a loyal coffin. My claim seems unlikely but I urge everyone to ruminate on it carefully and think for yourself.
def Posted January 7, 2015 Posted January 7, 2015 If by some miracle Sinclair comes up as loyal tomorrow, then we lynch the Speaker. It's as easy as that. Now why would you say something silly like that? I spearheaded a lynch on scum yesterday. You would be lynched before me, since you have done nothing to show yourself town.
Lady K Posted January 7, 2015 Posted January 7, 2015 Nails in a loyal coffin. My claim seems unlikely but I urge everyone to ruminate on it carefully and think for yourself. Anything else to say, because this isn't very convincing. Vote: Sinclair Viola (Scaevola)
Piratedave84 Posted January 7, 2015 Posted January 7, 2015 I Vote: Sinclair Viola (Scaevola) because Rep. Dixon said so!
mostlytechnic Posted January 7, 2015 Posted January 7, 2015 I Vote: Sinclair Viola (Scaevola) because Rep. Dixon said so! Hey, at least you're honest :)
MagPiesRUs Posted January 7, 2015 Posted January 7, 2015 What? Your cop must be an insane one or opposite. I'm Loyal and will turn up as so tomorrow should I be impeached. The investigator has presumably already investigated Siegfried and another townie, so it's impossible that they're insane and highly unlikely that they get the opposite result. Vote: Sinclair Viola (Scaevola)
Lego Spy Posted January 7, 2015 Posted January 7, 2015 Nails in a loyal coffin. My claim seems unlikely but I urge everyone to ruminate on it carefully and think for yourself. Well why would Siegfried, an essentially confirmed townie, lie about who is scum? Vote: Sinclair Viola (Scaevola) (OOC: Not getting it wrong this time! )
def Posted January 7, 2015 Posted January 7, 2015 I Vote: Sinclair Viola (Scaevola) because Rep. Dixon said so! Now that sounds like the kind of bitter thinking that Stanley had yesterday. Wanna call us wimps too?
Scaevola Posted January 7, 2015 Posted January 7, 2015 At least I ought to vote for the real scum. Vote: Gerald Hatley (Goliath) Hatley tried to obstruct the lynch on Day 1. He's been nothing but fickle and volatile throughout these sessions, and indeed as mentioned prior has scrupulous worked to endear to the majority. I Vote: Sinclair Viola (Scaevola) because Rep. Dixon said so! Indeed, Dixon has all of you under his thumb. To an excruciating point.
def Posted January 7, 2015 Posted January 7, 2015 Indeed, Dixon has all of you under his thumb. To an excruciating point. Did you vote for Stanley yesterday? Were you complaining about me then? Hmm. Something to think about.
Yzalirk Posted January 7, 2015 Posted January 7, 2015 Sinclair, your reasons are getting weaker each post. You have no proof that I apparently tried to deny a lynching that was clearly going to go through, which you did the same. You had almost no attempt to counter-argue what I said except for repeating yourself. There, I'll... Vote: Scaevola (Sinclair Viola) Because Siegfried was right about Figurelli and caught him in his lie. If you do come up as a Loyalist then the our speaker has a lot of explaining to. But due to his excellent presentation against Figurelli yesterday, I trust what Siegfried says.
Mencot Posted January 7, 2015 Posted January 7, 2015 Lets Vote: Scaevola (Sinclair Viola) Do we really have a watcher, what did he/she do?
badboytje88 Posted January 7, 2015 Posted January 7, 2015 I Vote: Sinclair Viola (Scaevola) Don't mind me, just hopping on the bandwagon.
Recommended Posts