-No clue.[/quote]
![Sad :(](./images/smilies/icon_sad.gif)
^^Pretty sure this is a random vote because it doesn't have anything to do with past games. @Awesoma: does it matter to you that some people are placing votes that "aren't random"?
ToastyToast wrote:@Awesoma: I asked you a question
Why can't I make a random vote? Just because no one else is doing it doesn't mean I have to. Its not counterproductive at all to acknowledge something different is being done, but vote in the usual manner.
StrangerCoug wrote:ToastyToast wrote:Why can't I make a random vote? Just because no one else is doing it doesn't mean I have to. Its not counterproductive at all to acknowledge something different is being done, but vote in the usual manner.
Here's a hint: When people are actually contributing, the RVS is over. There were already a few people that were major topics of discussion: Parama and I are the main candidates for revival, while Awesoma is being viewed as scummy. You chose to talk about none of us, so I don't plan on reviving you in the foreseeable future.
Bub Bidderskins wrote:
Anyway, even though I think toasty's prob town, we should not revive him. He'd just be a hinderence. However, if later in the game we need to revive somebody to win, then we can just revive him. He'd be good as a sort of saftey option.
Packbat wrote:VOTE: Bub Bidderskins
Thoughts?
Slaxx wrote:TT wrote:
People I will not revive: bobsnox, SC, wredfar, kewieagle, Awesoma, crypto (many of whom just haven't discussed enough)
ELABORATE.
Also, woot, you just crossed off over 50% of the remaining limbolist. You're either doing some serious scumhunting and townhunting, or you're just calling out random names because you don't care as much about who's revived.
Parama wrote:KIWISCUM IS TOAST. TOASTY TOAST. BLACK, BURNT, DISGUSTING TOAST. BLACK LIKE THE MAFIA.
Packbat wrote:(Incidentally, does anyone else notice how quickly the votes fled from Packbat the moment Parama expressed suspicion? I would not be surprised if ToastyToast, StrangerCoug or both were scum seeking towncred, even if I weren't suspicious of SC already.)
Bub Bidderskins wrote:Packbat wrote:What am I thinking? Finishselecting.
Right now, if either myself or Bub Bidderskins is at L-1 without me, I will hammer, and I will not hammer crypto, StrangerCoug, or kiwieagle. Outside that I'm open to negotiations.
^Ditto
@Everybody: Who do you like better: me or packbat?
SC wrote:The quick revival of Packbat after the vote count takes kiwieagle out of my top town read and makes me question whether clearing him was a good idea. (I know, "decide, damn it," but my mind is screwed enough right now.) The other person to vote Packbat after the count already flipped town.
StrangerCoug wrote:Can I have a top town read besides kiwieagle out of everybody and why?
malpascp wrote:I agree with Bub's revival. But I want to ask something to everyone.
@Everyone: besides Bub, who should we revive today?
kiwieagle wrote:I disliken the point that before bud was scumhunting, now hes stopped just because hes getting revived. As if though he doesnt wanna make a mistake which will stop that revive from happenin.
and I dont trust toasty.
kiwi wrote:When did my reads change?kiwi wrote:
Bud is better today.
With both Parama and SC being possible buddies, bud is better.
Oh and SC I dont mind not getting revived, im not a PR.
kiwi wrote:@slaxx
Im indifferent.
You are the one making the choice, do what you think is correct.
Toasty has played a bit townish.
though wtf was the point of point of post #189.
kiwi wrote:When did you say you were fine with a bud lynch(revive)?
ToastyToast wrote:you know, bub is at the height of my list too atm. There are a lot of people who just don't have enough content.
@bobsnox: your power is swingy and I don't trust it. I also don't understand why you had to reveal it so early
kiwi wrote:WHen did you ask me for my reads?
kiwieagle wrote:Has he said anything that struck you as scum?
kiwieagle wrote:ToastyToast wrote:kiwieagle wrote:Has he said anything that struck you as scum?
Bitching about RVS too much, then calling you scum, pushing it until Slaxx said something about you. Now your his big town read.
Whats scummy about the first though....
StrangerCoug wrote:Awesoma wrote:For the sake of fair voting, I am not going to participate in RVS.
The hell? This is not the RVS; right now Parama's discussing player meta to determine who should be revived. Nobody's vote is random in either the usually applied sense or the true sense.
SC wrote:How do our votes lack "true backing"? I voted Parama because he can be a vicious scumhunter, while my self-vote is admittedly a bit WIFOM-based as I don't see why someone who's been crap as scum lately would offer him- or herself to be revived unless the person is town.
SC wrote:Here's a hint: When people are actually contributing, the RVS is over. There were already a few people that were major topics of discussion: Parama and I are the main candidates for revival, while Awesoma is being viewed as scummy. You chose to talk about none of us, so I don't plan on reviving you in the foreseeable future.
Parama wrote:Hey look who the people trying to discredit the townslip are - the ones I find scummy! WOOP WOOP.
mal" wrote:Did SC, Bub, kiwi and MrTrow all disagree you?
And there was noone you didn't say was scummy disagree you?
Besides, I don't think there are 5 scum in this game.
TT wrote:@mal: he didn't say ALL scum are trying to discredit his point. He said ALL those trying to discredit his point were on his scum-list. Its a big difference.
mal wrote:Is Toasty agreeing with Parama?
malpascp wrote:I meant that Toasty is agreeing with Parama about his own towntell.
TT wrote:And im not covering up my mistake, I feel the slip seems faked, and its not even a slip.
MrTrow wrote:Toasty is trying to throw people together to discredit unrelated cases
MrT wrote:Split the town in 2 groups on this matter and calls for a decision based on the entire group. 'someone who looks scummy agrees with you -> you must be scum'
MrT wrote:reluctant to admit the slip is the entire town-toasty-case (when just a hammer away)
MrTrow wrote:Additional indication for this comes shortly after the bobsnox-claim.
Toasty tosses himself up as a 'safer powerrole' as an alternative, despite the fact a bobsnox-revival was already off the table.
MrTrow wrote:I also have no intention of letting you get away with using the read people have on kiwi/malpascp/bobsnox to discredit my case on you.
MrTrow wrote:If you had genuinely congratulated them you would have been very likely town and presumably slaxx would have resurrected you for it.
MrTrow wrote:There was no need for an alternative, it was an excuse to out yourself to boost your chances for revival, there was no other reason to claim, at least not one based on common knowledge
Packbat wrote:ToastyToast wrote:So why Pom over Bub? I like Bub better today
Is Pom less than 90%?
bobsnox wrote:I have scumvibes from Pom but no one cares so whatevs.
malpascp wrote:Ok, I need to ask you this: what conclusion do you get if everyone claims VT?
MrTrow wrote:if the scum-play here is to 'quickhammer' a tie and win on first-come-first-serve
why didn`t they steal your vote instead (outrunning crypto is a lot easier than outrunning you two)