Mini 228 - Smash Brothers - GAME OVER

Someone · Post Post #10 (isolation #0) » Thu Sep 01, 2005 12:31 pm

Vote: SO

Because I can

Someone · Post Post #40 (isolation #1) » Sun Sep 04, 2005 3:45 pm

unvote, vote Iammars

Gut.

Someone · Post Post #70 (isolation #2) » Thu Sep 08, 2005 11:18 am

So, are we going to see a claim?

Someone · Post Post #127 (isolation #3) » Tue Sep 13, 2005 9:13 am

Was lurking, am now here.

At this point, on day one with a claimed plain townee and sigignificant suspicions against him, with a high percentage of roles, it's probably a good idea to lynch him.

I do have some other suspicions, but I don't think it would be wise to push for more claims today, and risk revealing more roles.

I'm also waiting on the "role type" response.

Someone · Post Post #176 (isolation #4) » Thu Sep 22, 2005 8:09 am

I'm here.

Right now, I'm suspicious of inhim and chaos to an extent, but not enough to make a vote. I'm wondering where pbug is as well.

Someone · Post Post #187 (isolation #5) » Sun Sep 25, 2005 3:35 am

K. Doing a re-read. Promise. Don't lynch me.

Someone · Post Post #188 (isolation #6) » Sun Sep 25, 2005 5:49 am

After a re-read, neither bacde nor chaos are likely to be scum. At the start of the day, they looked scummy, but if you read the confrontation between the two, it would be a very gutsy thing for the both of them to do as scum. I just don't see it happening that way if either of them were scum.

Furthermore, both their claims sound legit.

One thing i've noticed is that armlx has also been lurking, but no attention has been called to it. Just an observation...

I'm suspicious of rajrhcpfreak. Imo he's scum with djinn. However, the absence of evidence against him makes me hesitate to vote prematurely.

Someone · Post Post #205 (isolation #7) » Tue Sep 27, 2005 10:05 am

A) I'm waiting for a response from Pbug on the "roll six" thing.

B) Barring a non-response from pbug, there's no point in pressuring him now... There'll be enough pressure on him to supply additional results in the days that follow.

C) I'm not sure why all these claims are coming out...it sure doesn't help our chances very much.

Someone · Post Post #206 (isolation #8) » Tue Sep 27, 2005 10:06 am

Bacde wrote:Playing smart? The town's general concensus is that I am at least not mafia because of my advocation of the lynch yesterday.

I don't necessarily think that's true. We think you're innocent because of your claim, not because of your behaviour.

Someone · Post Post #227 (isolation #9) » Thu Sep 29, 2005 10:56 am

Done.

Imo there's two ways to go from here. We either go bandwagon somebody else that looks suspicious and hope we don't hit the doc, or lynch the most suspicious looking claim.

If we're looking to lynch a claimant than I motion it to be chaos. I'm not throughly convinced of his innocence and his claim is not rock-solid. However, it is a power role.

I'm throughly against a mass claim, as imo we have a doc left (unless anyone wants to try to convince me otherwise.)

As for unclaimed targets...you'll have to wait for me to do another re-read for that info.

Someone · Post Post #243 (isolation #10) » Fri Sep 30, 2005 1:41 pm

Mine isn't a "b" move at all.

Any volunteers to be blocked?

armlx wrote: Note: Isn't it convienient that the 2 most lurky people didn't vote for ID?

Not to justify lurking or anything, but the fact that someone's lurking does make it less likely that they're going to be voting said person.

So, inhim, what about you?