VOTE: ElderadNachomamma8 wrote:Then vote elderad.
I liked your other plan better Nacho, for the record, and I think Lowell's not trusting a confirmed cop is sketchy at best, unless I missed something in skimming the last few days here.
VOTE: ElderadNachomamma8 wrote:Then vote elderad.
Lowell wrote:I just think the plan as was is dangerous as hell. We could lynch a doc, cop dies overnight, and we lose the innocents AND guilties? Terrible idea.
I agree with this.nacho wrote:I will not reveal any of my innocents. If I get enough innocents where the innocents + me make up a majority, then we win. Now, naturally, if scum knew who my innocents were, they'd be able to make a move to kill them early. But as long as I confirm all of the obvnondoc people I can, I'm pretty sure we'll be fine.
I will not reveal my guilties. Because I'm confirmed as cop, once I get a guilty result on someone, they're scum; we can lynch them whenever we like, so there's no rush there. Which means that I can watch scum interact when I know they're scum already, and do pretty well in discerning their partners. Scum also won't know how many innocents I have, so they won't know how close they are to losing the game.
I don't agree with this.nacho wrote:I would also prefer if you all let me hammer. I'm sure you guys won't be able to take a confirmed innocent of mine up to L-1, but just in case, I'd like to have the last say.
Quickhammer?!nacho, post 1027 wrote:But it seems I have to make my intentions clearer. Elderad is not being lynched today because of some investigation result. We're making an example out of Elderad to show townies and scum alike that quickhammering is the worst possible mistake they can make. He has to die based on principle before anything else, honestly.
I am not prepared to claim at this point.nacho wrote:Elderad, claim in your next post.
Bolded for your convenience! For everyone else, no more votes go on elderad until he claims, okay?
Yeah, I was going to say something about AGar's reaction and how forced it seemed.Glork wrote:Vote: eldarad
Eldarad-AGar connection still noted.
It's also important to stop people like you from quickhammering.elderad wrote:I don't agree with this.
You are a mod-confirmed cop. That gives you a veto over the lynch of confirmed innocents. It doesn't give you a veto over any other lynch, although your opinion will naturally carry more weight as you are a confirmed innocent yourself.
You hammered him before he claimed, and when I specifically told you not to. That's a quickhammer.elderad wrote:Quickhammer?!
Just to be clear, at no point did you oppose a hammer on RC.
You will claim in your next post, or you will be lynched without a claim. Don't try to squirm out of this.elderad wrote:I am not prepared to claim at this point.
Because we have a confirmed cop saying so? I'll post a more in-detail thought process later tonight or tomorrow, busy writing a paper for finals right now.Nocmen wrote:I agree with nacho's statement about the confirmed innocents, but why not claim the guilty results that you get? I don't see why you should hold out on us if you know they are scum. Also, why are you not voting eldarad?
Sub, why are you going after eldarad (besides that nacho said so)? You just switched in, I'd like to see the reasoning and your reads on people.
Hey. Did you just completely ignore our notes of you acting too forced to the eldarad outing?AGar wrote:Not ready to claim?
When does the lynchee get to call the shots?
VOTE: Eldarad
The exchange was this:DH: I don't think I said this yet, glad you're here...I'm not really understanding the eldarad wagon. Nacho said that this is going on, not because of any investigation result, but to prove some kind of point. If the point is Quick hammer=bad, I agree, but not sure how calling for a claim at L-5 is going to make that point. oh well, I'm getting pretty used to being the clueless townie.
You didn't oppose a hammer, you just said that you wanted to hammer yourself.nacho wrote:You hammered him before he claimed, and when I specifically told you not to. That's a quickhammer.
I refer you to my answer in my previous post.nacho wrote:You will claim in your next post, or you will be lynched without a claim. Don't try to squirm out of this.
Nacho didn't ask that no-one hammer. Here's what he said:Xine wrote:Eldarad, I really do want a response to my earlier question, but I'll rephrase it... Nacho asked that nobody hammer. you post, asking that nobody hammer, because you had something to say, that something was "I think RC is scum" and a hammer. why would you ask folks to not hammer, and then not pursue more discussion? should I put you on the clueless townie list with me? (are you scum or stupid?)
I read this as "I'm happy with this lynch, I'll hammer"nacho, post 987 wrote:That's L-1. Let me hammer.