Mini #553: Over!

GSGold · Post Post #21 (isolation #0) » Fri Feb 01, 2008 3:09 am

It's seven for a majority, not six. (Unless I have some serious brain damage and don't know what you did there.)

I'm not sure what to think on this whole name-claim argument, but I don't think it's a good idea on Day 1.

GSGold · Post Post #39 (isolation #1) » Sat Feb 02, 2008 8:37 am

FOS Matt_S

For seeming to be heavily informed on something nobody else really understands, and not really explaining himself clearly, if at all.

GSGold · Post Post #40 (isolation #2) » Sat Feb 02, 2008 8:41 am

Actually, he did explain himself after comprehending what I read. I'm going to keep my FOS though, as it seems ridiculous to accuse people of not knowing something that you're keeping secret. How can we know what you know?

GSGold · Post Post #44 (isolation #3) » Sat Feb 02, 2008 5:30 pm

What is going on in this thread.

GSGold · Post Post #46 (isolation #4) » Sun Feb 03, 2008 5:03 am

Alright, well, we still have the events before the untheme to think about, if any of it can be salvaged. Most of it was arguments about roleclaiming, which the logic behind no longer works.

Do we go back to random voting, or...?

GSGold · Post Post #64 (isolation #5) » Wed Feb 06, 2008 5:10 pm

vote: Khelvaster

Bandwagon rolling, getting a conversation going, ect.

GSGold · Post Post #85 (isolation #6) » Sat Feb 09, 2008 7:21 am

I would like to first take a moment to giggle at "GoldGS".

Well, I don't know where to start on defenses, as I'm not an experienced player at all. I have to leave in a moment anyway, so I'll start with this and comb through the stuff later tonight.

GS says hear that the mass nameclaim was "no longer logic behind the works." But right after that post, his next is jumping on a bandwagon of Khelvaster. He gives no reasoning other than to move discussion along and to get a bandwagon going. Care to comment on your change of heart GS?

You quoted me wrong, but I'm going to disregard that. It's true that the logic behind the mass nameclaim (Finding people not in the fellowship) wouldn't work anymore simply because we no longer have names. I don't see how that relates to my jumping onto a bandwagon, which was done to try and spur conversation. From what I can tell, it's worked, but not quite in the way I was hoping.

Yeah, this was probably a bad call on my part, I'm not terribly experienced at forums mafia or post analysis and all that. I've simply been doing the first thing that makes sense.

Unvote