[Werewolf] Werewolf: Black Death - Daybreak Day 6 - Crypto-flagellants win!
- Thread starter Adaham
- Start date
Users who are viewing this thread
Velpulus
Veteran
I was to resign from the Whoopin fanclub, but then we had a post from Soot.
Soot has been desperate to find a train he can pull to the night, but now we see him on the defencive. It seems so silly, considering how much support one would think Xardob to need to held his head above water. That would be no support.
Lynch Vote: SootShade
Soot has been desperate to find a train he can pull to the night, but now we see him on the defencive. It seems so silly, considering how much support one would think Xardob to need to held his head above water. That would be no support.
Lynch Vote: SootShade
Seff said:
I see. From my experience, "successfully forgettable" players who talk but do not contribute a whole lot tend to live long too because it is a lot harder to make a case against someone who has less to go off of - though it does depend on other factors. Either way, both kinds of players can live long, so I think that is one of the less important factors in making a case (though still a consideration). The reason why I bring it up is because it sounds like a defense for your play - "I think the wolves are going to be the more talkative ones, so don't mind me."
@Velup:
Which Soot post are you talking about? His response to Whoopin's attack on Xardob? And what "train" is this you speak of? The only "real" vote he has placed was on you, and it doesn't seem like he is "desperate" to find a train since he isn't trying to shove you in all of our faces (and he hasn't been jumping onto other "wagons" yet either) - sounds like a bit of an OMGUS. Also, I had a question for you here in case you missed it.
By actually hunting for the scum and trying to get even people like yourself to do the same. And yes, I voted for you in the hopes it might work as an encouragement, but I'm a little dissapointed by the results. As for 'incentive', I'm not certain you have the right word there, mine would be winning the game.Velpulus said:
Velpulus
Veteran
Phonemelter said:
Maybe you give him more credit than I do, but I counted his involvement in the Llandy train. I mean we all want her dead to stop messing with us, it would be the easiest target for a wolf, assuming the day would come to an end.
I responded to Seff's posts not being substantial enough and there you are asking me for a referral. If there's a sentence in context he's made to condemn the village, I'd like to see that and judge that. That's more harsh than I've been with half the village here.
SootShade said:
If you could, please set the record straight. You voted myself to 'encourage' me to find the wolves, or your vote was to lynch a suspected wolf?
Oh ym god this beer is delicious - only had ceral todya so I'll probably be drunk soon. Man, being a lightweight has it's benefits, I think.
Anyways, the recent accusation on Soot by Velup made me want to go back and take a look at a few things from him:
1. Xardob questioned his post about "morale," and when Llandy responded in agrteement wiht Velup, he immeditaely replied with "See how right I was." These is a bit of a morale component in WW, but on Day 1 when things are pretty active? Not really, at least in my view. Maybe later when lurkers start to ruin things (what Llandy suggested), but not now. Point being, one person in agreement doesn't warrant an "I am totally correct" response - it feels like he is trying to dismiss Xardob as quickly as he can.
2. He delayed responding to Orj's question. How much celear can "Are you rushing the night?" be? I can see how he would think the question is rhetiroical, but given his seemingly genuine "we should try and pick up the pace" attitude suggested by the post, it is a legitmate question to answer.
3. the "Go moss!" posts feels out of nowhere, and the "you are overestimating the skill of players" comment without further explanation seems... off? Almsot like a "coaching" attempt.
4. You told Shatari to back off on Llandy because he has "gotten as much out of it as he is going to get", which does make sense, but why not say the same about the quote war Twinkie has been getting into with me, Lep, and (to a lesser extent) Whoopin? - this is less of a suspicion than other things, but I'm just curious
5. Why does Soot's post make you not want to resign from the Whoopin fanclub? Does Soot's attack make you think Whoopin is innocent?
But there is a difference, isn't there? YYou aren't exactly trying to "swing" people your way... I can't actually think of what "your wat" is at the moment. For exmaple, AWdeV (no offense) is one of these players who usually posts, but kind of floats around more than taking "hard" stances and being "active" in the hunt, which makes it hard to make a case against him as a wolf - this is the kind of playe I am referring to. You are rather active, but not super substantial (though I did say you looking at Catholic was a stepi in the right direction).
Eh, I still am a bit suspicious of him - I just thought your reasoning against him was weird. He wasn't very involved with the Llandy trin though, no? His vote on her was a joke vote, before people got on her case about being all weird and ****. He wasn't active as far as I remember in trying to attack her, minus his mini-LoS post on her. Saying "we all want her dead" is an incorrect assumption though - I'm not super worried for meta reasons.
Huh? You said he was "insightful," and I was asking for an instance of that. He hasn't "condemned" the village, but do you think this contributions have been helpful in the hunt?
Anyways, the recent accusation on Soot by Velup made me want to go back and take a look at a few things from him:
1. Xardob questioned his post about "morale," and when Llandy responded in agrteement wiht Velup, he immeditaely replied with "See how right I was." These is a bit of a morale component in WW, but on Day 1 when things are pretty active? Not really, at least in my view. Maybe later when lurkers start to ruin things (what Llandy suggested), but not now. Point being, one person in agreement doesn't warrant an "I am totally correct" response - it feels like he is trying to dismiss Xardob as quickly as he can.
2. He delayed responding to Orj's question. How much celear can "Are you rushing the night?" be? I can see how he would think the question is rhetiroical, but given his seemingly genuine "we should try and pick up the pace" attitude suggested by the post, it is a legitmate question to answer.
3. the "Go moss!" posts feels out of nowhere, and the "you are overestimating the skill of players" comment without further explanation seems... off? Almsot like a "coaching" attempt.
4. You told Shatari to back off on Llandy because he has "gotten as much out of it as he is going to get", which does make sense, but why not say the same about the quote war Twinkie has been getting into with me, Lep, and (to a lesser extent) Whoopin? - this is less of a suspicion than other things, but I'm just curious
5. Why does Soot's post make you not want to resign from the Whoopin fanclub? Does Soot's attack make you think Whoopin is innocent?
Seff said:Phone: I'm rather active, though. And if I was trying to hide, wouldn't there be less people targeting me?
But there is a difference, isn't there? YYou aren't exactly trying to "swing" people your way... I can't actually think of what "your wat" is at the moment. For exmaple, AWdeV (no offense) is one of these players who usually posts, but kind of floats around more than taking "hard" stances and being "active" in the hunt, which makes it hard to make a case against him as a wolf - this is the kind of playe I am referring to. You are rather active, but not super substantial (though I did say you looking at Catholic was a stepi in the right direction).
Velpulus said:
Eh, I still am a bit suspicious of him - I just thought your reasoning against him was weird. He wasn't very involved with the Llandy trin though, no? His vote on her was a joke vote, before people got on her case about being all weird and ****. He wasn't active as far as I remember in trying to attack her, minus his mini-LoS post on her. Saying "we all want her dead" is an incorrect assumption though - I'm not super worried for meta reasons.
Huh? You said he was "insightful," and I was asking for an instance of that. He hasn't "condemned" the village, but do you think this contributions have been helpful in the hunt?
You seem to have a very strange perception of how things went down, in that case. You should be able to note the fact that I think most of the arguments brought against her were bad, and that I've stated so a number of times. In fact, at least from my point of view I really wasn't involved in that discussion at all, but rather engaged her on an entirely different matter before that even started.Velpulus said:
Both. You are currently my number one suspect, but I'd also like to see some proper effort from you in case you aren't a wolf.Velpulus said:
@Everyone: This isn't a quote war post, you should probably read it. I'm calling Llandy out on being a villain and presenting my case. It's a big enough call that it should probably be discussed/pulled apart by the rest of the village.
@Llandy:
So the reason you wanted a room to yourself was that you suspected that wolves could only kill people in the room they're in? And you being alone in a room was somehow going to prove something about this?
That's the least convincing, most incomprehensible excuse I've ever seen. That doesn't work or make sense in any way, shape or form. The complete lack of sense it makes makes it apparent to me that it's a hastily thought up excuse that has no bearing in reality and that you simply wanted to make something up to shake suspicion off yourself with a 'whoops I was mistaken no one pay me any mind'.
Or were you just plain lying completely about actually doing anything and you were just trying to survive to day two for your 'room list' (as if you were the only person who'd notice)? If so then none of your actions make sense, putting yourself in a room on your own doesn't improve your chances over staying in the tavern to an extent that justifies your layers of lies, grandstanding and attention that you drew to yourself to achieve. If you simply wanted to survive another night and nothing more just laying low would have been the obvious and natural course. Especially when taken in light of the fact that any wolf could have just followed you in there under the guise of 'She's up to something and I don't trust her'. Case in point, Shatari.
Which brings us to Snoopy. Your acceptance of Snoopy staying in the same room as you can only be interpreted in one of two ways.
a) You're convinced Snoopy can't be a villain because they arrived late to the game and Adaham probably wouldn't let a villain role potentially be unfulfilled (I don't personally buy into this, especially if they're a minion/lesser villain, but I can see the argument for it).
b) Snoopy being infected with the plague means that they won't effect your room ability.
My Meta sense suggests to me that we have a wolf pack and a separate villain type. Probably a converter (vampire/etc) because that's pretty standard. My assumption is that the converter has something to do with the black death because of Rathyr (a wolf) being killed by the plague (i.e. the villains packs are opposed). Also going off Adaham implying conversion in his OP as has previously been pointed out. Going ultra meta the first trailer features artwork that depicts the victims of the plague walking around murdering people with knives, swords, etc.
My conclusion: You're a villain converter, thematically enough your method of conversion is the plague. You convert from any room or randomly. Your conversions dying after a few days is a method of keeping your pack from growing too large (I'm sure I've seen a similar mechanic in a previous game to keep converters under control). For some reason you need an empty room, or having an empty room benefits you more than one with other people (maybe you do some kind of 'summoning of the plague' that has a chance of being discovered by witnesses).
Your actions don't make sense as an innocent, not the lies upon lies or the inconsistent excuses. You're either playing terribly as an innocent (in which case we lose little by making our day 1 lynch a player that's consistently created a smokescreen of suspicion and drama for the real villains to hide behind) or you're a villain who's giving their game away by trying to hard.
Either way, when the lynch comes I'm pretty convinced I want it coming for you.
Role-phishing isn't wrong if the role you suspect is a villain one.Phonemelter said:
As for the meta discussion about wolves only being able to kill people they're in a room with, I don't think it's the case. With 8 rooms + the watch players will be spread too thin for them to be able to kill safely. Even if the plague wipes out a room a day (I'm assuming it will, thus the plague infested mill we can't stay in) it'll still be quite a while before things will get crowded enough for the wolves to be able to kill without making themselves obvious. That'd disadvantage the wolves too much for the game to be fair.
So, pretty much what ejnomad was saying.
Velpulus
Veteran
SootShade said:
The pressure on me is so heavy, I can't take it no more
Phonemelter said:
This I want to address. I didn't use quotes but my response was to Xardob. He completely dismissed my post, to which my response was to 'punish' him and make him spend the night in seclusion. No one ever asked him how many games he had won as a villager, we just accepted the stats of 20-90% success he had on catching a wolf the first night. I don't think he carries a winning strategy and while I do enjoy his company, that comes second to me.
I'll stop and read Moss's post.
Sorry guys, just got home and I'm too tired to think straight, so no post from me today.
Just a quick word on the possibility of wolves being able to kill outside their rooms. I think this is true only on special circumstances. Most of the time they should conform to the general rule. But I also think it's useless to speculate about this and would advise everyone to keep this out of their hunt. The wolves have much more information than us, and any attempt to use game mechanics to find them will probably backfire.
Just a quick word on the possibility of wolves being able to kill outside their rooms. I think this is true only on special circumstances. Most of the time they should conform to the general rule. But I also think it's useless to speculate about this and would advise everyone to keep this out of their hunt. The wolves have much more information than us, and any attempt to use game mechanics to find them will probably backfire.
I'm being totally serious, but since the answer to this question treads deeply into game theory, I'll answer it later, if you really want me to.Phonemelter said:
JS
Sergeant at Arms
First up, I just got back and read *most* of the thread, still need to read Moss' post up there. ^
Secondly, per Adaham's request, and out of general courtesy for the rest of you, I am going to try oh so very hard to shrink my huge post, but please bear with me here folks, because I'm not used to having tiny post when trying to discuss every little thing. ^_^
@Lep
Okay, I'm trying to cut out crap that doesn't seem to be important to good discussion -- so that my WoT aren't as big -- but if you see anything that you feel you want a response to, or think is important, yell at me to get over there and respond to you. ^_^
Secondly, per Adaham's request, and out of general courtesy for the rest of you, I am going to try oh so very hard to shrink my huge post, but please bear with me here folks, because I'm not used to having tiny post when trying to discuss every little thing. ^_^
Nobody loves me.
@Lep
Okay, I'm trying to cut out crap that doesn't seem to be important to good discussion -- so that my WoT aren't as big -- but if you see anything that you feel you want a response to, or think is important, yell at me to get over there and respond to you. ^_^
I didn't think the blob of text something to reply to. You say "this is how I meant it", and either I can believe you or not; there's nothing I can do to prove that you meant what I thought you meant or the other way around. It was something that couldn't really go either way. Personally I didn't like your response, but everyone one knows I'm suspicous of you, so I didn't see the point in a response.
I don't think it is a good idea to throw a"joke" into your LoS this late in the game, especially something that is inaccurate. Of course I was gonna shoot down an argument that had no reasoning behind it. But you say it is a joke, and a joke it may be, but I ask that from this point forward you say: "Twinkle, you monkey brained goose, this is a joke." Just in case I don't pick up on it.Also, to be clear, the line about you in my fateful LoS was mostly a joke, as were the other bits in the list annotated with a
Correct me if I'm wrong, but this whole section of debate is to do with the fact that at the time I posted that initial comment about you, you hadn't expressed strong opinions about a specific person's guilt, instead focusing on bits of logic other people were using to challenge players. So yes, as far as I'm concerned you can't use the strong opinions you gained about me following my post to challenge my (again, only semi-serious) assertion about you in that post. Because of time.
/quote]I think I can. But tell me how useful you were up to that point, at least now you're actively hunting (even if you think it's me). I actually dug my heels in and tried to do something (and I consider bringing up you as bringing up a topic because I assumed you would respond to my post and we would have discussion.
Well, I would like to point out that you were my biggest suspicion even up to my first post on you. I did get more into it when you respond because now I had stuff about you to get into. Not sure *exactly* what balls to the wall actually means, but I'm assuming it means actually really getting into discussion and fighting hard. I can agree with that, except for the fact that I posted about Llandy, and it was at that point that I think I really went (as you put itBut again, see the above. To be fair, you did say something analogous to 'Lep's not really very committed to anything in his posts; it's a bit suspicious' before my big uber-post, but again - that was hardly anything firm at the time (unless I just misread it and you were already properly gunning for me). It's only since then that you've been balls-to-the-wall about anything
*sniffle* I'm touched -- Lep agrees with me on something.I really don't think anybody suckered into a TW wolf game is going to be anything like the special princess fairy you're making him out to be. As someone currently on the receiving end of Twinkle's (hmm, fairy metaphor might've been a bad call
@Llandy
A tempting offer, which I appreciate, but this is something that has been gong on a while (and tried to have been fixed many times over) another few days won't change it.
@Phonemelter
First,
Did this answer your question? If not let me know, and I'll try and dig up that post and explain it.
Not sure what you're getting at, really -- yes, I pointed out that everything you've thrown at me could be reversed. You could possibly be the wolf buddy of someone you've ignored, how is this proof? If it is, then it's proof you're allies with other people here who you have ignored. I'm sorry, but I can't see how putting that into perspective for you was suspicious at all.
Like the way you twisted that -- it almost looks convincing. I did not throw you in as Xardob's packy, because you have addressed him; however, I pointed out that you could be -- allow me to capslock so you don't miss it this time -- THAT WITH THIS WAY OF THINKING YOU COULD POSSIBLY BE WOLF BUDDIES WITH SOMEONE YOU'VE IGNORED. I would like to point out that the word twisting you did -- indicating that I stuck you on Xardob's side -- would make my argument basically inaccurate and ****ty for one big reason, YOU HAVE NOT IGNORED XARDOB. You see, if no one caught this, and simply thought you were accurate, they would probably think of me as a very wolfy person, however, I have pointed out your error and that threat has ended. But good try though, if I hadn't caught it you may have gotten away with it.
I gave an analysis of what I saw, which is what I've been doing all game --[sarcastic] I'm soooo sorry it didn't line up with yours. [/sarcastic] You're answer was dumb, as I pointed out (the points which you've conveniently ignored). Why don't you go back and read the points I've offer, and then try and pick them apart, and then come back and tell me how my question was dumb. Okay?
I would also like to say, because you brought it up, I find your argument against Xardob compelling, and at the exception of the lurker vote, had nothing to add. Sorry I didn't give perspective on something I didn't really find, at the time, a problem with -- I was very tunnelvisioned with my debates with everyone(which I previously mentioned).
Although this is weird -- how is that evidence at all? I could definitely see that as a gut feeling, but that's nothing in supporting your argument. Other that, I do not disagree really, but this is why I avoided discussing people who didn't really come up on my radar too much -- because I can't really add anything. (Lurker vote being an exception)
@Phonemelter
1) Just on thoughts; same thing he's accusing me of. I personally don't have a problem with it, I just wanted to point out to him that what he's saying about me being buddies with Xardob can be reflected to more than one person (including himself).
2) Didn't know he was a dad. However, saying he's "always active" doesn't mean he won't use the tactic of inactivity, rather, that sounds like a good tactic for him then, as it would catch people (looks like you included) on a blind side. Also, I was just throwing more potential reason out there about "when pressure is applied" because I was partly suspicious about it. However, I admit that I missed the part where Xardob replied to pressure, so I don't know (with Whoppin's reasoning, I am now going back to look at a lot of Xardob's post, and will hopefully find what you are talking about). Seff, on the other hand, doesn't seem to be contributing much more even under pressure, he seems to be trying harder (which makes me very suspicious) almost as if to say: "Look! Don't hurt me, I'm contributing," but his "contributions" don't seem to be getting any better, IMO.
3) I really wish I could, but with my job, my life, and this current game I'm not sure it's possible.
4) I'm looking, I guess commenting would be good too, huh? But I definitely made observations which I voiced (e.g. Whoopin, bandwagon in whoopin's favor for Watch, and of course Lep and Llandy, but we went over that a lot haven't we? ^_^)
5) I'm providing a quote:
I'm saying that you're pointing out a fault of mine (which I don't have, or at least I didn't until you narrowed down on what exactly you meant), while at the same time Lep is doing exactly what you're trying to call me out for, so if it applies to me, then it should apply to Lep too, right? I know you didn't come out and say it, but if it's a problem with one person doing it, then it's sorta implied when the other peson is doing it, too.
Just want to point out that since Whoopin has started to really engage in discussion he does not really appear tunnellvisioned to me, actually, he's done a fine job of bringing up multiple points and managed to engage in multiple discussions.
Alright folks, I tried to not be so trigger happy with the quotes and stuff, please let me know if I did a better job not making a boring and long post. Gotta go now, I don't have time to edit my post before posting, so please try not to be too upset with any mistakes you've found. ^_^
~Twinkle, who notes that he has a title, and if anyone could elaborate on what exactly the title means, he would appreciate it
That's a good post Moss. I'm glad to see you back with us.
Next person that talks about mechanics and not about players and how they could be the big bad wolf gets my vote or the lurker vote. We are 36 pages in and discussion about the mechanics and other pointless **** (we don't know until we get farther in the game or Adaham actually gives us the exact limitations of what these rooms do) is starting to wear on me.
@Whoopin
Really glad to see you not throwing around your packmates day 1 crap this game. I called you out on that **** last game but NOBODY of course listened. Just happy to see you not doing it here.
Next person that talks about mechanics and not about players and how they could be the big bad wolf gets my vote or the lurker vote. We are 36 pages in and discussion about the mechanics and other pointless **** (we don't know until we get farther in the game or Adaham actually gives us the exact limitations of what these rooms do) is starting to wear on me.
@Whoopin
Really glad to see you not throwing around your packmates day 1 crap this game.
I called you out on that **** last game but NOBODY of course listened. Just happy to see you not doing it here.Whoopin
Grandmaster Knight
Its the reason why Xardob has trouble living passed day 2. If hes too innocent he gets lunched and keeping the wolves on their toes makes it harder to lunch him without drawing OMGUS suspicion. However his use of the word confuse is not accurate, should simply be "suspicious enough to be lynchable" would be ideal. I figured this out a long time ago hence Ive been termed "Whoopin just being Whoopin".Xardob said:
He has done well confusing which is also highly suspicious but has failed on actually keeping wolves on their toes or at least convincing me hes here to assist. Hes doing exactly what he did in the last game and should hang for it.
@ejnomad
Havent built a proper case yet but one will come cause I dont want to disappoint. Also this discussion is already ripe, a ego hunch at this point my just be overkill to the activity.
Whoopin
Grandmaster Knight
skipped!Twinkle said:First up, I just got back and read *most* of the thread, still need to read Moss' post up there. ^
Secondly, per Adaham's request, and out of general courtesy for the rest of you, I am going to try oh so very hard to shrink my huge post, but please bear with me here folks, because I'm not used to having tiny post when trying to discuss every little thing. ^_^
Nobody loves me.
@Lep
Okay, I'm trying to cut out crap that doesn't seem to be important to good discussion -- so that my WoT aren't as big -- but if you see anything that you feel you want a response to, or think is important, yell at me to get over there and respond to you. ^_^
I didn't think the blob of text something to reply to. You say "this is how I meant it", and either I can believe you or not; there's nothing I can do to prove that you meant what I thought you meant or the other way around. It was something that couldn't really go either way. Personally I didn't like your response, but everyone one knows I'm suspicous of you, so I didn't see the point in a response.
I don't think it is a good idea to throw a"joke" into your LoS this late in the game, especially something that is inaccurate. Of course I was gonna shoot down an argument that had no reasoning behind it. But you say it is a joke, and a joke it may be, but I ask that from this point forward you say: "Twinkle, you monkey brained goose, this is a joke." Just in case I don't pick up on it.Also, to be clear, the line about you in my fateful LoS was mostly a joke, as were the other bits in the list annotated with a
I think I can. But tell me how useful you were up to that point, at least now you're actively hunting (even if you think it's me). I actually dug my heels in and tried to do something (and I consider bringing up you as bringing up a topic because I assumed you would respond to my post and we would have discussion.
Well, I would like to point out that you were my biggest suspicion even up to my first post on you. I did get more into it when you respond because now I had stuff about you to get into. Not sure *exactly* what balls to the wall actually means, but I'm assuming it means actually really getting into discussion and fighting hard. I can agree with that, except for the fact that I posted about Llandy, and it was at that point that I think I really went (as you put itBut again, see the above. To be fair, you did say something analogous to 'Lep's not really very committed to anything in his posts; it's a bit suspicious' before my big uber-post, but again - that was hardly anything firm at the time (unless I just misread it and you were already properly gunning for me). It's only since then that you've been balls-to-the-wall about anything
*sniffle* I'm touched -- Lep agrees with me on something.I really don't think anybody suckered into a TW wolf game is going to be anything like the special princess fairy you're making him out to be. As someone currently on the receiving end of Twinkle's (hmm, fairy metaphor might've been a bad call
@Llandy
A tempting offer, which I appreciate, but this is something that has been gong on a while (and tried to have been fixed many times over) another few days won't change it.
@Phonemelter
First,
Did this answer your question? If not let me know, and I'll try and dig up that post and explain it.
Not sure what you're getting at, really -- yes, I pointed out that everything you've thrown at me could be reversed. You could possibly be the wolf buddy of someone you've ignored, how is this proof? If it is, then it's proof you're allies with other people here who you have ignored. I'm sorry, but I can't see how putting that into perspective for you was suspicious at all.
Like the way you twisted that -- it almost looks convincing. I did not throw you in as Xardob's packy, because you have addressed him; however, I pointed out that you could be -- allow me to capslock so you don't miss it this time -- THAT WITH THIS WAY OF THINKING YOU COULD POSSIBLY BE WOLF BUDDIES WITH SOMEONE YOU'VE IGNORED. I would like to point out that the word twisting you did -- indicating that I stuck you on Xardob's side -- would make my argument basically inaccurate and ****ty for one big reason, YOU HAVE NOT IGNORED XARDOB. You see, if no one caught this, and simply thought you were accurate, they would probably think of me as a very wolfy person, however, I have pointed out your error and that threat has ended. But good try though, if I hadn't caught it you may have gotten away with it.
I gave an analysis of what I saw, which is what I've been doing all game --[sarcastic] I'm soooo sorry it didn't line up with yours. [/sarcastic] You're answer was dumb, as I pointed out (the points which you've conveniently ignored). Why don't you go back and read the points I've offer, and then try and pick them apart, and then come back and tell me how my question was dumb. Okay?
I would also like to say, because you brought it up, I find your argument against Xardob compelling, and at the exception of the lurker vote, had nothing to add. Sorry I didn't give perspective on something I didn't really find, at the time, a problem with -- I was very tunnelvisioned with my debates with everyone(which I previously mentioned).
Although this is weird -- how is that evidence at all? I could definitely see that as a gut feeling, but that's nothing in supporting your argument. Other that, I do not disagree really, but this is why I avoided discussing people who didn't really come up on my radar too much -- because I can't really add anything. (Lurker vote being an exception)
@Phonemelter
1) Just on thoughts; same thing he's accusing me of. I personally don't have a problem with it, I just wanted to point out to him that what he's saying about me being buddies with Xardob can be reflected to more than one person (including himself).
2) Didn't know he was a dad. However, saying he's "always active" doesn't mean he won't use the tactic of inactivity, rather, that sounds like a good tactic for him then, as it would catch people (looks like you included) on a blind side. Also, I was just throwing more potential reason out there about "when pressure is applied" because I was partly suspicious about it. However, I admit that I missed the part where Xardob replied to pressure, so I don't know (with Whoppin's reasoning, I am now going back to look at a lot of Xardob's post, and will hopefully find what you are talking about). Seff, on the other hand, doesn't seem to be contributing much more even under pressure, he seems to be trying harder (which makes me very suspicious) almost as if to say: "Look! Don't hurt me, I'm contributing," but his "contributions" don't seem to be getting any better, IMO.
3) I really wish I could, but with my job, my life, and this current game I'm not sure it's possible.
4) I'm looking, I guess commenting would be good too, huh? But I definitely made observations which I voiced (e.g. Whoopin, bandwagon in whoopin's favor for Watch, and of course Lep and Llandy, but we went over that a lot haven't we? ^_^)
5) I'm providing a quote:
I'm saying that you're pointing out a fault of mine (which I don't have, or at least I didn't until you narrowed down on what exactly you meant), while at the same time Lep is doing exactly what you're trying to call me out for, so if it applies to me, then it should apply to Lep too, right? I know you didn't come out and say it, but if it's a problem with one person doing it, then it's sorta implied when the other peson is doing it, too.
Just want to point out that since Whoopin has started to really engage in discussion he does not really appear tunnellvisioned to me, actually, he's done a fine job of bringing up multiple points and managed to engage in multiple discussions.
Alright folks, I tried to not be so trigger happy with the quotes and stuff, please let me know if I did a better job not making a boring and long post. Gotta go now, I don't have time to edit my post before posting, so please try not to be too upset with any mistakes you've found. ^_^
~Twinkle, who notes that he has a title, and if anyone could elaborate on what exactly the title means, he would appreciate it
Whoopin
Grandmaster Knight
haha its supposed to be obnoxious since thats the cool thing to do now. But Ill take your request into consideration since you asked so nicely.ejnomad said:Point it in spoiler tags next time Whoopin!
Maybe Adaham should take a poll to see everyones opinion if I should provide my ego guess. That way you have an chance to be spared.
Real post coming soon son is almost asleep, keeps walking outta his room and hugging my leg real pathetic style.
Also I gotta point out that the amount of time it took Xardob to not answer Faces question I was able to deliver the answer, its not like it was super secret hard to explain game "theory". He just wanted to spread out his usefulness and posting more clutter.
