|
|
Post by bane on Dec 6, 2013 22:04:16 GMT -5
Do you have an alternative? Because I see what your saying, but give another option. IDK, can't other people come up with ideas? I still think Jodo's weird and there were a couple people that defended him earlier. I think mods means the more experienced players rather than the actual rank. Anywho, we've spoken in PMs and everything and we've come to the conclusion that the both of us are not loyal - that leaves you, who doesn't seem the most loyal. Yeah, it's not full-on evidence but it's the best that we have and I'm sure we won't be failing today. Mod teams can be non-experienced players. It's happened before. Who you are as a player really doesn't determine your role. And how did you come to the conclusion that one of us is not loyal? We aren't even done with Day 1 yet so I'm curiously how you can possibly have enough evidence to determine that. OOC: I think he means it more like this: There are four mods playing, so in a game of this size, Newan's saying it's relatively likely that one is scum. It's basically saying that this would work whatever group of four you picked, just because of the ratio of scum to loyals. I don't know if I explained this right Newan.  If I didn't, sorry. IC: DO YOU SUGGEST THAT ONE OF THESE TWO ARE SCUM? IF NOT, THE MAJORITY OF YOUR DEFENCE IS NULLIFIED. But you're not getting the pointlessness in that. It's like me saying out of you, Malgus, Jodo, and Kenobi, about one of you is scum. So let's vote off Malgus because of that. You see? That just isn't good evidence. This is basically a random vote. IT IS A LOGIAL APPROACH, BUT NOT SOMETHING SOLELY TO BASE A VOTE UPON. THIS WE CAN AGREE ON. BUT THIS DOES NOT EXPLAIN YOUR DEFENCE. YOU REPEATEDLY STATED THAT GRIEVOUS AND THE HOBBIT HAD FLAWS IN THEIR EVIDENCE, SO ARE YOU ACCUSING THEM? STATE YOUR VEWS. |
|
|
|
Post by Namialus on Dec 6, 2013 22:04:55 GMT -5
So by your logic he's an easy target. I know you're going to throw this off as random "crap" but I needed discussion going. mhm. |
|
|
|
Post by Kenbo on Dec 6, 2013 22:05:57 GMT -5
So by your logic he's an easy target. I know you're going to throw this off as random "crap" but I needed discussion going. mhm. Wasn't that also wicket's goal |
|
|
|
Post by Potato on Dec 6, 2013 22:05:59 GMT -5
IDK, can't other people come up with ideas? I still think Jodo's weird and there were a couple people that defended him earlier. Mod teams can be non-experienced players. It's happened before. Who you are as a player really doesn't determine your role. And how did you come to the conclusion that one of us is not loyal? We aren't even done with Day 1 yet so I'm curiously how you can possibly have enough evidence to determine that. But you're not getting the pointlessness in that. It's like me saying out of you, Malgus, Jodo, and Kenobi, about one of you is scum. So let's vote off Malgus because of that. You see? That just isn't good evidence. This is basically a random vote. IT IS A LOGIAL APPROACH, BUT NOT SOMETHING SOLELY TO BASE A VOTE UPON. THIS WE CAN AGREE ON. BUT THIS DOES NOT EXPLAIN YOUR DEFENCE. YOU REPEATEDLY STATED THAT GRIEVOUS AND THE HOBBIT HAD FLAWS IN THEIR EVIDENCE, SO ARE YOU ACCUSING THEM? STATE YOUR VEWS. I'm not accusing them because I have no direct evidence against them. They still have flaws though and I've been saying them over and over. They're only voting for me because my character's a clone and I'm a Mod. They have no real in-game evidence which they always complain is absent in some votes. It's hypocritical. |
|
|
|
Post by Potato on Dec 6, 2013 22:06:40 GMT -5
So by your logic he's an easy target. I know you're going to throw this off as random "crap" but I needed discussion going. mhm. So everything you say, no matter how pointless or unhelpful it is, can be excused because it gets discussion going. Got it. |
|
|
|
Post by Namialus on Dec 6, 2013 22:06:49 GMT -5
I know you're going to throw this off as random "crap" but I needed discussion going. mhm. Wasn't that also wicket's goal On Wicket's side, if he is scum: No, he needed an easy target to kill off in Day 1. Which is what I believe because I think he is scum. If he is loyal: Yes that was his goal. |
|
|
|
Post by Namialus on Dec 6, 2013 22:07:16 GMT -5
I know you're going to throw this off as random "crap" but I needed discussion going. mhm. So everything you say, no matter how pointless or unhelpful it is, can be excused because it gets discussion going. Got it. *raises pint of beer with a grin* |
|
|
|
Post by Malgus on Dec 6, 2013 22:08:00 GMT -5
IT IS A LOGIAL APPROACH, BUT NOT SOMETHING SOLELY TO BASE A VOTE UPON. THIS WE CAN AGREE ON. BUT THIS DOES NOT EXPLAIN YOUR DEFENCE. YOU REPEATEDLY STATED THAT GRIEVOUS AND THE HOBBIT HAD FLAWS IN THEIR EVIDENCE, SO ARE YOU ACCUSING THEM? STATE YOUR VEWS. I'm not accusing them because I have no direct evidence against them. They still have flaws though and I've been saying them over and over. They're only voting for me because my character's a clone and I'm a Mod. They have no real in-game evidence which they always complain is absent in some votes. It's hypocritical. *Good player. I think that's what they mean not mod. |
|
|
|
Post by Potato on Dec 6, 2013 22:08:10 GMT -5
Wasn't that also wicket's goal On Wicket's side, if he is scum: No, he needed an easy target to kill off in Day 1. Which is what I believe because I think he is scum. If he is loyal: Yes that was his goal. You're including both side because you don't even know what I am. This is all random and there's no real evidence that can tell you if I'm loyal or scum. |
|
|
|
Post by bane on Dec 6, 2013 22:08:26 GMT -5
IT IS A LOGIAL APPROACH, BUT NOT SOMETHING SOLELY TO BASE A VOTE UPON. THIS WE CAN AGREE ON. BUT THIS DOES NOT EXPLAIN YOUR DEFENCE. YOU REPEATEDLY STATED THAT GRIEVOUS AND THE HOBBIT HAD FLAWS IN THEIR EVIDENCE, SO ARE YOU ACCUSING THEM? STATE YOUR VEWS. I'm not accusing them because I have no direct evidence against them. They still have flaws though and I've been saying them over and over. They're only voting for me because my character's a clone and I'm a Mod. They have no real in-game evidence which they always complain is absent in some votes. It's hypocritical. DALEKS FIND THIS ILLOGICAL. THEY STILL DO NOT TRUST YOU. |
|
|
|
Post by Potato on Dec 6, 2013 22:08:34 GMT -5
I'm not accusing them because I have no direct evidence against them. They still have flaws though and I've been saying them over and over. They're only voting for me because my character's a clone and I'm a Mod. They have no real in-game evidence which they always complain is absent in some votes. It's hypocritical. *Good player. I think that's what they mean not mod. That's basically the same thing. |
|
|
|
Post by Potato on Dec 6, 2013 22:08:57 GMT -5
I'm not accusing them because I have no direct evidence against them. They still have flaws though and I've been saying them over and over. They're only voting for me because my character's a clone and I'm a Mod. They have no real in-game evidence which they always complain is absent in some votes. It's hypocritical. DALEKS FIND THIS ILLOGICAL. THEY STILL DO NOT TRUST YOU. Why do you find it illogical? |
|
|
|
Post by Namialus on Dec 6, 2013 22:09:02 GMT -5
On Wicket's side, if he is scum: No, he needed an easy target to kill off in Day 1. Which is what I believe because I think he is scum. If he is loyal: Yes that was his goal. You're including both side because you don't even know what I am. This is all random and there's no real evidence that can tell you if I'm loyal or scum. No, there is evidence, it's random to you but it's just a *realllllyyyy* good guess. |
|
|
|
Post by Malgus on Dec 6, 2013 22:09:58 GMT -5
*Good player. I think that's what they mean not mod. That's basically the same thing. That's what I'm saying. So the evidence does at least partially make sense. |
|
|
|
Post by Namialus on Dec 6, 2013 22:10:04 GMT -5
Everyone that isn't Wicket, why are you so hesitant about voting him off? I mean, you haven't got any TIES to him, have you? I know you're worried that he might be loyal but loyals don't really make attachments. He's gonna come up scum, you'll see.
|
|
|
|
Post by Potato on Dec 6, 2013 22:10:11 GMT -5
You're including both side because you don't even know what I am. This is all random and there's no real evidence that can tell you if I'm loyal or scum. No, there is evidence, it's random to you but it's just a *realllllyyyy* good guess. And yet that's all you've said. You haven't said why it's a good guess. |
|
|
|
Post by Namialus on Dec 6, 2013 22:10:41 GMT -5
No, there is evidence, it's random to you but it's just a *realllllyyyy* good guess. And yet that's all you've said. You haven't said why it's a good guess. Grievous posted all the evidence.... |
|
|
|
Post by bane on Dec 6, 2013 22:10:46 GMT -5
DALEKS FIND THIS ILLOGICAL. THEY STILL DO NOT TRUST YOU. Why do you find it illogical? OOC: I was just saying that they're using weird evidence against you. At any rate, that's not why I suspect you. |
|
|
|
Post by Potato on Dec 6, 2013 22:10:56 GMT -5
That's basically the same thing. That's what I'm saying. So the evidence does at least partially make sense. How? People being experienced has nothing to do with what they turn up as. The same goes for being a Mod. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 6, 2013 22:11:05 GMT -5
I know you're going to throw this off as random "crap" but I needed discussion going. mhm. So everything you say, no matter how pointless or unhelpful it is, can be excused because it gets discussion going. Got it. You are the only lead we have, we have to vote someone. |
|
|
|
Post by Potato on Dec 6, 2013 22:12:44 GMT -5
And yet that's all you've said. You haven't said why it's a good guess. Grievous posted all the evidence.... Which is basically that I'm scum because I don't have a special role like him (which is irrelevant because Grievous is the only returning character) and that one of the Mods is scum, which is by no means verified. Any random four people could be scum. |
|
|
|
Post by Potato on Dec 6, 2013 22:13:31 GMT -5
So everything you say, no matter how pointless or unhelpful it is, can be excused because it gets discussion going. Got it. You are the only lead we have, we have to vote someone. We have other leads. We were given 2 days to vote, yet some people are acting like they need to vote before the end of the night. |
|
|
|
Post by Namialus on Dec 6, 2013 22:14:27 GMT -5
You are the only lead we have, we have to vote someone. We have other leads. We were given 2 days to vote, yet some people are acting like they need to vote before the end of the night. I have to vote before the end of the night, just saying. |
|
|
|
Post by Namialus on Dec 6, 2013 22:14:52 GMT -5
Grievous posted all the evidence.... Which is basically that I'm scum because I don't have a special role like him (which is irrelevant because Grievous is the only returning character) and that one of the Mods is scum, which is by no means verified. Any random four people could be scum. Yeah. But you're scum. |
|
|
|
Post by Potato on Dec 6, 2013 22:15:34 GMT -5
Which is basically that I'm scum because I don't have a special role like him (which is irrelevant because Grievous is the only returning character) and that one of the Mods is scum, which is by no means verified. Any random four people could be scum. Yeah. But you're scum. See, you can't come up with anything to prove that. |
|
|
|
Post by Malgus on Dec 6, 2013 22:15:44 GMT -5
That's what I'm saying. So the evidence does at least partially make sense. How? People being experienced has nothing to do with what they turn up as. The same goes for being a Mod. I think it makes some sense. All the best players probably won't be on the same team. |
|
|
|
Post by Newan on Dec 6, 2013 22:16:01 GMT -5
Still don't see how 1/3 of the players being mods isn't bad chance that we catch a scum..
|
|
|
|
Post by bane on Dec 6, 2013 22:16:14 GMT -5
OOC: I'm getting a bit tired of the roleplay so I'm just going to type this normally.  Everyone seems to be forgetting the way Wicket accused Dsak. He posted no evidence, just that he had a "feeling." What? That's not evidence at all. He tried to pass it off as one of those "pushing for discussion" accusations, but I don't think so. VOTE: WICKET (Potato) EXTERMINATE
EXTERMINATE
|
|
|
|
Post by Potato on Dec 6, 2013 22:18:39 GMT -5
I know it really doesn't matter, but VOTE: MERRY (NAM)
He's been shifty this entire time and makes up lame excuses to get around things he does and hasn't come up with any ideas on his own. This whole suspicion against me was brought up by Grievous, Merry just followed by saying I'm scum, when even he admitted this was random. You can't be certain of someone being scum when it's a random vote, yet Merry is. He doesn't post any evidence either, he just relies on other people to do that. He accused Jodo earlier and then accused me of doing it, but for some reason it's fine that he did it. He uses random evidence that I know he's usually against. He's hypocritical. Like I said, it probably doesn't matter but there you go.
|
|
|
|
Post by Potato on Dec 6, 2013 22:20:10 GMT -5
OOC: I'm getting a bit tired of the roleplay so I'm just going to type this normally. Everyone seems to be forgetting the way Wicket accused Dsak. He posted no evidence, just that he had a "feeling." What? That's not evidence at all. He tried to pass it off as one of those "pushing for discussion" accusations, but I don't think so. VOTE: WICKET (Potato) EXTERMINATE
EXTERMINATE
Because no one was doing anything... me posting that actually got everyone talking in the first place. How else do you expect us to accuse people at that point? You can't call someone scum when they just made two posts, but you can still say if the posts were odd. And Merry and Grievous and others also used the push for discussion thing. |
|
Wars Story
If I didn't, sorry. IC: DO YOU SUGGEST THAT ONE OF THESE TWO ARE SCUM? IF NOT, THE MAJORITY OF YOUR DEFENCE IS NULLIFIED. 
it’s been quite a while. I’ve been pretty good, how about yourself? 