|
|
Post by Kenbo on Jun 19, 2014 10:46:29 GMT -5
Honestly I don't really care what we do (as long as I'm not voted of course..) all I'm saying is the inactive vote should be a last resort One that we might have to use seeing as nothing else has come up yet.. I think we should rule out the people we shouldn't vote and the people that have been too severely inactive. Oh well there was one weird claim of "Loyal friend" by Bobby but maybe he's a helper idk. Lol loyal friend... |
|
|
|
Post by Pinda on Jun 19, 2014 10:57:57 GMT -5
So I believe the inactive votes have been supported by Revan (came up loyal), John (inspector) and me. So more likely than not one of you defending not doing a inactive vote is scum. But inactive votes usually end badly... In other games we decided inactive votes were a bad idea... |
|
|
|
Post by Newan on Jun 19, 2014 11:01:50 GMT -5
So I believe the inactive votes have been supported by Revan (came up loyal), John (inspector) and me. So more likely than not one of you defending not doing a inactive vote is scum. But inactive votes usually end badly... In other games we decided inactive votes were a bad idea... And again what's your superior plan? |
|
|
|
Post by Pinda on Jun 19, 2014 11:03:18 GMT -5
I think both are equally possible.. Well we know that the loyals are the one suggesting it (well maybe not Mav but I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt). Now You, Wyrm and Pie guy oppose. It so all 6 of us must be loyal now? Has to be a scum in there some where. Maybe majority of the scum are inactive or one of you don't want to do a random vote in fear of a scum dying. I don't really oppose it... I just think the outcome of inactive vote might be bad. And if me, this doctor guy and Wyrm were scum and we were trying to save an inactive teammate how large would the chances be of you picking out inactive teammate? I don't think the amount of scum is greater than 4 in this game... so let's assume there are 6 inactives and the three of us are scum... then the chance of you voting of a loyalist are 83% IF we were scum, why would we oppose that? |
|
|
|
Post by Pinda on Jun 19, 2014 11:03:47 GMT -5
But inactive votes usually end badly... In other games we decided inactive votes were a bad idea... And again what's your superior plan? I don't have a superior plan. I'm going along with the inactive vote if nothing else comes up... but I don't like it. |
|
|
|
Post by Newan on Jun 19, 2014 11:07:05 GMT -5
And again what's your superior plan? I don't have a superior plan. I'm going along with the inactive vote if nothing else comes up... but I don't like it. Well then do you have a choice on who you would like to vote? |
|
|
|
Post by Pinda on Jun 19, 2014 11:08:28 GMT -5
I don't have a superior plan. I'm going along with the inactive vote if nothing else comes up... but I don't like it. Well then do you have a choice on who you would like to vote? Not really. If we're going to do an inactive vote it will be a guess anyway. They're all too inactive, I don't suspect one of them more than the others. |
|
|
|
Post by Newan on Jun 19, 2014 11:09:56 GMT -5
Well then do you have a choice on who you would like to vote? Not really. If we're going to do an inactive vote it will be a guess anyway. They're all too inactive, I don't suspect one of them more than the others. I'm not really going for inactive I'm going for moderately active. |
|
|
|
Post by Pinda on Jun 19, 2014 11:10:49 GMT -5
Not really. If we're going to do an inactive vote it will be a guess anyway. They're all too inactive, I don't suspect one of them more than the others. I'm not really going for inactive I'm going for moderately active. So it's not an inactive vote then? Well, who do you consider "moderately active"? |
|
|
|
Post by bobafett590 on Jun 19, 2014 11:13:05 GMT -5
Not really. If we're going to do an inactive vote it will be a guess anyway. They're all too inactive, I don't suspect one of them more than the others. I'm not really going for inactive I'm going for moderately active. So... you've gone from defending an inactive vote to exactly what you opposed. A vote on active person that we can gather proof on... |
|
|
|
Post by Newan on Jun 19, 2014 11:14:08 GMT -5
I'm not really going for inactive I'm going for moderately active. So it's not an inactive vote then? Well, who do you consider "moderately active"? Doctor, Wyrm, You, Smith, Sam... I guess. |
|
|
|
Post by Newan on Jun 19, 2014 11:14:43 GMT -5
I'm not really going for inactive I'm going for moderately active. So... you've gone from defending an inactive vote to exactly what you opposed. A vote on active person that we can gather proof on... No I want a random vote if it comes to it. |
|
|
|
Post by Pinda on Jun 19, 2014 11:15:25 GMT -5
So it's not an inactive vote then? Well, who do you consider "moderately active"? Doctor, Wyrm, You, Smith, Sam... I guess. How am I moderately active? I had the second most comments on day 1.  |
|
|
|
Post by Newan on Jun 19, 2014 11:16:01 GMT -5
Doctor, Wyrm, You, Smith, Sam... I guess. How am I moderately active? I had the second most comments on day 1. Well you fall into the category of people I would consider voting today. |
|
|
|
Post by Pinda on Jun 19, 2014 11:16:37 GMT -5
How am I moderately active? I had the second most comments on day 1. Well you fall into the category of people I would consider voting today. So, this isn't an inactive vote at all? Now you're starting to confuse me... |
|
|
|
Post by Newan on Jun 19, 2014 11:21:54 GMT -5
Well you fall into the category of people I would consider voting today. So, this isn't an inactive vote at all? Now you're starting to confuse me... What I said earlier was pick someone at random they does not involve Revan, John or me.... I said since loyals are fine with inactive votes as well. Scum are more likely to be defending them. |
|
|
|
Post by Potato on Jun 19, 2014 11:23:10 GMT -5
Voting will start soon now. But first I need to get some pictures of a certain janitor...
|
|
|
|
Post by Pinda on Jun 19, 2014 11:29:16 GMT -5
So, this isn't an inactive vote at all? Now you're starting to confuse me... What I said earlier was pick someone at random they does not involve Revan, John or me.... I said since loyals are fine with inactive votes as well. Scum are more likely to be defending them. So you trust Revan now because he came up loyal? Anyway, a random vote is more likely get an active loyalist killed than a scum player... getting rid off a random inactive could be a last resort but taking out random active players seems... risky. |
|
|
|
Post by Kenbo on Jun 19, 2014 11:31:07 GMT -5
So, this isn't an inactive vote at all? Now you're starting to confuse me... What I said earlier was pick someone at random they does not involve Revan, John or me.... I said since loyals are fine with inactive votes as well. Scum are more likely to be defending them. Scum could be supporting them too typically most of the scum team is active and if opposing the decision is "scummy" they would likely support it to look loyal |
|
|
|
Post by Newan on Jun 19, 2014 11:31:17 GMT -5
What I said earlier was pick someone at random they does not involve Revan, John or me.... I said since loyals are fine with inactive votes as well. Scum are more likely to be defending them. So you trust Revan now because he came up loyal? Anyway, a random vote is more likely get an active loyalist killed than a scum player... getting rid off a random inactive could be a last resort but taking out random active players seems... risky. Trust him more than almost everyone else... |
|
|
|
Post by Pinda on Jun 19, 2014 11:32:18 GMT -5
So you trust Revan now because he came up loyal? Anyway, a random vote is more likely get an active loyalist killed than a scum player... getting rid off a random inactive could be a last resort but taking out random active players seems... risky. Trust him more than almost everyone else... Just because of the inspection results or are there other reasons? |
|
|
|
Post by Newan on Jun 19, 2014 11:33:43 GMT -5
Trust him more than almost everyone else... Just because of the inspection results or are there other reasons? Inspection results… why is that bad? |
|
|
|
Post by bobafett590 on Jun 19, 2014 11:34:38 GMT -5
So... you've gone from defending an inactive vote to exactly what you opposed. A vote on active person that we can gather proof on... No I want a random vote if it comes to it. I don't even understand what you want anymore. First, you say an inactive vote is a good idea and not supporting it means you're scum ( which totally makes no sense because an inactive vote never works for the loyals, leading the scum to support it). Then you change your mind to voting a 'moderately active' person. & now its becoming clear you vehemently want a random vote ( even worse than an inactive one) if it comes to it, which would almost certainly lose a loyal, so we might as well abstain from voting if we can't bring ourselves to do a sensible vote ( or a inactive vote with some basis to it). Shouldn't we be at least trying to go for a vote that we can be confident on? Instead of a risky vote which would bring us zero leads on the next day anyway? And I find that you have been barking out mindless accusations ever since you associated yourself with the inspector & claimed this unusual role of converting a third party, which is impossible to confirm and until someone can come forward and say they have been converted. Right now, your ambiguous role claim doesn't make you seem any more of a loyal in my eyes, but it doesn't make you seem more like a scum either.
|
|
|
|
Post by Pinda on Jun 19, 2014 11:36:59 GMT -5
Just because of the inspection results or are there other reasons? Inspection results… why is that bad? It's not bad. It's just possible that the results were messed up. Yesterday you said Maverick would be a good scum leader and now you suddenly trust him a lot due to inspection results... So I thought perhaps you had more reasons to assume he's loyal. |
|
|
|
Post by Newan on Jun 19, 2014 11:37:08 GMT -5
No I want a random vote if it comes to it. I don't even understand what you want anymore. First, you say an inactive vote is a good idea and not supporting it means you're scum ( which totally makes no sense because an inactive vote never works for the loyals, leading the scum to support it). Then you change your mind to voting a 'moderately active' person. & now its becoming clear you vehemently want a random vote ( even worse than an inactive one) if it comes to it, which would almost certainly lose a loyal, so we might as well abstain from voting if we can't bring ourselves to do a sensible vote ( or a inactive vote with some basis to it). Shouldn't we be at least trying to go for a vote that we can be confident on? Instead of a risky vote which would bring us zero leads on the next day anyway? And I find that you have been barking out mindless accusations ever since you associated yourself with the inspector & claimed this unusual role of converting a third party, which is impossible to confirm and until someone can come forward and say they have been converted. Right now, your ambiguous role claim doesn't make you seem any more of a loyal in my eyes, but it doesn't make you seem more like a scum either.
Yeah yeah whatever you feel like saying to not want to trust my oh so scummy role claim.... So far I ruled out that the 3rd party is not the protector, inspector, myself, Pie guy or Revan. |
|
|
|
Post by Newan on Jun 19, 2014 11:38:04 GMT -5
Inspection results… why is that bad? It's not bad. It's just possible that the results were messed up. Yesterday you said Maverick would be a good scum leader and now you suddenly trust him a lot due to inspection results... So I thought perhaps you had more reasons to assume he's loyal. Well unless Scum got a complete different party invitation thing it pretty much matches the one I got as a loyal according to him. |
|
|
|
Post by Pinda on Jun 19, 2014 11:39:40 GMT -5
It's not bad. It's just possible that the results were messed up. Yesterday you said Maverick would be a good scum leader and now you suddenly trust him a lot due to inspection results... So I thought perhaps you had more reasons to assume he's loyal. Well unless Scum got a complete different party invitation thing it pretty much matches the one I got as a loyal according to him. You're allowed to show others your invitation? |
|
|
|
Post by Newan on Jun 19, 2014 11:40:08 GMT -5
Well unless Scum got a complete different party invitation thing it pretty much matches the one I got as a loyal according to him. You're allowed to show others your invitation? He told me it... |
|
|
|
Post by Pinda on Jun 19, 2014 11:40:45 GMT -5
You're allowed to show others your invitation? He told me it... So, I could tell you about my invitation in PM to proof my loyalty then? |
|
|
|
Post by bobafett590 on Jun 19, 2014 11:42:18 GMT -5
I don't even understand what you want anymore. First, you say an inactive vote is a good idea and not supporting it means you're scum ( which totally makes no sense because an inactive vote never works for the loyals, leading the scum to support it). Then you change your mind to voting a 'moderately active' person. & now its becoming clear you vehemently want a random vote ( even worse than an inactive one) if it comes to it, which would almost certainly lose a loyal, so we might as well abstain from voting if we can't bring ourselves to do a sensible vote ( or a inactive vote with some basis to it). Shouldn't we be at least trying to go for a vote that we can be confident on? Instead of a risky vote which would bring us zero leads on the next day anyway? And I find that you have been barking out mindless accusations ever since you associated yourself with the inspector & claimed this unusual role of converting a third party, which is impossible to confirm and until someone can come forward and say they have been converted. Right now, your ambiguous role claim doesn't make you seem any more of a loyal in my eyes, but it doesn't make you seem more like a scum either.
Yeah yeah whatever you feel like saying to not want to trust my oh so scummy role claim.... So far I ruled out that the 3rd party is not the protector, inspector, myself, Pie guy or Revan. I emphasised that I didn't think your claim made you more scummy, but it by no means makes you more of a loyalist. The only confirmed loyalist here is Bane, with Mav being semi confirmed, as we can't put all our trust in inspection results. |
|
it’s been quite a while. I’ve been pretty good, how about yourself?
Sept 30, 2024 21:29:31 GMT -5
it’s been quite a while. I’ve been pretty good, how about yourself?
Sept 30, 2024 21:29:31 GMT -5
Nov 11, 2024 16:43:58 GMT -5
Nov 11, 2024 16:43:58 GMT -5