Conquer Club

unvote vote shaggy

unvote vote campin

unvote vote samgrossy

thechuck51 wrote:unvote vote shaggy

unvote vote campin

unvote vote samgrossy

If this is supposed to mean something, it isn't helpful to anyone. Especially not you. How is erratically voting the people putting pressure on you going to solve anything?

thechuck51 wrote:unvote vote shaggy

unvote vote campin

unvote vote samgrossy

??

thechuck51 wrote:unvote vote shaggy

unvote vote campin

unvote vote samgrossy

Can someone other than chuck explain what the heck is going on here? I think he just Unvoted me, then, in the end, just voted me.

I guess chuck is silenced and can only vote in the thread, and is telling his faction who he thinks he wants lynched. Anyway, its enough for me to say VOTE THECHUCK51

pancakemix wrote:

thechuck51 wrote:unvote vote shaggy

unvote vote campin

unvote vote samgrossy

If this is supposed to mean something, it isn't helpful to anyone. Especially not you. How is erratically voting the people putting pressure on you going to solve anything?

ALso, I haven't really put any pressure on Chuck, he pressured me the first day about a "Feeling vote" I had about PMC, was quiet all D2. It seems like he only gets one post a day and maybe can vote anytime he wants. But Anyway, my vote stands. THere is something completely crazy about what he is doing, and it is all scummy!

I would assume that he either has a post restriction where he must vote people who accuse him, or he has a power that works depending on who he votes / how many times he votes. It may be some kind of super-bomb that goes off on whoever he votes for in that day phase (a bit farfetched but still possible).

Either way, I definitely don't advocate killing someone because of a post restriction, and I think it's risky to vote him based on what has just happened until he gets a chance to explain himself. He wouldn't of voted and unvoted so much without a reason, and he would have known that he'd come under scrutiny because of it.

I agree, this whole thing smells a bit off to me. But I don't think rushing forward with it is a good idea. Ultimately if he doesn't change his posting or explain it is far safer for a vig to take care of him than vote when he's throwing votes around for (seemingly) no reason.

ShaggyDan wrote:

crazymilkshake5 wrote:grossys vote puts him at L4 by my count. alot of people seem to forget that votes need to be blue

and i am also on jgordons side. and do not believe shaggys claim, for most of the reason zim pointed out.

and if you all do decide to lynch jg at least get a claim before you do.

Also, we never got a response from this. And the person he was defending turned out to be the Mafia "Leader" (from what I can gather).

Vote crazymilkshake5

At the very least I want an answer from my question on day 2 about the reason that didn't seem to be there. Plus jgordon's response to your defence of him seems like blatant scum buddying.

I cant seem to find what your talking about on day 2.

as for the "scum buddying"
1. I didnt think he was scum. told me not to defend him. tried to bring me down with him.
2. Ive played plenty of mafia games, i know better than to scum buddy.

unvote vote pcm

unvote vote vodean

unvote vote shaggy

UNVOTE VOTE SAMGROSSY

thechuck51 wrote:unvote vote shaggy

unvote vote campin

unvote vote samgrossy

That...was...

Intresting...

Vote Chuck...

Please explain this...

crazymilkshake5 wrote:I cant seem to find what your talking about on day 2.

as for the "scum buddying"
1. I didnt think he was scum. told me not to defend him. tried to bring me down with him.
2. Ive played plenty of mafia games, i know better than to scum buddy.

I asked you to show where in Zim's post you were reffering to for your defence of him. In the following post:

ShaggyDan wrote:The mod changed the colour rule on the last vote count of day one. Also what point did zim make?

zimmah wrote:Jgordon chose not to target anyone, according to him. Even if this is true, it would mean he has a potentially dangerous move like roleblock or vig. I don't believe his claim though. Also since there are already 2 persons who claimed to have been roleblocked, it would be unlikely jgordon is another roleblocker. So that would make jgordon a vig, if he would be telling the truth. Which I highly doubt, as I don't really see a motive for shaggy to expose himself if he would be lying about his claim. (much too dangerous to make such a story up, especially this early in the game). If he's lying he will pay for it eventually.

Your defence of jgordon made no sense at the time and he turned out to be scum. I don't buy into the 'experienced player' defence, it doesn't make you exempt from mistakes. And there are plenty of reasons why even an experienced player would scum buddy like that. Since jgordon was considered 'the leader' of the mafia it's not a stretch to assume he was valuable to them, you spoke up in his defence then he silenced you because he saw there was no way out of it for him.

As for Chuck, until he is able to explain his actions I'm not going to vote on him for reasons I outlined above. Scum wouldn't play this bad without a reason. A jester springs to mind, as does a modified bomb. I'd much rather a vig take care of him.

if we lynch chuck and he flips town, then we can just lynch the people pressuring him

as for testing sam's theory, how about this: we ask chuck yes/no questions. if he quotes our post, then it means no. if he quotes our post and votes us, it means yes.

chuck, does that make sense to you?

with the shaggy issue.

think what you want.

as for the chuck issue. the same thing happened to me in the LC mafia a while back. chuck can only vote. he cannot talk. only vote.

crazymilkshake5 wrote:with the shaggy issue.

think what you want.

Way to answer the question . You still haven't explained what logic you were defending him on.

Am I the only one who thinks it's worth following up?

thechuck51 wrote:unvote vote pcm

unvote vote vodean

unvote vote shaggy

UNVOTE VOTE SAMGROSSY

If you're only able to vote, vote me then unvote.

If that's the case, I'm going to ask a series of yes or no questions and we can establish a code so you can answer them.

pancakemix wrote:

thechuck51 wrote:unvote vote pcm

unvote vote vodean

unvote vote shaggy

UNVOTE VOTE SAMGROSSY

If you're only able to vote, vote me then unvote.

If that's the case, I'm going to ask a series of yes or no questions and we can establish a code so you can answer them.

Actually, you posted something earlier today.

If you got a warning for that, vote me again, then unvote. That or explain yourself. If you won't I'm just going to vote to lynch you.

ShaggyDan wrote:

crazymilkshake5 wrote:I cant seem to find what your talking about on day 2.

as for the "scum buddying"
1. I didnt think he was scum. told me not to defend him. tried to bring me down with him.
2. Ive played plenty of mafia games, i know better than to scum buddy.

I asked you to show where in Zim's post you were reffering to for your defence of him. In the following post:

ShaggyDan wrote:The mod changed the colour rule on the last vote count of day one. Also what point did zim make?

zimmah wrote:Jgordon chose not to target anyone, according to him. Even if this is true, it would mean he has a potentially dangerous move like roleblock or vig. I don't believe his claim though. Also since there are already 2 persons who claimed to have been roleblocked, it would be unlikely jgordon is another roleblocker. So that would make jgordon a vig, if he would be telling the truth. Which I highly doubt, as I don't really see a motive for shaggy to expose himself if he would be lying about his claim. (much too dangerous to make such a story up, especially this early in the game). If he's lying he will pay for it eventually.

Your defence of jgordon made no sense at the time and he turned out to be scum. I don't buy into the 'experienced player' defence, it doesn't make you exempt from mistakes. And there are plenty of reasons why even an experienced player would scum buddy like that. Since jgordon was considered 'the leader' of the mafia it's not a stretch to assume he was valuable to them, you spoke up in his defence then he silenced you because he saw there was no way out of it for him.

As for Chuck, until he is able to explain his actions I'm not going to vote on him for reasons I outlined above. Scum wouldn't play this bad without a reason. A jester springs to mind, as does a modified bomb. I'd much rather a vig take care of him.

This is confusing, who is the 'you' you are referring to? The quote you mention has me an you in it, however, I dont think this whole scumbuddying is about me, is it? If so, I think you misinterpret my post, as I never defended jgordon. If you read the quote carefully, you will see I actually stated clearly I did not believe his claims, I just clarified what his claims were implying, as he did not claim yet at that point, I just pointed out the scope of his soft claim, I don't know how to word it. Either way, I voted him to show I didn't believe him, and we got him lynched. If this is not about me, than what is that quote all about?

Also, that pirate that is just voting, he's probably silenced in some way and trying to tell us something, I'd say let him live another day if possible, maybe he's only silenced for a day, some can explain himself tomorrow. This should in no way be taken as a defense for him though, I don't have any idea about him, I just want to give him a fair chance to defend and/or explain himself, as I doubt anyone would do something crazy like that without a good reason.

thechuck51 wrote:unvote vote pcm

unvote vote vodean

unvote vote shaggy

UNVOTE VOTE SAMGROSSY

the supposed PR is a bit suspicious, so FoS on Chuck,
although perhaps maybe he is trying to tell us something about samgrossy?
so perhaps we should pressure Sam a bit?, for the moment vote sam
and as mentioned before by shaggydan (in regards to chuck) there is always the vig option

ahh also I am not missing

Maybe the hint is in who he is voting? Some kind of clue? Aside from it being an aspect of a role I can't see any other reason...

Shaggy, Campin, Samgrossy.

Then; Pcm, Vodean, Shaggy, Samgrossy.

Maybe an acronym? S___ C___ Samgrossy. P___ V___ S___ Samgrossy.

Either way I'm willing to leave this till he gets a chance to explain himself. It looks like he cannot or will not post for now. Hopefully he is able to shed some light on why he is doing this, but if he can't we should explore other alternatives and return to it when we know more.

@Zimmah: all of my you's in that post were referring to milkshake. He said he believed jgordon was town for a reason you said (a reason which I can't seem to find nor has he told me) and then avoided my questioning with the equivalent of a "so-what?".

If no one else thinks this is worth pursuing I will drop it (to stop clogging the thread) but I can't shake the feeling that someone defending the confirmed mafia leader with no logic to back it up is scummy.

are there any roles that might prevent a player from posting but allow him to vote?
and most importantly can such a role act in the middle of the day?

i mean thechuck51 posted like a regular person and then all of a sudden he posted just votes.
something must have happened in the meantime.

DiM wrote:are there any roles that might prevent a player from posting but allow him to vote?
and most importantly can such a role act in the middle of the day?

i mean thechuck51 posted like a regular person and then all of a sudden he posted just votes.
something must have happened in the meantime.

I don't think chuck has been posting like a regular person. I think that his role is to kill me. I am not sure what kind of role that would be, (Insane silent Assassin?) but I think he is forced to gun for me. It is not like him to construct these flimsy cases and then push so hard.

But I also think he is trying to say something about the other people that he voted and unvoted.

Maybe we should let someone take care of him at night though. I can't imagine that any good will come of a day lynch from him. So I hope I am making the right move here.

UNVOTE

ShaggyDan wrote:@Zimmah: all of my you's in that post were referring to milkshake. He said he believed jgordon was town for a reason you said (a reason which I can't seem to find nor has he told me) and then avoided my questioning with the equivalent of a "so-what?".

If no one else thinks this is worth pursuing I will drop it (to stop clogging the thread) but I can't shake the feeling that someone defending the confirmed mafia leader with no logic to back it up is scummy.

i do agree that it is very scummy. but hold on. we need to figure out whats going on with chuck. then we can move back to your cases.
i also want to point out that jgordon was very defensive in his response to your post, which wasnt even directed at him.

samgrossy wrote:

DiM wrote:are there any roles that might prevent a player from posting but allow him to vote?
and most importantly can such a role act in the middle of the day?

i mean thechuck51 posted like a regular person and then all of a sudden he posted just votes.
something must have happened in the meantime.

I don't think chuck has been posting like a regular person.

actually he has. look here, on Thu Aug 09, 2012 5:35 am he posted what i consider a normal post.
then just 19 minutes later he posted this weird thing with nothing but votes

so in the span of those 19 minutes something happened.
in those 19 minutes at least 3 people were online and posting (shaggy, campin, vodean) and could have sent an action restricting chuck's posting. that's if such a role even exists. so far i've found no role that would explain this.
or perhaps chuck was warned by the mod to post only votes? i don't know.
at this point it could even be a crazy stunt pulled by chuck in an attempt to confuse us and get you lynched. maybe his role is lyncher and you're his target.

vodean wrote:I am town cop. i got two innocent results thus far, on edoc and safari. It would seem that there is more to my role (because of the camera, etc.) but i have no further info.

FOR VODEAN

got a few questions for you about this.
my character has a few attributes.


what is your characters name?
Rank?
Age?
hobby?

crazymilkshake5 wrote:

vodean wrote:I am town cop. i got two innocent results thus far, on edoc and safari. It would seem that there is more to my role (because of the camera, etc.) but i have no further info.

FOR VODEAN

got a few questions for you about this.
my character has a few attributes.


what is your characters name?
Rank?
Age?
hobby?

revealing that info will help no one but scum. i claimed to provide town with info. not because i was under pressure. revealing any more info about my character, or about roles in general, will only help scum fake-claim when the time comes.