Agger wrote:In the next 30 mins if I can get away without doing any work.
Work
Agger wrote:In the next 30 mins if I can get away without doing any work.
Co Thao wrote:
Kim Trong Tu wrote:I still don't have any handle on what's going on or who anyone is. Is that normal?
n.b. If you think that's suspicious or a convenient excuse for staying under the radar feel fee to kill me.
n.b.b. And if you think that's a double wolf bluff, feel free to kill me twice.
Han Xuan Phuoc wrote:Kim Trong Tu wrote:I still don't have any handle on what's going on or who anyone is. Is that normal?
n.b. If you think that's suspicious or a convenient excuse for staying under the radar feel fee to kill me.
n.b.b. And if you think that's a double wolf bluff, feel free to kill me twice.
I just wanted to let you know that from now on you are 'asian jerry stiller' in my mind.
Ong Xuan Giang wrote:Han Xuan Phuoc wrote:Kim Trong Tu wrote:I still don't have any handle on what's going on or who anyone is. Is that normal?
n.b. If you think that's suspicious or a convenient excuse for staying under the radar feel fee to kill me.
n.b.b. And if you think that's a double wolf bluff, feel free to kill me twice.
I just wanted to let you know that from now on you are 'asian jerry stiller' in my mind.
I was thinking Adam Ant but I see where you are going
To Cong Dac Kien wrote:Chung Duc Tho I like the look of Diep Lanh's analysis
Kim Trong Tu my second vote was going to be Bui Huu Khan,but he is dead, so rather than pick at random, which is what was coming, I'll copy Ong Xuan Giang's votes exactly, because he has some kind of reason, more than I do.
Last edited by Ong Xuan Giang on Thu Dec 18, 2014 12:35 pm; edited 2 times in total
Agger wrote:Stop quoting vote posts without changing the formatting you bunch of cunts.
Ong Xuan Giang wrote:To Cong Dac Kien wrote:Chung Duc Tho I like the look of Diep Lanh's analysis
Kim Trong Tu my second vote was going to be Bui Huu Khan,but he is dead, so rather than pick at random, which is what was coming, I'll copy Ong Xuan Giang's votes exactly, because he has some kind of reason, more than I do.
Oi, now i will have mongs accusing me of starting a bandwagon
EDIT
Right on cue, you couldn't make it up.
Any kind of analysis just gets shot to fuck in these games now.
Thao Dinh Huy wrote:Admin was reminding that some of the people in Flowdocks need to put email addresses. Suggests that some of the wolves weren't paying attention.Giang Quang Phuc wrote:Thao Dinh Huy wrote:Giang Quang Phuc wrote:Voting for people who didn't vote yesterday is a very easy out for the baddies.
How likely is it that someone who drew a wolf role would fail to make a vote on day 1 and thus draw attention to themselves?
Seeing as I just voted for the ones who didn't vote, I'll field this.
There is literally nothing else to go on. The wolves don't need to look for easy outs yet.
The chances of either of the non-voters being a wolf is less than the rest of the player population. With that in mind votes for them do help the wolves hide with two lazy votes with minimal justification and also don't help us find the bad guys.
It's a lose/lose proposition.
And in this round you can hide lazy votes without justification, because there is no way of justifying any votes... Apart from votes for me apparently :wave:
Thao Dinh Huy wrote:
The reason I was getting bangwaggoned was that I'd voted for the two non-voters, and it stopped when I showed pretty clearly that at least one wolf wasn't paying attention enough to make himself an email address, so there was a good chance he didn't vote.
Other reasons I picked up votes include "trying to be helpful" (albeit, I acknowledge now, in a stupid way). Sticking my head up like that would have been fucking stupid as a wolf.
I was never that close to being lynched, just picked up a few votes early on when there was nothing else to go on.
Hau Huu Due wrote:One for us all to watch is Ong Ngoc Huynh. All if his posts are in that gimmicky italic way, but not one of them has contributed anything. At all. Even his last vote there is without any reasons stated.
He's getting one of my votes. I'll see wjo gets the other.
Vong Qui Nguyen wrote:
2) Highlighting dead guys analysis, oft used wolf tactic implying someone was killed for good analysis leaving us looking at it and finding no wolves.
Vong Qui Nguyen wrote:
Ong Ngoc Huynh
To Cong Dac Cien
1) I don't trust his pro-village mystical doctor philosophy type posts, it has the hallmarks of a wrong 'un.
2) Highlighting dead guys analysis, oft used wolf tactic implying someone was killed for good analysis leaving us looking at it and finding no wolves.
Ong Ngoc Huynh wrote:More unnecessary deaths it would seem. Still we must stay strong and United in our cause.
Chung Duc Tho
Thong Cong Toan
I will be in the infirmary if anybody needs me.
To Cong Dac Kien wrote:Vong Qui Nguyen wrote:
Ong Ngoc Huynh
To Cong Dac Cien
1) I don't trust his pro-village mystical doctor philosophy type posts, it has the hallmarks of a wrong 'un.
2) Highlighting dead guys analysis, oft used wolf tactic implying someone was killed for good analysis leaving us looking at it and finding no wolves.
The village has been terrible at ignoring analysis and votes from players the wolves kill for many, many games now, I have made use of this as a wolf in previous games more than once.
If a player does some analysis early on and hits on a couple of wolves, even if he starts voting with it you can kill him straight away before he gains traction in the thread the village ignores it every time and you're off the hook.
If you leave it alone for a few rounds and it gets a bit of weight behind it then you're screwed as it will be seized upon. You have to pluck thrm early.
Han Xuan Phuoc wrote:Is he Trustworthy Doctor? One to look out for for sure, Christmas Bieber
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
|
|