[Basic] Pirates of the Caribbean (Curse of the Black Pearl) Game Thread - D2

[Guest]

Okay, let's do this then.

 

Here's my post.

 

 

 

 

 

Tiink got upset with people voting him before first interacting with him in post #487 (p25). I had said that your play by interaction with other players should be towny enough without having to explain yourself to everyone. Not long after that, he had said he has null on two of the most active players in the game. Almost like what Wildfire is doing atm. 

 

It could be a difference in play - that some people look at posts made by others and think of their own opinion, whilst others want to interact personally before getting their own opinion. But if we go with the fact that Tiinker had wanted the latter, but then proceeded to actually do the former... well. I don't see a difference in gameplay there. Rather, I see someone attempting to grasp at straws. Especially considering that he's stating things, but not backing it up with quotes that actually prove it. 

 

 

What???? Mate are we even playing the same game?

 

[unvote]

 

[v]Besie[/v]

 

Which part do you disagree with?

 

 

 

 

Here is the posts I was referring to in the blue bold.

 

 

 

 

as long as its on believer or tink  im in

 

How people get these reads after such little interaction is beyond me.

 

 

 

as long as its on believer or tink  im in

 

How people get these reads after such little interaction is beyond me.

 

 

Actually after no interaction. We haven't even spoken to each other yet itt. What's the deal Dice?

 

 

 

 

Then here's an ISO I did on Tiink then, to indicate why his excuses for not being here wasn't entirely valid imo.

 

 

 

A bit of an ISO on Tiink

 

 

 

Sporadicly available. I might be taking the Pral route and literally not exist until D2 since I'm swamped. I can't stop myself from reading and posting though so while I want to do that it probably won't happen.

 

So he immediately said he can't be here D1. Because of this, I'm not taking his low activity - the actual presence and post count - as alignment indicative. 

 

 

 

 

So let me get this straight. The suss on me is because I answered someone on what I thought his alignment was? Because I shared my thoughts? 

 

Well then. Let's change that.

 

Lots of time left if youre a villager.

 

 

I know. That's why I said "let's change that".

 

 

So whatcha going to do? 

 

 

This post shows that he's interested in what is going on in the game. He asks the questions that some others don't.

 

 

I'm gonna have a hard time this game since I have played with so few of you often and a lot of my gut reads are actually personality reads

I can't learn who you are in just one game :/

 

So how do I get on your good side? 

 

 

This is the post that I don't like. pocket attempt?

 

 

Monstr besie tink

Ggwp

 

well played darthe. well played.

 

 

So he obviously doesn't like the fact that he's in darthe's top 3 scum. 

Also lol to darthe who said - very recently - that no one replied to it?

Anyway. He doesn't really say much in this post except that he seems to disagree.

 

 

 

 

 

He kinda did. Post 1 non-mod of the game

This was to tinker

 

 

lol god damn it. [unvote]

 

Whoa. Wait a second.

 

You vote Z in something that looks like super thin reasoning, but it doesn't come across as a joke, and then as soon as you're corrected (which btw I can't believe you didn't go check this actually. It was like right there) you unvote? 

 

Afraid to step on anyone's toes?

 

I just don't think that's who I am. 

 

 

Defends himself slightly here. Still active in the game. This activity is not alignment indicative though, as this can be done as either alignment imo.

 

 

as long as its on believer or tink  im in

 

How people get these reads after such little interaction is beyond me.

 

 

 

I find this rather amusing.

 

For one, yes. Hard to interact when he's not here.

For two, if he expected to be interacted with - and thus be around for that to occur - then why did he say he won't be here D1?

And as conclusion, did he use that as a way to pass by D1 without too much worry? This may be done as either alignment, of course. 

 

Tiink, have you read D1 some? Can you give your ideas and/or reads and/or thoughts on who you think is scum/town/null?

 

 

 

Then here is the posts I was referring to in the bold orange.

 

 

 

 

Tiink, what do you think about zander and darthe's alignments?

 

This one? I don't know I haven't read closely enough to give anything good. For the sake of saying something I'll say null.

 

 

 

Tiink, what do you think about zander and darthe's alignments?

 
This one? I don't know I haven't read closely enough to give anything good. For the sake of saying something I'll say null.

This is a bad look to me. Zander and Darthe are up there in terms of content. Null without able to give specifics seems unlikely.

 

 

 

 

When looking at the bolded purple: The latter, being that you wanted to interact first, is evident in you telling Dice that he needs to interact with you first, before deciding on whether you are scum. That means you prefer finding scum by talking to them, right? If you want people to do that to you, then we can expect that from you as well - if we go at this logically.

The former, being that you can find people's alignments by seeing their interaction with others, is then what you have been doing further in the game - since you weren't terribly active yourself. Facts, as I see it.

 

So yes. We are playing the same game. 

 

[v]Tiinker[/v]

 

 

 

Edited with Mod permission.

[Guest]

I keep breaking posts. May I please edit this one too, Mod Goddess?

[Nolder]

Might be v/v violence but I want to see where this goes for now.

[Guest]

If someone quotes that post before I get permission to fix it, please just close the vote bracket behind Tiink's vote in the first quote.

[Tiinker]

 

 

 

BlomBesie and manbat are definitely not on the same team because in a game this empty they just wouldn’t put so much effort into distancing. 

 

The Zander train was legit imo despite what people are saying. I think that his game wasn’t too representative of his previous town games. He was playing more cautiously and I’d definitely say he was more careful about what he was saying towards other people when I’ve seen him go absolutely nuts when he thought he was in the right (see Overwatch, Tarmon Gaidan for a rep).

Once he put his focus in here after the Tarmon Gaidon game ended, he was more or less the way Zander always played. It frankly wasn't too different. Don't see why you would want to dismiss his train like that.

 

 

Zander had painted himself as scummy before then and I can totally understand people not being swayed purely off of "meta" at that point. It wouldn't have deterred me anyway and the other factor is that the counter attempt was to lynch another town.

 

He was definitely a bit different at the start. But, to totally dismiss his train with the explanation that he was a natural lynch option is someting i don't agree. There definitely was some scum involvement in pushing him and making it v/v trains.

 

 

You're right I won't dismiss it fully but it hasn't made me feel badly about the people on his lynch train atp.

[Tiinker]

I deleted a bunch of the quotes in your post because "error too many quotes". 

 

 

Okay, let's do this then.

 

Here's my post.

 

 

 

When looking at the bolded purple: The latter, being that you wanted to interact first, is evident in you telling Dice that he needs to interact with you first, before deciding on whether you are scum. That means you prefer finding scum by talking to them, right? If you want people to do that to you, then we can expect that from you as well - if we go at this logically.

The former, being that you can find people's alignments by seeing their interaction with others, is then what you have been doing further in the game - since you weren't terribly active yourself. Facts, as I see it.

 

So yes. We are playing the same game. 

 

[v]Tiinker[/v]

 

 

This is just no. I didn't want him to interact with me first. I had barely touched the game and he was making a nonsense statement by calling me out for admitting I was wrong and when I pointed out if the alternatives of continuing my vote on Zander after being explicitly shown proof that my reasoning was wrong OR coming up with some convoluted reason as to why I was right were both way worse he simply ignored me. He just tried to put me in a lose-lose situation which if town was incredibly lazy, but imo more likely to be scum given how aggressively he pursued it.

 

Do you have some sort of logical chart that you're following with a bunch of if/else statements because I feel like you've stripped all these things from their contexts just to try and make them fit your argument.

[Tiinker]

Might be v/v violence but I want to see where this goes for now.

 

It's really not going to go anywhere because the argument makes no sense. She's trying to paint it like I got annoyed because people weren't interacting with me specifically before getting on my ass.

 

 

 

 

Tiink - How is it that you have been around responding for awhile now, but have not had any actual contribution.

 

If you were actually AWOL it would make sense. But, you are here.

 

Cause I was replying from the gym and now I'm in class. I'm not going to go and analyze the previous part of the thread until I've got time to sit down and get my head into it since I'm in the middle of other things atm but I can still respond. 

 

I'm literally just being as honest as I can.

 

 

 

If I say I haven't read enough and you ask me to give a read anyway... You're just nitpicking.

 

 

 

Null on players that have little content makes sense of course. But, when players have a lot, I think you are pressed to defend a null stance on them.

 

I mean yeah, if I had a good idea of what the thread was like.

 

If you actually absorb that it seems pretty normal and the most probable thing for me to do. I'm not going to try and cover my ass with some fake read. But it seems like when people are looking at me it's just "Oh this post looks scummy" without bothering with any context at all. 

 

 

 

Also why would I give specifics with null? There isn't anything that specifically stands out. Look, here's what I'll do. I'll give you some reads when I've actually read the thread properly like I said earlier.

 

 

 

Literally said it like 50 times. 

 

 

 

 

as long as its on believer or tink  im in

 

How people get these reads after such little interaction is beyond me.

 

 

Actually after no interaction. We haven't even spoken to each other yet itt. What's the deal Dice?

 

 

I can only assume you ONLY read this post and dismissed all the rest 

 

That post was consequently followed by this:

 

 

 

was a weird reason for a vote and then way too easy for you to get off

 

So after I voted what would have been the towniest thing for me to do? Lol you've already decided you want me to be scum and literally just "filled" in the rest. Feel like this was done earlier by someone irt my vote but can't remember who.

 

 

and then me being ignored and him seeming to ignore me after. Sure is annoying but you saying I got annoyed because he voted me and when we didn't converse is insane when the only reason I got annoyed was because his reason was lame.

[Sooh]

Ok, I'm around and have read up and will be digging in now. 

 

Going to start with Darthe and work my way through at least Besie, Nolder and Tiinker. Wish me luck lol.

[Tiinker]

I might be sounding pissy here and I do apologize and I'm not one to say that there's a "right" way to play the game at all but the conclusions that people have come to in this game really boggle my mind.

[Guest]

I deleted a bunch of the quotes in your post because "error too many quotes". 

 

 

Okay, let's do this then.

 

Here's my post.

 

 

 

When looking at the bolded purple: The latter, being that you wanted to interact first, is evident in you telling Dice that he needs to interact with you first, before deciding on whether you are scum. That means you prefer finding scum by talking to them, right? If you want people to do that to you, then we can expect that from you as well - if we go at this logically.

The former, being that you can find people's alignments by seeing their interaction with others, is then what you have been doing further in the game - since you weren't terribly active yourself. Facts, as I see it.

 

So yes. We are playing the same game. 

 

[v]Tiinker[/v]

 

 

This is just no. I didn't want him to interact with me first. I had barely touched the game and he was making a nonsense statement by calling me out for admitting I was wrong and when I pointed out if the alternatives of continuing my vote on Zander after being explicitly shown proof that my reasoning was wrong OR coming up with some convoluted reason as to why I was right were both way worse he simply ignored me. He just tried to put me in a lose-lose situation which if town was incredibly lazy, but imo more likely to be scum given how aggressively he pursued it.

 

Do you have some sort of logical chart that you're following with a bunch of if/else statements because I feel like you've stripped all these things from their contexts just to try and make them fit your argument.

 

I remember that you said you didn't like his (Dice) reasoning for voting you. It doesn't change the fact that you had said you wanted interaction first. 

I did not see the events as you describe them - difference of viewpoint. As I had seen it, you'd said you wanted more interaction. So he did ask you. And your reasoning had definitely made sense. That was not what I was focusing here, and I do not doubt that you did a good job of explaining yourself there. I had even commented on your posts then.

 

No, I did not strip them of anything. I just posted a simple: this is what you have been doing. And you denied it.

Thus, I quoted the posts to prove that it is, in fact, what you've been doing.

 

You added context that I did not even refer to in the first place.

[Tiinker]

 

I deleted a bunch of the quotes in your post because "error too many quotes". 

 

 

Okay, let's do this then.

 

Here's my post.

 

 

 

When looking at the bolded purple: The latter, being that you wanted to interact first, is evident in you telling Dice that he needs to interact with you first, before deciding on whether you are scum. That means you prefer finding scum by talking to them, right? If you want people to do that to you, then we can expect that from you as well - if we go at this logically.

The former, being that you can find people's alignments by seeing their interaction with others, is then what you have been doing further in the game - since you weren't terribly active yourself. Facts, as I see it.

 

So yes. We are playing the same game. 

 

[v]Tiinker[/v]

 

 

This is just no. I didn't want him to interact with me first. I had barely touched the game and he was making a nonsense statement by calling me out for admitting I was wrong and when I pointed out if the alternatives of continuing my vote on Zander after being explicitly shown proof that my reasoning was wrong OR coming up with some convoluted reason as to why I was right were both way worse he simply ignored me. He just tried to put me in a lose-lose situation which if town was incredibly lazy, but imo more likely to be scum given how aggressively he pursued it.

 

Do you have some sort of logical chart that you're following with a bunch of if/else statements because I feel like you've stripped all these things from their contexts just to try and make them fit your argument.

 

I remember that you said you didn't like his (Dice) reasoning for voting you. It doesn't change the fact that you had said you wanted interaction first. 

I did not see the events as you describe them - difference of viewpoint. As I had seen it, you'd said you wanted more interaction. So he did ask you. And your reasoning had definitely made sense. That was not what I was focusing here, and I do not doubt that you did a good job of explaining yourself there. I had even commented on your posts then.

 

No, I did not strip them of anything. I just posted a simple: this is what you have been doing. And you denied it.

Thus, I quoted the posts to prove that it is, in fact, what you've been doing.

 

You added context that I did not even refer to in the first place.

 

 

Because it was needed context. This post here is a blatant misrepresentation of what happened. 

 

 

Tiink got upset with people voting him before first interacting with him in post #487 (p25). I had said that your play by interaction with other players should be towny enough without having to explain yourself to everyone. Not long after that, he had said he has null on two of the most active players in the game. Almost like what Wildfire is doing atm. 

 

It could be a difference in play - that some people look at posts made by others and think of their own opinion, whilst others want to interact personally before getting their own opinion. But if we go with the fact that Tiinker had wanted the latter, but then proceeded to actually do the former... well. I don't see a difference in gameplay there. Rather, I see someone attempting to grasp at straws. Especially considering that he's stating things, but not backing it up with quotes that actually prove it. 

 

 

You've selected "upset with people voting him before first interacting" which is not true. I got upset because people wanted me to give reads so I said I'd give them reads when I'd read the thread and then they scum read me for that despite the fact that we had plenty of time. Then you say "he has null on two of the most active players in the game" - again you've stripped this of the context that I said repeatedly that I hadn't read the thread and don't mention that I came back and gave the reads I said I would with detailed explanations of what I thought of these players.

 

Not going to bother with that last few sentences about "wanted the latter, but then proceeded to do the former."

 

 

 

[Guest]

 

 

I deleted a bunch of the quotes in your post because "error too many quotes". 

 

 

Okay, let's do this then.

 

Here's my post.

 

 

 

When looking at the bolded purple: The latter, being that you wanted to interact first, is evident in you telling Dice that he needs to interact with you first, before deciding on whether you are scum. That means you prefer finding scum by talking to them, right? If you want people to do that to you, then we can expect that from you as well - if we go at this logically.

The former, being that you can find people's alignments by seeing their interaction with others, is then what you have been doing further in the game - since you weren't terribly active yourself. Facts, as I see it.

 

So yes. We are playing the same game. 

 

[v]Tiinker[/v]

 

 

This is just no. I didn't want him to interact with me first. I had barely touched the game and he was making a nonsense statement by calling me out for admitting I was wrong and when I pointed out if the alternatives of continuing my vote on Zander after being explicitly shown proof that my reasoning was wrong OR coming up with some convoluted reason as to why I was right were both way worse he simply ignored me. He just tried to put me in a lose-lose situation which if town was incredibly lazy, but imo more likely to be scum given how aggressively he pursued it.

 

Do you have some sort of logical chart that you're following with a bunch of if/else statements because I feel like you've stripped all these things from their contexts just to try and make them fit your argument.

 

I remember that you said you didn't like his (Dice) reasoning for voting you. It doesn't change the fact that you had said you wanted interaction first. 

I did not see the events as you describe them - difference of viewpoint. As I had seen it, you'd said you wanted more interaction. So he did ask you. And your reasoning had definitely made sense. That was not what I was focusing here, and I do not doubt that you did a good job of explaining yourself there. I had even commented on your posts then.

 

No, I did not strip them of anything. I just posted a simple: this is what you have been doing. And you denied it.

Thus, I quoted the posts to prove that it is, in fact, what you've been doing.

 

You added context that I did not even refer to in the first place.

 

 

Because it was needed context. This post here is a blatant misrepresentation of what happened. 

 

 

Tiink got upset with people voting him before first interacting with him in post #487 (p25). I had said that your play by interaction with other players should be towny enough without having to explain yourself to everyone. Not long after that, he had said he has null on two of the most active players in the game. Almost like what Wildfire is doing atm. 

 

It could be a difference in play - that some people look at posts made by others and think of their own opinion, whilst others want to interact personally before getting their own opinion. But if we go with the fact that Tiinker had wanted the latter, but then proceeded to actually do the former... well. I don't see a difference in gameplay there. Rather, I see someone attempting to grasp at straws. Especially considering that he's stating things, but not backing it up with quotes that actually prove it. 

 

 

You've selected "upset with people voting him before first interacting" which is not true. I got upset because people wanted me to give reads so I said I'd give them reads when I'd read the thread and then they scum read me for that despite the fact that we had plenty of time. Then you say "he has null on two of the most active players in the game" - again you've stripped this of the context that I said repeatedly that I hadn't read the thread and don't mention that I came back and gave the reads I said I would with detailed explanations of what I thought of these players.

 

Not going to bother with that last few sentences about "wanted the latter, but then proceeded to do the former."

 

 

I believe the "people wanted you to give reads" only happened after you asked people to interact with you before voting.

 

And yes, I did say you had null on two of the most active players in the game. And you did. At that point in time, Calder had agreed.

I also hear that you say you weren't active, but you were active enough to respond. I put that in the quote of my ISO on you.

 

I can literally back up, and have backed up, every one of these statements with quotes.

 

 

The last few sentences are my opinion, based on what you were doing. It may be discounted because you say you play differently than I thought, and I will accept that.

[Nynaeve]

Savvy Vote Count

 

Besie (2): manbat, Tiinker

Believer (1): Darthe

monstr (1): Believer

Tiinker (1): Besie

 

Waiting for the opportune moment (6): The rest of you lot.

 

 

With 11 players alive, it take 6 to lynch.

 

 

Deadline: 

[Tiinker]

I didn't respond to things that required game-knowledge. I didn't case anyone and I didn't create random reads but I can respond to things like 

 

 

 

 

I deleted a bunch of the quotes in your post because "error too many quotes". 

 

 

Okay, let's do this then.

 

Here's my post.

 

 

 

When looking at the bolded purple: The latter, being that you wanted to interact first, is evident in you telling Dice that he needs to interact with you first, before deciding on whether you are scum. That means you prefer finding scum by talking to them, right? If you want people to do that to you, then we can expect that from you as well - if we go at this logically.

The former, being that you can find people's alignments by seeing their interaction with others, is then what you have been doing further in the game - since you weren't terribly active yourself. Facts, as I see it.

 

So yes. We are playing the same game. 

 

[v]Tiinker[/v]

 

 

This is just no. I didn't want him to interact with me first. I had barely touched the game and he was making a nonsense statement by calling me out for admitting I was wrong and when I pointed out if the alternatives of continuing my vote on Zander after being explicitly shown proof that my reasoning was wrong OR coming up with some convoluted reason as to why I was right were both way worse he simply ignored me. He just tried to put me in a lose-lose situation which if town was incredibly lazy, but imo more likely to be scum given how aggressively he pursued it.

 

Do you have some sort of logical chart that you're following with a bunch of if/else statements because I feel like you've stripped all these things from their contexts just to try and make them fit your argument.

 

I remember that you said you didn't like his (Dice) reasoning for voting you. It doesn't change the fact that you had said you wanted interaction first. 

I did not see the events as you describe them - difference of viewpoint. As I had seen it, you'd said you wanted more interaction. So he did ask you. And your reasoning had definitely made sense. That was not what I was focusing here, and I do not doubt that you did a good job of explaining yourself there. I had even commented on your posts then.

 

No, I did not strip them of anything. I just posted a simple: this is what you have been doing. And you denied it.

Thus, I quoted the posts to prove that it is, in fact, what you've been doing.

 

You added context that I did not even refer to in the first place.

 

 

Because it was needed context. This post here is a blatant misrepresentation of what happened. 

 

 

Tiink got upset with people voting him before first interacting with him in post #487 (p25). I had said that your play by interaction with other players should be towny enough without having to explain yourself to everyone. Not long after that, he had said he has null on two of the most active players in the game. Almost like what Wildfire is doing atm. 

 

It could be a difference in play - that some people look at posts made by others and think of their own opinion, whilst others want to interact personally before getting their own opinion. But if we go with the fact that Tiinker had wanted the latter, but then proceeded to actually do the former... well. I don't see a difference in gameplay there. Rather, I see someone attempting to grasp at straws. Especially considering that he's stating things, but not backing it up with quotes that actually prove it. 

 

 

You've selected "upset with people voting him before first interacting" which is not true. I got upset because people wanted me to give reads so I said I'd give them reads when I'd read the thread and then they scum read me for that despite the fact that we had plenty of time. Then you say "he has null on two of the most active players in the game" - again you've stripped this of the context that I said repeatedly that I hadn't read the thread and don't mention that I came back and gave the reads I said I would with detailed explanations of what I thought of these players.

 

Not going to bother with that last few sentences about "wanted the latter, but then proceeded to do the former."

 

 

I believe the "people wanted you to give reads" only happened after you asked people to interact with you before voting.

 

And yes, I did say you had null on two of the most active players in the game. And you did. At that point in time, Calder had agreed.

 

I also hear that you say you weren't active, but you were active enough to respond. I put that in the quote of my ISO on you.

 

I can literally back up, and have backed up, every one of these statements with quotes.

 

 

The last few sentences are my opinion, based on what you were doing. It may be discounted because you say you play differently than I thought, and I will accept that.

 

 

Lol for the last time. If someone asks me why I'm not able to be active I can tell them that. It's about me. If someone is asking me if I think Darthe is scum I can't tell them that without the appropriate information. It's not rocket science. These are not backed up statements and the fact that you're voting me based on this is just dodgey. You are voting me based on D1 interactions that have been there for ages and have not considered anything to do with the lynch, or NK. Somehow my D1 activity is enough to shoot me to the top of your WTL list despite nothing changing between then and now. Sketch.

[Tiinker]

Ignore the first sentence. I wrote the sentence out and then thought I lost it when I inserted the quote.

[Nynaeve]

[Believer]

I've risen from the grave that is my bed.

 

I've skimmed the last 5 or so pages. Are we killing tiink now?

[Nolder]

I think so.

Not only did his original reason stink but he failed to explain it and vastly overreacted.

 

[v]Tiinker[/v]

[Guest]

I understand your arguments, Tiink.

 

But your last paragraph completely throws what I have said out of context, and I honestly do not feel like trying to explain my single post - simple reasoning imo - to you anymore.

You've been scum to many people for many reasons, including myself and my reasons. You have been on my wtl since D1. 

I guess you wouldn't know that, since even though you were responding to people, nothing "required game-knowledge".

And even though you were obviously reading the thread D1, there was absolutely nothing that made you think that the top posters were either maybe more scummy or maybe more towny. This is a past argument - which wasn't even with me - that I had no intention of bringing up again. I just mentioned it because you accused me of false thoughts/ideas by saying that we weren't even playing the same game.

 

I'm stepping away from this argument now, because you are not actually addressing the problem - which was as underlined above. 

[Darthe]

What does nol think of common suspects like believe, sooh and wild?

[Guest]

I've risen from the grave that is my bed.

 

I've skimmed the last 5 or so pages. Are we killing tiink now?

 

I wouldn't mind it. He's definitely the most probable scum on my list atm.

[Tiinker]

I think so.

Not only did his original reason stink but he failed to explain it and vastly overreacted.

 

[v]Tiinker[/v]

 

Genuinely speechless.

[Sooh]

ISOing Darthe is a chore and a half. Kinda regretting the decision I made to start there.

 

Besie/Tiink is interesting. 

 

Believer needs to do more than pop in with an "Are we voting X now?" in order to get off my WTL list right now.

[Tiinker]

I understand your arguments, Tiink.

 

But your last paragraph completely throws what I have said out of context, and I honestly do not feel like trying to explain my single post - simple reasoning imo - to you anymore.

You've been scum to many people for many reasons, including myself and my reasons. You have been on my wtl since D1. 

I guess you wouldn't know that, since even though you were responding to people, nothing "required game-knowledge".

And even though you were obviously reading the thread D1, there was absolutely nothing that made you think that the top posters were either maybe more scummy or maybe more towny. This is a past argument - which wasn't even with me - that I had no intention of bringing up again. I just mentioned it because you accused me of false thoughts/ideas by saying that we weren't even playing the same game.

 

I'm stepping away from this argument now, because you are not actually addressing the problem - which was as underlined above. 

 

yeah the fact that you don't think that the context I provided is important to understanding why certain actions are taken means we are not playing the same game. I've addressed that. You voted me after I voted you and then you posted that you ISO'd me while quoting my D1 and voted me back. I've been on your WTL since D1 and despite lynch and NK you haven't reevaluated anything.

[Nynaeve]

Savvy Vote Count

 

Besie (2): manbat, Tiinker

Tiinker (2): Besie, Nolder

Believer (1): Darthe

monstr (1): Believer

 

Waiting for the opportune moment (5): The rest of you lot.

 

 

With 11 players alive, it take 6 to lynch.

 

 

Deadline: