Ok, finally enough time to post...
I was referring to the link and I apologize if you took offense. It wasn't meant as accusatory, I was asking about the rules.
John- are you more concerned with the fact that I half a**ed a post or that I didn't list you with the same status? Why the need to point the finger towards Charlie? You could have picked others on that list that have fooled me in the past. It was "fluff & filler". I don't see much else on day 1. I'd rather try to share my thoughts in some way rather than posting a hundred one sentence (when we're lucky) posts about movies and coffee and other "fluff". I don't have time to play like that this time.
You really think that is what I meant? Please let me know if that is the case.
Interesnting isn't it?
I don't. I'm sure Charlie has, probably Rb, but I've never played with TRS. My list was rushed. I named everyone and then entered my thoughts on them relative to THIS game. Those that I had nothing listed for, I included something more generic. My mistake, no doubt.
I understand the vote and that's fine. Just come up with a better reason than lack of content or value. If that's your only criteria, you have a bunch of suspects.
This may be the shadiest comment so far. Stating your version of someone else's action to a third person with zero context. This is overtly manipulative and may get my vote.
No. If you're going to give others your play by play, at least strive for a little accuracy. I voted because he was the first to call out a "slip". That's usually done by evils that are too excited and anxious for a lynch target IME.
My vote will stay for now. I'm happy with where it is. FF... you're number two. You better ask one of your more experienced buddies to reign you in a bit.
From the top line in bold: Good of you to find time to eek out 3 whole posts so far, HN. But then, that's it? Seems you've gone away again. The way you started off this post by saying you had enough time, finally, I kinda expected you might contribute more than you did.
HN's next line in blue: I appreciate the acknowledgement and you taking the time to explain your remark wasn't accusatory. I was happy to have that cleared up (by DD as well). But I wonder about what follows your statement now where you explained you were
just asking about the rules (blue part quoted above).
But... if you were really just questioning the rules at that moment in time,
what were you asking me for? I'm not the game mod, Pappy is.
Or.. well, you weren't actually
asking me that either, were you? No, I suppose not. It sounded more rhetorical than that... and it wasn't posted anywhere (by itself) as a general question to the group either, was it? No, it wasn't.
So okay, I get it. << :shakehead: >> You were wondering about the rules after having misread my post quoting/embedding that youtube video and you wanted to ask to have that clarified. Sure that makes a lot of sense now. << :shakehead: >> You didn't post it as a question for all, or for Pappy either. To resolve that question in your mind, you thought it best to just bury it toward the bottom of your list.... right next to my name.... the same list offering your general impressions about each player.
That way everyone would be sure to see it, along with it's association to implicate me, as being what... "helpfully" scummy?... "helpfully" pro-town? But...... without having to come out and actually say so.
Alright, I can see where you might have really wondered if I had done something inappropriate... if you didn't notice that I hadn't. Scrolling through the thread or scanning down the page would explain that well enough. No big deal there, and no offense taken.
What I can't see is how (having this question in your mind) you weren't also trying to
answer that question in the minds of
everyone else reading about your suspects... instead of simply asking your so-called rule question out in the open.
I could also understand pointing at me if you believed I was editing the posts of others in the thread... as well you should if someone ever did that, no matter what.
But you seriously wondered if that rule had been changed for this game???
You actually thought it might be possible we'd play a mafia game where the game mod says it's okay for site mods to alter the posts of other players???
I don't believe you, HN. Not for a moment. Act all innocent about your honorable intentions and play that off as sincerely as you can now that I've questioned you about it.... but don't expect me to fall for this. I believe your real intent is quite clearly evident, not just by
what you said... but
where you said it.
My vote is going to stay exactly where it is. (No offense, dude.)
From the part in red: Yes, HN. It's only the first day and we've got a big list of players to look at this round... and it's chock full of wonderful suspect candidates and people who are quite hard to read in this game when they're evil. I actually have more suspects right now than I know what to do with.
Your comment about me really is what brought my attention your way... and when I pulled your posts and found there were only 2 of them, I went to see what else you'd had to say. Not much of anything at all if you ask me, except one lousy vote and one fluff-filled player list. And yes, I would love to base my vote against you on something more substantial in terms of content or value.. or both. But it seems you're far too busy to post more than 3 times in over 2 days of play. You're not satisfied with my assessment of your contribution, thus far? That's fine. We still have a few hours left. Maybe you'll contribute something useful between now and then... in which case, my vote might change as well. Personally, I don't see that happening at this point.
Do you?
