Alright, bitchachos, new rule:
No anti-smite voting. You must give a valid reason for voting for someone.
No anti-smite voting. You must give a valid reason for voting for someone.
Werewolf: Nice and Simple GAME THREAD
- Thread starter the_j485
- Start date
wow, bitchachos, I'm adding that to my personal dictionary of insults.[DOUBLEPOST=1407443587][/DOUBLEPOST]Imma vote Shazam, she was pretty quick to try and throw those guys under the bus just for not saying "wolf"
My reasoning stands. The cake guy didn't even try to make a decent RP. I did the backstory of nobody thing at least.
Umm he was not throwing anyone under a bus. Any villager with a decent strategy would know that they could easily find a wolf since one possible wolf role involves having the word wolf in all his posts. All he was simply doing was asking those four people to post something without that word in it to narrow down some possible suspects. I vote for SkeletonPunk for the above reason
I wasn't actually serious, I was going to change it later, just wanted to get my vote in, I know the reason wasn't too legit, but it is better than saying antismite
As a wolf, Shazam gains nothing from that challenge-it casts no doubt that can't be wiped away with a single post. From the point of view of non-wolves, it's a useful check.
Vote SkeletonPunk for now, as he seems to be trying to shut down a tactic that we gain information from either way, but I would certainly be interested to hear from the other two
Vote SkeletonPunk for now, as he seems to be trying to shut down a tactic that we gain information from either way, but I would certainly be interested to hear from the other two
like I said, that vote wasn't intended to at all be taken seriously. I really don't know who to vote for so for now I can't really change it.
So you;re basically saying it was antismite?
Clever lad.
Alright bitchachos, next ant-smite gets themselves a punishment decided on a random number gen.
I gave a reason didn't I? Wether or not it was one I believed in isnt really a determining factor of wether or not I broke the rules isn't it now?
Also, these votes are bordering on bandwagoning
Alright bitchachos, from now on the next post even bordering on bandwagoning (i.e. less than two lines reasoning).
Alright bitchachos, from now on the next post even bordering on bandwagoning (i.e. less than two lines reasoning).
As much as I know you want to stop antismites. I think that is something that should be a guideline over a rule. Generally in the first couple of days there is no evidence against anyone. So how can we vote for someone with proof if there is no proof when this person needed to vote in the first place. Also sometimes antismites is used because you won't be on later to change...
You just stated that those were not reasons. I don't care if the reasons are bull. I want a decent god damn reason.
He stated reasons. He just doesn't believe in them completely
Well, if you won't be on later, look through the previous posts for evidence. believe me, I've seen a decent bit already.
Whether it was serious or not, it's the most suspicious thing I've seen anyone do this game so far (except for the_j485's murder spree, but you can't lynch the GM). If anything else happens that diverts my suspicions to someone else, then they'll get voted for instead. As things stand, I have to vote for you as far as I'm concerned