I got back sooner than I thought. Huh, seems the town didn't follow the usual procedure and lynch Revan anyways.

Unvote : Thul

Revan, I took the bullet so you didn't have to claim. Oh well, I want to know why Req is fishing for names. Voting and sticking with it, fighting and argueing for it, then unvoting as soon as Revan gives the name, after stating he thought I was lying. Scummy.

And Revan really is town... As much as I want to lynch him myself sometimes. Tone it down man, Dag did, better for everyone.

I'm sorry, but even after reading your first few sentences -several- times I can't make any sense of them. Would you mind rephrasing and using proper punctuation please? I'm too tired for doing riddles right now. :/

My post was for okieSakana...

Bloody freaking new site and getting interferred by Lorick *growl*

I think you're missing something here. There are a few people who still suspect Lorick and Revan besides just Requiem. And I think tonight one of them will be investigated and that will confirm or disconfirm their towniness.

Anyway, shadow makes a good point at the top of this page and I wonder if Saaga missed it or intentionally ignored it. Vote pending change, still awaiting further comment (would kinda like to hear Shayle's thoughts too)

-grumble- that was also towards okieSakana.

Actually, despite the fact that I'm having some difficulty reading a number of your points... you are right in one respect.



He never says that it's a two-person group, and it could be read as saying that there are more members of "the mason group" as he puts it. Perhaps I just read what I wanted to read. The rest of it definitely still fits though, which is also what sold it to me-- that and the fact that it's completely stupid to claim mason as scum, since it gives people two of you if even one goes down for whatever reason (vig, investigation, the opposing scum group that appears to be in this game).

... and something is urging me to vote: OkieSakana for some reason. Perhaps it's the whole "let's target someone who doesn't really seem to be connected to them, and if he turns out clean, let's lynch one of them too" reasoning... where's the connection? How does this make sense? Especially since, by your reasoning, if you lynch Requiem and he is scum, you'd be obliged to go off and target Revan/Lorick anyways. Either way, your reasoning demands that Requiem be lynched for no gain so that we can lynch Revan or Lorick the day after. If you want to verify one of them through lynching, then lynch one of them instead of taking some circuitous path to nowhere.

Stupid missing slash. I want to fix you. I WANT TO FIX YOU BADLY.

To be short and unexplained. Because I weild the english language like a brick. I basically stated that Req is suspicious and if he isnt mafia and no one proves or disproves lorrick and their towniness we can simply lynch one of them the next day to find out plain and simple.

Rika, I see you! May I fix my slash so my post is readable, please? I promise not to edit anything else.

Yeah, I have growing concerns about Req. That said, I don't really want to jump on someone elses wagon.. But I can't really let that little fishing expedition go.. Hrm... Might as well see where it leads.

Vote : Requiem dot exe

I wouldnt want to lynch revan and lorrick if req is scum because I would be even more sure in my mind that rev and lor are town.

Well I was mostly referring to this part:



A... huh?

As for the rest, I'm not sure if anyone claimed it to be a 2-man group (too tired to look it up) but does it matter anyhow?

It makes a world of difference for them because if one of them dies and rika puts them up showing that it was a three man group I know a couple of you would be like he lied lynch them all sorta crap go down. I am simply placing down the facts so that when this crap is argued about we can bring back up the info in a quote for a sound defense for our big awsome mason group. People seem to think vanilla masons are bad but a group of 3 confirmed townies in a voting block make getting a lynch on people who are gennerally suspicious easier.

Given that it's come up, Lorick, I'd like you to clarify for the record: Two or three?

Well, I know that the role a person had is stated if they die, but I'm by far not so sure if it is also said if they were in a mason.

And since that last sentence of mine sounded horrible, I'm going to bed before I embarrass myself further.

If it's like the last few games, it will display that line, but with removed in place of any names.

Fine. Vote count!

Thul - 7 (Shiri, Revan, Shayle, Arix, Zetsu, Silferras, Saaga)
requiem - 3 (Shamarah, okieSakana, Lorick)
Revan - 2 (daganev, Shou)
Silvanus - 1 (Bael)
Shamarah - 1 (Serella)
Lorick - 1 (requiem)
Saaga - 1 (shadow)
okieSakana - 1 (Xenthos)
Bael - 1 (Silvanus)

It's 11 to lynch

I think what she's referring to is something I said. When Lorick first claimed, I reasoned that killing half of a 2 man mason group in order to confirm the other one had about as much benefit as a possible town group of only 2 people. He later said that he wasn't necessarily saying there were only two of them. I acknowledged that, and then defended the fact that he keeps talking about how I'm dismissing masons in general. I'm only defending my original statement, which was based on the interpretation I had at that time.

I wasn't fishing for Revan's name. I posted at the earliest time I had available. I've been saying since 6 this morning that I had a class to go to. I also said that I've been posting on my phone. So the type of precision it would have taken to type that and actually have it sent out within a minute of beginning (because note that I'd have had to start typing after refreshing the page and then scrolling down and reading what Revan had to say first) isn't something that's going to happen.