vegitalian
New Member
Ok, so I googled OMGUS and came up with this: Office of Military Government, United States
Is this right?
Is this right?
"I want to go back to this post. If vegitalian is a wolf, than I would STRONGLY suggest we target Vablakes next. If vegitalian flips wolf that it would not be a stretch that he assumed Vablakes was going down was banking on Vablakes flipping wolf so he could go after me next using that as a basis."
Sound logic, actually. I'm not a wolf, so it doesn't apply, but I see where you're coming from. The question is, what is the reaction when I flip townie? If I get killed by the wolves and flip townie? Could draw a lot more suspicion to you. Only one way to find out, I guess.
You should worry about getting lynched today, not getting killed by the wolves at night (though being a wolf yourself, you shouldn't worry bout that). Are you trying to scare me? I told you, I have nothing to fear from wolves.
You should worry about getting lynched today, not getting killed by the wolves at night (though being a wolf yourself, you shouldn't worry bout that). Are you trying to scare me? I told you, I have nothing to fear from wolves.
Vegetalian said:what is the reaction when I flip townie? If I get killed by the wolves and flip townie?
You have nothing to fear from wolves? So you're either saying that you're a wolf, somehow protected, or not a threat? Well, you're extremely vocal, so I'm guessing you're a large enough threat to the wolves (if you are town-aligned). We're left with two options: some sort of protected role or wolf.
My initial post did not post him in a bad light - at least that was not my intention.
Ok, assume that I am a wolf:
-I list myself as defending SS7 and Tables
-I get lynched, flip wolf
-Tables and SS7 become targets
The reasoning behind posting what I posted is that one of the following scenarios take place:
a) Player X dies, flips townie... Player Y and Z that defended Player X's credibility are also revealed as likely townies and avoid the lynch vote
b) Player A dies, flips wolf... Player B and C that defended Player A have a higher likelihood of being wolves
That was my logic, and reasoning as a townie to share the information I had collected.
Absol maybe you missed the point and he is calling all of us on his wagon wolves?
If you flip wolf, I have no intention of targeting Tables and SS7 on that premise alone. From my experience, wolves tend to distance themselves from other wolves, not defend them.
M
b) Player A dies, flips wolf... Player B and C that defended Player A have a higher likelihood of being wolves
This will be the third time I've noted this, but I really think it holds water.
Vegetalian's predicament is where it is now because he was trying to subtly smear me and plant the seeds that I may be a wolf if Vablakes flips wolf because I “defended him,” which of course was false information. I called him out and it has led us here. I believe that Vegetalian was banking on Vablakes going down and flipping wolf and was planning to use what he was saying about me “defending” Vablakes as a platform to target me.
This is further cemented by this:
If (when) Vegetalian flips wolf I STRONGLY suggest we go after Vablakes either during the night, or during the next day.
Like I said, keep an open mind. You seem hell bent on a witch hunt (with 5 days left!) with very little information. Plenty more will unfold this week.
I specifically said that I think Kayle is town, and that your link to him is a moot point. I'm not calling all of you on my wagon 'wolves' (none of you actually - I haven't voted).
I'm not going to outright vote you (yet), but your overreaction seems a bit scummy.
and here:There’s that “indirect” accusation again. The same thing I pointed out before.
You simply try to throw suspision on to someone else. You even did an indirect (without actually voting) OMGUS on myself AND Kayle AND Prohawk.
why would you vote for another wolf so early into the game as a wolf yourself? There is no logic to your theory.
That's the point though - you're going out of your way to shoot down my points, not keeping an open mind, and succumbing to confirmation bias. You're either a really good wolf, or a really stubborn townie.
I'd say I'm a really good townie and I'd say you're a really stubborn wolf. Speaking of shooting down your points, I noticed that every time I shoot one down, you watch it crash to the ground and blow up, then lauch another five more hoping the results will change.
An analogy. I am Anit-Aircraft Artillery (AAA) and you are the Air-Force, and you keep sending planes into my fields of fire hoping that even though my rounds tore through every wave so far, maybe they won't this time.
You are going out of your way to NOT counter any of my points. Meanwhile I've countered all your points, and you never even counter-countered my counter points. Thus why you have already lost this battle.
That's exactly what a stubborn townie would say (or a good wolf?). I will counter your points tomorrow, when I have more energy. Notice I used the correct version of 'your'? Here's an analogy: I'm the Washington Post, and you're the Chinese take-out menu.
This is ridiculous. At this rate you two are going to create some absurd number of full pages of uselessness that will destroy any attempt at useful conversation. We have four to five full days of discussion left before we need to come to a decision, and you are going to prevent that discussion from taking place.
AT, you are a smug little troll-child on a playground. Cut it out, I'd have expected better from you. Vegitalian, quit while you might still have some semblance of hope left.
Unvote: Vegitalian
That's exactly what a stubborn townie would say (or a good wolf?). I will counter your points tomorrow, when I have more energy. Notice I used the correct version of 'your'? Here's an analogy: I'm the Washington Post, and you're the Chinese take-out menu.
Agreed. So far, this back and forth banter between AT and vegitalian has managed to halt all other discussion and scumhunting, and if it keeps up, it will lead to people not wanting to post and get caught in between the two opposing forces by taking sides.This is ridiculous. At this rate you two are going to create some absurd number of full pages of uselessness that will destroy any attempt at useful conversation. We have four to five full days of discussion left before we need to come to a decision, and you are going to prevent that discussion from taking place.
Alright, you never used the specific word "suspicious", but your questioning him did imply that you were suspicious.Not necessarily. I'll note that I said "I never said Tables was suspicious." Jpulice read that into my post himself. As did you. These things are important to note.
I'll reiterate to be clear on my thoughts on Tables. I'm wary of someone plopping meta ideas into a game without specific in-game evidence (or relevant data). I'm bothered by the way he did it. Am I suspicious? I'd chose a term closer to wary. I have seen little of Tables' play and do not have much to read him on.
Well, you said it yourself just a few posts ago in your "AAA analogy", where you claimed that vegitalian will just keep throwing points out for you to shoot down. While it may be fun for you to refute everything that comes your way, it leaves out the other 43 of us who are trying to scum hunt as well.Absoltrainer said:You want me to cut out calling out Vegitalian? Why? I'm having fun and he's incriminating himself further. He started it by trying to start a smear campaign against me.