PurplPanda
not at disneyworld
Or maybe an oath lynch?
I'd rather no lynch or do someone suspicious versus just getting rid of someone due to a track record they had in the past.
I'd rather no lynch or do someone suspicious versus just getting rid of someone due to a track record they had in the past.
Well, lynching someone randomly seems rather rude. I'd pick the waste of time.
Speaking of which, Ashtot, you're the only one who didn't really seem suspicious of ccemuka and tried to change the subject which kind of makes you suspicious too.
Well, lynching someone randomly seems rather rude. I'd pick the waste of time.
Speaking of which, Ashtot, you're the only one who didn't really seem suspicious of ccemuka and tried to change the subject which kind of makes you suspicious too.
It doesn't matter if it's rude, and it's not for a random reason. This game has tons to do with past behaviour and that's why we pretty much always do this. There are quite a few people here who would agree with me. It's your first time so you probably don't really know how this works yet.
Well, I care if it's rude and you really think I'm too stupid to know that? But I'm not going to just go and agree with your rude and barbaric playstyle just because it's what you "tend to do".
BellBringerGreen - Yes, about a 25% chance--but a 75% chance it could be someone who isn't a murderer. If court involved killing every single person they thought had a chance of being a criminal, there'd be a lot of innocent bloodshed.
I'm sorry but I don't see how I'm being rude, the only person here saying anything rude would be yourself. Lynches give information. A no lynch basically wastes a day, and wastes the amount of time we have to gain information. A no lynch is almost always a bad idea.
I haven't been rude at all. If you didn't see yourself as rude, you would've said that to begin with so you obviously know you're rude to some degree. I don't see how you can't think randomly choosing someone to get rid of isn't rude. Here are people trying their best and you're just being super judgmental.
"almost" =/= always.
BellBringerGreen - Yes, about a 25% chance--but a 75% chance it could be someone who isn't a murderer. If court involved killing every single person they thought had a chance of being a criminal, there'd be a lot of innocent bloodshed.
Well, of course we don't always hit Mafia on Day One. That's why we go with someone who has poor chances of being an ally to Town. It may be rude but this is usually the major way of how it's done. I see how that may be unfair to some though.
I think it's quite interesting how more long time players think of stuff different than the newer players. The newbies always have something else to go off of.
I would rather lynch LittleBeary. She is a distraction and in all the games she has played, 3/4 of her posts were spam/obvious information.
People can change though. It's just so incredibly rude and obnoxious to not even give people a chance. Makes me happy I'll never be playing again after this.
^^^ I have to agree with this ^^ I think everyone should be given a chance.
I'd prefer to do a no lynch rather than lynch someone random. What if this random person who got lynched had an important role?
Lynching someone important to the town would be just as much a waste as not lynching anyone at all.
I guess it's kinda this risk/reward system. sure you risk lynching someone important to the town (if there is a role like that) but there is also a chance of lynching one of the mafia which is huge!