House Dayne Posted October 1, 2012 Share Posted October 1, 2012 It was RP. Peckeldon is a Westerlands house. You expect a logical vote?Demand.Try to not stay too disengaged, friend.I am suspicious with the vote change for no very good reason. House Egen.Why? Were you ok with my first vote? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
House Dalt Posted October 1, 2012 Share Posted October 1, 2012 Golly, things got serious in a hustle.I refuse to join this "logic" revolution. It sounds terrible. Boycott! :commie: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
House Ashford Posted October 1, 2012 Share Posted October 1, 2012 Demand.Try to not stay too disengaged, friend.Why? Were you ok with my first vote?Explain how your votes were logical. Your first one was an OMGUS vote and the second a very opportunistical one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
House Dayne Posted October 1, 2012 Share Posted October 1, 2012 Explain how your votes were logical. Your first one was an OMGUS vote and the second a very opportunistical one.They were not logical.I've always thought of omgus as being more in game reaction to someone putting an actual case or suspicion on you. Am I wrong or am I not wrong and I'm just an asshole? ;)The second was an attempt to engage you. Which has kinda worked. Speaking of opportunistical - Templeton or Myatt (third vote on me. Just sayin.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
House Thorne Posted October 1, 2012 Share Posted October 1, 2012 It was RP. Peckeldon is a Westerlands house. You expect a logical vote?Extremely over-defensive, Linderly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
House Dayne Posted October 1, 2012 Share Posted October 1, 2012 Golly, things got serious in a hustle.I refuse to join this "logic" revolution. It sounds terrible. Boycott! :commie:you're no fun anymore Come play. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
House Ashford Posted October 1, 2012 Share Posted October 1, 2012 They were not logical.I've always thought of omgus as being more in game reaction to someone putting an actual case or suspicion on you. Am I wrong or am I not wrong and I'm just an asshole? ;)The second was an attempt to engage you. Which has kinda worked. Speaking of opportunistical - Templeton or Myatt (third vote on me. Just sayin.) Yes, I did understand that the first vote was a joke. Good point about Myatt, but I think a FM wouldn't give such an opportunistic vote. Maybe if he's a new player. Edit: @Ironsmith another to join the anti-logic club. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
House Dayne Posted October 1, 2012 Share Posted October 1, 2012 Yes, I did understand that the first vote was a joke. Good point about Myatt, but I think a FM wouldn't give such an opportunistic vote. Maybe if he's a new player.And I clearly cannot choose the squirrel in front of me! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
House Dalt Posted October 1, 2012 Share Posted October 1, 2012 I don't think Myatt's vote was particularly opportunistic, it's not as though it's setting the groundwork for a speed lynch at this point in the game. And the other two votes on him are pure joke.Speaking of opportunistical - Templeton or Myatt (third vote on me. Just sayin.)What's wrong with Templeton? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
House Yronwood Posted October 1, 2012 Share Posted October 1, 2012 Yes, I did understand that the first vote was a joke. Good point about Myatt, but I think a FM wouldn't give such an opportunistic vote. Maybe if he's a new player. Edit: @Ironsmith another to join the anti-logic club.overthinking that vote way too much... really dont like that :) lynderlyalso dont like how youre going on about 'anti logic' and just throwing it out there Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
House Ashford Posted October 1, 2012 Share Posted October 1, 2012 overthinking that vote way too much... really dont like that :) lynderlyalso dont like how youre going on about 'anti logic' and just throwing it out thereWell, it wasn't worth arguing. Hastwyk put me in a position I can't defend myself. He says I'm overdefensive( saying my vote is RP ismoverdefensive) so when I defend against that, I just prove his point.Edit: Point, not voteEdit: Read Ironsmith, not Hastwyk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
House Dondarrion Posted October 1, 2012 Share Posted October 1, 2012 Extremely over-defensive, Linderly.That was not even close to being over defensive, Ironsmith.Bad vote my friend, but thanks you for the scum slip, makes Day one so much easier. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
House Thorne Posted October 1, 2012 Share Posted October 1, 2012 That was not even close to being over defensive, Ironsmith.Huh? Explaining a joking vote isn't overdefensive? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
House Ashford Posted October 1, 2012 Share Posted October 1, 2012 Huh? Explaining a joking vote isn't overdefensive?Well, if Egen thought it wasn't joking................. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
House Velaryon Posted October 1, 2012 Share Posted October 1, 2012 Yay! Mafia!No. Noo. Noo!Lake I'll see your "no" and raise you by (0:35)Funny videos are funny!What are all these obscure houses?Masonity must have been feeling creative... Hastwyk? Algood? Blackbar?Golly, things got serious in a hustle.I refuse to join this "logic" revolution. It sounds terrible. Boycott! :commie:I hate serious too!That was not even close to being over defensive, Ironsmith.Bad vote my friend, but thanks you for the scum slip, makes Day one so much easier.Donniger and Lynderly sitting on a tree K-I-S-S-I-N-G. First comes love, then comes marriage, and then comes Donniger with the baby carriage! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
House Dondarrion Posted October 1, 2012 Share Posted October 1, 2012 Huh? Explaining a joking vote isn't overdefensive?It seemed to me, and I am sure every other innocent person that he was explaining his rp vote for Egen who Apparently missed that memo.So for you to jump on that, and try to explain say it was overdefensive feels like scum trying to contribute something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
House Dondarrion Posted October 1, 2012 Share Posted October 1, 2012 Donniger and Lynderly sitting on a tree K-I-S-S-I-N-G. First comes love, then comes marriage, and then comes Donniger with the baby carriage!Atleast get it right, My child with the Lady Lynderly would be a Stone not a Donniger. Or maybe She would pass it off as her Lords child and it would be Lynderly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
House Thorne Posted October 1, 2012 Share Posted October 1, 2012 Well, if Egen thought it wasn't joking....................then your naturally looking answer would be "Never mind, I was/am joking". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
House Velaryon Posted October 1, 2012 Share Posted October 1, 2012 Atleast get it right, My child with the Lady Lynderly would be a Stone not a Donniger. Or maybe She would pass it off as her Lords child and it would be Lynderly.Nu-uh!Donniger refers to yourself, pushing the baby carriage, not to your son's surname. Regardless, surely an inconvenient previous marriage on the Lady Linderly's side is not an obstacle to a resourceful murderer like yourself? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
House Ashford Posted October 1, 2012 Share Posted October 1, 2012 ...then your naturally looking answer would be "Never mind, I was/am joking".Well, at first, he asked about the separate vote. Then I explained the joke( he said it didn't look like a throw-away joke). You are trying to repair your mistake too much.IronsmithI don't like Donniger because I feel he's repeating my answers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.