|
![]() |
![]() |
#11 | |
Erotic Esquire
|
![]() Quote:
Hell, I even had the perfect excuse to be inactive and skirt through D1. I hadn't posted in more than a week, maybe two weeks. And it'd make perfect sense for me to act on the exact strategy that was so successful for Scum last game if I was, in fact, Scum; namely, you're concentrating on the active players and letting inactives and barely-actives skirt under the radar, which is exactly what's happened before, so as Scum assuming I had two brain cells in my head I'd keep my mouth shut, say vaguely noncommittal, noncontroversial things if necessary and skirt by until / unless I was pressured. You see I don't blame you for being offended by the fact that I basically insinuated y'all were stupid but I do blame you for interpreting the personal slight as 'Scummy behavior.' It isn't. The reality of the matter is the only reason you're voting against me now is that your panties are twisted because I dared insinuate you guys were playing a poor game. That's anti-town logic. You're not voting me off because you legit think I've been assigned a Scum role, you're just voting me because you don't like the way I'm playing the game. Again: anti-town logic. You'll kill a lot of increasingly frustrated or angry Townies that way as opposed to actually killing off Scum, who will be very friendly and agreeable as they have the benefit of additional information to inform their decisions and they won't need to take risks and say controversial things in order to garner information as to who's Town and who isn't. You shouldn't be worried about the controversial players. You should be worried about those who tell you how great you're doing and how comfortable they are with your play. They're the ones with daggers behind their roses.
__________________
WARNING: Snek's all up in this thread. Be prepared to read massive walls of text. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|