Posts: 4,471
Threads: 65
Joined: Feb 2006
(April 16th, 2013, 05:58)Jkaen Wrote: Also if I was going to fake a tracker result then there are far less risky ways of doing it than guessing you were passive, I could easily have scanned somebody who already claimed a passive to 'confirm' it
Unless Jkaen is scum with zak, but I think zak's play at the end of day 2 where he doesn't seem to care at all whom is lynched makes this less likely:
zakalwe Wrote:I voted for Azza and then a wagon built behind me. Lately I have been thinking I should get off it, but I was planning to go for Jkaen. And now I'm pondering if I should follow you on Gazglum instead.
And then votes jkaen at the end when he could have simply sat on azza.
Furthermore this is just bad:
Quote:Q: Who did Mattimeo avoid targeting?
A: Jkaen
Q: Who stood to benefit from Lewwyn dying on N1?
A: Jkaen
Q: Who stood to benefit from Gazglum being blocked on N1?
A: Jkaen
1) Matt didn't do much anyway
2) this line of argument implicates Zak himself more for the N2 and N3 kills
3) What? if Jkaen is scum, he's claiming to be roleblocked himself anyway
Posts: 7,902
Threads: 13
Joined: Aug 2006
(April 16th, 2013, 05:55)Jkaen Wrote: But zak you already know what my tracking result is! - no result
So who did you try to track? Are we supposed to know that, as well?
If you know what I mean.
Posts: 5,157
Threads: 37
Joined: Jan 2011
No, but why does it matter to you, everybody but you seems certain I was roleblocked so that piece of information gives no value to the village
Posts: 7,902
Threads: 13
Joined: Aug 2006
(April 16th, 2013, 06:40)uberfish Wrote: 3) What? if Jkaen is scum, he's claiming to be roleblocked himself anyway
What's your point here? I'm saying that on N1, two players (three, counting myself) were heavily suspecting Jkaen. One of them died, and the other was blocked.
If you know what I mean.
Posts: 7,902
Threads: 13
Joined: Aug 2006
(April 16th, 2013, 06:47)Jkaen Wrote: No, but why does it matter to you, everybody but you seems certain I was roleblocked so that piece of information gives no value to the village
WTF? Of course it does. It gives us insight into how you're reasoning, and we can see if that reasoning stands up to scrutiny or not.
Why should you NOT tell us?
If you know what I mean.
Posts: 7,902
Threads: 13
Joined: Aug 2006
I mean, in the event that you weren't blocked, the "no result" actually means that your target went nowhere, right? That is relevant information.
So why did you earlier treat the "no result" as if it could mean either "blocked" or "went nowhere", and now you're treating "no result" as if it definitely means "blocked"?
If you know what I mean.
Posts: 5,157
Threads: 37
Joined: Jan 2011
Because on day 2 we didnt have prove positive confirmation of a role blocker as gazglum could have been lying.
However just to keep you happy, you can have the answer, I tracked uber
Posts: 5,157
Threads: 37
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 4,471
Threads: 65
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 7,902
Threads: 13
Joined: Aug 2006
(April 12th, 2013, 19:13)Jkaen Wrote: Well looks like tasunke was our role seer.
I tracked Zak lt night as somebody suspicious to me, and since nobody had suggested who to follow. I got 'no result'
I assume that means he didn't follow anybody rather than my power got blocked
(April 13th, 2013, 03:16)Jkaen Wrote: It's been confirmed my result could mean blocked or could mean Zak didn't visit anybody
Gazglum
I'm talking about these posts, on day 3. You said your "no result" could mean "went nowhere" or "blocked", and then got that confirmed by the mod. And then you come back on day 4 and act as if "no result" says it all, without indicating a target.
Gazglum has nothing to do with it. This is about you forgetting how your fake role was supposed to work.
Uberfish, tell me this isn't scummy.
Ryan
If you know what I mean.
|
