Hamfia - GAME OVER - PICK YER POISON DID IT. SPECTACULAR. AMAZING.

I mean, scum are already down one. It's incredibly unlikely that three out of four people voting for you are all scum.

Are there even 3 scum left?? I thought that in a 12 person game, there's typically 3 scum total. Why would you assume there's 4?

So where's the attempt to narrow down or prioritize that list? It looks like you're just waiting for somebody else to pick up one of your threads and then you'll start pulling at it.

I don't understand.. I threw out the names of several people I'd be fine with lynching. Of course I'm going to see if anyone else is willing to do the same - I had 4 votes on me. Yes, part of this game is being confident in your suspicions and having various levels of them, but that doesn't mean I'm going to vote for someone who(m?) I feel more strongly about and get lynched myself over voting for a different person who other people also suspect even though they're not necessarily my strongest suspect. That was confusing but basically yes, I was waiting for support on one of my suspects because I would like to live to see tonight. Sorry if that's the Survivor player in me talking, but whatever. I'm more useful to the town alive than dead, especially since I seem to be one of the only people who cares about what happens today.

EBWOP:

What does this mean?

IN ADDITION! The fact that there's pretty much one singular criteria ("voted for me") that's a key part of three out of four of your accusations is making me uncomfortable.

What's making me uncomfortable is the way you continuously misconstrue my words and actions. Let's go over the four people you mention and what I said about them verbatim that makes me suspicious of them:

1. Dragon Fogel: "I'm suspicious of you because your post makes itself seem like it's full of content but you really have nothing definitive to say."

Where there do I say that I'm suspicious of you because you're voting for me?

2. Cat: "for inputting nothing but random votes thus far."

Not one of the 3 out of 4, so we move on.

3. Pick Yer Poison: "for just everything today. If it seemed logical (which I'm assuming was a joke but whatever), and doesn't now, unvote."

You get partial credit here because I do say I suspect him for everything today, and he voted for me today. But specifically I meant his post in which he seemed to admit his action wasn't based on anything sound, but then didn't undo it. Not that he voted for me.

4. Woffles: "for posting a lot with no content except a vote blindly following Mirdini."

I mean, I don't even know how to continue commentary. I stated specifically why I found him suspicious, and you take it and somehow turn it to me having one criterion of "they voted for me." It's ludicrous and I'm not going to take it. Either you're really terrible at doing your research and rereading, or you're intentionally doing this to incriminate me. Either way, it's really irritating.