Quote:
Originally Posted by Party Elephant
With 2 players emerging as frontrunners, it'll be interesting to see if more voters switch to the popular options or stick with their original suspicions knowing that person won't be lynched. If a blind lynch is better than no lynch, will those advocating it align their vote accordingly? I'm thinking of GGG and ECF specifically.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Party Elephant
I don't think I worded this very well. Just skimmed over the thread for the posters who insist that we have to lynch someone on day 1, but who aren't aligned with either of the frontrunners. GGG and ECF have both posted that it's better to blindly lynch someone than have no lynch, and are both currently voting for people with one vote each. Will either of them change to ensure a lynch?
|
Again trying to keep focus on the front runners
Then Day 2 he changes tune
Quote:
Originally Posted by Party Elephant
We're putting a lot on the line over the assumption that oling is telling the truth. I don't like it. I don't think I'll vote for timbo either since he seems to be the only one apart from me that doesn't trust oling. I'm gonna hold off voting for now.
|
He never gives a reason for why he no longer thinks Girly is a host just that he's worried about Oling.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Party Elephant
vote: hockeyguy15
This vote has me questioning the direction of the group as a whole. I think we've been manipulated too easily into this very specific strategy of voting on a potential spore holder that hinges entirely on taking one poster at his word. I've already laid out how us lynching girly and investigating oling could have us come up empty handed while also losing track of the spore, as if we're even sure where it was in the first place. With the way hockeyguy is forcing the vote on girly, I have to think he's steering he group in the wrong direction.
|
Then he goes for hockey guy. To me this appears to be going after guys that he can't lynch. He can tunnel away and not tip his hand.