And you are saying??.....Hensow wrote:In my book the amount of time befor my first post is about as good as any reson you'll have on day one
Moderator: Community Team
And you are saying??.....Hensow wrote:In my book the amount of time befor my first post is about as good as any reson you'll have on day one

Again with the whole "wait until a case is presented by someone else". If you're mafia, that's a perfect way to not draw attention to yourself because the more you talk the more likely you are to make a mistake/draw a cop investigation on yourself.Iron Butterfly wrote:And you are saying??.....Hensow wrote:In my book the amount of time befor my first post is about as good as any reson you'll have on day one

Hell, its something to go off of. I too will Vote Hensow unless something better comes up.safariguy5 wrote:Again with the whole "wait until a case is presented by someone else". If you're mafia, that's a perfect way to not draw attention to yourself because the more you talk the more likely you are to make a mistake/draw a cop investigation on yourself.Iron Butterfly wrote:And you are saying??.....Hensow wrote:In my book the amount of time befor my first post is about as good as any reson you'll have on day one
Pretty sure I'm already voting him but just in case (and seriously this time)
unvote vote Hensow
Missed this post before. Are you advocating a policy lynch?spiesr wrote:Vote gregwolf121 based on projected activity levels.
Really?Hensow wrote:In my book the amount of time befor my first post is about as good as any reson you'll have on day one
Not really, it was mostly a joke vote, although if somebody has to get semi-random lynched it might as well be a chronically inactive player.thechuck51 wrote:Missed this post before. Are you advocating a policy lynch?spiesr wrote:Vote gregwolf121 based on projected activity levels.
thanks for the vote of confidencespiesr wrote:Not really, it was mostly a joke vote, although if somebody has to get semi-random lynched it might as well be a chronically inactive player.thechuck51 wrote:Missed this post before. Are you advocating a policy lynch?spiesr wrote:Vote gregwolf121 based on projected activity levels.

vote gregwolf121 how else would you suggest we get some activity out of you?gregwolf121 wrote:thanks for the vote of confidencespiesr wrote:Not really, it was mostly a joke vote, although if somebody has to get semi-random lynched it might as well be a chronically inactive player.thechuck51 wrote:Missed this post before. Are you advocating a policy lynch?spiesr wrote:Vote gregwolf121 based on projected activity levels.
And it kinda has been true. 1 confirm post, a joke vote, then this.kgb007 wrote:vote gregwolf121 how else would you suggest we get some activity out of you?gregwolf121 wrote:thanks for the vote of confidencespiesr wrote:Not really, it was mostly a joke vote, although if somebody has to get semi-random lynched it might as well be a chronically inactive player.thechuck51 wrote:Missed this post before. Are you advocating a policy lynch?spiesr wrote:Vote gregwolf121 based on projected activity levels.
it took thechuck questioning a joke vote and spiesr's response before you chimed in, without anything useful to add
well i didn't see a need to respond to the joke vote, cause thats what i took it as a joke, and about the only case there is right now is on hensow, who seems slightly scummy but not enough, IMO, to warrant a vote, yet.kgb007 wrote:vote gregwolf121 how else would you suggest we get some activity out of you?gregwolf121 wrote:thanks for the vote of confidencespiesr wrote:Not really, it was mostly a joke vote, although if somebody has to get semi-random lynched it might as well be a chronically inactive player.thechuck51 wrote:Missed this post before. Are you advocating a policy lynch?spiesr wrote:Vote gregwolf121 based on projected activity levels.
it took thechuck questioning a joke vote and spiesr's response before you chimed in, without anything useful to add
wait...what? first you say hensow's behavior doesn't warrant your vote, and then you close a rather convoluted defense by voting hensow?gregwolf121 wrote:well i didn't see a need to respond to the joke vote, cause thats what i took it as a joke, and about the only case there is right now is on hensow, who seems slightly scummy but not enough, IMO, to warrant a vote, yet.
and i understand kgb that your prodding for results to see if ill rise to the bait and if i seem scummy or not, but it all seems a bit hypocrtical to me, cause i could make the same case against almost anyone in the game right now, for example spiesr, confirms, joke vote and an explanation of joke vote, kgb, confirm, joke vote, what looks like a semi-serious vote, a redaction of said vote, and a call for me to be more active, (and i might add after being prodded.) i could go on but it would be redundant to do so
as i said before the only one who has really posted a worth while case has been safari.
my thoughts on scum at this point is hensow, see saf's case
then their is ghostly who has only confirmed, i think it would be better to try and get him replaced, rather than lynch him outright
well since we really don't have much to go on i'll go ahead and unvote, vote hensow, by my count that puts him at L-3
well yes, when i started the post i didn't plan on voting hensow, but as i reread through the game i realized that it was the only case there was, and that we had to do something on day 1 so by the end i had decided to vote hen, yes i could have gone back and deleted my first statement before posting, but i thought it better to leave it as i originally wrote itkgb007 wrote:wait...what? first you say hensow's behavior doesn't warrant your vote, and then you close a rather convoluted defense by voting hensow?gregwolf121 wrote:well i didn't see a need to respond to the joke vote, cause thats what i took it as a joke, and about the only case there is right now is on hensow, who seems slightly scummy but not enough, IMO, to warrant a vote, yet.
and i understand kgb that your prodding for results to see if ill rise to the bait and if i seem scummy or not, but it all seems a bit hypocrtical to me, cause i could make the same case against almost anyone in the game right now, for example spiesr, confirms, joke vote and an explanation of joke vote, kgb, confirm, joke vote, what looks like a semi-serious vote, a redaction of said vote, and a call for me to be more active, (and i might add after being prodded.) i could go on but it would be redundant to do so
as i said before the only one who has really posted a worth while case has been safari.
my thoughts on scum at this point is hensow, see saf's case
then their is ghostly who has only confirmed, i think it would be better to try and get him replaced, rather than lynch him outright
well since we really don't have much to go on i'll go ahead and unvote, vote hensow, by my count that puts him at L-3
as for me being prodded, i posted Thursday and then enjoyed my weekend as i'm sure everyone else did!!
I'm pretty sure I've played with him before but I don't remember what game(s).dazza2008 wrote:Is hensow new to mafia? If he is I can forgive that kind of thing but if he has played before it looks not too good to me.
I'm curious that you haven't commented on it and are instead trying to redirect attention to gregwolf.Hensow wrote:In my book the amount of time befor my first post is about as good as any reson you'll have on day one


thechuck51 wrote:I'm pretty sure I've played with him before but I don't remember what game(s).dazza2008 wrote:Is hensow new to mafia? If he is I can forgive that kind of thing but if he has played before it looks not too good to me.
@kgb, what are your thoughts on this post by hensow?I'm curious that you haven't commented on it and are instead trying to redirect attention to gregwolf.Hensow wrote:In my book the amount of time befor my first post is about as good as any reson you'll have on day one