Can you explain why these are on your scum list (mostly the middle 2 as monk and inhim are pretty self-explanatory)muh316 wrote:ok guys heres my scum list
monkeyman
zang
karma
inhim
I'm not so sure about zang but there might be a chance of them three to be scum as a team. They've been showing lots of scummy behavior and I'm not getting any town reads from any of these guys. And sorry guys about my "gem" its just that I was busy the past few days.
He promised participation at the time which was more than muh offered, but inhim hasn't delivered.VasudeVa wrote:@Scott: What inHim participation?
---
Just to clarify, you are saying that you believe muh is town here?VasudeVa wrote:
Also, muh is reads as town.
O RLY? I think I've showed up this week as much as anyone else.Scott Brosius wrote:He promised participation at the time which was more than muh offered, but inhim hasn't delivered.VasudeVa wrote:@Scott: What inHim participation?
---
Unvote
Vote inHim
This is patently wrong.danakillsu wrote:He obviously voted for me simply because I was voting for him, and didn't even bother giving a fake reason for it. Just because it's "RVS" doesn't mean OMGUS is impossible.It was an RV, no? Why do you consider it OMGUS?
Well that's for others to decide and not you. Also I cannot recall any scum-hunting or even any scum suspects of yours.inHimshallibe wrote:O RLY? I think I've showed up this week as much as anyone else.Scott Brosius wrote:He promised participation at the time which was more than muh offered, but inhim hasn't delivered.VasudeVa wrote:@Scott: What inHim participation?
---
Unvote
Vote inHim
What an amazing response. You wouldn't happen to have any REASONS to say that, would you?inHimshallibe wrote:Oh, I always meant to respond to this, and never did.This is patently wrong.danakillsu wrote:He obviously voted for me simply because I was voting for him, and didn't even bother giving a fake reason for it. Just because it's "RVS" doesn't mean OMGUS is impossible.It was an RV, no? Why do you consider it OMGUS?
Remind you of somebody else?Karma wrote:Continually promising posts, and then delivering us that last post? No scumhunting
More involvement from me will come this week.
@all: Sorry, got a new job and adjusting to the schedule of having to wake up early. You should see more evening CST posts from me in the future.
Ekim wrote:Lurking is a scumtell, and even if it weren't it should be heartily discouraged. Not giving reasoning for all your actions upfront isn't lurking though.
I disagree that lurking is a scumtell. Because i have seen a lot of lurkers (including myself) that were town.Ekim wrote:I also think it would be great if we could somehow force people to contribute more. But I don't know how we do that given that y'all seem totally unwilling to lynch people for lack of involvement. Suggestions? Lynching muh sounds good to me.
Yes, but you have provided no real content and that is just as bad as not posting anything at all.Inhim wrote:O RLY? I think I've showed up this week as much as anyone else.
"Well, I was going to contribute, but if you're not going to completely ignore my predecessors actions in the face of the coming deadline, I'll just sit here and sulk."Starbuck wrote:I've had a class all day today. I started a catch-up.txt Friday while here at work and I'm only around page 3 or 4. I was planning to forward it to myself at home to finish today.
But if people are going to still vote for me because of Monkey's scummy ass behavior and thus lynch me, there's no reason to put any time into a catch up that will just go to waste, whether or not I help my fellow townies with it.