VV wrote:If we were scum(and have daytalk), we'd(well, He'd.) make up a damn better excuse than that.
Scum and town can have shitty reasons for voting.
Filler = 'making a post for the sake of posting', which is scummy in it's own way. Everyone probably knew what you said, and you're just saying it to appear helpful(and failing) FMPOV
I was trying to promote discussion since others were indirectly discouraging it. That, plus I wasn't sure what I was supposed to say.
Which was exactly what I'm accusing you in #71. Also, you're making someone look suspicious for something that isn't inherently suspicious. Scummy.
So voting someone and them never responding to what you're voting them for isn't suspicious?
More info is bad if scum gets info. True, we now know that scum probably has the sub w/c is good. But if Town GOT the sub, and the sub claimed, They now know who to NK. It's good NOW since we got that info but since Town had a higher chance of getting the sub when nobody knew, it was inherently bad at that time.
Yeah, but that was when I thought we had a doc around. I weighed my odds of doc & sub being in scum hands and, let me tell you, those odds were very low. I'll take my chances with good odds.
My accusation of your #156 is similar to #71: Filler posting. More filler posts = scummier
What is your definition of filler posts? I'd love to know. My 156 was to inform them to stop that theory discussion because it was a null tell.
I was pertaining to your @Enigma tidbit at that post. You were accussing Andy as scum feigning ignorance
I told Enigma Andy was not automatically town for that. Andy could be town not reading rules or scum not reading rules/feigning ignorance.
If you were scum, that little manuever was possible with daytalk. Of course, at this point I'm convinced you're scum so I can call out you're possible scum moves.
So misreading the vote count is now scummy. Yep, that makes sense. See, the great thing about your entire argument is you've called me out based on speculation, not logic.
Real scummy, misreping my attacks on you by saying it wasn't reasoned when it was DAMN WELL REASONED.
I didn't see very good reasoning in your attacks, hence why I'm calling you out on them.
Well. We learned 2 things from this:
1) Zhero is scum.
2) CAPS LOCK PLAYER is scum. Either SpyreX or Sociopath, probably.
3) WIFOM?
No. We learned 0 things from this. The entire dropped post could be a frame. We can't tell. The best thing to do is leave it as null.
Spyre, don't nuke-threat anyone in here like that. It will bring up ALOT of wifom.
...Ok, VV, wtf?
VV wrote:Note: The Stealth Bomber is a shared activated ability and cannot be detected.}
first post wrote:DEFCON 2 – Further increase in force readiness, but less than maximum readiness – Two weeks or until lynch.
a) All non-NATO factions gain the following shared activated ability: Stealth Bomber {Kill target player}
A.k.a. it can't be used on N1. Am I misunderstanding what you're trying to say here?
Percy wrote:But why would the scum want to suggest that Zhero is scum?
The better answer is that they want to focus on him and prevent a currently popular lynch. Again, we can't know this for sure. We should definitely ignore that drop for the time being, though.
I don't really like Spyrex pushing for the nuke threat but Andrius' reasons for voting Engima based on "role-related info" were shit too. wtf@the spyrex vote from calcifer. First, I'm scum, then zero is scum, then I'm scum again, then Spyrex is scum. Oh, let me guess, I'm going to be scum again?
Zhero wrote:Please don't buy this crap
Ok, now what's up with the AtE?
Anyways, I was looking through possible scum, when I read this:
RedCoyote wrote:Vote: Calcifer
-2 posts later-
I really thought he had a strong first day, but he's been kind of absent from anything going on today. Well, it gives me another suspect at least.
Oh, wait, and I think I may be able to free up a vote. Calcifer seems a little more intent on clarification now, so I think I'll back off like Enigma did.
Unvote; vote: Hinduragi
What? You backed off Calcifer because he's clarifying something? I didn't see much clarification because the entire vote is still not explained. Why mention the "like Enigma did" part?
Then you give some excellent content as to your read. Yup, "active lurking" vote. Nice one. Let's just ignore the fact that I may actually have stuff to do.
RedCoyote wrote:I'll willingly acknowledge that Doombunny is on my backburner, mostly because I think there are bigger, more pressing issues at the forefront here.
Pray tell, what did Doombunny do that gives him the pleasure of being on your backburner?
Your vote seems like an excellent place scum would love to be. It's only more accuentated that you've been following discussion and have other suspects but leave your vote where it is for the simple reason that you think I'm active lurking, which I'm not.
First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.