>neither of them are scum
In post 65, GhostWriter wrote:Actually, he was responding to TL himself, but still. On top of that, TL is probably scum alongside you.
>TL scum with slaxx
>neither are scum
>both town
In post 337, GhostWriter wrote:I seem to be looking at Fonz/Silavor/Elli/Quil as the lynch choice for today?
Well, right of the bat, Fonz is town. The arguments against him alone were enough to prove that. That leaves Silavor/Elli/Quil. I don't have enough to read Elli, and I couldn't give a shit to play "lolsecretmechanic". Which leaves Silavor and Quil. Quil keeps getting called 3rd party. I have no idea why. It's actually a little annoying, given we have a 3rd party roleflip already. Who the hell would bog the game down with 3rd party roles and a miller in a mini? So that adds Slaxx and leaves Quil up there. But not as major reads. Also, I don't really get the Sila case either. It seems like a stronger version of the Elli case, where not being here is replaced by actions some find scummy, but the bulk of it is still about "lolsecretmechanic".
In other news, Gandalf is scum. No doubt about it. And should be the lynch today. Seriously.
VOTE: Gandalf
>ignore all popular wagons
>push a mislynch
>say the most likely lynch is town
>attack the cases on elli and sila, both scum, calling them weak
>GW hasn't voted scum all game
>completely ignoring the point of the case
In post 349, GhostWriter wrote:That is not a case. I ask for a case to see A) who can give one and B) who find what scummy. Telling me to look at a person's iso doesn't give me insight into what you are thinking and why you are thinking it.
>refuses to see the obvious
>isn't scumhunting
In post 370, GhostWriter wrote:You've based it on nothing but the swing of the votes. Elli has done nothing to warrant lynching. There is no case, as evidenced by the fact that there is no case, yet "lol don't vote me" and "lol just sheep for great justice" is supposed to persuade me to follow along? Yeah, cause that shit's totally happening.
>haha you have no case
>no case means he's not scum
>elli was scum
In post 372, GhostWriter wrote:Number 1: you're flailing. As a town PR, you shouldn't be trying to draw that much attention to 1 vote on you. So you seem like a scum PR who can play their PR as town if required, and are trying to appear like a worried town PR. Number 2: You are legitimately scummy. I see no reason to unvote you.
>says gand is flailing
>gand is town
In post 390, GhostWriter wrote:Where is this 3rd party crap coming from? Like, seriously, I cannot figure out what you mean by it. We've had a 3rd party flip. Another, in a mini, would make no sense balance-wise.
>I know there's no more 3rd parties because I'm the last mafia
>alternatively, is 3rd party (unlikely)
In post 395, GhostWriter wrote:You called him "bussing 3rd party". And you're also too focused on 3rd-party, caring more about it than scumhunting. Survivors? Let them Survive. They align themselves with whoever is doing best. SK's? They get treated like scum. Hell, they always get treated like scum anyway. Lynchers, might be a threat, but seriously, they tend to tunnel and/or build shitty cases. Making them easier to spot. And, as evidenced by my miller flavor, we have at least one cop for this sort of thing, and I assume that they'd let us know if a neutral result were acting like a lyncher.
>cares way too much about 3rd party discussion
In post 402, GhostWriter wrote:How is it not advantageous for town to lynch scum? We lynch them all, we win. Most 3rd parties are little more than a distraction. Also, with a flavor cop, it causes them to have weaker reports when it comes to that gray area.
>please ignore the possibility of a 3rd party completely
I know town can be wrong sometimes
But town are NEVER this wrong. I have never seen it happen. I don't believe it can happen. Ghostwriter basically wrote us an essay on why he's scum.
...also, he really wanted to perpetuate that discussion of 3rd parties, for one reason or another. almost like he wanted it to distract us from scumhunting,
