eh.
while pine is right, I have to vote the person with the most awkwardest name.
just because.
that's cool(quote it you lazy bastard)
In post 76, Zdenek wrote:The policy lynch suggestion was for fun and not serious, and pops is blathering.
Unvote
Vote popsofctown
Nope.In post 80, Slandaar wrote:you guys do realise that he obv played terrible like this in the game which was quoted? its pretty null...
imo maybe I was waiting for someone to answer me imo.In post 258, Slandaar wrote:I do not understand the suspicion towards beck like at all.
Hiraki is fairly likely to be scum imo
Pressure?In post 280, Pine wrote:Need Hiraki case first.
Actually, pure meta case: This lurking and reasonable attitude are not what I associate with Town-Hiraki. It's not exactly what I think of when I reflect on scum-Hiraki either, but it's certainly odd. Not enough to go on, but certainly enough to warrant the pressure you're exerting.
yes.
You know, people can do this extraordinary thing.In post 322, Beck wrote:So the fact he went to the game thread and actually looked for the exact post isn't proof he wasn't kidding?
If he just said said it was based on his play in that game, that's different. Taking the extra effort to get the exact post is too much work for a lolpolicy lynch joke
I have no problem with it.In post 379, Slandaar wrote:also, beck seems to get a lot of heat for how he plays fwiw i have no problem with it so far and see no reason for the hate.
In post 321, Hiraki wrote:Except those were viable cases.
Just because you won't dignify them doesn't make them invisible or anything like that.
Besides, your case with Sorg is almost identical. If someone thinks he's joking/doesn't care about the PL, there goes all chances for a lynch based on your cases.
whee.
Beck wrote:You know, people can do this extraordinary thing.
It's called lying.
Revenus wrote:On the contrary, the game doesn't revolve around you, and until you realize this, don't sign up for games.
See there we go again.In post 403, Beck wrote:That doesnt prove why any of my cases are wrong
You are useless and probably scum
But pine is confirmed scum so..
confirm vote:pine
In post 193, Beck wrote:Saying it's crap or bullshit or some other non logical response isn't going to fly with me
No thanks.In post 411, Beck wrote:And hiraki, you have been useless all game so do something for once. Make a case on zdescum
Amateur, post 1 link of rev's scum hunting
You don't think Revenus was displaying any types of emotions?In post 418, iamausername wrote:I totally agree that it would be nice if Beck would shut the fuck up, but he's not scum.
In post 419, Beck wrote:In post 415, Hiraki wrote:No thanks.In post 411, Beck wrote:And hiraki, you have been useless all game so do something for once. Make a case on zdescum
Amateur, post 1 link of rev's scum hunting
Last post since I'm a man of my word, the rest of my posts will just be votes
Refusal to post a case on your scum read?
vote: hiraki
This was my main point as I looked over Shattered Viewpoint.Pine wrote:
And if you ARE "that good," then you have reasons for your accusations. I'm asking that you actually share them with we mere mortals, so we can understand your so-called brilliance.
this.In post 1087, Pine wrote:Meh. Nothing much has happened in the last few pages that is worth commenting on.
I used to go off this.In post 1181, Slandaar wrote:I agree with beck
I mean that hes scum here because he is playing slightly differently, there was actually more content in those games or what seemed like content
so you admit that there was a slipIn post 1604, popsofctown wrote:It isn't, though. I've already said why. The slip was bad, but not bad enough.
Not sure what you're getting at that, to be honest.In post 1622, popsofctown wrote:did you expect "the post formerly known as 'slip' " mr. Prince?
Admiral, PopsIn post 1649, Pine wrote:Remind me who you suspect? I'm too lazy to ISO you.
I dunno.In post 1781, Revenus wrote:In post 1779, Hiraki wrote:Admiral, Pops, Pine/Slandaar
one is prob scum
Prob slandaar
but I dunno yet
Another brilliant post.
Seriously, are we going to get any content from you like...ever?
truthIn post 1930, theamatuer wrote:I suggest that all people only change their votes to the 3 main wagons. It'll be near impossible to start a new one