i’m not tho?
i think your push has been bad pretty much from the beginning
that isn’t defending someone else
i’m not tho?
if you know my purpose was to engage with andresvmb because they had already mentioned the rules and i wanted to see if they actually interested in rules and such and not just finding something to sayIn post 596, Scorpious wrote:Fair, big posts are not easy for me, I'm surprised it was as coherent as it was.In post 592, angela wrote:@scorpious
why didn’t you ask questions regarding my entrance earlier
and
i already answered the why ?? but you just decided not to quote that one for some reason?
But what I didn't quote has no bearing on what I'm saying tbh. I want to know how it just kinda got pushed away,then someone actually called you scummy for it,then just also backed away,for no reason..
As far as bringing it up now. I wanted to read the game and started at the begining,and this just happens to be at the very beginning.
First off, if I thought you or Andres was immediately scum based on any of that I would be voting you. I am noting what I see as a potential connection based on what was written and timing.In post 602, angela wrote:like i can take the time to walk you through entire thought process and such if you really want but if your approach to that is going to be
‘you’re mafia based on these things that aren’t actually mafia indicative and ignoring everything else you’ve done’
it doesn’t really feel like super worthwhile for me to do so
i... still do not understand what andresvmb stating that percentage has to do with andresvmb potentially being mafia though, or what you questioning this would lead to, as i've stated numerous timesIn post 603, Scorpious wrote:I never “pushed” Andres at that point. I was questioning something that nobody would believe. I’ve also stated that it’s been proven true.
tbh I find his a lot more scummy than you.
I’m just pointing out what I’ve seen. There has been literally zero new content added. I’m just probing. Cause y’know *whisper* that’s what we’re supposed to be doing..
right like multiple people trying to ask them things (myself and galron off the top of my head, possibly others)In post 609, angela wrote:also if you want to 'probe' something please probe malcolmtucker coming to the thread and ignoring everything directed their way during their absence and just making those two posts
It’s an anomalous percentage , nobody will argue that.Angela went and looked it up. I wasn’t wasting my time with that.are you done twisting what I say to fit your narrative? That’s my final word on that..In post 606, Andresvmb wrote:And it wasn’t proven to be true by angela. This is the basic distinction you are failing to grasp. I clearly knew the number. Or at the very least, I showed that I at the very least kept a reasonably accurate record of the games I’ve played. And that’s NOT why I think you’re Scum. I’ve been questioning your thought process and your way of approaching my slot and others. That’s the fundamental item you’re not understanding.
Ok, man. Sounds good. It’s an awful push but do you..In post 607, Andresvmb wrote:So stop phrasing it as it being driven by a disagreement over a number. I find that incredible. At the very least try and understand the reasoning behind a read.
i at no time as town have ever focused on the quantity of my posts - i do not see much need to as this isn't a post restricted game anywayIn post 603, Scorpious wrote:Lastly, if you find yourself struggling to communicate. Concentrate on the quality of your posts and not quantity. I’m assuming English is not your first launguage( you type better than people I know that have spoken of their whole lives btw). You have the most posts, which is not a point at all. But I’d rather you have 30 less posts and feel more confident in your communication. I hope I’m not offending you.
In post 534, I said I am still catching up and despite my intent to vote you, I'm not doing it until I read the entire thread. Sorry if it was vague. The vote in 537 is unrelated to the rest of my post and is due to my read on you.In post 542, Scorpious wrote:I'm not the only one that thinks so. and I think I've reference you twice..In post 534, KittyTacky wrote:Correct. How is my post an overreaction? It's not like I flipped out, I just snarked at gera. This and your other posts regarding me read like a shade-throwing attempt.In post 369, Scorpious wrote:I'm fairly confident that within a few posts Kitty will vote me..I'll wait until I catch up to vote you to not accidentally hammer you if it came to that though.
What does the bold even mean?
It's not planned, I saw there were a lot of pages to catch up on and I didn't want to vote until I do lest I accidentally hammer him early in the day if a wagon had been built to E-2 (i.e E-1 with NM in the game).In post 549, angela wrote:i think pretty clear kittytacky was working to scorpious vote there through the posts just because vote is in last post doesn’t mean needs to be connected to rest of post in context
however the bit about ‘don’t want to hammer’ or whatever kinda ???
like it maybe seems too planned altogether as a series of posts to have the first one also say ‘lemme read the game first tho’
Elaborate.In post 573, Scorpious wrote:I think I currently have the 3 worst votes ever on me right now, lol..
They just keeping getting worse and worse..
Well, the one you quoted is just dumb..In post 621, KittyTacky wrote:Elaborate.In post 573, Scorpious wrote:I think I currently have the 3 worst votes ever on me right now, lol..
They just keeping getting worse and worse..
this feels like the exact sort of post someone makes with a green flip in mine.In post 587, MalcolmTucker wrote:
I'm getting town vibes from Scorpious a good bit, I don't think their posts are perfect but for the most part they seem genuine in a way I don't reckon is too mafia at the moment.