Mini Normal 2322: Game Over

[cw357]

Help.

I'm on my way to gallantly save you big daddy!

[cw357]

Quick, get in the car!

[cw357]

MASS ROLELCIAM NOW

IF YOU DO NOT ROLECLIAM OOUYOU ARE IMPOSTORO

[Pavowski]

If this is some kind of strat, it is not my favorite

[cw357]

If this is some kind of strat, it is not my favorite

its ok ur still my fave

ROLECLAIM NOW OR ELSE YOU ARE IMPOSTOR AUTOMATICLALY1!!!!!!!!!!

[cw357]

PVAVAAVOOOSKI IS NO ROLECLAIM HMMMMMMMMMM

Sent from my iPhone

[Laplacian]

Can we policy elim cw? Or modkill?

[cw357]

Can we policy elim cw? Or modkill?

dont be sus
time to roleclaim

[Abnegation]

Can we policy elim cw? Or modkill?

dont be sus
time to roleclaim

i hardclaim 1-shot dayvig.

dayvig: cw537

[Abnegation]

Can we policy elim cw? Or modkill?

modkills are generally reserved for breaches of game integrity.
idk what cw is doing but i skimmed his iso and i get the vibe he's just town playing weirdly so i would hope we don't have to policy him.
need to read rest of game though.

[Abnegation]

I'm with Thom here

1. Wishes people voted for a really bad reason
2. Would totally defend someone and get that nice townie cred
3. Goes full Vizzini when called out

Was gonna savor RVS for longer, but this feels legit sus to me
UNVOTE:
VOTE: Pavowski

this post vibes a bit weird, people had been discussing that pavowski's post may not be serious and then laplacian just completely ignores that possibility.

[Laplacian]

I'm with Thom here

1. Wishes people voted for a really bad reason
2. Would totally defend someone and get that nice townie cred
3. Goes full Vizzini when called out

Was gonna savor RVS for longer, but this feels legit sus to me
UNVOTE:
VOTE: Pavowski

this post vibes a bit weird, people had been discussing that pavowski's post may not be serious and then laplacian just completely ignores that possibility.

Was typing that while those other posts appeared, read them, decided I still stood by it. I read the tone as 'oh, this is not serious (unless you wamt to act on it then it's 100% serious)'

[Flavor Leaf]

kinda up for the policy if it continues. they already claimed vanilla, and yall know i love fading vanillas day 1.

[Laplacian]

Really, if it was just the first post I could have let it slide. It was the response that really cinched it for me

[cw357]

I'm going to be afk for the next three hours sorry
will be back soon I LOVE TO PLAY INTERNET AMOGUS

[ssbm_Kyouko]

Laplacian is scum you nerds you can policy the shitposter tomorrow

[HighPrincessErinys]

going to read everything this one missed in a sec here but saw a bunch of votes moving around Pavowski so time to UNVOTE: Pavowski before something stupid happens

[Laplacian]

Laplacian is scum you nerds you can policy the shitposter tomorrow

Um, excuse me, juggernaut masonizer death miller with 3x BP is clearly a town role.

[Joyboy]

doom-dut-da-da

[Joyboy]

hahahahahahahahaha

[Joyboy]

THIS IS MY PEEK!!!!!!!!!

[HighPrincessErinys]

going to read everything this one missed in a sec here but saw a bunch of votes moving around Pavowski so time to UNVOTE: Pavowski before something stupid happens

regret

[Joyboy]

He is here!!!!!

[Abnegation]

I'm with Thom here

1. Wishes people voted for a really bad reason
2. Would totally defend someone and get that nice townie cred
3. Goes full Vizzini when called out

Was gonna savor RVS for longer, but this feels legit sus to me
UNVOTE:
VOTE: Pavowski

this post vibes a bit weird, people had been discussing that pavowski's post may not be serious and then laplacian just completely ignores that possibility.

Was typing that while those other posts appeared, read them, decided I still stood by it. I read the tone as 'oh, this is not serious (unless you wamt to act on it then it's 100% serious)'

the thing is, your case is based on the assumption that he was serious. if you didn't think the posts were serious unless acted on (though i'm not entirely sure what you mean by "act on" so i could be misunderstanding something), why call them "legit sus" and make what would seem to be a serious vote based on that case?
idk, something doesn't add up here.

Really, if it was just the first post I could have let it slide. It was the response that really cinched it for me

is 51 the response you're referring to?

[Abnegation]

@cw357 - do you have any serious reads at the moment? preferably answer this question without trolling or referencing among us.