I was lyncher in one of my games that ended last week. Not so common role though but maybe can exist in this game.
I'm not gonna be careful with my votes coz of this game or whatever.
We have tracked your scumbuddy and now you are trying to divert the suspicions to me. You just might success though since I'm so easy target.bird1111 wrote:I'm here; and wonderng why Twito got so defensive over me inquiring why he voted for ubertimmy
It was him! *points a finger*Tamuz wrote:How did Twito get pulled into this menage a deux?
Seems to work rather fine..mikeburnfire wrote:I'll prod everyone soon. In the meantime, I encourage everyone to bookmark this page, as the WATCHED TOPICS ability is suspended.
For the love of god vote ubertimmy then, he is scum!pablito wrote:unvote, vote: chaotic_diablobecause someone needs to vote and someone needs to be voted now.
Coz he is scum?neongrey wrote:Okay. Why?Twito wrote:For the love of god vote ubertimmy then, he is scum!pablito wrote:unvote, vote: chaotic_diablobecause someone needs to vote and someone needs to be voted now.
I'm afraid to tell you that there are some things your gonna have to figure out yourself, my son.neongrey wrote:Yes, I got that part. Why's he scum?Twito wrote:Coz he is scum?
That's sad. You don't have a father?neongrey wrote:Then I'm afraid to tell you that I'm nobody's son, and that I'm not voting like that.
Ah sorry, my daughter.neongrey wrote:No, I don't have a penis. I hear that's kind of required for son-hood.
And I dunno. He hasn't said much to make me think either way.
By definitions I use:molestargazer wrote:Aplogies for the double post, but:Unless, of course, the definition of hopping over here is different to the one I think it isme wrote:Hopping?
If I remember rightly (which I probably haven't), I haven't voted at all before this - and certainly not in the past few pages. How does this count as hopping?
So it's an OMGUS vote?molestargazer wrote:Ah, OK. That's clarified then.
There's my reason.STD wrote:I kinda want to vote for C_D because of his shoddy attack on MSG.
Why you repeat it? Or did you just skim the rest of the post after that?chaotic_diablo wrote:OMGUS meansOhMyGodUS[/]uck. It means you're voting for a person just because he/she voted for you.
Me yes.chaotic_diablo wrote:I don't see how wagoning random people will accomplish anything.
So you are voting me based on me perfectly nailing yesterdays lynch?chaotic_diablo wrote:I'll just get to the main points. I do have some minor ones, but they have either been discussed already or are just stupid.
Top 3
1. Pablito
2. TCS
3. Twito
PablitoPablito has been jumping wagons for quite a while now, so that fact should only reinforce the case against him, not provide an alibi. The way that Pablito tries to twist basic logic so that he can continue to do something scummy in front of our noses just means he's trying to give himself an advantage over everyone else.261 wrote:Again, has it not been clear that I've been jumping wagons? And why is this suddenly big news?
Translation: my vote is justified because MC is surely scum.289 wrote:So witches float then? That must mean they're full of hot air. *ba dum*
Therefore, I think I'm justified in voting Masterchief then because surely he would float to the surface.Translation: OMG! The MC bandwagon is going downhill so I need to hop off it fast!291 wrote:Would it be harmful for me to say that half of the reason I started the wagon is to incite pressure on MC who I believe to be pro-town and the other half of the reason was to see who would join and how others would react?
That is a clear 180 degree turn on his stance.
TCSThe first thing we should do is suspect Twito, not praise him and drop all suspicion. The point is that Twito was correct that ubertimmy was scum, so why was he? As TCS pointed out, Twito could not have been a cop since he didn't have a chance to investigate. Considering that there are many possilibities on how Twito was right, there is no reason to put Twito into favorable light.260 wrote:Twito began the Ubertimmy bandwagon, and never jumped off of it. I would call this a coptell; however, we began with Day, so there's no way that he could have known from the beginning that Timmy was scum. Still, I would bet a dimebag that he was the one protected from last night's mafia hit.
In addition, TCS slips and says that Twito was the possible "night target." Although there is no certainty in the post, if it's true, then the first thing we should do is suspect TCS.
Poor excuse to vote KC over Pablito. "Pablito isn't scum because he acts scummy, but he isn't."303 wrote:Ok then.unvote, vote: Kelly Chen.At least I'll be consistent now. Pablito has convinced me by his actions since my long post that he isn't mafia, just insanely erratic. Maybe he has a post restriction that says he has to change his vote every five posts or get modkilled? Razz (Joke!)
Twito
Twito had been shooting for ubertimmy's lynch for the entire day one period. I have four scenarios for this.
1. Twito is scum who sold out his partner.
2. Twito is a lyncher.
3. Twito got lucky.
4. Some undiscovered game mechanic.
The Central Scrutinizer wrote:Back on the streets a day early.Save The Dragons wrote:Au contrair, I have a good reason for voting for you, I'm just not revealing it at this time.The Central Scrutinizer wrote:I'm going to stop this ridiculous hopping and OMGUSing and wait for a bit before casting another vote. I'm quite worn out with offering my opinion and having people like StD vote for me with less than half of a reason offered, all because I'm willing to stick my neck out and actually discuss who might be mafia.
Mole, can you give me a list of players from most suspicious to least suspicious? I would be very happy if you did so.
Are you claiming cop? Because if you are, you're an insane cop.
Otherwise, a bit of reasoning would be nice. Thanks.
Masterchief wrote:I'm just waiting for something scummy to happen. So far, I see nothing wrong.
FOS: JackJack wrote:molestargazer wrote: I find it odd that no-one has died, although I've never played any mafia variations before. Any ideas, anyone?Vote:molestargazerfor role fishing.
Twito wrote:I don't ask you to understand my methods I'm just saying that they work.
I luckily random voted ubertimmy which lead to his reactions based on which I caught him.Dead Rikimaru wrote:and you "nailed" ubertimmy luckly while random voting or caught him based on his "posting style"?Twito wrote: So you are voting me based on me perfectly nailing yesterdays lynch?
3. I got lucky in the sence of random voting scum.
4. Maybe you haven't discovered it yet but I usually catch scum based on their posting style.
Vote: c_d
and you "nailed" c_d luckly while omgus voting or caught him based on his "posting style"?Twito wrote: Oh btw didn't bother reading all the new posts since I was able to nail the next scum without doing so.
Umm.. shit..chaotic_diablo wrote:That's what we're doing right now. MSG already went and set the standard of bolding. Go check post 342. Even Jack and Kelly Chen followed that standard.331 Dead Rik wrote:That said things are too calm and I'm afraid we may end up having to choose on a deadline again.
I'd like to propose a game.
The name is "Top 3".
Each person says who are their top 3 suspects andWHY, and then choses who is the next.
11 are needed to play this game, let's play?
No I'm town idd just wondering how long it will take now that I'm back for me to say something utterly stupid and get lynched.Kelly Chen wrote:If you're trying to claim scum I'm not quite getting it. No dice if you just want to be lynched to get yourself out of the game.
Am I dead? Sorry I will shut up then..Masterchief wrote:Well for me you have already done that.
It has to be the new kinda marijuana I bought..Save The Dragons wrote:Just take a break for a day and come back to scum later or something. If you're "fking up," and there's a personal issue for it, try to deal with it. If it's because you're overloaded on games, do half one day and half another. If it's just a phase, then it will pass. Please do not try to hurt the town by requesting a lynch.
That is all.
Hell yeah I'm happy for succeeding perfectly and nailing ubertimmy!pablito wrote:I'm back. I find Twito's retroactive self-cheering for his Ubertimmy vote very scummy. However, I'm unsure if it's because he's scum or genuinely giving up on this game.
DO IT! But wait for neongrey to go first.pablito wrote:blah blah blah, wait wait wait, let's just lynch lynch lynch instead. And Yes, I am purposely keeping my vote on KC, but I won't bother explain until someone asks me to put my list of three.
Atleast you do read the last post on the thread when you show up.Masterchief wrote:Why do you do this in every game?? Also, what proof do you have that I am scum?Twito wrote:Vote: MC
Cuz he never reads any of the posts and makes a perfect lynch today.
However I will unvote if he quotes this and by doing so proves me wrong.
I'm pretty sure that's not gonna happen. Lets just lynch him.
This is my first post and the vote on him. It was a randomvote. Don't actually remember why I voted him..Twito wrote:Didn't make it on comp yesterday, checking in now.
I was lyncher in one of my games that ended last week. Not so common role though but maybe can exist in this game.
I'm not gonna be careful with my votes coz of this game or whatever.
Vote: ubertimmycoz he is scum.
His responce to my vote. Trying to dismiss it by stating false reasons as to why I did it.ubertimmy wrote:lol more like because you don't like how i mod
Looking for more reactions.Twito wrote:So why isn't ubertimmy lynched yet?
Again trying to dismiss my vote by giving it reasons I haven't stated.ubertimmy wrote:He came to that decision because of leekspin mafia, duh.
Me admitting it was random vote and thinking about moving on.Twito wrote:No not really I'm just bored and the game is not moving so I was kinda hoping for you guys to bandwagon me and make it easier to track scum.
This is after I re-read the thread looking for most suspicious one.Twito wrote:Oh yeah that was reply to guestions about my vote. Mmm.. bird why are you so interested, he isn't your scumbuddy is he?
Ubertimmy trying to make my vote on you unvaluable by putting words to my mouth is atleast a little bit scummy and reason enough to keep my vote on you.
So vote stands.
The reaction again.ubertimmy wrote:beats me!neongrey wrote:Okay. Why?Twito wrote:For the love of god vote ubertimmy then, he is scum!pablito wrote:unvote, vote: chaotic_diablobecause someone needs to vote and someone needs to be voted now.
Try being high and drunk at the same time. Or maybe it depends on what you drink, you should be drinking the same thing when reading my posts as I'm when writing my posts.The Central Scrutinizer wrote:WARNING: KELLY CHEN
THIS POST IS DEVOID OF CONTENT
...SORRY
Being drunk does NOT make Twito make more sense. Anyway. Back to our regularly scheduled tequila shots.
Changes. Mostly brandy since that's my favourite.The Central Scrutinizer wrote: What's that?
I can't smoke, I'm applying for jobs.
Well you commented the most important part of what has been going on. You really must hate me don't you? I still love you, ya know <3Masterchief wrote:Only Twito can turn a conversation to drugs and alcohol...
Oh btw I'm sure this was meant in a negative way but I'm happy to be needed. This makes me useful. As far as conversation about drugs and alcohol is useful.Masterchief wrote:Only Twito can turn a conversation to drugs and alcohol...
TCS wrote:I've never seen a more reasonable accusation be so completely incorrect.
Yep looks so so scummy. Atleast you don't try to cover it.TCS wrote:Two out of three of my people are the ones voting for me, and the my third is the one accused of being my scumpartner.
Me me! That's me!TCS wrote:Twito goes next.
I'm not sure how to take this.MBF the Mod wrote:Town! You must lynch bombers fast! Each night they place a bomb on somebody! They will take as many people with them when they die! They're nothing but a bunch of murderous murderers with nothing but murder on their mind and they'll stop at nothing... even murder! The longer it takes to lynch them the more bombs they will be able to plant! So hurry up yo!
First selfvote.chaotic_diablo wrote:vote chaotic_diablo
Secound selfvote.The Central Scrutinizer wrote:Vote: The Central Scrutinizer. That is one suspicious motherfucker.
Alright since we know ubertimmy is scum I'm also looking for his connections with other people. Mainly Tamuz who stand out on my earlier re-read. So here he would be mentioning 2 guys, one of which is his scumbuddy but not indangering his scumbuddy.ubertimmy wrote:Vote: Twomz
we have to lynch either him or tamuz today before it gets too confusing
Moving on after neongrey unvotes Twomz.ubertimmy wrote:unvote, vote: neongrey
I see this as a joke vote entirely.Tamuz wrote:vote: Twomz
fair enough, better him than me.
Very honest looking reply. But I can see Sherlock thinking what he was as town aswell..The Central Scrutinizer wrote:Jester? What's that role do?Sherlock wrote:I guess TCS and Chaotic DIablo could both be jesters, I mean this is suicide bomber mafia, it seems to fit.
Whatta fuck? This has gotta be a jokeSherlock wrote:Agreed, I'd say unvote all random votes just to be safe. If you have a good reason, keep it on there, but otherwise best to err on the side of caution.
Agreed?molestargazer wrote:Agreed.
Unvote: Twomz
Tamuz wrote:I think we have some people trying to be genuine townies (and yes I'm implying they are not) because they say that just because this is bomber mafia we should employ caution. Should we not, in any case, as good townies employ caution in every game and role we play? I personally think so, so saying we should now start playing carefully with our lynches and lynchplan just rings as falsetown to me.
Take this as you will.
Connecting to Tamuz.molestargazer wrote:I see what you're saying - however pointing out that could just be letting people know.
Why he chose TCS over c_d? Especially since TCS unvoted his selfvote and c_d didn't.cardb0ardb0x wrote:I'm going to go ahead and say I think it's pretty likely there might be a significant number of sacrifice-roles, based on the theme. Like, sacrifice vigkills or something. oh, and by the way,vote:the central scrutinizer. only scum vote for themselves!!!
Trying to wagon based on joke vote? Then again it is idd blatant bad logic if you don't get the joke.Tamuz wrote:unvote: Twomz vote: Cardboardbox
For blatant bad logic.
Ok makes sence.cardb0ardb0x wrote:In case it was for the vote, i thought it was pretty obvious that it was a classic startgame randomvote badlogic of sarcasm. I suppose I should have added a smiley. I would consider Tamuz's vote a vote of humor except he had already voted for someone else.
Maybe THAT is what killed me in another game.Twomz wrote:landmine SK (puts a landmine on a post number, and whoever posts in that number dies).
Maybe this is why I though we had already had a night..Twomz wrote:Our best strategy is to kill as many scum as soon as possible. Yes, that means if a cop has a guilty, my suggestion is that they come forward with it (again, my suggestion, you don't have to).
Pretty neutral. Commenting on me pushing ubertimmy without reasoning.Tamuz wrote:You haven't really given a reason for him to be.
You want him lynched, tell me why my vote should be there.
Also commenting on it.molestargazer wrote:And you came to that decision.. how?Twito wrote:Vote: ubertimmycoz he is scum.
You need to let us know before exepcting us to vote for him.
Could be distracting.Tamuz wrote:Or Glork.
unvote: whatshisname bad logic vote: ubertimmy
Why is he asking about this when ppl have so clearly pointed there is no reason at all?bird1111 wrote:Twomz, Twito, are there any reasons for your votes on ubertimmy?
This is indeed scummy. It was already declared to be a joke vote and he is dealing with it as if it were a serious vote.The Central Scrutinizer wrote:unvotevote:cardb0ardb0x
I think it's ridiculous to consider an early game selfvote a scum tell. I simply random.org'd it and the number came up me. I thought it would be funny to self-vote, so I did. I would like to hear your reasons for thinking that a selfvote is a scum tell (unless you were just OMGUS'ing).
This kinda posts I find as scummy.molestargazer wrote:Well.. there's not much I can say.
I'm still watching though.
This post didn't come until later but I though it's good one and makes more sence here:Twito wrote:We have tracked your scumbuddy and now you are trying to divert the suspicions to me. You just might success though since I'm so easy target.bird1111 wrote:I'm here; and wonderng why Twito got so defensive over me inquiring why he voted for ubertimmy
chaotic_diablo wrote:So what kind of point are you trying to bring up? Supposively, you called him defensive to call it into attention. My attention is on him now, but there's nothing there.bird1111 wrote:I called you defensive, not scummy, there is a difference between the two imo
Often I see scum putting maybe 3 suspects with one of those being their scummy buddy. Here he only mentions those 3 and as my assumption goes Tamuz as his partner.ubertimmy wrote:TWOMZ, TAMUZ 'N' TWITO
THE FIVE CHARACTER T-NAME-WITH-EITHER-TW-OR-Z BRIGADE
I though so when I replaced scum.pablito wrote:But most of all I really don't like Sherlock's posts. But I'm not going to vote him. Seriously Sherlock looked the scummiest to me on the re-read. Tried to make mountains out of molehills.
Hmm.. just kinda jumped up to me.molestargazer wrote:I'm here now.
What've I missed? Why are you voting that Chaotic?
Maybe pointing too hard on his ancestors scumminess. As a real scum I would expect him to be more quiet about it.pablito wrote:Sherlock's gone. I'm here now. But I would completely agree with that vote, c_d if he were still around.
Shiiiit....pablito wrote:rrrrrrrico.....y suave.
pablito wrote:unvote, vote: ubertimmyI felt compelled.
Why the hopping? Especially hopping away from voting scum.pablito wrote:well then,unvote, vote: kellychen
Kelly checking in.Kelly Chen wrote: My intro thoughts are a weakvote: chaotic_diabloandFOS: neongreyandpablito.
I don't like CD's (mistaken) Sherlock vote and I don't much like the case he attempts to make against MSG. It looks kind of contrived to me.
I think bird, Twito, and Tamuz are ok. Not actually sure on MSG. I would like to ask Twito for his other thoughts on the game. At the moment I don't think he should be followed on ubertimmy.
Alright. So StD and Pablito both have said something in spanish. It's obvious we have spanish speaking mafiaSave The Dragons wrote: C_D, could you refrence the game you played with the jester por favor?
Yep.Twito wrote:FOS: MGSTo me that looks like a wagon hop like C_D pointed out.
Promised re-read. Maybe attempt to make up reason to join the wagon on c_d.ubertimmy wrote:im very confused. i'll reread.
The Central Scrutinizer wrote:Hey, where's the cream filling?Save The Dragons wrote:k, next moving on toVote: The Central Scrutinizer
Almost following StD. However still pushing the case on c_d.Kelly Chen wrote:er okay.
FOS: The Central Scrutinizer
Tamuz had been so lurking.Tamuz wrote:QFTneongrey wrote:Sorry, I'm examulicious right now. Here, kind of reading, not a lot of time to do serious posting until... oh, the end of the week.
chaotic_diablo wrote:Skimmed it, and repeated it. My mistake.Twito wrote:Why you repeat it? Or did you just skim the rest of the post after that?chaotic_diablo wrote:OMGUS meansOhMyGodUS[/]uck. It means you're voting for a person just because he/she voted for you.
Maybe your just finding something to say.
The case she is pulling againts C_D is looking fairly forced.Kelly Chen wrote:Good work Twito.confirm vote: CD
P.S. neongrey you are scum.
So if Bombers plant enough bombs to take all town down they win. Aha! That's how the game works. So I'm not expecting nightkills. Unless the kills bombers make are shown as nightkills.mikeburnfire wrote:This is a small issue I noticed while going through my notes, but I thought I'd bring it to your attention:
Most pro-town PMs say "You win when all bombers are dead." I'd like to rephrase that as "You win when all bombers are dead and at least one pro-town role remains".
That is all. As you were.
Doesn't provide reason behind his vote.pablito wrote:vote: Tamuz
I'm not going to bother with the whole c_d mishap there. honest mistake, and I don't see any of the reactions to the discussion as being necessarily scummy.
Ok post is to be expected now from him and from ubertimmy.bird1111 wrote:Unvote, way past the time for random voting
I've read through the thread, but need to do so again to get an idea of who I find scummy
Again changing his vote.pablito wrote:c_d and dead rik are arguing points at different levels I think. therefore they're not attacking each other's direct arguments. Also, I think c_d's stealing examples have not been clear enough to make a good point.
good to know for future reference.
also,unvote, vote: Dead rikimarubecause I sense he's trying to pick an easily won fight.
Alright so he is away.mikeburnfire wrote:Tamuz has asked to be replaced.
Kelly seems to be making cases out of nothing.Kelly Chen wrote:Also pablito replaced Sherlock. I still think this is a scum tell.
The general lack of comment on the CD thing is odd. Especially as some people felt like commenting on his shoplifting metaphor.Anyway, the whole stealing side track... I dunno. It seems like a bit much of a tangent to me, and a bit like a distraction. It -really- came out of nowhere, and without much of a connection to anything else.unvote, vote: neongrey
Dead Rikimaru wrote:And when did I vote c_d?pablito wrote: "pick a fight" was a term I used to describe your vote on c_d. It wasn't meant to be literal. Just that you're choosing the easier battle to be won.
SHIIIIIT!pablito wrote:How incredibly astute of you.unvote: Dead Rik
Me after being away for a while. I might need to find this post later on.Twito wrote:This game listed as boring since I don't have too much time. More or less skipping last few pages.
KC's case is interesting. Seen scum playing bad and feeling threatened and asking to be replaced for that reason. Sherlock idd is around and could do something like this.
I will make more valid post later like monday I guess or so. And see if I can look to this issue with CD aswell and shit.
Oh and just looked back whether I've voted and I seem to have perfectly good vote on ubertimmy the scum. I stick to that one.
Another votehop based on nothing on page 9 randomvoting holyshityouare scum!pablito wrote:hmmm...time for a wagon!
1 for ubertimmy, 2 for MSG
Original Roll String: 1d2(STATIC) 1 2-Sided Dice: (2) = 2
Kelly Chen wrote:You have to roll again because actually neongrey was at 2 votes too.
Ok so you were forced to change the random vote.pablito wrote:good point.unvote
neongrey is three
Original Roll String: 1d3(STATIC) 1 3-Sided Dice: (3) = 3
Kinda scummy post.The Central Scrutinizer wrote:I'm here, still trying to figure out why everyone is so anxious to vote MSG, timmy, or neongrey.
FINALLY!Dead Rikimaru wrote:We are four days away from the deadline and we need a majority for a lynch.
It's time to check the current bandwagons to choose the best one.
*checks previous posts from ubertimmy, molestargazer and neongrey*
It's not because he already has the most votes, and it's not a random choice.
Between Oct 28 and Dec 10 ubertimmy posted 7 times with no content whatsoever.
According to the mod he has been prodded but hasn't posted in the last 8 days while posting frequently on other games.
This was his last post:I think he is by far the best lynch among the three.ubertimmy, on Dec 10 wrote:im very confused. i'll reread.
vote: ubertimmy
Just might point to my coinfidence of ubertimmy being scum.Twito wrote:Hehe he is dead. With 4 days remaining he could have claimed but I don't really mind.
Didn't have time for making that re-read.
Fking scumbag! You know why!molestargazer wrote:*Yawn*
Morning all!
Hey Jack! Mike said to give you a cheer, so... cheer.
Anyway, down to the matter at hand.
I find it odd that no-one has died, although I've never played any mafia variations before. Any ideas, anyone?
Him being replacement this looks to be a genuin post and I assume he is town.Jack wrote:Doctor presumably.
I'll read the rest of the thread and then vote for someone.
You can do scummy things as noob without knowing what's the name of the scummy thing your doing.molestargazer wrote:Well, in regards to that. I've only played one previous game HERE before, and it introduced me to a lot of odd terms I'd never seen before - where I've played before, the most complicated term was FoS.
Posting a lot without accusing people... I found in this game if I did try and accuse, I became lynch fodder. I think your arguments are perfectly sound, and it seems to me like you're just trying to root out the scum, so I'm not even gonna FoS this time.
Aha! Tamuz and MC are the same now. Makes more sence to lynch this person. Honestly my case againts Tamuz was though out before realizing MC replaced him.mikeburnfire wrote:Masterchief replaces Tamuz, who has requested replacement.
SHAZAM
Masterchief wrote:Hello everyone. I shall do a quick read.
Masterchief wrote:Wow a lot of the people I cannot stand are in this game....
I can also see some tension between mole and pablito. Anyone care to explain?
He claims to really have re-read and that's all he has to say. Did he re-read day 2 or all of the game. I bet day 2Masterchief wrote:Sorry meant to say "surrounding" Pablito and mole. (sorry for triple posting)
You should have taken. Would scum admit this? Maybe by mistake?pablito wrote:wtf? did I take anything seriously yesterday and then if you think so, why do you assume that I had intentions of any sort?
FOS: every single scum who's trying to paint me as an opportunistic lynch
Interesting.pablito wrote:I do find it very suspect that molestargazer decided to chastise my diceroll vote and then suddenly thereafter, ubertimmy was taken out by a torrent of votes.
I feel that msg did not like ubertimmy's lynch at all.
Seriously this guy is scum.Masterchief wrote:Hello everyone. I'm posting on my BRAND NEW LAPTOP!!
Following Kelly. Why?pablito wrote:Just for that,vote: masterchief
Thenunvote, vote: the central scrutinizer
I'm now doubting mafia has hits at night. Him believing they do would make him not-mafia.The Central Scrutinizer wrote:Twitobegan the Ubertimmy bandwagon, and never jumped off of it. I would call this a coptell; however, we began with Day, so there's no way that he could have known from the beginning that Timmy was scum. Still, I would bet a dimebag that he was the one protected from last night's mafia hit.
What about reading yesterday for what scummy happened?Masterchief wrote:I'm just waiting for something scummy to happen. So far, I see nothing wrong.TCS wrote:Jack & Masterchief: Replacements, haven't done much scummy, and their predecessors were pretty much lurkers with nothing to say. I'd watch them at this point. They seem particularly happy to let the MSG/pablito thing continue on rather than explore new avenues of discussion... and that seems pretty scummy.
He did vote on Masterchief for that along with Pablito. But why FoS Pablito?molestargazer wrote:TCS, that was an excellent post. I also liked the way you put yourself in and saw yourself from other points of view - you weren't trying to avoid suspicion.
You've got a point, but I think currently we've got more than enough evidence to go off.TCS wrote:Maybe I'm barking up the wrong tree, and we should be lynching the people who are talking the least?
Is there any particular reason for that other than you want to lynch an inactive? I don't think you're doing what's best to try and get us a good lynch.Pablito wrote:good idea.unvote, vote: Masterchief
FoS - Pablito
However..
I personally think you've got plenty to go off right now, especially if you read back a page. There's even been things happening since you were here.Masterchief wrote:I'm just waiting for something scummy to happen. So far, I see nothing wrong.
With that and also your completely useless posts - I've not seen a single one of value - I think I've found my vote.
Vote - Masterchief
Sticking to what other ppl say instead of saying something of his own.molestargazer wrote:No offence meant here, but if you can't see anything at least worth talking about, such as TCS's very good post recently, or Kelly Chen's ideas, then you need to make the font bigger.
If there's no suspicion that you can find - post what you think about people's ideas - anything to help out.
That simply reinforces my vote.
I can understand as a reason not to vote MC.neongrey wrote:And yeah, with masterchief, I'm not sure of where the line between 'scummy' and him just being kinda... well, himself. I myself wouldn't necessarily be too concerned about a pair of votes, but it'd be worth -some- sort of attention at least.
This should really start ringing alarm bells on everyone.Masterchief wrote:I don't believe this. I haven't doen anything to get suspision on me, yet you all still think I'm scummy by not contributing anythingYET.
GOOOOD!The Central Scrutinizer wrote:I'm on board. Masterchief, you're going to have to saysomething. Maybe you will with three votes.
vote: Masterchief
You look scummy for not voting him. Then again as his scumpartner you prolly wouldn't have said this.Kelly Chen wrote:The Masterchief wagon looks scummy. That is, the specific people voting him.
Do the individual members of the wagon agree with that?
@mole, TCS, pablito
Keeping vote on his scumbuddy to avoid looking like it was there just as a if-necassery underbusthrowingmanover.molestargazer wrote:Whoops, I forgot to add this.
My vote still stands. If I see something, I'll look upon it individually and make my decision. I'm going to try not to bandwagon again.
Masterchief wrote:pablito wrote:Well Masterchief surely isn't gaining pro-towniness posts. But he clearly fails to see that scum don't need to actively do anything to be scummy. Sometimes good scum get away by actively not doing anything at the most opportune times. And right now, MC, you sure are looking scummy by the way you keep avoiding the pertinent points around you and regarding you.
Kelly Chen wrote: @mole: Why do you decline to comment on the scumminess of the other people on the Masterchief wagon?