I swear ive seen you somewhere before.
BM
*no, this is not a random vote based on the fact that ive seen Babygirl before. just to clarify. lol
I was just watching the wagon on Babygirl grow in fine fashion, when i saw this post.The Fonz wrote:Vote: Alabaska J
Dissension ftw.
If BG86 HAD read all the posts condemning mellow man, and hammered him anyway, it's pretty clear she felt what she was doing was right, and didn't give a crap what people thought. Protown imho.
As an aside, I'm unbelievably pissed at Zombie. THE FUCKING POINT OF THE MASON ROLE IS THAT YOU CLAIM IT AND IT CONFIRMS YOU AS INNOCENT!
If there is a third mason in that masonry, and they are the last mason, I'd like that player to claim today. Since we've had two die without claiming, I don't want the possibility of a third mason hanging around as a scum fakeclaim.
*sigh*The Fonz wrote:Battle Mage, you're completely wrong.
THe mason ABSOLUTELY SHOULD CLAIM.
How will you feel about a mason claim from a player run up a few days claims mason?
The point of masons is that they are confirmable. Since we can't confirm them since we've had two masons die without claiming, it becomes a very handy safeclaim for scum,since there is nothing to counteract it.
Therefore, I want them to claim TODAY, when the mason claim is least advantageous for scum. If there is no claim today, we should lynch on sight anyone claiming to be part of that masonry later. Capiche?
Did Erratus lurk?The Fonz wrote:Except that no-one really attacked Erratus, and a large number of players just lurked through the day.Battle Mage wrote: *sigh*
Fonz, please dont do a CKD. I have a LOT of respect for you, but if you argue with mewhen i'm right, you wont come out of it feeling great.
With regard to the underlined comment, it is clear that you didnt read my last post fully, as i pointed out there that a mason claim now would be very hard to pull off as a fakeclaim, as it would rest not only on the consistency of that individuals interaction with 1 mason, but2!
OMFG. Dude, please stay awake!!Fonz wrote:The whole, DAMNED, point, is that they are not confirmed innocent because there's no-one else to confirm them! And a dead mason is not a dead cop.Hence, it is incredibly short-sighted and foolish to ask for a mason claim today, IF we even have more of them. Especially with a dead Doctor, what good is a confirmed innocent to us? They'll just get killed tonight. Id much rather they breadcrumbed now, and if we get a claim later, when a confirmed innocent is actually useful to us, then we can check it out, and all is well.
The great thing about this situation is that any mason claim can be virtually confirmed simply by reading the game. A mason claim now is suicide. Any mason who claims now is clearly a terrible player, who has a deathwish. Anyone who pushes a mason-claim now, is either really missing the bigger picture, or is scum.
BM, my spelling of it was CORRECT.Oh and ooc, please dont use the word kapish against me. Not only is it one of my favourite words, but your spelling of it was criminal.
BM
what part of this are you not getting? WE DON'T NEED TO NARROW IT DOWN TO ONE. Hell, it doesnt matter if 3 or 4 people match the description-hopefully the others wont claim mason and we'll narrow it down that way. This entire conversation is grossly anti-town...The Fonz wrote:Missed out that middle section:
If you can reduce the number of possible mason partners to one by reading just ONE DAY of interactions, when half the town lurked, I'd be very surprised.
actually thats a valid point.mr. incrediball wrote:i don't see how it would be particularly benificial for the remaining mason (assuming there is one) to claim or stay silent. after all, with both their partners dead, they're nothing more than a vanilla now.
on a side note, i don't think there are/were 3 masons in the first place. if there were 3, it would be more likely that one of them would back up zs.
OMGUS. Literally. No question about it. I vote for you, and you suddenly pay attention to me. In this case, it is scummy because you obviously dont have any other reason to find me suspicious. Plus you'd much rather sit on the largest bandwagon amirite?Mellowed Man wrote:Battle Mage wrote:Unvote, Vote: Mellowed Man
Couldnt be more obvious scum if he claimed Godfather.
BMFosBM.
Nice paddling an easy answer. It is never wise to assume that because people dont present a reason immediately, that they do not have one. In fact, anyone who reads your last posts will see the exact same thing as me. Not only do i find it very scummy that you vote for the largest bandwagon when it is very near completion, and we are still discussing, but also that you vote for someone solely based on lurking at this stage, with no analysis of the size of the BW. You even make it sound like a temporary vote, indicating that you either genuinely have no idea where we are in the game, or you want to play a blatant bandwagon attempt down.Not so Mellow Man wrote: Do you always play this way? If so, you need to use more logic.
random laughter interludes are the most well known scumtell. Just ask Skruffs.Mellowed Man wrote: Haha.
On the contrary, i like the Fonz alot. He's one of my favourite players on Mafiascum, and i believe i voted him for Best Newbie last year. Perhaps they seem personal firstly because we know each other fairly well, and secondly (wholly my fault) that in other current games i am getting slightly irate with people arguing stuff that is really poor. Much as i enjoy the novelty of being right, i hate arguing for ages over things like that, because people dont read those arguments, and nothing is learnt (as you yourself have proven).Mellowed Man wrote: First off, do you have something personal against The Fonz? It sure seems that way. Those exchanges between you two seemed to be more on a personal level, outside the game spectrum.
Well ive kinda been waiting for a fantastic introduction. But i guess the moment's passed now.Mellowed Man wrote:Also, my theory is Babygirl is just trying to go after me, because I'm the only other person that she thinks might be lynched today. That in itself is selfish.Battle Mage wrote:Vote: Babygirl
I swear ive seen you somewhere before.
BM
*no, this is not a random vote based on the fact that ive seen Babygirl before. just to clarify. lol
Also, it's not like you came into the game and provided lots of logic. All you have done is just come in and flat-out vote the OBVIOUS and vote Babygirl, what an easy target..
Awesome. We have confirmation.Mellowed Man wrote:By townie, I meant I was pro-town. Yay for WiFi at the airport.
I claim one-shot vig, and I killed korts last night because he kept attacking me for my lynch yesterday... and, I don't regret it at all, as he just as well could have been scum.
I bet you no one can attest to that, because I Indeed killed him last night. =)
This might be the last post I will make before my potential death.
umm, what is WIFOM about it?Alabaska J wrote:Dammit what do we do? I'm thinking it could be gambit, but he has created an immense wifom. DX
Lol. I actually LOVE this game. Its just too easy! Riceballtail is quite clearly Mellowed Man's scumbuddy. C'mon- why else would he be wanting to ADVISE and COUNSEL someone he thinks is scum? Unless you are a really REALLY lenient townie who genuinely wants to help the opposition perform better, i'm seeing your play as totally congruent with frustrated, but sympathetic, bussing scumbuddy.Riceballtail wrote:First:UNVOTE
Mellowed, you're failing at being less scummy than you want to be. I didn't like you D1, considering how much you lurked D1. Then you gave a crap reason for hammering. You even blamed it on your lack of participation!
Here you admit not participating, and also failing to make the notification that you were going to be V/LA until the day before you decided to "come back". IMO you've just reached the top of my scum charts. You and BG are taking this to a personal fight, similar to what you seemed to disapprove of BM and Fonz doing. Since you can't make up your mind, we'll help you.Mellowed Man wrote:I do feel contrite that I hammered ZS, I guess my absence led to stupidity, but I am NOT making any pathetic excuses for myself. Furthermore, those accusing me of making up an excuse for not posting can look and see that I had not before today posted in ANY of my ongoing four games in the same amount of time (4 days) as this one, and that I did indeed post in the Vacation/Limited Access Thread the first time I had just a short period of spare time yesterday.
VOTE: Mellowed Man
Also, don't lurk D1, then decide to call others out on lurking D2. It looks really bad.
Umm, except it literally invalidates the entire exercise, the point of which was, any mason who doesnt claim now will not be believed if they claim later. -.-The Fonz wrote:If they choose not to claim, that's their prerogative BM.
I disagree. After Day 1 he was always going to be high on the list of suspects, and i can see some logic in him wanting to use his kill in order to confirm himself, if he was worried about his immediate future. You'd be amazed how many times i see these 1/2 shot power roles using their shots early on.Alabaska J wrote:I think quite the contrary. If you are one-shot, you should wait until you are closer to endgame and have more information so that you can use your kill more wisely. This makes his claim less legitimate IMO.Battle Mage wrote:Plus if he WAS a 1-shot vig, i could see alot of logic in him firing earlier rather than later.
hmm, thats a valid point, although its possible that he didnt plan that far ahead. Either way, i dont think he IS a Vig, so this convo is pretty irrelevant. Im just pointing these things out from a general perspective.q21 wrote:BM - one problem I have in believing that that is the case is that he never mentioned that he suspected korts. If you plan on killing night one to confirm yourself then you need to give some sort of indication that you think the person you're going to kill is scummy.
I knew that. -.-Surye wrote:He did claim though, if he changes his claim, LAL. Either way, he's going. I'd be willing to hammer, if someone doesn't get to it before I get to a quick pre-hammer re-read.Battle Mage wrote:Claim-time.
BM
Mellowed Man wrote:Aww man, I'm scared the mafia will kill me at night. That's why I claimed one-shot, maybe they'll think I'm useless.
Anyways, BM is an idiot for forgetting I claimed, how can he forget that?
Also, I'll as the vigilante kill whoever the town wants me to kill at night, if you wish, but I'm basically dead already, and the mafia will hammer now, so have fun everyone, I've made a lot of mistakes, but that's part of the game.
So have fun!
P.S.
Since when do I have to say why I want to kill someone. Korts called me a hypocrite at the beginning of the game, and was always wanting to kill me.
qftishSurye wrote:A wagon isn't to teach you a lesson, it's to pressure you into making another mistake that will reveal you as scum.
And because of this comment, if Mellow comes up scum, i'll be straight onto you for setting up multiple lynches.Alabaska J wrote:Are we really? Well, I'll give mellowed one more shot, though I'd like to somehow work out a way to prove his ability.
unvote, vote Riceballtail. I love how he didn't even try to defend himself.
Also, if Mellowed is scum, I'm perfectly fine with a BM lynch.
eh? which post is that?nswhorse wrote:Interesting no-one at all has noticed my absence. So just who are we jumping on now MM has revealed (thinking he was dead)? I must say we're on a roll - two masons and the doc gone, and almost certainly the serial killer should have been gone. Is the aim of this game to get rid of all minor power roles?
FOS:Battle Mage
That a grand enough welcome for you? FOS for being so damned cock-sure of himself and pretending a one-line post constitutes a well-reasoned argument and summation of damning evidence.
Eh? I didnt bus him UNTIL he claimed Vig as far as im aware. The claim was the main point against him. But, that aside, hypothetical situations arent usually all that helpful. I could make a similar situation up for 90% of the players in this game.Alabaska J wrote:Wrong. [hypothetical]You bussed your scumbuddy, he claims vig, makes a big show of being town, people kind of believe him, it turns out he was never lynched, then you change your mind about bussing him with his new claim and stance as a possibly confirmed townie, and jump on Riceballtail .[/hypothetical]
However, if neither of you are scumwhich I am leaning towards(there is a reason I am not voting either of you atm), then you just saved the vig. Congrats. Also, thank god for Riceballtail looking extremely scummy IMO.
Got it?
Alabaska J wrote:I would look at BM. I never said I thought he was scum. I never said I thought BM was scum.
lolwut?Alabaska J wrote: if he happened to come up scum, I would look into BM
No shit!Alabaska J wrote: Also, there is no way you can ever be sure of anyone's alignment in a situation like this.
Are you an advert for terrible townsmanship?Alabaska J wrote: @BM: You did save him. Theexact same thing happened day oneand the person was hammered soon afterwards. I'm sure something similar would have happened today had you not speedily unvoted.
meh, i hate cradle-snatchers.Alabaska J wrote: One last thing:
Can I have your babies please?Mellowed Man wrote:unvote, vote Alabaska J
Right now, I don't trust certain people.
Maybe so he doesnt get NKed?mr. incrediball wrote:hmmm...
mellowed man... mellowed man...
1) i'm sorely tempted to go with LAL on this one. i can't see any motivation behind lying about the number of shots you have if you are town.
This is true. In fact, i almost always do it. But i tend to think that newer players are less likely to. Not everyone is as sick as me.Mr Incrediball wrote: 3) i don't get this whole "he claimed in twilight, he must be town" thing. i've been in plenty of games where players have maintained that they are town all the way up to the death scene, and then turned out scum.
erm, dude, use some context please. In between me thinking MM was scum and my subsequent suspicions was the fake-twilight thing. Anyway being suspicious of multiple people is usually a town tell. Why would there be confusion??Mr Incrediball wrote: and BM is flip-flopping on the MM issue. He seemed to leap straight from "MM must be scum" to "Rice must be scum" without there seeming to be any moment of confusion in between the two conclusions.
thats a towntell for incrediball imho. An idiottell but a towntell too.Mellowed Man wrote:Have you noticed who's died in this game? Korts was a doctor.mr. incrediball wrote:have you heard of a wonderful new invention? it's called a doc.Battle Mage wrote:
Maybe so he doesnt get NKed?
Alabaska J wrote:Yes. I don't think you are scummy, but you will jump to the top of my list if Mellowed Man comes up scum because the interaction between you two at that point points to a possible scum connection. And yes several people unvoted. Also, several people had reasons. Not only were you "first on the scene," you had no reason to unvote.Battle Mage wrote:Alabaska J wrote:I would look at BM. I never said I thought he [Mellowed Man] was scum. I never said I thought BM was scum.lolwut?Alabaska J wrote: if he happened to come up scum, I would look into BM
Whats with you?? You are so keen to emphasise that you arent attacking me now, and you dont find me atall scummy, but inexplicably, you will be after my hide if someone i unvoted comes up scum, when in fact, several people have unvoted-i was just the first on the scene.
thats pushing multiple lynches! And on poor grounds too, seeing as ANYONE town would have unvoted at that point. I'm sure you would claim to do the same, hence i find your attack grossly hypocritical.Alabaska J wrote:How the fuck did I push multiple lynches? Where is this bs coming from? All I stated was that if Mellowed ManBattle Mage wrote:No shit!Alabaska J wrote: Also, there is no way you can ever be sure of anyone's alignment in a situation like this.
That's mafia kiddo. But i'm really not buying your defence. It seems like you attempted to push multiple lynches, then when called on it, realised you had over-committed yourself, and backtracked, with the clear intention of bringing it up later. I'm not having it.evercame up scum (whether from a nightkill or a situation that occurs later in the game that causes him to be lynched (counter-claim or something)), I would look into BM first, because of the actions that occurred at the point in time when Mellowed Man was about to be lynched.
...true dat.Alabaska J wrote:Doesn't prevent it from happening. We have our fair share of idiots here at Mafia Scum.Battle Mage wrote:Are you an advert for terrible townsmanship?Alabaska J wrote: @BM: You did save him. Theexact same thing happened day oneand the person was hammered soon afterwards. I'm sure something similar would have happened today had you not speedily unvoted.
Anyone who hammered in the same situation is an idiot.
I'm serious when i say your attitude truly befuddles me.
What other reason could it have been? I mean, theres a big difference between 'there was no reason' and 'you didnt explain your reason'.Alabaska J wrote:Battle Mage wrote:Alabaska J wrote:Yes. I don't think you are scummy, but you will jump to the top of my list if Mellowed Man comes up scum because the interaction between you two at that point points to a possible scum connection. And yes several people unvoted. Also, several people had reasons. Not only were you "first on the scene," you had no reason to unvote.Battle Mage wrote:Alabaska J wrote:I would look at BM. I never said I thought he [Mellowed Man] was scum. I never said I thought BM was scum.lolwut?Alabaska J wrote: if he happened to come up scum, I would look into BM
Whats with you?? You are so keen to emphasise that you arent attacking me now, and you dont find me atall scummy, but inexplicably, you will be after my hide if someone i unvoted comes up scum, when in fact, several people have unvoted-i was just the first on the scene.
WTF? Yes i did. I unvoted because he sounded genuine, and to some extent confirmed himself.
See, the problem with this is you didn't say that what when you posted. We can't read your mind, genius. You said could be a well-thought out gambit but that wasn't likely. Why isn't it likely? Also, I find it weird that you believe this, even though you claim to do the same thing when you are scum. I know you given some reasoning about new players, but I did something similar (although, I admit, not identical, but the scenario was different) in my very first game as scum.
You are encouraging simultaneous lynches on dodgy grounds. If you dont find 2 people atall scummy, why would you try so hard to tie them together?Alabaska J wrote:No, it is not. Nowhere in this post do I advocate the lynch of Mellowed Man.Battle Mage wrote:thats pushing multiple lynches! And on poor grounds too, seeing as ANYONE town would have unvoted at that point. I'm sure you would claim to do the same, hence i find your attack grossly hypocritical.Alabaska J wrote:How the fuck did I push multiple lynches? Where is this bs coming from? All I stated was that if Mellowed ManBattle Mage wrote:No shit!Alabaska J wrote: Also, there is no way you can ever be sure of anyone's alignment in a situation like this.
That's mafia kiddo. But i'm really not buying your defence. It seems like you attempted to push multiple lynches, then when called on it, realised you had over-committed yourself, and backtracked, with the clear intention of bringing it up later. I'm not having it.evercame up scum (whether from a nightkill or a situation that occurs later in the game that causes him to be lynched (counter-claim or something)), I would look into BM first, because of the actions that occurred at the point in time when Mellowed Man was about to be lynched.
Well, yes and no. You are right with your definition, but what you fail to recognise is that tying two townies together is the same as tying a townie to a scumbag. Or at least, it has the same result. If said player is scum, then the result of losing a buddy is at the very least, 1 mislynch. Its a great investment by the scum, and happens ALOT. Just Alabaska made it VERY obvious.The Fonz wrote:BM:
Your 'multiple lynches' thing is BS. The point of the multiple lynches scumtell is that scum do it, along the lines of 'well, if X isn't scum, Y who he is arguing with MUST be' which doesn't follow, and can be used to lynch consecutive townies.
Looking for scummy connections between two players, and suggesting that you'll go after one if the other is scum, is what town basically HAS TO DO. It's so far from being a scumtell it's not even funny.
i would say ive never seen that role before, except i saw it for the first time ever, this morning. roflFonzie wrote: Also, I don't get why 'anyone protown' would HAVE to unvote Mellowed. Competent scum continue to insist they are town right up to the posting of the nightscene, in case there's a mayor/governor or some mistake in the vote count.
Worst. Philosophy. Ever.The Fonz wrote:Always assume you can win, until it's known that you've lost.i would say ive never seen that role before, except i saw it for the first time ever, this morning. roflFonzie wrote: Also, I don't get why 'anyone protown' would HAVE to unvote Mellowed. Competent scum continue to insist they are town right up to the posting of the nightscene, in case there's a mayor/governor or some mistake in the vote count.
Either way, its not that common, and is a pretty poor reason behind the play.
Rolefish? roflFonzie wrote:Regardless, acknowledging that competent scum do something is irrelevant, as MM is clearly not 'competent scum' (no offence!) to the extent that i think you mean.Do you know something i dont about him?Or are you just trying to be argumentative?unvote, vote: Battle Mage
For the blatant rolefish.
The Fonz wrote:Wouldn't you feel stupid, BM, if you'd fessed up to being scum, and then it was revealed that someone had forgotten to unvote, or something like that meant you didn't die?Battle Mage wrote:Worst. Philosophy. Ever.The Fonz wrote:Always assume you can win, until it's known that you've lost.i would say ive never seen that role before, except i saw it for the first time ever, this morning. roflFonzie wrote: Also, I don't get why 'anyone protown' would HAVE to unvote Mellowed. Competent scum continue to insist they are town right up to the posting of the nightscene, in case there's a mayor/governor or some mistake in the vote count.
Either way, its not that common, and is a pretty poor reason behind the play.
lol
Yes because of course i stalk you and know all your games at any 1 time, right? wrong.Fonzie-again wrote:You're asking if I have any knowledge that isn't generally available. Since a) I've never played with him before and b) if I HAD, I'd have let my meta on him be in the open, then I can only conclude that you were fishing for some kind of investigative role.ME! wrote:Rolefish? roflFonzie wrote:Regardless, acknowledging that competent scum do something is irrelevant, as MM is clearly not 'competent scum' (no offence!) to the extent that i think you mean.Do you know something i dont about him?Or are you just trying to be argumentative?unvote, vote: Battle Mage
For the blatant rolefish.
How do you figure that to be a rolefish?
I'm discussing his competency ffs. How does me asking whether you have a meta on him, pertain to his role, in any way, shape or form??
Loose-voter...
BM
If you dont have a meta on him, why would you make the assuation that he is an experienced mafia player?The Fonz wrote:BM: Again, IF I HAD A META ON HIM, I'D HAVE SAID SO, WOULDN'T I!
Also, how exactly would one have a meta pertaining to such a specific situation?
rofl. You're SO right, and it feels great watching Fonz get TOLD by a newer players.mr. incrediball wrote:The Fonz wrote:Regardless, acknowledging that competent scum do something is irrelevant, as MM is clearly not 'competent scum' (no offence!) to the extent that i think you mean.Do you know something i dont about him?Or are you just trying to be argumentative?unvote, vote: Battle Mage
For the blatant rolefish.
that's a MAJOR reach.
what could BM possibly be suggesting relating to this game? that you have a role which can find out how competent someone is? that he thinks MM has secretly revealed master strategies to you through nightalk?
he was asking if you knew something about how good MM is, not about his role! blatant paranoia.
Dang lol. I couldve sworn assuation was a real word. WHY DID NO-ONE TELL ME!?The Fonz wrote:Assertion, Bm.
In fairness, what you deem 'the optimum scum THING' is rarely of any consequence. Its only in very rare circumstances that it achieves anything. Just because i do it, does not mean that it is a great policy.Fonz wrote: And the short answer is- i didn't. I never made the assertion that he is an experienced mafia player. I said, it's a bad idea to 'clear' someone because they claim in twilight, especially when it's a change of claim, because it is the correct and usual thing for scum to do. Sure, you might get the odd newbie who doesn't think it through... but I'm not necessarily going to assume that MM, if he were scum, would be incapable of doing the optimal scum thing.
Then i was curious as to why you had insinuated that MM was experienced, after you had commented that it was a tactic used frequently amongst experienced scum.The Fonz wrote:That I have a guilty investigation on him, of course, you idiot!mr. incrediball wrote:
that's a MAJOR reach.
what could BM possibly be suggesting relating to this game? that you have a role which can find out how competent someone is? that he thinks MM has secretly revealed master strategies to you through nightalk?
he was asking if you knew something about how good MM is, not about his role! blatant paranoia.
And again- isn't it obvious to anyone with half a brain that if i had a meta read on someone, I wouldn't keep it to myself!!!!?
i didnt say noob. I said, newer than Fonz. thats not an insult. In fact, you seem to be a very good player from what i have seen so far today.mr. incrediball wrote:Battle Mage wrote:
rofl. You're SO right, and it feels great watching Fonz get TOLD by a newer players.
i like how everyone on this site thinks i'm a mafia noob.
aggravating the situation? You mean stop scumhunting? -.-Riceballtail wrote:BM: Stop aggravating the situation, it doesn't look well on your part.
there are few things that are in worse taste than apologising on someone else's behalf. Also noting that you make no comment on my affiliation.Riceballtail wrote: Fonz: Sympathies, as you to must suffer under the BM's mind games. I do think you did a reach on that post, but I also realize that you may not be wrong either. Neutral feelings.
oh wait, there it is. So i'm scummy...why? Because Fonz says so? I call bs.Rice wrote: Overall: MM and BM are showing to be quite scummy, and I don't like it. I think MM almost deserves policy LAL, especially saying he wasn't going to have access, then posted more frequently than the rest of the game. I still want to know what happened to VV.
the situations are different because:killa seven wrote:hmm i just want 2 step in and say, BM you should know better that when people are gettin BW and they fake claim they keep the fake claim to the death, we just went through this in mafia 75, when i was SK and claimed VIG i insisted i was vig untill the end.
and BG asking for replacement after 1 vote is scummy. i dont like how you vanished after the pressure was off you when the town switched to MM.
also i dont like how MM said he didnt have pc access because of his parents when he thought he was dead. then he gets saved and hes the most active besides MM
well after that.
FOS MM
FOS BM
sorry, ignore that.Battle Mage wrote:lets kill Rice.
lolThe Fonz wrote:BM, if you couldn't deal with criticism, you wouldn't have lasted five minutes, the amount you get.
*resists urge to post pornographic image*Alabaska J wrote:Battle Mage wrote:yeh Alabaska is scum. Fonz is just very foolish.
Love you and all your reasonings! Maybeto avoid making such sweeping generalizations as these.post more explicitly
this post gives me terribly scummy vibes. Enough for a wagon at this stage.DizzyIzzyB13 wrote:Surely we'd want him to die loudly so we can use his noise to track his buddies?
Yeah, i can see that. Fair cop.DizzyIzzyB13 wrote:Given his response to what I posted, to me this vaguely reads as BMscum telling Alabaskascum to keep his mouth shut so as not to implicate his scum buddies. Meh. I could be reading more into it than there is, but I'm considering the possibility.Battle Mage wrote:*resists urge to post pornographic image*Alabaska J wrote:Battle Mage wrote:yeh Alabaska is scum. Fonz is just very foolish.
Love you and all your reasonings! Maybeto avoid making such sweeping generalizations as these.post more explicitly
No, but srsly, its pretty obvious you are scum. Just die quietly so we can get on with finding your buddies, please.
BM
:sigh:DizzyIzzyB13 wrote:Why? Maximum content from scum is desirable as it increases the likelihood that they will make mistake and provide links to their fellow scum.