Lucky2u wrote:finally caught up here. So there was a fake cop result gambit and ETL is voting me for a dumb reason. No body takes RVS seriously. It's a silly stage of the game and your voting me for doing it wrong? Allow me to correct that then.
Original Roll String: 1d131 13-Sided Dice: (4) = 4
....Lucky2u wrote:VOTE: Aptil
Because the dice said so.
There, am I doing it right?
Because of my awesome sense of humor?
But your accusing of me started with my RVS. RVS is purposeful BS, not to be taken seriously. I usually vote the person I'm most familiar with in the game as a way of saying hello! I do that as both scum and town, so the fact that I did something unusual means nothing.In post 107, EspeciallyTheLies wrote:It relevant cuz I wont be giving you such an easy pass for bs this time.
Yeah and you didn't?In post 108, Lucky2u wrote:I usually vote the person I'm most familiar with in the game as a way of saying hello
I explained this already. I do it as scum and town, so when I do something completely new that has no precedent how do you draw the conclusion that it's scum?In post 109, EspeciallyTheLies wrote:Yeah and you didn't?In post 108, Lucky2u wrote:I usually vote the person I'm most familiar with in the game as a way of saying hello
That's my point.
What your telling me is that you are now paranoid that I'm a good scum and could be scum even if I appear town.In post 112, EspeciallyTheLies wrote:I don't think that's very fair, Lucky. We all learn from our experiences with other players. What I learned was not to underestimate you and to pay closer attention to what you are doing. Do you really expect me to ignore that and just not apply your meta elsewhere?
p-edit: Becausedeviation from normal meta = something is up. That's pretty standard analysis....
I agree with this, I assumed lucky's vote was just a joke and he'd eventually get around to something. However, lucky's next post completely disregards the whole BB gambiting Wake thing, and doesn't haven't any feelings about whether or not about if it's scummy or not. Lucky, do you have anything else to say about what happened then?In post 78, Wake1 wrote:Yeah, I don't like this from you two. His first post wasn't serious, and was a playful poke at MS for its problems. I'd do the same. Your reason for voting him is nonexistent.having an unserious post isn't Scummy, and you know that, so what are you doing?
Well obviously you don't look town to me, or I'd be voting elsewhereIn post 113, Lucky2u wrote:What your telling me is that you are now paranoid that I'm a good scum and could be scum even if I appear town.
And I don't operate on paranoia. I'm not Wisdom. 
Why? What do you see?In post 117, EspeciallyTheLies wrote:Also trying to figure out if gam is newbie scum .
You're doing it even more wrong.
@Bo: something about this post really pings me. The waffly nature he took by agreeing with wake about me, asking lucky for input, but then voting him anyway is weird.In post 114, gamsimbre wrote:Wow, lots of posts since I checked last time!
I agree with this, I assumed lucky's vote was just a joke and he'd eventually get around to something. However, lucky's next post completely disregards the whole BB gambiting Wake thing, and doesn't haven't any feelings about whether or not about if it's scummy or not. Lucky, do you have anything else to say about what happened then?In post 78, Wake1 wrote:Yeah, I don't like this from you two. His first post wasn't serious, and was a playful poke at MS for its problems. I'd do the same. Your reason for voting him is nonexistent.having an unserious post isn't Scummy, and you know that, so what are you doing?