In post 5521, Flubbernugget wrote:What do you think gm's motivation was behind her tunnel on you?
Bad play - I said that in thread a number of times.
Even her own explanation started and ended at 'gut'.
She even sat there during a phase when we had at least 1 confirmed scum between two players, called them both scum, and kept voting me - she was playing terribly.
In post 5521, Flubbernugget wrote:I like that muffin wouldn't play lawyer with you and called you out on it.
So...basically you like that he was argumentative without backing up his case and that translates to it being a good case simply because he was town aligned?
GM was also town aligned - was her case on me good also post awareness of that fact?
This is flim-flam.
In post 5521, Flubbernugget wrote:And will you stop with these Smurfing numbers because you had a 1/2 chance of lynching scum between that cc so whatever tactics you want to say you're using to scumhunt don't hold water with that lynch.
Some confirmed town players were unable to manage what I did, and you're acting like they had cases worth listening to - so I'm just trying to understand where you're coming from.
I'm still not sure, honestly.
In post 5523, Shiro wrote:In post 5520, Thor665 wrote:I would agree - but nothing present in thread supports that hypothesis, so...do you think we should debate something that has no evidence supporting it happened?
Do you see me debating that it is worth lynching you ? Do you see my vote being place on you screaming "guys lynch thor"? I believe the answer it is pretty self explanatory.
You're the one who brought it up, not me.
Why bring it up if you had no belief in it and no desire to push it?
Serious question.