In post 374, Thor665 wrote:What do you think I need to be considering that I am not?
Alternative options, you seem tunneled on me, and lynch me only.
In post 374, Thor665 wrote:What do you think I need to be considering that I am not?
In post 375, jasonT1981 wrote:In post 374, Thor665 wrote:What do you think I need to be considering that I am not?
Alternative options, you seem tunneled on me, and lynch me only.
In post 377, Thor665 wrote:I am scumreading a few and mentioned them, but find you more or equally scummy and you also have a large wagon on you, I see no reason to back off from that read imply to pursue someone else because they're a 'different option'.
In post 378, Save The Dragons wrote:I concede I was dumb but only for attempting to try and talk to you
Our conversation is getting pedantic and neither of us are budging so I'm going to stop.
In post 378, Save The Dragons wrote:As far as Delta I've provided many flaws to his arguments. He first mislabels a post and then claims it's supposed to be another post that's already labeled. That makes no Smurfing sense.
In post 378, Save The Dragons wrote:He spends most of his time just calling my arguments bullSmurf. He says I made up my reads and I pointed out where I did make my reads throughout the game. His argument is, multiple times, that I'm taking Smurf without much explanation.
In post 378, Save The Dragons wrote:If that is your definition of flawless remind me never to buy a diamond from you.
In post 379, jasonT1981 wrote:In post 377, Thor665 wrote:I am scumreading a few and mentioned them, but find you more or equally scummy and you also have a large wagon on you, I see no reason to back off from that read imply to pursue someone else because they're a 'different option'.
Alright, break it down for me, what exactly is your full case against me being scum
In post 381, Thor665 wrote:That would basically hit all my niggles.
In post 364, Fenchurch wrote:Trojan Horse wrote:In post 358, jasonT1981 wrote:It's weird you are still trying to work me out, and the fact you are hanging on for Tammy's opinion seems like you are stalling not wanting to say anything incase it derails the lynch, also if Tammy has experience with me, I (and this is backed up by Zach) would expect her to have something already this deep into the game or even something to say at least.
I am not hanging on for Tammy's opinion. You're my top scum pick (though less so than at the start), so I'm voting for you. I only brought it up because Fenchurch asked about it. As for Tammy not yet having a read on you: I just got a message from her, and she apologized for losing track of our games due to busyness. I'm sure she'll have a more solid read soon.
Why less so than at the start?
Does it bother you that jason seems to overblow and exaggerate everything that is posted about him?
In post 369, Thor665 wrote:In post 364, Fenchurch wrote:I agree with a whole bunch of Thor's observations in #327, although I don't support the subsequent stuff on STDragons. To me STDragons' righteousness and indignation sounds more like town than scum.
Eh, let's see what Jason flips and then we can debate that. Nacho agrees with you though, so, meh.
In post 368, jasonT1981 wrote:In post 360, Trojan Horse wrote:Lastly: Jason, Oversoul wants to know if you spent any tokens for this game.
Team does not want to discuss token distribution that is all I am saying on this
In post 388, Trojan Horse wrote:Is that 5?
UNVOTE: jason
This is only an unvote to avoid a quicklynch. I'm still eyeing jason.
In post 390, Fenchurch wrote:Everyone - we've currently got 6 'wagons' with one-vote each. We need to consolidate. (Preferably onto jason.)
In post 308, Save The Dragons wrote:VOTE: Delta
Here's the long list of posts where he basically does nothing.
Spoiler:
When you wake up tomorrow and start trying to play the game feel free to change my mind.