Well, +1 to me.I, too, am perplexed as to why camisade would neglect a vote or even so much as an FoS on he player he clearly suspected as scum. I think the most likely reason is that he tried to address one of the major flaws in Darko’s play style, the reason for which he was getting voted, and that is Darko’s defiance to contribute meaningful discussion. Valiant effort, but nonetheless frugal.
Thank you. +2 to me.What he may have been trying to say was that Darko’s argument summed up to "I'm useless so don’t vote me!" which was indeed scummy because of the defensiveness, but camisade was still not ready to vote him. I admit, this is a bit of a stretch, and if it weren’t for the fact that I know for sure camisade is townie, I would be siding with Albert right now.
I'm calling him out on wishy washy voting, attacking darko and in the next breath defending him. A townie would more likely commit to one stance then to move back and forth as the popularity of their target rises and falls.You stated earlier that you found it suspicious of camisade that he did not vote Darko despite his suspicions of him. But now, when Darko does vote for camisade, you call it distancing? So no vote = scummy, and vote = distancing = scummy. Is there not a bit of a double standard here?
Ask yourself why he did this. Were the reasons of his vote not strong enough ? It seems incredibly shifty and scummy for him to attack player a, and then attack player b because player b attacked player a.Negative. He was accusing you of bandwagoning (adding coal to) camisade without original reasons other than the one puffin gave. Take a look at Darko’s 65:
Its the rapidity at which he changes his stance as soon as a couple votes pile up or go off that jumps at me.Ok. So when Darko protects camisade, he’s scummy. When he attacks him, he’s also scummy.
Bollocks. Scum want to distance from each other and buddy up with townies. Consistently attacking me could result in me getting lynched, which would be bad for him if I were his partner.Since Darko ahs been consistently defending Hjallti and attacking you, it must also follow that Hjallti is a scum buddy. Correct?
Consistently defending Hjallti will result in being associated with Hjallti if and when one of them dies, which is good for him if Hjallti were town.
Attacking, defending, attacking then defending camisade is indicative that he has to place himself in a position that depends on the town's stance of camisade. If the town finds him townie, he will attack his partner. If we find camisade guilty, he will defend him. Classic scum behavior.
Absolutely not. This makes me even more sure that you are scum. The town's only surefire method of fighting scum is to lynch. If we don't lynch, scum gets an advantage. I really hate how you are trying to confuse the town with huge posts where half consists of agreeing with my accusations of you, and the other half with false claims and misdirection.And doesn’t it make sense that scum would be pro-lynch, i.e. trying to lynch?
Confirm vote d3sisted
