I don't like this post at all.In post 274, Aubrey wrote:And your case against Keyen or I is that much thicker?In post 267, alban wrote:Your case against Eric was thin. Which is why I wrote 134.In post 253, Aubrey wrote:I've basically skimmed the last 3-4 pages. On a skim, I'm much happier with the slot. As I said, my major issue with him was his contraditive attitude. "In post 249, chilledtea wrote:Initially the timing felt as if you were trying to derail the wagon on dave. It could also have been a vote, while not for derailing, for distancing.
Sometimes scum try to stay away from the topic at hand. Even if they don't want to directly influence the said topic.
Do you still find eric's slot scummy?Hey guys lets narrow down some lynch options right out the gate and get a move on, while I go sit in the corner and do nothing but complain!" When BTD said he asked for a replacement, I basically nulled the spot of its ever so light scum lean since it is so early in the game.
Regarding Dave, I just found his early posts playful shitty early day 1 activities. Eh. The argument that town would never vote themselves is farfetched, and a lie. Yea. Not a very interesting wagon in my eyes right out the gate.
--
Holy shit this game is on fire this morning.
Either what you are saying is true or you are backtracking coz you realised LQ is more active and persistent than Eric.
Also your backtracking and explanation appears defensive, and hence, suspicious.
My argument: X person looks as if they maybe attempting to be faking a proactive town stance.
Your arguments: X person is pushing a thin argument early game. X person is lurky-ish,.but I'll ignore other players who are also lurky-ish
This feels very much like scum aubrey vs town alban.