I was thinking that you can't agree that easily.
Finished Mafia XXXIX: Superheroes Vs Supervillains - Mafia has won!
- Thread starter Scattered mind
- Start date
- Status
Now that I read up on the cases and such, we should really get off of Little Cherrim and go toward Blakers or Professor Palutena. Little Cherrim seems like a confused town who was a bit pressured and used the wrong words to convey that they are town. Blakers and Professor Palutena seem to be slightly scum based on reasons posted by Celever and other players. I will look into posts by PP and Blakers to find other reasons. Sorry for the inactivity, I had school stuff
Sounds like scum trying to protect his buddy
How? A case became weak and less likely to be scum then others. By saying that @rainyman123 you are basically saying everybody who switched votes or is more into and supporting the PP/Blakers lynch is scum.
I'm not even sure if this is meant to be taken seriously.
Sorry rainy, but to me you're looking kind of scummy right now. You've been posting a fair amount of fluff, and you've been switching from one target to another. You've gon from PP to Celever and now it looks like you think Sceptile is scum alongside Cherrim? Of all people, why would you consider TSM scum? He's provided a fair amount of contribution to the game, and I'm definitely reading him as town. I'm also surprised you haven't already attempted to contribute to the case against me. All in all, there isn't much contribution and you are constantly switching targets. So if you had to pick your biggest scum read, who would it be and why?
##Unvote: Little Cherrim
##Vote: rainyman123
The following players receive a warning for inactivity (posting less than 3 posts since the start of the day, not counting PP who subbed out and Lord who's on V/LA). As of now, we have no subs in this game, meaning that inactive players will be mod killed one by one, if necessary (a very short game for a very inactive players).
@丅ᗴᗰᑭᗴᔕ丅
@Little Cherrim
@Vracken
@丅ᗴᗰᑭᗴᔕ丅
@Little Cherrim
@Vracken
Gonna just vote
##Vote ProfessorPalutena
I may switch if I see more evidence
##Vote ProfessorPalutena
I may switch if I see more evidence
I see this conversation with a half blind eye, but "P.P" has been unusually quiet, whereas in the early game, he was all out.
Due to his Sub-Out,
My reasoning may be outdated.
Due to his Sub-Out,
\
My reasoning may be outdated.
Why is easily agreeing scummy?
Why not? Like... why not?
From what I gather it's just based on precedent, so quote this precedent.
This is a good lynch.
Keep at it; you're my top town read right now.
i found you asking questions along with PP day 1, and then to suddenly just agree easily out of nowhere seemed fishy to me.
Why do you think it's impossible to agree with some things and question others? Questioning is a form of disagreement. It is not possible to disagree with absolutely everything, nor agree with absolutely everything. Both are inevitabilities.
For your "case" (and I use that in the most generous sense) to have any merit, you have to provide a precedent where I previously questioned something I agreed with. If you can't, your case is intrinsically flawed and bad, and you need to change your vote, else I will vote for you for being stubborn and useless.
@Celever @Blakers @Little Cherrim @rainyman123
Rainyman, I feel that you aren't responding as intelligently as possible, since all you are doing is creating random cases out of changes in reads for goodness sake. And as I said before, that legitimately is calling everybody a scum member by moving on from a weakening case.
And to the rest of those tagged, although I feel a rainy lynch is not a must due to previous posts, we should honestly dig deeper into cases now just to not always have rainyman accusing anybody of scum for read changes. This way he doesn't post useless such claims and is productive. We benefit by not overlooking small but key information to do a proper lynch.
Rainyman, I feel that you aren't responding as intelligently as possible, since all you are doing is creating random cases out of changes in reads for goodness sake. And as I said before, that legitimately is calling everybody a scum member by moving on from a weakening case.
And to the rest of those tagged, although I feel a rainy lynch is not a must due to previous posts, we should honestly dig deeper into cases now just to not always have rainyman accusing anybody of scum for read changes. This way he doesn't post useless such claims and is productive. We benefit by not overlooking small but key information to do a proper lynch.
While im familiar with people easing into agreeing with me, I'm not familiar with people going from questioning a lot to just agreeing. That's why I voted you.
##Unvote: Celever
##Vote: TheSceptileMaster
Voting TSM because honestly he's seeming quite scummy to me. While yes he's making good statements in length, I honestly see him trying to protect his scumbuddy. By saying we need to get off the Little Cherrim thing, (ik that's not exactly what you said, but I'm too lazy to quote that right now) I see it as you trying to protect your scumbuddy.
I literally don't even know what to say! D: All I can do is just hope that what I say helps Town, honestly I don't even know what to do.
He just somewhat defended you, if he was dead set on defending Cherrim, he would have rode the momentum against you. I don't think his post is a scummy move in the least.
- Status