That being said,
VOTE: Majiffy
What even is a
@Mr. KIn post 47, borkjerfkin wrote:So:
1) Mr. K is completely fallaciously comparing GnarlsBarkley's (god I love that) BS self-vote to something that he did late game under actual pressure in the game he linked.
VOTE: Mr. K
2) I fail to see the super serious tone in #31 that everyone else is assuming. Why's he scum for #31?
In post 59, Mr.K wrote:@Mr. KIn post 57, greygnarl wrote:
2) I fail to see the super serious tone in #31 that everyone else is assuming. Why's he scum for #31?
Correct this is a totally different scenario, if you hadn't RVSed me I'd be lynching you for scum. The entire point of this gambit was to see if someone would jump on my ass calling this a lame "scum gambit". While you were already on me, yelling quickhammer, quickhammer, looks really scummy, since you love meta I did that last game as scum and it cost me.
If you look in your ISO before that post you called me scum and said intent to hammer. You didn't toss a vote out immediately. That's not active and trying to get me lynched.In post 78, Majiffy wrote:I also voted you on the basis of your self-vote being a scum gambit, of which you are currently voting Piggy for doing.
I also have been active in trying to get you lynched, of which you are currently chastising Mr. K for.
And when I ask you why you're ignoring me, you tell me to fuck off and that you're ignoring me because I'm not doing anything?
You deserve rope so badly.
I'm not determined to get a quicklynch! The bork vote was a joke; I thought that was obvious. How am I jumping on every wagon? bork had no votes and I was joking. You had no votes and I was making a legitimate fucking case. I accusedIn post 80, PiggyGal15 wrote:In post 79, borkjerfkin wrote:
@Piggy -- what was scummy enough about #31 that you're confident enough to call it a "scum claim?"
What isn't scummy enough about it? He seems so determined to get a mislynch. Maybe that's just his play style, but he's jumping too quickly onto every wagon that seems to go by. Now since it's still the beginning pages of the game I'm not hammering (in the lynching and tunnel vision sense) him for it. But every time I see a post like that, 90% of the time it's from scum.
Yes. Piggy:Scum She tried to act like she wouldn't want a quicklynch and the went for me anyway. Majiffy:What? was acting town but now is claiming he was trying to get me lynched before he actually was. drmyshotgun:Null I think we have a misunderstanding.In post 82, pieceofpecanpie wrote:Gnarls are you saying that after your little opening move your primary suspect is Piggy?
In post 104, Majiffy wrote:So you're not troubled by the fact that someone is voting you for reasons you feel are illegitimate? Particularly when their vote puts you at L-1?
Yes, I expect you to fight tooth and nail against your lynch. That's what town does. You look like scum that has given up because they don't know how to defend themselves.
I'm saying that because Mr. K already had his vote on me, he doesn't look scummy like. If he had piled his vote on real fast I would have thought scum.In post 57, greygnarl wrote:@Mr. KIn post 47, borkjerfkin wrote:So:
1) Mr. K is completely fallaciously comparing GnarlsBarkley's (god I love that) BS self-vote to something that he did late game under actual pressure in the game he linked.
VOTE: Mr. K
2) I fail to see the super serious tone in #31 that everyone else is assuming. Why's he scum for #31?
Correct this is a totally different scenario, if you hadn't RVSed me I'd be lynching you for scum. The entire point of this gambit was to see if someone would jump on my ass calling this a lame "scum gambit". While you were already on me, yelling quickhammer, quickhammer, looks really scummy, since you love meta I did that last game as scum and it cost me.
@Piggy
What is this, you say it looks null, someone makes a half-assed argument for scum and you go "yeah, ok" That looks like a scummy excuse to hop on the biggest bandwagon going. You say, I'm not really sure unvote, then you wait for someone else to take the initiative and sheep them.
VOTE: PiggyGal
In post 127, borkjerfkin wrote:Here's the big question I think I have after the re-ISO of Mr. K and I think is the source of the meta/not meta business:
In post 39, Mr.K wrote:Yeah, gg found himself scum for the second time in a row and panicked. He figured that he could try to pull of the same stunt he did in the previous game because it failed there and it would be too stupid to try it again.
Why do you only mention the action (Gnarls self-vote) in regards to Gnarls previously doing it and not denounce it as scummy in and of itself?
In post 154, PiggyGal15 wrote:Mkay... I don't know what's wrong with me and this game -_-' I actually can't read anyone, and that scares me.
Or, it means that scum are all lurking and so only town are posting and that's messing with my brain.
Ergo,
UNVOTE: (was I even voting anyone?)
VOTE: silavor
Gunny was like this in the other game I've played with him - sort of, kind of... I read it okay?
And Hunter is a newb so I'll give him that leeway for now.
And (I don't even know who/where they said it, I only skimmed that last pageish) it's not that I'm not going toplayuntil day 2, it's just that I'm not going to be very good at scumhunting until day 2 when I actually have decent reads on people.
In post 216, drmyshotgun wrote:@Gnarl: Who's Scum and who's Town? Why exactly did you think quickhammering another player was a good idea without a claim? I mean, there's only two roles to claim and if there's a fake claim, counterclaim could easily catch him out. Tell me, or us for that matter, why should we not lynch you and who should we lynch?
I see that you entered the game of Day 2 with yet another defense of your own idiotic hammering instead of telling us who your suspect is, now that a PR is dead and floating on his back in the waters.
I'm not saying it's your own fault that a PR got lynched, but you'd be damned if you think you're not at all responsible.
No you wouldn't have hammered even after Tracker claim. Why the fuck would you hammer a Tracker claim? Like ever? Unless you are the REAL Tracker. Which is obvious to us that you are not.
In post 228, PiggyGal15 wrote:Whoever is jailkeeper needs to push your lynch hard and serious and forever until town realizes how obvious it is that there should be an obv scum caught by the jk.
Seriously, no night kill... there's a jailkeeper... Gunny said Grey was our obvlynch for today... I'm not stupid, I can put two and two together.
I wholeheartedly agree with this. However, if I daresay so myself placing me in that category is garbage.In post 255, drmyshotgun wrote:EBWOP:
In post 254, drmyshotgun wrote:There's no such thing as: Too Scummy to be Scum.
If you are Scummy you should fucking die.
Are you seriously saying this. Too scummy to be an actual Scum therefore he's Town? What the fuck is the use of any cases then? We might as well lynch Majiffy then, since he's Too Town to be Town.
Fuck you.
Anything I say has no meaning outside the game. Just trying to get a point across. That being said: Read the fucking game. You are a thousand times more useless than me.In post 277, PiggyGal15 wrote:Wow. Okay, you guys do realize this is a game right? And making jabs at the actual player is rude and against the rules.Seriously. No need to get so serious o.O
No gnarl, not policy lynch you because of the hammer, the hammer is whatever, everyone does it - usually more townies than scum, but that's typically because townies are just faster at posting than scum are.Policy lynch you because of your anti-town play style and general uselessness because you're such a distraction.
No Gunny, I know gnarl is going to turn up town because that's how town plays. Scum never play to a point where players want to policy lynch them. Ever. At least none that I've found. (PMysterious and others such as that don't count, because that's just a given.)
p-edit: no, me trying to start a wagon I know will turn up town would be me voting for gnarl.