First: I am not high and maybe it is my bad English (same reason as yours; as you said there is absolutely nothing to be sorry about there).In post 370, Salsabil Faria wrote:In post 356, kennyk wrote:It is true that you sussed me because you thought (and still think, I guess) I was playing the LAMIST card. But as you explained in the following post you came to this conclusion because I was sussing others.In post 353, Salsabil Faria wrote:Again the misinterpretation! I sused you because you're playing LAMIST card, and I stated the reasons clearly, go check again.
I can also say you're tunneling me because I was tunneling you, but I'll not say that, because I'm not YOU!
I am definitely not tunneling you because of you tunneling me. I might have had different views on things but that's about to happen in a game of mafia. It took quite some time to get you on my personal scum list (as you might see in my readlist in post 235).In post 68, Salsabil Faria wrote:In post 60, floo wrote:I think she says kennyk is trying too hard, missing the obvious motive as I pointed out for a scum accusation. It's good that someone is trying to be serious because this is how we move out of RVS, but kennyk is doing this wrong. She may also be accusing kennyk of doing that just to look town. I recall that the term LAMIST is used here for this.Perfectly explained but I want to add one thing: they said they had an account here before, so they played before here imo. That's why I'm not taking them that much of a newb player and when I read their posts ("this sus, that sus"), I found they were tryingtoo muchwhich I generally find suspicious.Either you're high or my English is bad (not sorry for this particular reason because English isn’t my native language)....
For the last time, I'm explaining & correcting your misinterpreted thoughts about my reason to scumread you. After that, if I see you're doing this again, that'll be a scum claim to me and I'll vote you without asking or correcting you!
I said, I think you're playing LAMIST card (which I generally find more scummy than townie, mentioned the reason also) by jumping out from the RVS stage by appearingsolvy. And what did you exactly do which made me think it wastoosolvy (a.k.a scummy, mentioned the reason already why I think like that) atp? The answer is: you were doingI find this sus, thus you're sus; I find that sus, so you're sus.... That's what I meant when I wrote (this sus, that sus) phrase. Therefore, I wasn’t scumreading you because you were susing others, I was scumreading you becauseyou appeared to be solvy at the RVS stage of the game for getting towncred and it worked for scum!you perfectly because not only you're already in the townblock of some players read-list, my read on you is kept flip-floping because of that (mentioned this too), I'mSo my points to scumread you aren't totally off or too good to be true as scum!you are getting the towncred you need and as multiple people defending you, it'll be not easy (may or may not) to find your partner based on that.
your counter wagon now and most probably get eliminated today (which will be fine for town but not for scum!you).
I find nothing in your correction that contradicts what I was saying. But let's try to rephrase your thought process:
You see me sussing people and things in the RVS
this is too solvy looks LAMIST LAMIST card is mist likely scum you sus me of being scum let's see if he slips under pressure you voting meSo me sussing others is the beginning of your logical chain of you sussing me. Without me sussing there won't be any sussing on your part. So you inderectly accuse me of sussing.
~ 
