I dont act.foil wrote: Timeater would have been on it, but lately he's been posting more and generally acting more townie then before, a great improvement.
You wont or you wont right now?nacho wrote: No. I haven't read the game, I'm not giving you my top three suspects. Sorry.
leaf wrote:As suspected, Timeater didn't flip the fuck out over foilist failing his test in the same way he did when he failed to see the three suspicions I posted.
Dear god you are the master of misrep. Have I flipped out at anyone so far concerning listing their top 3 suspects? No. So what basis do you have for this premise? None.
leaf wrote:I did post my top 3 suspects... which you'd know if you actually read my posts.
You said something about me in ISO post 10, but you seemed to accept my answer in ISO post 11 (yeah, it was just a misunderstanding on my behalf). You then say nothing about me until post 35, but this doesn't seem particularly aggressive. Perhaps 36 was, but you don't actually accuse me... then you ignore me apart from one question until post 43, where you vote me. So no, I don't accept that you've considered me scummy since page 6.
Right, but I was asking again and asking everyone, obviously. (Note that he later lists his top three like everyone else.)
If you haven't noticed, I wasn't quite active for a good portion of the game. Graduation and all that jazz. I don't have to scream to the heavens I think you are scummy for it to be so. I know what I know and truth is truth. Do think that I care if you accept what I think or not?
All that being said, I do agree with this sentiment. What gives, foil? Nhammen is most defintely not a lurker. Typo? Brain fart? I see nothing about lurkers in post #1246.leaf wrote:Bullshit detected: nhammen isn't a lurker. Logically, if "The lurkers" was your third suspicion, then your third suspicion should be the lurker you regard as worst.