In post 274, dybeck wrote:Well the point was the exact opposite of what it achieved... To get everyone back on track to find scum and start talking about Reinoe's silliness.
I mean
In post 274, dybeck wrote:Well the point was the exact opposite of what it achieved... To get everyone back on track to find scum and start talking about Reinoe's silliness.
In post 270, reinoe wrote:
Why is dybeck town? You say "more and more". What has dybeck being doing that has been convincing you that he's town?
In post 276, Baezu wrote:In post 270, reinoe wrote:
Why is dybeck town? You say "more and more". What has dybeck being doing that has been convincing you that he's town?
Man I hate this post from plagiarist. It just sounds wrong
In post 237, Obscurity wrote:How about the questions that were actually directed at you?
In post 277, Titus wrote:I like it. Why do you hate it?
In post 274, dybeck wrote:
Quoting NtM's post is a really bad reason to vote me. It accuses me of being scum for speculating and probing. That's what everyone should be doing. I'd love to see more of that. I will carry on being suspicious of everyone because THAT'S THE GAME OF MAFIA!
Excessive inquiry is not what helps scum. Apathy is what helps scum.
In post 219, Brandi wrote:In post 210, PeregrineV wrote:In post 196, Brandi wrote:unvotefor now. After reading NTM's recent posts I don't really feel like he's scum.
Dybeck's posts aren't great.
I want to note that Reinoe never initially claimed to have a post restriction, and his response to the complaints feel as though he genuinely has one. He said something to the effect of "I'm only going to say this once, you don't have to read it that's why it's in spoilers,"
We don't need to be all "the boy who cried wolf", why even focus on something like a fake post restriction when in the past it was from a town player?
It seems like a pointless distraction for the town.
vote: dybeck
@Evil: Why assume someone pointing out inactivity levels is scummy? He wasn't even claiming to cast suspicion on those who haven't posted in several days.
In post 197, Brandi wrote:The above probably reads weird but I was typing my thoughts as I caught up.
It looks like you are calling out Reinoe for "pointless distraction for the town." and then voting dybeck for ???
Is ???= biggest current wagon or pointing out the "pointless distraction for town"?
I wasn't calling out Reinoe for anything. I'm saying Dybeck's posts were the pointless distractions. With his "let me make this clear" post. It was a pointless post that he tried to make seem important.
In post 237, Obscurity wrote:PeregrineV, if you were to vote based on the amount of information that you have so far on this game, who would you vote? How much had you read when you answered this question?
In post 282, Not the mafia wrote:In post 274, dybeck wrote:
Quoting NtM's post is a really bad reason to vote me. It accuses me of being scum for speculating and probing. That's what everyone should be doing. I'd love to see more of that. I will carry on being suspicious of everyone because THAT'S THE GAME OF MAFIA!
Excessive inquiry is not what helps scum. Apathy is what helps scum.
I agree that it should be important to interrogate other players. The point was that your reasons for suspecting me are terrible. It seems like a leap to say that I'm scum, just based on the reasons you gave. If you could back up your claims rather than spout out conspiracy theories, that'd be great.
In post 288, Not the mafia wrote:I'm reading and responding by mobile. I hadn't been called out for lurking by the time I started replying. You still haven't explained to me your thought process in making me out to be scum by the way.
In post 288, Not the mafia wrote:I'm reading and responding by mobile. I hadn't been called out for lurking by the time I started replying. You still haven't explained to me your thought process in making me out to be scum by the way.