In post 59, FuDuzn wrote:Umm, answering with perhaps is the definition of wishy washy.
And asking for extra info from people is generally considered scummy, so in a vacuum I can see how someone looking in from the outside could see what I asked as scummy. My intentions were pure though.
It is not wishy-washy. If that was solely my reason for voting you I would have voted for you before when I did.
You seem quite self-conscious about your actions. Consider that another reason why I'm voting you.
Kison (11:42:01 AM): Fucks sake stop letting the tigers in
Scumchat wants you: aim:gochat?roomname=ScumChat&Exchange=5
In post 58, chamber2 wrote:How is it wishy washy? I believe I was quite clear in saying perhaps. And why do you think you understand why I think you had scummy motives with it?
please give a clear reason for youn vote
No. Bugger off.
Kison (11:42:01 AM): Fucks sake stop letting the tigers in
Scumchat wants you: aim:gochat?roomname=ScumChat&Exchange=5
If I remember correctly, one of the marathon games I played in had a ninja modifier. Granted, that was almost two years ago and holy shit I'm getting old.
How many people long for that "past, simpler, and better world," I wonder,
without ever recognizing the truth that perhaps it was they who were simpler and better,
and not the world about them?
How many people long for that "past, simpler, and better world," I wonder,
without ever recognizing the truth that perhaps it was they who were simpler and better,
and not the world about them?
In post 85, BipolarChemist wrote:@fuzzybuttnuts: Who do you think is most likely scum at this point? Do you think Bert has been scummy or just mostly useless?
At this point? Who knows. It's 4 pages in and we haven't had much content.
Bert is being Bert, so of course he's useless, but he's not scum for it. Hell, I don't even know if I'd call it scummy at this point.
How many people long for that "past, simpler, and better world," I wonder,
without ever recognizing the truth that perhaps it was they who were simpler and better,
and not the world about them?
In post 53, BipolarChemist wrote:I know you're all happy hyper sunshine and rainbows, but why did you claim right after we said that we shouldn't claim? D:
I didn't claim.
I was telling FuDuzn that I've played with him before on an old alt named 'nachopappa.'
I guess differing definitions? I mean who you think is Scum is a read?
How many people long for that "past, simpler, and better world," I wonder,
without ever recognizing the truth that perhaps it was they who were simpler and better,
and not the world about them?
How many people long for that "past, simpler, and better world," I wonder,
without ever recognizing the truth that perhaps it was they who were simpler and better,
and not the world about them?
How many people long for that "past, simpler, and better world," I wonder,
without ever recognizing the truth that perhaps it was they who were simpler and better,
and not the world about them?
How many people long for that "past, simpler, and better world," I wonder,
without ever recognizing the truth that perhaps it was they who were simpler and better,
and not the world about them?
In post 87, fuzzybutternut wrote:At this point? Who knows. It's 4 pages in and we haven't had much content.
Bert is being Bert, so of course he's useless, but he's not scum for it. Hell, I don't even know if I'd call it scummy at this point.
I can tell you're passionately finding scum. <3333 That's lovely!
In post 65, Konowa wrote:We've already seen two miller claims, which I think is null.
You are careful not to push the paranoid to believe that there is likely scum among said miller claims. Cool!
How many people long for that "past, simpler, and better world," I wonder,
without ever recognizing the truth that perhaps it was they who were simpler and better,
and not the world about them?
I thought I had something.
