Open 598: GAME OVER
-
-
You Got Schooled Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 420
- Joined: May 13, 2015
Also, can we look at the early vcs? It might be nothing, but...
350 Pers has 3 votes.
It's the first wagon to get to 3.
By the next VC, 440 the votes have disappeared onto newbie/gc.
The only other counter wagon that gets going is sthar, 566, in opposition to newbie, which doesn't mean as much.
Also, look at the first votes on pers: newbie, bbm and GC. 2/3 are conf!town.
Interesting, no?
-bella-
-
ika Survivor
-
-
Persivul Survivor
-
-
Persivul Survivor
- Survivor
- Survivor
- Posts: 10042
- Joined: May 4, 2015
In post 650, You Got Schooled wrote:Also, can we look at the early vcs? It might be nothing, but...
350 Pers has 3 votes.
It's the first wagon to get to 3.
By the next VC, 440 the votes have disappeared onto newbie/gc.
The only other counter wagon that gets going is sthar, 566, in opposition to newbie, which doesn't mean as much.
Also, look at the first votes on pers: newbie, bbm and GC. 2/3 are conf!town.
Interesting, no?
-bella
It's interesting that you know more about who has voted for me than I do.
It seems almost as if you and funyuns had this attack all planned out.-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
Yeah, I still think your responses are bunk. As I made clear in Post 469, Post 471, Post 474, Post 477, and Post 492.
The NK analysis is all Anti."This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
The notion that YGS & I are scum buddies
is as laughable as the notion that YGS & Persiv are scum buddies"This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
In post 653, Persivul wrote:It seems almost as if you and funyuns had this attack all planned out.
are you two
being this obvious on purpose
???"This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).-
-
Persivul Survivor
- Survivor
- Survivor
- Posts: 10042
- Joined: May 4, 2015
In post 654, Green Crayons wrote:Yeah, I still think your responses are bunk. As I made clear in Post 469, Post 471, Post 474, Post 477, and Post 492.
The NK analysis is all Anti.
Anti posted an opinion, not an analysis. I get that he's highly regarded here and you're likely to just follow him, but don't pretend it's on the basis of posted analysis.-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
I don't even know what you're saying.
I'm voting you based off of D1 case.
Anti talked about NK."This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).-
-
You Got Schooled Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 420
- Joined: May 13, 2015
-
-
Persivul Survivor
- Survivor
- Survivor
- Posts: 10042
- Joined: May 4, 2015
In post 659, You Got Schooled wrote:...pers, meta me.
Why - don't you mix it up just so that people can't reliably read you?
I love this VCA nonsense. This is pure!town-bella, sorry.
VCA?
Also, did you not read the game overnight?
Yes, but not too closely, as I didn't see the purpose in formulating a plan before the night flip. Also, I get the feeling that Anti can likely push what he wants through for another day, and a newbie isn't going to have much say.-
-
snscompt1
-
-
Persivul Survivor
- Survivor
- Survivor
- Posts: 10042
- Joined: May 4, 2015
In post 658, Green Crayons wrote:I don't even know what you're saying.
I'm voting you based off of D1 case.
Yeah, because D1 cases are so highly reliable.-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
In post 660, Persivul wrote:Also, I get the feeling that Anti can likely push what he wants through for another day, and a newbie isn't going to have much say.
What do you mean by this?"This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).-
-
Persivul Survivor
- Survivor
- Survivor
- Posts: 10042
- Joined: May 4, 2015
In post 663, Green Crayons wrote:In post 660, Persivul wrote:Also, I get the feeling that Anti can likely push what he wants through for another day, and a newbie isn't going to have much say.
What do you mean by this?
It seems pretty clear to me. What part of it don't you understand?-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
Well
You seem to be attacking Anti for pushing you
Even though he isn't voting you
And Newbie wanted to lynch you
So it's not like Newbie not having much of a say doesn't mean much when it comes to you"This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
So I'm not sure what you're trying to say."This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).-
-
Persivul Survivor
- Survivor
- Survivor
- Posts: 10042
- Joined: May 4, 2015
In post 666, Green Crayons wrote:So I'm not sure what you're trying to say.
That is totally apparent.
You need to consider context of a remark. In this case, I was replying to a question: "Also, did you not read the game overnight?"
And I replied: "Yes, but not too closely, as I didn't see the purpose in formulating a plan before the night flip. Also, I get the feeling that Anti can likely push what he wants through for another day, and a newbie isn't going to have much say."
When you read it in context, it's obvious point is that I didn't study the thread and formulate reads for two reasons: my reads might change based on the flip, and my input probably isn't going to matter for much anyway.
It has nothing to do with Anti pushing me on D1, and nothing to do with Newbie (capital N). The newbie I referred to was myself.
Slow down when you read my posts.-
-
lane0168 Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 6285
- Joined: March 7, 2011
- Location: Minnesota
-
-
Green Crayons Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7612
- Joined: September 21, 2002
- Location: Richmond, VA
Ah, okay. I was reading it in juxtaposition to our convo."This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).-
-
sthar8 Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2462
- Joined: April 29, 2008
- Location: Eastern Washington
-
-
Persivul Survivor
- Survivor
- Survivor
- Posts: 10042
- Joined: May 4, 2015
-
-
ika Survivor
- Survivor
- Survivor
- Posts: 11656
- Joined: December 13, 2013
In post 671, Persivul wrote:@ anti, ika: why did you let D1 devolve into a quick lynch:
- without giving Newbie opportunity for claim or other defense, and
- when night visiting strategy was still being discussed but hadn't been settled. Particularly anti - you seemed to think the strategy was pretty important at one point.
he was either scum or VT-
-
ZZZX Survivor
- Survivor
- Survivor
- Posts: 10778
- Joined: July 7, 2013
Sorry I forgot this started, Will check it out later as I have some paper work tomorrow.Implosion: I see ZZZX wasredacted. For shame, people. For shame.
The Bulge: ZZZX is ZZZX
Get to know a ZZZX: http://forum.mafiascum.net/viewtopic.php?f=61&t=58733-
-
Persivul Survivor
- Survivor
- Survivor
- Posts: 10042
- Joined: May 4, 2015
Copyright © MafiaScum. All rights reserved.
-