Mafiascum.net

@Lalendra: You're mistaken about what I'm trying to do. I'm not scum.

VOTE: Lalendra for fishing.

In post 426, Jamiet99uk wrote:VOTE: Lalendra for fishing.

Lol ok.

It's easy to say you're not scum, but you didn't refute my points.

If he's flat out saying he's VT and he's scum then how does that help scum narrow the pool?

In post 428, Lalendra wrote:It's easy to say you're not scum, but you didn't refute my points.

If I did that, I would have to explain myself. That would be counter-productive at this time. Don't vote for me tho. Thanks.

I'm just saying his claims are scummy at worst, and anti-town at best.

Personally, I think he's scum who is not claiming mason because that would be too easy for the actual masons to refute, so he's claiming VT instead.

It could also be that he's VT who is legit claiming but by doing so, is making the game easier for scum.

I think it's the first option, which is why I'm voting him. But either way, I don't like the odds of town winning if he lives.

P-edit: Too late, sorry

Aubrey ffs stop using images that never display lol

Aubrey once again that image isn't loading properly, I can't see what it is.

GET OFF YOUR PHONE AND USE A COMPUTER.

<3 with love - Aubrey.

This has been a public service announcement.

I'm on a computer and I can't see the images.

Who is claiming VT? Me? Nonono.

(Aubrey I am using a computer)

well, FUCK. My day is now officially ruined.

In post 432, Lalendra wrote:I'm just saying his claims are scummy at worst, and anti-town at best.

Personally, I think he's scum who is not claiming mason because that would be too easy for the actual masons to refute, so he's claiming VT instead.

It could also be that he's VT who is legit claiming but by doing so, is making the game easier for scum.

I think it's the first option, which is why I'm voting him. But either way, I don't like the odds of town winning if he lives.

P-edit: Too late, sorry

but why would scum bother claiming in the first place? all it does is draw more attention to yourself, as evidenced by this entire conversation.

In response to people telling you that your "challenge" to CK was a bad idea, you posted this:

In post 410, Jamiet99uk wrote:For the record I do stand by my assertion that a VT should not be afraid to die. A VT dying is not as good as scum dying, for sure - but it's way better than a PR dying. Plus, flips are informative. A lot of people have interacted with me today and if I died, those interactions could provide many clues.

You certainly didn't seem afraid to die, and said that your flip would be informative. For me that really sounds like you are soft-claiming VT.

We've already had a similar conversation with Jamiet after he said something else previously that was soft claimish at the very beginning of the game. It should have been already quietly determined to everyone he wasn't a mason.

In post 441, Lalendra wrote:In response to people telling you that your "challenge" to CK was a bad idea, you posted this:

In post 410, Jamiet99uk wrote:For the record I do stand by my assertion that a VT should not be afraid to die. A VT dying is not as good as scum dying, for sure - but it's way better than a PR dying. Plus, flips are informative. A lot of people have interacted with me today and if I died, those interactions could provide many clues.

You certainly didn't seem afraid to die, and said that your flip would be informative. For me that really sounds like you are soft-claiming VT.

Tunnel me more, please.

In post 442, Aubrey wrote:We've already had a similar conversation with Jamiet after he said something else previously that was soft claimish at the very beginning of the game. It should have been already quietly determined to everyone he wasn't a mason.

Wasn't likely*

My work break is up. Ta ta for now!

Yes, my continuing to push you on things you've said and refuse to defend, and calling you out on your unwillingness to explain yourself, is obviously just unfounded tunneling.

P-Edit: Bye Aubrey!

In post 446, Lalendra wrote:Yes, my continuing to push you on things you've said and refuse to defend, and calling you out on your unwillingness to explain yourself, is obviously just unfounded tunneling.

Perhaps your intention is well-founded and you just have no idea what I might be doing, but it's still tunnelling and it's not very helpful at this point. It's just becoming repetitious.

That's fine, I will just let my vote speak for itself.

@Mod: Really, will there be a vote count?

(I'll do one myself but can't rely on it...)