Was less defensive and more trying to suss of Temporal's intentions.In post 1071, chkflip wrote:Drew always seems defensive, but that's as both alignments I think?
I do think he is town tbh.
Was less defensive and more trying to suss of Temporal's intentions.In post 1071, chkflip wrote:Drew always seems defensive, but that's as both alignments I think?
Why are these indecisive lurkers not voting Alchemist???In post 1074, The Baker wrote:Not Voting (5): Lavender, gobbledygook, Pine, Almost50, Alchemist21
THIS IS NOT THE TIME FOR VANITY WAGONSIn post 1074, The Baker wrote:chkflip (1): Logicalicaltist
Iecerint (1): Elsa Jay
Doctor Drew (1): Vecna
Elsa Jay (1): TemporalLich
Alchemist is scum because the scum won't wagon him.In post 1078, TemporalLich wrote:give me a scumcase on Alchemist then, don't just tell me he's 3p and I should vote him
Eliminating a trueclaiming alchemist is bad for the town info-wise
Third parties always lie. The chances that he is true claiming are nil.In post 1078, TemporalLich wrote:Eliminating a trueclaiming alchemist is bad for the town info-wise
Pooky cannot be a fakeclaimer, humble subject.In post 1079, TemporalLich wrote:just because you're mechtown doesn't mean the possibility of Pooky being a fakeclaimer is off the table completely
I don’t know whatva quatloo is but I’ll raise to 30 of them.In post 1080, DrippingGoofball wrote:Alchemist is scum because the scum won't wagon him.In post 1078, TemporalLich wrote:give me a scumcase on Alchemist then, don't just tell me he's 3p and I should vote him
Eliminating a trueclaiming alchemist is bad for the town info-wise
The scum doesn't wagon him because he's one of them.
I'm betting 15 quatloos that he's a scum vanillizer.
I have a hunch the town is very powerful.
What a fabulous strategy it would be for scum to have their vanillizer claim 3p, and wipe out our powers.
In post 1076, DrippingGoofball wrote:Why are these indecisive lurkers not voting Alchemist???In post 1074, The Baker wrote:Not Voting (5): Lavender, gobbledygook, Pine, Almost50, Alchemist21
Look.. you've now said "vanillizer" more times than you said "Alchemist" in this thread, which begs the question: Are you INFOMRED Scum have a Vanillizer? And if you are, why didn't you say so from the beginning?In post 1080, DrippingGoofball wrote:Alchemist is scum because the scum won't wagon him.In post 1078, TemporalLich wrote:give me a scumcase on Alchemist then, don't just tell me he's 3p and I should vote him
Eliminating a trueclaiming alchemist is bad for the town info-wise
The scum doesn't wagon him because he's one of them.
I'm betting 15 quatloos that he's a scum vanillizer.
I have a hunch the town is very powerful.
What a fabulous strategy it would be for scum to have their vanillizer claim 3p, and wipe out our powers.
Sorry my assumption that non-voters were lurkers was wrong and hasty.In post 1084, Almost50 wrote:you just called me a lurker here. I am the 5th top poster out of 16 players, so I hardly can call myself a lurker
Unfortunately that's the only slot I feel comfortable removing from the game at this time.In post 1085, TemporalLich wrote:Gobble is a lurker with no content, so idk how I feel about gobble readwise
I am not informed, but a vanillizer begging to be targeted at night would be a brilliant play.In post 1086, Almost50 wrote:Are you INFOMRED Scum have a Vanillizer?
Yes, that too. He could be PGO.In post 1092, Almost50 wrote:Why not a PGO?? I mean, THAT would be the first idea to hit my mind when I see someone asking to be targeted.
In post 1082, DrippingGoofball wrote:Pooky cannot be a fakeclaimer, humble subject.
Or aesthetic reflexive cult recruiterIn post 1094, DrippingGoofball wrote:Yes, that too. He could be PGO.In post 1092, Almost50 wrote:Why not a PGO?? I mean, THAT would be the first idea to hit my mind when I see someone asking to be targeted.
I would laugh and laugh if he were a 3p pgo who had to kill x number of players.In post 1094, DrippingGoofball wrote:Yes, that too. He could be PGO.
noIn post 1096, username wrote:Or aesthetic reflexive cult recruiter