My apologies, i though post 366 of the game, would be quick enough to respond to post 365 of the game, my bad.
In post 369, Cephrir wrote:what's truly impressive is that not one of these posts says or does what you represent it as saying or doing
Sorry, i thought: " I mostly don't read them", means you mostly don't read them(posts, that is)
Or that describing the game, or your own feelings about it, by showing you are asleep, making sure everyone notices it and not lifting a finger to fix that issue, implies. 'There is nothing to do here, and i'm fine with that (maybe you should be too)', really far-fetched i know.
Now we're on the subject of posts like 'a JA vote doesn't need defending' (it IS the default, one needs a very good reason to provide 'usefull vote data') and your more recent
In post 371, Cephrir wrote:b) I don't think we're going to accomplish much of anything until we get a nomination here
Now that we have reached 'arbitrary game state' nomination #3, anything you want to bring to the table?
Not necessarily something that could not have been stated, when the intended nomination(which *shocker* matches the one actually being made) was already in thread.
The next 'arbitrary game state' we need to wait for before playing, would do.
In post 372, Cephrir wrote:but then again i think that's how i got him mislynched in that one game like six years ago
Interesting comparison.
I remember that one, (had forgotten you were in it though)
I replaced in late D1, correctly pinned your slot as scum D2, later you replaced in, insisted early-tells were bullshit, read only half of posts and got a perfect scum-win out of it.
And here you're playing the exact same tactic.
Wow, that actually was a useful analog to this game. (why did you bring it up?)
By the way, your mum says hello.
