Deciding if LUV is scum for
75 for attempting to portray what clearly was a joke as a “misrep”.
--
In post 49, nebula wrote:The replacement statement from Creature came 31 minutes after Hellfire Missile's last post and 17 minutes after the original ban announcement. One should logically conclude that, due to the temporal proximity of the ban announcement to the replacement statement, and Hellfire Missile's recent participation, that his replace-out was not voluntary.
Actually you are making large leaps to arrange this as an assured thing.
1. All your post timing assumes all involved were on and immediately acted. For all you know Hellfire MIssle requested replacement immediately at the same time as his prior post and Creature only posted it when he did simply because he first saw it then.
2. Furthermore when a player is generally replaced in a game for a ban the language used is “Player X has been replaced due to a ban” or similar. Creature’s post specifically mentioned Hellfire actively sought replacement.
Now it isn’t completely outside the realm of possibility that Hellfire actively sought a replacement because he knew a ban was incoming and was being upstanding. But it certainly isn’t outside the realm that Hellfire panic replaced under pressure and the ban timing was coincidental.
Absolutely you have, at least implicitly. You actively unvoted because “you didn’t have a good reason to be voting”. In the early stages there aren’t ever going to be “good reasons” outside of moving the game forward and looking for reactions.
In post 64, nebula wrote:However, does not the fact that the majority of the player base understanding that we are in RVS, and thus votes amounting to almost nil in terms of sincerity, negate the intended outcome?
No. Pressure is pressure even if it is brought in early RVS. Scum and Town both have been hammered in RVS on this site.
--
In post 52, Sesq wrote:Lil Uzi Vert - Randomly voted Music Box. I've played with him before, and this is far out of character for him.
Far out of character for him how? Further if it isn’t alignment indicative (which is the inference I am getting from you lack of voting) why even bring it up?
--
In post 53, Hawk wrote:I didn't want to be on that wagon cause I didn't want to play this game apart of an early wagon?
The way you handled that wagon is suspect Hawk. You actively acknowledged it while not RVSing and came back to RVS in a later post. It shows what I see as calculation in your approach in RVS. Which is more likely (if only a bit) likely to come from scum than Town IMO.
In post 71, Hawk wrote:@ the four people who haven't posted.
LURKERS ARE SCUM AND WILL BE ELIMINATED IF YOU DO NOT CONTRIBUTE QUALITY CONTRIBUTIONS TO THIS GAME!!!! I mean... uhhhh please get in here and post. I know some may not have gotten an message like for some reason I just got the email letting me know I had the message for this game lol
Lurker hunting less than 24 hours after a game has opened and no-one can possibly be due a prod?
VOTE: Hawk
Over the top LAMIST combined with your RVS play makes this my first earnest vote of the game.
--
In post 55, Toto wrote:The hawk is town. Hawk get your vote off me so I can sheep you.
Oh really? Please quote his posts before 55 that you think are indicative of Town and explain why. If anything he’s on the scum side of Null for me.
"I am a leaf on the wind ... watch how I soar!"
Pretty much Geriatric game restricted at this point ... unless there are players I REALLY want to play with.
YELLING
I honestly don't think that was a scum slip. but you do you.
