In post 1136, Morality wrote:Oh, what do you know...Vanders was on both. -.-
I'm scum for staying off of the wagons, but I'm also scum for being on both the wagons?
In post 1136, Morality wrote:Oh, what do you know...Vanders was on both. -.-
Please tear me up.In post 1145, Morality wrote:It’s not. It’s just how I play. When he posts in response to me, I can tear him up. I’m best in 1v1 interaction.In post 1139, CheekyTeeky wrote:Yes I have lingering suspicions from D1 on Vander. You say you could see scum Vander pushing another mislynch today, so wouldn't it make more sense to wait and see his direction to confirm your theory? Seems a bit rushed/premature to lock scum him, when you've nerfed the info potential of your push.
Pedit what does Chip have to do with proving someone is scum?
In post 1150, Vanderscamp wrote:In post 1136, Morality wrote:Oh, what do you know...Vanders was on both. -.-vote: Morality
I'm scum for staying off of the wagons, but I'm also scum for being on both the wagons?
In post 1151, Vanderscamp wrote:Please tear me up.In post 1145, Morality wrote:It’s not. It’s just how I play. When he posts in response to me, I can tear him up. I’m best in 1v1 interaction.In post 1139, CheekyTeeky wrote:Yes I have lingering suspicions from D1 on Vander. You say you could see scum Vander pushing another mislynch today, so wouldn't it make more sense to wait and see his direction to confirm your theory? Seems a bit rushed/premature to lock scum him, when you've nerfed the info potential of your push.
Pedit what does Chip have to do with proving someone is scum?
Told you guys. He did exactly as I stated.In post 1153, Vanderscamp wrote:I'm kind of hoping Morality is town after him rambling about how good he is, but I think his case on me is so awful, he's probably not.
This is clearly not what was said. You were playing in a way where you didn’t have to commit to either.In post 1150, Vanderscamp wrote:In post 1136, Morality wrote:Oh, what do you know...Vanders was on both. -.-vote: Morality
I'm scum for staying off of the wagons, but I'm also scum for being on both the wagons?
I have 0 completed games with Acid, by the way.In post 1152, Vanderscamp wrote:I think the NK points to someone who's had experience with acid and knows the difference between his lurker role play and his lurker VT play
Look, an excuse for him when I flip to say it’s not his fault.In post 1153, Vanderscamp wrote:I'm kind of hoping Morality is town after him rambling about how good he is, but I think his case on me is so awful, he's probably not.
Also, this wasn’t what was said, and this was the basis of his scum read, so he’ll likely continue without having a reason, or fabricate some case up.In post 1150, Vanderscamp wrote:In post 1136, Morality wrote:Oh, what do you know...Vanders was on both. -.-vote: Morality
I'm scum for staying off of the wagons, but I'm also scum for being on both the wagons?
No, because you weren’t avoiding any. I literally said the exact opposite to this. You were playing in a way where you could jump on any of them.In post 1149, Vanderscamp wrote:I jumped on Porkens who was a direct wagon, and I townread CT pretty strongly while he was a wagon.In post 1134, Morality wrote:In post 869, Morality wrote:I’m weary of a wagon flipping over to Chip suddenly if Una wagon doesn’t go further. If that starts to happen, please don’t push it further. Don’t need two claims here.
VOTE: VanderIn post 871, Morality wrote:Vander is playing in a way where he’s staying out of the direct wagons, but in a way where it will allow him to jump on either if he needs to, especially this close to deadline. Tomorrow, I can see ScumVander completely taking over and being able to push through another mislynch.Pretty sure you already agreed with my reasoning.In post 872, CheekyTeeky wrote:I agree on Vander but would rather get this wagon pushed as UnaH still has yet to respond after saying he would today.In post 871, Morality wrote:Vander is playing in a way where he’s staying out of the direct wagons, but in a way where it will allow him to jump on either if he needs to, especially this close to deadline. Tomorrow, I can see ScumVander completely taking over and being able to push through another mislynch.
Also, his placement on the Porken’s wagon.
It's fairly worrying that you're still using this.
Can you actually give specific examples of wagons that I was scummily avoiding?
I'm responding to the part of your accusation where you "call me out" for staying off of the wagons.In post 1156, Morality wrote:This is clearly not what was said. You were playing in a way where you didn’t have to commit to either.In post 1150, Vanderscamp wrote:In post 1136, Morality wrote:Oh, what do you know...Vanders was on both. -.-vote: Morality
I'm scum for staying off of the wagons, but I'm also scum for being on both the wagons?
Also, what do you mean staying off the wagons? You absolutely did not stay off the wagons.
You were on Chip, and then you went to Porkens. I said this yesterday, so this isn’t new like you are acting like it is.
In post 1134, Morality wrote:In post 869, Morality wrote:I’m weary of a wagon flipping over to Chip suddenly if Una wagon doesn’t go further. If that starts to happen, please don’t push it further. Don’t need two claims here.
VOTE: VanderIn post 871, Morality wrote:Vander is playing in a way where he’s staying out of the direct wagons, but in a way where it will allow him to jump on either if he needs to, especially this close to deadline. Tomorrow, I can see ScumVander completely taking over and being able to push through another mislynch.Pretty sure you already agreed with my reasoning.In post 872, CheekyTeeky wrote:I agree on Vander but would rather get this wagon pushed as UnaH still has yet to respond after saying he would today.In post 871, Morality wrote:Vander is playing in a way where he’s staying out of the direct wagons, but in a way where it will allow him to jump on either if he needs to, especially this close to deadline. Tomorrow, I can see ScumVander completely taking over and being able to push through another mislynch.
Also, his placement on the Porken’s wagon.
No, I didn't care that much, because I didn't think either of them were town and I thought they'd both played pretty scummy.In post 1158, Morality wrote:Now, even though I stated the same thing yesterday, he’s going to tunnel me acting like it just came up now when I ended the day voting him yesterday. Why are you all of a sudden finding this scummy, yet when Porkens/Chip we’re being wagon’d, you didn’t seem to care?
I commented D1 that I don't think it's helpful but I don't think it's unhelpful enough to continue arguing with people who want to do it.In post 1160, Morality wrote:Also, he didn’t even do the hypo vanilla claim thing or comment on it, which proves he isn’t reading everything throughly.
If I lynch you and you're town it absolutely would be partially my fault and I'd agree that it'd make me look worse.In post 1161, Morality wrote:Look, an excuse for him when I flip to say it’s not his fault.In post 1153, Vanderscamp wrote:I'm kind of hoping Morality is town after him rambling about how good he is, but I think his case on me is so awful, he's probably not.
Your case on me is total ass.In post 1162, Morality wrote:Also, this wasn’t what was said, and this was the basis of his scum read, so he’ll likely continue without having a reason, or fabricate some case up.In post 1150, Vanderscamp wrote:In post 1136, Morality wrote:Oh, what do you know...Vanders was on both. -.-vote: Morality
I'm scum for staying off of the wagons, but I'm also scum for being on both the wagons?
???In post 1163, Morality wrote:No, because you weren’t avoiding any. I literally said the exact opposite to this. You were playing in a way where you could jump on any of them.In post 1149, Vanderscamp wrote:I jumped on Porkens who was a direct wagon, and I townread CT pretty strongly while he was a wagon.In post 1134, Morality wrote:In post 869, Morality wrote:I’m weary of a wagon flipping over to Chip suddenly if Una wagon doesn’t go further. If that starts to happen, please don’t push it further. Don’t need two claims here.
VOTE: VanderIn post 871, Morality wrote:Vander is playing in a way where he’s staying out of the direct wagons, but in a way where it will allow him to jump on either if he needs to, especially this close to deadline. Tomorrow, I can see ScumVander completely taking over and being able to push through another mislynch.Pretty sure you already agreed with my reasoning.In post 872, CheekyTeeky wrote:I agree on Vander but would rather get this wagon pushed as UnaH still has yet to respond after saying he would today.In post 871, Morality wrote:but in a way where it will allow him to jump on either if he needs to, especially this close to deadline. Tomorrow, I can see ScumVander completely taking over and being able to push through another mislynch.Vander is playing in a way where he’s staying out of the direct wagons,
Also, his placement on the Porken’s wagon.
It's fairly worrying that you're still using this.
Can you actually give specific examples of wagons that I was scummily avoiding?
So what’s truly fairly worrying is that you are trying to shut things down that aren’t even what was said. In fact, the opposite has been said for most of it.