I completely agree.MagnaofIllusion wrote:You have made 5 posts in 10 Days, most of which contain only 1 or 2 lines with minimal game content. If this game is that overwhelming for you please replace out.CCARaven wrote:I'm still getting caught up, but first I'm going to unvote: SSBF. No reason that vote should still be there.
xvart wrote:On Richard's claim, I'm guessing his character is actually his character because Renly is a fairly prominent character and would fit well in this game in terms of flavor. As other's have said, that does not determine alignment. I could easily see this set of characters and abilities fitting in with a scum faction. His ability claim may very well be true. If anyone in Renly's camp (including Ser Loras) flips scum then Richard should be auto-lynched the next day.
This seems off to me. What if someone from Renly's camp fits scum, but the faction is something Renly wouldn't fit in? Should we still lynch him?
I guess there could be exceptions as I don't really recall all the people and the family structure of Renly's claim to the throne, but I meant that if we lynch Ser Loras or anyone that would obviously be on Renly's faction and that person flips scum then Renly should be auto-lynched. I was thinking that Renly's faction was more clear cut than some of the other houses where some characters could flip scum and others could flip town (or opposing scum).hasdgfas, 502 wrote:xvart wrote:On Richard's claim, I'm guessing his character is actually his character because Renly is a fairly prominent character and would fit well in this game in terms of flavor. As other's have said, that does not determine alignment. I could easily see this set of characters and abilities fitting in with a scum faction. His ability claim may very well be true. If anyone in Renly's camp (including Ser Loras) flips scum then Richard should be auto-lynched the next day.
I'm of the opposite pint of view; if he were scum he wouldn't have drawn attention to it.Rifka Viveka wrote:I do find SSBFs ''parrotgate'' suspicious, but not because parroting is suspicious itself, or more accurately since there was a ninja post, clearly no parroting happened at all. Instead, in his haste to accept 'guilt' for this action, and quickly get out in front of what was not scummy at all he reveals IMO a awareness of his own scumminess i usually see out of scum players-scum often see themselves and partners as scummier than they really look for example.
Scum can be genuinely pissed too. Anyway, I recall thinking you were scum somewhere earlier but I forgot why. I'll figure it out later.Raivan wrote: Call me a sucker, but I believe Kleedrac here. He seems to be genuinely pissed.
SSBF: DisagreeMcav wrote:SSBF: Scummy, due to apologizing for what is unnecessary to apologize for.
Magna: Scummier, due to latching on to "parroting" without looking at context, attempting an easy dig.
"Let's just kill him, if he's telling the truth someone else dies anyways" is pretty anti-town, I agree, too bad thats not what I said at all.Percy wrote: @Raivann: Hi! Thanks for replacing in! I stand by my original opinion on Richard's claim - it is confirmable, it relies on a second player, and is extremely unlikely to be fake. I don't like your vote, nor your Raise vote, or even your read on Kleedrac. Your vote in particular - "let's just kill him, if he's telling the truth someone else dies anyway" is extremely anti-town. Explanations, please - let's start with what exactly you like about the case against Richard.
My opinion on him is currently the same as before. I've already looked at his response to me at least twice.xvart wrote:Does I doubt It's recent poor argument change your opinion of him from only slightly suspicious to more suspicious or is your opinion of him the same?
I find this post scummy. Because people doesn't agree with your view on RichardGHP"s claim, you basically decided to bandwagon, which is bull because it basically said you're refusing to support your top lynch candidate in favor of a lesser scummy, but more popular lynch candidate.Raivann wrote:I see nobody argees with my view of Richards claim, and I don't think Renly is that prominent of a character as xvart was saying.
unvote, Vote: Kleedrac choo choo!. Someone made a good point about yeah he was pissed but that could just as easily come from scum
Yup, that's basically what I'm doingSmash Bros wrote: I find this post scummy. Because people doesn't agree with your view on RichardGHP"s claim, you basically decided to bandwagon, which is bull because it basically said you're refusing to support your top lynch candidate in favor of a lesser scummy, but more popular lynch candidate.
FoS: Raivann
This kind of all-out-attack is scummy. It's an attempt to shift the conversation from "Is I doubt it's case against Benmage any good?" to "Was I doubt it's case against Benmage scummy?", which are related but ultimately different questions. The fact that it was done with such strong rhetoric sets off my scumdar.Mina 486 wrote:If you think I doubt it's case was so embarrassingly bad that he shouldn't be allowed to play Mafia here, then why did you need a wall devoted almost exclusively to defending yourself from it? And why not let your defence speak for itself?
He's one of the Kings in the War of the Five Kings, which is one of the major plot-driving forces in the books. Have you read the series?Raivann 508 wrote:I don't think Renly is that prominent of a character as xvart was saying.
No comment on my blurb about Percy ignoring you in 499?Drippereth wrote:CATCHING UP!Scum can be genuinely pissed too. Anyway, I recall thinking you were scum somewhere earlier but I forgot why. I'll figure it out later.Raivan wrote: Call me a sucker, but I believe Kleedrac here. He seems to be genuinely pissed.SSBF: DisagreeMcav wrote:SSBF: Scummy, due to apologizing for what is unnecessary to apologize for.
Magna: Scummier, due to latching on to "parroting" without looking at context, attempting an easy dig.
Magna: Agree
Miku is prob town.
dana is town.
lynchme is to.
ah bleh, barely anything's changed.
Kleedrac still needs to die.
Your "response" was to say you don't see what I was saying. Scum aren't going to see why they're scummy. You're obviously not going to admit to being scum and vote yourself so I'm not really interested in a back and forth with you that will end in the exact same place it started.Super Smash Bros. Fan wrote:@Unsight: Despite having a vote on me, you've never really made a counter-response to a post early in the game (Will link if necessary). Your most direct reactions were your vote on me and basically saying that me and MacavityLock were scum buddies. Why do you not choose to counter-respond to that post if you think I'm your top suspect?
Let your friends known this game needs replacements! 
After several bandwagon jumps and zero follow-through on some cases he claimed to have, Vezo certainly didn't earn any townie points from me. And of course I'd developed some other thoughts by that point, but nothing really jumped off the page with suspicion to me in the way Vezo's lack of, well, anything, did. I certainly used his ISO (I assume this is isolated posting, yes?) when helping to organize my case against him, but I certainly didn't set out with a mindset of "RNG a guy and build a case."xvart wrote:When exactly did you become most suspicious of Vezo? If it became midway through your reading wouldn't you already have other thoughts compiled? It appears to me that you went through the ISO of someone and just commented on that person. If you really did a read through I would expect some other analysis besides pretty tame topics of the Raise candidates.
He tried to find some justification to do so, in saying that Richard's claim was weak, and that we shouldn't worry if Richard dies because - hey! - someone gets a day vig out of if it he was telling the truth. And then...SSBF wrote:@Mikujin: Do you have anything to say on Raivann's jump on RichardGHP's bandwagon? He replaced Deer if you haven't noticed.
Ok, a non-committal toss in to give Kleedrac a little support. But then why...Raivann wrote:Call me a sucker, but I believe Kleedrac here. He seems to be genuinely pissed.
... Do a complete 180? Bad bad bad. And this time there's not even an attempt to justify the bandwagon jump. More than anything this strikes me as extremely opportunistic - you come off more scummy now than ever before, taking whatever measures necessary to go unnoticed. If I had any inkling of suspicion against your predecessor Deer, you've certainly amplified it tenfold with this little ploy.Raivann wrote:I see nobody argees with my view of Richards claim, and I don't think Renly is that prominent of a character as xvart was saying.
unvote, Vote: Kleedracchoo choo!. Someone made a good point about yeah he was pissed but that could just as easily come from scum
Off the top of my head I can't recall when i began suspecting CMaR, readin my own iso or his would probably remind me...buttt i'd say a multitude of things including his sucking up to axel, the contract, discussion with him and his general play thus far.Mina wrote: ---
Benmage: I see you responded to MagnaofIllusion's questions to you. I understand that my post #486 was huge and you might have missed that I also mentioned you, but could I get a little reaction to point #5?
I more or less answered Mina's statements with my response to Magna, about my post towards I doubt it.Percy wrote: tl;dr: Benmage's reaction is a scumtell for me, but not a strong one.IGMEOY, waiting for Benmage catchup.