I love the attempt to discredit me. Recent events have made me think that I may be right.In post 2950, DOMO wrote:I think we're mutliball, but be careful saying that word because bulba has a hard on for me for suggesting it.
This feels fake.
In post 2998, Zdenek wrote:The pressure comes off BulbaFenix and they vanish. I'm shocked.
Activity levels and replacing out are not scumtells. No wonder you 2 are bad at finding scum with thought processes such as these. I mean, sheesh, Zdenek called me scum in a previous game, because he didn't like to read walls! These are not scumtells! Basing your reads on stupid crap such as this is going to do the town more harm than good, and we will end up losing the game, because you 2 can't learn to figure out what is and is not scummy!In post 3003, Serene wrote:VOTE: BulbaFenixIn post 2998, Zdenek wrote:The pressure comes off BulbaFenix and they vanish. I'm shocked.
What was your case against us again? Because I don't believe you've ever legitimately made one. Also, attempt to buddy up to Serene noted.In post 3006, Calcifer wrote: Hey, Serene. Legit question. Which between BulbaFenix and Thirdkoopa do you want to lynch more? They're both scum, and quite blatantly obviously so, but we only have the power to lynch one of them. Will happily switch to BulbaFenix if that's your preference.
You seem to have gotten your reads mixed up again.In post 3017, Serene wrote: BFenix is scum voting a townie, should switch vote.
In post 3101, Cephrir wrote:I don't think you're picking up what I'm putting down, Bulba. I gathered that, despite my defense, you suspect me over that. But since then you've been fitting the evidence to your read instead of vice versa and criticizing me for completely innocuous things. I'm not sure how you managed to interpret me saying, albeit indirectly, that I wasn't on board with the Ank wagon as a filler post. That is literally a concrete opinion.
You put little effort into answering Koopa's question concerning your case on him (a "yes" is not sufficient). You then comment on the recent events surrounding Ank, saying that you understand the argument but don't agree with it, and you disagree with the "not including both masons" scumtell. In essence, you are putting forth like you are contributing, but in actuality, you aren't saying much.In post 2898, Cephrir wrote:Yes.In post 2894, Thirdkoopa wrote:Page 60. I've been super busy. Trying to FINALLY finish Day 1.
Anyone have an actual reason for voting me asides from lurking?
I didn't really get the argument against Ank until we got to his reads changing, at which point I understood it but didn't think it was very good.
The idea that mentioning one of the masons but not the other could be a scumtell is ridiculous. There's no scum motivation, and in fact no reason anyone would do it at all.
I was quite behind at the time. I didn't know the status of the Koopa wagon, nor who was on it. The only reason I knew about the hammer was because posts about it ninja'd my post. If I was caught up, I probably would have noticed it.In post 3107, KingCrabd wrote:
Also lol at fenix's "PL crabd" thing. You're a decent enough player that I would have expected you to recgonize the play.
On to page 126. Going to catch up on this game tonight.
-Bulba