Why the hammer?
Why vote Dpants?
Why the hammer?
i'm a low poster?In post 348, Titus wrote:Antihero, you seem to like votes on bubba, ssk and BE. That seems like lynch the other low posters not me.
also, i don't like votes on SSK.In post 351, Antihero wrote:i'm a low poster?In post 348, Titus wrote:Antihero, you seem to like votes on bubba, ssk and BE. That seems like lynch the other low posters not me.
also, since my BE scumread hinged on greyice, i've since dropped my BE scumread
also, BE's not anywhere close to a low poster...In post 353, Antihero wrote:also, i don't like votes on SSK.In post 351, Antihero wrote:i'm a low poster?In post 348, Titus wrote:Antihero, you seem to like votes on bubba, ssk and BE. That seems like lynch the other low posters not me.
also, since my BE scumread hinged on greyice, i've since dropped my BE scumread
seriously, that's the second time you've misrepresented me now
Try to see this from my point of view. Someone you have played in a game with opens this particular game by playing up your scum game. Reinoe answered RVS questions at the beginning by saying that I would be the most dangerous as scum. Soon after, he makes that particular post where he says he would be jealous of someone for being my partner. Now, obviously my thoughts were wrong on this, but to me it looked like he was trying to play me up as some really good scum player. It made me really nervous about him, this combined with the other things I have already mentioned made me real paranoid that he was scum and was gunning for me.In post 138, goodmorning wrote:But how does that make him Scum???In post 133, Dr Pants wrote:128 is a response to 125. Interactions between me and Reinoe? Its him telling everybody about how I'm apparently so great at scum. He literallysays he would be jealous of you if you were my scum buddy.The hell is that about? I wanted to bait more content out of him before I shared this, but everything's out now. Trust me in 123 as well.
Him being jealous of your scumbuddy would more imply youScum than himScum.
Hmmm. The logic behind this is fairly sound, but it does rely on SSK being scum. If he isnt and hammed for other reasons then there really isn't anything on ika, is there?In post 346, Titus wrote: To me, ika's play Day 1 is the most scummy independent of a flip. He still has yet to explain this plan he has but expects me to go along with it. His pushing for a hsmmer is off.
The SSK hammer suggests that SSK values ika so much mire than R that he cannot bare the thought of R getting away snd ika being wagoned.
That is why I want ika to communicate his plan. His whole defense to scummy behaviot is trust me.
It seemed like the right thing to do at the time. The arguments around reinoe being scum were very convincing. So I hammered him.
In post 356, Dr Pants wrote:Hmmm. The logic behind this is fairly sound, but it does rely on SSK being scum. If he isnt and hammed for other reasons then there really isn't anything on ika, is there?In post 346, Titus wrote: To me, ika's play Day 1 is the most scummy independent of a flip. He still has yet to explain this plan he has but expects me to go along with it. His pushing for a hsmmer is off.
The SSK hammer suggests that SSK values ika so much mire than R that he cannot bare the thought of R getting away snd ika being wagoned.
That is why I want ika to communicate his plan. His whole defense to scummy behaviot is trust me.
not a blanket assertion.In post 358, Titus wrote:Anti-hero, can you just knock off the blanket assertions and provide content? Neither you nor BE has provided much of anything and BE is ignoring what superficial questions I ask of him.
"if you don't mention them, you silently consent to them?"In post 362, Titus wrote:You raised no objections to any of the other wagons at the time. It can be inferred that you liked all the other wagons/suspects currently being discussed.
-.- to the SSK partIn post 360, Titus wrote:My last post just said that SSK could be town. I just find scum SSK more likely. :facepalm
ika, not telling me your plan is the opposite of transparent.
trying to haveIn post 362, Titus wrote:However, I think you were just trying to have things both ways.
In post 367, Titus wrote:Rather, the specific language of #333 indicated you approved of those wagons.
that's the post. in it's entirety. the only wagons i approve of is bubbajack and shroom. that's exactly what i said. and that's exactly what i meant. i don't approve of any wagons that aren't those two. that's it. period.bubbajack is also a fine vote. i'll accept those too.