Mafiascum.net

In post 219, Wisdom wrote:

In post 209, Sakura Hana wrote:P-Edit: I asked if he re-read the thread and put a quote.

It was a reaction test, and it indeed doesn't show anywhere me saying I took a stance on the 1v1,

That's a lie. You were responding to Daniel's "you didn't give any stances on the 1v1" and you presented this quote as a stance.

Yet despite that, later you argued that it wasn't a stance.


VOTE: sakura

I'm having trouble seeing this as being voteworthy (and certainly in comparison to bald's play). Please go back :/

In post 224, 1baldeagle1 wrote:And he isn't, so I have no problem voting him now.

VOTE: Myko

This is a bad vote.

In post 224, 1baldeagle1 wrote:And he isn't, so I have no problem voting him now.

VOTE: Myko

Oh my god, you suck.

I wanted to vote him earlier but he was at L-2.

In post 168, Sakura Hana wrote:Anyway now that the reaction tests are done, now you do get my stance... or lack of it actually because I don't know myko nor mollie well enough to know if it's TvT or TvS or busing, if i had to put a gun to my head for it I'd be leaning more on the side of lynching mollie just from those interactions tho.

sakura don't we have like 3 or 4 completed games together?

there's no reasoning, eagle. there's no case. it smells like opportunistic scum waiting to vote.

Actually 2 iirc.

But both of them you were hydra and I couldn't tell you apart (Kerberos i thought it was always Mara and 50 shades of purple i thought it was mostly Nacho)

In post 108, 1baldeagle1 wrote:Scum likes to push for PLs since it gives them a free pass for that day. That's why I don't like you pushing for this wagon on heluim.

Helium is probably flustered town, I have reacted that way before. (In my Newbie game.)

In post 91, 1baldeagle1 wrote:Hey guys. /confirm.

Well, gee whiz, 4 pages already.

WISDOM, YOU BETTER NOT BE SCUM IN THIS GAME. I have a light scumread on Myko for wanting to lynch a hydra, but L-2 in 2 pages makes me think the other way.

I called him scum earlier.

And he was at L-2, so I didn't want to add another vote.

Daniel states that Sakura has nto given any stance on the myko-mollie 1v1:

In post 115, Daniel Bryan wrote:
Idk, theres something iffy with her stances this game, she hasnt even commented on the mykonian/helium-3 thing.

Sakura responds to that with disputing that and providing what she considered a stance:

In post 117, Sakura Hana wrote:Did you read the thread?

In post 87, Sakura Hana wrote:I'm not liking myko's sudden attitude but I don't think it's inherently scummy.

Yet later, when everyone's attention is on eagle, she claims that it wasn't a stance on the 1v1:

In post 144, Sakura Hana wrote:Indeed it isn't a stance on the 1v1, I never said the contrary.

And now she's claiming that her response to Daniel (second quote) was a reaction test. That isn't a reaction test in any way, that's defending against his accusation about the lack of stance.

Sakura is scum, exploited the fact we focused on eagle, and contradicted herself in the midst of trying to add heat on eagle.

In post 228, 1baldeagle1 wrote:I wanted to vote him earlier but he was at L-2.

You were in two minds about it

And you are seriously going to tell me you learned nothing since the first post you got here? Come on bald, these are the lamest of votes, returning to your first wishy washy statements about mollie/me. Make an effort (or something resembling a case, more then "I wanted this before")

Im still taking the stance that I never said that I took a stance in the 1v1.

I did, you wanted to PL hydras and scum pushes for PL.

In post 235, Wisdom wrote:Sakura is scum, exploited the fact we focused on eagle, and contradicted herself in the midst of trying to add heat on eagle.

okay, you are convincing here.



This is likely to be left there for the night, probably better if I leave such votes for tomorrow.

that's not a good case.

RE: Post 91 is invalid because that was an rvs vote

RE: Post 108 is invalid because PLs are not alignment-indicative.

ninjastop: i see.

ninjastop2: sakura, he's right, but we have bigger fish to fry.

ninjastop3: this is getting annoying...

In post 240, Feirei wrote:sakura, he's right, but we have bigger fish to fry.

Wisdom's no mind reader, that's why he keeps saying that.

Doesn't matter how many times he pulls it, he's still wrong, and idc

In post 238, 1baldeagle1 wrote:I did, you wanted to PL hydras and scum pushes for PL.

OMG, can you stop sucking? That PL was pregame and the first post, straight after mollie's reactions I went to attack those.

In short, you made a vote based on my pregame talk, and used that as a lame vote on page where are we now, 10? That's not a case, that's a place to put your vote because in all this time you actually haven't had a original thought. That's why you have to return to the weak wishy washy accusation you started the game off with, where you weren't sure "because the wagon was so quick".

That's not a case, dude. If you learned nothing since pregame, what the hell did you do here the last hour?

In post 214, Wisdom wrote:@mollie
because the mod counted it

if I am not mistaken the unvote happened before the mod count

you really have better things you could be doing.

In post 243, helium-3 wrote:if I am not mistaken the unvote happened before the mod count

I saw a message in the VC stating he was at L-1 so i figured my vote counted.

likely gonna be gone for the night. plus its dinnertime anyways.

In post 231, Sakura Hana wrote:Actually 2 iirc.

But both of them you were hydra and I couldn't tell you apart (Kerberos i thought it was always Mara and 50 shades of purple i thought it was mostly Nacho)

lol

we have at least 3.

and that is off the top of my head, I would have to go through playerlists to see how many.

and there is such an obvious difference between me and my hydra partners, that you are demonstrating it by responding to me tells me you can tell the difference.

rattled scum is rattled scum.

VOTE: sakura

bump for etl