Mafiascum.net

In post 697, Save The Dragons wrote:

In post 695, Jacket wrote:

In post 581, HawaiianPizza wrote:need jacket to explain why he townread osetr/me tbh

i am not getting an answer, am i

I don't feel like explaining, yeah.

You sure don't say a lot of things

In post 699, fua wrote:Also, part of my scumread was justification for my vote on him due to an inherent dislike of his conduct. The other part is me being biased in liking Dwlee and not wanting to scumread him.

In post 642, fua wrote:

In post 628, redtea wrote:okay. I don't like fua's tone in recent posts, but I haven't had the chance to really sit down yet so I won't hop on the wagon for now.

You never like my tone…

In post 704, redtea wrote:oh god why is everyone here at the same time

In post 698, fua wrote:

In post 696, Jacket wrote:

In post 597, fua wrote:I kind of want to let Dwlee prove himself? Osetr’s posts aren’t alignment indicative in hindsight because 90% of his posts were just trolling.

You said you legitimately thought Osetr was scum though.

I don’t think that anymore after context of him being banned from another site and a cursory reread.

In post 706, Jacket wrote:

In post 698, fua wrote:

In post 696, Jacket wrote:

In post 597, fua wrote:I kind of want to let Dwlee prove himself? Osetr’s posts aren’t alignment indicative in hindsight because 90% of his posts were just trolling.

You said you legitimately thought Osetr was scum though.

I don’t think that anymore after context of him being banned from another site and a cursory reread.

That doesn't make sense.

In post 711, Save The Dragons wrote:What am I not seeing

In post 711, Save The Dragons wrote:What am I not seeing

In post 709, House wrote:fua, quit while you're ahead.

In post 713, House wrote:

In post 711, Save The Dragons wrote:What am I not seeing

How you gonna say that I say a lot of things and not read the one thing I say that matters the most?

In post 716, Save The Dragons wrote:

In post 713, House wrote:

In post 711, Save The Dragons wrote:What am I not seeing

How you gonna say that I say a lot of things and not read the one thing I say that matters the most?

I didnt say I read a lot of things

In post 595, fua wrote:

In post 589, House wrote:

In post 586, HawaiianPizza wrote:don't tell him that was actually a pretty terrible take on osetr.

As it isn't true, I won't tell him that.

I feel like voting for someone on Day 1 because we won’t be able to rely on them at the end of the game

is

really flimsy reasoning, to be honest. I definitely agree that he deserved to be limmed if he wasn’t replaced because I don’t tolerate that behavior on this site, but that post from Three feels like he’s trying to justify his vote a little bit too much.

In post 595, fua wrote:

In post 589, House wrote:

In post 586, HawaiianPizza wrote:don't tell him that was actually a pretty terrible take on osetr.

As it isn't true, I won't tell him that.

I feel like voting for someone on Day 1 because we won’t be able to rely on them at the end of the game

is

really flimsy reasoning, to be honest. I definitely agree that he deserved to be limmed if he wasn’t replaced because I don’t tolerate that behavior on this site, but that post from Three feels like he’s trying to justify his vote a little bit too much.

In post 605, fua wrote:Actually. @Three I’m seriously suspicious of you, but I’m willing to give you the benefit of the doubt here if you’re willing to do the same with me. It’s in both of our best interests to work on a compromise for today— in case you are town, then scum is obviously going to look to keep our wagons as the main focuses so that the spotlight isn’t turned on them. Both of us

do

give out a lot of content that could be useful to find each other later, so why don’t we let each other keep talking and try to reach a conclusion on something else?

TL;DR: You trust me and take your vote off me, I’ll trust you and take my vote off you.