Mini Normal 2205: RotITGBSMoD [game over!]

Normal Games (With basic roles and standard mechanics) Signups Here
Forum rules
Locked
User avatar
Green Crayons
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
User avatar
User avatar
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
Jack of All Trades
Posts: 7612
Joined: September 21, 2002
Location: Richmond, VA

Post Post #36 (isolation #0) » Sun Apr 11, 2021 7:55 am

Post by Green Crayons »

VOTE: STD
"This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).
User avatar
Green Crayons
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
User avatar
User avatar
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
Jack of All Trades
Posts: 7612
Joined: September 21, 2002
Location: Richmond, VA

Post Post #37 (isolation #1) » Sun Apr 11, 2021 7:55 am

Post by Green Crayons »

In post 26, Haschel Cedricson wrote:
Vote: Green Crayons.
They know why.
My charming personality, I'm sure.
"This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).
User avatar
Green Crayons
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
User avatar
User avatar
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
Jack of All Trades
Posts: 7612
Joined: September 21, 2002
Location: Richmond, VA

Post Post #65 (isolation #2) » Sun Apr 11, 2021 9:49 am

Post by Green Crayons »

In post 46, Save The Dragons wrote:i think one or both of them might literally be scum pretending to stand out to look town
why though
"This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).
User avatar
Green Crayons
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
User avatar
User avatar
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
Jack of All Trades
Posts: 7612
Joined: September 21, 2002
Location: Richmond, VA

Post Post #92 (isolation #3) » Sun Apr 11, 2021 2:00 pm

Post by Green Crayons »

In post 56, Save The Dragons wrote:i already made my case against andres
wat
"This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).
User avatar
Green Crayons
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
User avatar
User avatar
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
Jack of All Trades
Posts: 7612
Joined: September 21, 2002
Location: Richmond, VA

Post Post #93 (isolation #4) » Sun Apr 11, 2021 2:01 pm

Post by Green Crayons »

In post 75, Salsabil Faria wrote:
In post 73, VFP wrote:Am I confirmed town yet?
Not to me...
have you ever rolled scum?
"This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).
User avatar
Green Crayons
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
User avatar
User avatar
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
Jack of All Trades
Posts: 7612
Joined: September 21, 2002
Location: Richmond, VA

Post Post #94 (isolation #5) » Sun Apr 11, 2021 2:04 pm

Post by Green Crayons »

In post 67, Salsabil Faria wrote:
In post 46, Save The Dragons wrote:
In post 43, PawnsGambit wrote:I don't find Osuka's self vote or Andres fake claim particularly scummy. Scum generally try to blend in on day one rather than stand out. I would rather look at the people attacking Osuka and Andres.
i think one or both of them might literally be scum pretending to stand out to look town
Hmm, maybe
Andresvmb
?
why'd you pick andres over osuka?
"This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).
User avatar
Green Crayons
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
User avatar
User avatar
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
Jack of All Trades
Posts: 7612
Joined: September 21, 2002
Location: Richmond, VA

Post Post #99 (isolation #6) » Sun Apr 11, 2021 2:39 pm

Post by Green Crayons »

In post 96, Salsabil Faria wrote:
In post 93, Green Crayons wrote:
In post 75, Salsabil Faria wrote:
In post 73, VFP wrote:Am I confirmed town yet?
Not to me...
have you ever rolled scum?
Once.
please share a link
"This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).
User avatar
Green Crayons
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
User avatar
User avatar
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
Jack of All Trades
Posts: 7612
Joined: September 21, 2002
Location: Richmond, VA

Post Post #100 (isolation #7) » Sun Apr 11, 2021 2:39 pm

Post by Green Crayons »

In post 98, Save The Dragons wrote:case = scum sometimes are loud to pretend to be town
reasoning = gut feeling about this loud person being one who is pretending to be town
oicn
"This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).
User avatar
Green Crayons
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
User avatar
User avatar
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
Jack of All Trades
Posts: 7612
Joined: September 21, 2002
Location: Richmond, VA

Post Post #103 (isolation #8) » Sun Apr 11, 2021 2:46 pm

Post by Green Crayons »

In post 51, Andresvmb wrote:VOTE: Save The Dragons

I’m not going to shy away from a fight if that’s what you want.
so what's this all about?
"This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).
User avatar
Green Crayons
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
User avatar
User avatar
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
Jack of All Trades
Posts: 7612
Joined: September 21, 2002
Location: Richmond, VA

Post Post #345 (isolation #9) » Mon Apr 12, 2021 1:44 pm

Post by Green Crayons »

In post 262, Save The Dragons wrote:green crayons and haschel cedricson, are you happy with your votes?
im always happy with my votes
"This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).
User avatar
Green Crayons
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
User avatar
User avatar
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
Jack of All Trades
Posts: 7612
Joined: September 21, 2002
Location: Richmond, VA

Post Post #346 (isolation #10) » Mon Apr 12, 2021 1:46 pm

Post by Green Crayons »

In post 263, VFP wrote:
In post 262, Save The Dragons wrote:green crayons and haschel cedricson, are you happy with your votes?
More important question for Green is what did do for him?
@Green
gave me a point of reference to see if my one prior experience with Salsa would be informative, because she was giving me pings of her prior play where she ultimately ended up showing herself as obvtown

more or less a moot point now bc i think her blow up was solidly town
"This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).
User avatar
Green Crayons
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
User avatar
User avatar
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
Jack of All Trades
Posts: 7612
Joined: September 21, 2002
Location: Richmond, VA

Post Post #347 (isolation #11) » Mon Apr 12, 2021 1:47 pm

Post by Green Crayons »

In post 275, VFP wrote:Yeah I'm torn on Osuka from games played.
Town games, he's just an edgy xQc fan.
Scum games he is as I said previously as more direct anger of being caught / fake anger to re direct. The only difference is he winds his neck in a lot more as scum, I guess to appease the player list instead. So it will be interesting to see here. I'm betting a double down.
Maybe Osuka is just going for town edgy again here though.
this just feels like scum latching on to someone who suspected them as a basis to effort post
"This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).
User avatar
Green Crayons
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
User avatar
User avatar
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
Jack of All Trades
Posts: 7612
Joined: September 21, 2002
Location: Richmond, VA

Post Post #348 (isolation #12) » Mon Apr 12, 2021 1:49 pm

Post by Green Crayons »

In post 276, Robert M Hunter wrote:Bad manipulation here: memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=35578
whats this supposed to link to?
"This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).
User avatar
Green Crayons
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
User avatar
User avatar
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
Jack of All Trades
Posts: 7612
Joined: September 21, 2002
Location: Richmond, VA

Post Post #349 (isolation #13) » Mon Apr 12, 2021 1:54 pm

Post by Green Crayons »

In post 344, Andresvmb wrote:@Green Crayons can you post? What’s going on? You actually tried to stay somewhat involved as Scum last time we played and revealed your alignment somewhat quickly in my eyes. Are you trying to avoid that here?
lol
"This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).
User avatar
Green Crayons
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
User avatar
User avatar
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
Jack of All Trades
Posts: 7612
Joined: September 21, 2002
Location: Richmond, VA

Post Post #350 (isolation #14) » Mon Apr 12, 2021 1:55 pm

Post by Green Crayons »

VOTE: Andante

for the Robert reaction
"This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).
User avatar
Green Crayons
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
User avatar
User avatar
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
Jack of All Trades
Posts: 7612
Joined: September 21, 2002
Location: Richmond, VA

Post Post #396 (isolation #15) » Tue Apr 13, 2021 6:08 am

Post by Green Crayons »

In post 369, PawnsGambit wrote:I'm torn between weather osuka is obvtown or if he might just hurt us in the long run by not listening to feedback and thinking that he's always right.
i don't understand the either/or here, as they both seem to be saying osuka is town
"This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).
User avatar
Green Crayons
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
User avatar
User avatar
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
Jack of All Trades
Posts: 7612
Joined: September 21, 2002
Location: Richmond, VA

Post Post #397 (isolation #16) » Tue Apr 13, 2021 6:15 am

Post by Green Crayons »

In post 382, VFP wrote:Did you read the scum game? What style of play differs there?
Regardless of the read now.
i skimmed her iso. i suppose this might be premature conversation as Salsa could be scum faking ate but also this is just a temp check and not really confirmation one way or the other so just typing through my thoughts i guess i don't really care about discussing atm; overall, she didn't do as much of the in-depth assessments of players as she did in her obvtown game.
"This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).
User avatar
Green Crayons
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
User avatar
User avatar
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
Jack of All Trades
Posts: 7612
Joined: September 21, 2002
Location: Richmond, VA

Post Post #398 (isolation #17) » Tue Apr 13, 2021 6:16 am

Post by Green Crayons »

In post 382, VFP wrote:
In post 352, InsidiousLemons wrote:no one seems to be pushing anya for posting almost exclusively filler even when there were better things to discuss. weird metaphors and non-pushes and... that seems to be it
Anya strikes me as an easy player to read as the day goes on.
oh i thought the gibberish was kids these days early D1 posting
"This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).
User avatar
Green Crayons
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
User avatar
User avatar
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
Jack of All Trades
Posts: 7612
Joined: September 21, 2002
Location: Richmond, VA

Post Post #399 (isolation #18) » Tue Apr 13, 2021 6:20 am

Post by Green Crayons »

In post 351, Robert M Hunter wrote:
In post 347, Green Crayons wrote:
In post 275, VFP wrote:Yeah I'm torn on Osuka from games played.
Town games, he's just an edgy xQc fan.
Scum games he is as I said previously as more direct anger of being caught / fake anger to re direct. The only difference is he winds his neck in a lot more as scum, I guess to appease the player list instead. So it will be interesting to see here. I'm betting a double down.
Maybe Osuka is just going for town edgy again here though.
this just feels like scum latching on to someone who suspected them as a basis to effort post
Why latch on a cantankerous player like osuka? Aren't there targets that may not flinch quite as much when poked?
you can't pick who suspects you. it looked reactionary.

also i just got out of a scum game with Datisi where all he did was basically beg and scream and pout and demand in the scum pt for a town to start picking a fight with him so he could post up a storm. ik you arent Datisi but its fresh in my mind.
"This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).
User avatar
Green Crayons
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
User avatar
User avatar
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
Jack of All Trades
Posts: 7612
Joined: September 21, 2002
Location: Richmond, VA

Post Post #401 (isolation #19) » Tue Apr 13, 2021 6:22 am

Post by Green Crayons »

In post 357, Andante wrote:
In post 350, Green Crayons wrote:VOTE: Andante

for the Robert reaction

lmao that's all? I'm genuinely your top fos? with all that has happened? Me not liking Robert's entrance is why you actually think I'm scum?
i don't really have a hierarchy of reads atm but this reaction isn't making me feel bad about my vote
"This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).
User avatar
Green Crayons
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
User avatar
User avatar
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
Jack of All Trades
Posts: 7612
Joined: September 21, 2002
Location: Richmond, VA

Post Post #553 (isolation #20) » Wed Apr 14, 2021 12:04 pm

Post by Green Crayons »

i don't follow the logic of basically anything Pawn is saying
"This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).
User avatar
Green Crayons
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
User avatar
User avatar
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
Jack of All Trades
Posts: 7612
Joined: September 21, 2002
Location: Richmond, VA

Post Post #554 (isolation #21) » Wed Apr 14, 2021 12:05 pm

Post by Green Crayons »

idk if that's ai, it's just annoying because it's distracting and makes me want to pipe up and say "that's not how thinking works" but what a distraction
"This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).
User avatar
Green Crayons
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
User avatar
User avatar
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
Jack of All Trades
Posts: 7612
Joined: September 21, 2002
Location: Richmond, VA

Post Post #556 (isolation #22) » Wed Apr 14, 2021 12:07 pm

Post by Green Crayons »

toying the theory that pawn and andres thinking the whole thread revolves around them might be town ai.
"This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).
User avatar
Green Crayons
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
User avatar
User avatar
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
Jack of All Trades
Posts: 7612
Joined: September 21, 2002
Location: Richmond, VA

Post Post #557 (isolation #23) » Wed Apr 14, 2021 12:08 pm

Post by Green Crayons »

Dragons has VPBaltar vibes so i'm going to say probably town
"This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).
User avatar
Green Crayons
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
User avatar
User avatar
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
Jack of All Trades
Posts: 7612
Joined: September 21, 2002
Location: Richmond, VA

Post Post #561 (isolation #24) » Wed Apr 14, 2021 12:13 pm

Post by Green Crayons »

In post 559, Save The Dragons wrote:
In post 557, Green Crayons wrote:Dragons has VPBaltar vibes so i'm going to say probably town
what does that mean
open, methodical, clear
"This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).
User avatar
Green Crayons
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
User avatar
User avatar
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
Jack of All Trades
Posts: 7612
Joined: September 21, 2002
Location: Richmond, VA

Post Post #562 (isolation #25) » Wed Apr 14, 2021 12:14 pm

Post by Green Crayons »

see, e.g., your self eval of andres
"This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).
User avatar
Green Crayons
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
User avatar
User avatar
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
Jack of All Trades
Posts: 7612
Joined: September 21, 2002
Location: Richmond, VA

Post Post #696 (isolation #26) » Thu Apr 15, 2021 10:18 am

Post by Green Crayons »

In post 645, Asteria wrote:
In post 639, InsidiousLemons wrote:
In post 621, Andante wrote:
In post 620, Anya wrote:woah are you trying to get killed night 1 insidious

We can just ask the mafia doctor to save insidious!!! duh! lmao (but for real, maf, we value insidious, and it would be greatly appreciated if you kept him around! Thank you)
this game is going to make me lose my mind. the longer i stare at this post the more i begin to think it's one of the most telling things andante has posted this whole game. what actual reason does town have to post this?
Also what reason does mafia have to post this though
maybe noob scum (oh ho look i'm posting a message to myself crazy right) but it's probably null
"This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).
User avatar
Green Crayons
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
User avatar
User avatar
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
Jack of All Trades
Posts: 7612
Joined: September 21, 2002
Location: Richmond, VA

Post Post #697 (isolation #27) » Thu Apr 15, 2021 10:20 am

Post by Green Crayons »

In post 651, osuka wrote:
In post 641, InsidiousLemons wrote:osuka, please explain . if you were scum, how could you be coaching pawnsgambit right now, during D1? if i'm missing something obvious, tear me to shreds over it. but i want to know why you said what you said
doesn’t mafia have daytalk by default in normal games? the past several games i’ve played had mafia daytalk
old fogey game i recently played didnt have daytalk

other than that, last couple of games i recently played had daytalk
"This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).
User avatar
Green Crayons
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
User avatar
User avatar
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
Jack of All Trades
Posts: 7612
Joined: September 21, 2002
Location: Richmond, VA

Post Post #698 (isolation #28) » Thu Apr 15, 2021 10:24 am

Post by Green Crayons »

In post 687, PawnsGambit wrote:I'm concerned with the number of salsas scumreads as I am with Robert.
tell me more
"This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).
User avatar
Green Crayons
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
User avatar
User avatar
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
Jack of All Trades
Posts: 7612
Joined: September 21, 2002
Location: Richmond, VA

Post Post #702 (isolation #29) » Thu Apr 15, 2021 10:25 am

Post by Green Crayons »

In post 694, Datisi wrote:
replacing PawnsGambit.
wtf
"This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).
User avatar
Green Crayons
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
User avatar
User avatar
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
Jack of All Trades
Posts: 7612
Joined: September 21, 2002
Location: Richmond, VA

Post Post #703 (isolation #30) » Thu Apr 15, 2021 10:25 am

Post by Green Crayons »

In post 700, Datisi wrote:
PookyTheMagicalBear replaces PawnsGambit.
oh i mean cool
"This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).
User avatar
Green Crayons
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
User avatar
User avatar
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
Jack of All Trades
Posts: 7612
Joined: September 21, 2002
Location: Richmond, VA

Post Post #812 (isolation #31) » Thu Apr 15, 2021 1:28 pm

Post by Green Crayons »

In post 704, PookyTheMagicalBear wrote:Green Crayons, will you be the first of my Nazgûl ? To ride forth and terrorize the land in my name?
do you pay union rates?
"This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).
User avatar
Green Crayons
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
User avatar
User avatar
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
Jack of All Trades
Posts: 7612
Joined: September 21, 2002
Location: Richmond, VA

Post Post #813 (isolation #32) » Thu Apr 15, 2021 1:29 pm

Post by Green Crayons »

In post 715, Save The Dragons wrote:i kind of want to get annihilated by pooky
sir this is a family game
"This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).
User avatar
Green Crayons
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
User avatar
User avatar
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
Jack of All Trades
Posts: 7612
Joined: September 21, 2002
Location: Richmond, VA

Post Post #814 (isolation #33) » Thu Apr 15, 2021 1:31 pm

Post by Green Crayons »

In post 718, InsidiousLemons wrote:if you were joking the whole time then why separate the post into two parts? why say "but for real?"
pretty sure if this is noobscum the "but for real" clause is also supposed to be joking
"This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).
User avatar
Green Crayons
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
User avatar
User avatar
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
Jack of All Trades
Posts: 7612
Joined: September 21, 2002
Location: Richmond, VA

Post Post #815 (isolation #34) » Thu Apr 15, 2021 1:34 pm

Post by Green Crayons »

In post 718, InsidiousLemons wrote:also strange to me that you only back up your null reads and don't mention your, you know, actual reads
agree with this point.
"This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).
User avatar
Green Crayons
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
User avatar
User avatar
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
Jack of All Trades
Posts: 7612
Joined: September 21, 2002
Location: Richmond, VA

Post Post #816 (isolation #35) » Thu Apr 15, 2021 1:35 pm

Post by Green Crayons »

In post 721, PookyTheMagicalBear wrote:one of my rules is no posts over 10 lines.
all hail Pooky, our new supreme overlord
"This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).
User avatar
Green Crayons
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
User avatar
User avatar
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
Jack of All Trades
Posts: 7612
Joined: September 21, 2002
Location: Richmond, VA

Post Post #817 (isolation #36) » Thu Apr 15, 2021 1:38 pm

Post by Green Crayons »

In post 763, Robert M Hunter wrote:I changed my mind, Andante is town. Deal with it.
what's the post that did it for you?
"This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).
User avatar
Green Crayons
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
User avatar
User avatar
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
Jack of All Trades
Posts: 7612
Joined: September 21, 2002
Location: Richmond, VA

Post Post #820 (isolation #37) » Thu Apr 15, 2021 2:11 pm

Post by Green Crayons »

In post 819, Save The Dragons wrote:you may have gotten sucked in by an AtE
agree. neither of those two were the post that gave me pause.
"This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).
User avatar
Green Crayons
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
User avatar
User avatar
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
Jack of All Trades
Posts: 7612
Joined: September 21, 2002
Location: Richmond, VA

Post Post #881 (isolation #38) » Sat Apr 17, 2021 4:04 am

Post by Green Crayons »

In post 845, VFP wrote:
In post 806, Andante wrote:uhhh not really, too hard to explain, I'm gonna go play in the snow (we have a snow storm right now) and when I'm back I'm ISOing Haschel, and if he's been here for 5 days with no content, I'm voting him, would rather keep people who try.
In post 840, Andante wrote:VOTE: lemons

I thought I flipped it last... oops
What content did you find then?
"This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).
User avatar
Green Crayons
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
User avatar
User avatar
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
Jack of All Trades
Posts: 7612
Joined: September 21, 2002
Location: Richmond, VA

Post Post #882 (isolation #39) » Sat Apr 17, 2021 4:11 am

Post by Green Crayons »

In post 832, VFP wrote:I feel like scum are trying to hide behind humour at this stage of the game.
Why do you have this feeling

Who is hiding behind humor

Why is humor AI here
"This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).
User avatar
Green Crayons
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
User avatar
User avatar
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
Jack of All Trades
Posts: 7612
Joined: September 21, 2002
Location: Richmond, VA

Post Post #938 (isolation #40) » Sat Apr 17, 2021 9:56 am

Post by Green Crayons »

In post 890, Save The Dragons wrote:my problem with pooky is that i'm expecting some content from the slot even through the RPing.
me too but i feel some runway is appropriate, both because of a replace in + personality
"This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).
User avatar
Green Crayons
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
User avatar
User avatar
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
Jack of All Trades
Posts: 7612
Joined: September 21, 2002
Location: Richmond, VA

Post Post #939 (isolation #41) » Sat Apr 17, 2021 10:00 am

Post by Green Crayons »

In post 908, Andante wrote:I'm still convinced Lemons is scum, has TMI and playing too matter of fact-ly
have you pointed out specific posts that support this?
"This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).
User avatar
Green Crayons
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
User avatar
User avatar
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
Jack of All Trades
Posts: 7612
Joined: September 21, 2002
Location: Richmond, VA

Post Post #940 (isolation #42) » Sat Apr 17, 2021 10:05 am

Post by Green Crayons »

In post 924, VFP wrote:I'm surprised you are asking who is posting 'humour in this game. Are you just looking for particular comments to try and pull up rather than reading the game?
why are you misrepping to push this loaded question?
"This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).
User avatar
Green Crayons
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
User avatar
User avatar
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
Jack of All Trades
Posts: 7612
Joined: September 21, 2002
Location: Richmond, VA

Post Post #941 (isolation #43) » Sat Apr 17, 2021 10:06 am

Post by Green Crayons »

In post 930, Save The Dragons wrote:
In post 928, Robert M Hunter wrote:
In post 898, Andante wrote:I. Am. Not. A. Vanilla. Townie.
Yes that obvious but i was trying to be discrete.

It must have been obvious to STD, too.

STD IS SCUM.
lol whut
"This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).
User avatar
Green Crayons
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
User avatar
User avatar
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
Jack of All Trades
Posts: 7612
Joined: September 21, 2002
Location: Richmond, VA

Post Post #942 (isolation #44) » Sat Apr 17, 2021 10:09 am

Post by Green Crayons »

the timing of adante's claim when she isn't exactly primed for an elim, but also it's suuuper weak and not something that would save her from an elim, doesn't strike me as a particularly smart scum play and so probably not coming from scum (~*~noobscum~*~ or otherwise)

VOTE: robert
"This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).
User avatar
Green Crayons
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
User avatar
User avatar
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
Jack of All Trades
Posts: 7612
Joined: September 21, 2002
Location: Richmond, VA

Post Post #944 (isolation #45) » Sat Apr 17, 2021 10:53 am

Post by Green Crayons »

In post 924, VFP wrote:
In post 882, Green Crayons wrote:Why do you have this feeling

Who is hiding behind humor

Why is humor AI here
Because everyone in the game seems to be allowing it to happen.
If you set a line where jokes or sarcasm can easy be used as a deflection then it will be abused.

Normally having a player or 2 with this attitude doesn't mean much but considering how half the players are reacting to making reads / confirming reads / or generally posting, I think that scum will be taking advantage of this.

This isn't how games are normally and says a lot since I'm not overly a serious player standardly.

I'm surprised you are asking who is posting 'humour in this game. Are you just looking for particular comments to try and pull up rather than reading the game?
I asked for you to point out who is hiding behind humor, which was your theory about scum using humor here, not “who is posting humor” which is a dumb thing to ask bc as we all know nobody is funny on ms
"This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).
User avatar
Green Crayons
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
User avatar
User avatar
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
Jack of All Trades
Posts: 7612
Joined: September 21, 2002
Location: Richmond, VA

Post Post #965 (isolation #46) » Sat Apr 17, 2021 4:03 pm

Post by Green Crayons »

[tweet][/tweet]
In post 945, VFP wrote:
In post 944, Green Crayons wrote:I asked for you to point out who is hiding behind humor, which was your theory about scum using humor here, not “who is posting humor” which is a dumb thing to ask bc as we all know nobody is funny on ms
Well if I knew as simple as who I would just be saying X and or Y are scum for hiding behind humour.
The fact so many players are going this route, it just means scum are getting away with it.

To clarify, I think scum are getting away with avoiding answering questions or giving realistic reads / reasons. I'm not set on who but Robert's original read list and some responses I have seen from them are a good start.
And there's more than 3 people playing like this, so it means that town are doing the same thing.
so i guess to get to the heart of this

you think that bc some not insignificant amount of the player base is trying to be funny

scum must be using humor as a weapon of blending in

but you don't have specific posts that are pinging you as scum potentially using humor as camo (well except robert but BUT things have changed maybe there)

this is just a theory about maybe what scum might want to do

.......

i think this is a bad theory but maybe town indicative
"This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).
User avatar
Green Crayons
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
User avatar
User avatar
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
Jack of All Trades
Posts: 7612
Joined: September 21, 2002
Location: Richmond, VA

Post Post #966 (isolation #47) » Sat Apr 17, 2021 4:03 pm

Post by Green Crayons »

In post 965, Green Crayons wrote:[tweet][/tweet]
i'm about 70% inebriated so not sure what this is but i endorse it
"This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).
User avatar
Green Crayons
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
User avatar
User avatar
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
Jack of All Trades
Posts: 7612
Joined: September 21, 2002
Location: Richmond, VA

Post Post #967 (isolation #48) » Sat Apr 17, 2021 4:06 pm

Post by Green Crayons »

In post 948, Robert M Hunter wrote:I crumbed my role in my first post.
UNVOTE: robert

lol 20/20 hindsight and all but wow that was obvious my b


so can you please point out the post where you thought andante revealed her pr because i didn't see it and i thought that was you scum BSing
"This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).
User avatar
Green Crayons
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
User avatar
User avatar
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
Jack of All Trades
Posts: 7612
Joined: September 21, 2002
Location: Richmond, VA

Post Post #968 (isolation #49) » Sat Apr 17, 2021 4:08 pm

Post by Green Crayons »

In post 953, Robert M Hunter wrote:
In post 949, VFP wrote:So I guess it's just general meta to claim a PR now days.
No one has even been put to E1 and we have 2 claims.

I've just finished a game where there were 3 PRs claimed day 1 and 1 was scum.

UNVOTE: Robert M Hunter

Personally I don't support this kind idlf mentality in general.
I'll take a re look in the morning to see who I vote.
I wasn't at E-1, but everyone scumreads me so it was only a matter of time.
blending some of my threads of convo here

but

was your earlier posting totally in earnest, or was some of your posting just noise ("humor") mixed in with real reads?
"This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).
User avatar
Green Crayons
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
User avatar
User avatar
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
Jack of All Trades
Posts: 7612
Joined: September 21, 2002
Location: Richmond, VA

Post Post #969 (isolation #50) » Sat Apr 17, 2021 4:11 pm

Post by Green Crayons »

In post 959, Asteria wrote:
In post 948, Robert M Hunter wrote:I crumbed my role in my first post.
Crumbing isn't really viable in my opinion if you claim it the same day you crumbed. Crumbing is for the long term. Anyone can crumb something in their first post and then use that the second there's a decent wagon on them
i dont understand this
"This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).
User avatar
Green Crayons
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
User avatar
User avatar
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
Jack of All Trades
Posts: 7612
Joined: September 21, 2002
Location: Richmond, VA

Post Post #988 (isolation #51) » Sun Apr 18, 2021 1:52 am

Post by Green Crayons »

In post 982, VFP wrote:I think I prefer Pooky town here to Dragon.
why is this an either/or?
"This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).
User avatar
Green Crayons
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
User avatar
User avatar
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
Jack of All Trades
Posts: 7612
Joined: September 21, 2002
Location: Richmond, VA

Post Post #1003 (isolation #52) » Sun Apr 18, 2021 6:35 am

Post by Green Crayons »

In post 990, PookyTheMagicalBear wrote:
In post 988, Green Crayons wrote:
In post 982, VFP wrote:I think I prefer Pooky town here to Dragon.
why is this an either/or?

Why are you not voting STD?
bc i dont think he's done anything suspicious

i have questions about T3's point after Dragons has responded
"This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).
User avatar
Green Crayons
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
User avatar
User avatar
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
Jack of All Trades
Posts: 7612
Joined: September 21, 2002
Location: Richmond, VA

Post Post #1636 (isolation #53) » Mon Apr 19, 2021 6:07 am

Post by Green Crayons »

there are a metric ton of posts since i last posted and my Monday is very busy. i won't be able to catch up until maybe tonight.
"This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).
User avatar
Green Crayons
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
User avatar
User avatar
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
Jack of All Trades
Posts: 7612
Joined: September 21, 2002
Location: Richmond, VA

Post Post #1797 (isolation #54) » Mon Apr 19, 2021 1:14 pm

Post by Green Crayons »

done with work for now

I am not reading however many pages that is

Any questions for me or is this just a claim wagon?
"This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).
User avatar
Green Crayons
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
User avatar
User avatar
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
Jack of All Trades
Posts: 7612
Joined: September 21, 2002
Location: Richmond, VA

Post Post #1806 (isolation #55) » Mon Apr 19, 2021 1:28 pm

Post by Green Crayons »

std why are you voting Andres
"This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).
User avatar
Green Crayons
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
User avatar
User avatar
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
Jack of All Trades
Posts: 7612
Joined: September 21, 2002
Location: Richmond, VA

Post Post #1808 (isolation #56) » Mon Apr 19, 2021 1:29 pm

Post by Green Crayons »

In post 1804, osuka wrote:my vote is on salsa right now
Why
"This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).
User avatar
Green Crayons
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
User avatar
User avatar
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
Jack of All Trades
Posts: 7612
Joined: September 21, 2002
Location: Richmond, VA

Post Post #1874 (isolation #57) » Mon Apr 19, 2021 3:10 pm

Post by Green Crayons »

I have voted Andante and Haschel
"This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).
User avatar
Green Crayons
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
User avatar
User avatar
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
Jack of All Trades
Posts: 7612
Joined: September 21, 2002
Location: Richmond, VA

Post Post #1875 (isolation #58) » Mon Apr 19, 2021 3:11 pm

Post by Green Crayons »

This game is stupid. Y’all posted 700 posts in 24 hours.
"This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).
User avatar
Green Crayons
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
User avatar
User avatar
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
Jack of All Trades
Posts: 7612
Joined: September 21, 2002
Location: Richmond, VA

Post Post #1877 (isolation #59) » Mon Apr 19, 2021 3:12 pm

Post by Green Crayons »

Like I don’t know who to vote for because there are 700 posts that happened since I was caught up.
"This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).
User avatar
Green Crayons
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
User avatar
User avatar
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
Jack of All Trades
Posts: 7612
Joined: September 21, 2002
Location: Richmond, VA

Post Post #1885 (isolation #60) » Mon Apr 19, 2021 3:18 pm

Post by Green Crayons »

No I’ve been underwater all day with work. I saw how much everyone posted over the night.
"This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).
User avatar
Green Crayons
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
User avatar
User avatar
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
Jack of All Trades
Posts: 7612
Joined: September 21, 2002
Location: Richmond, VA

Post Post #1886 (isolation #61) » Mon Apr 19, 2021 3:18 pm

Post by Green Crayons »

mod please replace me I’m not able to play at this rate. Sorry datisi
"This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).
Locked