Snake's WWE Invasion 'Royal Mafia Rumble'

[Retro Red]

I'm in the same boat as Ron. I see Dan as just an angry player, not scum. I did at one point see it as scummy but a lot more things than "frustrated" have came up with other people. The only problem being that the town is possibly a few players down with all the people not posting.

 

I don't think Dan or Nexus are the right lynches today.

 

 

If I do somehow manage to survive this day phase chris, I will open up tomorrow by showing why I feel you are scum, if I'm not lucky to survive i urge all town too look at chris b's play from the last day, surely I cant be the only one who it struck as scummy, If I hadn't off been so ill I feel I probably would have cleared my name and started to really root out the scum although it seems town players have been too focused on telling me I'm scum and doing very little else really. It has been quite a wasted day especially if you flip me and see innocent. Oh and if I survive the day and die tonite I have obviously scared the scum so remember to see who I named.

 

 

How many are we at now, 18? I do think we have a few floating voters and quite possibly a few low posting scum members. That said, I still think there are a few players who maybe don't stick out like a sore thumb, but their actions are incredibly suspect. I know I've said this before, but Family Guy PMSL has played a very different game than he normally does. His initial attack on me (because of what Dan said - the person he's now voting for...) was followed by what seemed like a very opportunistic move on Mike. A "let's see if we can get rid of the vocal player when he's not around" kind of move. Testing the water. Now he's voting for Dan, and while opinions can change I feel that recently he's been very opportunistic.

 

So if Dan is town, what do we do? By the looks of things we are going only going to get a lynch on 1 of 2 people tonight, Nexus and Dan. I don't think enough people will swing as there isn't enough evidence to convince on any other suspects. Do we risk a no-lynch and move to day 3 with 17 players or do we take the risk? I still think that Dan is scum rather than an angry town but this is my first game and I don't have experience on my side.

 

Add to that, Dan is now trying to bargain his way into surviving by witholding information on why Chris B might be scum. That is not in the town's interest, and if Dan is town then he wins when town wins whether he is alive at the time or not. Why would he withold what is supposed to be valuable information that could potentially help the town?

[FLips]

Ok then.

 

Dan, explain why you think Chris is scum. If it's a good enough reason, who knows, it might convince people to vote him and not you.

If you don't tell us though, then you'll obviously be the one to die today.

[Ron Simmons]

So if Dan is town, what do we do? By the looks of things we are going only going to get a lynch on 1 of 2 people tonight, Nexus and Dan. I don't think enough people will swing as there isn't enough evidence to convince on any other suspects. Do we risk a no-lynch and move to day 3 with 17 players or do we take the risk? I still think that Dan is scum rather than an angry town but this is my first game and I don't have experience on my side.

 

Add to that, Dan is now trying to bargain his way into surviving by witholding information on why Chris B might be scum. That is not in the town's interest, and if Dan is town then he wins when town wins whether he is alive at the time or not. Why would he withold what is supposed to be valuable information that could potentially help the town?

See, the problem is that Dan doesn't help himself. It's difficult to defend his behaviour, but I'm not sure his intention was to withold information. I think he's just resigned to death, and doesn't see much point contributing. I see him as an erratic player rather than scummy. True that doesn't help the town, but neither does losing two town members again, just as we did last night.

 

I actually don't think Chris B is scum, and I think Dan might be following his old habit of attacking he who suspects him (though perhaps you can prove me wrong by posting your case, Dan?)

 

Dan probably feels aggrieved, and that makes Chris seem scummy to him, whilst maybe not to others.

 

I'd rather see Nexus take the lynch, if he were actually posting as regularly as Dan I don't think he'd be getting off so easily.

 

As it stands I'm keeping my vote on Family Guy, and I'll hope other people see his behaviour for what I think it is.

[Dan Williams]

Its not that I'm withholding the information its just that I don't have the time to search through all his posts and pick out the ones that led me to think he is scum, I'm actually off out in a bit and will be back around 9/10 which is going to be too late to wait to see my opinions, if this means that you are going to lynch me you may as well get it over with but if you don't Im betting the next day phase will show some damning evidence.

[Dan Williams]

Oh and thats abit bollocks isn't it ron, practically every active player is voting for me so how can i not name some of them as scum?

[Ron Simmons]

Oh and thats abit bollocks isn't it ron, practically every active player is voting for me so how can i not name some of them as scum?

Sorry, it's just your case against Chris has been a long standing one. Correct me if I'm wrong though, I haven't checked back to verify that with certainty - I just assumed. Plus Chris has made a more active attempt to have you lynched.

 

Again I might be completely off the mark, and sorry if I am.

[Chris B]

Oh and thats abit bollocks isn't it ron, practically every active player is voting for me so how can i not name some of them as scum?

Sorry, it's just your case against Chris has been a long standing one. Correct me if I'm wrong though, I haven't checked back to verify that with certainty - I just assumed. Plus Chris has made a more active attempt to have you lynched.

 

Again I might be completely off the mark, and sorry if I am.

 

As I pointed out earlier, it hasn't been a long standing one. It's only just come up, and he's acting as if it's been something he's been saying all along.

[Ron Simmons]

Oh and thats abit bollocks isn't it ron, practically every active player is voting for me so how can i not name some of them as scum?

Sorry, it's just your case against Chris has been a long standing one. Correct me if I'm wrong though, I haven't checked back to verify that with certainty - I just assumed. Plus Chris has made a more active attempt to have you lynched.

 

Again I might be completely off the mark, and sorry if I am.

 

As I pointed out earlier, it hasn't been a long standing one. It's only just come up, and he's acting as if it's been something he's been saying all along.

Ah right. I've only just had computer access (was using a phone to access the site at the weekend) so I haven't had much chance to pick through the pages to see these things. Still, I would guess it's based on something you said accusing him rather than something you said generally. Once again I might be off the mark, I'll need to read back and see where this all started.

[Dan Williams]

It has been long standing as in I thought a few days ago he seemed pretty scummy but I have only just voiced all my opinions as I felt that it was imperative to let the town know who I found was scum if I died. If I had of been in full health I would have posted on Chris b along time ago and I was actually going to save my case for tomorrow but I feel that Chris for some reason has pushed a lynch on me with other players with very little in the way of evidence that I'm scum and even in light of some players seeing that I am infact town, town who was frustrated at the end of the last day phase that the rest of the town couldn't pull together on one lynch. Now a combination of scummy play by Chris b (hopefully some evidence will follow if i get time) and just shoddy play by the others who accused me of being scum will probably lead to my death. It seems that passion for the game and for the town just gets you labelled as scum.

[Dan Williams]

POst 652

 

Meanwhile, Dan - here's the scummiest thing I've seen from you. You said, in the last day, while you were grandstanding, that you'd change your vote if a consensus appeared to be agreed. You then spectacularly failed to do so. Considering the way you played yesterday, did you have any intentions of following through with that?

 

So apparently this was THE scummiest thing I said in the whole of the last day phase and its not actually that scummy is it really. It was obvious the reason I never switched was because people started to get on one wagon and it was the one I felt was wrong as I felt SMS was town as he turned out to be.

 

Post 697

 

Quoting Mike castle

So... we're using a time machine now?

 

Do I HONESTLY have to say "at that time" before I post anything? fucksake. If I did something at point A, then see something else at point B, and realize at point C that what I felt at point A was perhaps wrong, that doesn't change what I felt at point A initially.

 

However, even when things DID "kick off", can you tell me if we got any more than a long back and forth that didn't really help us any, or if we gained valuable insight into various players at that point of the game?

 

I'd say we got some valuable insight. Dan's one of my top suspects and Ron's not far behind. As I've already said, if the pressure is increased on scum, they have a tendency to slip up. You've already conceded this point, and now you're flip-flopping again.

 

He said he had some pretty valuable insight obviously into me as scum yet still has posted no evidence against me and showed in no way that I am scum

 

post 699

I'm honestly not sure. It certainly seems to be trying to push against Nexus in quite a bad way - however, Nexus played pretty badly earlier. Still, it was odd to see him being criticised for posting loads and also for not posting enough. I'd be far more interested in Dan's response than my own thoughts on it right now, as that's where the question really is.

 

I'm more interested in why he grandstanded about how he'd add his vote if a proper wagon formed, then didn't follow through.

 

I wasn't pushing against nexus in quite a bad way though was I? Infact I never even voted for him and then you say your not going to answer something as you don't think your answers relevant yet I should answer. And then he come back to that uber scummy point about me and his single minute shred of evidence me not changing my vote which I have just explained above.

 

post 720

WELL FUCK YOU LA.....

 

 

Okay. You make a good point, and I do think Dan's been the scummiest overall. I'm not trusting Mike, or indeed Triple A / Family Guy, but what I've got there is primarily a theory and attitude.

 

/unvote

 

Vote: Dan Williams

 

Happy birthday.

 

I have been the scummiest overall apparently but still none of that hard evidence is there?

 

Post 735

 

My main suspect is still Dan, as the case has been made on him pretty strongly. It's possible that he's been pushed to the lynch, but it seems more probable that he's walked himself there. Have I missed a V/LA, btw? I've not seen him around for a bit.

 

After that, Mike and Triple A, followed by Family Guy and Nexus. I don't think the Family Guy/Triple A lead I pointed out earlier is necessarily great, but it seemed to kick things off as it unconvered some potential buddying by Mike and Triple A. This makes me think Triple A is a more likely lead than Family Guy, although it could go either way. If Triple A ends up being scum, then so is Mike. And vice versa. In my opinion, anyway. I'm tempted to think they're buddying up on Ron, but it could also be that they're playing with him. For me, a lot of it comes down to how Dan flips - I think that would be the lynch that would give us the most information at this point

 

What case is this then chris as you are still to post any evidence you have of me being scum but just seem to mention the fact alot, pretty scummy play this is so far isn't it. Everytime i accuse someone of being scum i at least back it up with some evidence. And chris you say my flip will give the most information, what info will you gain when I flip town?

End of part 1

[Dan Williams]

However, Triple A - quick question for you. In the last day phase, you had no problem jumping on SMS's wagon when he'd said he wouldn't be around to defend himself. Why is this not either hypocritical or (more damagingly) flip-flopping to suit an agenda?

 

Several reasons.

 

1. He never officially V/LA'd, he just said "I won't be able to post X and Y days". He was sporadically posting when he could inbetween these, so it's not like he was gone completely.

 

This is true, but I took his post as being pretty clear about the fact he wouldn't be around.

 

2. He didn't V/LA or say he was going to be away until the day phase was over. He had around a day or two at the end of the phase to defend himself, and he infact actually did that and I unvoted him. It wasn't until he got back on a bad posting track that I re-voted.

 

Considering I'm talking about the third, and the deadline was the fourth, I'm not entirely convinced by the timing there.

 

3. SMS was around L-3, so pretty much everyone in the game who was taking part regularly had a vote on SMS, including myself. Granted, there may have been a small bandwagon rolling through town, but everyone up to that point had already either voted SMS, or said they would anyway as they thought he was lying. In a group of around 10/11 people, it's pretty much a given some of them will be scum bandwagon jumpers, so there was no point making a deal of it as it would have went nowhere.

 

So at which point is it scummy to vote for someone? I'll join a wagon if needs be, because I don't want to go through to a no-lynch, as I think that's bad.

 

4. Towards the end of the phase, I was on L-1 and it looked like it was either Me or SMS dying. As much as I regretted it (if you look back I admit this, and even unvote SMS for a period of time, willing to sacrafice myself) he eventually started posting desperate stuff again so it looked like he was lying. It was me or him and if I think he's lying i'm going to vote him regardless.

 

That's more to do with what happened when he was around, rather than when he wasn't, or even when he stated he wouldn't be. He had certainly suggested he wouldn't be around when you voted for him, and that was putting him closer to lynch.

 

The circumstances between the SMS votes and the Mike votes are completely different, in motive, time spans, quantity. Pretty much everything.

 

I'd say the time span is close, and that's the point I'm making.

 

 

 

With regards to the case I've made on Mike, I fail to see where it's a bad case. Mike's defences have generally been lacking in this game, and that's part of the problem. It's also frustrating at this point because I do think there should be a lynch, but any time a wagon forms, it gets sidetracked. I can't understand why the push on Dan has utterly failed to gain any traction while he's been acting badly throughout the game. On top of that, because two people vote closely to each other on Mike's (and again, I'll point out that the '15 minutes' thing is bollocks), it can only be a scum plan?

 

It's not so much that I'm annoyed at the suggestion that people taking the same action closely together is potentially scummy, but that it's being pushed as the only possible explanation, which is rather aggressive. It's not so much 'three people pushing the same action within 15 minutes' as it is 'one person pushing something, and two others responding almost an hour later, within ten minutes of each other'. That, to me, seems less scummy - although it's obviously possible that there's some jumping going on. It also strikes me as entirely possible that I struck a chord with some people, and they read and responded at similar times.

 

The bolded part is possibly because there is very little evidence to say I'm scum except for the fact you like to mention it regularly, if you say something enough eventually people will believe its true and that is a very scummy play indeed. And also you are defending the decision for the 3 votes on mike directly after he v/la's and is unable to defend himself in my mind thats a scum tactic and further shows me your true colours.

 

Post 919

 

I voted off Dan partially because I'm not comfortable with Nexus bandwagoning, but also partially because I'm genuinely concerned about the way Mike's been playing. I'm also beginning to wonder if we have lovers or perhaps tag-team partners (considering the flavour) in the game. Considering I was one in a previous game, it's dangerous to assume that someone is pro-town just because they have the town PM.

 

However, I'm not going to go against a lynch in the name of stubbornness. There are good reasons Dan's got this wagon on him, and I was on it a little while ago. It'd be silly for me to push against it.

 

Unvote

 

Vote: Dan Williams

So you Unvote mike and vote me because you think mike may be scum? Not only that but me and mike are partners? wheres any evidence of this at all? Mike was trying to lynch me and may even still have a vote on me. Completely scummy behaviour just making stuff up there Chris. Also Chris what are these good reasons I have a wagon on me because so far you haven't gotten any yourself you just like to mention I'm scum and have a wagon for good reason.

 

 

Sorry chris but this evidence posted screams scummy play accusing players of being scum but having no real evidence to back it up and its proved dangerous to me as it has seemingly tipped posters against me and will end with me being lynched.

[Nexus]

I don't understand how me not posting because I actually have a life now makes me scummy?

 

In the last however many games, I was unemployed. Now I'm not. So I'm not posting as much. It's not a scum tell.

 

I'm posting less, yes, but I'd rather post less than post the amount of bollocks that TripleA et al post.

[Chris B]

Dan's complaining about being potentially lynched reminds me very much of his actions in the last day phase.

 

quote name='Dan Williams' date='Dec 2 2010, 19:19' post='2263389'

Well it seems I am a prime suspect all because I trusted 2 players who appeared to be scum hunting, vote me off if you want but please don't waste this day and have it end in a no lynch we all know this only benefits scum. Oh and if you do vote me off and Ron flips scum remember that I told you so.

 

That does look like a familiar way of playing to me...

 

POst 652

 

Meanwhile, Dan - here's the scummiest thing I've seen from you. You said, in the last day, while you were grandstanding, that you'd change your vote if a consensus appeared to be agreed. You then spectacularly failed to do so. Considering the way you played yesterday, did you have any intentions of following through with that?

 

So apparently this was THE scummiest thing I said in the whole of the last day phase and its not actually that scummy is it really. It was obvious the reason I never switched was because people started to get on one wagon and it was the one I felt was wrong as I felt SMS was town as he turned out to be.

 

My issue was that it went absolutely against what you were encouraging people to do. Let's not forget that this came after you'd pushed the entire day for Ron to be lynched, then self voted and said you hoped that the scum won. You then made out that you weren't trying to push for a no-lynch at all - you were willing to go with the town's decision. Here are two separate times you said it.

 

Im not having a meltdown Im frustrated as no one seems to understand the point im trying to get across, it is advantagous to the scum that there is a no lynch at the end of this phase. We have just had more votes without pushing a lynch on anyone and this will end up with us no lynching, Im also frustrated at the people who are coasting through the game why did they even sign up if they aren't going to play. So can we get a common agreement on 1 person to eliminate and vote for them instead of pursuing our own agendas, I have been willing to do this I'm sure some of you can too for the good of the town.

 

 

ALSO

 

quote name='Dan Williams' date='Dec 3 2010, 1:03' post='2263672'

 

1) I suspect ron because i feel he tried to start a lynch on me by misquoting what i said and taking the words out of context

 

2) Nexus i only have a mild suspicion on due to his early posts but i felt he was popping up in most people suspicion lists so felt if we were heading to a no lynch we could vote him instead as several people had said they suspected him

 

3) I simply felt at the begining that they were the most positiv pro town players in my mind

 

4) I feel scum hunting was de-railed by Rons attempts to discredit me and Triple a's about face when i tried to push a lynch on Nexus (who he had earlier stated he suspected)

 

5) The plan i would now go with is in the next 12 hours we all need to agree with who to vote for as time is running out.

 

Also I will not be on tomorrow at all and wont be back on, on saturday until tea time.

 

You then didn't. Which I found to be really anti-town. You make a lot of noise about what you'll do if everyone else does it, and then you ignore it. How can this not look scummy?

 

Post 697

I'd say we got some valuable insight. Dan's one of my top suspects and Ron's not far behind. As I've already said, if the pressure is increased on scum, they have a tendency to slip up. You've already conceded this point, and now you're flip-flopping again.

 

He said he had some pretty valuable insight obviously into me as scum yet still has posted no evidence against me and showed in no way that I am scum

 

I didn't say 'I' had some pretty valuable insight. I said that 'we' (as in town/WWE) got some valuable insight. Which we did - the way you and Ron pushed on each other was bad. The way you continued and continued to push the point was worse. It then led to you self-voting, and refusing to change it unless either Ron or Nexus was lynched. And then saying you hoped the scum won.

 

post 699

I'm honestly not sure. It certainly seems to be trying to push against Nexus in quite a bad way - however, Nexus played pretty badly earlier. Still, it was odd to see him being criticised for posting loads and also for not posting enough. I'd be far more interested in Dan's response than my own thoughts on it right now, as that's where the question really is.

 

I'm more interested in why he grandstanded about how he'd add his vote if a proper wagon formed, then didn't follow through.

 

I wasn't pushing against nexus in quite a bad way though was I? Infact I never even voted for him and then you say your not going to answer something as you don't think your answers relevant yet I should answer. And then he come back to that uber scummy point about me and his single minute shred of evidence me not changing my vote which I have just explained above.

 

You repeatedly said that you would only change your vote if either Ron or Nexus were voted. You then changed that to 'if there was a consensus'. I'd say that was pushing against nexus, and then making out that he had posted 30 times, when he'd actually posted six was also pushing pretty badly against that. I note that you ignored the context for BOTH of those points.

 

post 720

WELL FUCK YOU LA.....

 

 

Okay. You make a good point, and I do think Dan's been the scummiest overall. I'm not trusting Mike, or indeed Triple A / Family Guy, but what I've got there is primarily a theory and attitude.

 

/unvote

 

Vote: Dan Williams

 

Happy birthday.

 

I have been the scummiest overall apparently but still none of that hard evidence is there?

 

I think that tunnelling on Ron the way you did, trying desperately to stop town from lynching, self-voting, saying you hoped mafia won, and then promising to go with the town's decision and then refusing to is pretty hard evidence. You've then been very, very quiet in this day phase until people started voting for you again.

 

Post 735

 

My main suspect is still Dan, as the case has been made on him pretty strongly. It's possible that he's been pushed to the lynch, but it seems more probable that he's walked himself there. Have I missed a V/LA, btw? I've not seen him around for a bit.

 

After that, Mike and Triple A, followed by Family Guy and Nexus. I don't think the Family Guy/Triple A lead I pointed out earlier is necessarily great, but it seemed to kick things off as it unconvered some potential buddying by Mike and Triple A. This makes me think Triple A is a more likely lead than Family Guy, although it could go either way. If Triple A ends up being scum, then so is Mike. And vice versa. In my opinion, anyway. I'm tempted to think they're buddying up on Ron, but it could also be that they're playing with him. For me, a lot of it comes down to how Dan flips - I think that would be the lynch that would give us the most information at this point

 

What case is this then chris as you are still to post any evidence you have of me being scum but just seem to mention the fact alot, pretty scummy play this is so far isn't it. Everytime i accuse someone of being scum i at least back it up with some evidence. And chris you say my flip will give the most information, what info will you gain when I flip town?

End of part 1

 

I encourage everybody to go back and read the third of December. Dan's play is ludicrously anti-town.

 

The reason why I think that your flip will gain the most information is because of the huge arguments between yourself and Ron and Triple A from that day. It was the most obvious of all the arguments that day, and seeing who defended you and attacked you meant that it could give us far more information than anyone else. Is this really in question?

[Chris B]

 

 

 

With regards to the case I've made on Mike, I fail to see where it's a bad case. Mike's defences have generally been lacking in this game, and that's part of the problem. It's also frustrating at this point because I do think there should be a lynch, but any time a wagon forms, it gets sidetracked. I can't understand why the push on Dan has utterly failed to gain any traction while he's been acting badly throughout the game. On top of that, because two people vote closely to each other on Mike's (and again, I'll point out that the '15 minutes' thing is bollocks), it can only be a scum plan?

 

It's not so much that I'm annoyed at the suggestion that people taking the same action closely together is potentially scummy, but that it's being pushed as the only possible explanation, which is rather aggressive. It's not so much 'three people pushing the same action within 15 minutes' as it is 'one person pushing something, and two others responding almost an hour later, within ten minutes of each other'. That, to me, seems less scummy - although it's obviously possible that there's some jumping going on. It also strikes me as entirely possible that I struck a chord with some people, and they read and responded at similar times.

 

The bolded part is possibly because there is very little evidence to say I'm scum except for the fact you like to mention it regularly, if you say something enough eventually people will believe its true and that is a very scummy play indeed. And also you are defending the decision for the 3 votes on mike directly after he v/la's and is unable to defend himself in my mind thats a scum tactic and further shows me your true colours.

 

Fine, I'll use Triple A's post from the last day phase, because I thought it was pretty strong - it's just that I thought SMS's play was worse.

 

Something here just isn't sitting with me right.

 

Ron Simmons and Dan Williams are feuding with each other, to the point where they're both getting votes in straight away.

 

I think one of them is scum.

 

Ron, as defensive as he is, hasn't done anything massively scummy. He's just playing a bit harshly.

Dan, up to this point only had the buddying up thing with me and Mike. However, added to the buddying now is the fact he's desperate to push a lynch, and against Ron Simmons too.

 

I think Dan is scum.

 

Taking into account I know i'm town, and i'm not convinced this minute that Mike is scum, then Dan would buddy us thinking he could get in with the town.

We all become suspicious of Ron Simmons, and Dan tries really hard to show his allegiance with us by tunnelling Ron.

He scoffs at even the suggestion of a no lynch, ignoring the fact we'll likely strike town, just so he can try and off Ron Simmons.

 

I think this is bizarrely scummy play, and therefore

 

Vote Dan Williams

 

This came before you self voted. This came before you said you hoped the scum won. This came before you refused to do anything other than vote for either Ron or Nexus. This came before you changed that and promised to go with whatever the town decided. This came before that turned out to be a lie.

 

So yeah, the suggestion that you haven't done anything scummy is unlikely.

 

Post 919

 

I voted off Dan partially because I'm not comfortable with Nexus bandwagoning, but also partially because I'm genuinely concerned about the way Mike's been playing. I'm also beginning to wonder if we have lovers or perhaps tag-team partners (considering the flavour) in the game. Considering I was one in a previous game, it's dangerous to assume that someone is pro-town just because they have the town PM.

 

However, I'm not going to go against a lynch in the name of stubbornness. There are good reasons Dan's got this wagon on him, and I was on it a little while ago. It'd be silly for me to push against it.

 

Unvote

 

Vote: Dan Williams

So you Unvote mike and vote me because you think mike may be scum? Not only that but me and mike are partners? wheres any evidence of this at all? Mike was trying to lynch me and may even still have a vote on me. Completely scummy behaviour just making stuff up there Chris. Also Chris what are these good reasons I have a wagon on me because so far you haven't gotten any yourself you just like to mention I'm scum and have a wagon for good reason.

 

 

Sorry chris but this evidence posted screams scummy play accusing players of being scum but having no real evidence to back it up and its proved dangerous to me as it has seemingly tipped posters against me and will end with me being lynched.

 

Right,three things:

 

1 - I think Mike is likely scum. However, every time I go back over your posts, you seem scummier. I keep forgetting just how badly you came across in the last day phase. I'd rather we have a vote on you than we go to a no lynch.

 

2 - I wasn't talking about you with regards to the lovers/tag team partners/whatever they may be called.

 

3 - I want us to lynch. I will change my vote to ensure that we lynch, because I think a no-lynch would be a mistake at the moment. I'm surprised this is such a strange suggestion to you - after all, you promised to do it in the last day phase.

 

Actually, it may seem a strange suggestion to you. I said I'd do it and then did it. You said you'd do it, but it turned out you lied.

[Ron Simmons]

I don't understand how me not posting because I actually have a life now makes me scummy?

 

In the last however many games, I was unemployed. Now I'm not. So I'm not posting as much. It's not a scum tell.

 

I'm posting less, yes, but I'd rather post less than post the amount of bollocks that TripleA et al post.

It's your attempts at explanation that make you seem scummy. The fact you don't post much makes it harder to actually have much else to go on. On top of that it protects you, because posts like this are just general abuse, which can line you up for the vote. In fact your general posting demeanor is rather confrontational and rude. If you don't want to play the game, don't. Don't slag off the people that do. Triple A is making an effort to play. The past few posts you've given have just generally been rude. Very few of your posts have contributed to the game. Say what you like about Dan Williams, but whether he's scum or town (I think town) at least he's made an effort to contribute. Lawz maybe hasn't posted as frequently as others, but in the posts he has written at least he's made the effort to put across his opinions in a rational way.

 

However, your third post said this:

TripleA, you're rolefishing by asking whether Ron's a SK. Stop it. It's scummy. He's not gonna be like "lolyeah, I'm a SK, string me up." That would be stupid.

 

As for me, there's not a lot I can say except I fucked up. I'm not scummy, when I play as scum I'm a lot more erratic, you know this. I was just trying to get some information, but fucked up.

 

*shrug*

 

It's maybe not erratic, but your posts have been abusive and generally provocative. Scummy, in my opinion.

 

Vote: TripleA

 

Really? A claim, this early? Even if it's "bold", it's fucking stupid. You had no reason for it.

I'm Big Show.

 

I voted for you, TripleA, to try and kickstart some discussion and see if anyone else jumped on the bandwagon. Yes, you do read like the PM I got. I just wasn't stupid enough to announce it in thread and invite a NK.

 

I knew there wouldn't be a wagon on you, I just wanted to see people's opinions.

 

unvote

 

No, it's a third party role, actually.

 

You're wasting your time asking the SK to "ADMIT IT." He won't.

 

Oh also, you paraphrasing the VT PM has sort of dicked anyone over who agreed with you that that is what was said: the scum now know who not to target at night. They'll target those who haven't mentioned their agreement in the hope of hitting a PR.

 

So yes, you may now be confirmed as town, but you've also screwed others over.

 

I was thinking: Let's see who doesn't read the thread properly, so will hope on a TripleA bandwagon blindly. It's happened before on the UKFF, so I thought I could catch someone out with it again. Obviously, it didn't work when people pointed it out.

(His explanation on his vote for Triple A)

 

You're appealing to emotion, SMS. That's classic scumminess that. Did you declare v/la? If not, then you can't whine at people who are voting for you. Doesn't work like that. You haven't become any less suspicious.

 

I made a wording error. I was pissed off that TripleA was claiming and therefore risking exposing other Vanilla Townies. I did the same thing when I was scum in the cowboy game, and it worked in the scums favour; they knew who was a VT and who wasn't, so could ignore the VTs during the night and try and hit a power role. That's what I feel TripleA's actions may lead to: the people who have indicated their agreement with the VT paraphrasing will be left alive at night whilst the scum try to hit power roles.

 

That's what I meant, and if that makes me scum, then so be it.

 

Whoever was asking about my scum meta: I generally act more erratic. If I'm caught out, I'll just go on a trolling spree. I've done neither of those things in this game; you've found something slightly scummy, but I'm not scum, so I'm trying to convince you not to lynch me, rather than accepting the inevitable and trying to fuck things up for the town more like I did last time.

 

What question?

U mad 'cos I'm voting your scumbuddy?

Because it's quite easy to fabricate a VT PM, they're all pretty similar. And he clearly didn't quote it, otherwise he'd be modkilled.

 

I don't really care if you don't buy my claim, you are scum with Williams, so your opinion means nothing.

 

Before anyone accuses me of being selective of the posts I've chosen here, there will be more in the way of Nexus posts, yes. I've no idea how many, but this is what I found in the pages that I looked at. There may be more with evidence of scumminess, there may be some where he tones it down a bit. But these are nearly all of the first few posts he made and the last few as far as I could tell.

 

I still think Family Guy is a better lynch, because Nexus might just be acting arsish for the hell of it. But his behavious is more scummy to me than Dan's as it seems like calculated, provacative posting as opposed to "all over the place" erratic posting.