This is getting old. Relevant points about other people are being discussed. Chime in.
I will not move off of Skander onto WOD. I would move to Cyan gladly. All the cases against WOD are moot to me, and I no longer feel compelled to comment on them.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Official Moderator of The [Gutter]
Think the MtgStaff is just swell? Join today! You too can be involved in an 8 year grudge and delete nearly 9000 of kpaca's posts!
I will not move off of Skander onto WOD. I would move to Cyan gladly. All the cases against WOD are moot to me, and I no longer feel compelled to comment on them.
Really? 'Cause WoD just posted a ridiculous rationale for making an unusual request. None of it parses.
It's not that you think I'm scum. It's that I posted a huge contradiction on WoD's part and instead of bothering to even comment on it you just repeat something you've been saying the whole day.
Because how is that scummy? What if he forgot about that game? Or, even still, that one set up doesn't make it the norm. It's just a ridiculous attempt on your part to move the lynch over nothing.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Official Moderator of The [Gutter]
Think the MtgStaff is just swell? Join today! You too can be involved in an 8 year grudge and delete nearly 9000 of kpaca's posts!
Because how is that scummy? What if he forgot about that game? Or, even still, that one set up doesn't make it the norm. It's just a ridiculous attempt on your part to move the lynch over nothing.
His opinion here is totally and completely against the 2 v 10 scenario. Whether it makes it the norm or not the game exists, and apparently there was no problem with it. WoD was in this game, it is a peculiar enough game (no roles) that I doubt he would forget about it. Especially when his opinion is so forceful against this type of game working.
Bold? When you're the scum part of a mason partnership, not having to talk to your partner is exactly what you DO want. If they don't talk to you, you don't have to tell them anything, ever.
Also, Skander is so, so obviously town. If you can't see the genuine frustration in his last few posts..then..look harder.
Actually, when a mason partner stopped talking to me (Elegant Mafia) was exactly when I started getting suspicious of him. That argument doesn't hold an ounce of water.
The counter-claim has been widely discussed as the primary reason most people had moved WoD to the top of their townie lists, however, Pale Mage has uncovered a glaring discrepancy in WoD's thought process, here.
I don't see how at this stage of the game you're turning a blind eye to anything, Kpaca.
MTGS stats (won/played)
As scum - 3/5
As town - 5/7
As neutral - none
(I really have been scum a lot)
I'm now writing for Eye of the Vortex, come check out MTG articles and other geek culture
I also moderate the MTG forum, so register (it's free) and voice your thoughts.
@PM - Ok, you have a point there. In hindsight, claiming my own rolename in that post was a terrible idea.
The reason I backed off was because I seem to remember someone saying quite soon after that "everyone is a goddamn mason" which fits with the whole "Janus" idea.
I must admit I've been overly ambivalent towards this game - the huge periods of inactivity just screwed up the experience for me entirely.
I have been wildly inconsistent with my votes, especially during the previous day and the early part of this day. I can completely understand how you'd read "scum" into that.
But you guys need to know that if you lynch me today, that we lose. Skander and Cyan are obvscum, with the former trying to argue us into the final mislynch the scums probably need to win, by trying to make us believe there are only two scum - even in the best case scenario, where somehow he ISN'T SCUM, he still cannot possibly know whether there are two or three scums, so we have got to play as though there are still 3 remaining.
Cyan, on the other hand, is never one, as Town, to sit back and ignore dodgy statements, especially from a player he previously was suspicious of. He's completely ignored my repeated requests for him to comment on Skander's argument for 2-scum vs 3-scum, and is just obv-scum.
The fact that he's just jumped on my wagon is icing on the cake.
@PM - Ok, you have a point there. In hindsight, claiming my own rolename in that post was a terrible idea.
The reason I backed off was because I seem to remember someone saying quite soon after that "everyone is a goddamn mason" which fits with the whole "Janus" idea.
I must admit I've been overly ambivalent towards this game - the huge periods of inactivity just screwed up the experience for me entirely.
I have been wildly inconsistent with my votes, especially during the previous day and the early part of this day. I can completely understand how you'd read "scum" into that.
But you guys need to know that if you lynch me today, that we lose. Skander and Cyan are obvscum, with the former trying to argue us into the final mislynch the scums probably need to win, by trying to make us believe there are only two scum - even in the best case scenario, where somehow he ISN'T SCUM, he still cannot possibly know whether there are two or three scums, so we have got to play as though there are still 3 remaining.
Cyan, on the other hand, is never one, as Town, to sit back and ignore dodgy statements, especially from a player he previously was suspicious of. He's completely ignored my repeated requests for him to comment on Skander's argument for 2-scum vs 3-scum, and is just obv-scum.
The fact that he's just jumped on my wagon is icing on the cake.
A very scummy cake.
I'm stewing on this, but in the meantime answer me this: Who's yer third scum and why?
But you guys need to know that if you lynch me today, that we lose. Skander and Cyan are obvscum, with the former trying to argue us into the final mislynch the scums probably need to win, by trying to make us believe there are only two scum - even in the best case scenario, where somehow he ISN'T SCUM, he still cannot possibly know whether there are two or three scums, so we have got to play as though there are still 3 remaining.
I've already admitted as such. Why didn't you address the point I made against you?
@PM - Ok, you have a point there. In hindsight, claiming my own rolename in that post was a terrible idea.
The reason I backed off was because I seem to remember someone saying quite soon after that "everyone is a goddamn mason" which fits with the whole "Janus" idea.
I must admit I've been overly ambivalent towards this game - the huge periods of inactivity just screwed up the experience for me entirely.
I have been wildly inconsistent with my votes, especially during the previous day and the early part of this day. I can completely understand how you'd read "scum" into that.
But you guys need to know that if you lynch me today, that we lose. Skander and Cyan are obvscum, with the former trying to argue us into the final mislynch the scums probably need to win, by trying to make us believe there are only two scum - even in the best case scenario, where somehow he ISN'T SCUM, he still cannot possibly know whether there are two or three scums, so we have got to play as though there are still 3 remaining.
Cyan, on the other hand, is never one, as Town, to sit back and ignore dodgy statements, especially from a player he previously was suspicious of. He's completely ignored my repeated requests for him to comment on Skander's argument for 2-scum vs 3-scum, and is just obv-scum.
The fact that he's just jumped on my wagon is icing on the cake.
A very scummy cake.
I just jumped on your wagon? Sorry, but not quite. Have you even read all of today's posts? I got on your case(and before anyone else) as soon as you were vote 2(with an effectively naked vote, no less) on PhantomS, your *mason partner*.
I think the third scum has to be DYH, his insistence on the dead PhantomS case, coupled with the fact that he's still alive, make him my distant third scum read.
I cannot possibly see it being Kpaca 2.0, and you yourself are being pretty reasonable and analytical, so I think you're town too.
The fact that PhantomS is allying with Kpaca and I make me feel pretty good about him, really.
I just jumped on your wagon? Sorry, but not quite. Have you even read all of today's posts? I got on your case(and before anyone else) as soon as you were vote 2(with an effectively naked vote, no less) on PhantomS, your *mason partner*.
@PM - Ok, you have a point there. In hindsight, claiming my own rolename in that post was a terrible idea.
The reason I backed off was because I seem to remember someone saying quite soon after that "everyone is a goddamn mason" which fits with the whole "Janus" idea.
I must admit I've been overly ambivalent towards this game - the huge periods of inactivity just screwed up the experience for me entirely.
I have been wildly inconsistent with my votes, especially during the previous day and the early part of this day. I can completely understand how you'd read "scum" into that.
But you guys need to know that if you lynch me today, that we lose. Skander and Cyan are obvscum, with the former trying to argue us into the final mislynch the scums probably need to win, by trying to make us believe there are only two scum - even in the best case scenario, where somehow he ISN'T SCUM, he still cannot possibly know whether there are two or three scums, so we have got to play as though there are still 3 remaining.
Cyan, on the other hand, is never one, as Town, to sit back and ignore dodgy statements, especially from a player he previously was suspicious of. He's completely ignored my repeated requests for him to comment on Skander's argument for 2-scum vs 3-scum, and is just obv-scum.
The fact that he's just jumped on my wagon is icing on the cake.
A very scummy cake.
@Cyan - I'd like answers to the statements/questions in bold, please.
@Skander - Sure, you found one game where there is 2 scum to 10 townies. That game was an open setup, where the For every 12-player game you find with 10town v 2scum, I can find you TEN games where there are 3 mafia to 9 townies.
@Skander - Sure, you found one game where there is 2 scum to 10 townies. That game was an open setup, where the For every 12-player game you find with 10town v 2scum, I can find you TEN games where there are 3 mafia to 9 townies.
Well you won't find me any vanilla games with a 9-3 ratio, I'm pretty sure of that.
But the main point was that you were in that game and knew of the existence of 2-10, but still decided to attack me for trying to say that this was a 2-10 game.
Well you won't find me any vanilla games with a 9-3 ratio, I'm pretty sure of that.
But the main point was that you were in that game and knew of the existence of 2-10, but still decided to attack me for trying to say that this was a 2-10 game.
No, I attacked you for trying to convince the Town that there was only 2 scum (and by extension, that we are not at LyLo).
No, I attacked you for trying to convince the Town that there was only 2 scum (and by extension, that we are not at LyLo).
And this is not a vanilla game.
Unconfirmed masons make it no better than that. But yeah we had this conversation once already. However, now instead of just saying from theory there's actually something to back me up in that the theory makes sense. Maybe I should never have bothered trying to point this out in the first place but your attack on me makes no sense since you knew of a game that was exactly what I was saying this was and regardless you chose to attack me.
Unconfirmed masons make it no better than that. But yeah we had this conversation once already. However, now instead of just saying from theory there's actually something to back me up in that the theory makes sense. Maybe I should never have bothered trying to point this out in the first place but your attack on me makes no sense since you knew of a game that was exactly what I was saying this was and regardless you chose to attack me.
What makes no sense is you continuing to tell the town that there are only two scum in this game when (if somehow you're a townie) you cannot possibly know how many there is. At the very best it is dangerous, and completely baseless speculation, and given the oh-so-convenient timing (perfectly set so that the town loses if in fact there are 3 mafia and we mislynch), I simply cannot accept you are anything except scum.
My apologies. I somehow found myself cast in a play.
Still think that Scander/Cyan are both scum. I find it very possible that WoD Scander on both scum as well, trying to deliver one to the town to clear their name. Gotta go to class now. Hopefully I'll be able to get on later, but there is a chance I won't be able to until tomorrow.
My apologies. I somehow found myself cast in a play.
We call that "auditioning".
Still think that Scander/Cyan are both scum. I find it very possible that WoD Scander on both scum as well, trying to deliver one to the town to clear their name. Gotta go to class now. Hopefully I'll be able to get on later, but there is a chance I won't be able to until tomorrow.
Unconfirmed masons make it no better than that. But yeah we had this conversation once already. However, now instead of just saying from theory there's actually something to back me up in that the theory makes sense. Maybe I should never have bothered trying to point this out in the first place but your attack on me makes no sense since you knew of a game that was exactly what I was saying this was and regardless you chose to attack me.
And yeah, this conversation took place once already and I pointed out a couple things you weren't considering and apparently still don't seem to be considering. Which leads me to:
I'm still trying to determine why you would have brought this up in the first place? I can't come up with a townie reason. Hooray if you're right and we don't lose on a mislynch, but why lower the 'alert level'? Why make a post that changes the focus from scum-hunting to setup postulating?
It's perfectly reasonable for WoD to attack you for what you did, even in light of the game you're referencing. It's just as fair for him to say "this is not a vanilla game" as it is for you to say "this is a vanilla game, unconfirmed masons are no better than vanilla". Furthermore, it's all speculation because it's no-reveal (other than alignment) - even the first set of masons were not listed as such.
The main thing bothering me about WoD is that he appears to have made up his rationale for asking the names of the other masons. PM is asking for reasoning on something WoD did a long time ago, so I can at least excuse that somewhat. And I can buy his "playing lazy" admission; look at the rate this game progresed.
However, bringing up the idea we might not be at lylo in the current game state? I can't excuse that, and I can't find a townie rationale.
Still hate Phantom, but too much of Dog's behavior doesn't add up.
Sigh. I suppose I've brought that on myself. Sorry for being so ambivalent this Day, I've probably lost us the game. To be honest, I'd probably pick me too.
Sigh. I suppose I've brought that on myself. Sorry for being so ambivalent this Day, I've probably lost us the game. To be honest, I'd probably pick me too.
Everyone has been in the forum since I voted you and no one has chosen to hammer. If I'm wrong about you, that means DYH is correct about Skander.
Now I have to go back and decide how much I trust DYH.
And yeah, this conversation took place once already and I pointed out a couple things you weren't considering and apparently still don't seem to be considering. Which leads me to:
I'm still trying to determine why you would have brought this up in the first place? I can't come up with a townie reason. Hooray if you're right and we don't lose on a mislynch, but why lower the 'alert level'? Why make a post that changes the focus from scum-hunting to setup postulating?
It's perfectly reasonable for WoD to attack you for what you did, even in light of the game you're referencing. It's just as fair for him to say "this is not a vanilla game" as it is for you to say "this is a vanilla game, unconfirmed masons are no better than vanilla". Furthermore, it's all speculation because it's no-reveal (other than alignment) - even the first set of masons were not listed as such.
The main thing bothering me about WoD is that he appears to have made up his rationale for asking the names of the other masons. PM is asking for reasoning on something WoD did a long time ago, so I can at least excuse that somewhat. And I can buy his "playing lazy" admission; look at the rate this game progresed.
However, bringing up the idea we might not be at lylo in the current game state? I can't excuse that, and I can't find a townie rationale.
I think Skander is scum.
Vote: Skander
If Skander comes up scum I'll definitely be giving this post a second look.
If he comes up scum? You mean if(when) he comes up town? That post is terribly scummy. I'm going to have to go re-read DYH now; that post seriously bothers me.
Except for making me more certain than ever that Skander is not scum.
If he comes up scum? You mean if(when) he comes up town? That post is terribly scummy. I'm going to have to go re-read DYH now; that post seriously bothers me.
Except for making me more certain than ever that Skander is not scum.
How was that scummy? We can never be certain of who is/isn't scum until they are lynched, unless of course we are scum, so how is it scummy to express this known uncertainty?
Have you ever actually played a game of mafia before?
DYH's post is opportunism at it's absolute finest. I'll be happy to eat these words if Skander magically flips scum, but I really, really do not see that happening. When Skander gets lynched and flips town, be ready to take a long, hard look at DYH.
Or, just make the right choice(this day is pretty much left up to you, PhantomS), and lynch WoD. When he flips scum, you'll realize that Skander cannot possibly be scum.
Have you ever actually played a game of mafia before?
DYH's post is opportunism at it's absolute finest. I'll be happy to eat these words if Skander magically flips scum, but I really, really do not see that happening. When Skander gets lynched and flips town, be ready to take a long, hard look at DYH.
Or, just make the right choice(this day is pretty much left up to you, PhantomS), and lynch WoD. When he flips scum, you'll realize that Skander cannot possibly be scum.
My thought was that DYH's post was was DYH re- presenting the entire case that has already been made on skander (which it is) in an effort to be on the town side of a lynch. However, I've been working on various things for 12 hours today and where that would have made sense earlier in the game, your point is quite compelling at this stage.
However, I must ask, if you're so certain that this is opportunism of DYH, why suggest I vote WoD?
unvote
I shall think on where that vote goes... For now awaiting the response to that question.
WoD has been scummy for most of the game, DYH hasn't hit my radar at all except that one post. It's not enough to change my vote.
Of course, this conversation is somehow enough to change Kpaca's vote.
@WoD: To answer your earlier question, I would expect this game to have 3 scum. Games that are this size typically do. But I have no idea whom the third scum is. I mean, I'm sure that you're one, and pretty sure that Kpaca is another(I haven't forgotten Kraj's actions towards Azrael, nor the fact that all of that suspect behavior was blown over when Kraj requested replacement). I know that I'm confident that Skander is town, and Pale Mage as well. PhantomS last few posts have felt fairly townie as well. But none of this matters ultimately, because I am *sure* that you are scum.
WoD has been scummy for most of the game, DYH hasn't hit my radar at all except that one post. It's not enough to change my vote.
Of course, this conversation is somehow enough to change Kpaca's vote.
@WoD: To answer your earlier question, I would expect this game to have 3 scum. Games that are this size typically do. But I have no idea whom the third scum is. I mean, I'm sure that you're one, and pretty sure that Kpaca is another(I haven't forgotten Kraj's actions towards Azrael, nor the fact that all of that suspect behavior was blown over when Kraj requested replacement). I know that I'm confident that Skander is town, and Pale Mage as well. PhantomS last few posts have felt fairly townie as well. But none of this matters ultimately, because I am *sure* that you are scum.
DYH's opportunism was so opportunistic that it makes somebody else scummy? Are you fist-****ing me right now?
MTGS stats (won/played)
As scum - 3/5
As town - 5/7
As neutral - none
(I really have been scum a lot)
I'm now writing for Eye of the Vortex, come check out MTG articles and other geek culture
I also moderate the MTG forum, so register (it's free) and voice your thoughts.
DYH's opportunism was so opportunistic that it makes somebody else scummy? Are you fist-****ing me right now?
vote: cyan
That is unfathomably far from what I said. I said that DYH is guilty of ONE scummy action; WoD has been scummy throughout the game, and thoroughly so all day today. Do I think DYH could be scum? Maybe, I'll have to re-read. Like I said, nothing he's said before this has caused me alarm. But I am confident that WoD is scum. And that is whom I am voting. It's pretty simple.
Yes. IF thinking you are scum=asinine.
I will not move off of Skander onto WOD. I would move to Cyan gladly. All the cases against WOD are moot to me, and I no longer feel compelled to comment on them.
Really? 'Cause WoD just posted a ridiculous rationale for making an unusual request. None of it parses.
It's not that you think I'm scum. It's that I posted a huge contradiction on WoD's part and instead of bothering to even comment on it you just repeat something you've been saying the whole day.
Really? Why?
His opinion here is totally and completely against the 2 v 10 scenario. Whether it makes it the norm or not the game exists, and apparently there was no problem with it. WoD was in this game, it is a peculiar enough game (no roles) that I doubt he would forget about it. Especially when his opinion is so forceful against this type of game working.
...you're ignoring what I'm doing re: WoD why why why?
Also, Skander is so, so obviously town. If you can't see the genuine frustration in his last few posts..then..look harder.
The counter-claim has been widely discussed as the primary reason most people had moved WoD to the top of their townie lists, however, Pale Mage has uncovered a glaring discrepancy in WoD's thought process, here.
I don't see how at this stage of the game you're turning a blind eye to anything, Kpaca.
V/LA: 3/21-3/24 & 3/27-3/29
WoD - 1 (Skander)
Not voting: everyone else
MTGS stats (won/played)
As scum - 3/5
As town - 5/7
As neutral - none
(I really have been scum a lot)
I'm now writing for Eye of the Vortex, come check out MTG articles and other geek culture
I also moderate the MTG forum, so register (it's free) and voice your thoughts.
V/LA: 3/21-3/24 & 3/27-3/29
Why the change in target? Why the naked vote?
The reason I backed off was because I seem to remember someone saying quite soon after that "everyone is a goddamn mason" which fits with the whole "Janus" idea.
I must admit I've been overly ambivalent towards this game - the huge periods of inactivity just screwed up the experience for me entirely.
I have been wildly inconsistent with my votes, especially during the previous day and the early part of this day. I can completely understand how you'd read "scum" into that.
But you guys need to know that if you lynch me today, that we lose. Skander and Cyan are obvscum, with the former trying to argue us into the final mislynch the scums probably need to win, by trying to make us believe there are only two scum - even in the best case scenario, where somehow he ISN'T SCUM, he still cannot possibly know whether there are two or three scums, so we have got to play as though there are still 3 remaining.
Cyan, on the other hand, is never one, as Town, to sit back and ignore dodgy statements, especially from a player he previously was suspicious of. He's completely ignored my repeated requests for him to comment on Skander's argument for 2-scum vs 3-scum, and is just obv-scum.
The fact that he's just jumped on my wagon is icing on the cake.
A very scummy cake.
I'm stewing on this, but in the meantime answer me this: Who's yer third scum and why?
I've already admitted as such. Why didn't you address the point I made against you?
I just jumped on your wagon? Sorry, but not quite. Have you even read all of today's posts? I got on your case(and before anyone else) as soon as you were vote 2(with an effectively naked vote, no less) on PhantomS, your *mason partner*.
I cannot possibly see it being Kpaca 2.0, and you yourself are being pretty reasonable and analytical, so I think you're town too.
The fact that PhantomS is allying with Kpaca and I make me feel pretty good about him, really.
Ditto to you.
Apparently I don't exist.
@Cyan - I'd like answers to the statements/questions in bold, please.
@Skander - Sure, you found one game where there is 2 scum to 10 townies. That game was an open setup, where the For every 12-player game you find with 10town v 2scum, I can find you TEN games where there are 3 mafia to 9 townies.
Well you won't find me any vanilla games with a 9-3 ratio, I'm pretty sure of that.
But the main point was that you were in that game and knew of the existence of 2-10, but still decided to attack me for trying to say that this was a 2-10 game.
And this is not a vanilla game.
Unconfirmed masons make it no better than that. But yeah we had this conversation once already. However, now instead of just saying from theory there's actually something to back me up in that the theory makes sense. Maybe I should never have bothered trying to point this out in the first place but your attack on me makes no sense since you knew of a game that was exactly what I was saying this was and regardless you chose to attack me.
My apologies. I somehow found myself cast in a play.
Still think that Scander/Cyan are both scum. I find it very possible that WoD Scander on both scum as well, trying to deliver one to the town to clear their name. Gotta go to class now. Hopefully I'll be able to get on later, but there is a chance I won't be able to until tomorrow.
We call that "auditioning".
Huh.
Vote: Wrath_of_Dog
Still hate Phantom, but too much of Dog's behavior doesn't add up.
Here we go again:
And yeah, this conversation took place once already and I pointed out a couple things you weren't considering and apparently still don't seem to be considering. Which leads me to:
I'm still trying to determine why you would have brought this up in the first place? I can't come up with a townie reason. Hooray if you're right and we don't lose on a mislynch, but why lower the 'alert level'? Why make a post that changes the focus from scum-hunting to setup postulating?
It's perfectly reasonable for WoD to attack you for what you did, even in light of the game you're referencing. It's just as fair for him to say "this is not a vanilla game" as it is for you to say "this is a vanilla game, unconfirmed masons are no better than vanilla". Furthermore, it's all speculation because it's no-reveal (other than alignment) - even the first set of masons were not listed as such.
The main thing bothering me about WoD is that he appears to have made up his rationale for asking the names of the other masons. PM is asking for reasoning on something WoD did a long time ago, so I can at least excuse that somewhat. And I can buy his "playing lazy" admission; look at the rate this game progresed.
However, bringing up the idea we might not be at lylo in the current game state? I can't excuse that, and I can't find a townie rationale.
I think Skander is scum.
Vote: Skander
V/LA: 3/21-3/24 & 3/27-3/29
Everyone has been in the forum since I voted you and no one has chosen to hammer. If I'm wrong about you, that means DYH is correct about Skander.
Now I have to go back and decide how much I trust DYH.
I was actually asked to be in the show as a favor. :V:V:V
If Skander comes up scum I'll definitely be giving this post a second look.
Except for making me more certain than ever that Skander is not scum.
How was that scummy? We can never be certain of who is/isn't scum until they are lynched, unless of course we are scum, so how is it scummy to express this known uncertainty?
DYH's post is opportunism at it's absolute finest. I'll be happy to eat these words if Skander magically flips scum, but I really, really do not see that happening. When Skander gets lynched and flips town, be ready to take a long, hard look at DYH.
Or, just make the right choice(this day is pretty much left up to you, PhantomS), and lynch WoD. When he flips scum, you'll realize that Skander cannot possibly be scum.
My thought was that DYH's post was was DYH re- presenting the entire case that has already been made on skander (which it is) in an effort to be on the town side of a lynch. However, I've been working on various things for 12 hours today and where that would have made sense earlier in the game, your point is quite compelling at this stage.
However, I must ask, if you're so certain that this is opportunism of DYH, why suggest I vote WoD?
unvote
I shall think on where that vote goes... For now awaiting the response to that question.
Utah- 80
unvote: Vote Cyan
Of course, this conversation is somehow enough to change Kpaca's vote.
@WoD: To answer your earlier question, I would expect this game to have 3 scum. Games that are this size typically do. But I have no idea whom the third scum is. I mean, I'm sure that you're one, and pretty sure that Kpaca is another(I haven't forgotten Kraj's actions towards Azrael, nor the fact that all of that suspect behavior was blown over when Kraj requested replacement). I know that I'm confident that Skander is town, and Pale Mage as well. PhantomS last few posts have felt fairly townie as well. But none of this matters ultimately, because I am *sure* that you are scum.
DYH's opportunism was so opportunistic that it makes somebody else scummy? Are you fist-****ing me right now?
vote: cyan
WoD - 3 (Skander, Pale Mage, Cyan)
Cyan - 2 (kpaca, PhantomS)
Skander - 1 (DYH)
Not voting: WoD
With 7 alive, it's 4 to lynch.
MTGS stats (won/played)
As scum - 3/5
As town - 5/7
As neutral - none
(I really have been scum a lot)
I'm now writing for Eye of the Vortex, come check out MTG articles and other geek culture
I also moderate the MTG forum, so register (it's free) and voice your thoughts.
That is unfathomably far from what I said. I said that DYH is guilty of ONE scummy action; WoD has been scummy throughout the game, and thoroughly so all day today. Do I think DYH could be scum? Maybe, I'll have to re-read. Like I said, nothing he's said before this has caused me alarm. But I am confident that WoD is scum. And that is whom I am voting. It's pretty simple.
If you guys want to lynch cyan instead I'm fine with that.
Unvote, vote Cyan