Jean Pelley Posted April 11, 2020 Posted April 11, 2020 20 hours ago, Andrew Laurent said: But since you're so concerned, let me put it this way: Vote: Joshua Levitt Ç'est literally the worst take of the day. You were allowed to say that Joshua isn't important right now, that there are fish plus grands to fry. You were allowed to say "yeah @Joshua Levitt hasn't posted at all today; I found that suspicious yesterday and I continue to find it suspicious today." But you've just gone and said "Daddy please don't hurt me, I'll vote for Joshua if that'll shut you up." The fact that you give not even the slightest merde about Joshua's inactivity today further proves that your votes yesterday were totally meaningless posturing. Nobody else has remarked on this most peculiar vote but I picked up on it right away, especially considering Andrew had the following to say about the ideal day two scum strategy: On 4/7/2020 at 8:48 AM, Andrew Laurent said: If anything, in my experience, the scummos attack each other gently in the first day or 2.
Daniel Lucas Posted April 11, 2020 Posted April 11, 2020 @Bob Can we get a vote count? It'd be timely to see who is active but not voting, who is not active but voting, and who is absent completely.
Vincent Denis Posted April 12, 2020 Posted April 12, 2020 *Fwom fwom fwom fwom* 52 minutes ago, Jean Pelley said: Ç'est literally the worst take of the day. You were allowed to say that Joshua isn't important right now, that there are fish plus grands to fry. You were allowed to say "yeah @Joshua Levitt hasn't posted at all today; I found that suspicious yesterday and I continue to find it suspicious today." But you've just gone and said "Daddy please don't hurt me, I'll vote for Joshua if that'll shut you up." The fact that you give not even the slightest merde about Joshua's inactivity today further proves that your votes yesterday were totally meaningless posturing. Nobody else has remarked on this most peculiar vote but I picked up on it right away, especially considering Andrew had the following to say about the ideal day two scum strategy: I missed that at first, but upon reading the thread over again, it struck me as well. You responded about it while I was reading. That is an odd response to your suspicions about Andrew and Joshua. Andrew was my first vote yesterday and the example Jean points out is not his only "petulant child"-type post. I'm putting that in quotes so it's clear it's about the feeling I get from his game play and I'm not insulting Andrew as a person. On 4/6/2020 at 9:24 PM, Andrew Laurent said: Now, since my first poke vote got people talking.... Vote: Alex Howe Similar to how I feel about Justin leaving his vote on Joshua, Andrew ignores all concerns about his poke voting and barrels forward like the suspicions don't matter. It's like he's worried only a scum would drop their tactic when questioned. This is a smart tactic for scum. Seem proactive and allows him to spread votes out. This could also be a proactive townie who is sure of his ways and he prefers to barrel through BS, which would be fine. I have other concerns about Andrew. I've said all along there seems to be something between Justin and Andrew. Daniel came in to defend them and to me, it looks also like Andrew is defending him in return. 22 hours ago, Andrew Laurent said: Who said any trust has to be involved? In past searches for traitors, I've had multi-day conversations in private with people I did not trust. Just like I can talk to people publicly who I do not trust. Heck, I don't trust you and I'm talking to you right now, right? This is Andrew's response to Daniel's PMs. His only response is a defense of Daniel PMing people he doesn't trust. Andrew, in your past endeavors to killer intruders, did you ever PM someone you didn't trust and say "Hey, let's work together?" 22 hours ago, Andrew Laurent said: You ninja'd me with posting this while I was in the middle of posting, but I want to respond so you don't accuse me of ignoring what you said. I didn't vote for Joshua for exactly the reasons I said. I could have not given any reasons, much less pointed out that I was not voting for him twice, if we're some traitorous buddies like you think. I could have not started out the whole voting if I was trying to keep attention off certain people. But since you're so concerned, let me put it this way: Vote: Joshua Levitt because I'm a loyal soldier and I don't know if he is, so let him defend himself. Is this another poke vote? The reasoning you give could be applied to everyone but you, if you are town. Why Joshua as compared to all of the other soldiers you wouldn't be sure of? Are you going to poke vote all of us? The hefty glass of WIFOM in the "I could have not started out the whole voting..." because scum would never poke an inactive scum buddy, right? 8 hours ago, Andrew Laurent said: As a loyal soldier, if I had to pick one of the 3 to be scum, my bet would be on Vincent. However, as I've said, I think all 3 are town and so I am not voting for any of the 3 unless new reasons show up. I think we should ignore the 3 of them for the rest of the day - yesterday and already today they're a distraction. Andrew has told us he has a lot of experience and this seems like he's setting something up. "Oh, they're all 3 town, they're all 3 town, the way they're arguing, they're town, they're town, they're town... Maybe Vincent is scum, though." And why me? 4 hours ago, Andrew Laurent said: Honestly, this statement is almost scummy enough to make me change my mind. An honest townie doesn't feel the need to respond to every tiny accusation. The scum sometimes too, because they are terrified of being caught. And a scum being lynched is a much bigger deal than a townie being lynched wrongly - we've got the strength in numbers. We can afford to lose a few - or a whole bunch - along the way and still win. And here he allows the seed to start to grow a bit. Oh well, now I've found a reason in the new thing Vincent said. Let's lynch him. Yes, I realize he didn't say that...yet. And then why I flip town, does he encourage everyone to go for Aiden next? Because this looks like Andrew trying to keep the heat off of Daniel and yesterday Daniel started his whole case against me when I said I was suspicious of Andrew and voted for him. Why are these two defending each other? Again, Andrew seems pretty dangerous if he is scum. If these are scum tactics, they seem like they can easily blend in with active townies. He hasn't blatantly come out and defended Daniel but looking at his actions, that could be the motive. On 4/8/2020 at 7:59 AM, Andrew Laurent said: My preference on a lynch would be either Alex (where my vote currently lies) or Fred. How do you feel about Alex and Fred today? Why did you lynch preferences take a back seat to Joshua? I find the potential connection interesting between Andrew and Joshua. Andrew's vote could be WIFOM. Joshua's only contribution yesterday was saying that two people were against a lynch that actually weren't. Neither Justin nor Andrew have pointed this out in talking about Joshua's contributions and that's the scummiest thing Joshua has done. Justin says he's still suspicious of him because he didn't say much but makes no mention of what he did say. I'm still suspicious of Justin and Andrew but let's see where this goes: Vote: Joshua Levitt *Fwomma fwomma fwom fwom Fwomma fwomma fwom fwom fwom fwom fwom fwomma fwomma fwomma fwom fwom fwooooooooooom fwoooooooooooom* 5 hours ago, Andrew Laurent said: we've got the strength in numbers. We can afford to lose a few - or a whole bunch - along the way and still win. *Fwom fwom fwom fwom* I forgot about this one. Like he's pre-justifying lining up townies for the lynch. *Fwom fwom fwom fwomma fwomma fwomma fwom fwom*
Bob Posted April 12, 2020 Author Posted April 12, 2020 Vote Count: Aiden Leon - 1 (Daniel Lucas) Joshua Levitt - 3 (Jean Pelley, Andrew Laurent, Vincent Denis) Daniel Lucas - 3 (Robin Tremblay, Fred Dumont, Trenton Monette) Vincent Denis - 1 (Justin Reynaud) With 14 players, a majority of 8 is required. About 68 or so hours remain in this day.
Andrew Laurent Posted April 12, 2020 Posted April 12, 2020 1 hour ago, Jean Pelley said: Ç'est literally the worst take of the day. You were allowed to say that Joshua isn't important right now, that there are fish plus grands to fry. You were allowed to say "yeah @Joshua Levitt hasn't posted at all today; I found that suspicious yesterday and I continue to find it suspicious today." But you've just gone and said "Daddy please don't hurt me, I'll vote for Joshua if that'll shut you up." The fact that you give not even the slightest merde about Joshua's inactivity today further proves that your votes yesterday were totally meaningless posturing. Way to take things horribly out of context. For the context, note that my reaction and vote on Joshua was on the first page of this day. I didn't expect him to have posted yet - most of the players hadn't. Adding in that accusation would have been weak and, well, looked scummy. My vote was to show that I'm not scum buddies with him. I'm town. He may or may not be scum. He's hardly said enough to make a judgement. At this point, he STILL hasn't shown up today so I'm quite happy leaving my vote on him along with a couple others who voted for him before and after I did. 25 minutes ago, Vincent Denis said: 1. Similar to how I feel about Justin leaving his vote on Joshua, Andrew ignores all concerns about his poke voting and barrels forward like the suspicions don't matter. It's like he's worried only a scum would drop their tactic when questioned. This is a smart tactic for scum. Seem proactive and allows him to spread votes out. This could also be a proactive townie who is sure of his ways and he prefers to barrel through BS, which would be fine. I have other concerns about Andrew. 2. This is Andrew's response to Daniel's PMs. His only response is a defense of Daniel PMing people he doesn't trust. Andrew, in your past endeavors to killer intruders, did you ever PM someone you didn't trust and say "Hey, let's work together?" 3. Is this another poke vote? The reasoning you give could be applied to everyone but you, if you are town. Why Joshua as compared to all of the other soldiers you wouldn't be sure of? Are you going to poke vote all of us? The hefty glass of WIFOM in the "I could have not started out the whole voting..." because scum would never poke an inactive scum buddy, right? 4. Andrew has told us he has a lot of experience and this seems like he's setting something up. "Oh, they're all 3 town, they're all 3 town, the way they're arguing, they're town, they're town, they're town... Maybe Vincent is scum, though." And why me? 5. How do you feel about Alex and Fred today? Why did you lynch preferences take a back seat to Joshua? I find the potential connection interesting between Andrew and Joshua. Andrew's vote could be WIFOM. Joshua's only contribution yesterday was saying that two people were against a lynch that actually weren't. Neither Justin nor Andrew have pointed this out in talking about Joshua's contributions and that's the scummiest thing Joshua has done. Justin says he's still suspicious of him because he didn't say much but makes no mention of what he did say. I'm still suspicious of Justin and Andrew but let's see where this goes: 6. Vote: Joshua Levitt I numbered paragraphs there and deleted some parts so that I can answer clearly for you. I don't want to start another war of the walls of text. 1. So you think I'm either a smart scum or a proactive, good townie. I guess that's a compliment. I'm not sure what it'll take to prove to you that I'm a proactive townie and not a smart scum, but I'll keep on trying for however long this scum hunt takes. 2. Uh, nope, I haven't. I have had people I didn't trust PM me, and yes, sometimes then I have worked with them. 3. See above for about my vote today. 4. Why you? Well, I still think you're town. However, if I was going to lynch off one of you three, my gut would vote for you. I don't have anything specific to cite. It's just a gut feeling. Maybe it's just that your style annoys me more. 5. Alex and Fred. Who are they again? Hard to pick anyone else out against the walls of text. Seriosuly, Alex has made a whopping single post today and Fred only 3. 6. I have to say, I find it interesting that you write this whole post digging into my words, and then end with voting alongside me against Joshua. You even said just above that you're suspicious of Justin and I, yet you vote for neither of us. You voting Joshua to test me, see if I try to back away from my vote to save my scum buddy?
Daniel Lucas Posted April 12, 2020 Posted April 12, 2020 This is how it looks like, plainly by votes and post counts. I've choosen below 10 as not active for now. Perhaprs it'll help to track our behavior. Active and voting: Andrew Laurent, Vincent Denis, Daniel Lucas, Fred Dumont, Justin Reynaud Active and not voting: Jean Pelley, Aiden Leon Not active and voting: Robin Tremblay, Trenton Monette Not active and not voting: Fabien Bellamy, Joshua Levitt, Alex Howe, Emmett Ware, Peter Lyon For personal reasons the most weird to me are the two votes on me from Robin and Trenton. Both of them had the same, short reason: Daniel is not helping, while others go under the radar. I asked for clarification and got nothing since. This sounds unfair from two actual lurkers going under the radar. Either I'm truly not being helpful or this is an agenda to label me. Now I've posted a lot but saying that all of it was unhelpful to Town is a debatable conclusion. 12 hours ago, Trenton Monette said: Daniel's PM to Vincent feels off too. And I don't think he's been very helpful at all. The problem is that the longer the two of them are both around and arguing the longer other players slip under the radar and we waste time bickering. Vote: Daniel Lucas 20 hours ago, Robin Tremblay said: Vote Daniel Lucas. If he is a townie He is not helpful and is a distraction. His contributions are worse than lurkers. I've got my first vote one me yesterday by Aiden with the very same short reason. I can't help myself to see the pattern. This feels all coordinated, a seemingly policy lynch. On 4/8/2020 at 2:39 AM, Aiden Leon said: Vote: Daniel Lucas You. Are. Not. Helping. That's pretty much all there is to it. Aiden, I'm voting for you at the moment and I've been accusing you since early Day 1. You voiced your preference of my policy lynch many times. This is your D2 opinion: 14 hours ago, Aiden Leon said: It doesn't matter whether Daniel flips town or scum because either way his points against Vincent were stupid as hell. 11 hours ago, Aiden Leon said: Either way I wouldn't forgo lynching you because you would continue to be a unignorable itch in the backround I'd constatntly be wondering about. 10 hours ago, Aiden Leon said: Again you could be either, but I'm to curious to not lynch you. If your a good boy then maybe you'll live a little while longer, but I'm pretty sure eventually people will want to lynch you. This is a contradiction. You wouldn't forgo because you'd be kept wondering about. One hour later you are too curious not to lynch. Aiden, you are cleary don't want to give an explicit answer, but keep hinting this issue. If you have any straightforward position on me, I think this is the time to be more clear about it. You have enoguh of information about me to decide, because you was not hesitant to make a constant campaign against me since I've dared to accuse you. Make your stand now. Do you think of me as scum or town? Are you going to vote for me or not? And either case: Why?
Aiden Leon Posted April 12, 2020 Posted April 12, 2020 3 minutes ago, Daniel Lucas said: Do you think of me as scum or town? Definitely 50/50. 5 minutes ago, Daniel Lucas said: Are you going to vote for me or not? Probably yes. 5 minutes ago, Daniel Lucas said: Why? For reasons stated a thousand times before.
Emmett Ware Posted April 12, 2020 Posted April 12, 2020 9 minutes ago, Daniel Lucas said: For personal reasons the most weird to me are the two votes on me from Robin and Trenton. Both of them had the same, short reason: Daniel is not helping, while others go under the radar. I asked for clarification and got nothing since. This sounds unfair from two actual lurkers going under the radar. Either I'm truly not being helpful or this is an agenda to label me. Now I've posted a lot but saying that all of it was unhelpful to Town is a debatable conclusion. It's hard to argue with their claim that you're not helping. At this point, I am less bothered by lurkers than people intentionally dominating the chat by spewing constant walls of quotes and text, especially when they aren't always relevant or accurate. That isn't helpful, pure and simple, no debate required. If we continue to allow you to flood the days with babble, we're going to end up killed by the scum during the nights. That's enough reason for me to vote. Vote: Daniel Lucas
Aiden Leon Posted April 12, 2020 Posted April 12, 2020 I initially tried to reply not realizing I hadn't even hit quote. I'm thinking that's a cue my that I need to go to bed.
Daniel Lucas Posted April 12, 2020 Posted April 12, 2020 Just now, Aiden Leon said: Definitely 50/50. Probably yes. For reasons stated a thousand times before. Probably yes? You see, this is why I am voting for you: because you are sneaky. @Jean Pelley Sorry, I see that you are voting as well, that's and error, my bad. Also that makes your Aiden the only seemingly active but not voting player. Make up your mind! Vote.
Aiden Leon Posted April 12, 2020 Posted April 12, 2020 Just now, Daniel Lucas said: because you are sneaky. No I'm just tired of having to repeat the same shit and tired rl lol.
Jean Pelley Posted April 12, 2020 Posted April 12, 2020 While the chips are in the air I exhort everyone to vote for Joshua for being generally scummy, and because the way he flips may shine much light on Andrew & Justin. bonsoir!
Aiden Leon Posted April 12, 2020 Posted April 12, 2020 Just now, Jean Pelley said: Bro I just realized your not standing straight. That's triggering as hell.
Vincent Denis Posted April 12, 2020 Posted April 12, 2020 *Fwom fwom fwom fwom* Just now, Andrew Laurent said: 4. Why you? Well, I still think you're town. However, if I was going to lynch off one of you three, my gut would vote for you. I don't have anything specific to cite. It's just a gut feeling. Maybe it's just that your style annoys me more. Ouch. I will take that to heart. If you think my style is more annoying then it's time for some introspection. Just now, Andrew Laurent said: 6. I have to say, I find it interesting that you write this whole post digging into my words, and then end with voting alongside me against Joshua. You even said just above that you're suspicious of Justin and I, yet you vote for neither of us. You voting Joshua to test me, see if I try to back away from my vote to save my scum buddy? I'm not at all sure how to vote today. I think we're onto something between you, Justin, Daniel, Fred, Joshua. It may not be you, but something's there. Thinking you're a proactive townie or a skilled scummo, and not knowing which, doesn't compel me to vote for you right now. As for Justin, at the beginning of the day, I'd prefer to have voted for him. His response does give me pause, despite it being 10% OMGUS. I still see contradictions, but that could be a communication difference. Despite what he said about leaving his vote on Joshua to keep everyone talking, he did follow that up with what I can see as a valid reason. You and Justin have this cloud hovering over you as Daniel defended you and you can be seen as defending him today. However, Joshua posting that he was worried about people saying they didn't want a day one lynch–and there not being anyone who said such a thing–may be the scummiest thing said in this game so far. If he were to be lynched and flip scum, I still don't think there'd be a clear picture of your alignment, but I would question Justin more about why he didn't respond to the scummy things Joshua said after he did show up. Joshua's actions seem like lazy scum hoping to fly under the radar and not even paying attention to what's actually being said, like he skimmed activity to find something to respond to and even got that wrong. More than anything, I find myself annoyed with this entire game right now. I won't go into why as I'm sure you can imagine why, but hopefully I can spend more time looking at the big picture now. And play my tuba. It helps me think. *Fwom fwomma fwomma fwomma fwom fwom fwom. Fwomma fwomma fwom fwomma fwomma fwom fwom*
Daniel Lucas Posted April 12, 2020 Posted April 12, 2020 Just now, Emmett Ware said: It's hard to argue with their claim that you're not helping. At this point, I am less bothered by lurkers than people intentionally dominating the chat by spewing constant walls of quotes and text, especially when they aren't always relevant or accurate. That isn't helpful, pure and simple, no debate required. If we continue to allow you to flood the days with babble, we're going to end up killed by the scum during the nights. That's enough reason for me to vote. Vote: Daniel Lucas Why no debate is required Emmett? You are now the third voter with the same label, calling me unhelpful. You gave no specifics why all I do is babble, while there are other players with long posts as well. Also this is how it works now? The longer you text the more likely you are being unhelpful? You are jumping on a wagon and making yourself convenient about it. And the fact that I'm the only one pointing it out is tragic. You just cut all angles saying there is no need to debate. How is Town not furious about a statement like that? You was not blocked to contribute. Nothing stopped you. You had two game days now and now you pick on the most posting player calling his contribution babbling. Also what are you saying? I'm Town and you are policy lynching me? Because that is again much more convenient and safer. 1 minute ago, Aiden Leon said: No I'm just tired of having to repeat the same shit and tired rl lol. Why are these multipost oneliner answers are better than my "babbling", which took quite a time to express as accurately as I could? Is this truly what serves the goals of the Town? Is the game not about reading carefully all the damn lines? Should we all play with oneliners and wait until the Scum takes the homerun? I'm honestly interested in others' opinion about this.
Joshua Levitt Posted April 12, 2020 Posted April 12, 2020 Oh wow, the arguing died down a little. I can finally see through the fog around here. There are two reasons I haven't been around today. One is the arguing, it put me off posting and it's hard to keep up with. If this wasn't an "anonymous" game, people would know that I can't stand that sort of yelling and back and forth walls of text. It gives me headaches, so I try to block from it as best I can. I've been trying to keep up with things that aren't screaming at each other so that I can help, but it seems the screaming has caused more than just myself to stay way today. Secondly, I had a fishing tournament to deal with and that was on set start/end times that was not a 96 hour day On 4/10/2020 at 6:23 PM, Peter Lyon said: Joshua called out "more than one person already pushing for a no-lynch" (this wasn't actually happening), but was worried about anyone pushing for a no-lynch I never said that, don't use quotes when you aren't actually quoting. I said that I was worried about people talking about non-lynch. Never said anyone was pushing for a no-lynch. Anyway, it was a no-lynch in the end and everyone ended up having a hand in it, between single votes and no votes. On 4/10/2020 at 8:41 PM, Jean Pelley said: So I want to re-emphasize the reasons Andrew manufactured not to vote for Joshua: I'm not going to answer for some lousy player's weird reasoning or wording when voting. Not everyone here speaks native English and that can be part of this sort of failed understanding too. I don't know what his motives are, but I really don't appreciate being targeted due to something someone else said. I really doubt Daniel and Vincent are both scum but I suppose it could be possible. Unprecedented interaction on day 1 and day 2, but possible nonetheless. Having to weigh my options, I see Vincent as more likely town here. Either way, you are really bringing the whole game down and a major cause for confusion and silence from multiple people from what I can tell. It's really hard to see who else could be scum because there's so little other discussion going on. Vote: Daniel Lucas
Aiden Leon Posted April 12, 2020 Posted April 12, 2020 8 minutes ago, Daniel Lucas said: Make up your mind! Vote. This is you trying get me to give you more to work with so you can try and get people to look at me. Just now, Daniel Lucas said: I'm honestly interested in others' opinion about this. And this is further comfirmation of that. I already said I'll probably vote for you, but that's not good enough in order for you to achieve your goal is it?
Vincent Denis Posted April 12, 2020 Posted April 12, 2020 *Fwom fwomma fwom fwom* Good thing for me, everybody loves the tuba! Just now, Joshua Levitt said: If this wasn't an "anonymous" game, people would know that I can't stand that sort of yelling and back and forth walls of text. Ah, crap. Now I'm going to metagame who I think it is and that would give me pause to vote for Joshua as I often misunderstand how he expresses himself. Metagaming is really dangerous in an anonymous game, though. But now I'm starting to chalk the absence and statement about people pushing for a no-lynch to who I think it is. Not enough to unvote yet, but it's got my gears turning in a different direction. Just now, Aiden Leon said: I already said I'll probably vote for you, but that's not good enough in order for you to achieve your goal is it? Believe me, I know what it's like to be on the other side of Daniel's constant yammerings. From that I can come up with my own reason, but I'd like to hear from you why you're not voting for him if you'll probably vote for him. And who else might you vote for? Most of what you've said is that Daniel is not helpful and you think Fred is also scummy. I agree with both of these takes, but what else is on your mind. Join us outside of the Daniel tunnel. *Fwommma fwomma fwom fwom fwom Oh everybody loves the tuba! Fwomma fwom fwom fwom Yeah! Fwom fwom Everybody! Fwomma fwomma fwom fwom*
Aiden Leon Posted April 12, 2020 Posted April 12, 2020 3 minutes ago, Vincent Denis said: Join us outside of the Daniel tunnel. Will do. In like...8 hours. ZZZZZzzz
Jean Pelley Posted April 12, 2020 Posted April 12, 2020 46 minutes ago, Jean Pelley said: exhort !!!!
Emmett Ware Posted April 12, 2020 Posted April 12, 2020 53 minutes ago, Daniel Lucas said: Why no debate is required Emmett? Facts are facts. I've tried to read through everything you've said and none of it is helpful. Therefore, I don't see anything to debate. You are obviously free to have a huge debate on the subject, but you'll be doing it without baiting me into participating in more derailing of this day. 53 minutes ago, Daniel Lucas said: Also this is how it works now? The longer you text the more likely you are being unhelpful? If you write a lot and say nothing, yes, that is unhelpful. I used to get in discussions like that, they only helped the scum. I eventually did it on purpose when I was scum. It was hard to learn not to do it as town, I could always convince myself that I was helping somehow, but I wasn't. I don't see where you're going to come to that understanding, so I have to assume it's intentional. 54 minutes ago, Daniel Lucas said: You had two game days now and now you pick on the most posting player calling his contribution babbling. Also what are you saying? I'm Town and you are policy lynching me? Two days of trying to make any sense of your floods of often pointless and contradictory rambling. I am absolutely not saying that you are town, if I sincerely believed that, I would try to steer you into behaving in a less harmful way. This isn't about a 'policy lynch', it's about removing someone who is actively hurting the town.
Daniel Lucas Posted April 12, 2020 Posted April 12, 2020 Town. is. braindead. You guys are the most lazy f*cks ever played a mafia game. Your whole argument about me being unhelpful is an unspecific pile of SHITTY mess. Not ONCE had you quoted anything and proved me wrong with actual facts. And you preach about lurking and hurting Town. If you'd just stopped holding to your d*cks for 20 minutes, and read all again and maybe, just maybe realize how many times these obviously twisting, fwooming, memeposting, multiposting, 4th wall breaking, videoposting dudes have lied we've could already lynched one of them, and you'd have finally stopped wondering why this moron Daniel makes so many posts about them. Maybe if you'd read, we wouldn't have to wait for D5 until you figure it out yourself. Their whole style is 1000% pure scum talk. You still keep thinkging about "Ohh Daniel did a PM to his suspect! Surely just wanted to ROLEFISH after making it the most obvious thing he is after him. So scum! Policy Lynch!". Are you even using any tools as a town besides your freaking role actions? Have you ever tried to make a scumtrap for a suspect on your own? I've caught upon their lies like half a dozen times now and you totally went past it, because you can't even participate in your own game. Also fine, I'm tired of pointing out constantly these ridiculously obvious anti-town posts and since you're so convenient putting me away instead of doing your own homework, there you go: I'm Town Jailer. You're welcomed to make your proper stand finally or give your counterclaims if you have any.
Jean Pelley Posted April 12, 2020 Posted April 12, 2020 24 minutes ago, Daniel Lucas said: Their whole style is 1000% pure scum talk. You still keep thinkging about "Ohh Daniel did a PM to his suspect! Surely just wanted to ROLEFISH after making it the most obvious thing he is after him. So scum! Policy Lynch!". Are you even using any tools as a town besides your freaking role actions? Have you ever tried to make a scumtrap for a suspect on your own? I love you Daniel. No counterclaim here. Can you reveal who you targeted last night? Would you please consider voting for Joshua?
Fred Dumont Posted April 12, 2020 Posted April 12, 2020 If Daniel reveals who he jailkept, and he is confirmed by that person to be unsuccessful, not necessarily revealing their role, I’d actually believe him.
Robin Tremblay Posted April 12, 2020 Posted April 12, 2020 47 minutes ago, Fred Dumont said: If Daniel reveals who he jailkept, and he is confirmed by that person to be unsuccessful, not necessarily revealing their role, I’d actually believe him. Yes. Daniel has finally said something useful after pages and pages of text. If true, I will recall my vote for him.
Recommended Posts