Hinckley

Yes, those two do seem to be in the Scum Goldilocks zone. Not too active not absent. Just gliding under the radar.

But you were suggesting he might still have lied about it. That's weird.

Why would Lodmund fake that conversation?

On what basis would you doubt it?

Sometimes there is no kill when the Scum successfully convert. But after all of the traitor talk and the Scum pretty much telling us they couldn't convert, that is the least likely option.

Oh good, so I'm not crazy. Even you agree that you're Scummy. It's hard to imagine you'd agree if you were actually Scum.

If I was wrong about Lodmund, I must be wrong about Dar. But then again, now that we know Lodmund was telling the (very bizarre) truth, it still is strange that Dar had the same idea about what I said that the Scum did. And then there was Dar's admission that the similarity was damning when he tried to suggest Lodmund was Scum and was trying to frame him. But I'm less confident about it today than I was yesterday considering I was so off on Lodmund.

Tomorrow 8 hours or tomorrow 24 hours?

I know Norse Mythology and Apocalypse Now really well and I'm afraid I'm at a loss.

When all you have to offer the game is to defend yourself, you seem Scummy.

And last but not least, Bob de Quatre brings us the fourth pre–release review of the new LEGO Minecraft set 21119 The Dungeon! Check it out here

No, I hadn't considered that. But seeing you choose this as your defense makes me more confident in my Scum-read of you.

I was off on the price. I will need to go adjust a few things. It's retailing for $79.99 Ah, yes. Perhaps I'm letting the self–consciousness show too much. I can see how that would be awkward. I'll go back and edit some of that out.

It's a great day for Minecraft fans at Eurobricks! Mostlytechnic is up with another thorough review of a new LEGO Minecraft set, 21121 Desert Outpost: Check it out here

If you had both misinterpreted my post or went off of what he thought it meant... Who is shouting? The other assumption Dar makes, as well as the Scum team–according to Lodmund–is that when I mention Duvors I am talking about him as the original three I knew about who contacted Jarl. For Dar or the Scum to jump to the conclusion that talking about Lodmund meant he was one of the three (who I never said were fake claims) was for them (and Dar) to know that only three people contacted the Scum. That's a rambling sentence. To be more concise, the Scum (in Lodmund's telling of his writeboard) and Dar seem to be all working off of the same incorrect assumptions about what I was saying.

If you're developing the plan together, Dar would be in the same mindset as you are describing the Scum to be when they supposedly cut off communications when I mentioned your name. Weird how Dar explained what the Scum were thinking in the post where you explained what they said.

It seems like a conversation an actual traitor would have or one that would be faked. I'm less confident the second time I read it. Now now. Be nice. I am still disturbed that Dar seems to think the same way the supposed Scum responded on the "deleted" writeboard. If Lodmund is Scum, then Dar gave himself away by matching what was made up about how the conversation on the writeboard ended.

I fully believe every word of it. And that's why my vote is staying where it is.

It appears the rules do prohibit quoting other players' PMs by PM. Why don't you paraphrase your conversation with Jarl for everybody?

VBBN pointed out the same thing. I will update that. Thanks for pointing that out.

I don't think the rules prohibit you from adding people to a conversation. Think about it. If I wanted to start a town block, I could just add the other PRs to my conversation with the tracker. Quoting PMs to each other by PM, do the rules prohibit that? I thought it was just posting them in public.

Under the list of participants, there's a link to invite participants.

The concern there is how long you went silent. No. Actually I get the missing page.

Damn editing rule...

It needs to be quoted from his original message to you. Or click the link from his original message and copy the URL directly from the address bar. If you copy the board's truncated version, that is what it will treat the URL as. You need the original link. Obviously, quoting Jarl is against the rules but if you follow his original link, you should be able to copy the full URL.