Piratedave84

I didn't remember the 'quotes' being so explicit on the text talk; thanks for clarifying.

There still seems to be some relation between those 2; Lodmund's explanation for Dar's comment does not sit well with me. Unless they are both in the town block or are both scum there is no reason for him to step in like that.

3 in 3!!! I'll echo Pudding here and say that Dar seems a bit too familiar with the contents of the boards. I read back and I can't see where it was made explicitly clear that there were text-talk in all 3 boards. pudding are it pretty clear but not the others. Lodmund's unvote yesterday and behaviour today is also highly suspicious. I want to know why you unvoted.

What the ... I leave for a few hours and i come back to a bunch of crazy paraphrased conversation, one unvote of a 'confirmed' scum and a pile of 'yes indeed' posts ... Scum are dumb and screwed from the looks of it. I am crazy suspicious of Lodmund's unvote. It's a crazy, crazy thing to do; unjustifiable in my opinion.

THIS.IS.THE.BEST! Part of me wants this to be over so we can go read the board!!! One the things that struck me was this: Am I the only one that wants to know who these 2 are and the reasons for their trying to be recruited/converted/joining scum?

I can only imagine what the scumboard looks like ...

LOL I don't know what to say ... Vote for me if you feel I'm so scummy

I really don't have a problem piggybacking someone's theory if I feel it's on point which is wha I did here. It's not so much the 'secret knowledge' (BTW where did you get that from) as the amount of time you spend explaining different definitions of the role; it's useless and does not add to the conversation besides keeping us focussed on a relatively irrelevant detail. Am I not doing this right now? Congratulations on making several posts; like Mist, you are now confirmed town. It's not so much twisting; more like trying to make sense of them ...

Easy, Easy! The traitor discussion whether there's one or not is taking a LOT of time and frankly the mechanics of the role are not super important. You have been one of the more vocal person in regards to the traitor role and as such (as you accuse me of doing) contributed little to the scumhunt. What other points am I supposed to raise? Where else am I supposed to vote? Your 'case' and justification for your vote is exactly the same as mine ... but my vote is easy ... right? The choice is clear for everyone

I'm thorn here. On the one hand we have Mist for which we have a fair amount of evidence where he was blocked while there was a lack of second kill. On the other hand we have Munud who has contradicted himself, seems to have knowledge of traitor-related info that no one else seems to have and is overall scummy in his posts. Then we have all the lurkers, leechers and followers flying under the radar ... The choice of vote is pretty clear but it aggravates me that it's so easy and that we hardly discussed anything else than the traitor ... again ... For now I Vote: Mist (Mencot)

Let's have a look at your posts shall we, since you know ... more posts = confirmed town, right? Straight out of the gate your reaction is OMGUS and you try and bash Pudding for relaying NA results that incriminate you. Then you make very good use of emotes and finally you give us a theory on the workings of the traitor role that seems as though you have goog knowledge of it's implications. Yup, defiitely town; you're cleared, next suspect.

Compared to the argument you are trying to make, his is candy!!! Since you have come under scrutiny, you have become weirder and more confusing than ever. Are you feeling the pressure?

bada-bing bada-boom! Lynch all the scum!!!! I can agree with this; it seems unlikely that Cranberry would be scum based on his day 2 vote. Can you explain or give us you toughts on the lack of second/third kill and your being blocked? I think you need a better defence/explanation .... "I'm not scum" will not cut it ... Oh! I missed this ... This seems to imply implies you know a conversion was succesfully done ... am I reading too much into this?

I know, I was implying he may know more than let on ... I'm curious to see if anyone was blocked last night

2 in 2, we're on a roll here!!! How many should there have been?

The conclusion to Day 2 was superb!!!!

Well ... unvote: Mist (Mencot) And vote: Jarl (jluck) I've never seen anyone claim scum before ... This is ducked!

I'm back, looks like I have a few hours to read the thread and make my mind up. I'll be back in a few I read/skimmed the thread and I want to vote: Mist (Mencot) for being a scumbum and an incredible annoyance. Sorry my vote does not have more substance than that but I really did not follow the discussions.

I have a few seconds to post while I have wi-fi; I asked Pudding Head to proxy vote (if 1-voting is mandatory and 2-proxy is allowed) on my behalf should I not be back in town by day's end.

One down! Not so bad for a first day!!! What a weird thing to say; care to elaborate?

I'm going camping tomorrow for the weekend so I wont be super actve, if at all, between Friday 12:00 EST - Sunday ~14:00 EST. Sorry

I'm going to Vote: Brand (Brickelodeon) for a few reasons: 1) As someone metionned earlier, I fear his behaviour will continue to get worst, or at least remain as flippy-floppy, and will undoubtedly become a burden on the group. 2) All the changes in his defence/explanations/PMs is making me uncomfortable 3) What's wrong with your quotes dude; just quote the post. Wow .... you really, really like Cranebeinn don't you!!! Why was it necessary for you to defend him twice in one post?

"Herburt Marred-Eye had mead hall EIEIO In that hall there were scummos EIEIO Here a ping, there a ping, everywhere a ping-ping" Please tell us why it is that Tarben was so up front with you ... I can't conceive that someone would be so bold as to say "hey! I'm scum" on day one UNLESS they had very good reason to do so.

I seems to me that it was initally Tarben who was probing Brand to see if he could recruit him; or is this a conclusion Brand drew and then discussed with you? It also seems as though Brand was trying to probe you to see if his concusions could lead to a lynch

Hum .... So while we're focusing on the who-said-what aspect of the discussion, it dawns on me that a portion of it went unanswered/was overlooked a bit; why would you know/think there are traitors and why would you allude to being one in the first place. This is not something we see too often and I'm curious as to why it was brought up.