|
On May 09 2012 06:49 Blazinghand wrote:Show nested quote +On May 09 2012 06:46 Nova_Terra wrote:
how is my vote on kenpachi an omgus
thats a filter check which saw nothing of use. and connection cases are terrible
and please, i at least think my scum play is not so dumb that i would get myself bussed by an ally then start a vote against said ally with no xontent with the purpose of getting him lynched KP calls you scum: + Show Spoiler +On May 05 2012 06:50 Nova_Terra wrote:Show nested quote +On May 05 2012 06:31 Kenpachi wrote:ARE YOU GUYS KIDDING ME? DO YOU NOT NOTICE THE TREND HERE? NT i thought at first was not mafia but then layabout cames along and throws in POLICY LYNCH TIME NO NO NO WTF? NO i believe layabout and NT are mafia together because NT NT had aroused suspicions in thread andended in hotshit. He was completely saved by something so stupid. layabout, as his buttbuddy saves him with such a weak push that only the newbs are following. by experience, policy lynch almost always never works. its a scare tactic, not an actual method used to lynch people, especially day 1 i also believe marvellosity is mafia with them because he said NT is scummy and changes his mind like nothing happened On May 05 2012 02:43 marvellosity wrote:
At the moment Nova looks the scummiest for reasons already expanded upon by others. The fact that so little of anything has occurred today makes Nova's stance that he doesn't want to air his tentative reads all the worse.
On May 05 2012 05:53 marvellosity wrote:
Sold, I don't have a solid scumread on anyone and BM is just useless and anti-town no matter his alignment.
such a contradiction, they were made about 3 hours apart. BM is a potent player and everyone knows that. I feel day 1 lynching a veteran is the worst thing you can do. If i were mafia, id put BM near the top of my priority list just because of his sheer experience. Oh wonderful, a connection case. Nothing quite like totally breaking the window of nice town atmosphere. This doesnt make any sense. he thinks im not mafia but then suddenly does because people dont immediately vote me and instead make a different target. And suddenly those people are mafia too. wtf you said you thought i was townie until these people thought i was townie. You respond to it kinda noncomittally, mostly with a "WTF". Then: Then: Show nested quote +On May 07 2012 04:37 Nova_Terra wrote:
Next, Kenpachi
Absolutely worthless, if you consider his connection case useful i dunno what to say
Vote: Kenpachi As you can see, this is a low-effort counter-bus. N_T doesn't post a case, making it an OMGUS to KP's bus. N_T answer my layabout question please.
If i was mafia and saw that kind of case against me, i would laugh because its ridiculous
im getting to that
|
1. Layabout goes hard on townie Bill Murray, who then is lynched
2. Layabout goes on Townie Blubbdavid who is then lynched
3. Layabout defends Mafia kenpachi, who dies to kurumis fist of modkillery
this shows outcomes that makes layabout seem more scummy
|
however, upon reading through kenpachis "case" if it can even be called that i am interested in the fact that layabout is there. Possible bus, maybe you're actually right about a bus bh. will have to think about that in time for my analysis
I should have analysis up tomorrow, please lynch me if i fail to do this and you still think im scum. I've had a rediculously dumb busy week so far, only had time to post with iphone and ipad.
me as a townie when seeing a connection case that bad makes me go WTF and get offended that something so blatantly bad against me can be a contribution
me as scum when seeing a connection case makes me giggle and repeatedly say gg to myself because it is so blatantly bad
|
On May 09 2012 07:05 Blazinghand wrote:Show nested quote +On May 09 2012 07:03 Nova_Terra wrote:
1. Layabout goes hard on townie Bill Murray, who then is lynched
2. Layabout goes on Townie Blubbdavid who is then lynched
3. Layabout defends Mafia kenpachi, who dies to kurumis fist of modkillery
this shows outcomes that makes layabout seem more scummy Ah, that's interesting, May 9th Nova_Terra! However, I have another player here who disagrees with you. His name is May 7th Nova_Terra! You should argue with him: Show nested quote +On May 07 2012 05:29 Nova_Terra wrote:
I dont think that layabout is scum, as 1. i really doubt that scum would push for a town lynch so hard and defend a scum mate who wasnt even active, which scum would know
When this behavior is continued on and on, it obviously makes someone more scummy
|
I think kurumi should be nominated for best town performance this game, catching all those lurker mafia
|
I will, got 1 more class, already dropped my brand new iphone which destroyed the screen, kinda put a damper on my plans for some sort of post earlier
|
Just got back from yet another apple store, looks like im gonna have to take an hour train ride to get to a place where teh iphone can be repaired for around 150$
isnt it wonderful
So anyway, as I promised i will be making an effort to do some analysis, i decided to do a bit of filter analysis on papapanda
Please read his filter along with this case
papapandas filter is surprisingly short. I didnt realize this until i actually went through his filter. Less than 2 pages.
Papapanda starts off the game decently, actually. He seems to post some minor analysis on behavior at the beginning of the game in regards to blubb and grush.
On May 03 2012 10:15 papapanda wrote:My guess is that grush is semi-lurker and just have been reading/agreeing/sheeping with what information that has/hasnot been posted by you. At first I would've have passed off the blue/green slip from blubbdavid as misreading because I can imagine myself accidentally misreading/mis-pronouncing blue/green. But from his defensive post i have to be a little suspicious. Show nested quote +On May 03 2012 07:55 blubbdavid wrote:
One post on D1 doesn't make someone scum. Even if I probably deserve a warning for my stupidity.
Will defend myself tomorrow, it's late here. And if it is even worth it.
And when you vote, please use the proper thread. It is reasonable to vote for blubb if no one else comes out with major slip-ups, and the town has to lynch someone. Otherwise I would sit back and wait for N1 or D2 when more information might be available. Me is hardcore BLU!
However, at the same time, i noticed a bit of noncommittal behavior on his thoughts on blubb. "i thought he probably misread, but im still somewhat suspicious" just say you have a neutral read if you're neutral on him. Then he kinda tries to make a very early bandwagon target. I dont like that.
Then theres a bunch of 1 liners, with a question that makes it seem like he is contributing. he likes to continually state that he will lynch/unvote blubb, while at the same time saying nothing else about anyone. another thing to note is he puts a "placeholder vote" on blubb in case he cant make the deadline, effectively setting himself up to not be there and not post if he doesnt have to.
Then he jumps on the GRUSH BE HELPFUL NOT THIS SHIT "contribution" bandwagon.
Now here comes the parts that i think are pretty scummy.
On May 05 2012 05:23 papapanda wrote:
Blazinghand:
I hate to be stepping into your line of fire, but I didn't find NT's post to be as bad as you make it sound like it is. Actually, I found that many of the points he made was very similar to the ones I tried to make.
I agree with you on "too dumb to be scum" is not an argument at all but I also do not believe grush to be scum, even though he isn't helping much (blubbdavid, I said this in my previous post but this is basically all my thought on grush as of now).
In fact, I share NT's suspicion of sinensis, and I assure you this is not just OMGUS. My original comment was just to get him to further explain his vote because he actually didn't say anything before his second response. I was shocked at what I believe to be an over-defensive reaction, one that might be coming from having something to hide, from sin. Given, he did provide sufficient evidence of reasoning, but he's accusation of me can hardly be called a read(from yourself, blazinghand).
I am still undecided on a vote. I have some gut feelings about a few persons but no evidence to base that off of.
This post goes like this
SOFT DEFENSE SOFT DEFENSE AGREEMENT AGREEMENT SOFT DEFENSE
and fluff. then he says he is totally undecided. come on, really? you can make a post spamming agreement and soft defense, but you cant make a solid read?
Next comes a puny case of marvellosity after saying a conspiracy theory about how BM's lynching was orchestrated by scum, which seems mighty convenient coming from someone who soft defended BM and didnt take part in his lynch
Then he reposts an idea from layabout and says its "interesting", then agrees again with someone else and sets up a cute little train "marv next after layabout" setting up for future lynch.
Goes on to criticize defense again and agains, and now he goes back to a neutral read on blubb. and says that the only reason to think blubb was scum was becuase of his slip day 1 (wait, didnt he say that he thought this wasnt scummy and he could have easily done the same thing?)
And some more 1 liners.
Later,
"i can see why you want to lynch N_T but like N_T said"
MORE AGREEMENT, MORE AGREEMENT, NOOOOOOOOOOOOO
PUSH SOMETHING OTHER THEN LAYABOUT/MARV MOOOOOOORE
Then he seems like hes making a misunderstanding about mementoss on purpose
allaround,
Agrees a shitton, 1 liners a ton, and tunnels a good bit, soft defends so he can use it later
so right now i feel comfortable putting a vote on him
##Vote: papapanda
|
Also i feel really terrible about not being able to be here, i'll be here as much as i can over the rest of the game, hope you can forgive me. i didnt realize how much of a pain my biology/chemistry/physics exams would be, had no time for the game as a result
|
On May 10 2012 04:52 layabout wrote:
froggynoddy you are now confirmed town
so my scumteam is in here:
grush57
l10f
Eiii
papapanda
cant tell if forgotten or actually made it out of the scumreads
|
On May 10 2012 05:26 grush57 wrote:
Though none of them died so they couldn't flip scum, however it is pretty clear they are all town.
how
|
[spoiler]On May 10 2012 05:44 papapanda wrote:Show nested quote +On May 10 2012 04:17 Nova_Terra wrote:
Just got back from yet another apple store, looks like im gonna have to take an hour train ride to get to a place where teh iphone can be repaired for around 150$
isnt it wonderful
So anyway, as I promised i will be making an effort to do some analysis, i decided to do a bit of filter analysis on papapanda
Please read his filter along with this case
papapandas filter is surprisingly short. I didnt realize this until i actually went through his filter. Less than 2 pages.
Papapanda starts off the game decently, actually. He seems to post some minor analysis on behavior at the beginning of the game in regards to blubb and grush. I made a neat compilation of all your post into a word document and counted your words to be 2653. I excluded all text in quotes. This data is up to this post. Show nested quote +On May 10 2012 04:56 Nova_Terra wrote:On May 10 2012 04:52 layabout wrote:
froggynoddy you are now confirmed town
so my scumteam is in here:
grush57
l10f
Eiii
papapanda cant tell if forgotten or actually made it out of the scumreads I also made one for myself, ofcourse excluding all text in quotes, and the count is 2213(not including this post, which has 280 words). 4 pages? 4 pages of spam maybe. Show nested quote +On May 10 2012 04:17 Nova_Terra wrote:On May 03 2012 10:15 papapanda wrote:My guess is that grush is semi-lurker and just have been reading/agreeing/sheeping with what information that has/hasnot been posted by you. At first I would've have passed off the blue/green slip from blubbdavid as misreading because I can imagine myself accidentally misreading/mis-pronouncing blue/green. But from his defensive post i have to be a little suspicious. On May 03 2012 07:55 blubbdavid wrote:
One post on D1 doesn't make someone scum. Even if I probably deserve a warning for my stupidity.
Will defend myself tomorrow, it's late here. And if it is even worth it.
And when you vote, please use the proper thread. It is reasonable to vote for blubb if no one else comes out with major slip-ups, and the town has to lynch someone. Otherwise I would sit back and wait for N1 or D2 when more information might be available. Me is hardcore BLU! However, at the same time, i noticed a bit of noncommittal behavior on his thoughts on blubb. "i thought he probably misread, but im still somewhat suspicious" just say you have a neutral read if you're neutral on him. Then he kinda tries to make a very early bandwagon target. I dont like that. I was not neutral on Blubb at that stage of the game, your summary of my post is very underrepresentative. It should be"I thought he misread, but his defense made me suspicious." I didn't think that was enough evidence to lynch him ATM. Show nested quote +On May 10 2012 04:17 Nova_Terra wrote:
Then theres a bunch of 1 liners, with a question that makes it seem like he is contributing. he likes to continually state that he will lynch/unvote blubb, while at the same time saying nothing else about anyone. another thing to note is he puts a "placeholder vote" on blubb in case he cant make the deadline, effectively setting himself up to not be there and not post if he doesnt have to.
Then he jumps on the GRUSH BE HELPFUL NOT THIS SHIT "contribution" bandwagon. I would like to remind you that I did, in fact, post afterwards when I realize that I would not miss the deadline. Show nested quote +On May 10 2012 04:17 Nova_Terra wrote:Now here comes the parts that i think are pretty scummy. On May 05 2012 05:23 papapanda wrote:
Blazinghand:
I hate to be stepping into your line of fire, but I didn't find NT's post to be as bad as you make it sound like it is. Actually, I found that many of the points he made was very similar to the ones I tried to make.
I agree with you on "too dumb to be scum" is not an argument at all but I also do not believe grush to be scum, even though he isn't helping much (blubbdavid, I said this in my previous post but this is basically all my thought on grush as of now).
In fact, I share NT's suspicion of sinensis, and I assure you this is not just OMGUS. My original comment was just to get him to further explain his vote because he actually didn't say anything before his second response. I was shocked at what I believe to be an over-defensive reaction, one that might be coming from having something to hide, from sin. Given, he did provide sufficient evidence of reasoning, but he's accusation of me can hardly be called a read(from yourself, blazinghand).
I am still undecided on a vote. I have some gut feelings about a few persons but no evidence to base that off of. This post goes like this SOFT DEFENSE SOFT DEFENSE AGREEMENT AGREEMENT SOFT DEFENSE and fluff. then he says he is totally undecided. come on, really? you can make a post spamming agreement and soft defense, but you cant make a solid read? No, I couldn't make a solid read because I didn't have enough information. This is your read: Show nested quote +On May 05 2012 06:00 Nova_Terra wrote:
In accordance with popular demand, i will share my top scumread which is currently Mementoss (not based on OMGUS)
mementoss starts off suggesting to policy lynch two people, etc. Makes a few totally unneccessary 1 liners, and then when he is called out on it he goes NO WAIT i has reason, then decided to teach us, which just came off freaking weird.
Then he goes aggressive on layabout, throwing suspicion while not doing much of anything, then joins the Grush did something scummy this looks really bad group. not original. then after blazing notes something on me he joins in that too, and makes remarks in an unsure way, seeming to want to be able to backtrack if necessary. then, when called out on it, he goes into defensive aggression mode and suddenly gains massive confidence which hadnt been in his play before.
Overall
1liners
Enlightens us on 1 liners
throws suspicion while not doing much at all
joins scummy bandwagon
seems unsure
agrees with an Oh i noticed the same thing!
makes arguments based on my meta, which is questionable entirely based on the fact that i never play this lurky, town or scum
randomly gets massively confident, as opposed to his earlier play, its as if someone told him to be more sure
and so ##Vote: Mementoss Seems to fit yourself better then mementoss. solid? No. Show nested quote +On May 10 2012 04:17 Nova_Terra wrote:
Next comes a puny case of marvellosity after saying a conspiracy theory about how BM's lynching was orchestrated by scum, which seems mighty convenient coming from someone who soft defended BM and didnt take part in his lynch
Then he reposts an idea from layabout and says its "interesting", then agrees again with someone else and sets up a cute little train "marv next after layabout" setting up for future lynch.
Goes on to criticize defense again and agains, and now he goes back to a neutral read on blubb. and says that the only reason to think blubb was scum was becuase of his slip day 1 (wait, didnt he say that he thought this wasnt scummy and he could have easily done the same thing?)
And some more 1 liners.
Later,
"i can see why you want to lynch N_T but like N_T said"
MORE AGREEMENT, MORE AGREEMENT, NOOOOOOOOOOOOO
PUSH SOMETHING OTHER THEN LAYABOUT/MARV MOOOOOOORE
Then he seems like hes making a misunderstanding about mementoss on purpose
allaround,
Agrees a shitton, 1 liners a ton, and tunnels a good bit, soft defends so he can use it later
so right now i feel comfortable putting a vote on him
##Vote: papapanda Keyword is last section is "Agree". Yes, I will admit if I am seeing a player agreeing all the time, it raises some suspicion that he is trying to stay off the radar. However, this is how I talk/post; if you want I can try to change that but it might/not work. If you feel like this is enough to lynch me, I won't pressure you for more reason, but I want you to seriously reconsider. I think I have my two scums in layabout and marv. While I am definitely keeping my head up for other suspicious people, this is where my focus lies. If you want to find someone with little posts, look at sinensis.
Hmm. I find it interesting that you seem to think that your reads were solid and mine werent. mine were "mem does X Y And Z scummy" and voted on it, yours were "i agree with X that Y is scummy but it goes along with Ys meta" etc. with no real pressure on it a all.
Please change the agree thing.
I will think over your posting more, but for now i leave my vote on you. i am interested as to what your two scumreads flip as, however.
|
On May 10 2012 05:46 Sinensis wrote:
N_T your "analysis" post makes me feel like we are playing a different game. No one is going to vote papapanda today...
If you're scum why didn't you deflect attention onto an easier target like layabout? Is layabout your scum buddy? Why didn't you deflect attention onto layabout anyway, do you think he's town?
If you are town and you have been suspecting papapanda for a while now, why didn't you say something about it before everyone was on your back asking for contribution? You could have at least mentioned you were suspicious of him and that would have counted for a small contribution.
The post that set me off on papapanda and made me remember that he was in the game is one where he agreed with me and didnt at the same time
or maybe it was when he agreed with me and understood someone else.
before that, i didnt really think anything of him
also im not scum, and therefore im not deflecting onto an easy target when i want these thoughts on papa out
|
also sin, i am really neutral as to layabout now. his defense of himself seems relatively genuine.
|
On May 10 2012 05:26 grush57 wrote:
Though none of them died so they couldn't flip scum, however it is pretty clear they are all town.
answer
how is it clear in any way that they are all town
|
|
|
it seems genuine from a frustrated townies perspective
|
quite possibly because i know the feel
|
On May 10 2012 06:06 papapanda wrote:Show nested quote +On May 10 2012 05:54 Nova_Terra wrote:[spoiler] On May 10 2012 05:44 papapanda wrote:On May 10 2012 04:17 Nova_Terra wrote:
Just got back from yet another apple store, looks like im gonna have to take an hour train ride to get to a place where teh iphone can be repaired for around 150$
isnt it wonderful
So anyway, as I promised i will be making an effort to do some analysis, i decided to do a bit of filter analysis on papapanda
Please read his filter along with this case
papapandas filter is surprisingly short. I didnt realize this until i actually went through his filter. Less than 2 pages.
Papapanda starts off the game decently, actually. He seems to post some minor analysis on behavior at the beginning of the game in regards to blubb and grush. I made a neat compilation of all your post into a word document and counted your words to be 2653. I excluded all text in quotes. This data is up to this post. On May 10 2012 04:56 Nova_Terra wrote:On May 10 2012 04:52 layabout wrote:
froggynoddy you are now confirmed town
so my scumteam is in here:
grush57
l10f
Eiii
papapanda cant tell if forgotten or actually made it out of the scumreads I also made one for myself, ofcourse excluding all text in quotes, and the count is 2213(not including this post, which has 280 words). 4 pages? 4 pages of spam maybe. On May 10 2012 04:17 Nova_Terra wrote:On May 03 2012 10:15 papapanda wrote:My guess is that grush is semi-lurker and just have been reading/agreeing/sheeping with what information that has/hasnot been posted by you. At first I would've have passed off the blue/green slip from blubbdavid as misreading because I can imagine myself accidentally misreading/mis-pronouncing blue/green. But from his defensive post i have to be a little suspicious. On May 03 2012 07:55 blubbdavid wrote:
One post on D1 doesn't make someone scum. Even if I probably deserve a warning for my stupidity.
Will defend myself tomorrow, it's late here. And if it is even worth it.
And when you vote, please use the proper thread. It is reasonable to vote for blubb if no one else comes out with major slip-ups, and the town has to lynch someone. Otherwise I would sit back and wait for N1 or D2 when more information might be available. Me is hardcore BLU! However, at the same time, i noticed a bit of noncommittal behavior on his thoughts on blubb. "i thought he probably misread, but im still somewhat suspicious" just say you have a neutral read if you're neutral on him. Then he kinda tries to make a very early bandwagon target. I dont like that. I was not neutral on Blubb at that stage of the game, your summary of my post is very underrepresentative. It should be"I thought he misread, but his defense made me suspicious." I didn't think that was enough evidence to lynch him ATM. On May 10 2012 04:17 Nova_Terra wrote:
Then theres a bunch of 1 liners, with a question that makes it seem like he is contributing. he likes to continually state that he will lynch/unvote blubb, while at the same time saying nothing else about anyone. another thing to note is he puts a "placeholder vote" on blubb in case he cant make the deadline, effectively setting himself up to not be there and not post if he doesnt have to.
Then he jumps on the GRUSH BE HELPFUL NOT THIS SHIT "contribution" bandwagon. I would like to remind you that I did, in fact, post afterwards when I realize that I would not miss the deadline. On May 10 2012 04:17 Nova_Terra wrote:Now here comes the parts that i think are pretty scummy. On May 05 2012 05:23 papapanda wrote:
Blazinghand:
I hate to be stepping into your line of fire, but I didn't find NT's post to be as bad as you make it sound like it is. Actually, I found that many of the points he made was very similar to the ones I tried to make.
I agree with you on "too dumb to be scum" is not an argument at all but I also do not believe grush to be scum, even though he isn't helping much (blubbdavid, I said this in my previous post but this is basically all my thought on grush as of now).
In fact, I share NT's suspicion of sinensis, and I assure you this is not just OMGUS. My original comment was just to get him to further explain his vote because he actually didn't say anything before his second response. I was shocked at what I believe to be an over-defensive reaction, one that might be coming from having something to hide, from sin. Given, he did provide sufficient evidence of reasoning, but he's accusation of me can hardly be called a read(from yourself, blazinghand).
I am still undecided on a vote. I have some gut feelings about a few persons but no evidence to base that off of. This post goes like this SOFT DEFENSE SOFT DEFENSE AGREEMENT AGREEMENT SOFT DEFENSE and fluff. then he says he is totally undecided. come on, really? you can make a post spamming agreement and soft defense, but you cant make a solid read? No, I couldn't make a solid read because I didn't have enough information. This is your read: On May 05 2012 06:00 Nova_Terra wrote:
In accordance with popular demand, i will share my top scumread which is currently Mementoss (not based on OMGUS)
mementoss starts off suggesting to policy lynch two people, etc. Makes a few totally unneccessary 1 liners, and then when he is called out on it he goes NO WAIT i has reason, then decided to teach us, which just came off freaking weird.
Then he goes aggressive on layabout, throwing suspicion while not doing much of anything, then joins the Grush did something scummy this looks really bad group. not original. then after blazing notes something on me he joins in that too, and makes remarks in an unsure way, seeming to want to be able to backtrack if necessary. then, when called out on it, he goes into defensive aggression mode and suddenly gains massive confidence which hadnt been in his play before.
Overall
1liners
Enlightens us on 1 liners
throws suspicion while not doing much at all
joins scummy bandwagon
seems unsure
agrees with an Oh i noticed the same thing!
makes arguments based on my meta, which is questionable entirely based on the fact that i never play this lurky, town or scum
randomly gets massively confident, as opposed to his earlier play, its as if someone told him to be more sure
and so ##Vote: Mementoss Seems to fit yourself better then mementoss. solid? No. On May 10 2012 04:17 Nova_Terra wrote:
Next comes a puny case of marvellosity after saying a conspiracy theory about how BM's lynching was orchestrated by scum, which seems mighty convenient coming from someone who soft defended BM and didnt take part in his lynch
Then he reposts an idea from layabout and says its "interesting", then agrees again with someone else and sets up a cute little train "marv next after layabout" setting up for future lynch.
Goes on to criticize defense again and agains, and now he goes back to a neutral read on blubb. and says that the only reason to think blubb was scum was becuase of his slip day 1 (wait, didnt he say that he thought this wasnt scummy and he could have easily done the same thing?)
And some more 1 liners.
Later,
"i can see why you want to lynch N_T but like N_T said"
MORE AGREEMENT, MORE AGREEMENT, NOOOOOOOOOOOOO
PUSH SOMETHING OTHER THEN LAYABOUT/MARV MOOOOOOORE
Then he seems like hes making a misunderstanding about mementoss on purpose
allaround,
Agrees a shitton, 1 liners a ton, and tunnels a good bit, soft defends so he can use it later
so right now i feel comfortable putting a vote on him
##Vote: papapanda Keyword is last section is "Agree". Yes, I will admit if I am seeing a player agreeing all the time, it raises some suspicion that he is trying to stay off the radar. However, this is how I talk/post; if you want I can try to change that but it might/not work. If you feel like this is enough to lynch me, I won't pressure you for more reason, but I want you to seriously reconsider. I think I have my two scums in layabout and marv. While I am definitely keeping my head up for other suspicious people, this is where my focus lies. If you want to find someone with little posts, look at sinensis. Hmm. I find it interesting that you seem to think that your reads were solid and mine werent. mine were "mem does X Y And Z scummy" and voted on it, yours were "i agree with X that Y is scummy but it goes along with Ys meta" etc. with no real pressure on it a all. Please change the agree thing. I will think over your posting more, but for now i leave my vote on you. i am interested as to what your two scumreads flip as, however. What I said was it was too early for any case to be solid. No worries, layabout:p
Then say that youre neutral leaning scum or something on him. dont say this "makes him normal but this is scummy" and do nothing with it
|
If it comes down to it, i would be willing to switch my vote to grush to ensure a majority
|
I kinda like most of that proposal
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
