Conquer Club

unvote vote suggs

pushing for the lynch of a claimed townie

scumdar just blew up

do you think if i was scum i'd really be that careless with my claim?
I'm innocent so just want to spped things up.
Frankly, your claim had as much convition as OJ Simpson's defence, ie NONE.

(yeah, yeah he got off-good come back, lets move on)

So, yeah Cena still gets my vote. To all my fellow townis, lets just lynch him so we can speed things up.
If he really is town, we have only lost a role that sounds like hassle anyway.

suggs wrote:So, yeah Cena still gets my vote. To all my fellow townis, lets just lynch him so we can speed things up.
If he really is town, we have only lost a .

role that sounds like hassle anywayYou kidding? If he's townie, we could use the bullets. We're hopelessly outnumbered, so lynching actual scum may well be next to impossible. We need as many other ways to get rid of them as possible.

browng-08 wrote:

suggs wrote:So, yeah Cena still gets my vote. To all my fellow townis, lets just lynch him so we can speed things up.
If he really is town, we have only lost a role that sounds like hassle anyway.

You kidding? If he's townie, we could use the bullets. We're hopelessly outnumbered, so lynching actual scum may well be next to impossible. We need as many other ways to get rid of them as possible.

EBWOP

what does ebwop mean?

by the way, i should stress that my vote is ytterly irrational and unfair.
Its a result of being in several mafia games at the moment where not much is happening.
So lets just lynch someone for gods sake.

suggs wrote:what does ebwop mean?

edit by way of post

[quote="suggs"]what does ebwop mean?[/quote
was wondering that myself..
I would stick to my original vote, but we do need to lynch someone and cena is as good an idea as any - if he does turn out to be a goodie, then we can always blame suggs!
so UNVOTE VOTE cena-rules

mandyb wrote:

suggs wrote:what does ebwop mean?

was wondering that myself..
I would stick to my original vote, but we do need to lynch someone and cena is as good an idea as any - if he does turn out to be a goodie, then we can always blame suggs!
so UNVOTE VOTE cena-rules

sorry, but that's just scummy as hell. We can't lynch someone just 'cause we're getting bored. Especially when the combined mafia are more than the town.
unvote vote mandyb
FOS suggs - same reason.

unvote vote Cena


I blame suggs.

Snowpepsi wrote:unvote vote Cena


I blame suggs.

Think for yourself. Or are you scum, hoping for a quick bandwagon lynch? FOS you, too (and anyone else who hops on this without presenting any good reason).

what constitutes a good reason? - no one has a clue at this stage - seems we just have to go for someone/anyone and hope for the best - lynch no one and we're no better off on day 2 than we are now.

f*ck it, lets lynch browno.

UNVOTE

VOTE BROWNG-08

I like being town ,you can really vote with impunity

mandyb wrote:what constitutes a good reason? - no one has a clue at this stage - seems we just have to go for someone/anyone and hope for the best - lynch no one and we're no better off on day 2 than we are now.

Except he's claimed. so we have more reason to keep him, seeing as there's absolutely no reason to suspect him

suggs wrote:f*ck it, lets lynch browno.

UNVOTE

VOTE BROWNG-08

I like being town ,you can really vote with impunity

Quite the opposite, actually. Town needs to vote carefully. Townies are the only people actually trying to lynch the right people. Scum don't give a shit. They know who's safe, and who is a threat. Townies need to think it out first.

browng-08 wrote:

mandyb wrote:what constitutes a good reason? - no one has a clue at this stage - seems we just have to go for someone/anyone and hope for the best - lynch no one and we're no better off on day 2 than we are now.

Except he's claimed. so we have more reason to keep him, seeing as there's absolutely no reason to suspect him

sure he's claimed, but does that mean anything?
Question is, is he telling the truth?
You're very keen to protect him - that makes me suspect you!
Shall have to think about this ...

brown is getting on my nerves plus suggs is a leg.

vote browng-08

mandyb wrote:

browng-08 wrote:

mandyb wrote:what constitutes a good reason? - no one has a clue at this stage - seems we just have to go for someone/anyone and hope for the best - lynch no one and we're no better off on day 2 than we are now.

Except he's claimed. so we have more reason to keep him, seeing as there's absolutely no reason to suspect him

sure he's claimed, but does that mean anything?
Question is, is he telling the truth?
You're very keen to protect him - that makes me suspect you!
Shall have to think about this ...

I'm not say we have to trust him. I'm saying that since there's absolutely no evidence against him, it's too great a risk for town.

browng-08 wrote:

mandyb wrote:

browng-08 wrote:

mandyb wrote:what constitutes a good reason? - no one has a clue at this stage - seems we just have to go for someone/anyone and hope for the best - lynch no one and we're no better off on day 2 than we are now.

Except he's claimed. so we have more reason to keep him, seeing as there's absolutely no reason to suspect him

sure he's claimed, but does that mean anything?
Question is, is he telling the truth?
You're very keen to protect him - that makes me suspect you!
Shall have to think about this ...

I'm not say we have to trust him. I'm saying that since there's absolutely no evidence against him, it's too great a risk for town.

So you are saying that we shouldn't lynch anybody?

amazzony wrote:

browng-08 wrote:

mandyb wrote:

browng-08 wrote:

mandyb wrote:what constitutes a good reason? - no one has a clue at this stage - seems we just have to go for someone/anyone and hope for the best - lynch no one and we're no better off on day 2 than we are now.

Except he's claimed. so we have more reason to keep him, seeing as there's absolutely no reason to suspect him

sure he's claimed, but does that mean anything?
Question is, is he telling the truth?
You're very keen to protect him - that makes me suspect you!
Shall have to think about this ...

I'm not say we have to trust him. I'm saying that since there's absolutely no evidence against him, it's too great a risk for town.

So you are saying that we shouldn't lynch anybody?

no.

What are you saying then? That we should wait and think and then oops - deadline and nobody gets lynched and townies lose a day?

*mad, MOB MENTALITY, HUZZAH!*

"Come on chaps, lets lynch browng-if nothing else, when we find out hes the copper, it will be a laugh".

*wildly looks around for the lead piping*

here here

amazzony wrote:What are you saying then? That we should wait and think and then oops - deadline and nobody gets lynched and townies lose a day?

Maybe I'm saying it's stupid to unquestioningly follow the noob who's spent his whole time trying to get someone bandwagonned because he's bored. But, you're right. Go ahead and vote cena off. We clearly have no time left to approach this rationally so, as suggs so aptly puts it, let's let mob mentality do the work for us.

Nah, you're out of date, brownstain.
The inner beast within is now shouting LYNCH BROWNBOLLOCKS, cos his eyes are too close together".

For gods sake this is a FANTASY INTERNET game-if you can kill someone indiscriminately here, where can you.

I was never near that car park.