Moderator: Community Team
You basically got it all, that was pretty accurate. It should be mentioned that Fissk later tried to explain his vote. Instead of summing it up, I suggest you go find it and read it yourself so you can draw your own conclusions. It happened a few pages ago.shieldgenerator7 wrote:Ok, then, for you I will do myArmy of GOD wrote:Can't be arsed to read the pages I've missed. Anyway, unvote vote nagerous because he's skummeh
SG7's Game Summary!
Not much has happened so far.
1. Joke votes
2. Freezie claims miller
3. Many doubters appear, some skeptical
4. Hank asks about "mafia alliances"
5. Town goes AWOL,
6. evilchaos votes hank,
7. TheFissk votes evilchaos with no reason,
8. TheFissk is pressured, unvotes, town bandwagons him
9. jonty BW on TheFissk,
10. nag claims "poor logic" and votes for jonty
11. chu votes nag for voting n00b
I may have missed a few things but that's basically it.
I don't know if that was intentional, but reading this summary was hilarious!shieldgenerator7 wrote:Ok, then, for you I will do myArmy of GOD wrote:Can't be arsed to read the pages I've missed. Anyway, unvote vote nagerous because he's skummeh
SG7's Game Summary!
Not much has happened so far.
1. Joke votes
2. Freezie claims miller
3. Many doubters appear, some skeptical
4. Hank asks about "mafia alliances"
5. Town goes AWOL,
6. evilchaos votes hank,
7. TheFissk votes evilchaos with no reason,
8. TheFissk is pressured, unvotes, town bandwagons him
9. jonty BW on TheFissk,
10. nag claims "poor logic" and votes for jonty
11. chu votes nag for voting n00b
I may have missed a few things but that's basically it.
Are you really going to make a vote on someone without doing your research on what has happened?Army of GOD wrote:Can't be arsed to read the pages I've missed. Anyway, unvote vote nagerous because he's skummeh
I just realized something - where is the little bugger? He hasn't posted at all since his clarification to the question, which left a lot to be desired.Victor Sullivan wrote:Vote Hank Why are we looking for people associated with him when we can just vote the man himself?
-Sully
TheFissk wrote:i think you could have been a little more creative than just copying his post and changing the last sentence but i guess their are time constraints...Fircoal wrote:Jonty is a new guy and he is learning, he probably had his reasons and now has come accross as a little scummy. However, I personally think that he is innocent and just trying to hunt leads and play the game. However, you've come accross to me now as just a bandwagon starter trying to get an easy lynch across.nagerous wrote:Fissk is a new guy and he is learning, he had his reasons and now has come accross as a little scummy by backtracking. However, I personally think that he is innocent and just trying to hunt leads and play the game. However, you've come accross to me now as just a bandwagoner trying to hide in the middle of the wagon.jonty125 wrote:unvote vote Fissk for voting a player with no reason (at the time of voting) and then providing a weak defense.
My vote goes on you, unvote vote jonty
My vote goes on you, unvote vote Nagerous
plus i have half a mind to vote for you for a similar same reason everyone is bandwagoning me (at least you tried to explain your self) but i'll hold for now...

Never do today what you can put off 'til tomorrowRodion wrote:Fissk, give me a GREAT reason not to vote on you.
I think that post went right over your head, as well as many other's heads. The point was basically that I was copying his response and applying it to his vote of Jonty. The thing that I find suspious about it is that he seems to let you (TheFissk) slide while he didn't let Jonty slide. They're both noobs doing noobish things. Can you please explain to me why you'll defend one but not the other Naggy?TheFissk wrote:i think you could have been a little more creative than just copying his post and changing the last sentence but i guess their are time constraints...Fircoal wrote:Jonty is a new guy and he is learning, he probably had his reasons and now has come accross as a little scummy. However, I personally think that he is innocent and just trying to hunt leads and play the game. However, you've come accross to me now as just a bandwagon starter trying to get an easy lynch across.nagerous wrote:Fissk is a new guy and he is learning, he had his reasons and now has come accross as a little scummy by backtracking. However, I personally think that he is innocent and just trying to hunt leads and play the game. However, you've come accross to me now as just a bandwagoner trying to hide in the middle of the wagon.jonty125 wrote:unvote vote Fissk for voting a player with no reason (at the time of voting) and then providing a weak defense.
My vote goes on you, unvote vote jonty
My vote goes on you, unvote vote Nagerous
plus i have half a mind to vote for you for a similar same reason everyone is bandwagoning me (at least you tried to explain your self) but i'll hold for now...
Skoffin wrote: So um.. er... I'll be honest, I don't know what the f*ck to do from here. Goddamnit chu.
This type of defense is only excusable if it's Mandy doing it. Then for some odd reason it seems perfectly normal.TheFissk wrote:Never do today what you can put off 'til tomorrowRodion wrote:Fissk, give me a GREAT reason not to vote on you.
-William Pulteney, Earl of Bath, English MP
I see that you have made three spelling mistakes
-Thomas de Mahay, Marquis de Favras, French aristocrat, his last words upon reading his death sentence before being
guillotined
life is not defined by your achievements but the mistakes you make, don't let this be one.
Skoffin wrote: So um.. er... I'll be honest, I don't know what the f*ck to do from here. Goddamnit chu.

Haggis_McMutton wrote:2. Anyone else find it kind of funny that naxus is NK'd right after insisting that we're all paranoid?
If there is we need to find out who!Rodion wrote:We have a "???" vote on TheFissk.
Perhaps there's a doublevoter out there?
nagerous wrote:Freezie are you trying to impute that there is some form of dodgy relationship between me and fissk because that is defamatory and I can sue your ass for that.

Why? So you and your scum buddies can kill him off?Hank44Soccer wrote:If there is we need to find out who!Rodion wrote:We have a "???" vote on TheFissk.
Perhaps there's a doublevoter out there?

Hank44Soccer wrote:If there is we need to find out who!Rodion wrote:We have a "???" vote on TheFissk.
Perhaps there's a doublevoter out there?

Way to tip your hand. unvote vote kratoskratos644 wrote:Are you really going to make a vote on someone without doing your research on what has happened?Army of GOD wrote:Can't be arsed to read the pages I've missed. Anyway, unvote vote nagerous because he's skummeh
Vote Army of GOD