Ryker said:
Three things.
1.) Why is being angry a scum tell? Don't just say it is.
2.) Now I'm not really angry, which isn't your original story.
3.) I have a history of being angry regardless of alignment and more than enough cause this game. Get your **** out of here
1) Because you have no reason to be mad. You cloak yourself in it because apparently it's your "meta" but in reality it just shows you're a poor player lacking the ability to play clamly.
2)But you're always angry? It's your meta, right.
3) BOOM. There it is. Exactly what I was waiting for, trying to push it off on the meta. Scummy ****, Ryker. Get your false **** out of here, because you're fooling no one.
@1: Dislike. Dislike. Dislike. That's such bull**** I can't even believe it. You make a reaching point that Ryker is trying to cloack himself in meta when responding the the question "why is being angry a scum tell" and then attack Ryker's credibility by calling him a bad player due to his habits. You didn't respond to ****, you're just underhandedly sandbagging him.
And there is significant reasoning for him being mad at L-1, which he stated right here.
Ryker said:
Do you honestly believe that ANYONE hammering me at this point would've ended well? A scum does it, they have a scum buddy to help push back a lynch. The entire town would have to push it and not get dissuaded IN LYLO OF ALL THINGS! If a townie does it, the scum have every reason to sink two votes onto a player where only one townie has to be persuaded and we lose the game.
Which I think is valid reasoning.
@3: This is also grody as ****. Ryker isn't trying brush things off, he's just stating why its a null-tell. You're blowing up the entire conversation pertaining to Ryker being mad a scum tell, then you acknowledge that its part of Ryker's meta and then call him scummy for him trying to tell you its meta. You're changing your argument to incriminate Ryker for getting angry at L-1 while in reality his outburst was supported with reasoning and the definition of null. How about
you get that **** out of here.
Ryker said:
Deflecting the question at hand.
I reacted to an INCREDIBLY stupid statement and I want you to answer the questions I posed instead of brushing them off.
PFP said:
I did answer it. I just asked why you were freaking out, because once again you had no reason. That's not frustrated town at all. I always get frustrated town vibes if they're there, I'm not feeling it with you to be honest.
Man. Ryker already got at what I was talking about above.
No, CR, you didn't answer his question. You incriminated him for a null-tell, misrepresented his defense, and attacked his credibility as a player.
Since PFP claimed prematurely, I call for a massclaim by vote. Asid, TSN, Soup, DH do you agree? Put the person you want to claim first, and then a second. Once the list is complete, points will dictate the order.
+2 Ryker
+1 TSN
No. Just no. Out of 7 players, one claims and you already want to mass claim when we aren't in danger after toDay's lynch? Since PFP did claim prematurely don't you think it would be a good idea to slow down and evaluate the day calmly? We're definitely not mass claiming and if we did I want CR claiming first since he's so eager to get everything out on the table.
@AW: I want your read on CR and I want you to tell me how PFP's push on Ryker is anywhere near as scummy as CR's.
@Soup: If you don't like dipping your toes into flavor speculation, why did you unvote PFP based on flavor speculation.
Continuing to read.