Pandar, your post is utter bullshit, and makes me think you are also scum. I'm considering moving my vote from Joker to you. I'll be happy if either of you scumbuckets hang today.
Roles that would blatantly buddy:
Scum with a beneficial effect when they die trying to implicate someone as well - for example, Mad Gunman buddies Townie X, then when Mad Gunman dies, he shoots someone randomly (hopefully not the buddied Townie X, in his mind), and now Townie X looks bad for having scum extol his virtues.
Jesters
Townies who have anti-town effects while existing (for instance, "Troll" from BYOR5 ruining all roleflips)
Point made yet?
Not even close. Jesters or townies with a deathwish would be trying harder (and Troll persisted after death in BYOR5, so death doesn't help there; bad example), and scum mad gunman is full of ifs and would not have defended himself as much. Your notion that someone would play it like that
on purpose is far fetched at best, pulled out of your ass to cover a scummy and vacuous argument at worst.
He seeks clarification for exactly why Toaster and MBP feel that IronyOwl was worth attacking for so long.
Ya, no.
Toaster and Puppet, please restate you cases against IronyOwl.
Not clarification. Restatement. The same stuff as before. Your attempt to reframe what he was doing shall be noted, however.
No. Restatement of one's case is, as I said, what I did earlier with Jokerman. A summary of the argument with evidence to show that the case is solid. It's not mindless repeating, it's a restatement of the premises, evidence, and process to prove it. Your continued reluctance to see this is scummy, and makes me think there's a reason you don't want people to prove their cases. Is it MBP's case in particular, or do you object to it in general? Let's see.
As the day will be over in a bit over 36 hours,
I call everyone to restate (briefly, with evidence) their case on the person they are voting or would like most to see lynched by day end. It will help form a consensus and compare the weight of evidence present. A lot has been said in the last week, and we could use a summary on everyone's position. I presented mine on Jokerman
[1], and can do one on Pandar if needed, but would prefer others to do it.
Joe isn't in the same suspicion category as IronyOwl. He's between that and the lower one because I can't decide where to place him for the REASONS I STATED.
That aside, in order:
Reasons already stated http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=72355.msg1810383#msg1810383
Again, no. Your "reasons already stated" post states no actual reasons. It says "Archangel asking MBP to restate his case is bad/scummy", which is bullshit, and it
fails to give reasons on whether Jokerman's OMGUS was scummy or not ("no content!" you say, and yet he has posted plenty of content. Go read it and
give a fucking opinion). Your continued indirect defence of both Jokerman and MBP is very scummy, and reflects badly on both of them. You still have played an utterly useless D1. If anyone is a jester here, it's probably you (or maybe Org, but less likely; he'd be trying harder, like you are).
You are dripping scumminess, and I'll be happy to see you hang for it. I'll go on record and say that I'll support a lynch of either Jokerman, Pandar or Org. If it's only up to me, I'll probably choose in that order, although I'm concerned about one of the last two being a Jester.
PS: Please don't do that huge font thing. It's sophomoric and obnoxious.