|
|
Post by Potato on Jul 18, 2013 12:27:36 GMT -5
Are we still going on about this? I accused Si for many other reasons, some that even Jet admitted he can see. Now you're just ignoring them because you know they're true. I was talking about yesterday. I don't recall seeing any other proof then: He's inactive and agrees too much with others. Yes, I had more proof yesterday too. The proof in the post I made earlier includes evidence on Si from yesterday and today. And ah, you're admitting that he has proof against him now. Excellent, you were saying he didn't earlier. |
|
|
|
Post by Potato on Jul 18, 2013 12:29:36 GMT -5
Basically Si's defenders are ignoring all proof against him other than the point that he agreed with others too much and lacked contribution. You all seem to be ignoring the fact that there is more proof against him from yesterday and especially today. Both Jet and Soraz acknowledged that but seemed to be trying to ignore it. Why?
|
|
|
|
Post by bobafett590 on Jul 18, 2013 12:29:36 GMT -5
Voting will probably begin any moment now.
|
|
|
|
Post by Pinda on Jul 18, 2013 12:31:03 GMT -5
I was talking about yesterday. I don't recall seeing any other proof then: He's inactive and agrees too much with others. Yes, I had more proof yesterday too. The proof in the post I made earlier includes evidence on Si from yesterday and today. And ah, you're admitting that he has proof against him now. Excellent, you were saying he didn't earlier. I was saying the proof wasn't convincing enough, especially compared to Varg. You keep changing my words to make me look bad. |
|
|
|
Post by Pinda on Jul 18, 2013 12:31:45 GMT -5
Basically Si's defenders are ignoring all proof against him other than the point that he agreed with others too much and lacked contribution. You all seem to be ignoring the fact that there is more proof against him from yesterday and especially today. Both Jet and Soraz acknowledged that but seemed to be trying to ignore it. Why? So what is this new proof against Si-donn? |
|
|
|
Post by Potato on Jul 18, 2013 12:32:49 GMT -5
Yes, I had more proof yesterday too. The proof in the post I made earlier includes evidence on Si from yesterday and today. And ah, you're admitting that he has proof against him now. Excellent, you were saying he didn't earlier. I was saying the proof wasn't convincing enough, especially compared to Varg. You keep changing my words to make me look bad. I'm not changing your words. I'm just pointing out that you're only saying I'm using one piece of evidence against Si, and that's not true. You even said that he did have more proof against him yesterday and today and you're still trying to ignore it. |
|
|
|
Post by Potato on Jul 18, 2013 12:33:24 GMT -5
Basically Si's defenders are ignoring all proof against him other than the point that he agreed with others too much and lacked contribution. You all seem to be ignoring the fact that there is more proof against him from yesterday and especially today. Both Jet and Soraz acknowledged that but seemed to be trying to ignore it. Why? So what is this new proof against Si-donn? Do you really need me to quote posts for you? |
|
|
|
Post by Pinda on Jul 18, 2013 12:33:46 GMT -5
So what is this new proof against Si-donn? Do you really need me to quote posts for you? Or tell me on which page your post is. |
|
|
|
Post by Potato on Jul 18, 2013 12:35:43 GMT -5
You accuse me because you say I don't contribute. I'm contributing. And you fail to notice the people who actually don't contribute. Why don't you accuse Groznacca or Da'lak? It's not just because of that. I've stated many other reasons that you keep ignoring, like Varg being sketchy on how to make you look loyal, you accusing me only because I accused you, you having other major suspects of mine side with you, and you acting like your loyal because Varg was voted off despite you not even accusing Varg until just about everyone already said they'd vote for him. My initial suspicions towards you were about lack of contribution, but my deeper suspicions were for many other reasons which led to me voting for you. You also keep telling me to accuse other people because you don't want to be accused. This post sums it up fairly quickly. Not to mention that one of Si's only defenses yesterday was in OOC because he had no IC defenses. |
|
|
|
Post by Potato on Jul 18, 2013 12:37:55 GMT -5
Another thing to consider is that I'm aggressive while Si's laid back. I've supported my reasons much more than him. Just about every time I accuse him all he says is that I'm scum for siding with Varg and that my evidence is bad.
|
|
|
|
Post by red on Jul 18, 2013 12:42:47 GMT -5
Another thing to consider is that I'm aggressive while Si's laid back. I've supported my reasons much more than him. Just about every time I accuse him all he says is that I'm scum for siding with Varg and that my evidence is bad. Y'know that could also be used against you. |
|
|
|
Post by Potato on Jul 18, 2013 12:43:27 GMT -5
Another thing to consider is that I'm aggressive while Si's laid back. I've supported my reasons much more than him. Just about every time I accuse him all he says is that I'm scum for siding with Varg and that my evidence is bad. Y'know that could also be used against you. How's that? |
|
|
|
Post by Pinda on Jul 18, 2013 12:46:08 GMT -5
It's not just because of that. I've stated many other reasons that you keep ignoring, like Varg being sketchy on how to make you look loyal, you accusing me only because I accused you, you having other major suspects of mine side with you, and you acting like your loyal because Varg was voted off despite you not even accusing Varg until just about everyone already said they'd vote for him. My initial suspicions towards you were about lack of contribution, but my deeper suspicions were for many other reasons which led to me voting for you. You also keep telling me to accuse other people because you don't want to be accused. 1. I don't understand what you mean by that. You mean that Varg accused him to make him look loyal? 2. Well that's something people on both sides seem to do. Many loyalists think people that want them voted of could be scum 3. What do you mean by that? He suspects people that are on your side? Well that's understandable yesterday you almost prevented the arrest of a scum. 4. You got a point there. Besides your second reason none of these could be use on day 1. So the proof on day 1 was very limited. Yet you still was so certain he was scum. |
|
|
|
Post by Pinda on Jul 18, 2013 12:48:35 GMT -5
Another thing to consider is that I'm aggressive while Si's laid back. I've supported my reasons much more than him. Just about every time I accuse him all he says is that I'm scum for siding with Varg and that my evidence is bad. Well that you sided with scum is more convincing proof than yours in my opinion. And he didn't know you claimed third party. |
|
|
|
Post by Potato on Jul 18, 2013 12:52:11 GMT -5
I can't quote it, but go to page 22 in the day 1 thread. You'll find a big post from me stating more evidence towards Si there.
|
|
|
|
Post by Potato on Jul 18, 2013 12:52:25 GMT -5
Another thing to consider is that I'm aggressive while Si's laid back. I've supported my reasons much more than him. Just about every time I accuse him all he says is that I'm scum for siding with Varg and that my evidence is bad. Well that you sided with scum is more convincing proof than yours in my opinion. And he didn't know you claimed third party. I'm sure someone like you told him. |
|
|
|
Post by Cad Bane (Dark) on Jul 18, 2013 12:52:32 GMT -5
Weak evidence? How? Do you really want me to pull up that post with all the suspicion towards you from yesterday? Are you forgetting the multiple times I've accuse you? You, Jet, and Soraz's excuses for voting me is that I have weak evidence. That in itself is weak evidence. You accuse me because you say I don't contribute. I'm contributing. And you fail to notice the people who actually don't contribute. Why don't you accuse Groznacca or Da'lak? Or me. |
|
|
|
Post by Cad Bane (Dark) on Jul 18, 2013 12:53:11 GMT -5
I might be voted off....
|
|
|
|
Post by Potato on Jul 18, 2013 12:53:45 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Pinda on Jul 18, 2013 12:56:13 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Cad Bane (Dark) on Jul 18, 2013 12:57:56 GMT -5
Inactivity.... Sometimes people vote off people for inactivity... |
|
|
|
Post by bobafett590 on Jul 18, 2013 12:58:18 GMT -5
 No one is suspicious of you. |
|
|
|
Post by Newan on Jul 18, 2013 13:06:05 GMT -5
No you wont be voted for inactivity though Nam said he would kill inactives so I would suggest being a bit more active  |
|
|
|
Post by Maverick-Jedi-Valen on Jul 18, 2013 13:11:09 GMT -5
Soraz just seems to be covering for Si-Donn in my opinion.
|
|
|
|
Post by Pinda on Jul 18, 2013 13:14:03 GMT -5
Soraz just seems to be covering for Si-Donn in my opinion. Because I don't think he's scum. I'm most likely voting Karshii for his weird accusations and sudden vote without explanation. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 18, 2013 13:14:34 GMT -5
Soraz just seems to be covering for Si-Donn in my opinion. Or just making a statement. |
|
|
|
Post by Pinda on Jul 18, 2013 13:14:48 GMT -5
OOC: Newan... did you just like your own post?
|
|
|
|
Post by Maverick-Jedi-Valen on Jul 18, 2013 13:16:05 GMT -5
Soraz just seems to be covering for Si-Donn in my opinion. Because I don't think he's scum. I'm most likely voting Karshii for his weird accusations and sudden vote without explanation. Yeah, that was unexpected. He's also determined to get rid of Jet and I really don't think he's stated his reasons. |
|
|
|
Post by Newan on Jul 18, 2013 13:17:35 GMT -5
OOC: Newan... did you just like your own post? I guess so I accidentally hit the like when I went to edit. |
|
|
|
Post by Pinda on Jul 18, 2013 13:17:48 GMT -5
Because I don't think he's scum. I'm most likely voting Karshii for his weird accusations and sudden vote without explanation. Yeah, that was unexpected. He's also determined to get rid of Jet and I really don't think he's stated his reasons. He did state reasons but they made no sense. |
|
No one is suspicious of you.
it’s been quite a while. I’ve been pretty good, how about yourself? 