Lurker > Corrik7

MoogleKupo141 posted...

Corrik7 posted...

HeroDelTiempo17 posted...

Why is the anti-abortion debate always framed around "consequences" and "responsibility?" Why is having an abortion irresponsible and not an explicit consequence? Why is it considered responsible to have a child no one is adequately prepared to raise? How come there is a point in the chain of events where you should no longer exercise agency to prevent an outcome and should just accept the conclusion?

It is a responsibility and consequence argument because it is a consequence of your actions and a responsibility that comes with your actions. You are robbing the child a right to life because you were irresponsible.

if a fetus has a right to life how is there any situation where abortion is acceptable to you? Theres never any other case where you get to kill someone without legal consequence unless theyre like actively trying to murder you.

I alrdy stated I believe in limited abortion and offered what I considered a compromised approach regarding it.

That is why I find it so funny when this vehemently argue against me so much in regards to abortion when I am far from an abortion hardliner and more towards the center on the issue, and I don't really find the issue a major one in which I consider when it comes to elections.
---

Xbox Live User Name - Corrik
Currently playing: Division 2

Leanansidhe posted...

Scum Mayor wouldn't be able to mayor a scum lynch like HB, which was almost the entire point. Ulti is very town.

Uh, I think you just pointed to a reason Ulti could be scum for why he is town lol.

Ulti can't mayor a scum Lynch if he is scum. (Well, he didn't mayor the scum Lynch after saying he would prove himself day 1 all day 1).

That would be more of a point towards Ulti being scum than town.

I mean, I alrdy cleared him as town with my hide, but yeah. Your logic is broken.
---

Xbox Live User Name - Corrik
Currently playing: Division 2

fire_bolt posted...

Awesome. Hit post when I meant to click my calculator tab.

fire_bolt posted...

19 posts in around 3 hours on topic 1

33 posts spread out throughout the day in topic 2

6 posts in topic 3

9 posts in topic 4

67 posts out of

67 posts out of 1525, or about 4% of overall posts. Most of them occurred within a couple hours of each other. You've been present for maybe 10% of the game. Yeah, I think that qualifies as lurking. I'm not saying its a scum read, because you largely helped lynch scum power D1. However, I don't know how intentional that was. Possibly you pointed something out and then Chris just slam dunked HB with it.

That might be a record high for posts by plum tbqh.
---

Xbox Live User Name - Corrik
Currently playing: Division 2

Meow1000 posted...

Corrik7 posted...

Meow1000 posted...

Corrik7 posted...

Meow1000 posted...

Also for the record I feel like I've shifted from "Two of Corrik/Botl/Red are scum" to "Two of Corrik/Scare/Red are scum"

Though I want to ask Ulti something: What has you set on Plum?

Do you believe me and red are scum together and I waited til I saw Ulti post to hammer red assuming Ulti would save red?

Ulti didn't have one post within an hour of that hammer

So what scenario can me and red be scum together?

See this is the thing. I don't particularly think it's alignment indicative and it's why it's not part of any argument I'd really adhere to. It was my first thought, but I don't think it means much overall.

When it comes down to it, I believe any alignment Corrik hammers any alignment Red if he feels like hammering Red at the time.

So, I hammer red as scum and if he is scum when we are down a roleblocker alrdy. Do you have any prior games you can point to for this? Because this sounds astronomically insane and I think red would freak the fuck out if his teammate did this to him and go ballistic.
---

Xbox Live User Name - Corrik
Currently playing: Division 2

HeroDelTiempo17 posted...

That argument only works if you think the "right to life" of unborn persons is more important than rights of living persons. You have to establish that fetuses are more important than their mothers and fathers first.

I have already stated I think abortion is.an acceptable choice of a mother if her life is at danger to have the pregnancy. So, the right of the child to life is not greater than the mother. But, it is greater than the "inconvenience" of life. Just because a child is inconvenient for your life doesn't make it right to be aborted when you consensually had sex and it could have resulted in a child yet you still did so, especially so when you didn't use proper prevention.
---

Xbox Live User Name - Corrik
Currently playing: Division 2

masterplum posted...

Meow1000 posted...

Corrik7 posted...

Meow1000 posted...

Also for the record I feel like I've shifted from "Two of Corrik/Botl/Red are scum" to "Two of Corrik/Scare/Red are scum"

Though I want to ask Ulti something: What has you set on Plum?

Do you believe me and red are scum together and I waited til I saw Ulti post to hammer red assuming Ulti would save red?

Ulti didn't have one post within an hour of that hammer

You know, Ulti as a scum mayor variant would be interesting. I dont think its the case, but the whole claim day 1 then dont mayor at the end would line up with that. Scum mayor Ulti would have great incentive to mayor town Red there.

I dont think we peruse this line until later in the game but I dont think Ulti deserves obv town status quite yet

I alrdy verified Ulti is town.
---

Xbox Live User Name - Corrik
Currently playing: Division 2

Nelson_Mandela posted...

For whatever it's worth, the Oscar snubs mentioned by me and Lasa before are pretty well-accepted, whereas you'd be hard-pressed to find many critics now talking about how Avatar got robbed.

Avatar is popular so makes you seem edgy and elite to hate on it. I think Avatar 50 years from now will have a different view from people.
---

Xbox Live User Name - Corrik
Currently playing: Division 2

Meow1000 posted...

Corrik7 posted...

Meow1000 posted...

Also for the record I feel like I've shifted from "Two of Corrik/Botl/Red are scum" to "Two of Corrik/Scare/Red are scum"

Though I want to ask Ulti something: What has you set on Plum?

Do you believe me and red are scum together and I waited til I saw Ulti post to hammer red assuming Ulti would save red?

Ulti didn't have one post within an hour of that hammer

So what scenario can me and red be scum together?
---

Xbox Live User Name - Corrik
Currently playing: Division 2

HeroDelTiempo17 posted...

Why is the anti-abortion debate always framed around "consequences" and "responsibility?" Why is having an abortion irresponsible and not an explicit consequence? Why is it considered responsible to have a child no one is adequately prepared to raise? How come there is a point in the chain of events where you should no longer exercise agency to prevent an outcome and should just accept the conclusion?

It is a responsibility and consequence argument because it is a consequence of your actions and a responsibility that comes with your actions. You are robbing the child a right to life because you were irresponsible.
---

Xbox Live User Name - Corrik
Currently playing: Division 2

KCF0107 posted...

You might be reading too much into that. I personally interpreted the tumor remark as a reference to its shape.

That is a hell of an interpretation.
---

Xbox Live User Name - Corrik
Currently playing: Division 2

masterplum posted...

I want to point out that fire bolt was early on HB because of the promise of a mayor.

I dont think firebolt is as town as people are assuming

Fire bolt very easily could be scum just because of his interaction with me.
---

Xbox Live User Name - Corrik
Currently playing: Division 2

red13n posted...

I never said I had a plan to claim today. I said if things stayed as is I would have claimed at some point yesterday.

So, like I said, you would claim. Popcorn asserted you wouldn't claim at all.
---

Xbox Live User Name - Corrik
Currently playing: Division 2

Meow1000 posted...

Also for the record I feel like I've shifted from "Two of Corrik/Botl/Red are scum" to "Two of Corrik/Scare/Red are scum"

Though I want to ask Ulti something: What has you set on Plum?

Do you believe me and red are scum together and I waited til I saw Ulti post to hammer red assuming Ulti would save red?
---

Xbox Live User Name - Corrik
Currently playing: Division 2

Popcorn_Fairy posted...

Corrik7 posted...

Majority lynched Red now all the sudden no one wants his claim or his head anymore. Lolol.

I'm not against the Red Vote, I would still very much like his claim. But he didn't claim under threat of being hammered. So, I doubt he's gonna claim even if we get him to -1 again. We are still pretty early in the day, and can put some focus and pressure elsewhere to gain some more information on someone who might give us something. If we still wanna lynch him later, so be it, but for now, we got time man.

He alrdy said he would claim. Then just wondered off when everyone came in going different directions.
---

Xbox Live User Name - Corrik
Currently playing: Division 2

fire_bolt posted...

Oh we doing the damn thing? Good

##Vote: ScareChan

Keep an eye on those votals. Corrik has proven himself willing to hammer early. I'd rather not let him do it without Scare responding

I early hammer a lot. They already knew I do. Especially if it can get the next day up a day earlier. It is known. That's why them acting all is funny.
---

Xbox Live User Name - Corrik
Currently playing: Division 2

Meow1000 posted...

red13n posted...

fire_bolt posted...

Is it possible one shot Mayor Ulti could have been scum? I think full mayor scum is banned here but not one shot? Idk how that would work. Considering how scummy Red looks I wouldn't rule it out immediately.

I think a host used scum mayor once but it is definitely a "banned" role((Nothing technically stops a host from using whatever they want, I'm looking at you scum lawyer). Its still banned and we still play it out like ulti is confirmed town and if he ends up scum we just never let Death host again.

Also Mayor here is always single use.

I can recall one game that has a scum mayor and one game that had a scum lawyer. I wasn't in either of them though

Only way he can be a scum mayor is if red is town. He can't stop a lynch on scum.
---

Xbox Live User Name - Corrik
Currently playing: Division 2

fire_bolt posted...

red13n posted...

fire_bolt posted...

Is it possible one shot Mayor Ulti could have been scum? I think full mayor scum is banned here but not one shot? Idk how that would work. Considering how scummy Red looks I wouldn't rule it out immediately.

I think a host used scum mayor once but it is definitely a "banned" role((Nothing technically stops a host from using whatever they want, I'm looking at you scum lawyer). Its still banned and we still play it out like ulti is confirmed town and if he ends up scum we just never let Death host again.

Also Mayor here is always single use.

Good to know. I know even single use scum mayor could be pretty broken but I didn't know if we could rule it out or not.

Popcorn_Fairy posted...

As for today, I'm Mos def up for lynching Corrik for that early hammer. A day that short is, really something.

We're not lynch Corrik for the early hammer. That's 100% on Red for not respecting his position at -1. As I said, I would have also hammered him. I'm still salty about it.

For the record, I don't have a lot of faith in any of my scum reads right now. Nobody looks just distinctly scummy enough for me to want to go "That guy, we need to kill him". I don't have enough information to make any kind of deduction and as a town we aren't applying any pressure to literally anyone. We've apparently let Red slide for his refusal to claim, have accepted Popcorn's demise, and are maybe half ass pushing at Corrik and his probably bullshit Hider claim. We're letting like half to player base get away with just lurking. Something has to change or we're gonna lose.

Corrik has easy reasoning to try and Lynch for scum. Easy to hide in that train. They are lynching someone cuz they were the SEVENTHvote on someone. You guys ran the vote up in the first couple hours of the day. Not me. Scare made it -1. Lopen let me know it was -1 when I thought it was -2. Lots of context being ignored in the wahhh someone hammered argument. I literally had someone say I should be banned because I was 1 of 7 votes on someone. Maybe learn how the game is played. That is what happened. Anyone crying about an early hammer better not have had their vote on red then. Voting someone means you wanted to Lynch them. You lynched them. Congrats.
---

Xbox Live User Name - Corrik
Currently playing: Division 2

TheSultanOfSlam posted...

Corrik is probably scum... also thanks guys for ending day so fucking quickly yesterday. I didnt even get to catch up before daybwas over

Also very weird that now that red was saved by Ulti everyone basically on that lynch is like ih red is town now... why the change of heart? I kind of dont get that so either you really had a change of heart or are scum also

. Yep. Majority lynched Red now all the sudden no one wants his claim or his head anymore. Lolol.
---

Xbox Live User Name - Corrik
Currently playing: Division 2

"7 people voted red but we are gonna be upset when a person was lynched by majority at only 1 person."
---

Xbox Live User Name - Corrik
Currently playing: Division 2

banananor posted...

It can feel unfair or raw that you as a man don't have any control over the situation, but you're also not the one that would have to undergo all the physiological changes that go along with growing an 8lb tumor that will eventually turn into a human. You can just turn around and impregnate someone else. That's the inherent unfairness of reality.

He is literally using the baby is a parasite debate. Holy hell. I thought I would never see this argument actually in real life debate!!!

And 8 pound tumor? He is saying a fully formed baby is a tumor. Wild.
---

Xbox Live User Name - Corrik
Currently playing: Division 2

Obellisk posted...

I'm in full support of abortion. There are enough irresponsible fuckheads on this planet and people who don't want kids probably shouldn't be having them.

We have an over flowing amount of orphans that will never get a real family because their parents were against abortion AND parenting.

I do not believe that the child support argument is a sufficient rebuttal to the woman being allowed to choose what she has to go through.

You are supporting irresponsibility in regards to human life. It is a disappointing take for you to have, in my opinion.

I see no reason you aren't flocking to my compromised position if that is truly your take. You are basically supporting after the fact prevention instead of actual prevention. And, you are basically saying because people make mistakes that an innocent child who could become so much shouldn't be given that opportunity because of how you view the conceivers.
---

Xbox Live User Name - Corrik
Currently playing: Division 2

IfGodCouldDie posted...

Corrik7 posted...

IfGodCouldDie posted...

Corrik7 posted...

IfGodCouldDie posted...

Since he hasn't been lynched yet, I am just keeping my vote where it was.

##Vote: Corrik

If you flip town I'll try and lynch Blade.

If I flip town, you are going to lynch the person I cleared as town? What?

I'm basing it off what Chris said.

Do you have any original thoughts?

Considering it seems like I am the only one willing to follow the best player that was in the game, I'd say my play is original.

So you are gonna follow someone who had zero information on day 1 off a cliff?
---

Xbox Live User Name - Corrik
Currently playing: Division 2

Where I significantly differ with Republicans is that I believe we should be giving out protection and possibly even requiring its usage. Many Republicans wanna argue no one should have sex thus they should not have protection given to them while also arguing they shouldn't be allowed abortion. It's an argument that leads to what they are supposedly so against.
---

Xbox Live User Name - Corrik
Currently playing: Division 2

Obellisk posted...

There are extreme health risks for a woman during pregnancy as well.

I agree in the event there are medical complications the woman should be able to make the choice of abortion if her life is at risk or the child reasonably cannot live a healthy life.

Obellisk posted...

A man has absolutely no rights to a fertilized egg inside a woman's body.

Then the woman absolutely has no rights to the sperm that fertilized the egg. That's a ridiculous argument.

The problem with your arguments is that you keep going back to the woman in the equation just automatically supersedes the father. That is just an uneven argument. The woman has every right to decide the fate of the right to live of a child while the man has absolutely none. That makes zero sense.

If a woman isn't ready, she can get an abortion. If a man isn't ready, a woman can choose to have a baby and also collect 18 years of child support on top of it.

It is clearly an unfair system.

It also bewilders me how many support the "right to choose" while also arguing they themselves would never do it. Just like it bewilders me about Republicans who argue against abortion yet secretly are trying to get them when their mistresses get pregnant and such.

There is a lot of hypocrisy in these arguments.

What is clear is that you are MORE LIKELY to not support abortion as much once you have children of your own and more likely to support it when you are younger. There are some obvious reasons for that, but it also questions if it takes experiencing the miracle of life before you truly get it also in being against abortion.

Though I am sure some of you will argue that it is just people being petty and thinking if they had their children others should also.
---

Xbox Live User Name - Corrik
Currently playing: Division 2

MoogleKupo141 posted...

This doesn't give the woman the right to terminate the right to life of a child against the other parents wishes.

it totally does. The woman bears all the responsibility of the pregnancy process so she gets all the choice to end it.

when a baby is actually born then the man is a position to share the responsibility, so at that point he gets a say in what happens with the child

This is something that should be understood can happen if you choose to do acts that can result in pregnancy.

it should be understood by men that a potential consequence of having sex is getting a woman pregnant, wanting her to give birth, and the woman getting an abortion against his wishes

if the guy didnt want to get a woman pregnant and then have that pregnancy aborted, maybe he should have been abstinent

That is a two party thing. The man didn't get the woman pregnant in consensual sex without her being party to the act. They share that responsibility just as they share having created it.
---

Xbox Live User Name - Corrik
Currently playing: Division 2

IfGodCouldDie posted...

Corrik7 posted...

IfGodCouldDie posted...

Since he hasn't been lynched yet, I am just keeping my vote where it was.

##Vote: Corrik

If you flip town I'll try and lynch Blade.

If I flip town, you are going to lynch the person I cleared as town? What?

I'm basing it off what Chris said.

Do you have any original thoughts?
---

Xbox Live User Name - Corrik
Currently playing: Division 2

Mr Lasastryke posted...

i assume you also think the phantom menace should have won best picture? that movie was completely revolutionary visual effects-wise too.

and no, i didn't tear up during those scenes. i very rarely cry during movies, though.

No.
---

Xbox Live User Name - Corrik
Currently playing: Division 2

Like, I don't know of a single President in maybe the last 50 years who wasn't really against strengthening the southern border from illegal immigration. JFK possibly being the one who maybe was over 50 years ago.

Hell, from this clearly liberal source...

"The final immigration law on the books is one which physically, socially, economically, and ethically affects our nations immigrants, citizens, and borderlands. The Secure Fence Act of 2006, supported by President Bush and, sadly, both Democratic candidates Obama and Clinton, paved the way for a 700-mile fence along our 2,000-mile southern border. This secure fence would reroute extralegal immigrants to the most dangerous desert sections of our border; it would be an affront to American immigrants past, present, and future; it would be a tremendous waste what some estimate to be $5 billion while border communities such as Brownsville and Hidalgo County continue to be the poorest in the nation; it would serve as a severe distraction from the necessity for comprehensive, compassionate immigration reform; it would strand extralegal residents on this side of the border; it would separate loved ones; it would cripple border economies which thrive on the influx of international business; it would destroy precious and rare ecosystems and wildlife which cannot be found anywhere else; and it would cause our young nation of immigrants to wall ourselves off from our neighbors and the globalizing world at large. "
---

Xbox Live User Name - Corrik
Currently playing: Division 2

Mr Lasastryke posted...

Corrik7 posted...

The point of a wall is that it makes crossing it more difficult. This allows less manpower on the border itself. Which frees up manpower to stop other types of illegal immigration.

this is nice argument, but it's not the one trump's using. he's just constantly going "WALLS WORK," as if the illegal immigrants would have absolutely no way of entering the US if they were confronted with a wall.

The walls they are trying to build are no different than the walling that Obama and others have created along the border in certain areas. They do this to help ease enforcement of this area and to funnel it into smaller areas for the common illegal immigrant. Creating a border wall would be again funneling it greatly off the border and into areas such as overseas, which is less accessible to the average illegal immigrant and that can be enforced much greater with less of a burden on the very large land border.
---

Xbox Live User Name - Corrik
Currently playing: Division 2

Calling Avatar "bad" is just an insane opinion.

The fact that The Hurt Locker won the academy award just because Bigelow was Cameron's ex-wife is what was crazy. Avatar should have won that award going away. Cameron literally created brand new technology to create that film. It was a masterpiece of filmography.

You can say the story itself is overused and trite if you wish to. However, that doesn't take away from the sheer magnificence of what they did to create that film.

Though, if you don't tear up during the World Tree scene or Neytir's scene, I am in shock.

I mean...



This is one of the best acted scenes I have seen, and it is freaking blue aliens portraying it.

The film is rather excellent that got hated on for being popular moreso than not being good. The Hurt Locker was 100x worse and was a slap in the face to the greatest director of films that has ever existed (arguably).
---

Xbox Live User Name - Corrik
Currently playing: Division 2

Mr Lasastryke posted...

why can't illegal immigrants use ladders to climb over the wall?

why can't they go around in boats?

You are making ridiculous deflections here.

The point of a wall is that it makes crossing it more difficult. This allows less manpower on the border itself. Which frees up manpower to stop other types of illegal immigration.

I mean the fact you are simply gonna say something like "hurr durr they can just go around the wall on a boat" is just dumb. The wall would help stop more illegal immigration of all types due to lessening manpower needed on the border itself allowing it to focus on other areas moreso.

The common illegal immigrant also isn't hauling boats around with them also.

There is a huge clog in our processing of illegal immigrants due to the overwhelming numbers. It is safe to say that measures must be taken in order to help alleviate this process. There have been other options besides a wall to help alleviate this that Democrats have blocked as well.
---

Xbox Live User Name - Corrik
Currently playing: Division 2

Why doesn't it solve anything?
---

Xbox Live User Name - Corrik
Currently playing: Division 2

IfGodCouldDie posted...

Since he hasn't been lynched yet, I am just keeping my vote where it was.

##Vote: Corrik

If you flip town I'll try and lynch Blade.

If I flip town, you are going to lynch the person I cleared as town? What?
---

Xbox Live User Name - Corrik
Currently playing: Division 2

TheRock1525 posted...

These topics are always terrible.

Can the fetus be removed and put inside the father and incubated for nine months until he births it? No? Then there's no argument. There is unequal stress put on the parents during a pregnancy and therefore there are unequal rights. Sorry.

This doesn't give the woman the right to terminate the right to life of a child against the other parents wishes. This is something that should be understood can happen if you choose to do acts that can result in pregnancy.
---

Xbox Live User Name - Corrik
Currently playing: Division 2

Panthera posted...

Good evening, getting caught up before I go to bed. Meant to do it yesterday too, but, you know. Corrik.

I feel like both Red and Corrik look bad right now, Red for that really crappy vote on Blade day 1, Corrik because he's giving me vibes of just trying to act crazy enough (the hammer, his big huge defense of HB late on day 1) to seem legit. Corrik now claiming to have hid behind Blade (I assume the post where he said "U and Blade" shortly after Ulti asked about his targets was an answer) is kind of interesting. I know I shouldn't dwell on Corrik claims but whatever. Corrik was very adamant about Blade being scum day 1 and at first on day 2, but then he seemed to reread the first day and changed his mind, so thinking Blade was town adds up. Doesn't really look like much effort to hint at doing it though. Probably like him more than Red though.

Speaking of Red...yo Red, at what point did you suddenly start feeling confident that Ulti was Mayor?

I had Firebolt in my town book pretty firmly on day 1 but this post is troubling

fire_bolt posted...

I don't disagree, even if I also would have hammered him. I blame red 100% for not co-operating with his teammates. Denial of information rewards scum, not town. Despite town having the numbers advantage, scum are usually ahead D1 and D2 because of information advantage. Unless Red's role is so goddamn important that we desperately needed scum not to know it then he made the wrong call.

This comes across as reeeeaaallly sure that Red is town. Like, the fact that I think Red is likely scum is the only thing going against how bad this post looks.

Oh, and one more thing before I sleep. I'm saying no to the Popcorn lynch. I think he's scum, but he's going to die anyway. Because I'm Hedorah (Godzilla vs Hedorah), TOWN Poisoner, and I poisoned him last night. My target is made aware of the poison so I can't think of any value in hiding this, the only thing I could think of was to see if there was a suspicious push to lynch him, suggesting scum would rather bus him during the day since he was dead either way, but Ulti started that train rolling already and it's kind of weak anyway since that would be denying themselves a mislynch opportunity. Long story short his vote on Chris day 1 was bad and the arguments Lopen pushed about him were convincing. It was either him or IGCD but honestly my reasons for considering IGCD were purely that I don't trust a guy who isn't really interested in playing if the games goes the distance, nothing to do with being scum so I couldn't justify it to myself.

Why would you have poisoned him night 2 and not night 1? What was the big difference there?
---

Xbox Live User Name - Corrik
Currently playing: Division 2

Awaiting ur claim
---

Xbox Live User Name - Corrik
Currently playing: Division 2

Leanansidhe posted...

Corrik is Mafia Untargetable

Lea is confirming my role. Thanks. Like, I said. Why would I lie about it.
---

Xbox Live User Name - Corrik
Currently playing: Division 2

red13n posted...

Corrik7 posted...

No, he got in trouble for assuming Tom drew a kill to himself in the final days and spent forever piecing together who Tom would have targeted pointlessly.

Corrik this isn't a "no" situation. Both of your statements on Lopen last game are true.

Claim!
---

Xbox Live User Name - Corrik
Currently playing: Division 2

UltimaterializerX posted...

Lopen got into trouble for ignoring results. Ben had three scans and Lopen went "oh wow Ben is lying!"

No, he got in trouble for assuming Tom drew a kill to himself in the final days and spent forever piecing together who Tom would have targeted pointlessly.
---

Xbox Live User Name - Corrik
Currently playing: Division 2

Also, let's not waste time on me. Surely someone tried to target me and failed alrdy to confirm me. Wouldn't be surprised if a shot was made at me night 1 and missed.
---

Xbox Live User Name - Corrik
Currently playing: Division 2

UltimaterializerX posted...

Lopen posted...

##Vote: Popcorn Fairy

Think this is the right lynch at the moment due to the really bad Chris vote post that I spent yesterday attacking.

Corrik isn't terrible either. I think he spent a little too much time yesterday wifoming as scum as Lea said. Like his clearly over the top defense of Hb and his tirade about how if he was scum he'd let big names live. I think he might be playing too hard into my preconception of his flaws too by literally RNGing cause he saw it worked for Ulti last game.

But Ultimately Popcorn Fairy seems best, right down to being conspicuously absent all the time after Hb's claim. Seems like something scum might prefer to just keep their head down for.

Look at this post from our town tracker.

If you're going to attack someone for bad votes, there are waaaaaay better targets based on day 1 play than Popcorn.

Popcorn got tracked. I have no doubts.

Sounds like what got Lopen into trouble last game. Assuming results.
---

Xbox Live User Name - Corrik
Currently playing: Division 2

How about no one votes anyone else til we get red's claim. We invested 24 hours into getting this claim at this point if not more.
---

Xbox Live User Name - Corrik
Currently playing: Division 2

red13n posted...

Corrik7 posted...

I think your merry Chris was grinning ear from ear for someone playing with some balls. Probably sipping a fine Merlot and regaling his fine fiancee with the tale of my crusade against the evil Red and my smiting him from the heavens and beyond.

can i destroy this fantasy with the fact I'm pretty sure he was just playing WoW last night.

...while playing wow.
---

Xbox Live User Name - Corrik
Currently playing: Division 2

fire_bolt posted...

Corrik7 posted...

fire_bolt posted...

I don't oppose a Corrik lynch even though I am town reading him right now

Corrik don't give me shit like that's a red flag. You and I both know I've wanted to lynch you from the second this game started. Barring Word Of God declaring you town I'll never oppose a Corrik lynch. Chris fear don't have shit on Corrik fear

You made a lot of comments about my play this game that don't actually line up with reality tho. You keep saying how you know how I play and how I will do such and such, but it honestly isn't really true.

It is why I am not so sure you are town. I think you are trying to placate me.
---

Xbox Live User Name - Corrik
Currently playing: Division 2

U and blade
---

Xbox Live User Name - Corrik
Currently playing: Division 2

fire_bolt posted...

I don't oppose a Corrik lynch even though I am town reading him right now

---

Xbox Live User Name - Corrik
Currently playing: Division 2

red13n posted...

And I want to see how the entire town is going to react to my stubbornness before I do anything. I don't give a shit about the simple majority.

So how much scum do you think was on you?
---

Xbox Live User Name - Corrik
Currently playing: Division 2

Leanansidhe posted...

fire_bolt posted...

Leanansidhe posted...

Vote: Corrik

Time to correct the mistakes of yesterday

Would you mind making a case for this? In my experience just trying to lynch Corrik rarely gains much traction.

It would have happened yesterday, if it had lasted more than five hours. Corrik is really annoying to lynch so you kinda have to just do it. The case I made yesterday still applies, even strengthened with Corrik's extremely anti-town hammer. He can talk his way out of everything by just burying people with stubborness, so he's emboldened to do blatant shit like that The ghost of Chris is extremely annoyed with us right now.

I think your merry Chris was grinning ear from ear for someone playing with some balls. Probably sipping a fine Merlot and regaling his fine fiancee with the tale of my crusade against the evil Red and my smiting him from the heavens and beyond.
---

Xbox Live User Name - Corrik
Currently playing: Division 2

red13n posted...

I took it seriously. But I play every claim like I'm holding fucking doctor. I'm not about to tip my hand in that manner by suddenly being weak.

I think at this point, you realize town wants you to claim.

Also, don't let scare saying he was drunk let him off the hook for purposely setting up that -1 when blade pointed out no one should vote red after that.
---

Xbox Live User Name - Corrik
Currently playing: Division 2

UltimaterializerX posted...

Even if Red is ultimately scum, a 5 hour day is just god-awful. I was not about to reward that nonsense.

That was the most fun I have had in mafia in awhile. I was hoping he was scum to top it off as the literal funnest. Maybe besides shooting a SK within the first hour of a game. That was fun too.
---

Xbox Live User Name - Corrik
Currently playing: Division 2