Sry for not posting much, I had less time in the last couple of days then expected. It will probably get better tomorrow.
@Voltgloss:
I was hoping more scum would pile on before people started seriously questioning this wagon, but getting at least one scum to join (and I agree with yuma that probably at least one did) is worth something to talk about today.
What I was trying to say regarding this is that I find it a bit strange that you base your thoughts on assumption there's no real evidence for. I think it might be possible, that you in fact know there was scum on that wagon, but had to justify it because you couldn't admit you do.
Watno: you said the wagon on me looked scummy? is there a player in particular who jumps out at you?
Because it seemed kinda farfetched to me that you were intentionally fishing. Eevee, Voltaire, shraeye and Insomniac jump out to me a bit more, since they only voted after they were able to see that others were willing to believe it was intentional fishing.
@shraeye: In fact, i think posts #369 was pretty acti-lurky. Speculating about double votes and posting a wall of text about sarcasm don't really contribute to us getting a read on you. Same for posting a list of post numbers. Starting a discussion about wording doesn't get us further either. It looks like youre trying to get us to think you were saying a lot, while in fact, you aren't.
I don't see your problem with my post #608. If people post something i think might be scummy, i point it out and see if they can explain to me why they did. Since there's not a single person I'm convinced is scum yet, I can't go after them excessively.
I agree with Eevee that Grujah seems to be contributing little even in the few posts he makes.
vote: Captain Frisk for still having a vote on TheMunch "so he notices he mustn't edit posts".
Also, since quite a few people are saying differently, I want to point out that Robz didn't say alignments were random. What he said was that it wouldn't be obvious and some people's alignments would be random.