| Beck -- II | Voting: Paperhorse, Master Mew |
| Crackfox -- II | Voting: Parma, GastlyGibus |
| Master Mew -- II | Voting: Beck, Kyriaki |
| GastlyGibus -- II | Voting: Crackfox, Midorikawa |
| Soulmaster -- II | Voting: Leggo, Crystal Onix |
| GliscorMan -- II | Voting: Zenax, Neonsands |
| jda95 -- I | Voting: jda95 |
| HumanDawn -- I | Voting: Soulmaster |
| Parma -- I | Voting: Mijzelffan |
| Mijzelffan -- I | Voting: Forgotten |
| Zenax -- I | Voting: UltimateMaximus |
| UltimateMaximus -- I | Voting: HumanDawn |
| Forgotten -- I | Voting: Mr. Fahrenheit |
| NeonSands -- I | Voting: Hippowdon |
| Kyriaki -- I | Voting: Rabbit |
| Crystal Onix -- I | Voting: Gliscorman |
| No Lynch -- 0 | Voting: None, yet. |
If I'm still alive Monday, I should be around a lot more from that point forth.
Allow me to explain:
Right. But I wasn't accusing you, I was accusing Soulmaster.
Why vote for someone just because you don't think they'll get enough votes to be lynched? Isn't lynching the precise purpose of voting?
Could I bother you for a suspect list, and reasons to accompany? You're being rather wishy-washy.
Greetings, all! Sorry I missed the first couple hours, Wednesdays are very busy days for me. For the record I'll also be 100% unavailable this Saturday, and I'll probably miss a chunk of Sunday as well (church work, go figure). To be honest, I was hoping this game would take longer to fill up.
Ignoring this
Now, onto business:
I haven't seen nearly as many red flags yet as I would have hoped, so I'll be giving the thread another hard look shortly, but so far I can say this: The subtle shifts against CrackFox so far reek. I don't like this dynamic of the thread at all. Taken in context, her initial post wasn't any more suspicious than those before and after it, yet she picks up a vote from GastlyGibus for it and Soulmaster calls her behavior strange for it as well (though not strange enough to warrant a vote, apparently, despite his current vote being random anyway), meanwhile the only person bothering to point this out is HumanDawn.
I do admit there aren't quite as many flags so you say. I have already admitted that I was being hypocritical, but nothing can take that first comment away. I am not a person to just vote without good cause, when I vote I want to be able to back it up with good evidence.
I'm not quite sure what all that means just yet, could be a number of things:
A.) CrackFox is Town and Scum are content to let her gather suspicion without getting their hands dirty.
B.) CrackFox is Scum and her partners don't want to go on the record as defending her, but feel it's too early to throw in the towel and bus.
C.) This is all just random Day 1 noise.
As for this part, to me, at least on my end of things, it is C. As I don't know one way or the other about CrackFox, I can't pronounce judgement here.
C, of course, doesn't tell me anything - and a theory doesn't make predictions is inconsequential, so I won't waste any time on it. A and B, meanwhile, are both plausible and nearly impossible to tell apart, however in both cases I would find Soulmaster slightly suspicious for endorsing the shift against CrackFox, and HumanDawn slightly townie for being the first, and only, person I've noticed who pointed it out.
With that, @Soulmaster has edged higher up my scumdar (albeit slightly) than my current RNG vote for Beck, so:
I feel honored to be higher on the great Master's scumdar. Okay, so I'm currently in the lead with 4. What can I say to clear me?
Unvote: Beck
Vote: Soulmaster
Yes, I remember your playstyle. The thing is, in this setup, you're voting whether you have good evidence or not. I guess I just don't understand why you prefer a vote with no evidence over a vote with little evidence?
You can start scumhunting, that would be relatively fantastic evidence that your win condition is to catch scum.
Why is this different from any other game in that respect? And it just so happens that today there was a majority on someone at the beginning of the phase, that was just blind RNG. We could have had a 5 way tie or something, so then would nobody have to defend themselves?
You never answered the question as to why you voted this, care to explain it now?
Like was noted, so did several other people, why focus only on HumanDawn?
Don't suppose you could make your posts have something more in them. You have posted several times, but they have all had very little in them. So is this a case of "better to say small things that don't matter than say anything at all"? I may not agree with this policy, but not everybody is me.
So, you're saying to switch up the votes, what if for some reason we all decided to vote you? It would be switching up the votes, but wait, there's some harm in that isn't there? At least to you there is. Be careful what you wish for.
Ignoring the first part, did nobody notice that she essentially said the exact same thing as CrackFox, Forgotten, and myself? That is exactly what she is saying, except she makes it sound not as straight-forward. So I would like to ask you the same questions that have been asked of the rest of us.
This post is kinda confusing, and everybody is making such a big deal out of CF's stuff, what about @Zenax; who hasn't posted at all and is on the alleged "first wagon"
Okay, so now I ask you, which gives us more information? A no lynch, or a random lynch? Even if the random lynch is a townie, normally it better helps the town in coming days, lets everybody get reads and whatnot.
I would really like to hear more from you. See what I said to UltimateMaximus earlier in this post.
It does help, thank you. It would help more if you accompanied it with a vote, though (or is your Beck vote serious now? That's fine if it is, since you included him in the above list of suspects, just say so). Why, after all that scumhunting, would you stick with your RNG vote?
