But after the end of the conversation, you kept reiterating that you still found him suspicious. Until suddenly, and without explanation or reason, you stopped doing that.
I’m a writer by trade; I know perfectly well how a nitpick can be expanded to a billion words, if the author is suitably motivated. The length of your argument doesn’t impress me. The content is lacking. The word “implicit” was not the key to Diggit’s case; the defense was the point. I’m comfortable speaking for Diggit, by the way, because it was obvious on first read that he was suspicious of the defense, not its implicitness.
If you’re not convinced by the evidence in my vote post, that’s fine, but I don’t know what else to say. I think I’ve been as clear as I can be about why I think it was suspicious, and why it’s not semantics. If you want me to reiterate or clarify something, I am happy to respond, but it’s all right there a few posts above.
It’s very hard, when someone is accusing you of acting scummy, to not automatically think that that person is themselves scummy (the very definition of OMGUS). It’s just a natural reaction, and I fight to avoid it. But you’re making it hard on me, story, when you say things like these:
(bolding mine)
These characterizations are completely untrue. I hope people follow your advice - “I’d encourage everyone to read the sequence of posts” - and read through the entire sequence. If they do, they will find a series of posts where, as I stated above, I go after sach pretty hard, then ease off as he explains himself. At the same time, they will find that as the other arguments against sach got posted, I responded to them because I felt they were bad. As the bad arguments mounted, my questioning of those arguments increased. There was NO sudden turnaround, NO lack of explanations.
I submit that it is patently NOT scummy to suspect someone, question them, and be satisfied with their answers (to whatever degree) and move on to someone else. It is, in fact, the opposite of scummy - it is playing the game as it should be played.
No, that is not untrue: I meant what I said and I said what I meant. I was not 100% convinced yesterDay that sach was not scum. As the bandwagon against him proceeded, however, I became more and more convinced that he was likely to be town, since it seemed to me that he was being railroaded. Another example of a similar attitude: as I said earlier toDay, I am not 100% convinced (or even close to it) that Blaster is not scum (or you, for that matter). But I am not voting for either of you - I am voting for someone who I find more suspicious.
Sorry for the numerous double negatives in that post.
Emerges blinking into the bright sunshine, peering owlishly at the spectacle of a few people arguing heatedly.
Good afternoon all. Sorry I’ve been unable to help you up to now. I understand you have a lycanthropic infestation in this town, so I went looking for wolfsbane and silver.
I only got here at lunchtime, and the first thing I found was my dead twin brother. It was such a shock that I must have fainted dead away.
Now thanks to your care, I can start testing people for lycanthropy - just as soon as someone returns my wolfsbane and silver.
… Not on my body you say? Are you sure?
… Then they must have stolen it. At least they didn’t steal the garlic I brought as a vampire repellent.
… Italian cooking is the staple here? Oh dear - Italian vampires are never repelled by garlic…
Tosses the stuff away.
So who’s the main suspect then?
(Joking apart, I’ve been following on but not with close attention to detail. I’ll need to read the game a couple of times in the next 24 hours or so in order to get a vote in.
Actually…we’re pretty vote-lite right now. It seems most of us don’t play much at all till monday / tuesday rolls around. I’m still trying to get time myself to look at my candidates. I believe we have all of 4 votes on the table right now?
It has been a long day involving much travel, and I’m too tired to think very deeply about this game at the moment; however, I did say that I would vote tonight. On the grounds that a) I’m pretty sure that at least one scum is hiding among the votes for FS on Day 1; b) Hockey Monkey and OAOW were obviously town; and c) I’m going to take CIAS / SR as more-likely-town-than-not, until and unless I get a strong vibe that storyteller is faking:
Vote Pollux Oil
That said, I’m not totally happy about this line of reasoning, since CIAS / SR could well be either the Alpha Wolf or one of storyteller’s scum buddies.
Will try to check back in the morning if I have time, but the exam reading starts at 8:30, so I may not.
Well, I have to say that I don’t have a clear read on anyone at this moment. But still: Could you explain your reasoning behind this assertion? In other words: why do you think “at least one scum is hiding among the votes for FS on Day 1”?
I don’t see a real reason for that. Actually, I think it’s a bit likelier that someone at the end of Day 1 voted for some patsy (sorry, OAOW) who was going to hang anyway. So:
Hey guys, I just wanted to post and say I’m really sorry that I haven’t posted much in the game this week. I haven’t been feeling too spectacular and in addition to that my father’s asked me to design him a website for a company he’s planning to start…while I have no real experience in website design so I’m teaching myself Dreamweaver from scratch. Add that to helping my mother with spring cleaning and searching for jobs I’ve had a full load.
Bleh.
Anyway, I’m going to do a full read-through of everything right now and post some thoughts. Hopefully I won’t be too tired by the end of it.
I don’t think that’s as good a line of reasoning, because that requires us to try and figure out what the scum were thinking when they killed people. It’s a road that just leads to a lot of wine in front of both you and me.
I think the masons should do this only if storyteller is 100% confirmed as a Constable. Otherwise we’d have outed the masons to the scum but we’d still be playing WIFOM with storyteller’s investigations.
The two people I’m most suspicious of (not counting storyteller, who is going to always be in a state of perpetual suspicion for me)…their votes look like this:
And then he hasn’t checked in at all since he made this vote…which was on Sunday.
I’ll wait for her answer to the question posed about his haircut, but for now this seems extremely bandwagonny to me.
Neither has said or done anything to remove my suspicions of them. Their votes are minimal information at best. It just doesn’t seem right. I will…
Vote Darth Sensitive
…again, for now…but I’m going to check in tomorrow. Mostly because I think the lynch of WF Tomba/Mhaye is a mistake. (Wow, it must be rough being mhaye…nightkilled as he’s subbed in, and now about to be lynched after being subbed in.) I suppose it’s because two of the people I think are scummiest have latched on to him on a Day where there hasn’t been a great amount of discussion. I haven’t found WF Tomba’s actions scummy at all, just aggressive townie-like. If my theory is correct about Darth and Freudian being scum buddies, then I highly doubt they’d be bussing another scum like this when it would be a lot easier to get a townie lynched with all the different opinions floating around.
Let’s say story isn’t the Constable. If that’s the case, I sure hope it’s someone else. If it’s someone else, there’ll be a point where they come out with their handy dandy investigation results, and we’ll fry a bunch of scum and/or confirm a bunch of townies. Until that happens, can we please quit reminding each other that story might not be the who he says he is? Regardless, there’ll probably be a counterclaim at one point or another. May I suggest lynching somebody who was supposedly investigated by one of them to try to confirm that way, instead of possibly lynching the real Constable.
Is it just me, or does this one just wreak? Almost like a “I’m the Vampire, but I’m trying to make it -look- like I’m scum!” Odd.
I have to agree with that sentiment. For now we can’t draw anything good out of discussing storyteller’s status.
The lynching thing, though? Bad idea. The problem with that is that a false Constable could easily pick some townsfolk and some scum in his investigations and provide himself with cover. In other words, it could very well be that we pick someone to lynch and that the status the Constable announced matches that player’s alignment.
ToMorrow, for instance, one of the current investigatees might wind up dead. That still wouldn’t fully confirm storyteller’s status.
I don’t think there’s a way around a lynch of one of the two supposed Constables.
I was not 100% convinced yesterDay that sach was not scum. As the bandwagon against him proceeded, however, I became more and more convinced that he was likely to be town, since it seemed to me that he was being railroaded. Another example of a similar attitude: as I said earlier toDay, I am not 100% convinced (or even close to it) that Blaster is not scum (or you, for that matter). But I am not voting for either of you - I am voting for someone who I find more suspicious.