I voted day 1. I did not have my vote anywhere when day ended, because I missed the last 36 hours of the Day. I was trapped at work feverishly restoring a dead Exchange server (and sleeping some of that as well).
Ok, well, thanks for the elaboration JSexton.
What follows below is kind of a thesis. I put it in spoiler tags so it wouldn’t take up the whole page. I encourage everyone to at least take a look at my analysis of Plumpudding’s posts. I try to go into detail on a lot of his activity.
Here is the TLDR version:
Plumpudding’s MO is a combination of random provocation, personal attacks, and bullying. He does not care if town get killed, and he will provoke anyone, for any reason, just to see how they respond. He establishes some impossible-to-meet standard (answer all my posts!), and beats on his targeted poster relentlessly.
His approach seems to be, if you want to make an omelet, you have to crack a few eggs.
I don’t know if he is a wolf or a bull in a china shop. In either case, he’s a liability for town.
Ask yourself if you want to be the next egg he tries to crack. If not, maybe you should join me and:
Vote Plumpudding
[Note: apologies for not bolding everyone’s name. I’m doing this in Word, and I’m too lazy to go back and fix the coding.]
OK, let’s take a look at Plumpudding, shall we? There is, shall we say, a lot to work with. Here are some highlights.
OK. Here goes.
Post 254 http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=18534969#post18534969
Plumpudding votes for Precambrianmollusc, “For this post, which makes it seem like he/she hasn’t read the thread, combined with frequency of posting about nothing interesting or arguing for surpressing discussion”.
My take: this is not a vote based on any real suspicion. He’s just trying to poke Precambrianmollusc and trying to dictate the way the game is played. Being deliberately provocative and trying to mod the game are themes we see throughout his posting history.
Post 256 http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=18534981#post18534981
He says to Dante G, “I am quite drunk, but this looks mostly like blabber to me. This is not proper reasoning. You’re on my list, you’ve been on it since you failed to show up earlier than you did, and you haven’t even tried to explain that. Even if you turn out to be a very confused villager, you haven’t actually contributed in any meaningful way yet, so I think it would benefit town over the long run. Please tempt me to change my vote”
My take: A second vote based on no real suspicion other than that he didn’t like Dante’s contributions to the thread. Also, after poking Precambrianmollusc for not reading the thread, he admits to posting while drunk. Projecting his behavior onto other posters is another therme we will see repeated.
Post 257 http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=18534988#post18534988
He levels a vague and threatening, “Another post I don’t really like”, in response to an obvious joke by Dante G
Post 258 http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=18535007#post18535007
He says, “On the discussion of ties, why would the first mason be worried about NK’s? Yeah, maybe the first mason dies, but so what? Who cares, apart from the eventual super-enthusiastic beginner?”
My take: He does not care if townies die. Either he is a wolf, or his attitude is, “well, if you’re going to make an omelet you have to crack a few eggs.” He is perfectly content to sacrifice townies. Because, after all, who cares about them?
Post 260 http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=18535062#post18535062
Regarding Dante, he says, “He has posted a total of seven posts in an already six page thread, not even reasonably explained himself, and five of his posts are in my record-keeping document already. If he’s town, fine, he in my opinion seems very confused, if he’s not there’s not a lot lost, no offense”
My take: Again, seeming to be more than happy to crack a few eggs. And he’s poking Dante for not having “explained himself”. This is another of his favorite tactics we see repeated. Throw down some accusations, and when the accused doesn’t reply to every single one to Plumpudding’s satisfaction, he must be guilty! He sets up an impossible standard of defense, and any failure to meet whatever he thinks the accused should say is yet more evidence of the accused being evasive and guilty rather than, you know, busy and distracted.
Post 261 http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=18535071#post18535071
After making a reasonably cogent post, he muddies it with a follow up, “Sorry, I basically said the opposite of what I was trying to say."
My take: he’s either deliberately sowing confusion, or just throwuig shit our willy-nilly to stir the pot, then trying to make sense of it.
Post 268 http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=18535681#post18535681
Here he tries to explain his previous post, and it’s just nonsensical as far as I can tell.
Post 269 http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=18535728#post18535728
He says he’s not an active poster and most people have more interesting things to write, but then he proceeds to take all the air out of the room for the rest of the Day. I think this is an admission that he’s just flinging crap around to see what happens. This is not constructive
**
Post 278 http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=18535942#post18535942**
“That is, I’m not very sentimental about loosing a townie Day One, especially if there’s some information to gain by it later in the game.”
My take: here again he admits he’s all for cracking a few eggs. This is not the most constructive approach for town.
Post 293 http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=18536276#post18536276
In response to Cygnus mildly defending Dante, Plupudding says, “To me his post seems like an awfully weird thing to say at all. I just don’t see any motivation for it at all. And just to be clear, we don’t have any evidence of Dante G being a mafia vet, other than his own words. Most of his own words hasn’t really portayed him as a vet, IMO. This isn’t ment as a stab at you, nor a personal attack Dante G, it’s just something to keep in mind.”
My take: This is more of his “I just want to highlight this” disingenuous attack style. He throws down some accusations and paints a thin layer of plausible deniability over them. He is Just Asking Questions here.
Post 318 http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=18537491#post18537491
To Dante, “I think the reason you’ve gotten some heat is because you still haven’t contributed to the discussion. You have seventeen posts either making excuses for blundering, talking meta about another board, or voting without giving any reason(you still haven’t, btw). If you made some contribution to the topics at hand, maybe you wouldn’t feel the need to make excuses”
My take: More attacks on a poster for not playing the game the way Plumpudding thinks it should be played. Trying to dictate the way other players play, and accusing them of being scum when they don’t.
Post 369 http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=18538884#post18538884
This is I think his first post focused on TexCat. He starts by quoting a couple of her posts, and says, “Maybe it’s just a funny coincidence… First highlighting how being helpful may be scummy, then being helpful, albeit not too helpful”
My take: OK, maybe that’s a legitimate point. Seems kind of tenuous to me, but OK.
Then, he quotes TexCat saying she is not going to go with the tie strategy and she is suspicious of Dante voters. Plumpudding answers, “She, an experienced player, suggests to ignore a potentially beneficial strategy, then points her FOS at players with legitimate reasons for voting, without voting herself, nor giving a compelling reason for stretching her finger and not casting a vote”.
My take: For some reason, he’s now advancing the standard that if your voice suspicion without voting, this is somehow suspicious. Note that he has done exactly this a number of times.
Then he quotes TexCat as saying, “I would go so far as to say that ALL townies should vote for whoever they think is the scummiest. (And I wouldn’t mind if the wolves did this as well )”. Plumpudding replies, “To me this looks like she’s promoting baseless voting.”
My take: Plum’s response here is completely nonsensical.
Then, after some more decent comments on TexCat’s post, he quotes TexCat talking about number disadvantages and protecting the masons. TexCat’s comments looked to me like she was discussing the plan reasonably. But Plum says, “And then we get to this highly suspicious post. Is it a slip, or not? She is experienced, so if it’s a slip, it’s a weird one, and if she is scum she’s probably not alpha as she would probably have read her pm a bit more carefully”
Plum doesn’t bother to say why it’s suspicious. I’ve read it several times and it doesn’t seem suspicious at all to me. It just looks like she forgot the Alpha was a Godfather. BFD. But Plum takes this as more suspicious posting.
In 372, TexCat gets a little peeved at Plum, for good reason. http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=18539499#post18539499
Post 400 http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=18541739#post18541739
He vaguely walks back some of his attacks on TexCat. “I’m new at this iteration of the game, and I asked a general question earlier asking wether it is more likely for a claimed mason to be NK’ed than any other unclaimed power role. I also reffered to that post. My thinking was, there is reason to believe a claimed first mason may be protected. Would the wolves take a chance on that, or try to NK another target and atleast get a kill, potentially another power-role. I don’t know and I didn’t presume.”
My take: Hey, he’s Just Asking Questions.
Post 450 http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=18544277#post18544277
“I’m glad to see the plan abandoned. Even if it would have worked, it didn’t seem like a fun way to play, as I said some posts earlier”
My take: After pushing for it and attacking those who pointed out flaws, now he’s glad it’s been abandoned. This is evidence that all the drama he created over the plan was just him throwing crap around for the sake of arguing.
Post 480 http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=18547233#post18547233
He writes, “I do have some thoughts on TexCat. I don’t trust her at all. In my ill attempt at an analysis, I highlighted a few issues I had with her, and her response was to ignore all but two of my points! I gave answers to her objections, one apologizing for (mis)reading to much into her post and one rebutting her misreading of my post. And her response so far has been to ignore that too! TexCat, am I on your ignore list already? Please don’t ignore me, I’m thinking a lot about you!”
My take: No one is under any obligation to answer every single scattershot thing that Plum pounds into his keyboard. Again, he is setting up this ridiculous standard that if you don’t respond to every single thing that crosses his mind, you’re suspicious. Here, after attacking TC and then JAQing, he comes back saying he’s still suspicious without offering new reasons or restating his case (which he walked back earlier). What is he even arguing at this point?
**Post 481 http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=18547244#post18547244 **
“Two others that so far have failed to provide me with an answer: Sario and Precambrianmollusc. It doesn’t look sparkly clean to ignore posters who have an issue with what you post. In TexCat’s case, she’s been selectively answering, and also seemed to be flinging and messing about for a while there, until the self-vote business began. These two haven’t actually answered at all. Something to keep in mind.”
My take: No one has to answer every question Plum flings out. When you throw accusations out willy nilly, people are going to ignore it. And again with the JAQ.
Post 482 http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=18547270#post18547270
This is one of several posts where he’s directing attention at the quiet players. Just to highlight it. He plunks down some more vague accusations with a veneer of plausible deniability.
Post 485 http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=18547471#post18547471
“In real life I’m quite hyper-active, so if I’m playing with someone like that, I’ll point and yell so spittle flies until the person reacts, because until that point they’re basically useless. Now, it is still early, so there is still time to wrap your head around everything and amp up your participation.
Also regarding the “snit” comment, everyone please remember it is a game. Let’s try to keep those emotions out of it. Sometimes emotions boil over, and now and again some comment will get out. Big deal. Me, I ignore it as it isn’t really relevant to the game.”
My take: here he reveals his strategy. Yell and scream and provoke a response just to see what the person does. Then, when the person doesn’t respond to every spittle-flecked accusation to his satisfaction, that’s just more evidence they are suspicious. Throw more spittle at them! Crack a few eggs!!
I also note that his argument here boils down to, “I get very emotional. You shouldn’t get emotional.” This is classic bully behavior.
Post 488 http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=18547525#post18547525
Here he first brings out the “emotional and aggressive” tack against TexCat. But he admits, “My “case” was to get a reaction, and to me it looks like she has reacted poorly in spades”.
My take: This is one of the more revealing posts. He never had any real reason to suspect TexCat. He just flung an accusation at her to see how she’d react, then he maintained an impossible standard for her to “defend herself”, then he attacked her personally. All the while, he says he’s just asking questions and it’s just a game and don’t get emotional. This was a bullshit case and a bullshit play from the get go.
Post 493 http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=18547752#post18547752
He says to septimus, “I don’t like this post. Why are you so eager to bring meta-gaming to the table? Who cares how Chronos has behaved in earlier games?”
My take: Of course that’s relevant information. Someone trying to share his experience of a player in the past is a perfectly valid and useful thing to do. Yet, to Plum, it’s suspicious. Or, more likely, it’s really not, and Plum is just throwing more shit around.
He then quotes Johnny Bravo’s case against septimus and says, “I wanted to highlight this post. I agree, Septimus has been on my list for some time now. Something smells fishy”
My take: JAQing again. “Hey, I just wanted to highlight this. Just putting it out there.” Why has septimus been on his “list”? He doesn’t really build a case.
He then quotes TexCat voting for spetimus, and says “This post, as I mentioned in an earlier post looks a lot like hop on a wagon. Maybe a bus?”.
My take: This is the vaguest, most un-falsifiable accusation possible. And after just saying that he thought septimus was fishy, he attacks TexCat for voting him. This is just another attempt to “get a reaction”. There is no real reason to think TexCat is a wolf, but he’s ready to crack a few eggs.
Post 500 http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=18547960#post18547960
He gets on septimus for talking about Chronos’ playing style, and continues to say that discussions of players’ history is “not relevant”. He says septimus is on his list, but “Not as smelly as TexCat of course”. He still hasn’t offered much reason to suspect TexCat other than that she got defensive when he provoked her.
Post 517 http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=18548394#post18548394
Here he attacks Papperwinkle’s for trying to provoke JSexton with a vote. Trying to provoke another poster is, of course, exactly the tactic Plum used against TexCat.
Post 522 http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=18548602#post18548602
Here he encourages Mahaloth to change his vote so it will be more useful. I guess this was just to get more churn on the septimus/TexCat fight. Note he is trying to get Mahaloth to join a bandwagon, when he has previously directed suspicion at players for votes that he thought were just bandwagon jumping.
Post 523 http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=18548672#post18548672
Here he is poking players who have been quiet. “New players, or players that are “busy, blabla”, could any of you please come forward with at least one substantial explanation for that. One explanation that might shed a bit more light than “I’m with the kids” or “We’re in the process of moving” or “I’m not used to this” or “Vacation”
My take: no one owes you an explanation, pal.
He goes on, “I have made a guy so frustrated that he didn’t want to talk to me afterwards. Guys, it’s just a game, and I never flat out insults someone unless I am one hundred percent sure they are scum”.
My take: This is more bully behavior, It’s also untrue, as he insulted TexCat even though he admitted his case against her was based entirely on her reactions to his provocation.
**
Post 527 http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=18548794#post18548794**
“In Mafia and it’s iterations(as I mentioned before I’ve played a bit of The Resistance face-to-face), a game about arguing, I sometimes seem like a douche, but I am playing a game. And in game I don’t care about your feelings”
My take: fair enough. We know where you stand.
Post 529 http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=18548832#post18548832
After not having interacted much with TexCat for a while, he comes back to her. “Okay, I wanna highlight what I would call uneccessary dramatic behaviour, misleading advice and useless posting, all on page 6 for everyone to see:”
My take: Personal attack, JAQ, and game mdding all in one post.
In response to TexCat calling him delusional, he replies, “Okay! I’m apparently delusional. All caps WHAT THE FUCK? Really?”
My take: I’m glad he’s the rational, non-emotional one in the room.
In response to TexCat’s argument that we should all vote for who we think is scummiest, “And I’ve come to believe yet again that this is a lie to, apart from the woman-stuff. No! They should co-operate and argue and scrutinize every inch of every post. No one should vote just whatever they think! Whatever being the key word. This is a “helpful” statement, do not believe her intentions are for the best of town”
My take: The hell? This is just kind of random. TexCat saying we should all vote for whoever we think is scummiest is kind of a bland thing to say, but to Plum it’s yet more evidence.
**
Post 530 http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=18548841#post18548841**
He says, “I know. We just need to keep a level head, and try to be as contructive as we can.”
My take: Uh, yeah.
Post 533 http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=18548897#post18548897
Here Precambrianmollusc talks out some ideas, and Plum accuses him on the basis of his voting for reasons that don’t meet Plum’s expectations. Recall that Plum voted TexCat just to see how she would react. But that’s different. I guess.
**
Post 553 http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=18549572#post18549572**
He continues to criticize septimus and TexCat for failing to rebut all of his posts. Really, who can keep track at this pont?
Post 572 http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=18550690#post18550690
He tells septimus to leave “meta” out of the game. No good reason for why that’s not relevant. He’s just attacking to attack.
Then septimus lays out some arguments in favor of Chronos being scum but says he wants to find a better use of his vote. Plum replies, “No dice! You don’t expect to be able to lynch him, so you go out looking for a comfortable wagon to sit on while hoping to not have to explain why, while at the same time still not giving a satisfactory explanation for why you think Chronos is scum.”
Plum evidently has his own standards for what is a “satisfactory explanation” of our votes. If only we could all live up to them.
Post 573 http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=18550736#post18550736
TexCat had called him out for saying the tie plan had no disadvantages, when in fact it did have disadvanteges. Plum tries to slip away with, “I never stated which iteration of the plan I supported, apart from my own interpretation, which would have exposed all masons eventually.”
My take: so, here he can attack those who support the plan that differs from his personal version (whatever that might be). Even though, in post 450, he was glad the plan was abandoned, no matter what anyone says about the plan, he can attack. Because provoking people randomly, getting them killed, and sorting through the debris later, is his strategy. His entire strategy.
**
Post 576 http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=18550862#post18550862**
Responding to someone (?), he says, “Do you not understand this? Is this hard to understand? It doesn’t really matter anyway, if you think I stink, do that. I think we have more important stuff to think about.”
My take: more personal provocation and dismissing anyone who wants to talk about something he deems (at the moment) to be irrelevant.
**
Post 580 http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=18550979#post18550979**
Again he gets on TexCat for not responding point by point every crazy thing he’s said.
**
Post 590 http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=18551298#post18551298**
By now TC is kind of flailing. Plum says, “Ah, another switch! If you answer all my questions, properly and substantially, without leaving out substantial context, without cherry picking from a much bigger post or train of thought, without misrepresenting my intentions and manage to convince me you’re town, I’ll unvote you. Until that happens, my vote will remain and I’ll continue to push on you”
My take: At this point, he is still pushing her to complete an impossible task. I await his demand that someone chop down some trees with a herring.
Post 597 http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=18551875#post18551875
Of TexCat he says, “I will state though, that she has become increasingly emotional in her posting, becoming more and more hysterical, while still failing to provide any kind of actual defense for herself”.
My take: Note that this was all started by an attack that Plum admits was a pure provocation. He just keeps after it, adding more sexist attacks.
Post 611 http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=18552115#post18552115
To TexCat, “Could you go back and answer all my questions please? If you’re actually town, could you calm down, go back and read what I’ve said and write a level-headed response?”
My take: Impossible standard; personal attacks
**
Post 615 http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=18552144#post18552144**
He accuses TexCat of “defending herself with histrionics”
Post 632 http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=18552264#post18552264
As people start calling him on his shit, he responds, “Please, do not misread my intentions; I’m not certain of anything other than what has been posted in this thread”
My take: JAQing off.
Post 655 http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=18552337#post18552337
“Exhilarating” indeed.
I take issue with this part of your post. Not because it’s untrue but because:
- At the time I only could add a quick post (because of real life issues)
which I amended in this post
[Quote=DiggitCamara]
This is the main reason I leave my vote on septimus.
- Finds a flaw in the plan which actually might make it more favorable to the Wolves
- After the “plan” peters out, gives it a jump-start to get it rolling again despite
- Not having a real argument to discount the flaw he pointed out in the plan
Which, basically, amounts to seeing an advantage in the “plan” (for Wolves) and therefore convincing Town to adopt it.
[/quote]
I didn’t see an explanation by septimus after that and therefore didn’t remove my vote from him. However, I should point out that I actually should have left my vote on DanteG, mostly because he never explained (to my satisfaction) his strangely “aloof” posts concerning this game, overall. So:
Vote DanteG
Wow, Bayard. That was … awe-inspiring. I hope you won’t think me ungrateful when I say you needn’t have gone to anywhere near such lengths to convince me Plumpudding is a blowhard and a loose cannon. Your comments echo my own stated concerns that many of his posts are borderline incoherent or contradictory. But I can’t sign on for a vote for him because, for all his flaws, I still think he’s probably town — town with a notably coarse and scattershot play style, but still town, and his zeal seems ultimately to be self-defeating (or else TexCat would have got lynched and not septimus). I wasn’t swayed by his previous case against TexCat and my vote for her now has little to do with his arguments, and much more to do with how I interpret the events of the final hours of the Day.
But no foolin’ — that is a devastating bit of analysis. Kudos.
Thanks! I respect your vote. I would just encourage you to consider that a loose cannon townie is not much better for us than a wolf. He makes rational play difficult and increases the odds of mislynch.
To the other good folks of Cecilton, if you can’t bring yourself to vote for Plumpudding (for the reasons stated by Nonsuch), that’s understandable. I think Plumpudding needs to go, but if you are of the opinion that a loose cannon townie is still a townie, cool. I would just ask that you at least not feed him. When you see him flinging spittle at whoever he turns his gaze upon next, just say to yourself, “Well, there he goes again” and go on about your way. If we can’t lynch him, let’s at least marginalize him.
(Fun fact. Did you know there is a 25,000 character limit on posts? I do now!)
Absent one notable distinction, that is, which is that in the latter case, killing him puts us closer to winning, and in the former case, killing him puts us closer to losing.
So, to respond to the people who object to my saying that my Day One vote was cast “to protect** septimus**”:
I thought that septimus was Town. I’m not just retroactively claiming to have thought that, I said so at the time. From post 464:
I didn’t have a strong feel one way or the other on TexCat, but, like almost everyone else, she had done some things that pinged me. So, when it became apparent to me that one of those two was going to be lynched, I voted accordingly: (post 591)
I didn’t cast that vote because I had a strong scum read on TexCat, I cast it because I had a strong town read on** septimus.** I think it is therefore completely reasonable for me to describe that vote as having been cast to protect septimus.
Can anyone point to anything I said yesterDay that would suggest I am now lying about what my thought process was then?
I do regret that I wasn’t able to participate much during the second half of Day One. I like to think I might have been able to help prevent septimus. but as I said at the end of post 464, in which I said I was near-certain that septimus was town:
And that turned out to be all I had time to do.
So basically what you are saying is that I didn’t say yesterday that** septimus** was Town, except for that one time that I did, which doesn’t count because mumble mumble?
I couldn’t analyze your case in detail when you made it because I wasn’t around. My statement that septimus was Town came in response to your vote, but you didn’t lay out a detailed case until later, in post 531.
Believe me, if I had had time to post more yesterDay, I would have had better things to do with it than answer Plumpudding’s question about something that nobody else, including you, seemed to have any trouble understanding at the time.
Basically, it seems that you are attacking me for not being able to monitor this game closely every single day,
Sorry, premature posting.
…for not being able to monitor the game closely every single day, which seems very scummy, especially coming from a lurker like yourself. As far as I can remember, your case against septimus in post 531 was your only substantive post all Day. Maybe once you’d gotten the bandwagon rolling, you didn’t want to call attention to where it started?
Also, my last post cut off the quote of Bravo’s post halfway. Here is the full post:
Your point about having given a heads up about not being around is fair. What I’m taking issue with is your insistence that you were so sure about septimus having been town. Only wolves can be certain about who is town and who isn’t. I get leery of anybody who claims certainty, or anything approaching it.
Also, I think it’s fair to say that this:
Contradicts this pretty well:
Right?
On Day 1, at any rate.
This is pretty hypocritical, since I also let everyone know that my time in game would be limited last week.
I’m not calling you out for lurking. My problem is that you’re trying to claim a lot of town cred for septimus having been town and your attempt to ‘protect’ him, but I don’t think it was particularly obvious that he was town.
I have to go back and look, but did anybody else claim anything even approaching certainty about **septimus’s **towniness?
Diggit Camara, you are correct that you did explain your vote in more detail in post 564. I don’t find your logic at all convincing, but I apologize for saying that you didn’t justify it at all.
I didn’t vote for TexCat until it looked clear to me that she and septimus were the only players who could realistically be considered “candidates” for that day. So, wrong, no contradiction at all.
Questions:
What does happen in the event of a tie?
Why did the wolves target Chronos?
I didn’t notice that you had said your time would be limited. If you can point out where you did that I will apologize.
You’re not calling me out for lurking, but you are calling me out for not having posted more in defense of septimus at a time when I wasn’t posting about anything at all. How does that make sense?
And I deny that I am “trying to claim a lot of town cred”. That is an accusation levied by misguided or scummy people based on THREE WORDS in the context of a lengthy analysis. I also said in that analysis that Professor P and Jimmy Chitwood justified their TexCat votes based on “not buying the case against septimus”; how come nobody is getting on me for that?
42
I don’t have that many posts during Day 1. Have you really not read through them all despite the fact that you’ve called me out for both lurking and posting “ludicrous” arguments?
Damn, Bayard.. That was really remarkable. Great work.
But, since apparently nobody else had the same reaction I did to his “Exciting!” post, I guess I was overreacting. And without that weighing against him, I have to agree with Nonsuch that I don’t see him as quite scummy enough to warrant a vote at this point (but the Day is young!).