[QUOTE=ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies]
Apologies as this is not a post of analysis and a vote (that is still coming later today, promise), but I can at least address some facets of suspicions that have been raised about me. I can’t recall who or what post numbers, but I’ll follow up with them later as well.
Is it inherently suspicious to vote for someone who has role-claimed, as I voted previously for Hockey?
No. Especially in cases where it is risky or flat out impossible to confirm or disprove the claim.
I believe this has been brought up on two specific occasions, and possibly by two individuals. Sorry my memory is so bad and time is too short right now to dig up the specific posts. I don’t recall much discussion as to this reasoning being weak, which I think it is. More nuanced application of the reasoning is fine, but blanket statements like that are not fine, imho.
[/QUOTE]
Following up on myself. It appears to be Idle Thoughts who is the lone no-vote conspiracy theorist.
[Quote=Idle thoughts]
The only one I see doing things kinda like this is CometotheDarkSide with her reminders that she (Cookies) does not trust her (Hockey), and even the vote that took place the last Day after Hockey roleclaimed. However Cookies also painted both FCoD and I shady for various reasons, so call it bias if you will, but I don’t feel she is doing this because she may be the Alchemst herself. I actually suspect her in having more ulterior motives, but again, more on this later (yes, I told you this would be a long post–it helps me (and may help others) when I sort my thoughts out this way with lists and breaking things down).
…
For one, I’m suspicious of CometotheDarkSide as of late. She doesn’t seem to add much, even from the start of the game and more or less tries to stay in the shadows. I haven’t really seen her say who she’s been suspicious of, other than as of late, but before mostly those she was suspicious of she just voted for. I don’t feel this is very helpful to the game, but then again, maybe she’s not looking to BE helpful. She’s also voted for someone who had ALREADY role claimed, seemingly willing to dunk them based on thinking they might he lying. Please note, I feel this is much more concerning than someone who may already be voting for someone who role claims or EVEN someone who holds their vote on someone they were already voting for who role claims. But to actually vote for someone who has already role claimed. that just seems and reads wrong to me.
…
So..before I get into this a bit deeper, let me say that I’m not going to vote for Cookies toDay because, really, I’m suspicious of her but it’s not a very strong thing yet, in the formation in my mind.
[/quote]
This can all be found for your re-viewing pleasure at #2301 at the top of page 47.
I cannot help but be reminded of a series of card tricks that I happen to know, when reading the successively shrinking lists that always happen to include my name…
He then goes on to vote to dunk confirmed town Captain Klutz. This is later (subsequent Day(s)) followed by:
[QUOTE=Idle Thoughts]
Two people have voted for others AFTER role claims. Cookies with Hockey and Mal with Pleonast. This strikes me as fairly shady..but when you combine it with stuff I was already getting hit with (Cookies quick to talk about how it’s weird not to link to explanations in the past when you just made a lot of them and Mal for everything on Day One and Two), it gathers strength, I feel.
[/QUOTE]
:o
As fluiddruid seemed to be making a pet project of me once upon a time, I’ve certainly no objection to seeing her go down, but I’d struggle to put together a case of my own at the moment. That’s why I’ve not voted. But if it makes people feel better, I’ll vote fluiddruid and take the flak if it turns out badly.