unvote
vote: Pleonast
Will you do it, Red?
You can do as many comparisons to how I’ve played in other games as you like, but you and I both know that the only thing that really matters is what’s written on the role PM, and mine says town. (Bolken, specifically, why would even say you think you’re the only one?)
Red and Pleo relationship, coming right up.
Oh no she di’n’t.
4 CST is 5 o’clock regular American, right?
Day One: nada. Pleonast refers to or fights with or responds to or comments on many of the players who are present and accounted for (Tom, Zeriel/Hirka, Mahaloth, Giraffe, Astral, glowacks …) but never refers to Red Skeezix. Skeez refers to glowacks and Astral.
Scum with nothing better to do at the time will tend to avoid each other.
Oh yeah I di’id. Enjoy the show; the game that has been eating my soul is pissing me off beyond all belief today and I need to work out some aggression on some scummers. Thank you, Red, I needed this.
And yes.
(Can’t draw connections that aren’t there.)
I do prefer a Pleo Lynch, we’ll figure out the 2nd scum tomorrow.
invite normal
vote pleonast
For the record, it is very hard to change votes on a phone…
And that was unvote not invite… damn autocorrect.
Day Two, post 144. Pleo decides to talk about the glowacks wagon, nice obvious place to find scum and there must be scum on it somewhere, right? So here’s his first mention of Red.
Town motivated, how generous.
That’s it. And Red only has two posts the whole day, the first saying he didn’t have much time, and the second a late quick vote on Giraffe that he had to know was going to bite him.
Wait a minute. In the same sentence you admit you were suspicious of ed, you accuse me of being scummy for … being suspicious of ed. You voted for ed exactly as much as I did. I first became suspicious of ed because of his lousy vote on Day One. And his continued lousy votes. You were too. We were both wrong, but somehow I’m scummy for it and you’re not.
That is a totally scummy argument.
I didn’t say anything about because there wasn’t much to say. They made pro-town (but wrong) case on glowacks while other players were going off the deep-end with anti-town arguments. It’s simply impossible to comment on every other poster on Day One. Before you make a case on me based on that, check to see who else didn’t post about Red. Did you?
But this is all a distraction anyway. Red and Hirka are throwing arguments and suspicions around trying to get votes on anyone but themselves. Don’t follow their lead.
Day Three, Pleonast post 360 shortly after start of the day. Votes (or “votes”, more like challenges) five different players. Of those chooses to truly vote #4, Special Ed. #5 is this:
[quote]
Fifth vote:
Red (and by extension any scum partner of his) KNOWS that Giraffe vote is trouble. He has to know it. So Pleonast gets in a little dig up front. But it’s not a real dig – it’s for the perfunctory sin of failure to participate only. He mentions Giraffe afterwards, but not specifically in combination with Red Skeezix, only in general. There is no specific mention of RS’s vote. But Pleo can (and does) later point back to this as having genuinely cast suspicion. In what world?
Also: according to Pleonast there must be scum on the glowacks wagon and there must be scum on the Giraffe wagon. If I have it right only Red and Ed were on both. But Pleo consistently chooses the wrong one to actually vote for.
Post 362 from Red Skeezix – Yes, you’re right Pleo, my participation has been bad. Message received to do better. When he posts again later that day he’s on Hirka for voting him and Ed (same as Pleo), but it’s so late he has no choice but to vote Inner Stickler. No further mentions of each other from either of them despite Red having had a vote on him from early on in the day.
I did, actually; didn’t like one aspect of his case on glowacks IIRC. And that despite not even being around for 90% of the day. Try again?
Also, I don’t expect people to comment on everyone, that’s silly. I do believe that, all else being equal, scum will tend to avoid commenting on each other whenever they can get away with it.
Okay, now what about Hirka/Zeriel and Jimmy, did they comment about Red?
But that’s how you’re acting. You’re implicitly demanding that a player comment on everyone else or face your vote later in the game. Did you comment on everyone else on Day One?
I find it ridiculous that despite being the only player who explicitly commented on all the lynch votes, I’m getting attacked for not commenting on one player until the next Day.
I think you’re town, so I’m not going to vote for you, but note how eager Red (a player you think is scum) is to get votes off themselves. You’re helping them.
I’m pretty sure I didn’t comment on Red until relatively late in the proceedings. Wasn’t in the game day one, spent day two shouting at you, and at everyone else about you, and then was almost entirely absent the next day, too. Thing is, I totally think that should be held against me in the final analysis, all other things being equal, and especially to the extent that I commented on other dead town people instead.
Hirka - you asked what I thought. It doesn’t look like my vote is going to be decisive anymore, but what I think is that no matter what any of us thinks about the case he just presented against Normal, Red made it after his hand was forced. Responding to posts and building a case once it’s the only thing that can get you off the chopping block is the kind of thing I’d expect from a town player or a scum player in this situation. That being the case, I go back to what Red did back when he still had the option of lying low, which is what I outlined in the post where I voted for him. Putting together a case against another player doesn’t really tell me anything about whether or not Red is actually scum at this point in the game.
day four – Pleo post 458
Nicely wishy-washy. Vote for special Ed. A while later, Red also votes for Special Ed. (Pleo mentions his day three “vote” for Red later on, when I question him.)
Day Four: Pleo votes for Red, but only after Hirka and I have both indicated that we are leaning that way.
Red votes for Pleo (because it’s his only choice) as the first time he’s seemingly noticed Pleonast all game, before deciding to make a fight of it and bouncing off onto me.
After a first day of ignoring each other, Pleo refers to Red as town-motivated early on day two while deciding to vote Special Ed for the glowacks wagon.
The next day Pleo is onto the Giraffe wagon, which again Red was on (and with a terrible vote to boot); again he chooses Special Ed as the bigger offender. Red warrants a non-vote for lack of participation only (not for the bad vote). Both vote Inner, ultimately; Red only after missing the entire discussion that led up to it.
Day Four Pleo can’t decide what he thinks of Red Skeezix, who was in some trouble the previous day. Again votes for Ed, who is finally lynched. Red also votes for Ed.
And day five Pleo votes Red only after two others have expressed suspicion**. Red votes Pleo (first time all game he’s so much as mentioned him, aside from the “thanks for reminding me to participate” thing because Pleo is the only other person with a vote, then has a better idea.
Red’s comments on me next.
Screw this, from now on I don’t care about the complaints for multi-voting, because I’m getting attacked for not voting.
When someone asks why I insist on coloring my multiple votes the same, I’ll direct them to this. If I’m going to get attacked no matter what I do, I’ll do what is right and not try to accommodate the whiners.
And this more bullshit. I posted that I’d likely not be able to post on Wednesday. I didn’t post, and no one else did. Yet I am the one you’re complaining about.
And when I posted first thing the next morning, others had already posted. Sorry for being in the Pacific Time zone. :dubious:
You’re not being attacked for not voting, far as I can see. You did vote. You’re being attacked, if at all, because you placed your vote – the one vote that you had that counted – for ed. You’re not “going to get attacked no matter what you do;” you’re just being held accountable for what you actually did do. A vote for ed made it one to one. A vote for Red would have made it 2 on Red and none on anyone else.
I find this a hilarious conversation. Even if your purple vote was blue, it wouldn’t have counted. And you know that, and you know everyone else does. Why bother getting angry about not getting credit for it?
Players were saying “you’ll try to claim credit for multivoting”, now I’m getting “you can’t get credit for multivoting”. If I’m going to get attacked either way, I’ll do it the way I want to from now.
And it’s not so funny when splitting our votes mean we lose.
Normal says they think Red is scum–so why are they voting for me? Even if I were scum, splitting the votes is loser.
I think those are the same criticism at different times, not two opposing ones.
“First you tell me I’m going to run the kid over, now that I’ve run him over you tell me I can’t do that! I can’t win with you people!”