DGBBBB
ITT: Mina gives no scum reads yet BUT:
Oh, come on. Of course I didn't literally not mention a single name all game. It was a facetious reference to what a filthy lurker I've been. But there was a grain of truth to that comment; unless you count my RVS vote for farside22, my first two posts didn't contain a single scum read or concrete suspicion, and I explicitly said that I had no clue what was going on...and my God, I'm actually having an argument about whether I'm scummy because my contributions HAVEN'T been crappy so far. But anyway, no matter whom I'd voted for, it would have been someone I'd never mentioned before (unless I decided to backtrack on one of my town reads). Because I didn't mention that anyone was scummy!
No. You could have in fact USED WORDS to fuel the vote. Or DONE THINGS before voting.
And the jump from "I didn't talk about anyone" to "I didn't say anyone was
scummy
" exacerbates this problem.
I can't speak for others' reasons for distrusting you, but this is ridiculous. You can just as easily find arguments for why it's scummy to vote a popular bandwagon, or why it's scummy to vote someone whom everyone thinks is town. Now that I've given my reasons, you can evaluate whether you think they make more sense for town than scum, but other people also finding you suspicious is irrelevant.
(That said, to be honest, those familiar with your play disliking it probably gave me more confidence in my read, because it meant I wasn't taking crazy pills.)
Again, what reasons?
Its "LOL META SPYREX META WOO"
And when the masses started a rumblin you jumped.
I can think of a reason for why MWR's first two posts would merit a vote, but he certainly hadn't started "floundering" at that point. Humour me (unless you don't want to help me write my blurb on Me = Weird).
Initially its gut on the classic numbers paranoia TM when LLD started statistics (its an easy thing to attack AND if it stumbles on the right path its normally bad juice).
But, the questions (of the absolutely junk kind) was the kicker.
Questions are fine. Those questions are the derail/fluff that when a little fishy pretending to be a big fishy does to try and shuck and move.
Maybe it's just that you missed Jack has admitted it was a gambit...but actually, yes. Everyone has moved away from it. No, seriously. Has one person said, "Hey, we should lynch Jack soon!" in the past few pages?
Maybe it's just that you missed Jack has claimed it was a gambit...but actually, everyone has moved away from him. No, really. Has anyone even suggested a Jack lynch within the last fifteen pages? Anyway, I should admit that it was partly just a gut feeling that your stance on Jack didn't feel natural--as if you were trying to milk town cred for being the first to declare he was town, but still keep on reminding people that we should.
This argument will defeat itself. As it sits, we'll see who is right about this particular dance when the time comes.
Just out of curiosity, what's your read on Fishythefish? I mean, ignoring Nobody Special's behaviour, of course.
Thats a real hard and altering piece to ignore. In a vacuum? Not impressed. Slightly scummy. However, not a vacuum so.
If you genuinely believed that Jack was telling the truth, why didn't you vote themanhimself?
Because I still want to go this way. That knot, even as it was, will untie itself. Knocking out another leg has merit.
(and, it pains me to say it, but META says that the series of events I found the least likely is still higher than I'd like. *vomit*)