Back again.
Immediately after I posted my long post last night I realized that I simulposted with Atronch's case on Geraintm, which happens to be rediculously good. To recap how I see it:
I'm not sure what to make of the fact that Geraintm claims he made the old 'you think [my weekend V/LAs] will hurt [the town] that much' for 'shits and giggles' in what he seemed to think would be a hilariously over-the-top 'newbie town' parody. Seems kind of weird and might be a bit much explanation regarding something unsubstantial, but RVS joking is what he seems to be saying it was, and that, too, seems plausible enough, so that's a nulltell in my own mind.
The rest of the case, however, pinpoints some pretty clear scumtells. Lack of substance in the posts overall, for one. For another, jumping onto Porkens' 'I don't really care too much about who gets lynched Day 1' statement in what I read as a scum jumping to agree with [someone else, alignment irrelevent] for his benefit - he didn't indicate that he felt this way until Porkens came out with his style of Day 1 play. Seems to set up a situation where he can advocate a random lynch. Not good. Random lynches mean no info out of Day 1 at all, which is bad. Even Porkens doesn't seem to want to completely waste Day 1.
Geraintm's initial IP vote
seemed
to come after his 'I'm town-aligned and we'll see about a full claim later' post, with such as a main reason, which I actually don't mind too much. It looked evasive, useless, and kinda weird. After that, I might have pused hard for a full claim as well (I happened to get to the thread only after both the 'town' claim and the 'Tracker' claim had been posted, if I recall).
Keeping his vote on after the claim was another thing altogether. As Atronach said, the reason for voting was to pressure him to claim, he claimed a Townie powerrole, and Geraintm kept his vote on IP. On the one hand, that's a vote for a reason that's now obselete, and secondly it was both a useless and scummy place to put the vote. Useless because IP wasn't going to get lynched at that point, no way no how, so there was no potential info out of it. Scummy because it implied that his preferred lynch at that point was IP despite the Tracker claim.
At one point Mega wrote that Geraintm looked like 'unhelpful, low contributing scum.' After reading Atronach's case and Geraintm's weak response to it, which incidentially did not address someof the things I consider scummiest very well, I feel fairly confident that Geraintm's a good lynch.
Unvote; Vote: Geraintm
I continue to be irritated by DonJ - especially his accusation that Juls used scummy 'veiled threats'. It was about time you stopped talking about what you thought the Doctor might/should/should not do, as it was anti-town and distracting etc.
Yes, I do get annoyed that you dismiss or accuse many things as being 'WIFOMic' when they aren't really WIFOM-related.
Stop taking things personally, if you could. Some players are blunt, sharp-tongued, or occasionally temperamental. Unless it gets profane or abusive, I'd advise you to deal as best you can.
And yes, I find you rightfully suspicious. Juls made a fairly good synopsis; in bold are my thoughts on her brief points:
Juls, with me expounding wrote:My suspicions of you are based on:
1) talking about lylo on day 1 and I feel preparing an escape clause for yourself if MT turns out to be town.
Er - slightly scummy, but on its own doesn't worry me too much.
2) being distracting. This is the third "fight" that you have started and have difficulty ending. you and MT had the theory discussion, you had your button/flyer campaign for nameless with few real bites, and now with me, you wouldn't end the doctor discussion despite at least 4 people suggesting it is a bad idea.
Yes, yes, this exactly.
3) you were leading the doctor despite being asked to stop.
This as well
4) you targetting me in an OMGUS kind of way and the other person who finds you suspicious just happens to be on your lynch list. And the third person on your list is IP which at least 3/4 of us find suspicious.
This mostly; my feelings are strongest about stuff mentioned at the beginning of this proof and steadily go down a bit throughout.
Nameless wrote:Another thing that I find suspicious, is that despite nearing deadline and still listing me as his #1 lynch candidate, Don unvotes me. He says "it is obvious noone sees what i am seeing." even when several posts have indicated similar suspicion of me (I've even made Plum's scummy mashup!). He apparently admits tunnel vission, but continues making misleading statements about myself. Basically, without any obvious trigger or change of position, Don has unvoted as we near deadline.
Yes. Appears to admit to tunnelvision and unvotes, but to what end and with what other suspicions? None until illegitimate case on Juls which appears to have elements of OMGUS and nuances of other scumtells; a well-balanced bottle of scum wine. Delicious with fish or chicken dishes, and especially delicate with light fruit desserts. Serve chilled.
So, my top three scummiest are: Geraintm, DonJ and . . . hm . . .DCF, I suppose.
I have come to the conclusion that Porkens' recent posting is of slightly better quality, though his play is unconventional and looks . . . potentially scummy, and that Nameless' scumminess hinges most on noting suspicions of a scumteam at an anti-town time and a bit of wavering about bandwagons. Unless things have slipped my mind. Doubtless there are more specific details which I've discussed, but current gut on them has now shifted to null-at-worst and in light of stronger new or developing cases (see above), they are not among he people I would most rather see lynched today.
IP STOP ACTIVE LURKING YOU SCUMMY FOOL!!! POST, WITH SUBSTANCE, FOR HEAVENS' SAKES! I'M SICK OF THIS!
Sorry for the Caps Lock, all
.
