Wall-E wrote:What is the case on corporate/Netlava?
Ignoring the irony of
you asking...
PBPA: (numbers are to individual's posts in isolation)
0: random vote - negligible, although in light of magisterrain's lurking, this may hint at something. I'll let you figure out what.
1: Switches random vote for a reason that he later claims is a joke, but it is not at all obvious at the time that it's just a joke.
2: Calls Nekka out on voting someone who'd done something even scummier than his own vote (put Atlas at L-3 instead of L-4).
3: Says he figured L-3 isn't dangerous; I'd argue that at this phase of the game, since L-3 is 57% of the lynch requirement, if 3 other players just decided to "randomly" vote Atlas, hey, he's been speedlynched!
4: ...hmm. Says his vote on Budja was just a joke, but also says that he pulled a random vote when he thought the game had left the random stage. On first glance, this vote would appear to be his vote on Atlas; looking in the context of the thread, I can see how he might have meant Budja. Then questions a vote with more motive than his had.
5: Attempts to defend himself by saying "we all know how flip floppy D1 votes can be." I'm sorry, I really don't like his defense. Atlas is hitting him hard, and he's having trouble coming up with reasoned defenses, is what this looks like to me.
6: Complains that Atlas is nit-picking and refuses to acknowledge that it's an invalid way of scumhunting. Again, it could be cracking under pressure.
7: Recommends we keep Gamma alive, misinterprets Wall-E's statement that he's testing the lynching waters, and dismisses Atlas's post #44 (which itself had good points for corporate being scum) as not worth paying attention to. Was he not going to defend himself? It sure seems that way.
8: Claims that he can, indeed, ignore post 44. And that Atlas "backed off" his argument with corporate. (Well, Atlas won.)
9, 10, 11: Tries to make a preemptive case on Wall-E for giving himself an excuse to lurk. I'm sorry, what?
12: Joins in RB speculation and congratulates Tony for thinking of it.
13: Suggests Atlas's confirm vote on him (for ignoring his question on where he backed down) is OMGUS.
14: The thread explosion he points out invalidates any lurking points he may have. Especially against Wall-E, who seems more active during the explosion than before it, and Atlas (through this point) has still been making multiple posts per day.
15: His "excuse to back out" defense, which he tries to use here, is looking more and more shaky each time he uses it.
16: Alleges that Atlas's posting eased up. (Over 24 hours. I rarely make more than one post per game per RL day anyway.) Atlas calls him on it in #184.
17: Suggests (again) that Atlas and Wall-E are scumbuddies conspiring to get him lynched.
18: Says he's not sure Tony is town. Except... wait a minute... let's look at post 12 again.
19: Claims he stated a case on... Wall-E, I guess, although Eek seems to think Atlas. Either way, I don't see it.
20: The entire post is as follows: "checking in thanksgiving is keeping me busy ill catch up when i can but i have a pretty full schedule this weekend." Well, the timing is somewhat appropriate, anyway.
21: Misinterprets Budja's post "I'll go with whichever wagon
on two specific people
(including corporate) town supports more" into "whichever wagon ends up lynching".
22: Apology for lurking - Thanksgiving weekend. Passable.
23: Confirm votes Wall-E, but doesn't elaborate on why. ("For all the obvious reasons"? Really? Let's pretend I'm being slow. What are they?) And suggests that Gamma killing N1 is a bad idea. We now know that the kill he made didn't work out so well for us, but we weren't going to find ourselves suddenly in LyLo today, either, so I wouldn't have minded.
24: Attempts to use laziness as an excuse for not explaining his votes and insults Wall-E. Not that Wall-E hadn't been doing more than his share of insulting, mind, but two wrongs don't make a right.
25: Restates his suspicions (without reasoning, if anyone cares), wonders where Atlas is. Reasonable question; the answer appears to be that he left the site.
26: Tries to use meta as a defense.
27: Makes a halfhearted attempt to explain why he finds Atlas scummy.
28: Congratulates Gamma for complaining about MME's nitpicking; remember, corporate's 6th post complained at Atlas for doing the exact same thing. At least he's consistent.
29: Snaps at Wall-E for ignoring Jordan's case against him.
30: Suggests Atlas may need to be replaced; forgets the reasons at the beginning of the game for which he thought Atlas was scum.
31: Apology for missing the weekend.
32: "Nope, nothing's happened that would make me change my vote."
33: Requests that people be prodded. Gets told that people are probably just waiting on Atlas's replacement.
34: Points out that yes, he did say why he'd thought Atlas was scummy.
35: Again, supports a no-kill. I think this is likely a null-tell.
36: Slams Tony (a) based on a misinterpretation and (b) for roleblocker speculation... which, wait, he supported earlier on. I could very easily believe that this is bussing, especially since they're my top two suspects.
37: Backtracks from his previous post, but leaves the part where he slams Tony's RB speculation.
38: Suggests that if Tony thinks Wall-E is scum, he should be voting to put Wall-E at L-1. FoSes Tony, but not without a bit of prompting. Make of that what you will.
39: Suggests Tony has changed his mind about who he thinks is scummiest... except he really hasn't.
40: Wonders how a suspect list (in this case, Tony's) is useful to anyone other than scum. I'd say it helps town by letting everyone know who you'd be willing to switch your vote to.
41: He then gets wrong how scum could use it to their advantage: If there's a player that everybody thinks is town, scum would likely want to kill that player. (Which then gives the doc a lead on whom to protect, which starts a logic chain that's going to give me a headache if I think about it too much.) He merely suggests that if the list's poster doesn't die, scum knows where they stand in the eyes of the dead player.
42: Says that Tony's unvoting Wall-E (who was at L-1) to wait for replacements is "wishy-washy". Really? I can understand why Tony would have been cautious and unvoted.
43: Decides Tony's not confident in his Wall-E vote/unvote.
44, 45: Declares that Wall-E's either scum or playing horribly.
46: Requests a deadline, then promptly avoids posting for two-and-a-half weeks. In fairness, it was over the holidays.
47-49: Contentless, just "need to catch up" posts.
corporate requested replacement over N1; Netlava replaced in.
0-2: "I'm busy, I'll post eventually."
3: Claims to have read the thread, but doesn't have any points past page 6. Votes the guy who is essentially confirmed to be either vig or SK.
4: Has no idea why Gamma shouldn't be lynched... perhaps I was too subtle.
5: Maybe it's just me, but I get the feeling he's looking for an excuse to vote Gamma.
Does that clear things up, Wall-E?
WhereIsTony wrote:I was not saying we should lynch him. Just trying to encourage his replacement to step up, and explain/off theroies
Minor problem here: A lot of what Netlava would need to explain came from corporate. As such, only corporate would be able to fully explain why he did what he did.
