Open 143: Jungle Republic (Game Over!) before 787

[Percy]

Here are my thoughts from AA's most recent posts.

Try scumhunting and stop bashing me for a case you admit EXISTS - - My case is based on the very points you ADMIT exist - that's a little hypocritical and narrowminded, no? I mean, hell, I'm not bashing your Ace case and I in no way have suggested he is innocent

Here is what you are not understanding.

I am not saying that Mix is not worth pursuing. In terms of "people who have done potentially scummy things", Mix is on that list. I do not think it is inappropriate for you to point this out.

However, I feel

very strongly

that you are

1. Overstating the case against Mix, and
2. Ignoring the rest of the game in your narrow-minded pursuit.

You have pretty much admitted 2, and I have gone to great lengths to show the truth of 1. You have really seriously changed your opinions on Ace more than once, with glaring inconsistencies.

@Percy
Why would his opportunity lynch be towny if he fought so hard to say it wasn't?
What question did he answer? I asked for his reasons, and you admit he hasn't given me them - I REALL want them

This is what Mix said:

No, I didn't switch over because of the numbers. I switched because I believed zwet would flip scum and his lynch would provide the town with more information than an Ace lynch on D1.

This is not a refutation of the opportunism charge. The opportunity presented itself for Mix to lynch zwet, and as he believed him to be scum, he took advantage of that opportunity. Your argument is that he hammered just to kill someone - however, I do not believe this to be the case. I reject the claim that Mix 'fought hard' to refute the opportunism claim, when he in effect admitted to it.

This is the question I was referring to:

Mix - Why did you hammer? All the reasons are out the window because you didn't care for them pages and pages before your Ace rants - - you said you don't like early wagons and backtracked a LIE - - so since that didn't work out

WHAT - IS - YOUR - ANSWER

He has already answered why he hammered. He didn't start the Ace wagon, it's true. Your question is, therefore, "why didn't you post more about zwet before hammering him, even though you voted Ace after Percy?" He acknowledged the lack of posting as a flaw that he regrets, and said that he wanted to pressure Ace into posting - something that very few players have been engaged in. Are you dissatisfied with this answer?

You also haven't answered

his

question:

@AA- The people you are accusing me of dirtly hoping behind, Ash and hewitt, are now shamelessly hoping on behind you. What do you make of that?

...and I think this deserves and answer. I'd also like to know why you've ignored it, even though Mix asked you to answer it

multiple

times.

And Percy - - Mix has suggested not having many games under his belt at present. Exactly how is it that you feel confident in his meta?

I've played in one game with Mix. I don't feel confident in his meta, because I don't have a good read on it. Why do you think I do?

Now I'm hearing that Ace didn't lie just about the Dust meta - - he has aparently lied MULTIPLE times, and from the beginning of the game -
Can you please elaborate on that?

Are you just not reading posts unless they're addressed to you and/or talk about Mix? How can you be this involved in the game, and be this far in, and have no idea what the Ace case is?

I just want it to be known that my agreed points of

The Dirty Hammer
The lies
The lurking
The hypocrisy (which I proved in an earlier post)

All exist - - -

Opportunistic

Hammer? Yes. Dirty? Not necessarily.
Lies? I haven't seen him lie.
Lurking? Sure, he's been doing that lately. However, I don't think you'll find a scummier lurker in this game than Ace.
Hypocrisy? I assume you're referring to Mix's "I won't get on a wagon early" post, when he in fact did get on the Ace wagon early on. Sure, there's an inconsistency here.

Dej is saying I'm scum because I'm not on the Ace wagon

You just don't read people's posts, do you?

"AA23!! HAHAH! You're so stupid to be on a wagon with all that evidence"

Stop with the misrep. Just fucking stop it, I am so tired of your appeals to emotion. It makes my fucking head hurt.

EVEN IF

I was to concede

EVERY POINT

that you have made so far, Ace is still

FAR SCUMMIER

.

EVEN IF

I

FURTHER

concede that Mix is

EQUAL TO OR MORE SCUMMY

than Ace, that does

NOT

excuse your lack of participation in this game in all matters not directly relevant to your case against Mix.

Additionally, you accuse dej of flip-flopping, when he did no such thing. When he asks for quotes, you ignored him. That is inexcusable. Add to that your inconsistent approach to Ace, your continuous appeals to emotion and your twin habits of ignoring difficult questions and making claims without evidence, and you're looking more scummy by the minute.


Your case has some evidence, but you're playing like scum.

Vote Count

Mixologist 3 - AA23, AshMC1984, hewitt
AceMarksman 3 - Mixologist, Percy, dejkha
AA23 1 - Empking

[AA23]

Percy - he said that he believed Zwet would flip scum, and I'm saying that the reason it's scummy opportunity is that he DIDN'T believe he would flip scum - -

He listed his reasons for thinking him scum - - those existed on 5 and didn't convince him

He said he didn't like early.....(repetition)

I think you got accidentally criss crossed there - - you think he answered my major question of "Why did you lynch" when really he hasn't - - saying "I thought he was scum" isn't good enough, when he in fact proved from 5-14 he did NOT think he was scum for ANY of the listed reasons.
----------------------

And I'm not ignorant to other cases - if you please read even slower, I'm saying that I am PRIORITIZING Mix.

Mod - please prod Mix -

He seems to have scurried off without defending any of the valid points, or proving that he indeed hammered Zwet not out of scum opportunity, but because he truly felt he would flip scum (in which case, he would have to finally give the evidence and reasons for thinking he's scum, because all the existing ones were completely disregarded by him for many, many, many pages where he only cared about the Ace case)

**Khamisa and Thesp - - what are your thoughts please

[Empking]

Hewitt: Three reason why Mix is scum.

Mix: Three reasons why Ace is scum?

[AshMC1984]

Hewitt: Three reason why Mix is scum.

Mix: Three reasons why Ace is scum?

Ugh. Honorary Vote: Empking

[dejkha]

And I'm not ignorant to other cases - if you please read even slower, I'm saying that I am PRIORITIZING Mix.

He said you are ignoring the rest of the game, which you are. In this post:

What I think on any other player is irrelevent because I feel the MOST sure about priority one, Mix - - he's MY priority - -

You say that Mix is your priority,

so

what you think about anyone else is irrelevant which shows that you don't care about and are ignoring other cases.

And also:

lol you guys are laughable - - "AA, don't go after Mix jsut because you think he's scum and he's poorly defending himself, go after some OTHER possible scum!"

You laughed at and mocked us in this post for telling you to scumhunt elsewhere in addition to Mix, showing how you're ignoring the other cases. I love quotes, don't you?

[Thesp]

Will get a substantial post in tonight, please hold me to that. (Monday and Tuesday are usually my busiest days, so it will be uncommonc for me to give good posts during them, I should have warned in advance.)

[AA23]

@Dej - - No, notscumhunt other people as well, you guys have an attitude that suggest I should scumhunt someone else INSTEAD. - I'm happy with my wagon


** There's a lot a talk about investigating multiple people, talking to all, etc - - why am I the only person being spoken to? You guys aren't even trying to talk to the person on YOUR wagon let alone another (since we all aparently need to juggle multiple suspects on a day that only lets you lynch ONE)

I'm staying put on my vote - move along, boys

At the end of the day, it's a difference of opinion - I have no problem with you staying on your wagon, and you guys have acknowledged I have evidence.

Any further harrassment just seems wildly suspicious to me, I'm doing my job lol

[AA23]

Mod prod Khamisa

[hewitt]

Hewitt: Three reason why Mix is scum.

No, before I answer this you give me three solid reasons why you're voting Mixologist. You can't just float through this game asking questions.

[Khamisa]

I absolutely dislike how Percy criticizes AA23's playstyle, not his case, and AA23 attacks with a demonstration of the playstyle Percy criticized, only leading to a deadly cycle.

AA23, WE HATE YOUR PLAYSTYLE. However, your cases are decent. Make them more presentable and maybe more people will listen.

It's also very funny how Ace "forgets' the game.

Does anyone in this town ALSO finally acknowledge that Mix lynched opportunistically? - And if so, are you all honestly going to bash my case and call me scum for preferring him to Ace?

I think your case on Mix is good, and I think a lot of other people do too, but you are misrepresenting everyone by saying that they are bashing your case. It's your playstyle.

If anyone has a better case, lay it out. Otherwise, leave me and my case be

If someone wants to openly criticize your case, shouldn't they be allowed to do that? I'm not saying there are problems with it, but if someone were to find some inconsistency, they should be allowed to look into it.

@Khamisa - - Given what's presented, does the Mix wagon earn your vote? Does the case make sense and show Mix for scum?

Yes. And I think more people would be more likely to see the truth in it if they are able to read through what your saying.

Vote: Mixologist

[Percy]

You guys aren't even trying to talk to the person on YOUR wagon let alone another (since we all aparently need to juggle multiple suspects on a day that only lets you lynch ONE)

I've said all I need to say about Ace. He hasn't posted answers to any questions of any substance all day. He's obvious scum. I could "try to talk" to Ace, but I would just be repeating myself and getting no reply.

Hewitt: Three reason why Mix is scum.

No, before I answer this you give me three solid reasons why you're voting Mixologist. You can't just float through this game asking questions.

Empking is voting AA, but I would still like to know why he thinks AA is worse than Ace or Mix.

I absolutely dislike how Percy criticizes AA23's playstyle, not his case, and AA23 attacks with a demonstration of the playstyle Percy criticized, only leading to a deadly cycle.

AA23, WE HATE YOUR PLAYSTYLE. However, your cases are decent. Make them more presentable and maybe more people will listen.

This seems hypocritical to me. At the very least, I'm missing something. Why do you say you dislike my criticism of AA's playstyle, and then turn around and say you hate his playstyle too?

Furthermore, I have read between the lines of AA's case against Mix, and it's not simply "a good case pushed by tunnelled town with an annoying way of talking". It's a case that has been deliberately inflated by a player who has been inconsistent, ignored questions, claimed things were true when they weren't, and actively avoided commenting on anything other than his case.

It's a case that is being pushed in a scummy way by someone playing scummily. This is not something that should be ignored to prevent a "deadly cycle" (whatever that means).

@Khamisa: Do you find AA scummy?



And just for everybody's reference, here is a summary of AA's shifting attitudes towards Ace, mainly plagiarised from Mix's 440:

Ace lies about a meta to put a vote down and gets caught/suspected of it later - - this could make him a villain and the reasons for lying suggest Dust being a villain of the opposite variety to him.

He interprets it as a lie, and says it

might

make him a villain.

Then:

I based the first part of what you quoted me on from you and Dej saying he lied - - in between that and me realizing it was semantics, I read back to his statement - - it's purely hyperbole hat can be exploited as a scumtell - I'm not lynching someone for that.

On his re-read, he rejects it as "purely hyperbole", and not worth a lynch.

But then:

FoS:Ace
For using hyperbole to strengthen a vote against Dust and opportunistically distancing yourself to take it off.

FoSing for the same reason that he said he wouldn't lynch for, with no discussion in between.

And thus to:

Why go for a guy that believed something, instead of the person who was caught in a LIE...

...and finally:

Ace is most certainly someone I'm interested to investigate
...
[Mix is] priority one for me because I find [him] most scummy- Ace is priority number two because I find him most suspicious -

...with no follow-up investigation (and that last sentence is totally confusing). His argument as to why he hasn't been talking about Ace is that if he doesn't lynch Mix today, it will be harder for him to lynch Mix tomorrow because the "iron won't be hot", making it easier for Mix to avoid being lynched for his Day 1 play. I submit that the same would then hold true for Ace; AA's said that Ace is "worth investigating", but doesn't think this should happen until Day 3. This could very well be a deliberate attempt to take heat off Ace.

@AA: If Mix is lynched today, will you pursue Ace tomorrow? On what grounds? How do you feel about the case now?

[AA23]

And just for everybody's reference, here is a summary of AA's shifting attitudes towards Ace, mainly plagiarised from Mix's 440:

These are in the exact order you presented them - it seems you need clarification:

Ace lies about a meta to put a vote down and gets caught/suspected of it later - - this could make him a villain and the reasons for lying suggest Dust being a villain of the opposite variety to him.

He interprets it as a lie, and says it

might

make him a villain.

Then:

I based the first part of what you quoted me on from you and Dej saying he lied - - in between that and me realizing it was semantics, I read back to his statement - - it's purely hyperbole hat can be exploited as a scumtell - I'm not lynching someone for that.

On his re-read, he rejects it as "purely hyperbole", and not worth a lynch.

What was wrong with that? I re-read it and found it not worth a LYNCH - also meaning not worth a VOTE - - it's not illogical in the least bit. I felt it wasn't a lie so much as hyperbole

And after more activity:

FoS:Ace
For using hyperbole to strengthen a vote against Dust and opportunistically distancing yourself to take it off.

I sent an FoS his way- - it seemed that the hyperbole could have been

intentional

- which is manipulative and suspicious.

Once again - for all those catching up - NOT worth a vote, NOT worth a lynch...as I consistently prove above with an FoS - - no flip flopping.

Later, Zwet gets lynched and somebody said a good reason is for lynching him was the he "believed Ace's lie" - -

this seemed illogical to me. If you believe someone has told a lie, why would you vote the person who believed it (Zwet)? Would it not make more sense to go for the person you think maliciously lied? So I asked:

Why go for a guy that believed something, instead of the person who was caught in a LIE...

And believe it or not - that question wasn't even answered (rather disappointing)

But I maintained

Ace is most certainly someone I'm interested to investigate
...
[Mix is] priority one for me because I find [him] most scummy- Ace is priority number two because I find him most suspicious -

staying true to what I said - when I put an FoS his way - I find him suspicious.

@AA: If Mix is lynched today, will you pursue Ace tomorrow? On what grounds? How do you feel about the case now?

D3 I will be investigating Ace - not putting a wagon his way, or a vote - investigating.

----------------------------

So Percy - the inflation seems to be your opinion on me - - you're making me feel like I'm scum for not being on your wagon.

You know why I'm voting - - It's for valid reasons - - there's nothing scummy about that.

If you're going to present me with something, let it be a little more forwarding, otherwise we'll all end up bickering.

[AA23]

I'm trying to lynch a person I think is scum - - to say I'm not giving ENOUGH attention to another suspicious person, or talking enough to other people is going to clutter the whole process - -

has it not occured to you that there are 4 other villains aside from the ones each of us are trying to lynch? The very reason you're trying to lynch Ace is because you're confident it is the right choice, but what of the other villains? Are you "buying them time"? Are you "taking the heat off of them"? - - no - you're trying to eliminate their numbers - - that's why I'm doing - working to lynch Mix, someone I believe is scum

Someone I have presented the case to, clearly, and asked a single simple question to that he lied in response to twice before lurking - - lurking, lurking, lurking.

I can't lynch all five today, so I need to work on the one - just leave me be unless it's bloody intelligent/substantial that can prove innocence/guilt of any player - - otherwise you're all just going to wind up harrassing me and we'll all bicker and get nowhere

[dejkha]

And believe it or not - that question wasn't even answered (rather disappointing)

Yes it was. I answered it twice. Once when it happened and another time when you asked later in the game.

You know why I'm voting - - It's for valid reasons - - there's nothing scummy about that.

By that logic, there wasn't anything scummy about my vote on Zwet, which you claimed it to be.

[AA23]

You know why I'm voting - - It's for valid reasons - - there's nothing scummy about that.

By that logic, there wasn't anything scummy about my vote on Zwet, which you claimed it to be.

I feel that your bias, prejudice, and negative nature is bad for any lynch - -

Just as a homicide detective looks for how something can be homicide, and an arson detective: arson - I believe that when someone says they would lynch somebody for NOTHING - that ANY reason will suit them

That's all - - I just don't think you truly believed him to be scum, I think you found reasons that fit to lynch him.

[dejkha]

I had reasons that 7 other people agreed with. And yes, I found reasons that fit to lynch him... that's why I voted for him.

Seriously, what is with the dashes? You use, like, only one period every post.

[dejkha]

I'm sorry, 6 other people

[AA23]

I write in stream of consciousness.

[Thesp]

Percy, what do you think of hewitt?

Fairly null read at the moment. He's anti-AA, anti-Mix, anti-Ace. I'd like to hear more of his thoughts on Ace, as is the case with everyone.

Why do you ask?

I asked because I thought your answer would be informative.

I disagree with you on [Mix] - I think he needs to die. Along with AA23 and dejhka. I'm happy lynching any of them. I don't mind the pressure on AceMarksman. There are some others I won't lynch that I'm not going into at this moment.

Can you explain in more detail why you want dej and AA lynched. I would also like you to expand on who the 'others' are.

For dejkha, in part I'm not comfortable with his early-stated (and later affirmed) zwet/Empking lynch policy, it feels like he's giving himself an out for later rounds. I'm also a little befuddled with how up in arms he got with AA23 in his back-and-forths, and surprised he makes almost no comment on Mixologist until late in the day, only a throwaway comment of "I just don't see anything scummy about his hammer" when zwet clearly should have been given the chance to claim yesterday.

I like some of your thoughts on AA23 (though particularly I'm not sure how far I follow you on the '9/11 truther' comparison), but more particularly the tunnel vision and verbal diarrhea bothers me. He seems to be tunneling in on one person to the exclusion of others in a game with 5 scum, which is not only unhelpful, but allows him to jump from target to target day to day without having to account much for previous days beyond saying "my bad" if he's wrong.

I will not expand on who the 'others' are at this time. (I probably shouldn't have mentioned it in the first place.)

I understand what's been levied against [Ace], I just don't find it as moving as some other people right now.

I would appreciate it if you could tell me how Ace-as-town makes sense to you.

I don't find Ace-as-town to be terribly compelling. I just find others as more likely to be scum. I'm perfectly fine with an AceMarksman lynch.

@Hewitt- Percy explained the Ace case pretty well. Do you understand why Ace was lying now? And why do you continue to hardly post and post little when you do.

Okay I get it now and that was pretty flipping dodgy of AceMarksmen but I'm still going to have to stick with my vote for Mixologist. Between the two I think Mix is the scummier play and did a scummier move.

I get that you think Mixologist is worse, but do you think AceMarksman is likely to be scum? It's becoming increasingly unclear.

The only player I had really been thinking about in this game was Mixologist. And AA23 by default because he posts so much but not because I think he's scummy just because he stood out in my mind.

Why? (I don't get this.)

@Thesp - - thoughts on my presented case that people are voting in favor of given the evidence that exists AND people are NOT voting of....while still acknowledging the evidence that exists. Where does your vote lie, and if it doesn't lie on the two given cases, do you have one of your own.

@Khamisa, Thesp and Ash: You're not voting. Why? What do you think of the cases?

I'm really happy lynching either - I think they're both scum. I'd be happy with my vote on either one, and don't feel the need to choose, I'll choose whichever is closer to lynch.

Apologies, Ash.

It's Ace who isn't voting.

What a surprise.

I feel like this is just turning into a dejkha vs. AA23 game.

Maybe if you and others started taking part, it wouldn't be that way.

I know but honestly I don't care about your guys' argument. If I had to pick a side I couldn't because I just don't think either side is really compelling.

Who are your top 3 candidates? Any push any direction?

Hewitt: Three reason why Mix is scum.

Mix: Three reasons why Ace is scum?

Ugh. Honorary Vote: Empking

Why?

Hewitt: Three reason why Mix is scum.

No, before I answer this you give me three solid reasons why you're voting Mixologist. You can't just float through this game asking questions.

I'd like to hear three reasons why you think Mixologist is scum as well.

Actually, the more I think on it, I have a slight preference towards lynching AceMarksman, as I find the AceMarksman-AA23 combo compelling, and it'd be nice to hit two-for-one. I have no qualms hammering either, but want a significant post from either before I'd do the deed.

AceMarksman, what do you think of AA23?

[AA23]

He seems to be tunneling in on one person to the exclusion of others in a game with 5 scum

, which is not only unhelpful, but allows him to jump from target to target day to day without having to account much for previous days beyond saying "my bad" if he's wrong.

I will not expand on who the 'others' are at this time.

(I probably shouldn't have mentioned it in the first place.)

This is hypocritical to me - -

ONE person can be lynched today - and I'm most confident in ONE person - - There's nothing tangable for me to work with at this point. I have suspicions on Ace, but better scum reads on Mix

If I find them both not to be innocent, how am I trying to protect Ace? - It seems slightly unfair that I'm being tied to his potential guilt by people bitching about me not supporting them killing him - - The "Ace/AA23 combo" - - can I please get some evidence backing that?

In addition to that - you seemed to have missed post 536 where I addressed the inflated statements about my Ace position.

How do you go from saying I'm a guy on a decent case with a curse of poor play to suggesting I'm scum with a person you're not voting for?

How do you justify finding it negative that I focus on one person (in a gamer where we can only LYNCH

one

bloody person a day) to making a statement about not wanting to mention other people yourself?

There are two people in question with cases on them - Ace and Mix - - It is only natural with one lynch a day that we have to pick one, yes? - - I've done what everyone has - I've picked my one and continue to suspect the other - It seems like you're all taking advantage of me in a lose/lose situation

If I were voting someone for weak reasons, that's understandable (note Emp voting me when the only two tangable cases are Ace/Mix) but I'm not - I'm voting a justified case

I think it's unintelligent, ignorant, foolish, dirty, and childish to attach me to the potential guilt of someone just because I'm not walking in line with you (Ace wagoners)

[AA23]

To repeat - -

There are only two people with cases on them - - I have nothing to go on for anyone else, I'm not excluding anybody, I'm presented with "Ace, or Mix" - and I have made my choice and expressed interest in investigating the other for D3 - it's not excluding

2 people to work with - - anything else would be irresponsibly manufacturing a case on somebody - - nobody else has had any scumtells jump out at me - - hence TWO people to choose from - - I've made my SINGLE decision, the ONLY power I have is to pick ONE person to lynch a day, hence ONE person - it is not singling out.

[Thesp]

He seems to be tunneling in on one person to the exclusion of others in a game with 5 scum

, which is not only unhelpful, but allows him to jump from target to target day to day without having to account much for previous days beyond saying "my bad" if he's wrong.

I will not expand on who the 'others' are at this time.

(I probably shouldn't have mentioned it in the first place.)

This is hypocritical to me - -

I'm not sure I made it clear - the 'others' referred to in the post (by Percy and I) are the people I won't lynch today.

If I were voting someone for weak reasons, that's understandable (note Emp voting me when the only two tangable cases are Ace/Mix) but I'm not - I'm voting a justified case

This is a straw man - scum will likely have excellent cases they can pursue - there's another scum group, after all. Heck, even in games with a single group, scum can often pursue excellent cases against hapless townies.

Having a good case does not preclude you from being scum.

There are only two people with cases on them - - I have nothing to go on for anyone else

I'm not sure I'm understanding you correctly, are you suggesting you only have two people you think are scummy, and uncertain on the rest?

I think it's unintelligent, ignorant, foolish, dirty, and childish to attach me to the potential guilt of someone just because I'm not walking in line with you (Ace wagoners)

I agree with the general tone of this sentiment (though not the derogatory aspects of it) while thinking it's unlikely many in this game fit this as described.

[AA23]

They describe the act more so than the person.

I find Mix scum, Ace suspicious, I think Emp is actively lurking but his meta suggests nothing out of the norm, and am unsure about the rest (all the while uncomfortable with Dej's confrontational behavior) - - That's all.

And Thesp, I not only have a good case, but I also have Mix's poor defense.

You will notice the rate of activity he had up until his wagon - he would even notify when he was V/LA - -

He hammered - then he waited a few hours and gave his reasons - those proved to be a lie, so when I asked further, he said he didn't like being on wagons early wihtout starting them - that proved to be a lie as well (lie number 2) - he has yet to tell answer for the hammer.

He lied twice, was hypocritical, and now he is genuinely lurking. He has been prodded, he gave no V/LA or req. for replacement that we know of - he's uncharacteristically lurking - I feel it's because he's caught.

So Thesp, I am not only satisfied with the case, I am satisfied with his lack of a defense.
--------------------------------------------------------

On the Ace matter - - I prioritize Mix - - I feel that both Mix and Ace could get lynched, but faith will be lost in the Mix case is Ace is first (does that make sense?) -

I respect both the cases we have going right now, and I in no way am bashing the Ace case - I just want to see this one through before I contribute to it - - otherwise, would I not come across as hypocritical if I laid out reasons and thoughts on why Ace should be lynched all the while wanting Mix out?

I'm not being sarcastic - genuinely asking

[Percy]

D3 I will be investigating Ace - not putting a wagon his way, or a vote - investigating.

1. I will hold you to that, in the unfortunate instance that Ace survives today.
2. What more investigation do you feel needs to be done? I think I've adequately described my case against him. In what way do you feel it is lacking?

has it not occured to you that there are 4 other villains aside from the ones each of us are trying to lynch? The very reason you're trying to lynch Ace is because you're confident it is the right choice, but what of the other villains? Are you "buying them time"? Are you "taking the heat off of them"? - - no - you're trying to eliminate their numbers - - that's why I'm doing - working to lynch Mix, someone I believe is scum

Again you are misrepresenting my arguments. Perhaps I can respond to your statement with a question.

What happens if Mix flips town? You will have spent all day doing nothing but talking about how scum a townie is. All of your analysis, all of your contributions to this game will be reduced to nothing.

You aren't looking at the rest of the game. You keep reminding us that there are other villains out there - so why concentrate on one potential villain?

I write in stream of consciousness.

Don't.

I will not expand on who the 'others' are at this time. (I probably shouldn't have mentioned it in the first place.)

Yes, because now you are publicly withholding information from the town. Noted.

zwet clearly should have been given the chance to claim yesterday.

What use would a claim have been?

The "Ace/AA23 combo" - - can I please get some evidence backing that?

Read my posts, ffs.

I've made my SINGLE decision, the ONLY power I have is to pick ONE person to lynch a day, hence ONE person - it is not singling out.

Just read that again, slowly. Perhaps your reason will catch up with your stream of consciousness and reveal to you how absurd this statement is.

Better still, I'll paraphrase.

"I can only lynch one person, so I've picked one person and made my decision. That's not singling anyone out".

otherwise, would I not come across as hypocritical if I laid out reasons and thoughts on why Ace should be lynched all the while wanting Mix out?

No. You would come across as a pro-town player who is trying to find

all

the scum. Remember all those posts where you were begging, screaming and yelling to be heard about the Mix case? How you wanted everyone to stop what they were doing and talk about it? Would you have been satisfied if I had simply said "Well, AA, I have my own case, you go do your thing"?

Start talking about the Ace case.

Having a good case does not preclude you from being scum.

QFT.



I would like Mix to start talking now. Whilst I feel that the case against him is not a strong one, his complete lack of participation is reaching Ace-like levels. He is at L-2, and should start defending himself.

If Ace doesn't post soon he will incur my vote.

How long is "soon"? Does this mean you prefer the Ace case to the Mix case now?


For the record, from scummiest to least scummy:


AceMarksman - strong scum read.
AA23 - middling scum read.

Mixologist - weak scum read, but getting stronger.
Empking - weak scum read, but getting stronger (lurking, generating no content)
Khamisa - weak scum read (lurking, inconsistent approach to Mix case)
hewitt - weak scum read (lurking, and his ignorance of the Ace case bothered me)
Thesp - weak scum read (scummy entrance, withholding information, but sounds sensible most of the time)

Ash - fairly null (some fence-sitting)
dejkha - sensible contributions, mostly town read.

[Thesp]

They describe the act more so than the person.

I'm not sure what this is referring to.

I find Mix scum, Ace suspicious, I think Emp is actively lurking but his meta suggests nothing out of the norm, and am unsure about the rest (all the while uncomfortable with Dej's confrontational behavior) - - That's all.

I'm a bit flabbergasted/surprised/befuddled that you have what appears to be at best 2.5 suspects, and are

unsure about the rest

, particularly given the attention you've paid to this game.

I respect both the cases we have going right now, and I in no way am bashing the Ace case - I just want to see this one through before I contribute to it - - otherwise, would I not come across as hypocritical if I laid out reasons and thoughts on why Ace should be lynched all the while wanting Mix out?

No. (I've been on one wagon while supporting others as well in the past.)

I will not expand on who the 'others' are at this time. (I probably shouldn't have mentioned it in the first place.)

Yes, because now you are publicly withholding information from the town. Noted.

I'm also withholding it from the scum, which I feel is more important at this time. As before, I probably shouldn't have said anything on the subject in the first place.

zwet clearly should have been given the chance to claim yesterday.

What use would a claim have been?

What if

zwet

claimed seer? (In fact, his constant little "Dust is scum" comments led me to think he was trying to indicate that he was actually the seer, whilst his play demanding the seer claimed seemed so forced that while reading through, I suspected he was setting up a seer claim.) It seemed entirely possible to me that zwet was going to claim seer as well, which as town was gutsy (and likely unhelpful, but a gambit nonetheless that might have drawn an erroneous nightkill), and as scum would have stalled for a little bit before having him strung up anyway.

Mixologist's quick hammer makes sense for preventing such a scenario, and the refusal to ask for a claim makes a heck of a lot of sense

if he already presumes that Dust is the actual seer

. I'm greatly uncomfortable with the quick hammer because it's most tactically sound for scum, and not at all tactically sound for town to have done.