I'm seriously opposed to the Brandi lynch at this stage. BMQ lurks heroically, and when he posts it's to support any lynch going.
My responses to Brandi's wagon (wouldn't normally do this, but deadline is closing in):
Brandi wrote:It's just nice to have input on such matters. Speculations as to why someone was NKed, or reactions to the deaths of others. Some may be surprised, some may have expected something to happen. Personally, I honestly don't know why scum would target DDD, he didn't particularly give off the feel of a power role- and he wasn't particularly a strong voice for the town. It almost seems as if it were a completely random choice. Anyway, If all you feel is "meh" then that is an adequate response as well.
This appears to be the main post people dislike. I don't see that it can in any way be interpreted as rolefishing. It's solely speculating on night kills- and the vig (if such exists) is hardly going to come out and claim.
Gorrad claims that Brandi is trying to "out the doc". How on earth do you expect the doc to react to Brandi's questions, differently from a VT? You credit our PR's with very little intelligence if you're expecting something like "well, I'm surprised DDD died, because
I saved him
he wasn't all that useful", and I really can't see what else you thought was coming.
Gorrad is speaking in hugely vague terms about PRs being likely to slip when talking about night actions. Brandi wants to talk about who died, and why. It is very unlikely that a PR would slip discussing this, and it feels like Gorrad wants to take a standard scum tell, and run with it even though it doesn't really apply.
veerus's case is one line long:
veerus wrote:Brandi's fishing for night action reactions reminds me strongly of one of Tar's standard scum tells. And his tells are right on the money way too often for me to ignore one here.
This line is an appeal to authority which, as discussed above, does not apply here. Brandi simply didn't fish for night actions.
To add to this gem of an attack, he goes after Brandi's own reaction. He summarises this:
Brandi wrote:Slicey was definitely more obviously town, and I definitely suspect it to be the work of a vig.... DDD, I am a bit more surprised with. I was actually a bit skeptical of him before the end of the day, and had planned to look into him more this day, because he gave me a bad feeling.
and this:
Brandi wrote:Personally, I honestly don't know why scum would target DDD, he didn't particularly give off the feel of a power role- and he wasn't particularly a strong voice for the town. It almost seems as if it were a completely random choice.
as this:
veerus wrote:You, on the other hand, went on a tirade about how it sucks that Slicey was killed and why, oh why, was DDD targeted?
A tirade? No. It sucks that Slicey was killed? Well, slightly. This sentiment was withdrawn immediately. Handwringing about DDD is heavily implied by veerus- when all that is there is surprise scum picked a player who wasn't particularly protown.
BMQ's case: First, he makes a valid point that since we all have identical and perfect information about the dead, discussing them isn't likely to be productive. This isn't a point for Brandi being scummy though. Second, he says he was happy with a Brandi vote yesterday. Third, he says Brandi's "behaviour today" is scummy- with nothing to support it. The only solid post in favour his case is this one, from way back yesterday (ie. this is the only time he makes an actual point against Brandi, or agrees with a specific point against her):
BrianMcQueso wrote:Fishy wrote:This is also not good. Obviously, wagoning just to wagon is one of the those policies with an exception when you are the object of the wagon. This seems like a rather weak attempt to sling a bit of mud in InHim’s direction.
I also dislike Brandi’s habit of calling people protown- this is unhelpful for the town, and potentially buddying or an attempt to look good later after they die. Like others, I also dislike the “bear this in mind” quote- while her explanation is valid, it just feels more like a scum stashing away an excuse to vote than a townie stating an obvious truth.
Fishy echoes a lot of my sentiments towards Brandi. Then she followed his post with what looks like a lot of defensive, snappy personal attacks. Anyone who votes her seems to get the brunt of it. Even when inHim backs off a little and says he's going to reconsider, Brandi attacks him for that (112). I'm starting to predict a little backlash myself:
unvote, vote: Brandi
Most of my points were pretty thoroughly beaten down over the course of yesterday. The rest is a false accusation of personal attacks, and telling Brandi she'll be considered scummy if she attacks BMQ.
Gorrad and I both make the point that Brandi's surprise she didn't die is surprising. I've rather changed my mind on this one. You can see why Brandi would think her aggressive style a danger to the scum- she led the town to a lynch yesterday, and players with the ability to do that are dangerous. In my opinion, she underestimated the typical backlash from a mislynch, but you can see where she is coming from, whether or not you agree with her. Certainly not a strong point, anyway.
I think Tzee just voted to get a claim (and perhaps fair enough, given the proximity of the deadline and the amount of lurking)- at any rate, there are no other reasons given.
This wagon reeks.
