>< you are right SC, I already got you and the person i replaced mixed up once, looks like I did it again, lovely...
I am beginning to wonder about something myko. As far as I have been able to tell, you believed StK to be scum. Why do you now believe her (now me) to be town? So much so that you state it twice:
Myko wrote:Stk now wolframnhart: Town
and here
Myko wrote:just take this with you for the next day: Wolf is town. That should help in Lylo
I have made an early case on him, true, I thought him scum. It seems better to me that I won't give reasonings why he is town, but when reflecting, I saw from the reactions to my cases that he was likely town.
Surrender, imagine and of course wear something nice.
Im referring to personal connections between me and other players, ont just reading their posts. I have always used this, and if you havnt noticed i got out of the loop fast in this game early on, and its hard to recover.
Its academic in any case, as flareoneage will be replacing me pending officialization. I hope i didnt waste too many peoples time in this site. MWIA out
People live their lives bound by what they see as right and true. That's what they call reality. However, right and true are nothing but vague terms. Their reality could turn out to be an illusion. Everyone is living by their own assumptions.
Pom, I don't think you can explain it well, since the other two players are on me for different reasons.
I think I can do it objectively:
You vote me for votehopping, and this is scummy because that means I don't value my vote, and could mean that my reasonings aren't good enough.
Malpa votes me because of his theory that I daytalked with StK to organize the weird L-1 vote.
SC votes me because he thinks I wanted to force the masons to claim. He thinks I should have gotten the obvious link between them as town.
and my defenses:
First is not true, I believe in my reasonings, but love to use my vote for pressure and clarity. Having one vote limits me in showing who I all think scummy.
Second is simply untrue, and much easier explained by me starting very aggressive (seen the talking about short/long day's before etc.) The vote could be explained as a normal interaction from that. No daytalking would be needed.
The third is partially my mistake, but I saw the defensiveness of SC for Malpa not as an interaction between masons (since malpa wasn't close to a lynch, desperate mason actions were not needed), and I expected the masons to try to be hidden. So I saw the weird move from SC (the defensiveness) as a possible buddying attempt from a scum player when a towny came under attack.
Surrender, imagine and of course wear something nice.
mykonian wrote:SC votes me because he thinks I wanted to force the masons to claim. He thinks I should have gotten the obvious link between them as town.
Liar, liar, pants on fire. I voted you for dodging questions. The fishing accusation came later.
mykonian wrote:The third is partially my mistake, but I saw the defensiveness of SC for Malpa not as an interaction between masons (since malpa wasn't close to a lynch, desperate mason actions were not needed), and I expected the masons to try to be hidden. So I saw the weird move from SC (the defensiveness) as a possible buddying attempt from a scum player when a towny came under attack.
I concede that perhaps I should not as harshly defended my mason, especially on day one. I
DID
try to stay hidden. My personal inexperience with the role cost me there.
